#fuck the tories
Text
The Rwanda bill has been passed. People seeking asylum in the UK are no longer safe. This bill has been criticised by many human rights groups, yet parliment have still decided to go ahead with it. People are seeking safety in the UK, and are being turned away. Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.". The Rwanda bill prevents this. There is no conformation that people sent to Rwanda will be safe there. This is a blatant violation of human rights. Asylum seekers are human too, and they should be treated as such.
230 notes
·
View notes
Text
You're a reasonably informed person on the internet. You've experienced things like no longer being able to get files off an old storage device, media you've downloaded suddenly going poof, sites and forums with troves full of people's thoughts and ideas vanishing forever. You've heard of cybercrime. You've read articles about lost media. You have at least a basic understanding that digital data is vulnerable, is what I'm saying.
I'm guessing that you're also aware that history is, you know... important? And that it's an ongoing study, requiring ... data about how people live? And that it's not just about stanning celebrities that happen to be dead?
Congratulations, you are significantly better-informed than the British government!
So they're currently like "Oh hai can we destroy all these historical documents pls? To save money? Because we'll digitise them first so it's fine! That'll be easy, cheap and reliable -- right? These wills from the 1850s will totally be fine for another 170 years as a PNG or whatever, yeah? We didn't need to do an impact assesment about this because it's clearly win-win! We'd keep the physical wills of Famous People™ though because Famous People™ actually matter, unlike you plebs. We don't think there are any equalities implications about this, either! Also the only examples of Famous People™ we can think of are all white and rich, only one is a woman and she got famous because of the guy she married. Kisses!"
Yes, this is the same Government that's like "Oh no removing a statue of slave trader is erasing history :("
You have, however, until 23 February 2024 to politely inquire of them what the fuck they are smoking. And they will have to publish a summary of the responses they receive. And it will look kind of bad if the feedback is well-argued, informative and overwhelmingly negative and they go ahead and do it anyway. I currently edit documents including responses to consultations like (but significantly less insane) than this one. Responses do actually matter.
I would particularly encourage British people/people based in the UK to do this, but as far as I can see it doesn't say you have to be either. If you are, say, a historian or an archivist, or someone who specialises in digital data do say so and draw on your expertise in your answers.
This isn't a question of filling out a form. You have to manually compose an email answering the 12 questions in the consultation paper at the link above. I'll put my own answers under the fold.
Note -- I never know if I'm being too rude in these sorts of things. You probably shouldn't be ruder than I have been.
Please do not copy and paste any of this: that would defeat the purpose. This isn't a petition, they need to see a range of individual responses. But it may give you a jumping-off point.
Question 1: Should the current law providing for the inspection of wills be preserved?
Yes. Our ability to understand our shared past is a fundamental aspect of our heritage. It is not possible for any authority to know in advance what future insights they are supporting or impeding by their treatment of material evidence. Safeguarding the historical record for future generations should be considered an extremely important duty.
Question 2: Are there any reforms you would suggest to the current law enabling wills to be inspected?
No.
Question 3: Are there any reasons why the High Court should store original paper will documents on a permanent basis, as opposed to just retaining a digitised copy of that material?
Yes. I am amazed that the recent cyber attack on the British Library, which has effectively paralysed it completely, not been sufficient to answer this question for you. I also refer you to the fate of the Domesday Project. Digital storage is useful and can help more people access information; however, it is also inherently fragile. Malice, accident, or eventual inevitable obsolescence not merely might occur, but absolutely should be expected. It is ludicrously naive and reflects a truly unpardonable ignorance to assume that information preserved only in digital form is somehow inviolable and safe, or that a physical document once digitised, never need be digitised again..At absolute minimum, it should be understood as certain that at least some of any digital-only archive will eventually be permanently lost. It is not remotely implausible that all of it would be. Preserving the physical documents provides a crucial failsafe. It also allows any errors in reproduction -- also inevitable-- to be, eventually, seen and corrected. Note that maintaining, upgrading and replacing digital infrastructure is not free, easy or reliable. Over the long term, risks to the data concerned can only accumulate.
"Unlike the methods for preserving analog documents that have been honed over millennia, there is no deep precedence to look to regarding the management of digital records. As such, the processing, long-term storage, and distribution potential of archival digital data are highly unresolved issues. [..] the more digital data is migrated, translated, and re-compressed into new formats, the more room there is for information to be lost, be it at the microbit-level of preservation. Any failure to contend with the instability of digital storage mediums, hardware obsolescence, and software obsolescence thus meets a terminal end—the definitive loss of information. The common belief that digital data is safe so long as it is backed up according to the 3-2-1 rule (3 copies on 2 different formats with 1 copy saved off site) belies the fact that it is fundamentally unclear how long digital information can or will remain intact. What is certain is that its unique vulnerabilities do become more pertinent with age." -- James Boyda, On Loss in the 21st Century: Digital Decay and the Archive, Introduction.
Question 4: Do you agree that after a certain time original paper documents (from 1858 onwards) may be destroyed (other than for famous individuals)? Are there any alternatives, involving the public or private sector, you can suggest to their being destroyed?
Absolutely not. And I would have hoped we were past the "great man" theory of history. Firstly, you do not know which figures will still be considered "famous" in the future and which currently obscure individuals may deserve and eventually receive greater attention. I note that of the three figures you mention here as notable enough to have their wills preserved, all are white, the majority are male (the one woman having achieved fame through marriage) and all were wealthy at the time of their death. Any such approach will certainly cull evidence of the lives of women, people of colour and the poor from the historical record, and send a clear message about whose lives you consider worth remembering.
Secondly, the famous and successsful are only a small part of our history. Understanding the realities that shaped our past and continue to mould our present requires evidence of the lives of so-called "ordinary people"!
Did you even speak to any historians before coming up with this idea?
Entrusting the documents to the private sector would be similarly disastrous. What happens when a private company goes bust or decides that preserving this material is no longer profitable? What reasonable person, confronted with our crumbling privatised water infrastructure, would willingly consign any part of our heritage to a similar fate?
Question 5: Do you agree that there is equivalence between paper and digital copies of wills so that the ECA 2000 can be used?
No. And it raises serious questions about the skill and knowledge base within HMCTS and the government that the very basic concepts of data loss and the digital dark age appear to be unknown to you. I also refer you to the Domesday Project.
Question 6: Are there any other matters directly related to the retention of digital or paper wills that are not covered by the proposed exercise of the powers in the ECA 2000 that you consider are necessary?
Destroying the physical documents will always be an unforgivable dereliction of legal and moral duty.
Question 7: If the Government pursues preserving permanently only a digital copy of a will document, should it seek to reform the primary legislation by introducing a Bill or do so under the ECA 2000?
Destroying the physical documents will always be an unforgivable dereliction of legal and moral duty.
Question 8: If the Government moves to digital only copies of original will documents, what do you think the retention period for the original paper wills should be? Please give reasons and state what you believe the minimum retention period should be and whether you consider the Government’s suggestion of 25 years to be reasonable.
There is no good version of this plan. The physical documents should be preserved.
Question 9: Do you agree with the principle that wills of famous people should be preserved in the original paper form for historic interest?
This question betrays deep ignorance of what "historic interest" actually is. The study of history is not simply glorified celebrity gossip. If anything, the physical wills of currently famous people could be considered more expendable as it is likely that their contents are so widely diffused as to be relatively "safe", whereas the wills of so-called "ordinary people" will, especially in aggregate, provide insights that have not yet been explored.
Question 10: Do you have any initial suggestions on the criteria which should be adopted for identifying famous/historic figures whose original paper will document should be preserved permanently?
Abandon this entire lamentable plan. As previously discussed, you do not and cannot know who will be considered "famous" in the future, and fame is a profoundly flawed criterion of historical significance.
Question 11: Do you agree that the Probate Registries should only permanently retain wills and codicils from the documents submitted in support of a probate application? Please explain, if setting out the case for retention of any other documents.
No, all the documents should be preserved indefinitely.
Question 12: Do you agree that we have correctly identified the range and extent of the equalities impacts under each of these proposals set out in this consultation? Please give reasons and supply evidence of further equalities impacts as appropriate.
No. You appear to have neglected equalities impacts entirely. As discussed, in your drive to prioritise "famous people", your plan will certainly prioritise the white, wealthy and mostly the male, as your "Charles Dickens, Charles Darwin and Princess Diana" examples amply indicate. This plan will create a two-tier system where evidence of the lives of the privileged is carefully preserved while information regarding people of colour, women, the working class and other disadvantaged groups is disproportionately abandoned to digital decay and eventual loss. Current and future historians from, or specialising in the history of minority groups will be especially impoverished by this.
15K notes
·
View notes
Text
Fantastic Beasts is suspended indefinitely.
Musk is begging for cash because he made the stupidest purchase in internet history.
Zucky Wucky is hemorrhaging cash because the Metaverse goal of becoming the NFT successor of real estate speculation was met with the deserved mockery at how stupid it was.
Trump is finally being properly prosecuted for crimes he unquestionably and very inconspicuously committed.
Alex Jones owes a billion dollars to Sandy Hook victims.
The Tories are imploding in a schism that might actually result in the collapse of the British empire.
Putin has ran out of army and crawled pathetically to the corner a tiny insurgent army pushed him towards, decades of military propaganda burnt away in months.
Prime Minister Shinzō Abe died with no glory.
The GOP is so confused after the Trump era they don't even know how to run their grifts anymore.
Rings of Power was such a mediocre release Amazon could potentially drop Prime Video altogether.
Turns out 2022 was really the "find out" year. It took a while but I'm loving this season finale so far.
#fuck trump#fuck jk rowling#fuck elon musk#fuck jeff bezos#fuck mark zuckerberg#fuck the tories#fuck the gop#fuck alex jones#fuck shinzo abe#fuck putin#fuck around and find out#2022
78K notes
·
View notes
Photo
double prime minister event is in the cards, i have done the maths
ETA: This post continues to be spread and spread and spread, which is deeply funny to me, so I’d just like to plug the work of 350.org, Tree Aid, and Survival International, if you’re that way inclined. I’d like to think the continued success of this post might spread lols and good in the world :)
#uk politics#state of government in the UK at the moment#liz truss#politics memes#i made this in five minutes lol#uk#fuck the tories
42K notes
·
View notes
Text
“I’m a fighter not a quitter”
- Liz Truss, less than 24 hours before quitting
#liz truss#british politics#uk politics#fuck the tories#tory britain#the conservative party#tories#the tories#tory leadership
16K notes
·
View notes
Photo
probably a good thing i don’t live in london because i might be inclined to hunt this man down and kill him with my bare hands xox
#i am so sick of this island lmao#PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD TO EAT OR HEAT THEIR HOMES#CAN'T AFFORD TO PUT SHOES ON THEIR CHILDREN'S FEET#'we all have to do our bit' while our gov passes multmillion £ contracts to their rich pals#ruining our public services while someone lines their pockets#large corporations consistently dodging tax and getting away with it#this IS the bad place honestly#fuck the tories
7K notes
·
View notes
Text
gonna be real, i literally don't give a shit whether charlie dies or not. he's only going to be replaced by his bald son and the monarchy will continue as it always has.
what i do care about is how this is going to be all over the news for the foreseeable even though tens of thousands of people are dying in a genocide our government is helping to fund, how people in our own country are suffering because of the cost of living crisis and the tories practically trying to tear the nhs (and many other public services) down.
and if he does die? we'll have to watch as this 'no money for the nhs' is funnelled into another state funeral and coronation. forgive me if i don't participate in the celebrations
#uk politics#british royal family#king charles#fuck the monarchy#fuck the tories#and at this point? fuck labour#or fuck kier starmer at least#i truly truly hate it here
1K notes
·
View notes
Text
one year since the funniest thing to ever happen
#196#r196#r/196#/r/196#196 campfire#rule#apartmentofawesome#literally 19684#r/196archive#liz truss#uk politics#uk#fuck the tories
1K notes
·
View notes
Text
Hey, don't cry. Over 1000 tory council seats lost, okay?
2K notes
·
View notes
Text
So. While the current arsehole serving as UK PM is currently coming out with all kinds of nasty policies to appeal to the worst of his voter base, I wanted to say two things to fellow disabled and long term sick Brits.
Firstly, Sunak does not believe he or the Conservatives are going to be in power by the end of the year, so most of this shit isn't going to happen. While the alternatives are also not great, they are marginally less horrible.
Secondly, if/when you are forced to go through a Work Capability Assessment, it is your right to demand it be recorded. They will try to dissuade you, but you can refuse an appointment unless and until they agree. You receive a copy of the recording (just put it somewhere safe, don't listen to it unless you need to). Now you have concrete proof of what happened in the assessment, which makes it harder for them to screw you over.
My last WCA was during lockdown, so it was a remote one. It was delayed for 2 months because I demanded a recording. And it was the second time ever in 15 years that I didn't have to go to tribunal. I also was moved from the limited work group to the support group.
Hopefully this helps someone. Hang in there everyone. We are worth it.
394 notes
·
View notes
Text
Around twenty percent of the UK population are living in poverty, and these make up ten percent of people who work a full time job. Despite this, the Tory government decides to spend its funds on sending people seeking asylum in the UK to Rwanda. I have explained in a previous post how awful this is. The Tory government does not care about the people. I fully believe that you could completely kill off the UK population, apart from the rich and the tory government, and they wouldn't bat an eye.
24 notes
·
View notes
Text
Ok I’m fully for Scottish independence. Fuck the Tories. Fuck the English. Free the Scots. And give trans people the respect we deserve.
#I hate this government#I hate this government.#I hate this government!#Scottish independence#not even joking#run guys. while you still can#fuck the tories#British blogging
3K notes
·
View notes
Text
Good grief... this stupid woman Truss is a danger to Britain and the whole world.
A failed Tory prime minister who only lasted a few disastrous weeks in office, but who managed to crash the British economy in that time, now suggests Trump should win?!
She shouldn't be allowed out into the community, never mind being given political power.
#britain#uk#uk politics#fuck the tories#conservative party#british politics#tory party#liz truss#trump 2024#trump is a threat to democracy#fuck trump
345 notes
·
View notes
Text
#guilty feminist#the guilty feminist#feminism#feminist#women’s rights#human rights#deborah frances white#woman’s rights#uk politics#uk news#trans rights#nhs#conservative conference 2023#women and trans women#politics#fuck the tories
792 notes
·
View notes
Text
The UK is an absolute cluster fuck at the moment, people are suffering and all our gov wants to do atm is launch a smear campaign against workers and individuals who advocate for them (Mick Lynch) also teach the kids maths.
The audacity of implying that nurses and paramedics are endangering lives when they strike, when the actual endangerment is the calculated destruction of the NHS. The implications that nurses don't work hard enough when they work ridiculously tiring shifts. That if they worked some more they wouldn't need food banks.
That is simply one example of how workers are being mistreated and exploited by this government. And its an important one, we as a country were united by our health service, one we all could be proud of and rally behind.
Our workers desvere so much better, striking is the solution and it's not a decision taken lightly by workers. They need protect.
If you are uk based I'm asking that you sign this petition, demonstrate some solidarity.
3K notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
noggi1980
Unbetitelt
itmeansnoworriesox
Hakuna Matata
bluentcad
BluEntCAD
cephalopox
Untitled
enigma-the-mysterious
THE MUSKETEERS🇵🇸 (semi-hiatus; queue running)