There are no Indians in India really. They only become that abroad. They're primarily prone to identify themselves by native language (no Indians don't speak Indian, that's not a language), race (there's an entire rabbit hole for AASI and AANI), religion (there's more Muslims in India than in the middle east and India also has more Christians than in eastern Europe), and there's always caste. That's before you get to socioeconomic status.
The only thing uniting that country is bollywood and cricket. Given this background, they're ironically best placed to become generic Americans. Heck they've larping an artificial nationality for 3 generations back home, they can easily switch to sportsball and Swifties.
Indians joke that Pakistan is an army with a nation, that's actually respectable. India is a cricket team and a 3 hour musical waiting for a green card.
The weakness of "Generic American" is it's not a term most "Generic Americans" would like to go by. At least "Heritage" is aspirational. You can make normies mad with statements like "you look like your favorite TV show is Friends".
The purpose of Generic Americans isn't to give these people a term to call themselves. It's a way to describe them. It's more accurate than Heritage Americans in that regard.
How about American mutt or American mongrel? I have used both to describe my ancestry - and I have ancestry back to the Mayflower and the William Penn household.
The term heritage American sucks. I am not a heritage American despite my first ancestor to come to America coming in 1886. The issue is you exclude so many people that the movement becomes worthless.
There are no Indians in India really. They only become that abroad. They're primarily prone to identify themselves by native language (no Indians don't speak Indian, that's not a language), race (there's an entire rabbit hole for AASI and AANI), religion (there's more Muslims in India than in the middle east and India also has more Christians than in eastern Europe), and there's always caste. That's before you get to socioeconomic status.
The only thing uniting that country is bollywood and cricket. Given this background, they're ironically best placed to become generic Americans. Heck they've larping an artificial nationality for 3 generations back home, they can easily switch to sportsball and Swifties.
Indians joke that Pakistan is an army with a nation, that's actually respectable. India is a cricket team and a 3 hour musical waiting for a green card.
The weakness of "Generic American" is it's not a term most "Generic Americans" would like to go by. At least "Heritage" is aspirational. You can make normies mad with statements like "you look like your favorite TV show is Friends".
The purpose of Generic Americans isn't to give these people a term to call themselves. It's a way to describe them. It's more accurate than Heritage Americans in that regard.
How about American mutt or American mongrel? I have used both to describe my ancestry - and I have ancestry back to the Mayflower and the William Penn household.
The term heritage American sucks. I am not a heritage American despite my first ancestor to come to America coming in 1886. The issue is you exclude so many people that the movement becomes worthless.
I don't champion Heritage American as a term. I think my posting and articles make that clear.
I know that when I said you I meant people who use the term not you specifically sorry.
Happy to be a dissenting American as opposed to a generic one.