The Question Of America’s Identity

A response to IM-1776’s discussion of our national identity

“What is an American?” is arguably the toughest question for the American Right. The different answers to this question divide the Right into clear ideological camps. Those who include white in their answer find themselves in the identitarian camp. Those who say it has little to do with race find themselves in the mainstream conservative camp. (Some identitarians who are more critical of America would give an answer closer to the latter option). Civic nationalism versus ethno nationalism is a battle that shapes the right.

IM-1776 recently published an interesting discussion between Lafayette Lee and Darryl Cooper (Martyr Made) on this question of national identity. The discussion didn’t give a clear answer to this complex issue, but it did offer food for thought. Some insights were good; some not so good. (Cooper claimed the 1790 Naturalization Act wasn’t primarily focused on restricting non-whites from the body politic. That overlooks how American identity was forged in contrast to the otherness of blacks and Indians within the country. Those groups were excluded from the body politic by laws such as the Naturalization Act.)

Both Lee and Cooper find civic nationalism insufficient in providing meaning for a people. But they also dismiss white identitarianism for being too unrealistic. They seem to favor returning to regionalism or shaping American identity away from its European roots. Here are the parts that best illustrated these views:

[Lee:] If our history, culture, and identity are bound up in regional tensions, and control of Washington is the grand reward for sectional domination, could the answer to so many of our problems lie closer to home? No doubt we have to wield federal power to secure the border and halt mass immigration. But the questions beneath the surface — matters of identity, culture, and even political power — we have yet to embrace this most American aspect of our heritage. This is really what separates us from European nations. All of our political machinery rests upon it, and any cultural power we hope to wield depends on us seizing this ground first. Here, not in Europe or Washington, is where we may find, not only answers, but also solutions.

…

[Cooper:] My questions, then, are these: What if preserving America as a nation-state was never in the cards? What if, given the vastness of our territory, the length of our borders, and the teeming impoverished masses to the south and east, it was inevitable that others would push in before it was possible to truly make every inch of the country in the image of 19th century America? All of these are preliminary questions to the real question I’d like to consider: What if it was never America’s destiny to be a junior partner in European or Western civilization? What if the Western Hemisphere is a new civilization that is our destiny to lead? Five hundred years from now, historians could very well see this outcome as obvious and inevitable. If Europe cannot muster the will in the coming centuries to hold off the exploding populations of Africa and the Middle East, a view of America as an outpost of European civilization will seem quite anachronistic. How would it affect our view of demographic change, or our relationship to Asia, Latin America, and Europe, if America was understood not as one of many European nation-states, but as a civilization state in embryo?

Lee concluded the conversation on an optimistic note, saying, “We are on the cusp of yet another great transformation.” It’s not clear what this transformation might be, but the conversants seem confident it will happen and it will be positive. 

I agree a lot with the dialogue, especially with the shallowness of American mass culture and the need for immigration restriction. But I take issue with the general conclusions. Regional identity in America is disappearing. Distinct accents are dying out, with most Americans sounding the same wherever they live. Regions largely share the same culture, restaurants, and tastes as others – even if they have radically different environments. Voting patterns do differ in some regions, and sports preferences change depending where you are in the country. But a remarkable feature of America is how relatively homogenous it is considering its size.

This is due to the nomadic character of Americans and the power of our mass culture. Americans dug up their roots in the Old World to come here. Many left their cultural traditions and heritage behind them. The majority of Americans move around so much that it’s hard to develop a strong attachment to place. The average American moves nearly 12 times in their life. Americans move far more often than Europeans. Regional identities are so strong in Europe because countless generations dwelt in one location, creating an attachment to place. America was built by people on the move, whether coming from the Old World or heading out west. The frontier days may be over, but the itch to move somewhere else deemed more profitable is still with us. American identity, whatever it might be, is much stronger than regional identity in our country.

Mass culture acts as the glue holding our society together. Both Lee and Cooper note how new migrants quickly assimilate to the mass culture, but rightfully lament how shallow it is. It doesn’t create deep bonds between people or induce meaning in the lives of citizens. Much of America’s identity crisis stems from the failures of our mass culture. People want to find belonging in modern America, but the mainstream doesn’t offer that. It just offers amusement to pass the time. That may be enough to satisfy NPCs, but it’s not the stuff for a serious national identity. Lee and Cooper get that.

While talk of America as a new civilization separate from Europe has a grain of truth to it, I’m not sure where Lee and Cooper want this to lead to. Multiracial America with its degenerate mass culture and dizzying diversity already resembles a civilization distinct from Europe. Lee imagines a separate America as a wild land defined by the virile frontiersman. However, it could very well be the mixed-race rapper bragging about consumerism that characterizes it. I don’t think this is what we’re aiming for.

While Lee says “race is real” in the discussion, both of the participants don’t really like the racial angle to the identity debate. There are understandable reasons due to the great taboo surrounding it, but race cannot be left out of any discussion of who Americans are. The historic American nation is white. It’s uncomfortable to say, yet it’s the truth. 

A major issue with American national identity is that we have millions of people who don’t fit into the historic American nation and are hostile towards it. Pretty soon, the core population will be a minority in our country, further complicating the task of restoring an authentic national identity. 

The eternal conflict in America has always been an ethnic conception of American identity versus an ideological conception. The ideological conception has been winning out for the last 60 years, and it’s only gotten worse. In order to appease the new Americans, it’s become more hostile to the core population and even denies its importance in the founding. The new preferred historiography imagines non-whites as the real Americans. 

Lee and Cooper hope to transcend this divide by offering a third way, but they don’t succeed in articulating a clear alternative. 

What lies ahead for the historic American nation is deciding between acceptance of the new multiracial model or embracing the racial foundation to its identity. There isn’t a third way out of this problem.