In the recent civil war within the right wing sphere of the American political dynamic, a recent debate about “Americaness” has popped up. There grows an ever increasing number of people using the term “Heritage Americans”, and using that term to gatekeep who can or cannot contribute to American politics, philosophy, etc. I believe that the term is without merit, as who can or cannot be American should not be defined by the origins from which you derive, but rather what you contribute to the society rit large.
Recently, at the Turning Point USA conference, Vivek Ramaswamy gave a speech calling out figures such as Nick Feuntes, and Tucker Carlson, for using the term Heritage American, and using that term to attempt to gatekeep who is or is not an American. Them and others have recently been using the term “Heritage American” to broadly mean (because everyone has a slightly different description of what specifically a Heritage American even is) to describe Americans whose families have lived in the US for at least 3 generations, sometimes prior to the Civil War, and even as far back as those who landed on the Mayflower back in 17th century. Broadly, the term attempts to create a sort of American ethnic group, as it attempts to limit who truly is American by creating a barrier in which those who came after are less American (or not even “really American at all”) than those who came before the barrier. The common thesis among those who use the term more or less believe that anyone who is not a Heritage American does not have as much stake in America as the Heritage Americans do, as the non-Heritage Americans can simply return to the country from which they or their parents (or possibly even grandparents) came from, whereas Heritage Americans have been around long enough that there is no return to the origin for them (which was typically western Europe, or the British isles specifically). It also supposes that America was not a nation built on a set of ideals, a propositional nation, but rather a nation created for a specific group of people.
I find this overall line of thinking rather silly, as it completely ignores the actual history of the foundation of the United States, the people who founded the US, their motivations, and what the American Experiment actually is. Overall, there were many different groups of people who settled in pre colonial America, for all sorts of different reasons. Those who came on the Mayflower did so for purely religious reasons, as they thought of themselves as Englishmen who were practicing the true and right religion, rather than the debauchery that they saw happening in England at the time (which was also during the tumultuous reformation period, of which there were numerous religious wars occurring in Europe. Many came over because the Old World was ossified by classism, and the relics of feudal Europe (which had largely gone away, yet class mobility was still relatively stagnant). Those believed that they could set sail to the New World with little to virtually nothing (some with nothing but the clothes on their back, and a contract for indentured servitude for a period to pay for the passage), and the ideal that they could make something better for themselves in the New World,versus the Old World. Still yet, many slaves were forcibly removed from their homes in Africa, and shipped over to the New World. Those who came to America, had many reasons.
Secondly, America is a propositional nation. The reason historically the separation of America from the United Kingdom is called “The American Revolution” is because it wasn’t just a rebellion aimed at a political separation from a distant, foreign power, as the newly minted Americans saw themselves as Englishmen and English subjects in the New World. Rather, it was a revolution, as the American experience under the crown, and the lack of political representation in the parliament, firmly embedded the ideal that just government derives legitimacy from the consent of the governed. All of the writings of John Locke, Thomas Paine, and others, boosted the American foundation from a rebellion, to a full revolution of what the foundation of government is. America the nation was founded on ideals and philosophy, rather than membership of a specific group of people. There were struggles as to who was American for sure after the fact, specifically with the enslaved population of the South, but that more had to do with a misunderstanding and mischaracterization of who was or was not a human being, rather than who was or was not American, and the 14th Amendment clearly states who is an American.
This brings me to another issue with the Heritage American term: Who does or does not have stake in America. The Heritage American arguers would argue that those whose families have lived in America for an extended period of time have a stake in the success of America, and therefore should have the sole political authority over those who “recently arrived”. The general idea is that Heritage Americans are going to vote overall in the interest of the nation, whereas the “new arrivals” will vote for their own self interests, and vote themselves freebies from the government, at the expense of the Heritage Americans. I do not believe that “new arrivals” are the reason the American welfare system exists, nor do I believe that new arrivals are the ones who voted to give themselves the resources from the welfare or social programs systems that the so called Heritage Americans created. If anything, American politicians (the majority of whom would likely be classified as Heritage Americans), in order to get votes for political office, promised expanding the franchise or benefits to a broader population of people. If anything, Heritage Americans are the reason that the abuses of the welfare system exist in the first place.
I believe that, if we’re going to classify who is or is not American based on the stake they have in the nation, then we should base it on something actually tangible and measurable, rather than the innate status of where one is born. There are plenty of “Heritage Americans” who simply live off of welfare, do not contribute, whereas there are immigrants who sign up to fight in the armed forces for the promise of gaining American citizenship. I think those who actually sacrifice for America are more American than those who sit in the safety of America, and live off the decadence created by others. Those who build industry, those who create economic growth, and those who create community and culture, are far more American than anyone with a lot of hot air, and a last name that they claim traces back hundreds of years.