Monday, March 18, 2019

American Nationalism and White Nationalism are one and the same. George Washington knew it. Study American history to understand our future!

It was in the United States during the first 150 years of "America" that the idea of "White Nationalism" was deliberately considered, carefully tweaked, and fully embraced.

The ideas were first described by Americans in the late 18th Century and memorialized by George Washington in his Farewell Address.

They were then continued as an American myth after the Civil War, most notably in the context of coining the term "Melting Pot" which was never intended to include more than the white European milieu.

At the beginning of the 20th Century, science was embraced in the discussion by an American lawyer, writer, and zoologist Madison Grant known primarily for his work as a conservationist and co-founder of the Save the Redwoods League. Grant was a close friend of U.S. presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Herbert Hoover, part of the 20th Century American pro-environmental aristocracy progressive wing not some crazy outlier.

You probably don't know about Grant when he gained infamy partly because Adolf Hitler embraced his book published in 1916 The Passing of the Great Race: Or, The Racial Basis of European History (link is to a 16.5MB PDF copy of the book), considered one of the main works in the 20th Century science of eugenics.

Today too many assume eugenics cannot be a "science" because of the 20th Century controversies. As noted in Wikipedia, a resurgence of interest in the subject has arisen because of the advances in human genetic engineering and the view that prenatal screening is a form of contemporary eugenics because it may lead to abortions of children with undesirable traits.

We will return to Grant after exploring the historical basis of the idea that American Nationalism is White Nationalism.

As explained in Part III of an extensive post here titled An American 21st Century Kaleidoscope versus a Civil War?  Saving the Union is a struggle against pots, bowls, and mosaics, between individuality, identity, and  assimilation, amid unprecedented wealth disparity the core of "White Nationalism" began to be inculcated into the culture of the United States at the time of its founding as a slaveholder country and was continued after the Civil War with the "melting pot" idea which is very different from what most Americans understand today:

Beyond government, people need an identity that stimulates a sense of belonging and loyalty. In 18th Century in the 13 Colonies many who were feeling separate from Europe worried about that. But some saw a solution evolving.

A migrant to the New World from France, J. Hector St. John de Crevecoeur, in his Letters from an American Farmer (1782), wrote:

    ...Whence came all these people? They are a mixture of English, Scotch, Irish, French, Dutch, Germans, and Swedes....
    What, then, is the American, this new man? He is either an European or the descendant of an European; hence that strange mixture of blood, which you will find in no other country. I could point out to you a family whose grandfather was an Englishman, whose wife was Dutch, whose son married a French woman, and whose present four sons have now four wives of different nations. He is an American, who, leaving behind him all his ancient prejudices and manners, receives new ones from the new mode of life he has embraced, the new government he obeys, and the new rank he holds....
    The Americans were once scattered all over Europe; here they are incorporated into one of the finest systems of population which has ever appeared.

His "finest systems of population" was that described by George Washington in his Farewell Address:

    With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles.

But Crevecoeur's "people" who, according to Washington had "with slight shades of difference...the same religion, manners, habits and political principles" at no time were all the persons living with the States....

In the January 1, 1875, edition of the magazine The Galaxy, the term "melting pot" first appeared in print in an article "A New Country" by Titus Munson Coan.... To give a sense of his thoughts when he wrote "A New Country", ...the paragraph containing the term "melting pot" are offered below:

    People say that the American character is unformed; and it is a fashion with some to say that there is no American character as yet. I do not think so; the national type seems to me quite as definite as most others. Like any other, the American character is of course undergoing constant change and development, for growth has no fixed limits in its processes, and we speak roughly when we speak of its stages. But our character seems to me to have gained its features. No nation of equal size was ever developed so rapidly. The fusing process goes on as in a blast-furnace; one generation, a single year even, transforms the English, the German, the Irish emigrant into an American. Uniform institutions, ideas, language, the influence of the majority, bring us soon to a similar complexion; the individuality of the immigrant, almost even his traits of race and religion, fuse down in the democratic alembic like chips of brass thrown into the melting pot. The resulting character seems to me a definite alloy; and its homogeneity is a guaranty that the nation is to remain one as long as the Federal Government shall retain the least efficiency. It is hard to see what cause of civil war should arise among a people so homogeneous in language, customs, and ideas as ourselves. We are one as no other great nation of Christendom is; and it seems unlikely that domestic quarrels, as about tariffs, or in this late age any discussion between Catholic and Protestant, should become bitter enough to bring about any secession wars. Predictions are dangerous, but what is there for us to quarrel about, unless a dictator should try to make himself our king some day?

So, the guy who first offered up "melting pot" was impressed that it "transforms the English, the German, the Irish emigrant into an American" who as "Catholic and Protestant" won't fight because "the individuality of the immigrant" is fused "down in the democratic alembic like chips of brass thrown into the melting pot."

This brings us back to Madison Grant and his book. America has a continuous history of discrimination against immigrants including various discriminatory immigration laws which have been reviewed in posts here. Grant provided statistics for the Immigration Act of 1924 to set the quotas on immigrants from certain European countries and assisted in the passing and prosecution of several anti-miscegenation laws, notably the Racial Integrity Act of 1924 in the state of Virginia. His thinking was included in  F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby and Ernest Hemingway's The Torrents of Spring; A Romantic Novel in Honor of the Passing of a Great Race.

Grant's thinking may sound contemporary to many Americans as they watch their 24-hour news channel. Grant argued that the members of contemporary American Protestant society who could trace their ancestry back to Colonial times were being out-bred by immigrant stocks and that the new immigrants were creating separate societies within America including ethnic lobby groups, criminal syndicates, and political machines which were undermining the socio-political structure of the country.

A majority of  Americans today do not strongly support or oppose immigration. Rasmussen pollsters regularly ask like voters if they think illegal immigrants are a significant strain on the U.S. budget and the answers are regularly about 50% yes and 50% no. On the other hand, opinions about legal immigration policies are all over the place as can be seen in this NPR story. However, the Gallop Poll mentioned in the story is taken every six months and shows a consistent 40% for keeping current immigration levels, while 30% want them increased and 30% want them decreased.

Obviously, Grant would be horrified by the multiculturalists of today. If you didn't know he died in 1937, you might think he wrote the cover story in The Atlantic.

Ironically, it is written by David Frum, a Canadian-American who took the US citizenship oath on 11 September 2007. Frum is a former fellow of the American Enterprise Institute, a neo-conservative think tank, and currently a board member of the Republican Jewish Coalition, a pro-Isreal conservative lobbying group. Frum served as special assistant for economic speechwriting to President George W. Bush from January 2001 to February 2002.

Two paragraphs buried deeply in Frum's story offer the key questions about immigration policy:

    The question before the United States and other advanced countries is not: Immigration, yes or no? In a mobile world, there will inevitably be quite a lot of movement of people. Immigration is not all or nothing. The questions to ask are: How much? What kind?
    Too little immigration, and you freeze your country out of the modern world. Too much, or the wrong kind, and you overstress your social-insurance system—and possibly upend your democracy. Choose well, and you build a stronger, richer country for both newcomers and the long-settled. Choose badly, and you aggravate inequality and inflame intergroup hostility. How we choose will shape the future that will in its turn shape us.

Frum discusses in detail a variety of related economic and social issues which makes his story well worth reading. Interestingly, he offers one key statement: "If liberals insist that only fascists will enforce borders, then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals refuse to do."

In discussing population and birth-rate data, he also notes that half of surveyed white working class Americans in 2016 felt “Things have changed so much that I often feel like a stranger in my own country.”

Which brings us back to the title theme of this post - American Nationalism and White Nationalism are one in the same. Simply, 76.6% of Americans are white.  Yes, 15.9% white hispanics so maybe we could say potentially only 60.7% are culturally European...except, people from Spain are European.

You see, it's complicated. Is American supposed to be a melting pot turning everyone into an American Nationalist? Are American Nationalists still at least culturally White Nationalists as understood by George Washington or Madison Grant?

Or in the end is the United States not even a nation? Or as argued in that previous long post are we not "A More Perfect Union, Not Country, Nation, Or State" that has no need for any nationalism? And if that is the case, how do we get rid of our historical White Nationalism without another Civil War in our More Perfect Union?

Even in a room full of Democrats who all claim to be "progressive" it is complicated as noted in The meeting was supposed to ease tensions between Muslim and Jewish Democrats. It ended with tears. And this did not even involved our the Catholic majority of our Supreme Court and Protestant Senate Republicans.

No comments: