Monday, 15 December 2014

Blocked By Carswell!

On this blog we have followed Douglas Carswell on Twitter for many years; when he was a Conservative MP and now as a UKIP MP. However recently (not long after he has joined UKIP) we are now blocked from seeing his twitter feed as the above screenprint illustrates clearly.

To block our Twitter account is obviously his prerogative, but it confuses us why... Our Twitter account rarely uses bad language, never insults nor is gratuitously offensive. In fact our Twitter exchanges with Douglas Carswell have been minimal to say the least.

Yes, this blog has not always been complimentary about Carswell, but given his inconsistent position on aspects of EU membership among other matters then as an elected MP he should expect a degree of scrutiny and questioning.

It's thus strange from the same chap who argued for more internet interaction in politics as per the Plan page 24:
Analogue politics in a digital age.

Never has the expectations gap been so wide. when we book a holiday or buy a DVD we expect choice and immediacy. we browse the internet for options, we click a couple of buttons, and we get what we came for.

Compare this to the experience of applying for a driving licence, or getting planning permission – let alone trying to get a child into a particular school. The technological advances of the past decade have empowered consumers in everything except their dealings with the state.
Previous generations were much readier to accept that what they wanted might not be available and that, even when it was, they would have to queue for it.
But the internet has created almost unlimited capacity, eliminating storage costs and reducing barriers to entry. whatever we want, the chances are that someone somewhere will be selling it. And it is now more feasible than ever to deal with that someone – unless that someone is a government agency.
Odd again when we consider this from page 27 from the Plan:
The web has made it possible, as never before, for a politician to come from outside, appealing directly to voters over the heads of party bigwigs.
Even more odd behaviour when we see this from Carswell's blog in 2013:
Twitter is killing spin
Twitter is a great detector of bull. It is changing the way that news is managed fundamentally. And for the better.
We guess though we shouldn't expect any different. Like every other politician what Carswell says is not what he does. He advocates open primaries as per page 23 of the Plan:
Many of the peculiar features of American democracy – the election of public officials, from the school board to the Sheriff; the fiscal and legislative autonomy of the 50 states; the use of open primaries to select candidates; term limits and recall procedures to control politicians; open congressional hearings for big appointments; local and state-wide referendums – are designed to prevent law-makers from becoming remote.
Yet when he defected to UKIP he was made the UKIP candidate in Clacton with no open primaries and as result of trampling all over UKIP party rules to the detriment of the hard work by Roger Lord.

Presumably UKIP is supposed to be the new anti-establishment politics, but for the life of me I can't see the difference.

27 comments:

  1. Just asked him, maybe it's a mistake.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nope, no Twitter reply since yesterday. Chopped liver.
      It's a shame, thought he was better than that as a person. I'm afraid I have judged him accordingly.

      Delete
    2. Thank you for trying...Carswell's lack of response doesn't come as a surprise unfortunately.

      Delete
  2. If memory serves, it was a UKIP rule before 2000 that HQ could decide who would be the candidate in a by election.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That was the argument UKIP used, however that is undermined by the fact that they tried to convince Roger Lord to stand in another seat for the GE which means Carswell has been selected for the General Election as well.

      Delete
  3. I prefer to think of this as cock up rather than conspiracy. That's not to suggest that there is no conspiracy. Now, where are those gremlins hiding tonight?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My experience of Carswell in the past with comments on his blog, means I would personally take the 'conspiracy' option

      Delete
  4. You are not alone ... I've been blocked as well ... and have now returned the favour.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Im very new to twitter, only been on it about a week and still not 100% sure how it all works, though I'm not blocked yet, give it a week maybe

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What's your twitter account - I'll add you to mine

      Delete
  6. I actually follow you (i think) guessing you are PwilliamsTBF. though mine is Dinsdale@wtfpit (i was trying to find a domain that was not already taken, and just as i was getting bored and typed the intitials of "Whats The ******* Point In This" i actually got one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Yep, I'm @PwilliamsTBF. Just followed you now, thanks for your question to Carswell. Let's see what he says if anything at all.

      Delete
    3. Wont be surprised if i end up blocked :)

      Delete
    4. im blocked :o) honour worn proudly :)

      Delete
  7. I've been blocked for months... Mr Carswell doesn't "do" interaction.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm blocked by Dr North so Carswells not the only one at it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've been blocked by Dr North too - for drawing his attention to the critical errors in his Brexit 'plan'. He's borrowed the Phil Jones (UEA) climategate defence to justify it... 'I haven't put years of work into this just to have you criticise it'.

      Delete
    2. @PeterS Your comment of 'I haven't put years of work into this just to have you criticise it'. isn't the full picture though is it?

      I've seen your exchanges with Dr North and there's clearly a disagreement over interpretation on a technicality but rather than agree to disagree, you carry on with the same point over and over again trying to disparage Flexcit entirely over what is a technicality. - some examples here:

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/11261536/We-can-have-more-clout-outside-the-EU.html#comment-1720332451

      Delete
    3. "... interpretation on a technicality".

      1) In your view, is Art68 (of the Vienna Convention) a 'technicality' because it is succinct? Or is it succinct - as a law - because it is unconditional (no ifs, no buts)?

      2) If Art68 is not a 'technicality', would it form the cornerstone of your preferred exit plan?

      "you carry on with the same point over and over again... "

      3) Isn't that exactly what Dr North does when he sees a poorly thought out & unworkable exit plan?

      Delete
    4. @PeterS Richard has dealt with your points many times, EU exit is a political process as well as a technical one. Again you've dismissed the entire plan on a disputable technicality.

      If you have an issue with his arguments may I suggest you take it up with him here (again)

      http://www.eureferendum.com/

      ...and not on this blog.

      Delete