Rafe Heydel-Mankoo

Rubbish. Your bill is called the "English ETHNIC Identity Bill" You criticised the flying of the English flag. Now you seek to deny the English their unique ethnicity, their ultimate & most intrinsic identity Denying a group their ethnic heritage contributes to "cultural genocide" or "ethnocide" according to the 1944 definition Polling shows that ALMOST ALL ethnic minorities in England still understand that "English" is a fundamentally ethnic identity to which they do not belong It is only certain parts of the White British community - and activists like yourself - who seek to engage in ethnic erasure Such a large percentage of White British people disagree with you, that it is dangerous to go down this needless path Acts like yours are the reason for the growth of ethno-nationalism, not to mention political extremism. Their rise is a direct reaction to needless provocation from leftist elites If one is born and raised in England, a person may be culturally English -- but that is wholly distinct and separate from being ethnically English. The two should not be conflated. The two identities - ethnically English and culturally English - have happily co-existed for generations - with the historically tiny culturally English understanding their status and preferring to identity as civically and legally "British" rather than English. This was done partly out of respect for the ethnic English, who accounted for 92% of the population of England as recently as 1991. But it was also because they naturally identified with their own ethnic group. This is the only correct view. By way of illustration: An Englishman born and raised in Japan, who was brought up in Japanese culture and who speaks Japanese with a flawless Japanese accent is clearly culturally Japanese -- but he remains ethnically English. That is an immutable characteristic. In contrast with England, however, an immigrant to Japan can also be legally Japanese. Japan is a sovereign country of which he is a passport-holding citizen. So this Englishman is culturally and legally Japanese but he is clearly not ethnically Japanese. I'd wager that 99%+ of Japanese people would agree with this - they'd say it was blindingly obvious There is such an Englishman in Japan, actually. His name is Joshua Thomson, and he is a sensation for precisely this reason. He identifies as culturally Japanese but acknowledges he is not ethnically Japanese But Englishness is an even more exceptional case. Unlike Japan, England is not a sovereign nation. It has no citizenship or passports. There is no nationality law. One may be culturally English - as, say, the footballer Ian Wright is. But Ian Wright can no more be ethnically English than he (or anyone) can be legally English. So that begs the question: what is the point of doing this? What is behind this dangerous, provocative and completely unnecessary desire to erase / undermine English ethnicity, by far the most historically significant and consequential identity for creating the England we know and love? Ethnic minorities are not calling for it. Poling shows that a mere 10% identify as English. The rest identify either as British or of the ethnicity of their ancestral homeland. If anyone still believes the myth that the Liberal Democrats are a "centrist" party of "moderates" - falling somewhere between the Tories and Labour - this reprehensible policy by one of their MPs must surely blast it to smithereens. Economically they may be more centrist than Labour - but culturally they are every bit as reckless and dangerous.

I know you're a convicted criminal but must you also commit crimes against scholarship? 1. Your last line shows your post is AI generated 2. Tax payers did NOT pay enslavers' bill for 180 yrs* 3. UK did NOT drain $45 trillion** You are as ridiculous as ever * The £20 million payment to free the slaves was paid off long before 2015 (it may have been paid off as early as the 19th century but was almost certainly paid off during the 20th century). You are basing your claim on a poorly phrased Treasury tweet which has since been clarified. ** The ludicrous claim that Britain stole $45 trillion from India comes from Marxist Utsa Patnaik's biased calculation, which compounds estimated colonial transfers at 5% interest over generations, producing this ridiculous nonsensical sum rather than the actual amount Britain received. Do your own research and writing next time instead of relying on AI. This is utterly embarrassing.