Is it about illegal immigration or...

[Cisairse]

This is untrue.

Actual leftists despite nationalism because it competes with class interesting. A dedicated leftist will tell you that nationalism should be opposed because it exists to divide the working class amongst itself, rather than letting the working class unify to oppose the hostile interests of the employer class.

Leftists are not "identitiarian." From the left's point of view, there is no difference between assimilationary nationalism and pluralistic nationalism; both stand in the way of class consciousness.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_nationalism

I struggle to see how non-ethnonationalist nationalism agrees with the hypothesis that leftists oppose civic nationalism and support identitarianism. If anything, this supports my point even further.

That being said, left-wing nationalism is yucky and not really a big part of the leftist sphere.

[Purpelia]

And the primary culture of americans is for all intents and purposes WASP.

Not even "for all intents and purposes," you are almost literally correct:
European-Americans in former slave states overwhelmingly identify as "ethnic Americans" even though that is absolutely not a thing. The fact that this class of self-identification does not exist anywhere in the country except former slaveholder areas should tell you everything you need to know

It boils down to this:
Which culture is overwhelmingly depicted in your media of all forms as "american"?
Which culture has provided 100% of your top tier politicians and in particular presidents?
Which culture dominates the playing field in general?
Which culture is the one everyone thinks of when they say "american"?

It's questions like these that ultimately define what the "official" culture is.

[Kedri]

And the primary culture of americans is for all intents and purposes WASP.

Not even "for all intents and purposes," you are almost literally correct:

(click to enlarge)

European-Americans in former slave states overwhelmingly identify as "ethnic Americans" even though that is absolutely not a thing. The fact that this class of self-identification does not exist anywhere in the country except former slaveholder areas should tell you everything you need to know

It's not necessarily xenophobia or some kind of nationalism. The majority of the areas that simply identify as just Americans tend to have primarily Scots-Irish roots. They were people on the border of England and Scotland and later moved to Northern Ireland, so they always saw their ethnic identity as fluid. "Huh, I guess we're Irish, now," is what they probably thought.

There also wasn't as much immigration to those parts of the country until recently, so there wasn't really a need to distinguish themselves from other whites, as it was assumed most whites were Scots-Irish like them.

They also lost touch with their roots and assimilated early on in American history. They also tend to have ancestry from all over Europe or don't really know where specifically in Europe their ancestors came from.

[Cisairse]

European-Americans in former slave states overwhelmingly identify as "ethnic Americans" even though that is absolutely not a thing. The fact that this class of self-identification does not exist anywhere in the country except former slaveholder areas should tell you everything you need to know

Perhaps you would care to elaborate on this remark?

The idea that there is a "default" American identity and that other identities are "identitarian" and hostile to the existence of "the American" is an idea that has obvious racist undertones and not coincidentally exist primarily in the sections of the country that have, historically, been the most racist and the most persistent in establishing racism as the official law of the land.

[South Odreria 2]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_nationalism

I struggle to see how non-ethnonationalist nationalism agrees with the hypothesis that leftists oppose civic nationalism and support identitarianism. If anything, this supports my point even further.

That being said, left-wing nationalism is yucky and not really a big part of the leftist sphere.

Leftwing nationalism is the most common type of leftism on planet Earth.

[Cisairse]

Not even "for all intents and purposes," you are almost literally correct:

([url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a7/Census-2000-Data-Top-US-Ancestries-by-County.svg/800px-Census-2000-Data-Top-US-Ancestries-by-County.svg.png]Image)[/url] (click to enlarge)

European-Americans in former slave states overwhelmingly identify as "ethnic Americans" even though that is absolutely not a thing. The fact that this class of self-identification does not exist anywhere in the country except former slaveholder areas should tell you everything you need to know

It's not necessarily xenophobia or some kind of nationalism. The majority of the areas that simply identify as just Americans tend to have primarily Scots-Irish roots. They were people on the border of England and Scotland and later moved to Northern Ireland, so they always saw their ethnic identity as fluid. "Huh, I guess we're Irish, now," is what they probably thought.

There also wasn't as much immigration to those parts of the country until recently, so there wasn't really a need to distinguish themselves from other whites, as it was assumed most whites were Scots-Irish like them.

They also lost touch with their roots and assimilated early on in American history. They also tend to have ancestry from all over Europe or don't really know where specifically in Europe their ancestors came from.

If that's the case, then why does northern New England, which is also primarily of British ancestry through the colonial era and has not seen large amounts of immigration, primarily self-identify as British/English rather than "American?"

The fact that this phenomenon exist almost exclusively in the South doesn't really lend to your argument being true.

[Purpelia]

Perhaps you would care to elaborate on this remark?

The idea that there is a "default" American identity and that other identities are "identitarian" and hostile to the existence of "the American" is an idea that has obvious racist undertones and not coincidentally exist primarily in the sections of the country that have, historically, been the most racist and the most persistent in establishing racism as the official law of the land.

On the contrary. The concept of a "default" or "generic" culture and person is one that is deeply ingrained in every culture and indeed every group of people that exist. It goes right down to the family where you your self might have experienced having an "odd" relative that does not fit in. That's simply him or her diverging too far from the default of your family.

You don't consciously think about these things of course. But it is a basic part of human nature to generalize in this way. It's the way we make snap decisions of US vs THEM which in an evolutionary environment could have meant the difference between life or death.

[Ashkera]

Actual leftists despite nationalism because it competes with class interesting. A dedicated leftist will tell you that nationalism should be opposed because it exists to divide the working class amongst itself, rather than letting the working class unify to oppose the hostile interests of the employer class.

Leftists are perfectly fine with stirring up racial consciousness to advance their own left-wing interests; the current alternative identitarian movement is neither US Conservative, openly right-wing, nor liberal.

Leftists are not "identitiarian." From the left's point of view, there is no difference between assimilationary nationalism and pluralistic nationalism; both stand in the way of class consciousness.

It's a strategic choice and part of a new and broader understanding of 'Left' in which race and class are "intersectional," such that there can be oppressed races and not only oppressed classes.

Further, you need to increase your understanding of the left-identitarian system - its broken theory of knowledge in which all opposition are counter-revolutionaries (or in this case, all criticism is "racist"), embracing of collective moral responsibility and rejection of individualism, and calls for mass redistribution are all illiberal elements that have caused major problems in Communism in the past. The symbols may be different, but many of the mechanics are the same.

[Krasny-Volny]

Perhaps you would care to elaborate on this remark?

The idea that there is a "default" American identity and that other identities are "identitarian" and hostile to the existence of "the American" is an idea that has obvious racist undertones and not coincidentally exist primarily in the sections of the country that have, historically, been the most racist and the most persistent in establishing racism as the official law of the land.

As it so happens I live in one of those former slaveholder areas you refer to.

In my case I identify solely as American, because I am such a mixture of different races and nationalities in my ancestral line that I cannot single any one out as being definitively my "ethnic identity".

I don't think it's any of my business what another man chooses to identify as...those who are very closely identified with a single ancestral culture (for example, the Chinese in San Francisco or the Cubans in Miami or the Italians in New York) are welcome to identify with that culture, but I simply cannot. I just don't have a single ancestral culture to identify with, meaning I cannot even claim to be "multicultural" or "bicultural".

And what if I were to arbitrarily choose one of the many dozen or so nationalities in my background to identify with? Well sir I wouldn't be able to identify as a member of that group without feeling like a fraud and a misrepresentation.

I am thus an American, because the factor of being born in the USA and having generations of ancestors born in the USA, with cultural mores that reflect this region and the other Americans around me, is the closest thing to a demographic group identity I possess. Stripped of the American group label, I am merely a deracinated, stateless, cultureless, multiracial alien.

Perhaps you ought to consider this perspective before writing off those of us who live in former slaveholding states - including millions of ladies and gentlemen such as myself who possessed no slaveholding ancestors or any connection to slavery - as inherently prejudicial due to the way we choose to identify ourselves.

[Grimmsland]

Many years ago it probably would bother me when I was what can be described as a "normie" , now not only does it not bother me but I only wish I could speak the language too. Only somewhat legitimate reason for someone to be bothered by a language they don't understand is if there's a problem and they are talking shit and you can't understand what is being said about you. That would suck.

[Vetalia]

If that's the case, then why does northern New England, which is also primarily of British ancestry through the colonial era and has not seen large amounts of immigration, primarily self-identify as British/English rather than "American?"

The fact that this phenomenon exist almost exclusively in the South doesn't really lend to your argument being true.

Most likely a much higher level of overall education, personal wealth and literacy during the colonial and antebellum eras and better recordkeeping in terms of genealogy compared to the people who lived in the South. You can even still see many of the areas where the planter class and other wealthier populations were concentrated have identifiable English or French ancestry rather than American.

Many of those who identify as American have been in the country so long it's pretty much impossible to really know their ethnic origins; it's highly likely they would be primarily English or Scots-Irish but even then there's hundreds of years of immigration and intermarriage without that kind of detailed genealogical recordkeeping making it even more difficult to determine. For example, the New England Genealogical Society was founded in 1845 at a time when some individuals who had lived during the colonial period were still alive, whereas comparable organizations weren't founded in the South until the 1960s and 1970s, nearly 200 years after the end of the colonial period.

[Rojava Free State]

And the primary culture of americans is for all intents and purposes WASP.

Not even "for all intents and purposes," you are almost literally correct:

(click to enlarge)

European-Americans in former slave states overwhelmingly identify as "ethnic Americans" even though that is absolutely not a thing. The fact that this class of self-identification does not exist anywhere in the country except former slaveholder areas should tell you everything you need to know

There are actually quite a few people in my state and in my town who identify ethnically as American, but their ancestors are from those slaveholder states.

[Grimmsland]

Also.. it seems many Americans (in the south) do not even relate Spanish with Spain.. OR they are unaware of Spain(or Europe!). You've no idea how outright ignorant they are. You might think you know but you do not. It's infuriating, sad and scary all at the same time.

[Grimmsland]

There are actually quite a few people in my state and in my town who identify ethnically as American, but their ancestors are from those slaveholder states.

Majority in my area do. They know nothing else. Again.. infuriating, sad and scary.

[Krasny-Volny]

There are actually quite a few people in my state and in my town who identify ethnically as American, but their ancestors are from those slaveholder states.

Majority in my area do. They know nothing else. Again.. infuriating, sad and scary.

There is nothing infuriating, sad, or scary about identifying solely as an American and not as a member of any other cultural or ethnic group.

[Vetalia]

There is nothing infuriating, sad, or scary about identifying solely as an American and not as a member of any other cultural or ethnic group.

This is absolutely correct. People who identify as American have simply been here so long they don't know their specific origins and are likely much more mixed in terms of ethnicity vs. more recent immigrants. Even if you go off of a surname, all it takes is one marriage and your entire ethnic line can become indeterminable without detailed genealogical records.

One neat thing in that chart - my parents are from Luzerne County in PA and I can definitely say we are without a doubt Polish.

[Grimmsland]

Majority in my area do. They know nothing else. Again.. infuriating, sad and scary.

There is nothing infuriating, sad, or scary about identifying solely as an American and not as a member of any other cultural or ethnic group.

The ignorance is infuriating, sad and scary.

[Rojava Free State]

There are actually quite a few people in my state and in my town who identify ethnically as American, but their ancestors are from those slaveholder states.

Majority in my area do. They know nothing else. Again.. infuriating, sad and scary.

They all happen to not so coincidentally be the guys with confederate flag trucks, big guns, Trump love and not liking immigrants very much.

[Vetalia]

The ignorance is infuriating, sad and scary.

Why? If someone has been in this country for 400 years and has no idea of their genealogy, what else should they identify their ancestry as? For all intents and purposes, everything about themselves and their identity is purely American.

[Rojava Free State]

The ignorance is infuriating, sad and scary.

Why? If someone has been in this country for 400 years and has no idea of their genealogy, what else should they identify their ancestry as? For all intents and purposes, everything about themselves and their identity is purely American.

The issue isn't when people don't know their own heritage and end up calling themselves American. It's when they go acting like the borg trying to assimilate everyone into their collective mass.

[Vetalia]

The issue isn't when people don't know their own heritage and end up calling themselves American. It's when they go acting like the borg trying to assimilate everyone into their collective mass.

I doubt they have that amount of influence. However, there does need to be some degree of assimilation in order to have a cohesive society.

[Grimmsland]

The ignorance is infuriating, sad and scary.

Why? If someone has been in this country for 400 years and has no idea of their genealogy, what else should they identify their ancestry as? For all intents and purposes, everything about themselves and their identity is purely American.

How did it end up that way? At what point was it "forgotten"? To me it just comes off as willful ignorance for the ones that today still don't know or care to know. Is my telling them that American is not an ethnic group and they came from Europe rude? Maybe..

[Cisairse]

The ignorance is infuriating, sad and scary.

Why? If someone has been in this country for 400 years and has no idea of their genealogy, what else should they identify their ancestry as? For all intents and purposes, everything about themselves and their identity is purely American.

And yet, the most ethnically heterogeneous areas of the country have no significant "ethnic American" population, despite segregation which enforces racial purity not being an institutional thing since colonial times like it was in the South.

My point is that people in the North who have "mixed" ancestry, including myself, aren't broadly identifying as an "ethnic American." I have about a dozen different ethnicities somewhere in my family tree, including first-generation colonials, but American is not an ethnicity so I would not say that it is mine.

[Krasny-Volny]

Why? If someone has been in this country for 400 years and has no idea of their genealogy, what else should they identify their ancestry as? For all intents and purposes, everything about themselves and their identity is purely American.

And yet, the most ethnically heterogeneous areas of the country have no significant "ethnic American" population, despite segregation which enforces racial purity not being an institutional thing since colonial times like it was in the South.

My point is that people in the North who have "mixed" ancestry, including myself, aren't broadly identifying as an "ethnic American." I have about a dozen different ethnicities somewhere in my family tree, including first-generation colonials, but American is not an ethnicity so I would not say that it is mine.

I do agree American is not an ethnicity but surely you cannot deny it has emerged as a definitive label for lack of a better term in those cases where people cannot identify any one ancestry as their own. Personally I always check the multiracial/two or more races box on the census - but identify solely as an American if asked since I do not have a hyphen to add to the front of that label.

[Vetalia]

How did it end up that way? At what point was it "forgotten"? To me it just comes off as willful ignorance for the ones that today still don't know or care to know. Is my telling them that American is not an ethnic group and they came from Europe rude? Maybe..

I mentioned it a little bit ago, but a lot of initially was due to lack of genealogical recordkeeping, low levels of income and education, and the sheer amount of time and isolation from their home countries. Comparatively, throughout the colonial period New England was constantly in contact with the UK whereas the settlers in the backcountry had little to no such contact. Add onto that subsequent waves of immigration and intermarriage and it becomes even more muddled. It doesn't seem all that surprising that over such a long period of time they would lose any memory of where their ancestors came from and identify primarily with the country where they have lived for generations.

They weren't slaveholders, either; if anything the slaveholding wealthy were the only ones who did identify and trace their ancestry because it was highly important to the aristocratic society that developed among them in the antebellum period.

In theory you could call them European-American to match African-American, but it's pretty much a meaningless quantifier and is debatable given a not-insubstantial number of "Americans" have some degree of Native American ancestry as well.