X Close

Britain is now one of the world’s most socially liberal countries

Source: The Policy Institute/World Values Survey

March 7, 2023 - 7:15am

The UK ranks among the world’s most socially liberal countries, new data shows, yet large swathes of the public remain socially conservative. A study from the Policy Institute at King’s College London measured 24 countries and their respective attitudes to issues like homosexuality, casual sex, divorce, abortion and euthanasia, asking respondents whether each was ‘justifiable’. 

Two-thirds of British people think homosexuality is justifiable (65%), which places the country behind only Sweden, Norway and Germany, marking an increase from 12% acceptance in 1981, when the survey began. Yet it is striking that 34% still oppose same-sex practices entirely. Similarly, nearly a quarter (23%) of UK respondents disagreed with the statement “homosexual couples are as good parents as other couples”.

Source: The Policy Institute/World Values Survey

When it comes to acceptance of casual sex, the UK ranks fourth globally, yet only 42% of Britons think it is justifiable, up from 10% in 1999. Meanwhile, a minority of UK residents (48%) believe that abortion and euthanasia are acceptable, with only 64% thinking the same about divorce. It is striking that, even with these numbers, Britain is still more liberal than most of Europe and the United States. Indeed, just 38% of Americans say divorce can be justified, and only 24% say the same about abortion. 

A smaller number — 17% — of Britons support prostitution, while there is, perhaps unsurprisingly, a generational divide in terms of attitudes to sex. The Policy Institute finds that while 67% of members of Generation Z (comprising those born in 1997 and after) think casual sex is justifiable, this figure is 30% for Baby Boomers (born between 1946 and 1964). This goes some way to countering the widely-held belief that today’s young people are more prudish than their forebears (55% of millennials agree), yet is hardly indicative of a libertine takeover.

Source: The Policy Institute/World Values Survey

The UK is noticeably more authoritarian on capital punishment than on other social issues, according to the study. One in five UK respondents thinks it is justifiable — more than twice as many as each of Greece, Italy, Germany, Sweden, Norway — even if this figure has fallen from 32% in 2009. Considering that 35% of the UK think that the death penalty is potentially justifiable, that means that a majority — 56% — of Britons support the use of execution in some circumstances. The UK is, in light of this, less liberal in terms of public approval of the death penalty than Russia and the Philippines. 

Source: The Policy Institute/World Values Survey

While the UK as a whole ranks among Europe’s more liberal countries, the Home Nations are not uniform in this respect. Northern Ireland is significantly more conservative than the other constituent parts, with 49% acceptance of homosexuality, 48% acceptance of divorce and 25% acceptance of abortion.

Across a range of social issues, the UK has moved substantially in the last few decades, making it far more liberal than the majority of its international peers. Yet this data suggests that there are still substantial sections of the population that are more conservative than we might think.


is UnHerd’s Deputy Editor, Newsroom.

RobLownie

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

64 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Stephen Walsh
Stephen Walsh
1 year ago

It would be interesting to see on what basis 77% of respondents agreed with, or expressed no opinion on, the statement that “homosexual couples are as good parents as other couples”. Given that same sex couples have a higher breakup rate, can never both be the child’s biological parents, and lack the gender balance of heterosexual couples, on the face of it that statement is unlikely to be generally true, however pleasing it would be to think otherwise.

Last edited 1 year ago by Stephen Walsh
Matt M
Matt M
1 year ago
Reply to  Stephen Walsh

Possibly because they have never met any homosexual parents. (I’m not saying btw that they are worse parents just thinking why people respond as they do. As it happens, I only know one set of homosexual parents (women) and they split up when their kids were young).

Last edited 1 year ago by Matt M
j watson
j watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt M

That’s a good point MM. People do tend to respond differently when asked a question in the aggregate to how they might handle the issue with friend/family. It’s often the same with Ethnicity or Race. Familiarity changes perception.
On the Gay couples/parenting issue – one fact is they don’t become parents by accident, unlike some Hetero couples. Thus a more explicit decision probably means a bit more thought doesn’t it?. The difficulty of course is we are all a bit subject to anecdote on this. I’m not aware of any longitudinal studies that have reported, but probably only a matter of time.

Last edited 1 year ago by j watson
tom j
tom j
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

Whatever is shown by longitudinal studies, we as a society made the choice to permit same sex parents without that information, it was an act of faith not science.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

Well, perhaps… but how many laws have a scientific basis? And furthermore, where would the data come from, unless society allowed same sex parents in the first place?

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

Well, perhaps… but how many laws have a scientific basis? And furthermore, where would the data come from, unless society allowed same sex parents in the first place?

tom j
tom j
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

Whatever is shown by longitudinal studies, we as a society made the choice to permit same sex parents without that information, it was an act of faith not science.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt M

That’s a good point MM. People do tend to respond differently when asked a question in the aggregate to how they might handle the issue with friend/family. It’s often the same with Ethnicity or Race. Familiarity changes perception.
On the Gay couples/parenting issue – one fact is they don’t become parents by accident, unlike some Hetero couples. Thus a more explicit decision probably means a bit more thought doesn’t it?. The difficulty of course is we are all a bit subject to anecdote on this. I’m not aware of any longitudinal studies that have reported, but probably only a matter of time.

Last edited 1 year ago by j watson
Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
1 year ago
Reply to  Stephen Walsh

They’re regurgitating what is considered the acceptable view of their class.

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  Stephen Walsh

It would be interesting to know how children of same sex marriages turn out compared to children of heterosexual marriages. I feel that a child that is loved by anyone is better than no love at all.

Mike Cook
Mike Cook
1 year ago
Reply to  Stephen Walsh

The break-up rate for gay couples who have children is relevant not the general break-up rate, which in my experience is considerably less. They can never be the child’s biological parents, but neither can Step-Parents, a potentially much worse scenario for children. Gay couples will often have close friends of the opposite sex – in fact very close friends (some of whom are donors) and who would consider it a privilege to ensure that there is a gender balance.

Matt M
Matt M
1 year ago
Reply to  Stephen Walsh

Possibly because they have never met any homosexual parents. (I’m not saying btw that they are worse parents just thinking why people respond as they do. As it happens, I only know one set of homosexual parents (women) and they split up when their kids were young).

Last edited 1 year ago by Matt M
Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
1 year ago
Reply to  Stephen Walsh

They’re regurgitating what is considered the acceptable view of their class.

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  Stephen Walsh

It would be interesting to know how children of same sex marriages turn out compared to children of heterosexual marriages. I feel that a child that is loved by anyone is better than no love at all.

Mike Cook
Mike Cook
1 year ago
Reply to  Stephen Walsh

The break-up rate for gay couples who have children is relevant not the general break-up rate, which in my experience is considerably less. They can never be the child’s biological parents, but neither can Step-Parents, a potentially much worse scenario for children. Gay couples will often have close friends of the opposite sex – in fact very close friends (some of whom are donors) and who would consider it a privilege to ensure that there is a gender balance.

Stephen Walsh
Stephen Walsh
1 year ago

It would be interesting to see on what basis 77% of respondents agreed with, or expressed no opinion on, the statement that “homosexual couples are as good parents as other couples”. Given that same sex couples have a higher breakup rate, can never both be the child’s biological parents, and lack the gender balance of heterosexual couples, on the face of it that statement is unlikely to be generally true, however pleasing it would be to think otherwise.

Last edited 1 year ago by Stephen Walsh
chris Barton
chris Barton
1 year ago

That explains the breakdown in law and order, declining birth rates and generally nothing working as it should. This is progress! (apparently)

chris Barton
chris Barton
1 year ago

That explains the breakdown in law and order, declining birth rates and generally nothing working as it should. This is progress! (apparently)

Dominic Murray
Dominic Murray
1 year ago

I’m puzzled by choice of word justifiable in these questions. I’d probably end up selecting don’t know!

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic Murray

Does seem odd, I would have thought ‘acceptable’ might prompt an easier response.

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic Murray

I’d wager if “don’t care” was an option that would have come top in most sections. Brits tend to let people do as they please as long as it doesn’t intrude on anybody else

Linda Hutchinson
Linda Hutchinson
1 year ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

Exactly – as long as the horses are safe.

Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

The Brits do not care who gets F_ed up – as long as it is not them.

Kill all the babies you want, groom all the children, sexually abuse them, give them steroid blockers, and mutilate their genitalia – not a problem.

Let people steal cars, burgle, cause social disorder till the whole community is miserable – Fine – and to show that give the criminals free housing, free legal defense, pocket money, phones – and a license to rob and beat…

Knife crime? Oh, well….can’t do anything about it – they are juveniles……

Empty the jails and mental hospitals, wait 4 hours for an ambulance because someone uses it as a free taxi

Put the criminals who break in the country ahead of locals – hotels, spending money, health care, school – and free crime….

Billy Bob – I do not know whan you were back in UK – but my old parts of London – you do not walk around at night.

Linda Hutchinson
Linda Hutchinson
1 year ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

Exactly – as long as the horses are safe.

Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

The Brits do not care who gets F_ed up – as long as it is not them.

Kill all the babies you want, groom all the children, sexually abuse them, give them steroid blockers, and mutilate their genitalia – not a problem.

Let people steal cars, burgle, cause social disorder till the whole community is miserable – Fine – and to show that give the criminals free housing, free legal defense, pocket money, phones – and a license to rob and beat…

Knife crime? Oh, well….can’t do anything about it – they are juveniles……

Empty the jails and mental hospitals, wait 4 hours for an ambulance because someone uses it as a free taxi

Put the criminals who break in the country ahead of locals – hotels, spending money, health care, school – and free crime….

Billy Bob – I do not know whan you were back in UK – but my old parts of London – you do not walk around at night.

Andy O'Gorman
Andy O'Gorman
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic Murray

My exact thought and stopped reading to make sure that I understood the word correctly!
I did and so the whole sorry article is now moot.
adjective: Having sufficient grounds for justification; possible to justify.
Capable of being justified, or shown to be just.
That can be justified.
If most of the questions were “just”, we have already slipped too far down the ladder.
Not judging is as far as I can really go. Live and let live, but don’t make me feel as if I have to accept everything the “progressives” want me too.

Last edited 1 year ago by Andy O'Gorman
A Spetzari
A Spetzari
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic Murray

Yes it is a bit odd – as it is trying to remove any nuance whatsoever, to questions that do have varying degrees of nuance.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic Murray

Does seem odd, I would have thought ‘acceptable’ might prompt an easier response.

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic Murray

I’d wager if “don’t care” was an option that would have come top in most sections. Brits tend to let people do as they please as long as it doesn’t intrude on anybody else

Andy O'Gorman
Andy O'Gorman
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic Murray

My exact thought and stopped reading to make sure that I understood the word correctly!
I did and so the whole sorry article is now moot.
adjective: Having sufficient grounds for justification; possible to justify.
Capable of being justified, or shown to be just.
That can be justified.
If most of the questions were “just”, we have already slipped too far down the ladder.
Not judging is as far as I can really go. Live and let live, but don’t make me feel as if I have to accept everything the “progressives” want me too.

Last edited 1 year ago by Andy O'Gorman
A Spetzari
A Spetzari
1 year ago
Reply to  Dominic Murray

Yes it is a bit odd – as it is trying to remove any nuance whatsoever, to questions that do have varying degrees of nuance.

Dominic Murray
Dominic Murray
1 year ago

I’m puzzled by choice of word justifiable in these questions. I’d probably end up selecting don’t know!

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

I’m not sure that I pay much attention to such surveys. They are designed to boost the self – regard of those middle class liberals that concoct them: A self-regard that I suspect is beginning to fray at the edges. As I said on an earlier article about people’s atitudes, there is only one question being asked. – Are you virutous?- Are you the sort of person that I would invite to one of my dinner parties? – Would I let you use my “restroom”?
On the basis oo my responses to this survey, I would appear modern and liberal, but I assure you that I am not. I would be about as sincere in my responses as Vicki Pollard would have been. “Do you think it important to respect other people’s choice of personal pronouns” “Yeah, Wotever”, but what I am really saying is that I have so little regard for you, and for the pronoun people, that I can’t be bothered to give you a frank answer.
See Sir Humphrey Appelby on the value of surveys. For those unfamilar with Yes Minister, it wasn’t just the finest comedy on politics, it was also the finest documentary.
PS: Great girl, Vicki. A survivor.
PPS: If you want to know what people really think, you have to dig a lot deeper.

Last edited 1 year ago by polidori redux
Linda Hutchinson
Linda Hutchinson
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

You watch Yes, Minister? Do I neeed to contact Prevent?

Andy O'Gorman
Andy O'Gorman
1 year ago

Excellent spoof!

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

Cheeky!
There I was, being all serious!

Andy O'Gorman
Andy O'Gorman
1 year ago

Excellent spoof!

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

Cheeky!
There I was, being all serious!

Diane Tasker
Diane Tasker
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Perfectly put!

Last edited 1 year ago by Diane Tasker
Linda Hutchinson
Linda Hutchinson
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

You watch Yes, Minister? Do I neeed to contact Prevent?

Diane Tasker
Diane Tasker
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Perfectly put!

Last edited 1 year ago by Diane Tasker
polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

I’m not sure that I pay much attention to such surveys. They are designed to boost the self – regard of those middle class liberals that concoct them: A self-regard that I suspect is beginning to fray at the edges. As I said on an earlier article about people’s atitudes, there is only one question being asked. – Are you virutous?- Are you the sort of person that I would invite to one of my dinner parties? – Would I let you use my “restroom”?
On the basis oo my responses to this survey, I would appear modern and liberal, but I assure you that I am not. I would be about as sincere in my responses as Vicki Pollard would have been. “Do you think it important to respect other people’s choice of personal pronouns” “Yeah, Wotever”, but what I am really saying is that I have so little regard for you, and for the pronoun people, that I can’t be bothered to give you a frank answer.
See Sir Humphrey Appelby on the value of surveys. For those unfamilar with Yes Minister, it wasn’t just the finest comedy on politics, it was also the finest documentary.
PS: Great girl, Vicki. A survivor.
PPS: If you want to know what people really think, you have to dig a lot deeper.

Last edited 1 year ago by polidori redux
Hugh Bryant
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago

All this really shows is the extent to which Western societies are being undermined by corrupt elites.

Hugh Bryant
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago

All this really shows is the extent to which Western societies are being undermined by corrupt elites.

Arkadian X
Arkadian X
1 year ago

On many issues I seem to be socially conservative. Good!

Arkadian X
Arkadian X
1 year ago

On many issues I seem to be socially conservative. Good!

Richard Barnes
Richard Barnes
1 year ago

Whenever I see something like this I wonder how they constructed the sample and to what extent it was truly random.
I looked at their website and it is by no means clear that they have selected a random sample. I suspect, but can’t prove, that the socially conservative are under-represented in their sample.
For instance, those who refuse to co-operate with surveys are by their nature not going to be represented. What social views might that group hold, I wonder?

Richard Barnes
Richard Barnes
1 year ago

Whenever I see something like this I wonder how they constructed the sample and to what extent it was truly random.
I looked at their website and it is by no means clear that they have selected a random sample. I suspect, but can’t prove, that the socially conservative are under-represented in their sample.
For instance, those who refuse to co-operate with surveys are by their nature not going to be represented. What social views might that group hold, I wonder?

Linda Hutchinson
Linda Hutchinson
1 year ago

From the comments (so far) it would appear that, as I have suspected, the subscribers on this site are more conservative/right-wing than the general population of the UK. It was a similar reaction to the poll on climate change from yesterday. It is often the call on this site that politicians should listen to what the people want, but I wonder if such people would really want that, given how much they seem to be out of alignment with public opinion. On some things I think there would be agreement e.g. identity politics, but generally this site seems to be home to outliers, who, of course, may not be wrong.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago

Valid observations. I’d go further and suggest rather than outliers however, there are many with extremist views that are rigidly biased. And indeed wrong. It’s a peculiarity given the core values of the site.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Ah! Conjugation time!
I am right.
You are wrong.
He is an extremist.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

and ” biased”!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

and ” biased”!

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

How can views be wrong? Childish! “It’s my opinion so I’m right.”

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

A quick trawl through the comments on many of the articles will provide the answer to that. In response to Linda’s observations, it’s unfortunate, but there is a large section of the audience here that could do with some unherding from extreme right wing views that prompt the same responses on some subjects in a Pavlovian manner. Sadly, it shuts down interesting discussion.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Definition of extreme “right wing”? Something you don’t agree with. Like the illustrious mayor of London yesterday.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Definition of extreme “right wing”? Something you don’t agree with. Like the illustrious mayor of London yesterday.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

A quick trawl through the comments on many of the articles will provide the answer to that. In response to Linda’s observations, it’s unfortunate, but there is a large section of the audience here that could do with some unherding from extreme right wing views that prompt the same responses on some subjects in a Pavlovian manner. Sadly, it shuts down interesting discussion.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Ah! Conjugation time!
I am right.
You are wrong.
He is an extremist.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

How can views be wrong? Childish! “It’s my opinion so I’m right.”

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

Linda, the problem with using “ight wing” and “left wing” is that these terms have lost any real meaning: They are just insults to throw at people. People simply do not readily fit into these categories. An obvious example is the old private secor working class: Economically left wing, socially highly conservative. ( I should know, I was born into such a community) I wonder what you call them/us/me. Illiberal collectivists perhaps, or pre-Blairite Labour.

Last edited 1 year ago by polidori redux
Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Nazi = National SOCIALIST…. a hint of a clue there?

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

I used to go fishing on the river Lee canal as a boy, Nicky, so I know how to bait a hook.
I caught better fish than you.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

I used to go fishing on the river Lee canal as a boy, Nicky, so I know how to bait a hook.
I caught better fish than you.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Nazi = National SOCIALIST…. a hint of a clue there?

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago

The difference on this site is that people think and are literate enough to explain their views. That is the single point of UnHerd.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

Yes.
There’s also an argument that people who’re able to think with a degree of independence can find themselves labelled “right-wing” simply because they don’t follow a mainstream point of view.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

Perhaps. Many however are merely stuck with their engrained biases that are reinforced on right wing sites that just act as an echo chamber. TCW comes to mind.

Martin Terrell
Martin Terrell
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Curious to see where you spend your time.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Martin Terrell

I don’t spend any time there, I assure you. Vile place.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Martin Terrell

I don’t spend any time there, I assure you. Vile place.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Know thyself

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Nothing to excess. Plenty of it there.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

I was simply asking you to look into the mirror.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

I was simply asking you to look into the mirror.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Nothing to excess. Plenty of it there.

Martin Terrell
Martin Terrell
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Curious to see where you spend your time.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Know thyself

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

Or being accused of being “woke” because one is liberal, in the dictionary definition of the word -classical liberalism. Sadly,these words have become meaningless.

Last edited 1 year ago by CLARE KNIGHT
Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

Perhaps. Many however are merely stuck with their engrained biases that are reinforced on right wing sites that just act as an echo chamber. TCW comes to mind.

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

Or being accused of being “woke” because one is liberal, in the dictionary definition of the word -classical liberalism. Sadly,these words have become meaningless.

Last edited 1 year ago by CLARE KNIGHT
Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

Yes.
There’s also an argument that people who’re able to think with a degree of independence can find themselves labelled “right-wing” simply because they don’t follow a mainstream point of view.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago

Valid observations. I’d go further and suggest rather than outliers however, there are many with extremist views that are rigidly biased. And indeed wrong. It’s a peculiarity given the core values of the site.

polidori redux
polidori redux
1 year ago

Linda, the problem with using “ight wing” and “left wing” is that these terms have lost any real meaning: They are just insults to throw at people. People simply do not readily fit into these categories. An obvious example is the old private secor working class: Economically left wing, socially highly conservative. ( I should know, I was born into such a community) I wonder what you call them/us/me. Illiberal collectivists perhaps, or pre-Blairite Labour.

Last edited 1 year ago by polidori redux
Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago

The difference on this site is that people think and are literate enough to explain their views. That is the single point of UnHerd.

Linda Hutchinson
Linda Hutchinson
1 year ago

From the comments (so far) it would appear that, as I have suspected, the subscribers on this site are more conservative/right-wing than the general population of the UK. It was a similar reaction to the poll on climate change from yesterday. It is often the call on this site that politicians should listen to what the people want, but I wonder if such people would really want that, given how much they seem to be out of alignment with public opinion. On some things I think there would be agreement e.g. identity politics, but generally this site seems to be home to outliers, who, of course, may not be wrong.

AC Harper
AC Harper
1 year ago

Perhaps another poll which confuses what people profess socially and how they behave individually. So only 42% think casual sex is justifiable, but I suspect that a rather greater proportion of people in a long term relationship engage in sex outside marriage. It’s a matter of definitions (again).
Another confusion laid bare is the definition of ‘liberal’. From Wikipedia:

Classical liberalism is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market and laissez-faire economics; civil liberties under the rule of law with especial emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech. 

You can make a good argument that ‘classic liberalism’ would generate the sort of answers that the poll ‘uncovers’ yet it is more socially conservative (small ‘c’) than the current crop of ‘social liberals’.
What a shame that no significant political party embraces Classical Liberalism in this country.

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  AC Harper

EXACTLY!!

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  AC Harper

EXACTLY!!

AC Harper
AC Harper
1 year ago

Perhaps another poll which confuses what people profess socially and how they behave individually. So only 42% think casual sex is justifiable, but I suspect that a rather greater proportion of people in a long term relationship engage in sex outside marriage. It’s a matter of definitions (again).
Another confusion laid bare is the definition of ‘liberal’. From Wikipedia:

Classical liberalism is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market and laissez-faire economics; civil liberties under the rule of law with especial emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech. 

You can make a good argument that ‘classic liberalism’ would generate the sort of answers that the poll ‘uncovers’ yet it is more socially conservative (small ‘c’) than the current crop of ‘social liberals’.
What a shame that no significant political party embraces Classical Liberalism in this country.

Frederick Dixon
Frederick Dixon
1 year ago

I wonder why these “liberal” attitudes seem to have all accelerated in around 2009? Did anything happen around then which might have escaped my notice?

Frederick Dixon
Frederick Dixon
1 year ago

I wonder why these “liberal” attitudes seem to have all accelerated in around 2009? Did anything happen around then which might have escaped my notice?

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

Those results don’t seem that surprising to me. There has always been a strong streak of “mind your own business” in Britain and a lot of those attitudes seems to reflect that it seems to me. However, there is also a sense that if the law is broken you should get punished, which fits with the soft support for capital punishment for certain offenses.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

Those results don’t seem that surprising to me. There has always been a strong streak of “mind your own business” in Britain and a lot of those attitudes seems to reflect that it seems to me. However, there is also a sense that if the law is broken you should get punished, which fits with the soft support for capital punishment for certain offenses.

Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
1 year ago

What struck me is how Russia compares with the UK on these issues. With that kind of divide over what are essentially theological questions, it’s hard to say this current Russia vs NATO war (and that’s what it actually is) doesn’t have a significant religious dimension.
Secular liberalism appears to be on a religious crusade. And this is nothing new. Commodore Perry in Tokyo Bay was articulating quintessential liberal theology: “if we can’t get access to your markets, we’ll blow them to bits”.

Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
1 year ago

What struck me is how Russia compares with the UK on these issues. With that kind of divide over what are essentially theological questions, it’s hard to say this current Russia vs NATO war (and that’s what it actually is) doesn’t have a significant religious dimension.
Secular liberalism appears to be on a religious crusade. And this is nothing new. Commodore Perry in Tokyo Bay was articulating quintessential liberal theology: “if we can’t get access to your markets, we’ll blow them to bits”.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago

Weird the spike goes up from 2008. That’s when I turned 18. We certainly had a good time.
Do you think from 2008 crash really we knew we blew it but couldn’t admit it and we’ve been on borrowed money ever since…… Last party before reality slaps us in the face….
I am partly joking.

Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago
Reply to  B Emery

It is spinning out of control – in 20 years people will be fighting for a place in the soup line.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

Is it cockroach or mealworm soup today?

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

Is it cockroach or mealworm soup today?

Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago
Reply to  B Emery

It is spinning out of control – in 20 years people will be fighting for a place in the soup line.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago

Weird the spike goes up from 2008. That’s when I turned 18. We certainly had a good time.
Do you think from 2008 crash really we knew we blew it but couldn’t admit it and we’ve been on borrowed money ever since…… Last party before reality slaps us in the face….
I am partly joking.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

At risk of committing the nu britn capital and undefined crime of ” racism”, this ” survey” conveniently omits to give any guide to what the muslim/ African/Caribbean citizens think? Oooh perish the thought…..

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago

What makes you think they weren’t asked?

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago

What makes you think they weren’t asked?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

At risk of committing the nu britn capital and undefined crime of ” racism”, this ” survey” conveniently omits to give any guide to what the muslim/ African/Caribbean citizens think? Oooh perish the thought…..

Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago

Kill the babies protect the psychopathic killers, Haha – Europe is so sick…..

Europe is toast – it is just a pit of degeneracy, loves the bad, hates the good….Good luck with all that in the coming depression.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

Well thanks then. America is the imperial hegemon, I blame you nutters.

Last edited 1 year ago by B Emery
B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

Well thanks then. America is the imperial hegemon, I blame you nutters.

Last edited 1 year ago by B Emery
Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago

Kill the babies protect the psychopathic killers, Haha – Europe is so sick…..

Europe is toast – it is just a pit of degeneracy, loves the bad, hates the good….Good luck with all that in the coming depression.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago

Would be interesting to see the correlation with religion. That could explain the rejection of homosexuality and abortion, particularly in the US.

Andy O'Gorman
Andy O'Gorman
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

The truly religious would not accept any, otherwise they would be paying lip-service to their respective religions – I would think.

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Exactly.

Andy O'Gorman
Andy O'Gorman
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

The truly religious would not accept any, otherwise they would be paying lip-service to their respective religions – I would think.

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  Robbie K

Exactly.

Robbie K
Robbie K
1 year ago

Would be interesting to see the correlation with religion. That could explain the rejection of homosexuality and abortion, particularly in the US.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago

I suspect that in the past ordinary people didn’t really have opinions on these things because they were too busy just getting on with life. A combination of the short working hours today and the fact that everybody is on the internet means that for 60+ million people there are 60+ million opinions.
In the past, people would have taken their opinions from local peer groups, especially the church or chapel. Now they follow what they see on MSN, not realising that this is biased (to say the least).
If everyone has an opinion, nothing can be done. You have to listen patiently to numerous groups who stand for their own limited views. Take any divisive issue: nuclear energy, transes, boats of refugees, vaccinations …. We are swamped by people who know absolutely what is right, but of course they are probably just as wrong as everybody else.
Hence the tendency to look back lovingly to a (slightly) more authoritative government which ploughed through the cr*p. But, shudder, not too authoritative like China and Russia. Definition of too authoritative: ‘Those you don’t personally like because they might even ignore your views, heaven forbid’

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

Does the people who have too much time on they’re hands include you?

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  CLARE KNIGHT

Yes, and you obviously.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  CLARE KNIGHT

Yes, and you obviously.

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

Does the people who have too much time on they’re hands include you?

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago

I suspect that in the past ordinary people didn’t really have opinions on these things because they were too busy just getting on with life. A combination of the short working hours today and the fact that everybody is on the internet means that for 60+ million people there are 60+ million opinions.
In the past, people would have taken their opinions from local peer groups, especially the church or chapel. Now they follow what they see on MSN, not realising that this is biased (to say the least).
If everyone has an opinion, nothing can be done. You have to listen patiently to numerous groups who stand for their own limited views. Take any divisive issue: nuclear energy, transes, boats of refugees, vaccinations …. We are swamped by people who know absolutely what is right, but of course they are probably just as wrong as everybody else.
Hence the tendency to look back lovingly to a (slightly) more authoritative government which ploughed through the cr*p. But, shudder, not too authoritative like China and Russia. Definition of too authoritative: ‘Those you don’t personally like because they might even ignore your views, heaven forbid’

tom j
tom j
1 year ago

We tend to just follow the US in this ‘great awokening’ social revolution, and what strikes me here is that after all this time only 24% of Americans actually believe abortion is OK. And only 44% think that about homosexuality. Whatever you want to call the US political system, it’s clearly not a democracy.

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

Exactly and I live there. It’s a “god fearing” country and that’s a big problem. Most things are accepted as long as one believes in god. I find it sickening.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  CLARE KNIGHT

Try Europe where our fears may be related to a different god.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  CLARE KNIGHT

Try Europe where our fears may be related to a different god.

CLARE KNIGHT
CLARE KNIGHT
1 year ago
Reply to  tom j

Exactly and I live there. It’s a “god fearing” country and that’s a big problem. Most things are accepted as long as one believes in god. I find it sickening.

tom j
tom j
1 year ago

We tend to just follow the US in this ‘great awokening’ social revolution, and what strikes me here is that after all this time only 24% of Americans actually believe abortion is OK. And only 44% think that about homosexuality. Whatever you want to call the US political system, it’s clearly not a democracy.