On the 26^th January 2025, David Webb replied as follows to my article, A Nation Betrayed: Outrage of a Voluntary Englishman:

I welcome the fact that a Chinese young man is pro-English and is prepared to speak out against our immigration policy, but let’s get one thing straight. There is no such thing as a voluntary Englishman. Sebastian Wang is not English. It is not to insult him to say that. It is just a statement of the truth. I think if we ever could encourage an outflow of the immigrant-descended population, we would never have a 100% English society, and the goal should not be to be some kind of English version of North Korea, with no interaction with the world. Maybe we could aim to be something like Hong Kong, where there is a stable low percentage, maybe 3%, of non-Chinese people. Hong Kong can attract high-skilled bankers where they need to, but Hong Kong does not market itself as a doormat to the world and will not allow immigrants sitting on benefits to make up 10%, then 20%, then 30%, then 50% of the population.

In that context, a future England could welcome a few non-English people not hostile to us, like Sebastian Wang, but also people like Ben Habib, and that would be fine in a revived England. Nevertheless, it is ominous that each article contains some reference to the glories of China. I suspect he identifies strongly with China. Given what has happened to us demographically, we should not allow Chinese migration to the UK either — as we would bring in people who have a different identity and who in the context of multi-culturalism would simply gain advantages in our society from openly expressing their hostility to us, a bit like government minister Penny Wong in Australia. That said, a few pro-English minorities among those already here would create no problem. We need to be talking more about English culture than Chinese culture. My impression is that the Chinese in the West are bemused by the multi-culturalism of the white liberals. In America, I think the Chinese call the liberals the baizuo (Chinese for “white left”), and they are the butt of jokes within the Chinese community there.

Thank you for your thoughtful response to my article, Mr Webb, and your acknowledgment of my position as both a critic of mass immigration to Britain and an admirer of English civilisation. Your points deserve a clear and respectful reply, which I will attempt to provide.

Let me begin with the matter of my identity. Of course, I identify as Chinese. That is what I am. My ancestry is Chinese, my cultural frame of reference is largely Chinese, and I hold the civilisation of China in high regard. I see it as no less, and no more, admirable than the civilisation of the West before about 1700. Each has its strengths and weaknesses, its good and bad points. It would be unnatural for me to try to forget my ancestry, and it would be dishonest to conceal what I feel about it. Frankly, it would also be more of a threat to your people if I were to deny this. A man who suppresses or hides his loyalties is more likely to act in secrecy than someone open about them.

At the same time, I was born in England. I see this as a stroke of good fortune. The history and civilisation of England are of course a possession of the English people, but are also a gift to all mankind. I may not be as unconditionally an Englishman as you are, but I am what I called myself—a voluntary Englishman. Define that as you will.

You allude, I think, to the “Cricket Test” suggested by Norman Tebbit—that immigrants’ loyalty to Britain can be judged by which cricket team they support. Let me be honest: I don’t know which side I would support as a general rule. If China were to commit some undeniable aggression against Britain, I would support Britain. If Britain were to commit some undeniable aggression against China, I would support China. In most other circumstances, I imagine I would remain neutral, observing events with a mixture of sorrow and hope that peace might soon return.

If this disappoints or outrages you, I am sorry. But it would be dishonest to pretend otherwise. My loyalty is neither uncritical nor blind, and I do not believe true loyalty should require such a standard.

You worry about the future and the role of people like me in it. Let me offer you my perspective. I believe the 21^st century, if not blown up or infected to death by the whims of lunatic old men, will be the most prosperous and enlightened in human history. One of its features will be a blurring of boundaries and identities. I do not say this as code for the abolition of nations or the dispossession of their peoples. I am simply observing that, as mankind becomes wealthier and gains greater mastery over nature, it will also become more mobile and more open to new influences.

This does not mean, I repeat, the end of nations or the homogenisation of cultures. It does mean that there will be more room than ever before for conditional and hybrid identities. People like me will become more common—individuals shaped by more than one culture, able to admire and criticise both without betraying either. I do not think this is a bad thing. In fact, I think it offers new opportunities for understanding and cooperation.

I understand your concerns about large-scale migration, and I agree with much of your critique. Britain should not be a doormat for the world, nor should it allow immigration policies that erode its culture or strain its resources. I also agree that it is reasonable for a nation to manage its demographic balance, as Hong Kong has done. You are right to point out that the current system, with its indulgence of multiculturalism, often favours those who openly express hostility to the host society. This is wrong, and it is a situation that must be addressed.

At the same time, I believe there is room in England’s future for those who are not English by ancestry but who admire and respect your culture. And I observe that you believe the same.

If you dislike what I have said, or if you think I have been evasive, I am sorry. But this is my opinion, and I have tried to express it honestly and clearly. I hope we can continue to discuss these matters openly and respectfully.

Thank you again for engaging with my writing.

Sincerely,

Sebastian Wang

Related posts:

Does This Man Exist? Men, Morality and International Order Peter Mandelson: Why was He even Considered?

Powered by YARPP.