As long as liberals personally are not impacted by crime they'll have no problem having the justice system being lenient with criminals. I think it's a lack of imagination on their part. They can't imagine how a crime victim feels.
A while back I coined the term 'Uniparty' which has caught on with a lot of people who now recognise the parties act in lockstep. In this case, the legislation weakening the sentencing has been under the 'Tories' which is the British so-called "right" leaning party.
In truth, they and Labour are one and the same. Neither liberal nor conservative is the answer because this is about morality and authoritarianism.
Whilst I cited Julian Assange as a more politically neutral individual, the British government have jailed both "liberal" and "conservative" protestors when they don't suit their agenda; in the liberal camp they jailed 'liberal' greenpeace activists for criticising McDonalds with fliers that McDonalds claimed were defamatory (normally defamation is a *civil* lawsuit, not a criminal one). In the 'conservative' camp a Scottish man had been jailed because he taught his girlfriend's pug to raise a paw when he said 'Sieg Heil' as a prank.
Meanwhile, the UK government allows agitators to walk free of either side of the aisle if it suits their agenda. The UK government do not arrest 'just stop oil' protestors who block roads delaying ambulances resulting in possible deaths, and they did not arrest so-called "Tommy Robinson" (Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) who spearhead people to protest during Armistice day and got 100 people arrested.
That is because those two groups are adjuncts of the government: the former promote their Net Zero agenda, and the latter allows them to expand their authoritarian powers whilst allowing shoplifting thieves to go free.
Way to go, Project Veritas!
No, truer words.
have noticed governments practicing “inversion” for some time to make normal citizens into criminals (& vice versa)
As long as liberals personally are not impacted by crime they'll have no problem having the justice system being lenient with criminals. I think it's a lack of imagination on their part. They can't imagine how a crime victim feels.
I don't engage in duo-politics (see here for why: https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/what-robbers-cave-can-teach-you-about ), as I don't attribute immorality to one 'side' or another.
A while back I coined the term 'Uniparty' which has caught on with a lot of people who now recognise the parties act in lockstep. In this case, the legislation weakening the sentencing has been under the 'Tories' which is the British so-called "right" leaning party.
In truth, they and Labour are one and the same. Neither liberal nor conservative is the answer because this is about morality and authoritarianism.
Whilst I cited Julian Assange as a more politically neutral individual, the British government have jailed both "liberal" and "conservative" protestors when they don't suit their agenda; in the liberal camp they jailed 'liberal' greenpeace activists for criticising McDonalds with fliers that McDonalds claimed were defamatory (normally defamation is a *civil* lawsuit, not a criminal one). In the 'conservative' camp a Scottish man had been jailed because he taught his girlfriend's pug to raise a paw when he said 'Sieg Heil' as a prank.
Meanwhile, the UK government allows agitators to walk free of either side of the aisle if it suits their agenda. The UK government do not arrest 'just stop oil' protestors who block roads delaying ambulances resulting in possible deaths, and they did not arrest so-called "Tommy Robinson" (Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) who spearhead people to protest during Armistice day and got 100 people arrested.
That is because those two groups are adjuncts of the government: the former promote their Net Zero agenda, and the latter allows them to expand their authoritarian powers whilst allowing shoplifting thieves to go free.