Turn on thread page Beta

So, 18,000 junior Doctors are going on strike today. Does anyone care? watch

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    Given the behavior of some of those thugs at the Tory conference (eg. spitting at people who weren't even Tories but were journos, threatening to rape a woman etc etc) the guy you're responding to can be forgiven for his point. Add to that the way a lot of anti-democracy sorry I mean anti-austerity protestors after the election in May behaved (really really aggressively and also don't forget the cockroach (es) who graffed on the war memorial) and he's bang on the money.

    Also it says a lot about you the way you tried to justify the attacking of that guy.
    Tried to justify? Or simply explained the context of the situation? There difference between throwing an egg at someone, and throwing an egg at someone who seemingly has tried to incite a reaction. I don't condone any violence, and actively spoke out against both the egging and the spitting when they occurred, but there is nothing wrong with provide context.

    As for the anti-austerity protests, or as you call them anti-democracy protests, they would have happened regardless of the outcome of the election, well unless the greens won I suppose, as both Labour and the Conservatives had austerity in their manifesto, just different amounts of austerity. The People's Assembly had planned to march against austerity politics from before the result was known, because they knew we'd have a Government pushing through austerity politics regardless of the outcome.

    I'd also suggest you look at those protesters and wonder how many of them would back a PR election system that means the Government has to have roughly 50% of the votes to control 50% of the seats, obviously I don't couldn't guess on behalf of all of them, but I'd wager quite highly most of them would back a form of PR. Oh and all PR systems being vastly different to AV so the idea that the electorate rejected PR doesn't hold any water, just incase anyone thought they'd mentioned AV/ the AV referendum. Any PR would be vastly more democratic than the First Past the Post system we currently use, just to make make my point on that clear, as it'd mean that a Government would have to have 50%+ of the votes to control the house. (If you want a debate on if coalitions are democratic however I am willing to have a debate on that sure)
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    People's Assembly are not part of any party. It;s an anti-austerity protest platform.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    Tried to justify? Or simply explained the context of the situation? There difference between throwing an egg at someone, and throwing an egg at someone who seemingly has tried to incite a reaction. I don't condone any violence, and actively spoke out against both the egging and the spitting when they occurred, but there is nothing wrong with provide context.

    As for the anti-austerity protests, or as you call them anti-democracy protests, they would have happened regardless of the outcome of the election, well unless the greens won I suppose, as both Labour and the Conservatives had austerity in their manifesto, just different amounts of austerity. The People's Assembly had planned to march against austerity politics from before the result was known, because they knew we'd have a Government pushing through austerity politics regardless of the outcome.

    I'd also suggest you look at those protesters and wonder how many of them would back a PR election system that means the Government has to have roughly 50% of the votes to control 50% of the seats, obviously I don't couldn't guess on behalf of all of them, but I'd wager quite highly most of them would back a form of PR. Oh and all PR systems being vastly different to AV so the idea that the electorate rejected PR doesn't hold any water, just incase anyone thought they'd mentioned AV/ the AV referendum. Any PR would be vastly more democratic than the First Past the Post system we currently use, just to make make my point on that clear, as it'd mean that a Government would have to have 50%+ of the votes to control the house. (If you want a debate on if coalitions are democratic however I am willing to have a debate on that sure)
    AV would have given an even more disproportional victory to the Tories than what we have now lol
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    AV would have given an even more disproportional victory to the Tories than what we have now lol
    I've not looked at if it would or not, so I can't comment, but my point was about PR electoral systems, not AV. AV was the compromise between FPTP and a PR system agreed upon by the Conservatives, who back FPTP, and the Liberal Democrats, who back PR.

    And as for you point about the People's Assembly not being a political party, I'm afraid I missed the point? It was them who organised the marches following the election, the marches which would have occurred regardless, although may have been slightly smaller, as both Labour and the Conservatives had more austerity in their manifestos.

    I'd also suggest that perhaps it's not undemocratic to campaign for an option not given to you by the major parties in a general election as you never had the option to vote for it and have your voice heard, due to First Past the Post.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Going back to the question, whether you think they should be marching or not, I'd just like to note that whilst many of the doctors are protesting over pay, working conditions etc, most of them are also protesting because of the increasing risk to patients which has arisen from recent changes and will continue if the proposed changes go ahead. My cousin's an NHS doctor and wasn't planning on going today, but then last Saturday, despite the fact she only qualified in July and only moved to the hospital she now works at a couple of weeks ago, for 6 hours or so she was the only doctor in the entire hospital. I'm sure she's a great doctor, but this is evidently going to lead to greater patient risk. Just thought I'd make the point that the reasons for protest aren't entirely selfish.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    billydisco educated and well paid professionals do kick up fusses as you can see.
    and I bet they aren't right-wing
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    As for the anti-austerity protests, or as you call them anti-democracy protests, they would have happened regardless of the outcome of the election
    No they would not have. These people are reverse-snobs, they simply hate the Tories. If their beloved Labour made the cuts, they would agree with them.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    and I bet they aren't right-wing
    That irreverent. They are protesting.

    Maid Marian is a UKIP supporter and is on the side of these trouble makers. People in unions do vote conservative. You don't have to politically identity as left wing to go on strike or protest.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    That irreverent. They are protesting.

    Maid Marian is a UKIP supporter and is on the side of these trouble makers. People in unions do vote conservative. You don't have to politically identity as left wing to go on strike or protest.
    A tiny minority doesn't dispute the fact striking is a left-wing, socialist concept....... hence why Labour is effectively the political wing of the trade unions!
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    A tiny minority doesn't dispute the fact striking is a left-wing, socialist concept....... hence why Labour is effectively the political wing of the trade unions!
    Ye well when the normals and right wingers get annoyed and start protesting that's when the socialists get to power.

    You can be a liberal or a conservative and protest. The protesters in Hong Kong demanding democracy are not all going to be socialists. Plenty of suffragettes were conservatives. I could go on.

    I;m sure that boils your blood and don';t understand why we can't outlaw political represent ion in Parliament of the unions.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Ye well when the normals and right wingers get annoyed and start protesting that's when the socialists get to power.

    You can be a liberal or a conservative and protest. The protesters in Hong Kong demanding democracy are not all going to be socialists. Plenty of suffragettes were conservatives. I could go on.

    I;m sure that boils your blood and don';t understand why we can't outlaw political represent ion in Parliament of the unions.
    Who said I have a problem with protesting??

    I have a problem with people protesting over idiotic things. Women wanting the right to vote is not an idiotic thing and should not be compared with the idiotic Charlotte Church brigade.

    I dont know the Junior Doctor strike story very well, hence cannot really elaborate on it. Whats it about?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    Who said I have a problem with protesting??

    I have a problem with people protesting over idiotic things. Women wanting the right to vote is not an idiotic thing and should not be compared with the idiotic Charlotte Church brigade.

    I dont know the Junior Doctor strike story very well, hence cannot really elaborate on it. Whats it about?
    You just said protesting or striking is socialist in its nature. Not my fault you are incoherent.

    As far as I know they are striking over pay and working conditions. They are being over worked and under paid to the determinate of the service. Government isn't listening to them, hence the protests. Some of them may well be socialists, shock horror I know.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)

    You can be a liberal or a conservative and protest. The protesters in Hong Kong demanding democracy are not all going to be socialists. Plenty of suffragettes were conservatives. I could go on.
    Do me a favour? I usually have no problem with your mealy-mouthed progressive claptrap, however can you stop at the point you invoke liberalism as a polar opposite ideology to conservatism?

    It isn't. The *******isation of liberalism is, and that's not liberalism. It's progressivism, it's mob mentality, it's socialism re-branded, it's a marketing ploy. Whatever it is, it isn't liberalism. Liberalism is concerned with individual rights and has a long tradition in support of laissez faire capitalism. Democratic socialism/progressivism is about class conflict (or the projection of class conflict onto other groups in society, i.e., men (bourgeoisie) vs. women (proletariat), own-group bias, outcomes over opportunity, centralisation of power/statism and the dehumanisation of the individual.

    What is it with progressivism always seeking to re-brand itself after a monumental fubar moment? It's like how the Democrats cover up the fact they formed The KKK, or voted against the abolition of slavery. They don't refer to these people as Democrats, they refer to them as conservatives (a euphemism for Republican). They know exactly what they're doing and it's fundamentally dishonest.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCitizenAct)
    Do me a favour? I usually have no problem with your mealy-mouthed progressive claptrap, however can you stop at the point you invoke liberalism as a polar opposite ideology to conservatism?
    I meant liberalism and conservatism in relation to socialism. By liberalism I mean liberalism in the william beveridge sense and the approach to the economy. Liberals want to promote social and/or economic justice through already existing organizations of society without too state interference and with respect of individualism of some kind. As apposed to wanting to completely up heave and replace modes of production and social relations and replace them with more just ones like that the socialists want. Most of my political understanding comes from the late 19th century and early 20th century so the words I use reflect that time period. So when I use the word liberal it doesn't really reflect the usage of the word in America now for example.

    I know it is way more complicated than that but I was just showing how grass routes organizations do not have to be socialist. I wasn't trying to say liberalism was the polar opposite of conservatism rather that they are political ideologies that can be found in popular protest.

    All you seem to do on here is get angry about feminists and immigrants and shoe horn it into anything and evrythign whilst picking fights with supposed progressives. I wont be doing you any favors.

    I agree with you though. Political terms get misused and warped all the time. It makes it very hard to talk about anything. Which is probably partly designed. What you are describing happens to the left as well. Loads of socialist history has essentially been erased from people's minds.

    This has happened to Adam Smith. He was very anti renterism and thought his idea of markets would lead to some kind of economic equality and warned of dangers related to the division of labour. The idea of equality for equality's' sake motivated his desire for markets. That bares no resemblance for the fetishism of inequality we see now done in the name of noeliberalism.

    Ultimalty I don;t care what word get attached to things. It;s what actually happens that matters.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    7 day week da***?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    A tiny minority doesn't dispute the fact striking is a left-wing, socialist concept....... hence why Labour is effectively the political wing of the trade unions!
    It isn't like that anymore. Also the Labour Party was born out of trade unions so it was origionally
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCitizenAct)
    Not at all.

    1. I would argue that importing 320,000 per year will have an impact on the number of hours Doctors have to work.

    2. I would argue that if this is our mentality - screw residents, prioritise the world - then we should stick to it. Just import more Doctors who are willing to work for less. It's not like we've not already imported plumbers, carpenters, builders and a lot more besides, many of whom are willing to work longer and for less. Why is it only a problem when it impacts Doctors?
    It's true. A foreign labour force is cheaper.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Most Competitive)
    I couldn't care less.

    I'm in favour of the government's proposals because they will deter people who are "in it for the perks" from doing medicine.
    (Original post by Most Competitive)
    In reality, professionals such as paramedics and firemen are probably the ones who are under the most stress at any given time. You don't see them complaining.

    Junior doctors think they've got it so hard when they actually haven't.
    Only a Tory could say something as ignorant and poorly-informed as this. Read between the lines: this is not about preventing people entering Medicine for the money. It's a way of introducing privatisation of the NHS. This is a method that's been proven time and again: pay cuts, demoralising staff, forcing them to change careers or leave the country because they simply cannot afford to work in the UK any more, hence causing staff shortages and making way for private firms to take over the NHS, which is the ultimate aim of the Tories. Doctors are protesting to keep the NHS alive and defend the safety of patients - none of this is for their own self-interests. You're an idiot if you think that doctors don't have a right to complain about the stupid hours they may be forced to work under these new contracts. Tired, exhausted and overworked doctors make mistakes that can affect people's lives - simple. For someone like you who has no experience of working in Medicine it's very easy to say doctors don't work hard. According to you, paramedics have it harder - but if these contracts are implemented, nurses and paramedics will be next to suffer pay cuts and they will protest in the same way that doctors are doing now.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    No they would not have. These people are reverse-snobs, they simply hate the Tories. If their beloved Labour made the cuts, they would agree with them.
    It was under a Labour government that we saw the biggest ever protest march, admittedly against the Iraq War. Another example is the Winter of Discontent which effectively saw the Labour Party brought down by public sector strikes, leading the way for Thatcher to win her first election.

    The idea that people don't match against "their beloved Labour" is absurd, there were calls from not only Labour MPs and new candidates who either are now MPs or who lost, members, ex-members, floating green/labour voters and many others for Labour to come out as anti-austerity, they didn't and a lot of people said "well they're a bit better than the tories, and if they get in they might listen to us if we march and protest, we know the tories won't"
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Most Competitive)
    I couldn't care less.

    I'm in favour of the government's proposals because they will deter people who are "in it for the perks" from doing medicine.
    Perks? Wow let's see you work 12 hour days of stressful work, making life and death decisions whilst having slept for around 2 hours. I know nurses and doctors that go to work not having slept in 2 or 3 days and quite frankly that's scary. Your life in the hands of someone so sleep deprived. Medicines only 'perk' if your not passionate about it is the money. But what's the point in money if you spend your entire life so stressed it makes you ill?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 

2,055

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.