Main Edition
US
FR
April 27, 2023 - 7:15am
The UK is one of the least racist countries in the world, according to a massive new global study, with just 2% of Britons feeling uncomfortable about the idea of living next door to somebody of a different race. Asking whether someone would be happy living next to someone of a different race is one of the traditional ways that researchers measure racism. The data also shows that the British are amongst the most accepting countries in the world. In addition, the nation is among the highest-ranking for tolerance of gay people and immigrants.
The analysis from the Policy Institute at King’s College London, forming part of the World Values Survey (WVS), compared two dozen countries to judge global standards of trust and “acceptance of the people who live alongside us”. The proportion of Britons uncomfortable about living next door to somebody of a different ethnic background has gone down by eight percentage points from 10% in 1981 to 2% today, and now only Brazil and Sweden score lower (both 1%, essentially tied within the margin of error). Meanwhile, developed European countries like Italy and Spain score noticeably higher (12% and 13% respectively), with the least tolerant country on the continent being Greece, where almost a quarter (24%) of respondents would not want a neighbour of a different race.
Who would you NOT want to have as a neighbour? (%)
Britain has also come from behind to overtake the rest of the Anglosphere when it comes to racial tolerance. Since 1981, the United States has only gone down by five percentage points and Australia by two while Canada’s tolerance has, in the last forty years, actually risen, with a present-day figure of 4%.
Views on racial difference have softened across generations, too. In 1981, 13% of the pre-war generation and 7% of baby boomers said they would not like to live next to somebody of a different race; the proportion for both groups is now 2%. Indeed, no age bracket scores more than 2% on the question, while less than 1% of Generation Z, the youngest category measured, object to ethnically diverse neighbours.
The overall acceptance of religious minorities is even more striking: just 1% of Britons would not want to live next door to someone of a different faith. Regardless of race or creed, the UK population is generally trustworthy of the people around them, with 84% trusting their neighbours — fourth in the WVS table behind Norway, Sweden and Egypt. Mexico (50%) was the only country surveyed in which there was not a majority in support of their neighbourhood. While Britain’s trust level has risen from 78% in 2005, the US’s fell from 80% to 72% between 2006 and 2017.
The King’s study comes months after a UN working group claimed that ethnic minorities in Britain are “living in fear” as a result of systemic racism, and just two weeks after a separate report detailed that the UK is “not close to being a racially just society”. This new report provides a dramatic counterpoint, suggesting that Britain is, overall, a more welcoming place than its critics might suggest.
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.
SubscribeOh dear. This will upset quite a few politicians and various activists/influencers (sic).
I am sure it will be said that this report was written by some blatant racist.
Naw, you’re not up with the words on the street. Try racial gatekeepers, bounty bars, coconuts.
Naw, you’re not up with the words on the street. Try racial gatekeepers, bounty bars, coconuts.
No. Sadly, they will just pretend this does not exist.
I am sure it will be said that this report was written by some blatant racist.
No. Sadly, they will just pretend this does not exist.
Oh dear. This will upset quite a few politicians and various activists/influencers (sic).
The King’s College survey will carry no weight with our activist elite. The link in the final paragraph will take you to a Guardian page much more in line with their world view. It’s filled with data ‘proving’ that Britain is still a racist society in desperate need of a good dose of social engineering. The data has been gleaned from familiar activist-riddled sources of course: The Runnymede Trust and Bristol University.
It is worth spending a little time reading the Bristol report. It is available here (https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/ethnic-inequalities-in-a-time-of-crisis). It is open access, so you can read every word. The question asked was had the respondent experienced racial attack before the pandemic. No timeframe (eg last five years before the pandemic) was mentioned. So if an elderly man had “Go home, N****r” just once in the 1960s, then that was noted.
The point is that the researchers could not have set the bar any lower if they had tried. You could repeat the exercise, by asking people if they had ever experienced dangerous driving on the motorway, even just once; then you could create the impression that our motorways are deathtraps, filled with lunatic drivers.
But I encourage readers to use the link above and judge for themselves.
Reminds me of how the ever-widening definition of domestic abuse creates the impression that a huge number of men are wife-beaters (of some sort or another).
The object of such studies is not to determine the truth but to create evidence to back up the prejudicial notion that society is corrupt and immoral.
And on this ‘ever widening definition of domestic abuse’ would you care to give an example so all the female readers can see, and maybe even comment?
How about so that everybody can comment?
I am reminded of the expansion of the Australian definition of domestic abuse a few years ago to include door slamming and walking out of the house. The latter of course is something primarily men do in domestic disputes…and now it’s evidence of abuse.
Of course, do the responsible thing and remove yourself from the situation, breath, cool down, don’t let your anger get the better of you, this is what decent men do in such situations but now they’re defining it as abuse? Heaven help us!
Of course, do the responsible thing and remove yourself from the situation, breath, cool down, don’t let your anger get the better of you, this is what decent men do in such situations but now they’re defining it as abuse? Heaven help us!
How about so that everybody can comment?
I am reminded of the expansion of the Australian definition of domestic abuse a few years ago to include door slamming and walking out of the house. The latter of course is something primarily men do in domestic disputes…and now it’s evidence of abuse.
And on this ‘ever widening definition of domestic abuse’ would you care to give an example so all the female readers can see, and maybe even comment?
Has such a survey been carried out in African and Islamic countries to identify their warm welcome and integration of white, Christian, Jewish and Hindu peoples? Do they read the news, appear on TV advertisements, work as politicians and/ or in Government? If not, perhaps someone out there can explain why not?… or perhaps get arrested and charged, and convicted on no independent evidence of a hate crime?
Reminds me of how the ever-widening definition of domestic abuse creates the impression that a huge number of men are wife-beaters (of some sort or another).
The object of such studies is not to determine the truth but to create evidence to back up the prejudicial notion that society is corrupt and immoral.
Has such a survey been carried out in African and Islamic countries to identify their warm welcome and integration of white, Christian, Jewish and Hindu peoples? Do they read the news, appear on TV advertisements, work as politicians and/ or in Government? If not, perhaps someone out there can explain why not?… or perhaps get arrested and charged, and convicted on no independent evidence of a hate crime?
It is worth spending a little time reading the Bristol report. It is available here (https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/ethnic-inequalities-in-a-time-of-crisis). It is open access, so you can read every word. The question asked was had the respondent experienced racial attack before the pandemic. No timeframe (eg last five years before the pandemic) was mentioned. So if an elderly man had “Go home, N****r” just once in the 1960s, then that was noted.
The point is that the researchers could not have set the bar any lower if they had tried. You could repeat the exercise, by asking people if they had ever experienced dangerous driving on the motorway, even just once; then you could create the impression that our motorways are deathtraps, filled with lunatic drivers.
But I encourage readers to use the link above and judge for themselves.
The King’s College survey will carry no weight with our activist elite. The link in the final paragraph will take you to a Guardian page much more in line with their world view. It’s filled with data ‘proving’ that Britain is still a racist society in desperate need of a good dose of social engineering. The data has been gleaned from familiar activist-riddled sources of course: The Runnymede Trust and Bristol University.
How about the fact that the indigenous population actually lives in fear, that they are no longer allowed to express, that they are having large parts of their country taken over by cultures who have no respect for the indigenous people, but who are protected by laws and rights passed by British governments, that give them what are effectively superior rights and freedoms, and that many of the immigrants wish to see a Britain that will subsume to their culture and religious identity, and are using insurgence war and violence all over the African continent to achieve that aim, and terrorism elsewhere in the world? paranoia?… or provable fact?
Err think you jumped to the ‘fire and brimstone’ stuff bit quick there NST and missed the Survey conclusion. British public are pretty chilled out about living next door to someone from different background and culture. Not exactly hiding in the cellar.
Err think you jumped to the ‘fire and brimstone’ stuff bit quick there NST and missed the Survey conclusion. British public are pretty chilled out about living next door to someone from different background and culture. Not exactly hiding in the cellar.
How about the fact that the indigenous population actually lives in fear, that they are no longer allowed to express, that they are having large parts of their country taken over by cultures who have no respect for the indigenous people, but who are protected by laws and rights passed by British governments, that give them what are effectively superior rights and freedoms, and that many of the immigrants wish to see a Britain that will subsume to their culture and religious identity, and are using insurgence war and violence all over the African continent to achieve that aim, and terrorism elsewhere in the world? paranoia?… or provable fact?
This is so annoying, I’ve made my mind up, so why do you keep confusing me by presenting “alternative” facts?
This is so annoying, I’ve made my mind up, so why do you keep confusing me by presenting “alternative” facts?
What about the minorities who used to enjoy Hunting? What about Old Etonians and so called ” toffs” who can be abused and insulted verbally and in print? What about the old aristocracy who were banned from The Upper House? So it is perfectly acceptable to pillory, abuse, and ridicule a small section of society, who through no fault of their own were born into some privelige, and openly express hatred, and dislike of them? to mock their accents and the way that they dress?
Fortunately, they dont care, but all I am attempting to illustrate is that the bare faced rank hypocricy that festers in nu britain, not least driven by emerald green faced envy, is almost funny.
Not to mention dog fighting, badger baiting and countless other age old ‘country pursuits!
However given the antics of the Provost and Headmaster of Eton in recent years, there is definitely a ‘case to answer’.
But NST, you are missing the point – most of these Toffs are into a bit of S&M submission. It’s ingrained from prep-school. They’d pay for it at weekends anyway.
oik…
oik…
Not to mention dog fighting, badger baiting and countless other age old ‘country pursuits!
However given the antics of the Provost and Headmaster of Eton in recent years, there is definitely a ‘case to answer’.
But NST, you are missing the point – most of these Toffs are into a bit of S&M submission. It’s ingrained from prep-school. They’d pay for it at weekends anyway.
What about the minorities who used to enjoy Hunting? What about Old Etonians and so called ” toffs” who can be abused and insulted verbally and in print? What about the old aristocracy who were banned from The Upper House? So it is perfectly acceptable to pillory, abuse, and ridicule a small section of society, who through no fault of their own were born into some privelige, and openly express hatred, and dislike of them? to mock their accents and the way that they dress?
Fortunately, they dont care, but all I am attempting to illustrate is that the bare faced rank hypocricy that festers in nu britain, not least driven by emerald green faced envy, is almost funny.
Not for much longer.
We were warned eons ago by EP.
Not for much longer.
We were warned eons ago by EP.
There is’nt a country without racism,even in mono cultures ,even the slightest difference can trigger it,even if those differences can not be noticed by outsiders…
There is’nt a country without racism,even in mono cultures ,even the slightest difference can trigger it,even if those differences can not be noticed by outsiders…
This report simply confirms that facts are tools of white supremacy, designed to oppress minorities. And it threatens thousands of jobs in the race industry. Reports should be cancelled.
This report simply confirms that facts are tools of white supremacy, designed to oppress minorities. And it threatens thousands of jobs in the race industry. Reports should be cancelled.
Blacks used to complain they didnt see themselves on screen. Now it is the opposite and every ad portrays a multiracial couple. White people dont see themselves.
Blacks used to complain they didnt see themselves on screen. Now it is the opposite and every ad portrays a multiracial couple. White people dont see themselves.
Let us look at some of the things that some over the last 20 years, may call progress? Armed police, Downing st behind gates and armed police, airport security and searches, and more armed police, anti terrorist security outside our Parliament, domestic terrorist attacks, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan… what is the common denominator?
Let us look at some of the things that some over the last 20 years, may call progress? Armed police, Downing st behind gates and armed police, airport security and searches, and more armed police, anti terrorist security outside our Parliament, domestic terrorist attacks, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan… what is the common denominator?
Diana Abbot would be furious with this report if she could understand the statistics.
Diana Abbot would be furious with this report if she could understand the statistics.
Why did the UK spike upwards in about 1997?
Why did the UK spike upwards in about 1997?
This accords with my very positive experiences as an N. Irish person (from the terrorist community) living in England (Midlands, Yorkshire and London) for most of the 1990s. In my lived experience, British everyday culture is extremely tolerant, and good humoured. Just good fun! People generally prefer banter, and if a conversation in a pub is becoming too “heavy”, someone will always take the p, and steer things back on a more light-hearted track. It’s a lovely culture. I only have great memories of my time in England. By contrast, the first time I went to New York, whilst I enjoyed the city itself very much, the racial tension there was palpable, and was something that 10 years living in Britain had not prepared me for. See my blog on “The New Apartheid”:
https://ayenaw.com/2021/10/10/the-new-apartheid/
This accords with my very positive experiences as an N. Irish person (from the terrorist community) living in England (Midlands, Yorkshire and London) for most of the 1990s. In my lived experience, British everyday culture is extremely tolerant, and good humoured. Just good fun! People generally prefer banter, and if a conversation in a pub is becoming too “heavy”, someone will always take the p, and steer things back on a more light-hearted track. It’s a lovely culture. I only have great memories of my time in England. By contrast, the first time I went to New York, whilst I enjoyed the city itself very much, the racial tension there was palpable, and was something that 10 years living in Britain had not prepared me for. See my blog on “The New Apartheid”:
https://ayenaw.com/2021/10/10/the-new-apartheid/
Maybe this ‘tolerance’ is a sign of decline.
Maybe this ‘tolerance’ is a sign of decline.
Useful counter weight to some of the more outlandish claims of racial bias in modern Britain. We all know things are better than when we were kids and casual awful racism was common. A credit to our Nation, albeit with a few things we can still do better.
Nonetheless having gone through the report it does depend on how questions are phrased and how things are defined. Now if the UnHerd usual commentariat were selectively polled I wonder if we’d hold to the 2% too?
And given the key conclusions – folks are pretty chilled about who lives next door regardless of background and culture – suggestive we’ll have no problem absorbing and getting comfortable with a gradual change in demographic going forward (not more in total just a change in make-up).
Ah but now there’s uproar that one could suggest that. Thus is it really 2%, or just an UnHerd silo that might buck the trend?
I might have known you’d have to put your oar in Watson. By the way, don’t you qualify as one of UnHerd’s usual commentariat? Not a day goes by without one of your schoolmasterly contributions such as this choice extract:
You forgot to add: “We must all pull our socks up and there’s no room for complacency”.
V glad you’re paying attention at the back of class there NS. Will keep giving you the homework.
V glad you’re paying attention at the back of class there NS. Will keep giving you the homework.
I might have known you’d have to put your oar in Watson. By the way, don’t you qualify as one of UnHerd’s usual commentariat? Not a day goes by without one of your schoolmasterly contributions such as this choice extract:
You forgot to add: “We must all pull our socks up and there’s no room for complacency”.
Useful counter weight to some of the more outlandish claims of racial bias in modern Britain. We all know things are better than when we were kids and casual awful racism was common. A credit to our Nation, albeit with a few things we can still do better.
Nonetheless having gone through the report it does depend on how questions are phrased and how things are defined. Now if the UnHerd usual commentariat were selectively polled I wonder if we’d hold to the 2% too?
And given the key conclusions – folks are pretty chilled about who lives next door regardless of background and culture – suggestive we’ll have no problem absorbing and getting comfortable with a gradual change in demographic going forward (not more in total just a change in make-up).
Ah but now there’s uproar that one could suggest that. Thus is it really 2%, or just an UnHerd silo that might buck the trend?
So what explains Brexit?
Indeed, obviously nothing to do with racism. Perhaps it could have been something else like a desire to have some sort of democratic accountability – who knows?
It was because we wanted to be able to have as many E numbers in our Prawn cocktail crisps as we jolly well felt like and they can stick those EU rules where the Sun don’t shine…err even if we’d written them.
Nonetheless Vote Leave made sure it covered all bases with the rubbish about 70 million Turks coming tomorrow and influx of Syrian refugees, because it did want any racists to vote for them even if that’s just a small v stupid minority.
what exactly IS racism? please elaborate?
It was because we wanted to be able to have as many E numbers in our Prawn cocktail crisps as we jolly well felt like and they can stick those EU rules where the Sun don’t shine…err even if we’d written them.
Nonetheless Vote Leave made sure it covered all bases with the rubbish about 70 million Turks coming tomorrow and influx of Syrian refugees, because it did want any racists to vote for them even if that’s just a small v stupid minority.
what exactly IS racism? please elaborate?
Something else, obviously.
Why would BREXIT have been a racist vote? – perhapds you are confusing it with somehtign else.
There was an element of the campaign to curb the free movement of predominantly white people from other EU countries, so absolutely nothing to do with racism. Obviously yet again the truth is inconvenient to those who wanted to paint leave voters as old, stupid and racist so they could be justified in going against the democratically expressed will of the people – old, stupid, racist and anyone else who does not agree with what the elite says is best for them really should not have the vote at all.
There was an element of the campaign to curb the free movement of predominantly white people from other EU countries, so absolutely nothing to do with racism. Obviously yet again the truth is inconvenient to those who wanted to paint leave voters as old, stupid and racist so they could be justified in going against the democratically expressed will of the people – old, stupid, racist and anyone else who does not agree with what the elite says is best for them really should not have the vote at all.
Assuming anti immigration sentiment was one element of the vote, is it the same thing as racism?
Antipathy to a significant influx of largely unskilled and semi skilled workers driving down wages in lower income groups, driving up rent, and overwhelming public services, would seem reasonable objections from an indigenous population.
Why hang a pejorative tag on a rational reaction?
So what explains Brexit?
Scepticism of and/or disenchantment with the EU and a desire for more democratic accountability, I imagine. And possibly a distaste for the much higher levels of racism characteristic of so many EU countries such as France, Spain, Italy, Greece and Poland (see the charts above).
The UK will Never get credit,there will always be bullhorns on the left crying stuff like institutionalised racism,when the Truth is mainland Europe is considerably More racist than the UK..p.s.It’s interesting to look at the EU parliament ,which is whiter than a klan rally,despite members whom like Britain are former colonial powers such as France ,Spain and the Netherlands ,but have few ethnics in either their respective goverments and in the EU parliament,even though France has a sizable Arab and African populace,ironically there were more brown and black faces in the EU parliament when the Brexit party was there..
The UK will Never get credit,there will always be bullhorns on the left crying stuff like institutionalised racism,when the Truth is mainland Europe is considerably More racist than the UK..p.s.It’s interesting to look at the EU parliament ,which is whiter than a klan rally,despite members whom like Britain are former colonial powers such as France ,Spain and the Netherlands ,but have few ethnics in either their respective goverments and in the EU parliament,even though France has a sizable Arab and African populace,ironically there were more brown and black faces in the EU parliament when the Brexit party was there..
The intelligence, political sophistication, courage and patriotism of the British public.
Followed by May, Bojo, Mad Liz and Rish!
Satire is not dead.
Followed by May, Bojo, Mad Liz and Rish!
Satire is not dead.
Cos you can welcome immigration without wishing for endless immigration.
Yes you are right GT. And that is where the heart of the country almost certainly is
Yes you are right GT. And that is where the heart of the country almost certainly is
Indeed, obviously nothing to do with racism. Perhaps it could have been something else like a desire to have some sort of democratic accountability – who knows?
Something else, obviously.
Why would BREXIT have been a racist vote? – perhapds you are confusing it with somehtign else.
Assuming anti immigration sentiment was one element of the vote, is it the same thing as racism?
Antipathy to a significant influx of largely unskilled and semi skilled workers driving down wages in lower income groups, driving up rent, and overwhelming public services, would seem reasonable objections from an indigenous population.
Why hang a pejorative tag on a rational reaction?
So what explains Brexit?
Scepticism of and/or disenchantment with the EU and a desire for more democratic accountability, I imagine. And possibly a distaste for the much higher levels of racism characteristic of so many EU countries such as France, Spain, Italy, Greece and Poland (see the charts above).
The intelligence, political sophistication, courage and patriotism of the British public.
Cos you can welcome immigration without wishing for endless immigration.
So what explains Brexit?