@NealOKelly@raelbrav That is fine: that Sunak's identification with the English nation does not make him also part of the English ethnic group is clearly true
Rather than the idea that Sunak's identification with England, born + bred here, is somehow a threat to eradicate English national identity
@raelbrav One problem with the idea it must take 5-6 generations to become English is this means many of the white majority group aren't English.
There would be v few English Jews, even in the 3rd/4th generation here. Does anybody who isn't antisemitic really argue that seriously?!
@raelbrav Why shouldn't his English identity be respected as well as his British identity? Do you really think Paul Ince, Ian Wright and Marcus Rashford are not English - simply due to their skin colour + ancestry? Did Tom Stoppard not become English too?
@Mark_A_K_W@andrew_lilico My claim was "But most ethnically English people do demonstrably see the English nation as wider than their ethnic group" - ie, most white English people are in the 84% that don't see it as exclusive to their ethnic group
(You may think I was saying the opposite?)
@Mark_A_K_W@andrew_lilico 84% is most: they are the ones saying yes black people can be English.
The 11% are the people who agree it is ethnically exclusive, so only white people can be English.
.
Yes, it is 1/10 of the white majority group, but 1/6 to 1/4 of minorities
https://t.co/i8Xjf2JInD
@Mark_A_K_W@andrew_lilico The 2016 Brexit polls were v much within the margin of error & too close to call throughout. There is a big difference between 8-1 fimdings and 50-50 fluctuations in attitudes research with nat rep samples
@Mark_A_K_W@andrew_lilico The evidence is in the repeated findings of the last 2-3 decades of attitides research with nat rep samples across majority & minority groups, as to how people conceive of national identity and its connection to ancestry, faith, race and civic msrkers of belonging.
@KonstantinKisin@RishiSunak Your polls comment is a bit spun. It is not carefully crafted Qs about celebrities
Your view reflects a broader minority of migrants, like yourself, & minorties (though a minority) than of the white English, where overlapping ethnic/civic views v common but yours crashes 9-1!
@KonstantinKisin@RishiSunak I saw that bit.
My question was whether your concept means all people of Asian ethnicity in Scotland are "British, not Scottish", eg the former SNP first minister Humza Yousaf & the Labour leader Anas Sarwar? That would be quite strange
@LordWalney Happy to discuss in person. Of course you would never put that about 1920s or 2020s. You would recognise this was often made in 1920s in UK & France & Germany against those promoting all model of participation ( eg maintaiming visible faith with integration + total assimilation)
@LordWalney An analogous argument would identify abuse/threat to elected MPs as product of low trust in instns + legacy of MPs expenses scandal. I think you reject that: see scrutiny of expenses & frustration as legit, never abuse. At most context for illegit efforts to socialise abuse
@LordWalney Obviously "I don't accept Sunak is British" or "I don't accept Badenoch/Sadiq Khan as British" is a proof point of [no form of integration is enough to make me accept people]. Its a key mistake to conflate that with: but is Sunak the exception, not the norm. How many integrate?
@KonstantinKisin@RishiSunak I am not a paid subscriber. Are you are keeping the answer to the question about those of Asian ethnicity in Scotland and England as an esoteric one, or are you prepared to give it in public also?
@LordWalney It would make much more sense to say: in excluding racism, we should not castigate legit concerms about integration or migration as racist.
Rather than to infer racism, antisemitism are primarily the product of legit concerns at conduct of black & Asian people, Muslims & Jews.
@LordWalney What kind of intellectual gymnastics are necessaey to imagine "too many minorites in grammar schools" as a concern about a lack of integration? This is not a call for more integration, but an objection in principle to it