https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/10/05/theresa-may-criticized-the-term-citizen-of-the-world-but-half-the-world-identifies-that-way/
QuoteTheresa May criticized the term 'citizen of the world.' But half the world identifies that way.
In defense of the Brexit decision she now must implement, British Prime Minister Theresa May said Sunday that no "divisive nationalists" would hold up the process of exiting the European Union, and she firmly asserted that all four of Britain's constituent "nations" — England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland — would Brexit together.
But the Brexit decision was fueled in many ways by nationalist sentiments, centering on perceived threats to Britain's sovereignty and many of its citizens' desires to prevent the supposed dilution of their national identity by immigrants crossing the European Union's open borders.
Just three days after her comment about "divisive nationalists," at her Conservative Party's annual conference, May espoused her own brand of nationalism — one that seems to encompass all of Britain, but excludes those who may feel as though they have multiple nationalities, or identities.
"Today, too many people in positions of power behave as though they have more in common with international elites than with the people down the road, the people they employ, the people they pass on the street," she said. "But if you believe you are a citizen of the world, you are a citizen of nowhere. You don't understand what citizenship means."
As it turns out, about half of the people "down the road" or whom one might "pass on the street" identify with the very phrase May disparaged — being a "citizen of the world" or global citizen.
In an 18-nation survey conducted by GlobeScan in conjunction with the BBC World Service that was released just over a month ago, 47 percent of Britons said they somewhat or strongly agreed that they considered themselves more as global citizens than citizens of the United Kingdom.
That number is just slightly below the 51 percent of all respondents who felt the same way. Below is a look at how respondents from each of the 18 surveyed countries responded. It is worth noting that "urban-only" samples were used in Brazil, China, Indonesia and Kenya.
The poll surveyed 20,000 people between December 2015 and April 2016, which coincides with the lead-up to the Brexit vote.
GlobeScan has been carrying out similar surveys since 2001, and this year marks the first time since then that a global majority leans toward "global citizenship." Strong upticks in feelings of global citizenship in developing countries — including Nigeria (73 percent, up 13 points), China (71 percent, up 14 points), Peru (70 percent, up 27 points) and India (67 percent, up 13 points) — were the biggest drivers of the increase.
Conversely, seven European countries in the survey have followed an opposite trajectory, dropping to a low of 39 percent in 2011 and remaining at low levels since (now at 42 percent), according to GlobeScan. It notes that this has been "particularly pronounced" in Germany, where identification with global citizenship as opposed to national identity has dropped 13 points since 2009 to 30 percent today (the lowest since 2001).
(https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2016/10/global-citizen.jpg)
At this rate I might just have a new favourite prime minister in a few years. Sorry Maggie.
Poor May.
Time for us to kick 43% of population to Canada. :mad:
Also this was good. I can't wait to be listed.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-05/u-k-plan-to-make-companies-list-foreign-workers-faces-backlash
QuoteU.K. Plan to Make Companies List Foreign Workers Faces Backlash
U.K. Home Secretary Amber Rudd defended a series of policy proposals aimed at cutting the number of foreign workers at British companies after she was accused of stoking racism and anti-immigrant sentiment.
Under the plans announced at the Conservative Party conference, companies would have to list the non-U.K. nationals who work for them. Banks and landlords would also face sanctions if they fail to make checks on foreigners doing business with them.
"We mustn't ignore the fact that people do want to talk about immigration; if I want to talk about immigration, don't call me a racist," Rudd told BBC Radio 4 on Wednesday. "We should be able to have a conversation about immigration, about what skills we want to have in the U.K. and where we need to go to get them, in order to help business and boost our economy."
Lawmakers for the opposition Labour Party joined business leaders in criticizing Rudd over the plans, which she said are part of a review aimed at helping companies train local staff to reduce the dependence on workers from outside Britain. Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt used his conference speech to announce plans to make the National Health Service "self sufficient" within a decade so that it no longer needs to rely on doctors from overseas.
'Nasty Party'
"Sorry, but no, we're not having this," Labour lawmaker Andy Burnham tweeted over a picture of the headline 'Firms Must List Foreign Workers' on the front page of Wednesday's Times newspaper. "This has been an unpleasant, xenophobic Tory Conference. Theresa May has presided over the return of the Nasty Party," he added in a further tweet.
Rudd on Tuesday reaffirmed the government's commitment to reduce net migration to "tens of thousands" as the U.K. heads for a future outside the European Union. It was a near-record 327,000 in the year through March.
"A lot of businesses would be saddened if they thought that having a global workforce was a mark of shame," Adam Marshall, acting director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, told the BBC. "I don't think they should be penalized for doing so when they have a specific skills need."
Rudd said the listing of workers is a proposal and would be part of a wider review of immigration regulations.
Prison Threat
"It's not something we're definitely going to do; it's one of the things we're going to use in the review," she said. "What we're saying to businesses is 'work with us to deliver what we need to have, which is a more skilled local labor force."'
Landlords who knowingly rent property to illegal immigrants could face prison, Rudd told Tory activists in Birmingham, central England, on Tuesday. Banks will also have to check their clients are allowed to be in the country. She said she's looking to toughen the conditions that companies have to meet before getting a visa for a foreign worker.
The plans were criticized by the Institute of Directors business lobby group, which said the target is "arbitrary" and has no connection to the skills needed by British businesses.
They're making a list and checking it twice, gonna find out who's Muslim or white. Conservatives are going to town.
Given the state of Labour, is there a chance that the LibDems succeed on a platform of not being insane or racist?
Sad to see UK of all nations turning inward in these times. That's our shtick.
Quote from: celedhring on October 06, 2016, 07:03:45 AM
Given the state of Labour, is there a chance that the LibDems succeed on a platform of not being insane or racist?
We I joined them but they were pretty much crushed at the last election and aren't polling much better at the moment.
Although the (awful) Amber Rudd quotes make it sound as if the Tories have turned sharply to the right, my guess is that this is largely political posturing. Red meat to the brexit hordes to keep the party united while taking advantage of turmoil in UKIP to destroy them as a political force. I'd give good odds that these policy proposals are never made concrete. I hope so any way.
On non-immigration & non-education matters, May is sounding very one nation Tory, even left-wing.
Quote from: Gups on October 06, 2016, 07:23:35 AM
Although the (awful) Amber Rudd...
Yes, for once we definitely agree on something. She's awful.
Quote from: Gups on October 06, 2016, 07:23:35 AMOn non-immigration & non-education matters, May is sounding very one nation Tory, even left-wing.
Agreed; and even on education matters she's not sounding as right wing as grammar school opponents are making out.
She is, in fact, tacking too far to the left on several issues in her speeches for my comfort. It is a bit of a surprise given her record (I disagreed with her when she was at the Home Office mostly for her being too right wing.)
Which is the real "Theresa May"?
Quote from: Gups on October 06, 2016, 07:23:35 AM
On non-immigration & non-education matters, May is sounding very one nation Tory, even left-wing.
probably because the real base of the left is far less pro-migration than the caviar-layers remember. There's after all a reason why it's the lower tiers of society (i.e. those people who the left claims to represent) are making (or have made) the switch from traditional left-wing parties to parties with programs that limit migration (often called right-wing until one reads& the rest of their programme).
I don't understand why this argument matters. So what if you are a citizen of the world or not? Seems a meaningless label to me. It doesn't grant me access to countries, the right to live and work elsewhere, welfare etc. Are there any serious implications?
Quote from: Monoriu on October 06, 2016, 08:14:56 AM
I don't understand why this argument matters. So what if you are a citizen of the world or not? Seems a meaningless label to me. It doesn't grant me access to countries, the right to live and work elsewhere, welfare etc. Are there any serious implications?
I heard that "nowhere" has a pretty low tax burden.
I notice that only 4% of Germans "strongly agree" even though they are really quite an outward-looking people in many ways. I think that is because they have thought about the question rather than indulging in wishy-washy feelings. It is the country that provides its citizens with healthcare, pensions, protection etc., one can love and admire certain foreign countries but short of emigrating there they are not going to provide one with those things. Maybe that is why so many Nigerians regard themselves as citizens of the world, given that their country provides them with bugger-all.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 06, 2016, 08:31:56 AM
I notice that only 4% of Germans "strongly agree" even though they are really quite an outward-looking people in many ways. I think that is because they have thought about the question rather than indulging in wishy-washy feelings. It is the country that provides its citizens with healthcare, pensions, protection etc., one can love and admire certain foreign countries but short of emigrating there they are not going to provide one with those things. Maybe that is why so many Nigerians regard themselves as citizens of the world, given that their country provides them with bugger-all.
That reasoning makes the Russians the most level-headed of them all, then.
Quote from: Monoriu on October 06, 2016, 08:14:56 AM
I don't understand why this argument matters. So what if you are a citizen of the world or not? Seems a meaningless label to me. It doesn't grant me access to countries, the right to live and work elsewhere, welfare etc. Are there any serious implications?
Not yet.
The more people start thinking that way though the less we will be prisoners in the place where we happened to be born and the less toxic "don't blame the government who are making your lives miserable for your problems. Blame those nasty people who have the cheek to be foreign" will work.
Quote from: celedhring on October 06, 2016, 08:35:00 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 06, 2016, 08:31:56 AM
I notice that only 4% of Germans "strongly agree" even though they are really quite an outward-looking people in many ways. I think that is because they have thought about the question rather than indulging in wishy-washy feelings. It is the country that provides its citizens with healthcare, pensions, protection etc., one can love and admire certain foreign countries but short of emigrating there they are not going to provide one with those things. Maybe that is why so many Nigerians regard themselves as citizens of the world, given that their country provides them with bugger-all.
That reasoning makes the Russians the most level-headed of them all, then.
Exactly :P
I don't think it is a very useful survey, the results are all over the place. Do nearly three quarters of the Chinese think of themselves as world citizens rather than Chinese citizens? Very doubtful, in their case I think it means that they are excited about touristic opportunities, but who knows.
+
In the case of Spain, is along the lines of what I would expect. Spanish national sentiment is not very strong - still too tied to Franco and a pretty divisive subject matter.
Quotecitizen of the world
:bleeding:
I am a citizen of the world. Murica is the world. Murica.
What if in your heart you consider yourself a citizen of another country in a different time period? Say...1789 or something?
Also:
'What is your nationality?'
'I'm a drunkard'
'That makes Rick a citizen of the world.'
Quote from: celedhring on October 06, 2016, 08:52:43 AM
In the case of Spain, is along the lines of what I would expect. Spanish national sentiment is not very strong - still too tied to Franco and a pretty divisive subject matter.
Yet they also are among the leaders in strongly disagreeing.
Quote from: Valmy on October 06, 2016, 09:09:53 AM
What if in your heart you consider yourself a citizen of another country in a different time period? Say...1793 or something?
Fixed for the true Jacobin. :P
Quote from: Valmy on October 06, 2016, 09:11:00 AM
Quote from: celedhring on October 06, 2016, 08:52:43 AM
In the case of Spain, is along the lines of what I would expect. Spanish national sentiment is not very strong - still too tied to Franco and a pretty divisive subject matter.
Yet they also are among the leaders in strongly disagreeing.
Football fans.
But yeah, national sentiment is a divisive matter, and you need somebody at the other side for it to be divisive.
Quote from: Valmy on October 06, 2016, 09:09:53 AM
What if in your heart you consider yourself a citizen of another country in a different time period? Say...1789 or something?
Also:
'What is your nationality?'
'I'm a drunkard'
'That makes Rick a citizen of the world.'
Actually I think that makes Rick a Russian citizen.
Quote from: derspiess on October 06, 2016, 09:04:32 AM
Quotecitizen of the world
:bleeding:
I know. Makes me want to puke.
Even if discussions like this are just a ruse to lure UKIP retards to the fold, this never ends well.
Look at how the Cameron's Brexit bluff ended. Or what happened to the Republicans.
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 06, 2016, 10:11:31 AM
Quote from: derspiess on October 06, 2016, 09:04:32 AM
Quotecitizen of the world
:bleeding:
I know. Makes me want to puke.
Where are you from?
Oh everywhere really...
Hippie fucks
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 06, 2016, 08:31:56 AM
I notice that only 4% of Germans "strongly agree" even though they are really quite an outward-looking people in many ways. I think that is because they have thought about the question rather than indulging in wishy-washy feelings. It is the country that provides its citizens with healthcare, pensions, protection etc., one can love and admire certain foreign countries but short of emigrating there they are not going to provide one with those things.
The poll does not provide any explanation for the results, so your reasoning can be correct. But it could just as well be because Germans feel "Deutschland über alles". Who knows.
I feel like I am really openminded, interested in other cultures, love to travel - but all my travels have shown me that yes, I am a German and that also defines part of my values, convictions and the way approach situations.
Quote from: Tyr on October 06, 2016, 08:37:59 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on October 06, 2016, 08:14:56 AM
I don't understand why this argument matters. So what if you are a citizen of the world or not? Seems a meaningless label to me. It doesn't grant me access to countries, the right to live and work elsewhere, welfare etc. Are there any serious implications?
Not yet.
The more people start thinking that way though the less we will be prisoners in the place where we happened to be born and the less toxic "don't blame the government who are making your lives miserable for your problems. Blame those nasty people who have the cheek to be foreign" will work.
It's really sad that Europe is being scared out of their Schengen progress now. Someday there may be a day when people can freely go wherever they want without papers, customs, financial controls, etc, but now I doubt it will be in my lifetime.
Nigerians always get the hippie 'we love everybody' award in all these kinds of polls. You would think the country was like Disney Land.
It's probably so bad there they all wish they were citizens of someplace else.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 06, 2016, 12:11:23 PM
It's probably so bad there they all wish they were citizens of someplace else.
Nah. Those polls where they ask people in different countries 'how do you feel about various foreign countries' Nigerians just love everybody. Or the 'how happy are you?' poll the Nigerians usually score near the top. IIRC anyway.
At least the British will soon not be citizens of the Fourth Reich European Union anymore and have their blue passports back! :bowler:
So can we confirm now that May has no substantive policy agenda, no coherent vision for such an agenda, no concrete ideas whatsoever? Is there any reason not to let her retire and replace her with a bot programmed to generate random sound bites, slogans, and grist for the Daily Mail mill. Same result, and less upkeep costs at Downing Street.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 06, 2016, 01:34:34 PM
So can we confirm now that May has no substantive policy agenda, no coherent vision for such an agenda, no concrete ideas whatsoever? Is there any reason not to let her retire and replace her with a bot programmed to generate random sound bites, slogans, and grist for the Daily Mail mill. Same result, and less upkeep costs at Downing Street.
Yep, that's pretty much my view I posted over in the other UK thread:
Quote from: mongers on October 05, 2016, 09:20:48 AM
Quote from: Tamas on October 05, 2016, 08:58:14 AM
P.S. Farage is back leading UKIP again. What a joke.
Why is it a joke, it perfectly fits in with the seriousness and intellectualism of our current political climate in the UK; The PM has just given a speech greeted with rapturous applause, it's contents a series of Daily Mail headlines or sound-bite responses to such headlines.
Well there you go, great minds and all. :)
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 06, 2016, 03:59:33 PM
Well there you go, great minds and all. :)
No not really, at least on my part, the lack of underpinning in her speech was blatantly obvious.
And yet 60% of the my countrymen will turn around and say "that was a great speech, I really like the bit about her protecting our boys*, from left-wing ambulance chasing human rights lawyers"
*soldier in a warzone/occupation.
The Tories do feel a bit too eager to quickly embrace the most controversial aspects of Brexit. "Let's make list of people and companies who are not British enough" as one, and also the BBC triumphantly reported a few days ago how British soldiers will be less accountable because they are opting out of the applicable European laws from next year.
I mean, sure, that could be a good thing but come on, what kind of headlines are these?
This is a decent summary of Tory positioning and motivation.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/07/tories-left-right-theresa-may-brexit
f Ed Balls didn't have the medium of dance through which to express his feelings, he might be forgiven for wanting to punch a wall right now. So perhaps we can expect a more than usually vigorous turn from the former shadow chancellor on this week's Strictly Come Dancing. Imagine the frustration of losing a seat last May, only for some of your political thinking to live on, also in May. Theresa May, that is.
This has been a depressing, frightening week in UK politics; a time when genuinely ugly things have been said, then half-unsaid, but not forgotten. But it's the worst possible time for progressives to abandon hope. May has not lurched right, or left, or towards the centre ground. She's done all three.
She's moved left into the kind of borrow-and-build, state-led economic strategy that Balls would recognise, and into an anti-fat cat rhetoric Ed Miliband absolutely did recognise, judging by his single sardonic tweet in response to hints of a clampdown on energy prices: "Marxist, anti-business interventionism imho [in my humble opinion]".
But she's also moved sharply rightwards on immigration, something Labour agonised over in the last parliament but couldn't bring itself to do, even though it was clearly what many working-class voters wanted.
And all the time she's talking of what she calls the "new centre ground", although centre of gravity is perhaps closer to the mark; not some balanced ideological midpoint between left and right, but the great confusing expanse of political territory where those labels stop making sense, because public opinion seems to be left-ish on some things (believing big business must be screwing them over) but right-ish on social issues. And if that looks confusing and contradictory from the outside, imagine how it feels on the inside.
This week has revealed a government still interestingly unsure of its ground
May was right to point out this week how many politicians and journalists were wrong about Brexit. But her attack on the dreaded leftie liberal elite disguises the fact that they certainly weren't alone in getting it wrong. Plenty of outers didn't see victory coming either, judging by private conversations in the run-up to the referendum, and nor did many of May's current cabinet.
Not long ago the health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, was earnestly telling us how Brexit would hurt the NHS, and Amber Rudd was socking it to leavers in the TV debate. What a difference a referendum makes. This week Hunt, an instinctive internationalist whose wife is Chinese, was trumpeting plans to train more British-born doctors instead of importing them – prompting a furious row over whether foreign doctors are being tacitly encouraged to leave.
Rudd, a socially liberal ex-journalist, meanwhile suggested companies be forced to publish data about how many foreign staff they employ. In a country happily relaxed about immigration, that might have sounded more pointless than sinister. In the current climate, she was accused of being one step away from handing out yellow stars.
And yes, it's scary stuff. But it also falls apart surprisingly quickly when prodded, and therein lies the ray of hope: this isn't a cabinet of racists. It's a cabinet peppered with people terrified of being exposed as closet liberal elitists, clumsily second-guessing what people they'd once have regarded as racists think, only without the instinctive feel that true believers often have for when they're going too far. Push back hard enough, and they give surprisingly fast.
Within hours, May was clarifying that she didn't actually want to send any foreign-born doctors back, while Rudd was on radio explaining that her plan wasn't necessarily going to happen – and the odds, given the instant backlash from business, are certainly against it. (When ministers asked firms to publish minimal and anonymised data about male and female salaries as part of its equality strategy, the furious complaints about red tape and unfair bad publicity nearly killed the plan. If they're that afraid of a little light feminist critique, imagine how chief executives feel about ending up on some far-right hit list of supposedly "unpatriotic" businesses reliant on Romanians.)
If Rudd wants to see how divisive this idea might prove in the workplace, meanwhile, she could simply look down the cabinet table. Boris Johnson was born in New York, lived there until he was five, and until last year held dual American and British passports. Should May have hired a homegrown foreign secretary? Or should we be embarrassed to live in the sort of country where anyone would raise that question?
The damage is done now, of course. Some people will have heard the dog whistle all right, but missed the dogs being called off later. Sadly, those who have felt unwelcome here since June may simply feel more so. But the whole episode reveals a government still interestingly unsure of its ground, precisely because much of this isn't naturally its ground; it's still feeling its way in circumstances most ministers didn't anticipate.
That means it can be shamed, it can be reasoned with, and now its defences have been tested properly its weak spots are more obvious – as are the places where arrows ping helplessly off its armour. And Labour ought to know, because it's been there.
There was more than a whiff of Blue Labour – the economically leftwing, socially rightwing, heavily nostalgic movement that was fashionable for a while under Ed Miliband – about May's agenda this week, and that provides some interesting clues as to where it might get unstuck. Team Miliband liked Blue Labour's ideas on economic justice but balked at their awkward, uncomfortable messages on immigration (with the arguable exception of Balls, who was raising concerns over freedom of movement back in 2010).
Judging by the wild applause for every mention of Brexit in Birmingham, and the silence when May promised to protect workers' rights, Red Toryism has a similar problem in reverse. But if the 2015 election result is anything to go by, cherrypicking the easy bits and ignoring the harder ones doesn't work; like trying to dance a waltz without a partner, people can see something's missing.
Trying to keep both ideologically warring halves of the package together, however, is like trying to waltz with someone who's trying to make you dance the Charleston. Blue Labour excelled at capturing what angry voters thought, but could never quite turn it into coherent policy. Judging by last week, the Red Tories are about to find out how that feels.
Yeah, yeah. It is perfectly alright for the center right to cater for the far right, it is very easy to keep those guys under control, I am sure nothing bad can come out of this.
:P