Reform and Britannia … Poland … Love All Always or Prefer Those Like Ourselves?
Reform and Britannia … Poland … Love All Always or Prefer Those Like Ourselves?
Part 1
Love All Always … or … Prefer Those Like Ourselves?
Introduction
J D Vance and Pope Leo
J D Vance on Fox News … Rory Stewart
Finkelstein on Vance and Stewart
Value functions
Loving and loving functions
The structure of groups in society
Part 2
War and empire: nation - self positive, other negative
Part 3
The West… the right divided Poland
Part 4
Britannia … the Conservative party
Patrick O’Flynn … Daily Express … UKIP … Spectator
A two-group system … the Britannia group
The Britannia variable
The Britannia variable: parties and Brexit support
The Britannia variable: parties/groups and nations
Part 5
Loving All Always and social cohesion … the Britannia variable
Love All … Trust All?
A Britannia social cohesion scale: the Reform-LibDem differential
Income and connectedness
Part 1
Love All Always … or … Prefer Those Like Ourselves?
Introduction
A recent column by Daniel Finkelstein provides a rich discussion of some of the concepts underlying current politics in the USA and UK. Should we treat friends and strangers in the same way? On this the Vice-President and the Pope disagree … Prime minister Keir Starmer is concerned that the UK might become “an island of strangers”. People are positive about their own tribe but not about a different tribe … but how do people decide who their own tribe is? Negativity towards others may arise from perceptions of unfairness, with the other not conforming to a norm for reciprocation, particularly the reciprocation of positive social contributions. How does positive reciprocation come about? By social development or biological evolution?
“How vampire bats explain Starmer’s ‘strangers’. Humans, like some other species, appreciate reciprocity, and tend to worry someone’s taking more out than they put in. … We are experts at self-deception. Everyone thinks they contribute.”
Daniel Finkelstein. The Times. May 14, 2025: 19.
J D Vance and Pope Leo
“Before becoming Pope, Leo … had shared an article suggesting that J D Vance was wrong to say Jesus asked Catholics to rank their love for others.”
Daily Telegraph, 18 May 2025: 11.
J D Vance on Fox News … Rory Stewart
J D Vance on Fox News (1)
“… how America First is underpinned by Christian theology.” (2)
“Daniel Finkelstein sides with J D Vance’s argument that we naturally choose the needs of friends and family over those of strangers.” (3)
“We may be predisposed to react favourably to people like ourselves but, as the Pope and Rory Stewart have written, J D Vance is thoroughly wrong to call this a Christian concept. Jesus’s parable of the Good Samaritan directly contradicts our preference for immediate neighbours.” (4)
Following the above quotations it is helpful to distinguish between (i) what happens and (ii) what should happen … and between what people do and what they say … about (i) and (ii).
References
.(1) J D Vance https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peo8Rtkur34
.(2) “Why Rory Stewart clashed with J D Vance.”
Catholic: https://www.ncronline.org/opinion/guest-voices/jd-vance-wrong-jesus-doesnt-ask-us-rank-our-love-others
Stewart and Vance: https://x.com/RoryStewartUK/status/1885238679737684445?lang=en-GB
Spectator: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/rory-stewart-is-no-match-for-jd-vance/
(3) Richard Bryant in (A);
(4) Grace Dalton in (A).
.(A) “ ‘Island of strangers’ and the impulse to help.” Letters to the Editor. The Times, May 16, 2025: 22.
.(B) Daniel Finkelstein. The Times. May 14, 2025: 19. See sections below.
Finkelstein on Vance and Stewart
Daniel Finkelstein comments on the Vance and Stewart debate. Stewart invoked the late and the new popes, arguing that “to Jesus everyone was the same, and we should think of everyone in the same way”. Vance argued that people do not do this - and indeed should not. Finkelstein makes a distinction between what is and what should be, his argument taking the form: “what should be … but … what is.”
“We should treat every human being with respect and dignity … but it is utterly unrealistic to expect us to be utterly indifferent when choosing between a close friend and a stranger.”
However Finkelstein appears to have an aspiration towards treating everyone as the same:
“I think it is a civilising instinct to constantly widen our circle of trust and friendship, to see more people as part of our tribe and fewer as strangers, and to strain every sinew to do that. … But I am fairly realistic about how far we can really go with this …”
Such a disjunction between what should be and what is makes us feel uncomfortable:
“None of this is particularly comfortable, but I don’t say it to be comfortable, I say it because it’s true.”
Daniel Finkelstein. The Times. May 14, 2025: 19.
Preference functions; value functions
Ranking our love for others is a special case of the general case of having preferences over a set of objects. The general topic of preference functions has been extensively studied.
A special case is a preference function giving rise to “indifference when choosing”. Empirically both indifference and definite preference occur.
Preferences may be such that there is an ideal object, preferred to all the other objects …
… preferences may be such that the set of objects can ranked, put in an order such that each object is preferred to its next preferred object.
It may be that the set of objects can be located in some space, possibly a one-dimensional continuum …
… a preference function may be single-peaked on some dimension or in some space.
Different people may have different preferences - different preference functions.
In addition to having preferences on a set of objects, a person may attach a value to each object, giving rise to a value function. Values may be positive or negative; and the distribution of value over a set of objects is of interest.
Loving and loving functions
Loving involves placing a very high positive value on the object being loved. Loving functions are a particular type of value function. “Love All Always” refers to a loving function where a very high positive value is placed on all the objects. “Preferring Those Like Ourselves” refers to placing people, including ourself, in a social space with dissimilarity distances between people in the space; and a value or preference function which is single-peaked with the peak occurring at the point corresponding to the self.
The structure of groups in society
The set of groups in society exhibit various structures. There are nested groups, for example according to geography: I was born in Dunfermline, Fife, Scotland, UK, … Europe, Northern hemisphere … British Empire. These are some of my various identities and group memberships.
There are groups in a partition of mutually exclusive groups, for example as in single-vote elections for a set of political parties. There are intersecting partitions such as when class-based groups intersect with geography-based groups.
There are relations between individuals and between groups, and also between an individual and a group that the individual is a member of, in particular the relationship between the individual and society.
Part 2
War and empire: nation - self positive, other negative
Wars and empires are phenomena where nations are positive to themselves and negative towards other nations.
“VE Day: today in the UK, tomorrow in Russia
“Eighty years on. Victory in Europe was the ultimate triumph of hope over despair.”
“Xi and Putin are brothers in arms of force for Victory Day.”
The Times, May 8 2025: 25 (Editorial); 28.
World wars are global events but are locally experienced and remembered.
‘Local’ may be national experience and remembrance …
… and ‘national’ may be a certain conception of the nation …
… and conceptions may be political.
GO TO
World Wars I and II (extracts from the 2014 and 2015 Yearbooks)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Dt9G_bv5Ue5-WfaaD0PVpgSL3rutbe4s/view
‘Our values’: nationalism and remembrance, pp 5-8
Universalism? Global war and local remembrances, pp 8-11
The Russian Empire, pp 14-18
The British Empire, pp 18-19
1945: Japan, USA, China and the Pacific, pp 19-20
1945-2015: the United Nations, pp 20-22
The national self … empires in Europe … the Ottoman empire
Click: The national self … empires in Europe … the Ottoman empire
This is part of Nations and world: variation and self.
Part 3
The West … the right divided … Poland
“Death of the centre right. Across western democracies, populists are ravaging traditional conservatives. Britain’s Tories are not alone … the new right turned against managers, civil servants and professionals.”
Sam Freedman. The Observer, May 25, 2025.
Centre-right prime minister Donald Tusk now has to co-habit with the newly elected president, Karol Nawrocki of the radical right, who gained 50.9% of the vote, defeating Rafal Trzakowski who gained 49.1%. The turnout was 72%.“Europe or America, city or countryside, liberalism or anti-liberalism” … Nawrocki is “anti-European, anti-German, anti-immigration … intensifying anti-Ukrainian sentiment”,
“an elite perceived as self-serving and patronising”, “voting against Tusk [and his government]”. The radical right thus displays ‘self positive, other negative’.
Education was an important variable:
Nawrocki: 73.4% only primary … 37.7% higher education
Trzakowski (“establishment”): 26.6% only primary … 62.2% higher education
The real division is between the top and the bottom of society
Elsewhere other populist leaders, akin to USA’s Donald Trump are Italy’s Giorgio Meloni, Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Slovakia’s Robert Fico … also France’s Marine le Pen.
“Poland’s new populist president spells trouble for its centre-right ruling coalition.” Editorial. 25.
“Hard-right victory in Poland is ‘revolt against elitism’. 26.
The Times, June 3 2025.
Part 4
Britannia … the Conservative party
In the UK, the notion of Britannia has involved a certain conception of Britain. It has been associated with the Conservative party.
“Churchill’s Ghost. The war leader’s words and Ukraine’s courage lent poignancy to the VE Day parade …
… The King was, like his grandfather George VI, attired in the uniform of Admiral of the Fleet, and like him took to the balcony of Buckingham Palace to acknowledge the crowd.”
The Times, May 6, 2025: 23.
GO TO Chapter:
2 VE Day: Winston Churchill and George VI on the balcony
In draft online book:
Britannia: Three Prime Ministers and a Queen
Patrick O’Flynn … Daily Express … UKIP … Spectator
The recent obituary for Patrick O’Flynn provides a glimpse into the role of the press in the lead up to the Brexit referendum and an insight into some of the ideas motivating the campaign to leave the EU.
Cambridge-born and Cambridge-educated. He was political editor of the Daily Express and in 2010 persuaded the Express to become the first national newspaper to campaign publicly for Britain to leave the European Union. He listened to the readers and reflected their concerns. In 2013 became director for communications for UKIP under Nigel Farage and persuaded Farage to modify his Thatcherist instincts and shift his strategy towards disillusioned voters in Labour areas in the north and midlands. UKIP triumphed in the 2014 European elections; and in 2016 Leave won the referendum. He left Ukip in 2018 because of the appointment of the far-right Tony Robinson. He joined the SDP which O’Flynn said “espouses broad and moderate pro-nation state political values … firm and strong on Brexit … recognises a social dimension in our politics and also understands that brussels does not command the loyalty that’s needed to create institutions like the NHS. We do this as a nation.” … O’Flynn’s fierce patriotism … Kemi Badenoch: “… my goodness, he loved this country.”
“Patrick O’Flynn. Eurosceptic journalist and politician who cultivated ‘Red wall’ Brexiteers.” The Times, May 24 2025:70.
The Britannia variable
The Britannia variable is a hypothetical variable which correlate with a cluster of variables and is revealed in the correlations between the variables and would correspond to a factor or component in an appropriate statistical analysis (not carried out here).
A two-group system … the Britannia group
The members of the Conservative party have varied in the strength of their commitment to the notion of Britannia. Over time parties have formed with a strong commitment to Britannia: UKIP, the Brexit Party and now Reform. The parties sympathetic to the notion of Britannia can be considered as a group, the Britannia group, Group A, with other parties belonging to a Group B. So UK politics can be thought of as a two-group system.
At the time of the Brexit referendum the combined vote for the Conservative and the Brexit party, the Group A vote, was about 50%. It is currently just below this level in the opinion polls. There is much attention to how the vote is split between and within the two groups.
Before and after its success in the recent local elections the Reform party has been ahead of Labour in opinion polls.
A Conservative 20% (17-23) – midpoint, range
B Labour 23% (20-26)
A Reform 27% (25-29)
B Lib Dem 14% (11-16)
B Green 10% (7-13)
…
Group A 47% (45-48)
Group B 47% (45-49)
…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
Here is how one opponent sees Reform and its view of Britain:
“… there is a serious chance Reform could form the next government. The idea fills me with horror. The party represents a nostalgic, xenophobic, small-island view of Britain. It includes racists.”
“I abhor Reform but they’re right on one thing. Leaving the ECHR would let us retain a liberal immigration policy – and keep Farage’s party out.” Emma Duncan. The Times. May 9 2025: 24.
Here is another angle:
“Voters are sick of lectures from the lanyard class. Reform is surging because working class people resent the professional cadre who dismiss them as stupid and racist.” Janice Turner. The Times. May 10 2025: 23.
In the wake of the local elections there is much talk of the two-party system being replaced by a five-party system. What is also the case is that there has been a continuation of a two-group system, each consisting of about half the voters.
The Britannia variable: parties, groups and Brexit support
Parties and groups of parties can be placed in an ordering on the basis of how their supporters voted in the Brexit referendum.
One dimension of political space is support for Brexit. The proportion of a party’s supporters who voted Remain in the 2016 referendum provides a measure of a party’s support for Brexit. Four parties have a high Remain score – referred to as Group B - and two parties have a low Remain score – referred to as Group A.
B SNP 0.83
B Labour 0.81
B Green 0.78
B Lib Dem 0.7
- Plaid C 0.5
- Other 0.5
A Conserv 0.39
A Reform 0.13
The Britannia variable: parties/groups and nations
The table below shows the party voting across the UK nations, general election 2024. The nations can be put into an ordering – England, UK, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland – such that the Conservative, Reform and Group A vote decreases and the nationalist party vote increases (independence from the UK). Also the Lib Dem and Green vote decrease along the ordering whereas the Labour vote scarcely varies. There are a couple of minor exceptions to this. One can say that this ordering of the nations correlates with the Britannia variable.
Table Party voting across the UK nations, general election 2024
. Eng UK Wales Scot. N. Ireland
Reform 15.3 14.3 16.9 7.0 0
Con 25.9 23.7 18.2 12.7 0
Group A 41.2 38.0 35.1 19.7 0 [34.3]*
LibDem 13.2 12.2 6.5 9.7 -
Green 7.3 6.4 4.7 3.8 -
Labour 34.4 33.7 37.0 35.3 [SDLP]
Group B 54.9 52.3 48.2 48.8 -
PC - 0.7 14.8 - -
SNP - 2.5 - 30.0 -
SF - 0.7 - - 27.0
SDLP - 0.3 - - 11.1
Alliance - 0.4 - - 15.0
UU - 0.6 - - 22.1*
UUP - 0.3 - - 12.2*
2024 GE
UK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_general_election
England https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_England
Wales
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_Wales
Scotland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_Scotland
Ireland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_Northern_Ireland
Part 5
Loving All Always and social cohesion … the Britannia variable
“[without strong migration rules] we risk becoming an island of strangers, not a nation that walks forward together.” Prime Minister Keir Starmer.
spoken: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52AbmuODkPM
“Hello, Stranger. Sir Keir Starmer has belatedly recognised the negative consequences of unfettered immigration. His new proposals may be sweeping but fail to tackle illegal asylum.” Editorial. The Times. May 13, 2025: 25.
“Starmer mocked by Farage for ‘learning a great deal from Reform UK after immigration backlash.” The Independent. May 14, 2025
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/farage-migration-starmer-reform-uk-b2750865.html
“How vampire bats explain Starmer’s ‘strangers’. Humans like some other species, appreciate reciprocity and tend to worry someone’s taking out more than they put in. … We are experts at self-deception. Everyone thinks they contribute. … My family knows how hard it is for an outsider to be seen as an insider.” Daniel Finkelstein. The Times. May 14, 2025: 19. [See also the discussion at the beginning of this report.]
“Britain is an island of strangers, poll finds.”
Daily Telegraph, 18 May 2025: 11.
The notion of ‘loving all always’ relates to social cohesion, societal bonds, community connection and neighbourhood trust. These aspects were investigated in a recent survey by More in Common. Here is the introduction to their report:
“Introducing This Place Matters
Our new public opinion research lays bare the challenges facing social cohesion in Britain today and the urgent need for a renewed focus on strengthening societal bonds, community connection and neighbourhood trust.
These findings are announced as Citizens UK, UCL and More in Common launch This Place Matters, a new project designed to provide local and national governments with a blueprint for what an effective cohesion policy looks like, and to amplify the work of civic actors on the ground who are already doing so much to strengthen our social fabric.
Drawing on polling of more than 13,000 Britons and focus groups from across the country, the research finds that a plurality of Britons feel disconnected from British society, wary of institutions, and anxious about rising community tensions.
Though some of this mistrust stems from concerns around migration and societal change, this is only one part of the picture. The findings show that the rise of social media and technology, the impact of the pandemic, the cost of living crisis and political fragmentation have all had lasting impacts on people’s relationships with those around them. This sense of distrust is particularly strong among young Britons, and those who feel economically insecure.”
https://www.moreincommon.org.uk/our-work/research/social-cohesion-a-snapshot/
The questions and how the answers relate to social variables
The survey asked about the aspects listed below. Also listed is the correlation of these aspects with social variables such as age, education, party and ethnicity.
Aspects: 1 stranger; 2 disconnected; 3 trust; 4 rigged; 5 multicultural; 6 integration; 7 minority; 8 white; 9 riots; 10 Jew/Muslim; 11 past
The results by party are given for questions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 9.
1 Sometimes I feel like a stranger in my own country. (Describes me very well.)
… little or unclear link to ethnicity
… link to low household income
… strong link to party
2 I feel disconnected from society around me.
… strong link to low household income
… strong link to party
3 I have little or no trust in my neighbours.
… link to low household income
… strong link to young age – see below
… link to party, see below
4 In the UK the system is rigged to serve the rich and the powerful.
… link to education
5 Multiculturalism benefits/threatens our national identity.
… link to party, see below
6 We need to do more to encourage integration between people of different backgrounds in the UK.
… link to party, see below
7 Integration is mainly the responsibility of those from ethnic minority groups.
… link to party, see below
8 People of different ethnicities will never be as British as White people.
… no link with age
9 People in these riots do not speak for me.
… link to party, see below
10 Do you think the UK in 2025 is a safe place for … Jews … Muslims?
11 Britain’s best years are behind us.
… link with low education
https://www.moreincommon.org.uk/our-work/research/social-cohesion-a-snapshot/
Love All … Trust All?
Do all the people love all the people? Perhaps the answer would be similar to the survey findings for trust for …
… Do all the people trust all the people? The survey suggests that the average respondent trusts half the people and that respondents are spread across the full range, from trust all to trust none, with more respondents in the middle than in either of the two extremes of trusting most or distrusting most. In the survey respondents were offered four options:
1 Most people can be trusted … +
2 [majority trust] … +
3 [majority mistrust] … negative
4 You can’t be too careful with most people … negative
The average as given by the net percentage is -7% (slightly on the negative side of the middle of the scale … corresponding to trusting half the people (?)). The distribution is 11% trusting most people, 36% majority trust, 31% majority distrust, and 22% distrusting most people.
There was a strong age/generation effect with the young trusting least and the old trusting most. If it is an age effect then the young will become more trusting as they get older. The net percentages were:
Age 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+
Trust -31% -25% -22% -14% +2% +18% +42%
A Britannia social cohesion scale: the Reform-LibDem differential
The report gives a breakdown by political party for seven of the questions. For each question the net percentage for each political party can be calculated. On the basis of these percentages the political parties can be ordered as follows – Reform, Conservative, Labour, LibDem and Green – this ordering giving either increasing or decreasing net percentages for each question (with some exceptions). For each question the Reform-LibDem differential can be calculated.
The multiculturalism question has the highest differential at 95% with Reform much more likely to agree that multiculturalism threatens our national identity. The score of 95% Involves the difference between the 60% net Reform voters agreeing and the 35% net LibDem voters disagreeing.
The next highest differential related to feeling a stranger in their own country (84), followed by identification of the Southport rioters (68) and integration being the responsibility of ethnic minority groups (62).
5 Multiculturalism threatens our national identity. (95)
1 Sometimes I feel like a stranger in my own country. (84)
9 People in these [Southport] riots speak for me. (68)
7 Integration is mainly the responsibility of those from ethnic minority groups. (62)
6 We do not need to do more to encourage integration between people of different backgrounds in the UK. (48)
3 I have little or no trust in my neighbours. (38)
2 I feel disconnected from society around me. (38)
The table below gives the net percentages for each party and the differential for each question. The net percentages for Reform are high for questions 5 and 1. The net percentages for LibDem are high for questions 9, 7 and 6.
. … net percentages … differential
Green LibD Labour Cons Ref DNV Ref. – Lib Dem
5 multi 52 35 33 26 -60 -95
1 stran -30 -38 -32 -4 46 -6 84
9 riot -60 -66 -52 -54 2 68
7 minority 70 70 64 40 8 -62
6 integr 80 70 70 38 22 -48
3 trust 6 18 6 16 -20 -24 -38
2 disc 6 -22 -22 -26 16 22 38
(Note that the signs depend on which end of the scale is taken as positive.)
Income and connectedness
“I feel disconnected from the society around me.” Connectedness only weakly relats to party. However it does relate to income.
Disconnected = 0.64 - 0.35 household income
(0 is under £10,000; 1 is £100,000 or more)
THE END