Ethnic Politics

In Europe the definition of nation is closely tied to the word’s etymology: a nation comprises the present descendants of a putative ancestor. No such physical bond, however, could have been postulated to unite the diverse peoples of the American colonies, and the nation that evolved out of them was based on political principle rather than accident of birth. Those who formally accepted the doctrines of democratic liberty and justice could become American citizens and, whatever their prior status, pass on this identity to their children. (Even today, European intellectuals often find it difficult to understand this distinction. In particular, many consider it laughable if not outrageous to denote certain activities as “un-American.” For what could the meaning be of, say, accusing a Swede of “un-Swedish activities”? Every Swede is defined by his blood, and whatever he does is Swedish.) It was the magnet of political and social democracy rather than any government policy that enabled the new U.S.A. to realize its motto of E pluribus unum—“Out of many, one.” The “melting pot” has been a target of liberal attack for so many years that the actual policy associated with that slogan has been all but forgotten.

First, one should recall that full acculturation was not only the government’s intention but also the typical aspiration of the immigrants themselves. Not incidentally, the phrase derived from a highly successful bit of kitsch by the Anglo-Jewish writer Israel Zang- will. The story of The Melting Pot revolves around the marriage between the Jewish hero and the daughter of the Czarist official responsible for the pogrom in which the hero’s father was murdered. For in the New World— this was the play’s message—all the ancient hatreds would disappear through a literal mixing of the races. And by any criterion except utopian precision, the American melting pot has worked. Compared to those in any other major receiving country, ethnic strains in the United States have generally moved toward a common center, not necessarily losing their identity but softening it sufficiently to become genuinely parts of a single whole.

WP

About the Author

William Petersen

In Europe the definition of nation is closely tied to the word’s etymology: a nation comprises the present descendants of a putative ancestor. No such physical bond, however, could have been postulated to unite the diverse peoples of the American colonies, and the nation that evolved out of them was based on political principle rather than accident of birth. Those who formally accepted the doctrines of democratic liberty and justice could become American citizens and, whatever their prior status, pass on this identity to their children. (Even today, European intellectuals often find it difficult to understand this distinction. In particular, many consider it laughable if not outrageous to denote certain activities as “un-American.” For what could the meaning be of, say, accusing a Swede of “un-Swedish activities”? Every Swede is defined by his blood, and whatever he does is Swedish.) It was the magnet of political and social democracy rather than any government policy that enabled the new U.S.A. to realize its motto of E pluribus unum—“Out of many, one.” The “melting pot” has been a target of liberal attack for so many years that the actual policy associated with that slogan has been all but forgotten.

First, one should recall that full acculturation was not only the government’s intention but also the typical aspiration of the immigrants themselves. Not incidentally, the phrase derived from a highly successful bit of kitsch by the Anglo-Jewish writer Israel Zang- will. The story of The Melting Pot revolves around the marriage between the Jewish hero and the daughter of the Czarist official responsible for the pogrom in which the hero’s father was murdered. For in the New World— this was the play’s message—all the ancient hatreds would disappear through a literal mixing of the races. And by any criterion except utopian precision, the American melting pot has worked. Compared to those in any other major receiving country, ethnic strains in the United States have generally moved toward a common center, not necessarily losing their identity but softening it sufficiently to become genuinely parts of a single whole.