Not so much "extremists" as "highly placed members of society and the media", and not so much "infiltrate" as "buy" or "walk through the front door". Remember, aggressive censorship of the internet is widely supported by the press. Just look at any of the Mail coverage on this.

> don’t think anyone in the UK is going to want every transaction they do online available to the government!

As usual, their desire to have every transaction of $BAD_GROUP (usually "terrorists" or "paeodophiles") watched hugely outweighs any desire for personal freedom.

> "highly placed members of society and the media", and not so much "infiltrate" as "buy"

Zero evidence for this in the U.K. 81,000 voters chose the last PM in an election 0.3% were eligible to vote in [1]. They’re more middle class and rural than the average Briton and from outside the London cosmopolitan bloc.

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-60037657.amp

That's agreeing with me: the Tory party membership is very roughly the old "high society", a weird little elite. And they chose the most extremely incompetent candidate. The extremism is coming from inside the house.

> the Tory party membership is very roughly the old "high society", a weird little elite

That’s not who pulls the strings. It’s middle class English and Scots, not the aristocracy or wealthy. This isn’t high-placed society buying power; it’s dues-paying Tories casting a vote.

Extremists can also be from "high society", as you say they chose an absolute crazy person who just came back to say that she was right despite the idea that giving more money to the rich will cause growth has been totally disproved by economists for generations.

The difference between rent seeking capitalists and dynamic job creating innovative capitalists does not seem to exist in the minds of these people. They believe both are great which is why we have laws like free stamp duty if you have enough cash to buy 6 houses at once like the current UK chancellor.

I still think politicians don’t seem to understand that without proper encryption their behaviour will be subject to blackmail, public scrutiny and more problems than it even is now. I’m not sure they want financial information and off shore transactions to be more easily discovered.

Adding in these type of backdoors and key registries or whatever other madness these fantasists want means you can guarantee these will be broken by foreign adversaries and others.

We never did find out how the footage from a security camera in a secure zone of the Department of Health, a security camera the Minister did not know was there, was leaked, did we?

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/brandon-lewis-matt-hancoc...

(The obvious answer would be "by some other insider" - MPs communicate over "secure" whatsapp group chats all the time, but often with a large enough number of people in them that one of them feels safe enough to leak it)

Just spin it. Create some targetted facebook adverts

"New law to allow people like Jeremy Corbyn to see pictures of your kids"

With a sinister view of him looking evil

"New law to allow people like Boris Johnson to see pictures of your kids"

With a sinister view of him looking like an idiot

> first past the post is becoming so undemocratic as extremists infiltrate the political parties

It’s FPTP combined with member-only primaries.

> I think first past the post is becoming so undemocratic as extremists infiltrate the political parties it really is a worry.

I'm sorry you had any faith in it to begin with. Fascism is a common outcome of a capitalist regime where the wealthy class would prefer keeping power to keeping democracy (thus losing power).

FPTP was always a fake voting system because it's so easily gamed. It's just all the more apparent now.