For years, the concept of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, or DEI, has merited a ton of ire. It is a pseudo-moral position that reduces people to skin color and gender while treating ancestry like a social credit score. I have no love for DEI. I analyzed a study showing how DEI increases racial tension, hostility, and authoritarian tendencies. In pursuit of DEI, much of the political Left has abandoned colorblindness, embraced the dubious Critical Race Theory, and obsessed over race to the point where "anti-racism" has become a form of racism that has set U.S. racial relations back at least 65 years. DEI is illiberal, racist, and fundamentally at odds with a democratic, pluralistic society that values freedom. On this point, those on the Right were correct, particularly Matt Walsh with his documentary Am I Racist? (see my two-parter on his documentary here and here).
In a twist of irony, those on the Far Right have decided that the issue with DEI was not identity politics itself, but the "wrong identities." They fell in love with the idea, rebranded it as "Heritage American," and declared themselves the most oppressed people in a society where they have historically dominated. For those who do not know, a "Heritage American" is someone on the Far Right that defines being "authentically American" based on ancestry (typically privileging older Anglo-Protestant lineages), rather than civic allegiance or shared political ideals. This term functions as a gatekeeping tool, signaling who "counts" as genuinely American while excluding immigrants, people of color, and others whose families arrived to the United States more recently.
Tucker Carlson has engaged with guests on Heritage Americans on his show, thereby giving the idea more traction in mainstream conservative circles beyond the fringe. I saw political commentator Brad Polumbo broadcast an episode on Nick Fuentes deriding Vivek Ramaswamy for his ancestry (and doing so in light of Ramaswamy's gubernatorial race in Ohio), which is what prompted me to write this piece. As a member of the Sons of the American Revolution, whose ancestors actually fought in the American Revolution, I find the concept of "Heritage American" to be as ridiculous as it is un-American.
Virtue Signaling: Gender & Race versus Genealogy
As Cato Institute scholar Alex Nowrasteh pointed out in his piece on Heritage Americans, many political organizations on the Far Left tore themselves apart by arguing who had greater victimhood status. On the Far Left, status is measured by how much oppression you can cite, document, or perform. On the Far Right, the same obsession with identity politics plays out. Instead of who is more oppressed, the Far Right measures "authenticity" by ancestry, colonial participation, and military lineage. Much like the DEI crowd argued over whose experience is more valid, Heritage Americans argue over whose family tree lends them the most credibility.
It gets at a delicious irony, and not simply because both the Heritage Americans and the DEI crowd have the same collectivist mindset in which special privileges are based on inherited characteristics. The same people who had been wagging their finger at transgender people or nonbinary people for "playing dress-up" now indulge in historical cosplay. Instead of gender-reassignment surgery or preferred pronouns, the Heritage American props are great-great-great-great grandfathers, colonial muskets, and Civil War enlistment records. Whether in victimhood points or ancestry points, they are both forms of virtue-signaling theatrics that try to prove who matters the most.
American Identity Is Built on a Creed, Not Bloodline
In Europe, standing and socioeconomic status in society were based on one's family tree. Now some Far Right-wingers want to impose European-style ancestry tests into U.S. patriotism, one that would have the Founding Fathers rolling in their graves. The Founding Fathers envisioned a nation of ideas and individualism, not a lineage fan club.
The U.S. Declaration of Independence states that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." The American Dream is not mean for those who had a better pedigree, but all individuals. The Constitution says "We, the people," not "we, the people with older birth certificates." The American government is grounded in a universal political collective, not a bloodline group. The phrase E pluribus unum has been part of the U.S. seal since 1782. The phrase in Latin means "from many, one," not "from many, but we really only mean those whose ancestors have been here long enough."
My ancestors enlisted in the Continental Army to do battle against the British Empire that was oppressing them. They fought and died for a country where citizens can be united by liberty, equality, and rule of law, where citizens are judged by the commitment to these principles instead of bloodline, genealogy, or ancestry. Apparently, the notion that American identity is civic (and not genealogical) has been conveniently overlooked in the Heritage Americans' version of "history."
Americans Speak: Principles Over Pedigree
It is not only the Founding Fathers who held the view that American identity is not based on heritage. As a recent YouGov poll asking about "what makes someone American," look at the results below to see what ranks at the top and what is at the bottom. Having many generations of American ancestors and having American parents are towards the bottom of the list. At the top of the ranking are obeying U.S. laws, supporting the U.S. Constitution, and believing in the principles of the Declaration of Independence. In other words, American identity for the vast majority of Americans is creedal.
Postscript: Patriotism Is Not Hereditary
At its core, American identity was never meant to be a family tree competition. America is neither a race nor a bloodline. The fact that American identity is based on liberty, equality, and rule of law instead of the European notion of genealogy is one of the major facets that makes America exceptional. E pluribus unum was not a slogan for those with the proper pedigree. It was for any citizen willing to uphold those ideals. This creed is what allowed the United States to thrive, to welcome immigrants, and adapt across cultures over time, making it unique in human history. To quote Capitalism Magazine, "Those who don't understand this don't understand America, regardless of how many generations their families have been here."
Heritage Americans may have a fantasy about fighting in the American Revolution or a nostalgia for "a better time," but none of that changes the fact that the strength of the United States has been civic, not genealogical. Even if a small minority believes in this genealogical gatekeeping, it risks shaping public policy in ways that ignore the civic principles that define what the United States of America has been throughout its history. The fact that Ramaswamy had to repudiate the idea at a Turning Point USA's America Fest, an event full of conservative activists and leaders of all places, late last year says that the Right itself is at a turning point. Will the political Right head in a direction where being American is treated as an ethnic identity or one based on the ideals of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence?
I want America to remain a nation of ideals and a creed, not a reenactment of a colonial family reunion. Patriotism is not inherited, and the notion that one can be an American either through being born in the United States or through a naturalization process helps make the United States a shining city on a hill. While some might clutch muskets in one hand and pearls in the other, the vast majority of Americans understand that being American is not about where your ancestors are from, but the principles you embrace.
No comments:
Post a Comment