Announcement: New publication will detail government attacks on citizens’ freedoms

The Renault Captur: It seems that David Cameron's Internet filters would identify this as pornography. It is possible that this would make Renault executives proud.

The Renault Captur: It seems that David Cameron’s Internet filters would identify this as pornography. It is possible that this would make Renault executives proud.

Synchronicity? Coincidence? Isn’t it strange when you become aware of several instances of the same phenomenon at once.

Today, having written about the Data Retention and Investigatory Bill, Yr Obdt Srvt sat down to watch, of all things, an old episode of the BBC’s Top Gear from July last year in which, amazingly, Jeremy Clarkson criticised his Chipping Norton neighbour (and part-time Prime Minister) David Cameron for wanting to end our freedom to look at pornography on the Internet.

Some of you may approve of Cameron’s stand; that’s not the matter at hand. Clarkson’s point was that the way Cameron proposed to regulate Internet porn was so cack-handed, he was going to make himself – and his government – look even more of a gang of halfwits than they do already.

Cueing up an image of the Renault Captur (above), Clarkson told audiences they wouldn’t be able to see it, once Cameron’s filters are put in place.

“In what way is that pornography?” inquired Richard Hammond (he’s the short one).

“Well, it’s orange.”


Clarkson gladly elaborated: “Well, the thing is – and this is a true story: A friend of mine has a website, okay? It has an orange backdrop. Now, in various offices and workplaces that have this porn filter on the Internet, orange is picked up as a skin tone, which of course it is in Cheshire.

“So it will just see that it’s a naked lady with a sort of a vajazzle in the shape of a Renault badge and it won’t let anyone see it.”

This is just one example of the idiocy inherent in Cameron’s attempts at repression, which also include legislation to stifle free speech and expression, permitting Boris Johnson to buy water cannon to prevent free protest (another pointless move, for reasons I may explain in the future), an attempt to stymie electoral freedom by cutting down the number of people permitted to vote in elections, and now the Surveillance Bill.

In recognition of this campaign of disenfranchisement against the free people of the UK, Vox Political proposes to publish a book of all-new material – that’s right, all new – entitled How the Coalition government tried to curtail your freedom – and how David Cameron c***ed it up!

Catchy title, don’t you think? The idea is for the words to take up most of the cover, so it won’t require artwork (you may have noticed art covers aren’t VP‘s strong suit).

We are now accepting nominations of repressive legislation or policies that should be mentioned in the new publication. Please post yours in the ‘comment’ column.

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

Vox Political needs your help!
This independent blog’s only funding comes from readers’ contributions.
Without YOUR help, we cannot keep going.
You can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Alternatively, you can buy Vox Political books!
The second – Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook
The first, Strong Words and Hard Times
is still available in either print or eBook format here:


21 thoughts on “Announcement: New publication will detail government attacks on citizens’ freedoms

  1. Chris K

    I think it’s a strange synchronicity that you have to quote one @$$hole to poke fun at another @$$hole?

  2. Joanna

    does this lot really Not want to be re-elected? I thought the aim of all parties was to stay in power as long as possible?

  3. Pingback: Announcement: New publication will detail gover...

  4. Pingback: Announcement: New publication will detail gover...

  5. Smiling Carcass

    Reblogged this on SMILING CARCASS'S TWO-PENNETH and commented:
    Well, Mike- where to begin. How about anti-trades union legislation? Is there anything more repressive than preventing a lawful organisation from effectively representing its members or effectively challenging oppression by employers?

    Of course, there is also the current trend to controlling what we may or may not view online.

    One could make a case for austerity being repressive; how can we be pro-active if we cannot even afford to live, own a computer or even send a letter?

    In fact, I could make a case for all laws, criminal and civil being repressive if you are not wealthy enough to manipulate said laws and the law-makers to your advantage.

    1. Mike Sivier

      Anti-union – good!
      Austerity as a whole – more problematic. There’s certainly a case for including anti-welfare-state legislation, and repressive wage restrictions.
      Your comment about wealth reminds me of the changes to the legal profession – Legal Aid.

  6. beastrabban

    Reblogged this on Beastrabban’s Weblog and commented:
    Mike here reveals that he’s got another book coming out, devoted to the government’s continuing attempts to remove our constitutional freedoms. And he also explains why, according to Jeremy Clarkson on Top Gear, the electronic equipment designed to block porn on the internet will decide that the Renault Captur is terrible porn . Disgusting! Ban this filth!

    1. Mike Sivier

      I’m hoping to get an illustrated cover for the next Vox Political collection, entitled Cruel Britannia, which will be out just as soon as I’ve edited it down to something approaching manageable size.

  7. eclectictaste18

    They have intentionally made voting more complex by forcing everyone to register if they want to vote at the next election. They are counting on the apathy of the British public, and that some people leave their voting till the last minute.
    Apart from via social media, the new rules have not been publicised, so most people don’t know.
    They are counting on a large number to be ineligible to vote or not vote in 2015. That way they can either run with all the money and assets they have stripped from the country, counting on the fact that a government can’t be formed in time to stop them. Or alternatively join with UKip to form a government, then the nasty party will become the very much nastier party.

      1. tom potter

        forcing us to vote on line, I for one certainly don’t want to vote on line. Its private, and the government are doing away with privacy

  8. Michele Witchy Eve

    Just a couple. Employment Laws, such as now having to have several hundred quid to have an unfair dismissal case heard. Fracking policies/laws, such as drilling under your land/property without having to ask permission. Family law, such as secret trials or saying that using food bank is the same as neglect, which risks you losing your children to Social Services or some privatised outsourced care homes. Criminal law, such as Joint Venture.

    It’s all very disturbing the way our state control is going. And this from the government that said they wanted a smaller state and less control. Isn’t that called something like dissonance? (I forget the correct term for someone carrying out a plan that is the opposite of what they said they wanted to do. We called it ‘lies’ back in the day.)

Comments are closed.