48% of Britain's would refuse to fight for their country

[cakeorwine]

So a new headline today

Daily Telegraph
Half of Britons would refuse to fight for their country

Half of Britons say there are no circumstances in which they would go to war for their country, a poll has found.

While the pollster Ipsos found strong backing for increased defence spending, some 48 per cent said there was no situation in which they would take up arms.

One in two Britons would never fight for their country | Politics | News | Express.co.uk

It was not that easy to find the data set but I've linked it below and shown the data from the question

Original data here

Despite rising support for increasing defence spending, half of Britons say there are no circumstances under which they would take up arms for Britain | Ipsos

War-trends-final-weighted

Would be interested to hear your opinion on the survey results

As would Sir Humphrey

Britain's.

That was enough to make me want to go to war.

What did you think of the question wording?

Good point

Is this a cynical attempt to paint us all as feckless cowards - or maniplate us all to say yes higher taxes for defences please - is that the suggestion?

We lived through the media and mad reactions during covid reporting on neihgbours insisting everyone bang pots - many on here lived through papers whipping up mass hyteria when Diana died - happier notes the surge of patriotic pride during olympics when just before eveyrone was saying it was a massive mistake to host. Any pre-war period manipulation of mass opnion happens even when as there always have been dissenting voices.

I think what would count against fracture media environment - on-line more news from aborad and podcasts and less papers and traditional media - cynicism from covid PR stunts - and small sized familes. No-one every wanted to send their son and daughtrs off to war but when it such a huge econimic scarifice to raise one or two kids I think there may well be huge cynicism that people without kids or who can get them comfy positions safe somewhere want to send that one child - possible one grandchild off into a high risk war.

A huge part of the British military during World War Two was people who were not "British born" - people from Africa, Asia, India, Canada, Australia, etc.

I did read those things. I don't think you read my comment at all and are just weirdly spoiling for a fight with me, so, bye!

Would you pick up a gun and go into the battlefield?

Yes.

9,000 gurkas, 90,000 Indians, 2,000 West Indians died fighting for Britain during World War 2.

Over 600,000 Muslim soldiers served as part of the 2.5 million-strong British Indian Army.

How quickly history is forgotten (or never learned by some).

Quite right, I’ve not raised 2 men for them to cannon fodder for war mongering old bastards. I note the people who seem to think our kids should fight for this shithole are always boomers who’ve enjoyed a lifetime of peace with no risks to themselves.

I find these surveys fascinating and to me underlines the key differences between a multi racial and multi cultural society.

Now if you take the British Army as an example it is very much multiracial which rightly should select the best candidates based on merit and attitude regardless of their skin colour or sexuality or background (RAF please take note) in order to produce the most effective military force.

However the Army can really only be one culture of following Army rules, uniform, behaviour, history, instructions etc. There isn't an option to mix up your uniform with say a bold coloured scarf and maybe a designer belt or some in fashion flat pump shoes.

Now if you take society as a whole in the UK it is very much multi cultural and we have been told for years that "diversity is our strength ". When in reality diversity of culture is a major weakness that promotes different cultures that creates separate, competing cultural standards and parallel societies causing societal fragmentation, distrust, the erosion of shared values and ultimately balkanisation.

This can be shown in this survey with attitudes of why should I go to war and potentially die to protect "xyz" parallel society/ culture in the UK
when they wouldn't do the same for me etc etc.

What I would once fight for is now gone, we are a nation on strangers.

I would fight for my family and my people, but that’s it.

Why? Many of them don’t want to be on the frontline and that’s why they have to be forced. Most normal people don’t want to participate in wars.

I've got a few Finnish friends and they have all done some form of national service as young men without having a problem with it, they also used to go back for refresher training every year, which was a couple of days in the woods playing soldiers and then a weekend of drinking with their mates from their unit - they used to look forward to it.
They were also very aware that their next door neighbour had been to war with them several times in the 20th century and that in the event of a wider European war the Russians would be back again.
As you pointed out, the Finns by and large have a much better standard of living (paid for by taxation rates that would make even Jeremy Corbyn go "That's a bit high") and have a much more cohesive society, with things like housing for everyone (you can't have people living on the streets in a Finnish winter), free education from nursery to PhD level, excellent child care and maternity support, combined with a strong work ethic.
In other words something their people feel is worth defending.

I would sign up but I don’t think I’d be much good.

What is a nation on strangers?

I doubt young Russians do either, they’re forced to. It’s their leader to blame.

Going up against Ukrainian drone wars sounds horrific. And in reverse poor Ukrainians. All awful, what a waste.

Who would fight for a country who treats its citizens like shit?
Who, despite already being exonerated, are dragging elderly veterans back to court .
My son is a veterean with reserve liability and he says he would rather go to jail

Odd that it's only Finnish men who think that their country is worth defending and not Finnish women.

The question seems reasonable.

i personally would answer no because I am severely disabled and use a wheelchair so I would be precisely no use to any army.

if the question is asked in exactly the same way across time it’s comparable.

the Second World War was a relatively unusual war in that most people (not all) in Europe were pretty much forced into fighting by invasion and Britain was also under threat of invasion.

other wars - Vietnam for America, gulf war etc - have not had the same level of legitimacy.

if Ukraine collapsed tomorrow and Russia was at the borders of several other European states support for war would go up.

wars far away that cost a lot in time and money and people are rarely seen as worth it.

Our enemies will be delighted to have that information!

I highly doubt there are 'no' circumstances in which people would fight. Most would do so to protect their family, at the very least.

Different competing or parallel cultures with unshared values, norms, and behaviors, aka multi culturalism.

As opposed to a unified civic identity, shared language, respect for British laws and institutions, and a commitment to the country above ethnic or religious ties.

Surely it depends on the exact situation & alternatives as pp said?

The frontline of Russians are ex prisoners, people who were in the army pre war and anyone else putin can find. He promised at one point that conscripts would replace the army within Russia so that the existing non conscript army went to Ukraine.

now it also has significant North Koreans etc.

Russian public opinion is pretty solidly anti war

The country has neglected younger generations so it’s hardly surprising many aren’t interested in fighting for it.