Vivek’s War On ‘Heritage Americanism’

The Indian Republican is fixated on a debate that voters don’t care about

Vivek Ramaswamy has declared war on the “Heritage American” concept. In a New York Times column and an AmericaFest speech last week, the Ohio gubernatorial candidate insisted this country’s identity is based on ideas, not ancestry.

“The idea that a ‘heritage American’ is more American than another American is un-American at its core,” he said at the Turning Point USA event. He argued that our national identity has nothing to do with one’s lineage. “You are an American if you believe in the rule of law, in freedom of conscience and freedom of expression, in colorblind meritocracy, in the U.S. Constitution, in the American dream, and if you are a citizen who swears exclusive allegiance to our nation,” he claimed in his column.

These opinions obviously didn’t go down well with the Online Right. The comments inspired many confident predictions that Vivek was finished as a viable candidate. His fate in the general election remains to be determined, but Ramaswamy is still heavily favored to be the Republican nominee for governor. His only challenger is an anti-Trump rando running his entire campaign on X.

It is odd for a gubernatorial candidate to fixate on this debate. Ordinary voters don’t care about it and are probably not even aware of this discussion. Right-wingers insist Vivek’s comments will deeply offend voters, but that’s probably not true. They’ll just be confused by it. The average American, whether we like it or not, agrees with Vivek on what makes an American American. They just don’t care about litigating an online fight in a real-world campaign. Voters want a candidate who addresses the issues that matter to them, not waste time railing against “Heritage Americanism.”

It’s unlikely the average Ohioan is aware of the term “Heritage American.’ It’s an online expression meant to signify those who have long-standing ancestry in this country. Your humble author, whose American ancestry goes to the seventeenth-century, would count as a heritage American. Who else counts is a matter of debate. Many Heritage American advocates count blacks as part of this group, while others don’t. It’s also not clear how long someone’s family has had to be here to count as a heritage American. It’s understood Indians and Somalis would clearly not count, but what about Italians and Poles? It’s a complicated matter.

The ambiguity is part of the appeal. Heritage American acts as a palatable euphemism for “white.” Saying only whites can be American makes people very uncomfortable. There’s a strong taboo against it. Heritage American sounds much nicer to normie ears. It allows for the White House to appeal to the concept in social media posts and prominent influencers to defend it. When asked to define it, its advocates can say it’s not a racial thing, but one based around heritage and culture. That’s far more appealing to regular conservatives than saying “white.”

One could call it a “dogwhistle.” However, contrary to hysteric liberals, ordinary Americans usually don’t recognize dogwhistles. They take everything literally. When they hear about “bad schools,” they’ll strongly deny it has anything to do with race. They think a thug is a thug–nothing racial about it. It’s why there’s so much confusion over Heritage American. They need to know it’s not racial so they can accept it. There’s no sudden “white supremacist” mode activated when they hear it, like libs imagine.

While heritage American talk won’t offend ordinary Americans (or at least not Republicans), its view of national identity isn’t shared by the citizenry. Self-described Heritage Americans insist ancestry and culture, not ideas, is what defines our countrymen. The majority disagree. A 2024 Pell Center poll found that 63 percent of Americans say our national identity is shaped “not by a shared religion or ancestry or history, but by our shared commitment to a set of American founding ideals: that we all have inherent and equal rights to live, to not be tyrannized, and to pursue happiness as we each understand it.”

A 2021 PRRI poll found that over 90 percent of Americans say believing in various democratic rights–such as in individual freedoms and voting–make one “truly American.” Meanwhile, just 43 percent say being a Christian and a mere 17 percent say Western European heritage are important to being American. A 2025 YouGov poll found similar results. Seventy percent of Americans say supporting the Constitution is important to being an American, with another 68 percent say believing in the principles of the Declaration of Independence is important. Only six percent say white is important to being an American. Both polls found the majority of Americans don’t think it’s important to be born here, much less have ancestors dating back to the Revolution, to be truly American.

Unfortunately, Vivek’s cringe rhetoric expresses the majority opinion. Granted, that doesn’t mean regular Americans think there’s no cultural element to American identity. These polls show speaking English and respecting our laws and institutions are seen as fundamental to being an American. The PRRI poll found nearly 60 percent say loving capitalism is a sign of true Americanness. The YouGov survey reported that nearly half of respondents say “participating in American customs and traditions” is important to our identity. The overwhelming majority of Americans agree with Vivek’s basic point, but they will still not recognize someone with a funny name who doesn’t follow our customs and barely speaks English as truly American.

These views also don’t prevent Americans from wanting to restrict immigration and back other policies favored by Heritage American advocates. They can still say the Declaration defines who we are while wanting Somalis deported. Mass deportations are still very popular among Republican voters. Cringe beliefs don’t necessarily undermine support for right-wing policies.

While Heritage Americans insist they represent the silent majority, they’re more likely to be Dissenting Americans rather than representatives of mainstream Red America. There’s a depressing example of this from Tennessee. A group of solid right-wingers recently moved to Jackson County, Tennessee. This would seem an ideal place for a Heritage American community. It’s 93 percent white and 82 percent of the county voted for Trump. These people are conservative Heritage Americans. But the local community isn’t happy with the self-described Heritage Americans moving in, largely due to hysterical news reports about their apparent “racism.” When the new arrivals try to set up meetings at local restaurants, the Trump-supporting locals sometimes stage sit-ins to stop the gatherings from happening. If these people reject explicit heritage Americanism, then who’s supposed to embrace it?

It should also be noted that many of the people really into Heritage Americanism aren’t actually Heritage Americans. The term was supposedly coined by an Indian. The Online Right, which loves the term, is surprisingly very diverse. The strange abundance of non-white white nationalists is something the mainstream media notices. A new study from the Manhattan Institute even discovered the odd finding that “New Entrant Republicans”--a group that would encompass much of the Online Right–is both far more diverse and far more open to “racist” views than traditional Republican voters. If you spend any amount of time on X, you will notice the Heritage American rhetoric comes off as a bit LARP-y and try hard, especially when the people loudest about don’t have any Revolutionary ancestors. It is something not organically existing in the country, at least not in the way its advocates imagine. It’s a term that was created on the internet–by an Indian, no less.

All that aside, it can still be a useful term to describe the ethnic core of the country. It’s more appealing than saying “white,” “Anglo-Saxon,” or even “Anglo-Protestant.” But it has to be remembered that this is not how actual Heritage Americans view themselves. They simply see themselves as Americans. There was once a time where the ethnic core thought of themselves in these terms. Anglo-Saxon was once a popular identity animated support for immigration restriction. But that was a century ago. We now live in a country that’s only 57 percent white and very few tout their Anglo-Saxon heritage.

Being a minority position is not a mark against Heritage Americanism. All views have to start somewhere, and maybe it could gain more adherents over time. But it’s not the majority view.

While Vivek’s views on national identity may be in-line with the majority, that still doesn’t make his crusade a smart political move. Polls show that mean comments toward Vivek and arguments over national identity don’t really matter to Ohioans. They care about the economy, health care, immigration, and other matters that affect their daily lives. This online discussion topic isn’t going to persuade them to vote for Vivek. It makes Vivek care more about being an influencer than a governor.

Ramaswamy is obsessed with it as he sees the matter as one of vital importance to him becoming a leader on the Right. However, if he wants to remain politically relevant, he has to win in 2026. This is not how you win an election.

His fixation on Heritage Americanism rather than real issues could result in his defeat–and a victory for those right-wingers he calls “un-American.”