| No surprise on 20:25 - Feb 19 with 919 views | Swansea_Blue |
| No surprise on 16:22 - Feb 19 by DJR |
I can't make up my mind if I'm a progressive activist, a civic pragmatist, a disengaged battler, a loyal national, an established liberal, a disengaged traditionalist or a backbone conservative!
More seriously, I can't stand this sort of stuff, which indicates to me all that is wrong with modern day politics, where focus groups and Mondeo man or Worcester Women dominate.
I often think that polling companies and the like come up with this sort of nonsense in order to make money (Deborah Mattison and the Observer springs to mind), and at the same time fool their clients (in this case More in Common) into thinking this sort of stuff makes any difference in the scheme of things.
The problem is that if you try to rely on focus groups, or seek to appeal to everyone, you end up pleasing no one because no one knows what you stand for, as Starmer is finding out
For me (and paraphrasing Groucho Marx)
I don’t want to belong to any [imaginary group] that would have me as a member. [Post edited 19 Feb 16:28]
|
You might need to explain what a Mondeo Man is for anyone under about 35-40! |  |
|  |
| No surprise on 20:39 - Feb 19 with 883 views | Herbivore |
| No surprise on 18:42 - Feb 19 by Dubtractor |
I tend to avoid immigration threads, as they are largely a mess of arguments, but I'm going to break cover here.
I've never been a fan of the 'immigration has a net benefit to the UK' argument. Not because I disagree with the point, but more because its the sort of argument that is easy to make if you're not living in the areas most affected by immigration. Telling people who are unhappy about immigration, who possibly do live in those areas, that immigration has a 'net benefit' just feels a bit tone deaf to me.
Edit: just to add, I say this as a Guardian reading lefty who mostly thinks that immigration is a good thing. [Post edited 19 Feb 18:45]
|
You have a point, but it's also worth noting that anti-immigrant sentiment is often highest in areas least exposed to immigration.
The Brexit vote was, in the main, higher in areas of lower immigration: https://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-how-areas-with-low-immigration-voted-m
I think they cite some other similar research in there as well. There are interesting outliers where migrant populations increase quickly from very low levels that would support your point but by and large, areas with higher levels of immigration tend to have more positive attitudes towards immigration than areas with low levels. [Post edited 19 Feb 20:40]
|  |
| |
| No surprise on 20:41 - Feb 19 with 876 views | Trequartista |
| No surprise on 20:11 - Feb 19 by BanksterDebtSlave |
As an aside who they feck came up with 'progressive' as a thing and when? |
It sounds to me like something made up to convince people they are always right i.e. everyone (sane) wants progress, no-one (sane) wants to regress, so if you call yourself progressive you are fooling people into thinking that all your views represent progress. |  |
| |
| No surprise on 20:43 - Feb 19 with 862 views | Herbivore |
| No surprise on 20:41 - Feb 19 by Trequartista |
It sounds to me like something made up to convince people they are always right i.e. everyone (sane) wants progress, no-one (sane) wants to regress, so if you call yourself progressive you are fooling people into thinking that all your views represent progress. |
Or it's just an antonym of conservative, which seems a more likely explanation. | |
| |
| No surprise on 20:47 - Feb 19 with 843 views | Dubtractor |
| No surprise on 20:39 - Feb 19 by Herbivore |
You have a point, but it's also worth noting that anti-immigrant sentiment is often highest in areas least exposed to immigration.
The Brexit vote was, in the main, higher in areas of lower immigration: https://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-how-areas-with-low-immigration-voted-m
I think they cite some other similar research in there as well. There are interesting outliers where migrant populations increase quickly from very low levels that would support your point but by and large, areas with higher levels of immigration tend to have more positive attitudes towards immigration than areas with low levels. [Post edited 19 Feb 20:40]
|
Its a fair point on the first bit there - I grew up very much in rural Suffolk and the attitudes of people there are pretty clear!
I just don't really like that argument, and even when used its really about overall economic benefit to the country, which doesn't really mean much to a lot of people. There are loads of clear benefits to this country from immigration, that make much stronger arguments for me, that's it really. |  |
| |
| No surprise on 20:55 - Feb 19 with 813 views | Herbivore |
| No surprise on 20:47 - Feb 19 by Dubtractor |
Its a fair point on the first bit there - I grew up very much in rural Suffolk and the attitudes of people there are pretty clear!
I just don't really like that argument, and even when used its really about overall economic benefit to the country, which doesn't really mean much to a lot of people. There are loads of clear benefits to this country from immigration, that make much stronger arguments for me, that's it really. |
Yes, and part of the issue is that a lot of the communities that have low immigration have low immigration because there are no jobs and they've been passed by and overlooked by successive governments, so talk of economic benefits really isn't likely to resonate with those folks. Agree there are better arguments in favour. | |
| |
| No surprise on 20:55 - Feb 19 with 809 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| No surprise on 20:21 - Feb 19 by Oldsmoker |
Have you watched any podcasts from 'respected' journos with opinions.
e.g. The Rest is Politics, News agents etc.
They have one thing to say and they take 20 minutes to say it and repeat the same 'thing' many times in different ways. Boring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We need Betty from Barnsley types to scream a Seig Mail like Headline in 20 seconds 'cos that will wake up the masses.
It can be absolute lies - 'cos that doesn't matter anymore apparently. [Post edited 19 Feb 20:21]
|
It can be absolute lies because that doesn't matter anymore ... to the President of US of A. |  |
| |
| No surprise on 21:30 - Feb 19 with 764 views | DJR |
| No surprise on 20:11 - Feb 19 by BanksterDebtSlave |
As an aside who they feck came up with 'progressive' as a thing and when? |
The first person I heard use it was Nick Clegg, which tells you all you need to know.
Indeed I would regard the expression not as equivalent to left wing but instead as equivalent to centrist or Liberal.
Going back to the More in Common categories, I've now had a chance to think and would put myself down as a disengaged, civic, established, loyal, backbone national. [Post edited 19 Feb 21:32]
|  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| No surprise on 04:44 - Feb 20 with 683 views | WeWereZombies |
| No surprise on 15:29 - Feb 19 by lowhouseblue |
yes - the ons data which is published quarterly. |
I doubt that the Office of National Statistics is doing the leg work to follow through the progress that recent migrants make as they try and adapt to a new environment. If you just take raw data and fit it to match the answer that you want then it is unlikely that you will provide a reasoned analysis worthy of debate. |  |
| |
| No surprise on 08:43 - Feb 20 with 601 views | Plums |
| No surprise on 21:30 - Feb 19 by DJR |
The first person I heard use it was Nick Clegg, which tells you all you need to know.
Indeed I would regard the expression not as equivalent to left wing but instead as equivalent to centrist or Liberal.
Going back to the More in Common categories, I've now had a chance to think and would put myself down as a disengaged, civic, established, loyal, backbone national. [Post edited 19 Feb 21:32]
|
I first heard Lib Dems use it when I was a member back in the 90's. I said then and still think it's a ridiculous Westminster-bubble type phrase that means nothing to people outside that world. |  |
| |
| No surprise on 11:39 - Feb 20 with 537 views | DJR |
| No surprise on 08:43 - Feb 20 by Plums |
I first heard Lib Dems use it when I was a member back in the 90's. I said then and still think it's a ridiculous Westminster-bubble type phrase that means nothing to people outside that world. |
It strikes me as being a phrase that the centrists in More in Common would apply to themselves.
Indeed when it comes to illiberal centrists, James O'Brien must take the biscuit because he tries to humiliate anyone who dares to disagree with him.
For my own part, I'd happily call myself a liberal socialist. | | | |
| No surprise on 12:27 - Feb 20 with 510 views | Herbivore |
| No surprise on 11:39 - Feb 20 by DJR |
It strikes me as being a phrase that the centrists in More in Common would apply to themselves.
Indeed when it comes to illiberal centrists, James O'Brien must take the biscuit because he tries to humiliate anyone who dares to disagree with him.
For my own part, I'd happily call myself a liberal socialist. |
My take is that it's a way of (broadly and crudely) categorising social attitudes as opposed to economic ones. People tend to be either socially conservative and favour perseveration of traditional social structures and institutions, or they tend to be progressive and favour social change and reform (generally in a liberal direction). I suspect it's something we've imported from the US. It sounds very American. | |
| |
| No surprise on 12:33 - Feb 20 with 491 views | DJR |
| No surprise on 12:27 - Feb 20 by Herbivore |
My take is that it's a way of (broadly and crudely) categorising social attitudes as opposed to economic ones. People tend to be either socially conservative and favour perseveration of traditional social structures and institutions, or they tend to be progressive and favour social change and reform (generally in a liberal direction). I suspect it's something we've imported from the US. It sounds very American. |
I came across this from a BBC article back in 2010.
But the term began to gain currency again in British politics during the Blair years - when many Labour politicians felt uncomfortable about describing themselves as "socialists" or even "left-wing". | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
