@William_Mary The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ( RIPA) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, regulating the powers of public bodies to carry out surveillance and investigation, and covering the interception of communications. It was ostensibly introduced to take account of technological change such as the growth of the Internet and strong encryption.

The types of surveillance covered by RIPA include:
covert surveillance on private premises or in private vehicles;
covert surveillance which takes place in a public place but which is directed at a specific individual;
the use of police informants;
the use of undercover police officers;
the interception of letters, emails and phone calls (telephone tapping);
being provided with any kind of telecommunications data from a provider, such as making sure you are provided with mobile phone records;

IPA 2016 included extensive powers for government agencies to require technology and communications businesses, based in the UK and abroad, to retain internet connection records (a record of the internet services to which devices have been connected) and communications data of their customers for up to a year for access by law enforcement agencies, and other public bodies, without a warrant.

On top of these Acts of Parliament, which are the tip of the iceberg of surveillance powers, the UK has more CCTV than any country in the world, far more than even Russia. These can be used to track people, some can even listen into conversations, others have had loudspeakers to enable controllers to warn people about their conduct.

Even traffic cameras, that had been introduced on all motorways and main roads into towns and cities to monitor traffic flow are now used to track the movements of cars of interest to the authorities. Such surveiilance extends to hotels, where credit cards are now required to be used. It would seem that the police use credit cards to track the movements using the live use of credit card transactions to monitor 'persons of interest.

When David Cameron became prime minister, he introduced the Behavioural Insights Team (what became known as a 'nudge unit', whose staff were psychologists, economists and civil servants familiar with government -- and ideally people with a background in all three. The role was to introduce policy to brainwash the poulation into adopting government policy. This policy has been adopted by countries around the world, including the USA, who have set up their own units.

The state’s understanding of the good life may be very different from ours at some point, and having a right to dissent allows us not only to choose well despite the efforts of the state, but also to let the state know of our disagreement. The right to dissent is a safety net for citizens, just as essential for the proper functioning of democratic states as the acceptance of the rule of law is.

The problem with nudge policies is that they threaten our freedom to choose, without us even realising it. If we don't know how and what behaviour government is influencing, how do we know what freedoms have been lost to it? It's a sure bet that governments will use it to influence elections.

The world complains about China restricting what its citizens can read; no-one is standing up to governments who are manipulating how we think, it's classic misdirection. How long, though, will it be before people who can see through this web of lies and deception are labelled as enemies of the state?