To think those that are campaigning to deselect MP's are bullies

[LovelyBranches]

There's been a number of these type of campaigns popping up and I absolutely hate the undertone. MP's in the Labour Party were given a free vote on Syria action and were free to vote how they wished. Surely if we were to deselect MP's who defied the party position, ignored the Whip or voted against public popular opinion then Corbyn would have been deselected a long time ago. Surely the point of the democratic system that we have, is that every 4/5 years everyone gets a chance to vote to keep their local MP. Deselecting after a vote seems undemocratic to me.

Also sad to see how much grief Women politicians in particular are getting. The bullying that Stella Creasy has been subjected to is shameful.

Agree absolutely with Chaz. Just because people are shrill or shout more it doesn't mean they're right. Usually the opposite, in my experience.

I'm not sure I see it as people being angry that the MPs didn't follow the part line. Is it? Are people raging against MPs ignoring the party line?

Isn't it people being angry that MPs voted contrary to the way a large number of their constituents wanted them to?

I think some of the anger echoes that expressed when Blair ignored the massive protests and rallies against war and proceeded regardless. I think people feel impotent that civilians are going to die in their name.

I do get that the situation is way more nuanced than that - I'm just conveying where I think the anger comes from rather than expressing my view.

I personally gave up expecting MPs to do anything other than that which suits them politically , a long time ago.

Caprini - we are a representative democracy- not delegative. This means that we vote in someone we trust to make decisions. In any case, most studies show the public 50/50, so any vote would have gone against what a lot of constituents wanted. It's just that the anti-bombing lot were more vocal.

And?

50/50? Where did you see that? YouGov has 48% pro, 31% anti and the rest don't know. That's nowhere near 50% 50%. More like 50/30/20.

Personally I'm a 'don't know'. Not through ignorance, but because I genuinely don't know. But I think the anti-war movement are seriously deluded about the amount of support they have and it's actually damaging them because they look silly.

Booyaka - I didn't see that poll - thanks. I agree about the anti-war lot being deluded. I'm unsure myself, but it is important to me that we don't end up with mob rule, so well done to the Labour MP's who didn't let themselves be bullied.

So the point it that MPs weren't necessarily voting against what a large number of their constituents wanted, but what their constituents wanted doesn't match the vocal opinion of certain groups within their own party so they are still attacked. Maybe the MPs were a better judge of the mood within their own constituency than a vocal pressure group.

Lol at 'mob rule'

The shrill seems to be spreading.

Any threats, intimidation and harassment are dreadful and deplorable. Unacceptable. Totally.

But the op is about deselection which is part of the democratic process. You can't have it both way - trumpeting that people should adhere to the democratic process or shut up for fear of being shrill, and then complain about people availing themselves of the ..er..democratic process.

If the vote is strongly pro bombing the the MP are fine. If they get deselected it's by people entitled to deselect them. I don't get the 'bullying' thing. It's just being accountable.

SamG it is true that nationally there is a majority in favour (albeit a rapidly declining one, based on the YouGov polls). However, a majority of Labour Party members are against, and it is Labour membership opinion that Labour MPs are getting their knickers in a twist about.

And they are right to be worried, because based on the Labour party members that I know personally (old school labour of my generation: forty and fifty something professionals and small business people, not young activists), people are extremely upset about this, and even very reasonable people with relatively moderate politics are talking openly about deselection.

Caprini - so the local MP acts in accordance with the majority of his constituents, and is then threatened because what he did wasn't in accordance with the views of a little clique who have paid £3 to be able to express an opinion. Not sure if that is very democratic. Why not let the voters kick the MP out?

Well firstly , and obviously, an MPs constituency is a specific thing. Any individual constituency will have voted in a specific way to elect , for example, a Green Party Mp rather than a UKIP MP. So their constituents can reasonably be expected to want different things.

But pointing out whether you think the idea of trying to deselect an MP is unfair and ignoring that it is a valid part of the democratic process just stamps on your repeated point that people should accept the democratic decision and shut up.

I'm just saying you can't have it both ways because it is exactly the same thing.

Mistigri - MP's are responsible to their constituents, not their local party. To take an example, imagine there was a Tory party coup and lots of Monday Club types were allowed to join up. That wouldn't mean all current Conservative MP's would be expected to back the repatriation of non-whites.

Among Corbyn's staff are one person who has backed Class War against a Labour candidate (and Class War are pretty close to mob rule), and another who is an unrepentant Stalinist. That's not exactly a track record of democracy.

So you don't agree with the bits of our democracy that you don't like?

All the bits that work for you are great and democratic. The bits where you don't like the process or potential outcome are close to mob rule?

Caprini - the bits of democracy I approve of are the bits where the MP represents his or her constituents. The bits I don't approve of are when they are asked instead to vote in line with an small clique, who themselves have very little public support. My DH worked for the Labour party (pre-Blair) and there was always a vocal bunch of activists who tried to influence decisions but actually had very little wider backing.

I'm sorry, you have no idea if some of the MPs have represented their constituents.
You can't assume that an x percentage of support nationwide will mean that every individual constituency support it?
Otherwise it looks like pretty much whole of Scotland ignored their voters?

I understand your irritation but you really can't couch it in terms of being undemocratic and then pick and chose which bits of democratic process you personally think worth following.

Say it annoys you by all means but the comments about 'how dare they ignore the democratic process' are a bit hypocritical, surely?

Caprini - I don't think I ever said that. I said that Stalinists and class war activists are not generally in favour of democracy, which I still think is fair.

I agree with you Caprini. To me it seems fairly obvious that if National support for DC's position is just over 50% and Labour party opposition to it is estimated at about 75% then in constituencies with Labour MPs the majority will be in opposition.

Since you mention Scotland, that is where I am. If there were 50ish Labour MPs from Scottish constituencies as was the case prior to the GE then I believe the balance in the PLP would be significantly different. My local Labour MP was a casualty of the SNP landslide. His voting record was very similar to JC's as were a lot of his Scottish colleagues. I do not know anyone in favour of bombing where I live, although I understand the official polling for Scotland is 75% against. The longer the PLP seems so far out of step with support for JC the less likely Labour will make any headway in the 2016 Scottish elections and the more likely a push will come for another independence referendum.

The Scottish thing is really interesting.

this is quite a good graphic

Why is it female and gay Labour MPs who complain the most about being "bullied", "harrassed", etc.?

So long as people are acting within the law they are perfectly entitled to make their views known to MPs in whatever terms they want. If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen and if you can't deal with criticism from constituents resign. Sick of listening to the whining from the usual suspects.

The abuse my local MP is getting is beyond the pail. I actually feel ashamed of my town right now for it.

Mine is too. It is disgusting tbh.

Some can't get their heads around a free vote or that MPs in votes like this represent all constituents not just members or JC supporters.

I also think some of those doing the harassing would still be doing so if their MP voted Yes and constituents also wanted Yes just because it wasn't what they wanted.

There have been a few MPs who have said the views within their constituents was very split

I also find it ironic that those who are campaigning for peace seem to deem it ok to threaten other.

So long as people are acting within the law

Some aren't though. Some of the threats I've seen most certainly aren't

Shutthatdoor: If people are breaking the law then that is a matter to be referred to the police and the CPS.

However, I'm not sure that commentators really understand what is or isn't legal. (I am a solicitor with over a decade of experience.)

I don't want to listen to BS from MPs saying that their staff are being harassed. In my experience of contacting them, MPs' staff are some of the most useless, defensive and hostile people I have ever dealt with.

Sorry but to me as soon as you start hurling abuse or dishing out threats you loose whatever point you may have had.

Being very upset about something is no excuse.

Some are coming accross as my way or the highway.

So much for the broad church that JC keeps talking about.

Apparently over 15,000 members have left in the past month alone and I can't see that number decreasing anytime soon.

My DF has been a Labour party member for over 50 years. He is seriously for the first time considering canceling his membership as are quite a few others that I know of.

Shutthatdoor: If people are breaking the law then that is a matter to be referred to the police and the CPS.

There are instances which have been.