It is sweet and right to lie for your Mori poll…..Mark Easton’s internationalist motto?
Had to laugh or cry, when Humphrys asked (at 08:55) ‘Are we becoming less nationalistic and more international?…who better to ask than Mark Easton.’
Who better to ask I suppose depending on whether you want an honest answer or not…Mark Easton being a very pro-immigration kinda-guy and anti-nationalist.
A coincidence that it was pointed out in the last post that ‘the thing the BBC doesn’t hold dear but rather holds in contempt… ‘values and the continuity of the country’s historic national identity: about what Britain stands for’…the BBC preferring instead open borders, cheap imported servants and a lovely diverse, cosmopolitan feel to London’
In 2012 Mori’s interpretation of their figures…..
The report also found Britons shared a strong national pride, with 61% saying they would rather be a citizen of Britain than any other country.
In 2014 the BBC’s intepretation of the latest figures:
Ask people “Who do we think we are?’ and the answer is as likely to be bird-watchers as Brits.
A not so subtle denigration of your pride in being British…..a lesser consideration apparently than being a birdwatcher.
And you have to get half way down the latest BBC report to find out that:
57% of people said they didn’t think there had been any change in their connection to people in other countries around the world
So most people still presumably have that ‘strong national pride’……..Hardly justifying the exaggerated BBC headline or indeed the whole thrust of Easton’s ‘promise’:
UK becoming ‘more local and global’
Every community is concerned and identifies first with their local area….and always has. To claim this is a new phenomenom of great significance is spin by Easton trying to change people’s perceptions of their own beliefs and what they mean….. creating a new ‘truth’. All very Orwellian.
Just how much can you trust a BBC Mori poll? Try this one from 2005:
Muslims ‘Take Pride’ In British Way Of Life
Britons endorse multi-cultural society — as British Muslims say immigrants should ‘integrate fully’
Most BRITISH Muslims support British laws and culture, and do not believe Islam is incompatible with British democracy, according to new research from MORI.
The survey shows that 62% of British people — and 82% of Muslims in Britain — agree with the statement: “Multiculturalism makes Britain a better place to live”. When asked if the policy of multiculturalism is a mistake that should be abandoned, 68% of people ( 74% Muslims ) disagreed”.
Half of British people (49%) and two-thirds of British Muslims (66%) do not think that Islam is incompatible with the values of British democracy.
Briton’s endorse multi-cultural society?……Yeah right…..the BBC’s intepretation of the value of a ‘pride in Britain‘ is different when they have an alternate message to propagate…that immigrants and ethnic communities ‘love Britain and are more British than the British’...then funnily enough British identity becomes an important factor to be cherished rather than sneered at.
Can’t imagine why the BBC didn’t similarly report the ‘national pride’ of French Muslims voting for the Front National.
The BBC, Mark Easton, via Mori, has conducted a poll of 2,500 ‘Brits’. The BBC has placed it top of it’s ‘featured’ stories on the Frontpage…..
UK becoming ‘more local and global’
Data are weighted to the profile of the population……That is the only nod to the effects of immigration and self-isolated ghetto communities we get.
So the UK is becoming ‘more local and global’?
Note that ‘more’….as compared to when? ‘When it comes to comparisons with a decade ago’ so essentially before mass immigration began…..many of that 11% who ‘felt more of a connection with other countries of the world’ …could they possibly be mostly the new ‘British citizens’?
And what does more connected mean? Does it mean they therefore feel less connected with Britain….that is more connected, identifying more, with Land X than with Britain…or just ‘more connected’ as in having the ability to connect to family and friends via the new technology.
From what Mori says it is the latter…..
‘It may be the impact of new technology and global media that is strengthening our relationship with the wider world.’
So ‘more connected’ purely means literally that…able to talk to people around the world….your family in Australia or other Liverpool fans in Argentina, dog lovers in Andalusia or whatever.
So not an interpretation that Easton wants…that of a new international breed of people unconcerned with the notion of borders and national identity….especially as…..
‘57% of people said they didn’t think there had been any change in their connection to people in other countries around the world’
So nearly 60% say there is no change in their views…..I doubt that any previous poll would have got a radically different figure….ask any soldier and he will say he is fighting firstly for his mates or his regiment not Queen and Country…it’s a standard answer in any interview…..
‘Contrary to popular belief soldiers don’t fight for Queen and country, they fight as they would rather die than let down their mates or their regiment.’
…..however that isn’t to say he isn’t in the end prepared to fight for Queen and Country….ironically from a Muslim soldier:
“My home is the UK. As a Muslim, that’s the place I’d happily die for and kill for. That’s the same way it’s going to remain until my dying day.
“My entire soul belongs to the UK and I’m more than proud to fight for this country.”
In fact when Mori did a poll last year this was their, not the BBC’s interpretation:
The report also found Britons shared a strong national pride, with 61% saying they would rather be a citizen of Britain than any other country.
So around 60% is evidence of a ‘strong national pride’…and note….57% can’t really be claimed as evidence of less pride in the Nation…especially considering the margins of errror.
The perception gap between national and local sentiments is easier to measure than to explain (‘hometown favouritism’ was one explanation offered by US academics in the late 1990s)
So Easton trying to spin a tale of us discarding national identity for a more local one is bunkum…..everyone throughout the history of mankind has probably identified more with their immediate surroundings, people and activities than an amorphous nation…that should not lead to the conclusion that nationality is not important to them.
Proof of the slippery interpretation by Easton comes from this:
The people of Northern Ireland emerge as the most likely in the UK to say they identify with their city, town or village.
Ask any Protestant if he is British and I doubt you’ll get a negative….so Easton trying to say people identifying firstly with their local area is a sign that they are less nationalistic is more bunkum….is it also a sneaky, underhand message he’s trying to present…the Northern Irish don’t identify with Britain…therefore Britain should hand over Northern Ireland to Eire?
Everyone identifies first with their family, their own values and ideas, then with the area where they were born or live, and then with their country…well, most people.
Easton exaggerates for his own effect saying:
‘It is notable that significantly more people appear to feel they are closer to the international community than say ties have weakened.’
With the global community, 11% more thought ties were closer than those who felt less close. However, 9% more people said connections with their own country were weakening, than those who thought they were strengthening.
Really? ‘Significantly more people….’? Well 2% more……considering that ‘The margin of error on the overall UK results is plus or minus two percentage points, with a confidence level of 95%. Results for individual regions and nations have a margin of error between two and nine percentage points, depending on sample size.’
I think Easton is over-egging things a bit.
Easton selects and highlights what he wants to emphasise for you to absorb and come to believe…your nationality means nothing to you……
What is striking about these answers is that none are aspects of identity that we are born with. Only 20% said their nationality was among the top three or four things they would tell a stranger was important about them.
‘Striking’ or obvious? And of course it all depends on the question and the context. Why would being ‘British’ be important or on your mind when going about your daily life?…it’s not something you think about…you are more likely to be thinking of going surfing with your mates or what the local school is doing for your kids than singing ‘Rule Britannia’ before every meal.
The use of ‘striking‘ tells us that Easton has a particualr line and an agenda here….to exaggerate the meaning of his ‘research’.
As for that…’none are aspects of identity that we are born with.’….the underlying line from that is that birthplace plays little part in your identity…..complete and utter tosh…….where you were born, and raised, is probably one the most powerful things someone might identify with…..just ask a Yorkshireman for instance….or a Sikh…..
Three-quarters of the UK’s Sikhs have experienced racism but 95% are proud of being born or living in Britain, a survey suggests.
Of course the BBC’s intepretation of the value of a ‘pride in Britain‘ is different when they have an alternate message to propagate…that immigrants and ethnic communities ‘love Britian and are more British than the British’...then funnily enough British identity becomes an important factor….from the Guardian…
83% of Muslims are proud to be a British citizen, compared to 79% of the general public.
Hmmm…in that study 79% of the general public are proud to be a British citizen…bit higher than 57% or 61%…….who to trust eh?
Then note this……
The survey asked respondents what aspect of their identity, other than job and family or friends, they would tell a stranger were most important. None of the top three answers would be found on a passport or ID card.
The aspect of identity picked by easily the largest proportion of people was “my interests and leisure activities”. Next came “my values and outlook”, closely followed by “my personal views and opinions”.
So people’s identity is wrapped up in their values, outlook, personal views and opinions’?
In other words everything that the BBC attacks whilst trying to impose its own values, views and opinions upon the world.
And again note the sly dig…. None of the top three answers would be found on a passport or ID card.
But how do you identify yourself when someone asks about you. Is it ‘British’ or do you give your own family name or the town you live in or were born in? When asked where you come from do you say the UK or ‘Town X’? It depends who is asking and where…if you’re abroad you’re going to say British or English or Scots etc……. Easton’s self serving manipulation of the figures proves nothing accept he can’t be trusted.
Another Mori poll from 2013 Easton hasn’t been keen to emphasise:
- Approximately ¾ of British people favour reducing immigration, on most recent surveys and polls.
More… - Large majorities in Britain have been opposed to immigration since at least the 1960s.
More… - Immigration is currently highly salient: over the past 15 years it has become one of the most commonly chosen “most important issues”.
More… - Close to 70% in a 2001 poll supported more migration among those with needed skills, and those with financial support for themselves or from family members, but more data are needed on this topic.
I’ve just carried out a quick poll amongst some people I know, all Biased BBC readers as it turns out. Here’s how they identified themselves:
1. Opposed to European Union – 100%
2. Opposed to Multi-culturalism – 100%
3. Opposed to bogus Environmentalism – 100%
4. Opposed to television tax – 100%
5. Opposed to criminality (incl MPs & expenses) – 100%
6. Opposed to race hustlers – 100%
7. Opposed to mass immigration – 100%
8. Opposed to interfering in other people’s countries – 100%
I know it’s generally better to be for things rather than against things, but I still feel all of the above is statistically important and call upon the BBC to publish these findings.
It has always fascinated me how the peoples of these islands don’t seem to stress nationality, in particular those that could be described as English. To a foreigner it can be seen as a sort of arrogance, the unspoken assumption that there are “God’s people” and the “Foreign”.
One visual clue is the near total absence of the national flag – we just ‘are’ we don’t need to literally ‘flag’ it. Compare this the USA where the flag is hardly ever out of sight. Note also how in the USA there are hyphenated Americans and Americans, the later being part of the Mayflower family and their extended family from these isles.
“British”, to me is a made-up term by politicians. When abroad I would say that I’m from the UK, when at ‘home’, I just ‘am’. Being “British” is something invented by politicians to include people neither born here or, despite the claims, “sharing ‘our’ values”. (Listen to the way Obama uses ‘America’ or ‘American’ in every other sentence. It is the same idea, trying to create a ‘nation’ out of a disparate, disconnected people).
For a start, we should get Britannia back on our coins and notes where she was for centuries before being removed by the Europhiles.
At the last census I put as nationality “English / East Saxon ” as I am one of those “Essex Men ” , I guessed it would piss off the pc brigade , who I assumed would be to dim to understand the word “Essex” means East Saxon.
I saw reference to this for the first time as I watched the 10pm news this evening. The first thoughts I had were:
1. Why is this research necessary,
2. What are its objectives,
3. What will it achieve, and
4. What will the results be used for?
… and then, the answer came to me- to push the BBC agenda towards multi-culturism. I had a quick ask around- no-one I asked had been approached to answer any questions leading into this important research, and none of them seemed to know anyone who had been asked either.
Hmmm, how great it is that our licence fee is used in this way.
If the BBC go round asking the millions of recent immigrants, or second generation immigrants, whether they feel British or more attached to their country of origin, they will of course say the latter. Therefore, even an idiot can see that the country will be less British than it was Labour’s Great Betrayal.
What are the BBC doing this for? Do they think we are stupid enough to believe anything they conclude from this ‘survey’? Surely they don’t expect that we will all nod our heads and think what great progress we are making in becoming the multicultural hotch potch that the BBC seem to regard as a sort of Promised Land. Or it is just part of the great liberal left project of ‘rubbing their noses in diversity’.
The BBC are so OUT OF TOUCH with what real Brits think.
Lets see the results of their survey sliced and diced by region , urban and country etc. Of course this will highlight those areas where they need to do more work to convince the Brits that mass , unrestricted,immigration is a ‘good thing’. Perhaps that was the point of the survey all along and a sinister one at that.
And many of the remainder are immigrants.