why was one situation for the benefit of the residents and the other for control of the residents? It seems you're putting your own spin on things here. Both were enacted by councils which are elected by the people.
There are increasing feelings of alienation from elected officials across the west, I imagine you somehow feel that whoever did this doesn't represent the people. Maybe thats what you should be adressing. It's not some election stealing or whatever, its just bubbles between political class and everyone else, we need good communication imo. Some way for elected officials to have to spend time in their communities
I most certainly have the right to put my "own spin" on it, because I am expressing my personal opinions and values here. My own personal interpretation of the situation, which most of us here are also doing too.
And I do feel that the actions of authorities here might not represent the values of the people. That it's a typical power grab by authorities, in many cases those "small minded" bureaucrats who micromanage and want to police the minutiae of daily lives. Not that different to the "bin police" here in the UK who hand out fines and warnings for not recycling.
That's making people angry. And conspiracy theorists are latching on to it too. But ordinary people are right to be upset about it.
With the "15 minute city" roadblocks and the "bin police" the overall benefit to the community from the measures is far outweighed by the inconvenience and control. In particular the feeling that you are being "ordered about" by the local government. It's micromanagement, and almost a form of bullying.
Yes, the alienation we are feeling is because the government is implementing the agenda of activist pressure groups and prioritizing that over the people's will.
Those pressure groups having minority opinions. And we are seeing that play out in multiple areas of society, including the restriction of freedom of speech here in the UK in order to prevent offense to minorities, such as transgender or LGBT people. Something the general public strongly opposes.
we live in a democracy. Authorities serve us. We shouldn't be rolling our eyes and saying "oh I guess that's just what they do". Imo that kind of cynicism's going to lead to our society crumbling - it's the reason democracy falls in undeveloped countries, because everyone assumes the elites are just corrupt to the core and so dont engage. Personally I don't think it's a "power grab" or whatever, the person who did it won't be serving after their term is done anyway.
I find it unusual to even frame it in that regard - if you talk to politicians, they aren't out for themselves, they're trying to make everyone's lives better. They might have a different idea of how to do it, because their experience doesn't match most people's, and endless lobbying organisations try to target them with information to influence what they think needs solving.
However, I suggest you try to find statistics about what the public believes, as well as read the actual text of laws and find out about how they are actually enforced. Because there is a lot of misinformation about the government targeted to people you (and separately to people like me)
A lot of said misinformation paints the government in a caricatured light, as though they believe everything you stand against. The government of the UK has been Conservative for many years, and I find it hard to believe they would restrict free speech for the benefit of LGBT people.
There are increasing feelings of alienation from elected officials across the west, I imagine you somehow feel that whoever did this doesn't represent the people. Maybe thats what you should be adressing. It's not some election stealing or whatever, its just bubbles between political class and everyone else, we need good communication imo. Some way for elected officials to have to spend time in their communities