David Vance SubstackRead More
I saw a recent X post by Elon Musk endorsing Rupert Lowe’s views on English ethnicity. This has in turn has sparked a spicy debate on national identity. Let’s dive into it here!
Lowe’s original statement states that English ethnicity is an undeniable biological fact, akin to ethnic identities in Japan, India, Thailand, Mexico, or Denmark. He argues that long-term residency and integration do not alter one’s ethnicity, using footballer Paul Pogba as an example of being French by citizenship yet not ethnically French. (Mind you, that didn’t stop playing for France and helping France win!)
Lowe then went on to claim that while individuals of any ethnicity can be British through shared culture, beliefs, patriotism, and values, a mere British passport does not confer true Britishness. As evidence he cites the case of Egyptian activist Alaa Abd El-Fattah to illustrate this point and criticises politicians who deny English ethnicity as cowards. Lowe’s argument is that basically being born in a stable does not make you a horse, and I fully agree.
Restore Britain’s position is clear: English ethnicity exists as the key data point collected by government, and acknowledging it does not preclude multiculturalism or erase immigrant contributions.
Elon Musk reinforced this by stating;
“If ethnicity exists at all, which it obviously does, then English is an ethnicity.”
Using his tech background, Musk distinguished cultural identity as “software” from biological heritage as “hardware,” stressing that this fact should not license cruelty or unfairness but promote fairness to all ethnicities without pretending differences do not exist.
Realism is a good philosophy.
In came the responses to this X exchange. Supporters, including English nationalist commentators, view the acknowledgment as essential common sense and a defence of the English people’s historical claim to their homeland.
They argue that the English, descended from Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Celts, define England’s character, and any immigration must respect this foundational group. That seems fair enough to me. I also saw comments such as “England belongs to the English” and praising the hardware-software analogy as profound.
However others say that highlighting ethnic Englishness is divisive and exclusionary. They claim it risks fostering division by implying immigrants can never fully belong in England, potentially erasing their positive contributions to British society.
The 2021 Census shows 74.4 percent of residents in England and Wales identified as White British. However that leaves us with 25% of the population who do not fall into this camp. What are they and what happens to them?
Then there is the not insubstantial matter of Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish identity. These all make up that which we call Britain. Does Restore Britain’s focus on English identity deal with their rights? Is it Restore Britain or Restore England? In what way can we secure our Nation without splintering it off?
None of these are easy questions but I think it’s healthy to have the debate.
