Home > Alex Massie

Monday 21 May 2012

Tory Authoritarians

Wednesday, 20th January 2010

Here's a surprise: a rather good speech on civil liberties and the government's (English) DNA database from Chris Grayling. Later in the debate, however, David Davies, Tory MP for Monmouth and a man who really should not be confused with David Davis MP, made this contribution:

"Most of the Bill's provisions ultimately come down to a simple argument about the price of civil liberties as against the price of security. While travelling into London on the tube this morning, I was reading the dreadful stories of what is going on in Haiti. I suppose that at present the people in that country have the ultimate in civil liberties, in that they can go out and do and say what they want and steal what they want, but is anyone more secure for it? No, they are not. Would anyone want to live in Haiti at present, or in any of the other failed states of the world? No, they would not.

"Mention was made earlier of one of the Gulf states, where apparently there is a universal database. I forget the name of the country, but I remember thinking that it is a country where many British people and other westerners have gone to work. They are perfectly happy in that environment. It may not be the paradise of a Liberal Democrat-run council in the desert, but people feel very safe regardless of the level of civil liberties they apparently enjoy.

"What I am trying to say is that, in many ways, security is more important to us than civil liberties. Security has to come first. We all remember that in the '70s we used to say, "Better dead than red", but the reality is that I would prefer just about anything to being dead or to living in a failed state, even if it meant giving up some of my civil liberties."

There's so much dumb packed into just three paragraphs that one hardly knows where* to start or whether it's even worth doing so. In fact, these opening remarks are so confused and dim that one could be forgiven for thinking they'd been made by a member of the United States Congress. If I lived in Monmouth I suspect I'd be sorely tempted to vote Labour on the assumption that losing Mr Davies would be unlikely to cost the Conservatives the election while also improving parliament.

The other notable thing about this is that Tim Montgomerie, head honcho at ConservativeHome and the man most closely identified with the attempt to build a US-style Conservative "movement" tweeted** that he takes Mr Davies's side in these matters, not Mr Davis's. A reminder that movements - whether on the left or the right - almost always flirt with authoritarianism...

*But, inter alia, note how Mr Davies would rather be a Communist than one of those ghastly libertarianish people...

**My Twitter feed is here, should you be into this sort of thing.

Filed under: Civil liberties (52 more articles) , Libertarians (143 more articles) , Tories (273 more articles)

Previous Back to Alex Massie Next

Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (14)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Kay Tie

January 20th, 2010 2:08pm Report this comment

Damned depressing stuff. Same old Tories. Is there anyone who can hold them back? No-one with a libertarian streak?

Fergus Pickering

January 20th, 2010 2:15pm Report this comment

I take it you do not subscribe to the Hobbesian world view, Mr Massie. You sound more like a Rousseau man. That is your prerogative, but I wouldn't risk calling Thomas Hobbes dumb. He might come back to haunt you.

DavidDP

January 20th, 2010 2:32pm Report this comment

"Same old Tories."

As Alex points out, the same party also plays host to the David Davies who is on the other side of the spectrum on this issue (pleasing symmetry really).

THX1138

January 20th, 2010 2:39pm Report this comment

Yep! I fear that the Tories are going part of The Daily Mail "There should be a law against that" brigade.

Kevyn Bodman

January 20th, 2010 2:42pm Report this comment

David Davies is a fool,for he has revealed himself to be either a lazy political illiterate or a malign liar.

As readers here surely know, Libertarians do not advocate a right to steal.

Alex Massie

January 20th, 2010 2:49pm Report this comment

I should also make it clear that there are trade-offs. Mr Davies - not to be confused with Mr Davis - seems to subscribe to the "If It Saves One Life" school that, in the end, justifies anything and everything and is, therefore, deeply suspect and inimical to the principles of an open society.

Thomas Byrne

January 20th, 2010 3:46pm Report this comment

You may well say that, I couldn't possibly comment.

Rhoda Klapp

January 20th, 2010 4:06pm Report this comment

Leave us not forget, unpleasant though Mr Davies appears to be, it is the Labour government who are stealing our civil liberties, and the tories' only contribution has been severe wetness in opposition.

Edmund Jerk

January 20th, 2010 5:09pm Report this comment

Mr. Davies also seems to conflate security with stability. We have a stable society that won't become a failed state just because we've rejected - for now - ID cards, DNA database etc. Even if a state like Haiti had all of our security there's no guarantee they'd have a stable society: the huge riots in China last year are a good example of tight security with a fragile civil-society.

I agree with you Alex, as a classical liberal I'm forced to vote Tory because they're the only party committed to reducing the size of the state and cutting taxes: but I'm aware that the authoritarian, 'punishment freak' (Auberon Waugh's description), strand in the Tory party could come to the fore, and the Tories don't have the best history for protecting civil-liberties. But maybe they've changed...ha!

Snowman

January 20th, 2010 6:39pm Report this comment

One either subscribes to Franklin’s ‘they who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security’, or one doesn’t.

This chap talks pure tosh, he seems to have no understanding of either the concept of liberty or security. The burghers that elected him ought to be sacked, and the guy shipped to North Korea to get a taste of his take on ‘security’.

Whether an authoritarian streak still runs through the Tory party is neither here nor there at this junction of the country’s political life. It was Labour that has done the damage. Rhoda Klapp’s lament sums it just right.

Fergus Pickering

January 20th, 2010 6:50pm Report this comment

What I was trying to say is that Mr Davis has a point. Perhaps I can leave the rest to Hobbes. What a man!

Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man, the same consequent to the time wherein men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them withal. In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

In2minds

January 21st, 2010 5:46pm Report this comment

Rhoda Klapp @10.46pm - "it is the Labour government who are stealing our civil liberties, and the tories' only contribution has been severe wetness in opposition".
Correct, but please have patience, the tories turn will come.

Luawaving

January 22nd, 2010 12:36pm Report this comment

Unfortunately for democracy this David T C Davies is on the Home Affairs Committee listening to evidence on the dna database. When I attended he didn't want to learn anything but just banged on about young black men committing crime and that everyone should be on the database.

Robin Wilton

January 25th, 2010 11:14am Report this comment

I have a growing conviction that argument by false opposition is the refuge of the tiny mind. It seems to crop up a lot in political blether of Mr Davies' kind.

I'm sure that, given the choice between living in a failed state and surrendering some of his liberties, Mr Davies would go for the latter... but isn't the point that people who live in failed states and people who sacrifice their liberties don't - by definition - get offered the choice? (sigh)

Post comment