"The whole idea of 'English' folk music is about as absurd as the idea of a true born English person"
I agree with most of that post. However I am also a "English Music" enthusiast and perpetrator of one of those "anything but Irish" sessions and I think I should explain why. It's true that you can't pin down the origins of some tunes or songs to one country or another, but there are recognisable current repertoires and styles of playing that are typically English, Irish, Scottish and even more regional than that. And there's also a balance or perception to be restored: many English people outside the folk scene don't think there is such a thing as English music at all. They hear a tune played on a fiddle or a penny whistle in a pub and assume it's Irish. I've had several conversations about that with onlookers at pub music sessions. Why do they attach a national label to it at all, and why not just call it folk or traditional music (like they would in Scotland)? The reason is because the whole concept is so unfamiliar that it's assumed to be foreign, and because Irish (or "Celtic" or Scottish) music has been better marketed)

MacColl was dealing a similar and quite specific problem in his time. When I was a clueless kid I thought folk music was an American invention. UK folk singers were singing American songs (and in a fake American accent) and MacColl was just reminding them that we did have some indigenous music of our own and why shouldn't we include at least some of that in our repertoire?

(English music has had some media recognition in the last 10 years, so I suppose I can be a bit more relaxed about things now. It's still what I enjoy playing and researching)

Anahata