I have no truck with abuse online but I wonder whether some people can see the difference from heavy criticism and the claims of abuse that some MPs are claiming to have recently after the vote to bomb Isis in Syria
Welsh MP Chris Bryant has warned threats on social media are having a “destructive” effect on politics – and claimed the existence of such sites in the 1930s may have stopped Britain waging war on the Nazis.
The Wasting Mule says that the poor dab spoke out about the rise of “political extremism” after being criticised for his decision to vote in favour of air strikes in Syria.
And he called on fellow MPs not to be swayed to make decisions based on the views of online critics.
he wrote in an article named ‘On why MPs shouldn’t always vote for what their constituents want’.
He added: “
The Rhondda MP, who is Shadow Leader of the House of Commons, said:
He added:
He is of course right in that our members of our Legislatures are Representatives not Delegates (This does not apply to the Lords). t
But he probably claims to be speaking for his Constituents and he should listen to them.
Appearing to Lump all those who criticise him in the social media as abusive Trolls is not what I would want .
I am sure many who spoke out against the vote to bomb Isis in Syria have also received abusive emails etc and certainly called "Sympathisers of Terrorism".
Mr Bryant can selectively pick the most abusive emails as examples and smear us all.
He is fre to make comparisons with those of us who opposed the bombing of Syria with the appeasers of the Nazi's . Something I find a Offensive but do live in a democracy after all.
Many of those who were not in favour of another War in the 30's had only just lived through the horrors of the first.
And many had argued against the conditions that had brought Hitler to power.
But why does Chris Bryant and the rest of thise who voted with the Tories last week believe that he can make offensive statement because they a MP ant we ordinary mortals can not.
Welsh MP Chris Bryant has warned threats on social media are having a “destructive” effect on politics – and claimed the existence of such sites in the 1930s may have stopped Britain waging war on the Nazis.
The Wasting Mule says that the poor dab spoke out about the rise of “political extremism” after being criticised for his decision to vote in favour of air strikes in Syria.
And he called on fellow MPs not to be swayed to make decisions based on the views of online critics.
“If we just become ciphers for online referendums, we shall narrow debate aI even have a sneaking feeling that if Twitter and Facebook had existed in the 1930s, MPs under threat of de-selection might not have endend make our country ungovernable,”
he wrote in an article named ‘On why MPs shouldn’t always vote for what their constituents want’.
He added: “
The Rhondda MP, who is Shadow Leader of the House of Commons, said:
“Several members have had their officers barricaded. One member had her house surrounded. Many had photos of dead babies pushed through their front door at home. I gather today some members have received photographs of severed heads.
“MPs have broad shoulders, of course they do. But I ask on the leader to review the arrangements of members homes and officers. It’s not just about members but their families.”
He added:
“Those who were opposed to air strikes were absolutely certain that everyone in the Rhondda wanted me to vote against and those in favour claimed everyone knew that those opposed were just terrorist sympathisers.”
“The classic instance is restoring the death penalty. The pollsters tell us it would be popular.
“Perhaps a majority of my constituents would vote for it in a referendum. But whatever the majority for the death penalty, I would never vote for it.
“Every vote in the Commons is in some sense a vote of conscience, even if our conscience invariably tells us to vote with our party.”
He is of course right in that our members of our Legislatures are Representatives not Delegates (This does not apply to the Lords). t
But he probably claims to be speaking for his Constituents and he should listen to them.
Appearing to Lump all those who criticise him in the social media as abusive Trolls is not what I would want .
I am sure many who spoke out against the vote to bomb Isis in Syria have also received abusive emails etc and certainly called "Sympathisers of Terrorism".
Mr Bryant can selectively pick the most abusive emails as examples and smear us all.
He is fre to make comparisons with those of us who opposed the bombing of Syria with the appeasers of the Nazi's . Something I find a Offensive but do live in a democracy after all.
Many of those who were not in favour of another War in the 30's had only just lived through the horrors of the first.
And many had argued against the conditions that had brought Hitler to power.
But why does Chris Bryant and the rest of thise who voted with the Tories last week believe that he can make offensive statement because they a MP ant we ordinary mortals can not.
No comments:
Post a Comment