Trajan12
Deity
For those of you who haven't heard, the Bradley Report, has made some interesting findings on America's identity issue.
Basically, America's "National Identity" is losing out for several reasons. The increased amount of importance being played on ethnic identity(as seen in the "Demographic Demagoguery" this primary season) which has long caused division, the shocking lack of education high school level students have on basic American History and the Constitution, The strong and passionate divide about Unregistered Immigrants living here in America, and so on and so forth.
I've long held the belief that Republicans would benefit well from attacking patriotism from another angle. The majority of liberals, patriotic liberals even, cringe out of reflex whenever they hear Republicans blathering about patriotism.
So what I'm proposing is that a new form of patriotic rhetoric be adopted. A much more all inclusive form. This should not only emphasize the inclusion of all people in the American Identity. It should deemphasize divisions along ethnic and religious and political lines. Many times one is used without the other to no avail.
It should also free itself of the connotation of their being a stereotypical or archetypal American. Often times the promotion of this image is turns others off.
To win the General Election, one candidate is going to have to build a broad and inclusive coalition. And in order to keep that coalition stable, divisions must be heavily deemphasized. An article I read recently talked about the problem of the democrats holding together a broad 'multicultural' coalition being that they have to walk on eggshells not to offend anyone or to make anyone feel less important. Deemphasizing the differences altogether would alleviate that issue. And beyond the General Election and into the future, students need to be much better educated about the history of America from a non ethno-centrist or ethno-apologist perspective. So there should be no "(Ethnicity) History Month", and no "(Ethnicity) owes (Ethnicity) for (X act)", or "(Ethnicity/Immigrants) are the cause of (Problem)".
A lot of politicians pay lip service to this ideal, and look where it's gotten us now. They just believe that they can hack away at divisions and a unified identity will form. It doesn't work like that. Conservatives are on the right track with their opposition to things like 'Black History Month' or the NAACP, but where they fail is in seeing the root cause of organizations like these. Which would be the failure to be convincingly inclusive. Black History Month exists because people didn't believe the history and accomplishments of Blacks in America was ever being taught about. So to just strike that down does not alleviate the cause of it ever being in the first place. What would need to be done is to strike it down with the reassurance that, as every American should be an American and nothing more, Black History should be adequately included in general American history and not isolated for a special month or neglected. This is only one example of ways that the attempt to form a national identity(I'm opposed to using this as it brings me back to the issue with the "Archetypal American" as opposed to ethnic identities is lacking.
Lastly I think that the pride in diversity should place more emphasis in diversity among individuals than among ethnic groups.
Phew, these thoughts all seem haphazard and unorganized, apologies.
Discuss.
Basically, America's "National Identity" is losing out for several reasons. The increased amount of importance being played on ethnic identity(as seen in the "Demographic Demagoguery" this primary season) which has long caused division, the shocking lack of education high school level students have on basic American History and the Constitution, The strong and passionate divide about Unregistered Immigrants living here in America, and so on and so forth.
I've long held the belief that Republicans would benefit well from attacking patriotism from another angle. The majority of liberals, patriotic liberals even, cringe out of reflex whenever they hear Republicans blathering about patriotism.
So what I'm proposing is that a new form of patriotic rhetoric be adopted. A much more all inclusive form. This should not only emphasize the inclusion of all people in the American Identity. It should deemphasize divisions along ethnic and religious and political lines. Many times one is used without the other to no avail.
It should also free itself of the connotation of their being a stereotypical or archetypal American. Often times the promotion of this image is turns others off.
To win the General Election, one candidate is going to have to build a broad and inclusive coalition. And in order to keep that coalition stable, divisions must be heavily deemphasized. An article I read recently talked about the problem of the democrats holding together a broad 'multicultural' coalition being that they have to walk on eggshells not to offend anyone or to make anyone feel less important. Deemphasizing the differences altogether would alleviate that issue. And beyond the General Election and into the future, students need to be much better educated about the history of America from a non ethno-centrist or ethno-apologist perspective. So there should be no "(Ethnicity) History Month", and no "(Ethnicity) owes (Ethnicity) for (X act)", or "(Ethnicity/Immigrants) are the cause of (Problem)".
A lot of politicians pay lip service to this ideal, and look where it's gotten us now. They just believe that they can hack away at divisions and a unified identity will form. It doesn't work like that. Conservatives are on the right track with their opposition to things like 'Black History Month' or the NAACP, but where they fail is in seeing the root cause of organizations like these. Which would be the failure to be convincingly inclusive. Black History Month exists because people didn't believe the history and accomplishments of Blacks in America was ever being taught about. So to just strike that down does not alleviate the cause of it ever being in the first place. What would need to be done is to strike it down with the reassurance that, as every American should be an American and nothing more, Black History should be adequately included in general American history and not isolated for a special month or neglected. This is only one example of ways that the attempt to form a national identity(I'm opposed to using this as it brings me back to the issue with the "Archetypal American" as opposed to ethnic identities is lacking.
Lastly I think that the pride in diversity should place more emphasis in diversity among individuals than among ethnic groups.
Phew, these thoughts all seem haphazard and unorganized, apologies.
Discuss.
