It’s interesting that the Scots-Irish who populate the South told the Census Bureau that their ethnic heritage is “American.” I don’t think of them that way. Now, I don’t pull rank on anyone. I am related to three passengers on the Mayflower, but I don’t exactly celebrate my Puritan heritage if you know what I mean. I have never met anyone in my extended family who self-identified as Congregationalist. They interbred with Italians and Germans and Hungarians and who knows who else.
So, I’m not here to tell you that I’m a real American and anyone else is not. But I do recall that a huge part of this country tried to secede from the Union, causing my ancestors to risk their lives fighting the rebels. And I know that for a full century, a big part of this country both operated as a shameful Apartheid state and, defaulting on Jefferson’s promissory note, resisted all efforts to live up to the meaning of our creed that all men are created equal. My America runs through Plymouth Rock, but also through Ellis Island where one Italian great-grandfather of mine signed his name with an ‘X.’ My America doesn’t look alike, it doesn’t believe alike. My America flies the Stars and Stripes, not the Stars and Bars. I find Southern Whites as culturally alien as Afrikaners.
I am not saying all this because I want to go off on the South. I just want to point out that the most un-American thing in the world is to secede from the Union. And slavery and Jim Crow are stains on this country, not a heritage to celebrate. If we’re as good as we aspire to be, the people who claim to be ‘American’ on the census have no special claim to this country. They are part of it, just like the latest naturalized citizen from Uzbekistan. But, that’s it.
I am tired of these articles that try to make me feel sorry for the poor oppressed white Southerner who is losing all his privileges. Guess what? My heroes are Nelson Mandela and John Lewis, not Stonewall Jackson or Robert E. Lee. My ancestors didn’t oppress the immigrants that followed them to these shores; they fell in love with them. Complainers in the South should try it. Maybe they’ll like it.
We’re still slowly coming out of our haze of viewing the Reconstruction Era as a terribly poor period in American history because the oppressive North sanctioned the South too harshly. So we’ve still got a bit to go.
Oh wait, is that not the view of history that you Yankees received? Because that’s what I was taught in primary school in neoconfederate VA.
No. We were taught that we had just completed a glorious 105-year struggle to bring you nut-jobs to your senses.
I will say that it’s probably not as bad as the earlier times, but I guess it was still bad; it reminds me of Atrios recently pointed out that interracial marriage didn’t even have majority support until the 1990’s. Think about it. I took VA history in 4th grade, which was around 1997-1998. This is where most of the Civil War was discussed, excepting 6th grade (1999-2000), and 11th grade and having a critique of Howard Zinn’s book as your summer assigment.
By 11th it was better, but mostly because I formed my own opinions. But now that I think about it, Reconstruction was just viewed in such a negative way in school, and I never really understood why. I understand that it’s (almost) universally seen as a failure, but looking back it’s clear why my area thought so: it was the North’s fault.
FTR, my ancestors were Quakers in Pennsylvania and were part of the Underground Railroad, I’m not “from” the south ethnically speaking.
Loving v. Virginia wasn’t decided until 1967. The president was born in 1961.
Think about that.
Rather earlier, we were taught, as Seabe said, that reconstruction was extreme.
To this day, I think, the Radical Republicans are viewed as, if not the bad guys outright, then at least, uh, too radical.
High school, fall of 1962 through spring of 1966.
In Massachusetts.
Yep, carpetbaggers and scalawags. While ignoring that the captains of Southern industry in the New South just happened to be plantation owners or their heirs.
But the conventional story is that poor Scarlett O’Hara lost everything.
We were taught in Illinois public schools that Reconstruction was a time of good intentions marred by massive corruption.
One of the absolutely best moments in the Civil War was the decision of the North to seize Lee’s plantation and turn it into Arlington National Cemetary. That turd was the reason for most of the dead, and his losing his property was just and fitting. The veneration for that murdering bastard is beyond annoying. Jackson too. All of the southern generals were scoundrels. Many of the criminals who later created havoc in the West were ex-Confederate soldiers – Billie the Kid among them. And the start of Nathaniel Forrest was the massacre of civilians at Leavenworth, KS.
The South still has crimes to answer for. I got my degree at UNC-CH – and that is as far South as I will ever go again. Even there, the Dishrag of Treason (the Stars and Bars) was all over the place. Nauseating.
How could Billy the Kid be an ex-Confederate soldier when he was born in 1859?
He might be thinking of Jesse and Frank James. Also there were the Colter brothers.
lol. I mean Younger brothers, including Cole Younger. I just finished reading Battle Cry of Freedom and started something about “Colter’s Hell” so got names convoluted.
Probably the James brothers. I do know that many criminals in the west had CSA service backgrounds.
Granting you your degree was a crime? <ducks> 🙂
How far out of Chapel Hill did you get? And when were you there?
If you went to Princeton (NC) in the early 1970s, you might have really freaked out?
1975-1983 – we traveled upon occasion to the Outer Banks, to Asheville. For a time, my wife worked in W-S while I live in CH.
I did have a girlfriend for a period who lived in the deep south part of NC. Very different. I went to her house for T-giving one year. Now that was a difficult holiday.
My graduate program in UNC-CH had 1 guy from NC, 4 guys from NJ, several from IL, and 1 from WI. 7/10 were Jewish. UNC-CH was that throughout – almost no one from the actual south. The south is not big on academic accomplishment.
Well no doubt you found out that a lot of the “deep south” part of NC refers to UNC-CH as “the North Carolina zoo”. That was an interesting reversal that happened after Jesse Helms was elected in 1972. Before then almost all North Carolinians (Duke and NC fans excepted) were proud of their nationally ranked public university.
The real hotbeds of modern conservatism in NC were Johnston County (Smithfield-Princeton), Randolph County, Cabarrus County, and the friends and proteges (like son-in-law Jesse Helms) of A. J. Fletcher. That was separate from the traditional Republican areas in the mountains until the Reagan grand fusion.
Right now the nitwits are in total control, Art Pope (Americans for Prosperity) at the helm. Going to be looking like the disaster in Michigan pretty soon. Pretty dismal for the state that produced Frank Porter Graham, William Friday, and Charles Kuralt.
Yes, very discouraging. But the roots of disgusting attitudes were there all along.
I also spent a summer in Kannapolis, NC, selling books door-to-door for the Southwest Co. Now THAT was an education in white trash, I’ll tell you. I knocked on thousands of doors. I didn’t make a lot of money, but did make enough to pay the rent and feed myself. I started the summer as a pretty shy, tongue-tied person, and ended it with much greater ability to talk to people.
Oooh. Kannapolis. How much sweet iced tea did that force on that nice young person from Carolina while they were talking your ear off about their attitudes? Was that during the great hollowing out of the Cannon Company?
of course SD never had slavery – very interesting place
I don’t feel I’m losing my privileges and by ancestry I fall squarely in that group that labels themselves “American” but in the 1960s were known as white Anglo-Saxon Protestants. This in spite of the fact that there were folks with mixtures of Scots, Scots-Irish, Welsh, French, German, Dutch, Native American, African-American, and French Huguenots among them. WASPs were as opposed to folks who self-identified as “Heinz 57”.
I am a Southern White by most folks’ definition. My ancestors likely came (although I can find no records) as indentured servants to Virginia; as Welsh and later Baptists to Burlington NJ and then to South Carolina; as Scots-Irish to central NC; possibly as French Huguenot to Maryland and later eastern NC.
Here’s the thing. Let’s take those “Americans” at their word as “Heinz 57 varieties” because for some folks that’s what they are trying to say.
Not the statistic on the ancestry map is a little deceiving because the largest single group is not necessarily the majority because of the number of ancestries. Take Charleston County SC, for example. On the map it is “African-American” because the white majority is split among English, French Huguenot (a lot of the elite like the Manigaults and Ravenels), and all the polyglot of Charleston Naval Base to just name a few of the groups.
Unless you’ve done a thorough study of it, I would not assume that none of your ancestors oppressed the German, Irish, Italian, and other immigrants that followed them. Only the later generations fell in love with them. As I did with my Yankee (MI) wife–whose Scots-Irish ancestors came by way of Massachusetts and upstate NY, whose Dutch ancestor was one of the first settlers of Poughkeepsie, and whose Irish ancestor migrated through NY during the Famine.
My reading of the complainers, and some are friends and relatives, is that they know the horrible history of oppression that the elites in the South have carried out, have been brought up not to enable those attitudes but still feel tarred by the broad brush or national censure–and they resent it. That resentment creates a “circle the wagons” mentality that has been exploited in religion and politics.
My heroes align with yours but they also include folks like Clarence Jordan, Tom Turnipseed, Benjamin Franklin Perry, Eva Jefferson (a non-Southerner), John Andrew Rice, Myles Horton, James Bevel, Don West, James A. Dombrowski, Anne Braden, Tom Coffin, Stephanie Coffin, Howard Romaine, Gene Guerero, Will D. Campbell, the folks at Appalshop, and Eliot Wigginton. Those are just a few and the ones with easily available bios or histories.
You know I love you, Tarheel, so please don’t take offense. I wonder if you are attuned enough to the sensibilities of your northern WASP neighbors to understand why that comes off, at a minimum, as very serious effrontery.
Why would I never consider defining my ethnic heritage as American? First and foremost, it’s because I recognize that no one who isn’t a Native American can claim to have an American ethnic heritage. If you’re a WASP, then your ethnic heritage is from the British Isles. Second, it would ignore my other ethnic heritages. Third, it places me over and above other immigrant group waves.
In fact, the only way I could justify listing my heritage as American is if I decided I was too much of a mutt to claim any single other heritage, which is the precise opposite of why southerners choose that designation.
I’m sure you don’t see things the same way, but I think I can speak for most people in the North when I say that (unless you are a Native American) it comes off as dickish to have someone ask you your ethnic heritage and to answer “American.”
I don’t label myself “American” but I am related to, and thus fall into that group, that does label themselves that.
And IMO a lot of those folks who do really are too much of a mutt to sort it out. And afraid of what they might find.
A Native American likely calls themselves by what we would call “tribe” — Dakota, Cherokee, etc.
If you want to get technical, there are not American ancestry really — an btw, it seems that Amerigo Vespucci never came near the continent.
You just make the reflexive assumption that all Southerners are always dickish. Check out the links. Real dickish Southerners.
That’s a major dodge.
What the census data shows is that the least mutt-like population in America, white Southerners, is the most likely to assume an American ethnic identity.
If you ask me my heritage, I have to choose between English, German, and Italian, and I might not want to choose one over the other, not being certain of the exact percentages. For the record, I probably can drop the Italian, since it is just one ancestor. One the one side, I have two Mayflower ancestors on one side and one on the other, but my ancestors also founded the town of Berlin, Pennsylvania. So, I could choose ‘American’ as a non-committal decision.
But that is absolutely not what I am talking about here. I am talking about exactly what you articulated: the transformation of WASP in the 1960’s into ‘American’ today.
That’s arrogant in my book. It is not justified. It’s rude.
Scots-Irish, Welsh, French Catholic, French Huguenot, Scots, English, German, Dutch, Moravian (German Czech)–you start looking at the genealogies and those are the mixtures that you see over that territory. It is more mutt-like than you imagine. And for all the folks in the South who do trace their genealogy, there are a lot who don’t and who don’t care or don’t know.
What these folks are seeking is what the dominant culture of the turn of the 20th century celebrated as the Anglo-Saxon heritage. Even Princeton scholars wrote in those terms, Presbyterians that they were.
It’s not the checkmark on the Census that is arrogant, it’s the assertion by Republican politicians and their parrots about what is “Real American”. And as I pointed out, those counties stick out because in a lot of them there was more fragmentation of ancestry and the mutts were the largest group.
White Southerner does not equal Republican nitwit. That’s an error that folks keep making because the nitwits are so visible. Even white Southern Republican doesn’t equal Republican nitwit. I know a lot of relatively reasonable and tolerant Republicans who vote on perceived economic policy. But I also know some real bigoted religious nitwits. It’s very easy to fixate on the nitwits and the loudmouths to the exclusion of the folks who will bring progressive change.
“And as I pointed out, those counties stick out because in a lot of them there was more fragmentation of ancestry and the mutts were the largest group.”
Two questions, given this map, from the link, http://tinyurl.com/abekm5p:
I just don’t have the standing to say ‘American’ is my heritage. It wouldn’t occur to me to say that.
There’s mutthood and there’s white mutthood. In white mutthood, Southern Europeans are excluded. Used to be that white mutthood identity also went by the name “Southerner”. That seems to have been the accepted definition nationwide for the white mutts in the Old Confederacy. It still names the stereotype.
It would occur to you to say it if your ancestors had been around since before the American Revolution and you had ulterior political reasons for saying it. Like claiming that the South in the Reagan through Bush era really held claim to traditional values of being a real American. I get Booman’s objection. But I know that it is far from a universal claim of white people who live here, even the folks who are not transplants.
I dunno, BooMan, the way I see it is almost the exact opposite. I count among my ancestry Scots-Irish, English, Welsh and German. Anecdotally of course — I can’t document any of that. And those are just the ones I know, or think I know, about. I’m sure there are many other strains in my heritage.
And for that very reason I call myself American, and proudly so. Not because I think any part of that is uniquely or especially ‘American’, but because, like most Americans, I am of profoundly mixed (even if mostly European*) ancestry. By my reckoning, most of us are Americans. If all your ancestors have been in the US more than three or four generations, and they encompass at least three or four different ethnicities — and not necessarily just European or white — then I’d say you qualify as much as anyone.
And some people may equate ‘WASP’ with somehow being uniquely ‘American.’ I do not. In fact, I’m not sure where or when I first heard the term WASP, but I’m quite sure it was used in the context of Not Us(TM). And it was probably fairly near the words ‘Yankee’ and/or ‘snob’ in the conversation.
*In another forum, dedicated to DNA analysis and genetic genealogy, I sometimes describe myself as a Certified Western Atlantic Mongrel. My ancestors belonged to many different tribes who were cheerfully slaughtering each other, and anyone else who got in their way, all across Europe and the British Isles long before any of them made it to these shores.
The “British Isles” includes Ireland which has a relatively small WASP minority especially in the south. Even northern protestants are mostly of Scots ancestry, and the Scots see themselves as neither Angles or Saxons – ancient tribes which populated England rather than the Celts (and Picts) who populated most of Scotland, Wales and Ireland. In addition Irish Celts are 95% of Catholic origin.
I fully appreciate that the term WASP has taken on entirely different connotations in more recent times, sometimes as a term of abuse for the (northern) American ruling class of indeterminate origin.
If you are Catholic, you are not Protestant.
As for Celtic vs. Anglo, that distinction isn’t kept, since the religious one is preferred.
Booman Tribune ~ Comments ~ Apologies on a Rant
You are saying that to an Irishman (admittedly of Germanic Saxon origin?). I think we know that rather too well.
Given that, as you say, the religious aspect of WASP is dominant over he ethnic aspect, this reinforces my point that “the British Isles” which include Ireland cannot be used in the definition of WASP. You should have used “English” rather than “British Isles” in your definition of WASP, or English and protestant Scots-Irish (although these two groups often hate each other and would never identify closely with each other over here!!).
the whole point is that the people over here who self-identify as WASPs are often not Angle or Saxon. Most of them came from Ulster. The rest are mainly Yankees of snobby stock.
Yep.
In my neck of the woods, Scots-Irish meant Scots from Ireland as opposed to Highland Scots. Not many Lowland Scots migrated to Virginia and the Carolinas.
Does arrival by a land bridge confer special privileges?
In contrast to arrival by boat, I mean?
Perhaps a millennium or two might constitute a significant difference?
yeah, you get to experience genocide and live on a reservation.
Only if you set up strong border security.
Fuckin’A Bubba Boo.
IMO the South even screws up college football.
I have my moments of sympathy but more often than not it doesn’t take long to be reminded just how messed up things and thinking have been and are down there.
I was never so strongly reminded of that than last November when I was in Houston the day after election day and was assaulted at a business meeting by those demanding to learn from me how in the world NJ could possibly have voted for Obama.
Sore Notre Dame fan?
Oh no. Big 10 over God’s Squad any day. 😉
I don’t believe football should exploit men of poor character.
I believe football should build character and make good men from boys by teaching them sacrifice and commitment to goal and support of each other.
I believe to win football should require 11 players working together to impose their will on the opponent.
I don’t believe football offense should rely on the outsized talent of one player and/or look like a basketball fast break.
That all looks more like a team Bo Schembechler would coach than an SEC team. Actually it looks more like a John Gagliardi team.
Well Big 10-wise, I loved the Gator Bowl. For a year I can wear the school cap with a bit of respect and dignity.
3 out of 4 of my grandparents were immigrants. I only knew 2 of those 3, both from the Ukraine. Speaking with heavy accents, they reverted to Russian when they didn’t want anyone else to understand. (They knew multiple languages.) There was never any question that they were Americans. They came here young and worked hard their entire lives to achieve only very modest material rewards. But they were always able to take care of their family, and proud of it.
Everybody here is descended from immigrants. Even the Indians.
Courtesy of the way-back machine, Billmon on “Scotch Irish” War Party. He had another and more personal piece on the same topic that was much better but is no longer available.
Nice insightful piece.
I am related to three passengers on the Mayflower
Bill Weld was once asked if he had ancestors on the Mayflower. He answered, “No, my ancestors sent the help ahead first to open up the cottage.”
Nice burn. And quite possibly true. A prudent man awaits news about conditions.
Self-burn: he actually said that.
Bill Weld was a funny guy.
No doubt they are the same people who, when asked their religious affiliation or denomination, reply “Christian.”
Exactly the same attitude.
And for only two groups is that pretty close to true–Church or Christ and Disciples of Christ denominations are both colloquially called “Christians”.
As in “I’ve been a Baptist all my life, and no one is going to make a Christian out of me.”
I was at a wedding a while ago. The brides family name was something like krautburger. Making small talk with her father I asked if the name was German. He was a very no nonsense practical engineer type. He looked very confused and replied, “um.. I am from Ohio.”
Right. And the reason that is funny is because he’s obtuse.
You have reframe the question for him to get the response you want because he’s slow on the uptake.
Which is annoying.
Which is precisely why listing your heritage as American misses the point of the question and comes off as dickish.
I’m half Southern man, Virginian since long before the Revolution and I’ve spent a lot of time down there and well South among family and friends. I’d say that a huge percentage of the folks who describe their ethnicity as American do so for two main reasons: they honestly don’t know their heritage (sure you could just look at their last name, but unless they immigrated one or two generations ago, that isn’t the best way) OR they are echoing the rejection of the crown from the Revolutionary era or even the colonial era (If I’m not a subject, then I am American). Whatever the reason, they are the vanguard of what has happened with many nations in the past: the conversion of nationhood to ethnicity. What was the Roman before the founding of Rome? My point being that in 300 years, perhaps most people here will call themselves ‘American’ as a simple, obvious statement of fact.
Speaking of the founding of Rome, that’s my other side: one of the founding generals of Rome.
I don’t take much stock or pride in that crap, though. But it’s an interesting story when it comes up.