Fedayn
Well-Known Member
Will reply to this when I leave work if that's ok.
David Davis resigns as MP over civil liberties
- Thread starter magneze
- Start date
Will reply to this when I leave work if that's ok.
Extremely signified example with made up numbers:
Lets say 80% were against 42 days, but only 60% would vote for DD. If DD were the only person standing against 42 days, then the issue would only attract those 60%. If others stand too, then the overall vote against 42 days could be up to 80%.
Depends on what the 6 other candidates stand for, don't you think.
NuLabour will portrait even a 100% win for DD as an irrelevant artificial by-election in a tory safe seat. They will spin whatever happens.
The problem is each candidate would likely stand on their own grounds.
For instance the example I gave earlier of a woman standing against the lacks attitude of Government towards domestic violence, rape victims etc etc.
Now you had 80% of people who were against 42 day detention, but 30% of them are even more strongly oppossed to the poor conviction rate of rape at the moment.
I have already shown the example that a Lady is already standing on a different issue in the same by-election.
Yes but it is much harder to spin what happens when every single picture in every single paper and on every single TV show has images of hundreds of people standing around with placards decrying the loss of their civil liberties.
If you get enough people into that small constituency, that is exactly what will happen.
Add to this my idea earlier that people should actively campaign and call for people to vote for Davis and you are playing to every politicians nightmare. Their career. They understand that thousands of people are willing to turn up and campaign, it hits them in the only place apart from their wallets that we know it hurts. In the voting Booth.
You want ot protect your civil liberties, then all the marches, all teh demos, all the campaigning in the world won't do shit, if politicians think they are safe...which they are when you split the vote, 10% here, 15% there. If they think their jobs are on the line, they will vote the way that protects their careers.
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
Why should I? My main concern is, funnily enough as a pro-working class socialist, not the Conservative party but of the advance in pro-working class politics. Strangely enough that's the barometer I use, and i'm sure even you'll agree, supporting an anti-trade union, pro scab, anti working class politician, pr 28 days detention, pro Iraq War, anti gay rights, pro hunting right-wing goon like David Davis isn't going to advance pro working-class/socialist politics.
Personally if I was there i'd vote for either the Greens, if they were 'Left-wing' enough or the SEP candidate. After all as one Eugene Debs once said 'I'd rather vote for something I want and not get it than vote for something I don't want and get it'.
What is his being a 'back bencher' got to do with anythimng? It's not where he sits that matters but what he supports, he's a right-wing Tory goon whether he's on the front or back benches. Is it that difficult to understand or realise that as a socialist I vote for candidates whose politics I think advance socialist/pro working class politics. You, as is no surprise, have failed miserably to explain how voting for a right-wing Tory will advancer socialist politics?
How is voting for a Tory who supports 28 days, but has been utterly unable to explain how 28 days = defending civil liberties but 42 days = attacking civil liberties. WHo has voted time after time against lesbian and gay equality. Who voted strongly fot eh imperialist idioct adventure in Iraq, ie has blood on his oh so civil rights backing hands. What about the civil rights of the Iraqis he voted to interfere with?
The point is, as with previous posts you have singularly failed to explain why voting for a right-wing anti trade union Tory is helpful to progressive let alone socialist politics. It frankly saysd more about you than it does the rest of us.
Why should you? Your only complaint it is that it David Davis, now you want to say that you shouldn't have to justify what the big complaint is?
If you will only act when it furthers your own agenda...socialist working class politics...then surely you have to admit that you don't really give a shit about civil liberties. You care more about socialist politics then you do peoples civil liberties.
Which is fine, but that is what I said ages ago and you moaned about it. Now you are confirming exactly that.
You will be getting it anyway, that is the whole point.
To paraphrase the statement, "It is better to vote for something you want, and get something you want and something you don't, then to not vote and get only what you didn't want"
As a backbencher his views are irrelevent. The ONLY reason the Media is even interested is because it is new, it hasn't really been done before, so people are watching.
I don't give a fuck about socialist politics, that is your hang-up not mine.
I care about Civil Liberties and if it means supporting someone else who doesn't care about socialist politics to make a stand against the errosion of our civil liberties then fine.
Again you are caught up in the person, while I am caught up in the protest and the gains that could be made.
I care that the media are watching, that any protest done on this ground will send a strong well publicised message.
I don't care about David Davis, I don't care about his voting record, I don't care how he stands on any issue...other then that of Civil Liberties, becuase that is the ONLY issue he is standing on.
I have shown OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN why voting for him matters or campaigning for him matters.
Here let me put it in bold and make it short so you can't miss it.
THE MEDIA IS WATCHING
That is why voting, campaigning and supporting David Davis is important, and as I have explained in previous posts, breaking up the vote and splitting it between many factions will do nothing but make it look like a minority group of people against civil liberties and labour will paint you as such.
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
In that one small sentence all you have done is confirm your own prejudice.
It seems beyond you to grasp why a socialist won't vote for a right-wing Tory goon like Davis, as such it's rather difficult to debate with someone who cannot grasp simple realities.
Well that is clear, the fact that his stance on civil liberties is a sham bothers you nopt a joe either. 28 days, anti-gay rights, anti trades union.... All issues about our liberties, Davis fails on them.....
No it seems to be beyond your grasp that you are putting your petty party politics before something far more important.
A protest isn't reliant on David Davis being the second coming of Jesus Christ to be a good protest.
You can't get over your petty hatred, and I was right in my first post.
After all this shit of "having it out" you have just proven exactly what I said in the first post, you would rather sit on the sidelines and snipe or actively undermine any real protest because of your own arrogance and attitude of being better then everyone else.
You view my defense of civil liberties and opportunistic nature of using David Davis as some sort of capitulation to conservatism. I see your pointless stance as typical of the left-wing in this country, cut off your nose to spite your own face.
"Why should I stoop to helping David Davis when he fails to met my personal expectations and desires, what? I could be helping Civil Liberties, nah fuck them, I am too caught up in my own little world of socialist politics."
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
No it seems to be beyond your grasp that you are putting your petty party politics before something far more important.
A protest isn't reliant on David Davis being the second coming of Jesus Christ to be a good protest.
You can't get over your petty hatred, and I was right in my first post.
After all this shit of "having it out" you have just proven exactly what I said in the first post, you would rather sit on the sidelines and snipe or actively undermine any real protest because of your own arrogance and attitude of being better then everyone else.
You view my defense of civil liberties and opportunistic nature of using David Davis as some sort of capitulation to conservatism. I see your pointless stance as typical of the left-wing in this country, cut off your nose to spite your own face.
"Why should I stoop to helping David Davis when he fails to met my personal expectations and desires, what? I could be helping Civil Liberties, nah fuck them, I am too caught up in my own little world of socialist politics."
Good lord..... You are as blind as you are sleep inducingly repetitive.
What 'petty hatred', a fairly sensible political opposition to a man who has voted with alacrity for numerous attacks on the working class and working-class organisations. But because of his claim that 42 days = bad but 28 days = good I, and others, am supposed to roll over kick our legs in the air and let this goon tickle our bellies........ No thanks, but hey you carry on.
A fairly sensible opposition at any other time.
Right now it is an opportunity for a real protest to protect our civil liberties, you are so blinded by the fact that David Davis doesn't measure up to your high standards that you fail to see the opportunity that he has created.
You didn't answer a single of the points I put to you either.
You are exactly as I described and exactly what you moaned about being called. You care more about your own agenda and your own personal political feelings then you do civil liberties, yet you want to act like we are the ones letting the side down, when the truth is you can't be bothered to put aside your petty political animosity for a moment and see what a great opportunity this is for all people from all sides of the political spectrum to gather and make a meaningful protest that is guarenteed to be in the media eye and be well publicised.
The stupidest part was David Davis made the entire election about a single issue for exactly this reason.
So that people that don't agree with him on other things can step up and say, I disagree with 42 days.
Instead you going to moan about a voting record and an opinion record that he purposely put aside so that you didn't have to wrestle with your conscience.
Why take a principled stance on such a meaningless point? Why disrupt a good opportunity for a protest because your principles won't allow you to bend an inch, even when it is completely and utterly irrelevent, since you will not change the outcome of the election. David Davis will win. So your great principled stance against supporting him amounts to what?
The weakening of a protest. That is what it amounts to.
So that people that don't agree with him on other things can step up and say, I disagree with 42 days.
Instead you going to moan about a voting record and an opinion record that he purposely put aside so that you didn't have to wrestle with your conscience.
Why take a principled stance on such a meaningless point? Why disrupt a good opportunity for a protest because your principles won't allow you to bend an inch, even when it is completely and utterly irrelevent, since you will not change the outcome of the election. David Davis will win. So your great principled stance against supporting him amounts to what?
The weakening of a protest. That is what it amounts to.
That's hardly the same as pro-civil liberties groups fielding their own candidates, which I thought we were discussing.
There two different problems each with their own issues. The one I highlighted was that particular issue the other issue is this.
The only power we have in this country is through MPs.
I put it to you like this, as an MP, which of these two scenarios would worry you most if you were deciding on whether to back the governments stance or not, remember your personal feelings aside, this is politics, your career that you have worked oh so hard for is at stake.
1) Several candidates campaigning on Civil Liberties each of which garner 10% of the vote while the incombant MP gains 40% and keeps his seat.
2) A single group that takes 90% of the vote while campaigning on a single ticket of Civil Liberties.
When you have answered the question you will realise why weakening the vote doesn't do the fight for civil liberties any good at all. It might further someones own personal political agenda, ie pushing forward Socialist Politics, but it won't actually help in the fight against Civil Liberties.
If you are struggling for the answer, it is number 2) a single person on a single ticket gaining a massive majority of the vote is going to worry an MP, loads of little groups taking small amounts isn't going to worry many MPs who hold a large majority in their constituency, those few in marginal seats might be flustered, but they alreay were.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Interesting tidbit taken from the SEPs report of their campaigns progress:
(Clear the decks: Abolish the National Dock Labour Scheme was the proper name of the report he authored)
(Clear the decks: Abolish the National Dock Labour Scheme was the proper name of the report he authored)
You bring this up as if it is somehow secret unknown Knowledge.
A quick google notes that it is on David Davis page on the Conservative website, that he wrote a book called 'Clear the Decks' about the Abolition of the Dock Labour Scheme.
Dravinian said:
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
"whoosh"
exosculate
a stagger with a beat
I know what you mean. Although to be fair there is a big difference ideologically between negative and positive rights.
Negative rights in this context might be civil liberties issues, whilst trade union rights could be seen as positive rights.
I am not quite sure how me quoting myself pointing out that he is standing on a single issue so that anyone who disagrees with him on other issues can still stand for this issue...is somehow having something posted that points out that he holds opinions I don't agree with is going over my head, which is what I assumed the woosh was.
I don't agree with David Davis on very much, I don't particularly like him on the instinct he is a Conservative.
I am however, willing to ignore my personal dislike and our personal differences on almost all issues, to rally around the idea of protecting our civil liberties that I see as a major issue.
Are Labour/Union rights an important issue, sure, but it isn't as important an issue as civil liberties and civil rights. Once you have those rights, when you have those liberties, then you can argue for what you want.
Without those basics you can't even argue effectively, as is evidenced by the ban on Demonstrating around Parliment unless you have permission to do so.
exosculate
a stagger with a beat
I think Butchers is saying that your failure to connect breaking strikes as a sign of DD's lack of general integrity, shows you lack political sophistication. I have sympathy with the whoosh on that basis. However I am mainly explaining that negative and positive rights are very different in political discourse.
I am still not quite sure how I am lacking in understanding that Davis is a git, when I have said as much.
yes, he is a conservative tosser who doesn't like unions....who didn't know this before?
It doesn't change what I ahve said during hte entire thread, we all agree on this single issue, regardless of our other politics, and regardless of the reasons that Davis is doing this, it is a good opportunity for a protest. If by helping Davis, in a single by-election he was going to win anyway, it means we can show other politicians that our civil liberties mean something then ok that I can do.
Not sure how this is showing any lack of understanding that Davis is a git.
Just saying "whoosh" and then ignoring the entire argument that it doesn't matter what type of git Davis is, he isnt a baby eater, just another right-wing conservative tosser, isn't really a fair way to debate is it.
So anyhting I don't have an answer for, I just say whooosh and pretend that you have missed some vitally clever part of the argument, even though when pushed the only part I have been accussed of missing I have clearly answered, several times over.
exosculate
a stagger with a beat
i think leaving it as a whoosh, is for the best.
Bit of an admission of fanatacism then perhaps?
You can't change your mind, even when presented with an argument you can't refute.
But you won't change the subject. There was no reason to post whoosh other then to continue the debate.
Fanatic, someone who can't change their mind and won't change the subject.
exosculate
a stagger with a beat
magneze
🎧
Anyone know?
I think it's relevant as if the only party with a pro-42 day agenda is a joke party then it's pretty clear that 42 days is practically indefensible. In this case, does it matter that the vote will be split?
Why doesn't he stand as an Independent?
Speaking of single issue politics:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...im-will-stand-against-david-davis-855414.html
Speaking of single issue politics:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...im-will-stand-against-david-davis-855414.html
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Jane whats her face.
magneze
🎧
Found a list of candidates and a bit of spiel about each here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7483851.stm
Only 2 obviously pro 42 days out of 26 from what I can see ...
Only 2 obviously pro 42 days out of 26 from what I can see ...
Nick Foster
New Member
Vote Shan Oakes Green Party!
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Where is this massive public debate that this stunt was designed to provoke taking place exactly?
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Exactly what I thought when I realised the vote was today!
Similar threads
