That was the whole point of the article, which you appear to validate. One would think that a Westerner, and especially an American, would judge another by his conduct, not bloodlines. When the author saiys he is "as British as anyone," he means that he is versed in and follows British traditions, knows country's history, pays taxes, probably has members of the family that served in the armed forces, etc.
That was exactly the point that, despite the alleged enlightenment and contrary to the stated aspirations of the British society, it is the bloodlines that matter --- and matter exclusively.
It is surprising that you find this to be so natural.
The English at home have hardly ever been accused of accepting non-Englishmen into their society. He shouldn't be the least surprised it's coming out.
Oh, how compassionate of you. So, you are born to patriotic parents, you grow up to be an honest citizen, you aspire to do service for your country ---- and all the while you are supposed to expect to be kicked out?
This is a pretty heartless remark.
I find it natural in the English because I know them and how they think. Classical liberal (Whig) England gave us the notion of equality before the law, even if there remained social disabilities, and that's more or less what is still true in England: there is no discrimination against Jews in getting places at Oxford or Cambridge or in finance in the City, what discrimination exists is social.
What I said, and I maintain, is that it surprises me that any bright person raised in England would not understand that howevermuch the ethnic 'English' may be perfectly happy to admit others to the privileges of citizenship, and even the peerage, it doesn't mean they have to like them or socizlize with them. Young Mr. Pollard has been unobservant if he didn't realize this. Is it OK? No. Is it a fact? Yes.
I appreciate many things about the English, including their steadfastness generally and as our allies in particular. But, they are and always have been quite ethnocentric.