So the religious tend to hold more right wing views, and Muslims are more extreme in that they are a newer religion in Britain, so how do you explain that
most Muslims vote for Labour*, or at least intend to do so. In the last election upwards of 70 per cent wanted to do so, even when labour had historically low support with the British public.
Like I said, when you try to rationalise the voting public, it makes sense on paper, that people reading the mail or the sun would be voting tory, but unless recent research shows differently, the correlation really isn't that strong.
*
And you'll remember how Muslims oppose the war in Iraq, Afghanistan etc.. they still vote labour. How people vote can't be distilled into things that feel like sensible rational answers. At least not with the data set we currently have.
Anti-immigration stances are incredibly detrimental to Muslims/Islam, as it's a religion that tends to come to the UK via immigration. Almost all followers will either exclusively be 1st/2nd/3rd wave immigrants. That's almost the case anywhere in the West where Islam is. Christianity/Catholicism was brought here a far longer time period ago. Western enlightenment is largely based on Christianity as well.
I'll say it again, it's not one shoe fit all, it's always about observing behaviour and coming to conclusions of likelihood. Religion is an offshoot of discussion, and as it stands in the UK our separation of Church and state means politics and religion often do not mix on face value. Although,
Queen and Country still does have a lot of ties to the Church of England. However, none of the parties we can choose from really rule/dictate by religious standings or even really talk about religion. Tony Blair was a bit of a religious nut, but most of that was kept to his personal views (although sadly some of it seeped into
why we went to War). Whereas in America the republican party is still often seeped in ties to Christianity. The UK is far more secular than the US. Attitudes in the UK around homosexuality are often better looked at via social factors (or religious) than they are what political party is being voted for. You can also vote for a party for
one reason (say immigration or taxes) and then still hold right-wing views about something like gay marriage/homosexuality/etc. Heck, I have some seriously devout Catholics in my family, many of whom express they do not agree with homosexuality/gay marriage, and they vote SNP. The SNP being one of the most progressive on LGBT issues. One has to hope if a progressive party keep getting most of the votes, views will slowly change, and that research I linked to earlier shows this does happen, even amongst religious people.
Anyway, going a bit off-topic. May/the Conservatives are the real focus here, not so much the voter's beliefs, although sympathies for certain ideologies/beliefs in majority Conservative camps do often show trends that show why May acts how she does. The Conservative party are veering further right than they have before and it's no surprise how they then hoover up UKIP voters. A lot of the Conservative viewpoints around immigration are authoritarian and probably some elements of disgust come into it (racism is often steeped in high disgust sensitivity). I mean, christ, Hitler went on to try and wipe out a whole race partially based on disgust. He himself being a right nutcase when it came to cleanliness as well, from going from cleanliness around dirt/rubbish to then taking it to a whole race, the Jews, are
dirty/
unpure/need to be eradicated. The gas chambers based around gases that were used to kill unclean vermin, rats/rodents, being used on humans. I mean, that's as fundamental as you can get, but varying levels of disgust for another race/ideology/group will tend to show up more in right-wing beliefs.
ps. No, it doesn't mean anyone who votes Conservative is "literally Hitler". I'll leave that source of rhetoric for the internet to use as a form of "discourse". The points above were to try and highlight what disgust sensitivity is arguably like when it goes to its furthest level of intensity ~ Trying to wipe out people/violent racism. With nearly everything in life, there is a massive scale from 0 to 100. The majority of people falling into categories that do not include genocide. However, a lot of unnecessary suffering can still come from varying levels of right-wing views. Although, forms of suffering know no political bounds, people can cause suffering no matter where they fall on the political spectrum. Life is suffering and it's about how we best know how to cope with that and try to aid those in need (which does include yourself, martyrdom is not a noble cause, it's destructive). Hence why at the end of the day every country does still need immigration vetting. The question is whether or not those powers are being abused, not that they shouldn't exist.
