5 ms·

> Even the USA is rooted in non-homogeneous immigration. USA used to be mostly Northern European and christian (protestant), black slaves who were moved there

> Even the USA is rooted in non-homogeneous immigration. USA used to be mostly Northern European and christian (protestant), black slaves who were moved there by force or pre European colonization inhabitants were never considered part of the foundations of US. US foundations were anything but non-homogeneous. Now after WWII, US attempted to replace the racial and religious identity at the heart of "americanship" with some idealistic identity based on american exceptionalism, the american dream and the cult of the american imagery (flag, eagle, colors...). No need to point out that this re-invention of "americanship" is slowly crumbling as we speak. Who knows what will remain of that cohesion in the next 50 years.

Calavar 4y ago
You're applying a 21st century post-globalization lens to a 18th century world. Sure, today a German is welcome in France or the UK and seen as more or less equal. In the 1700s, there wasn't even a concept of equality for subcultures within a single country, let alone different cultures in different countries. See Scottish/English relations or Parisian/Occitan relations or Flemish/Dutch relations. The fact that people of Anglo-Saxon descent and people of Scots-Irish descent had an equal hand in the early US government was remarkable in and of itself, let alone the fact that the Catholic population in Maryland had equal rights under the law from day one.
- throw_m239339 4y ago
  > You're applying a 21st century post-globalization lens to a 18th century world. because we're discussing 20th/21st century geopolitics at first place? Of course I am. Pakistan or India didn't exist in the 18th century, in fact these are British constructs. > The fact that people of Anglo-Saxon descent and people of Scots-Irish descent had an equal hand in the early US government was remarkable in and of itself, let alone the fact that the Catholic population in Maryland had equal rights under the law from day one. Yes, fighting against the British empire certainly was an efficient motivator. But still black people and indigenous populations were still left out of what you consider a feat.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > still black people and indigenous populations were still left out of what you consider a feat If we concede no feats have been achieved in human history for not being unblemishingly perfect, sure. Fine. We'll leave the term with religion (and madness). Whatever the next rung of achievement is, the highest one in realm of the possible, America's founding matches it.
  - eynsham 4y ago
    The idea of Pakistan was created by Muslim intellectuals, not the British.
rayiner 4y ago
Remarkably ignorant post. Like saying that everyone in India/Pakistan/Bangladesh is homogenous because they're all subcontinental "brown" people. The conflict between whites on one hand and Asians/Latinos in modern America pales in comparison to the conflict that existed between different groups of northern european Christians at the time of the founding.
xyzzyz 4y ago
The “Protestant” Northern Europeans in colonial America were anything but homogenous. New England Puritans not only had laws requiring Quakers to stay away, they in fact whipped, mutiliated and even executed those that refused to do so. The four English cultures that settled colonial America were vastly different from one another. The idea that there existed some kind of “US religious identity” upon its founding is profoundly ahistorical, and, in fact, laughable.
skissane 4y ago
> USA used to be mostly Northern European and christian (protestant) You are completely ignoring here the huge role that anti-Catholic prejudice had in US history (and the rest of the Anglosphere as well). Indeed, the vast majority of historic anti-Irish sentiment was really anti-Catholic – "Irish" came to mean "Irish Catholic", and Irish Protestants in the US rebranded themselves as "Scots-Irish" (not only those Irish Protestants who had recent Scottish heritage through the Plantation of Ulster – Irish Protestants who lacked any recent Scottish heritage called themselves that too.)

Calavar 4y ago

You're applying a 21st century post-globalization lens to a 18th century world. Sure, today a German is welcome in France or the UK and seen as more or less equal. In the 1700s, there wasn't even a concept of equality for subcultures within a single country, let alone different cultures in different countries. See Scottish/English relations or Parisian/Occitan relations or Flemish/Dutch relations. The fact that people of Anglo-Saxon descent and people of Scots-Irish descent had an equal hand in the early US government was remarkable in and of itself, let alone the fact that the Catholic population in Maryland had equal rights under the law from day one.

throw_m239339 4y ago
> You're applying a 21st century post-globalization lens to a 18th century world. because we're discussing 20th/21st century geopolitics at first place? Of course I am. Pakistan or India didn't exist in the 18th century, in fact these are British constructs. > The fact that people of Anglo-Saxon descent and people of Scots-Irish descent had an equal hand in the early US government was remarkable in and of itself, let alone the fact that the Catholic population in Maryland had equal rights under the law from day one. Yes, fighting against the British empire certainly was an efficient motivator. But still black people and indigenous populations were still left out of what you consider a feat.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > still black people and indigenous populations were still left out of what you consider a feat If we concede no feats have been achieved in human history for not being unblemishingly perfect, sure. Fine. We'll leave the term with religion (and madness). Whatever the next rung of achievement is, the highest one in realm of the possible, America's founding matches it.
- eynsham 4y ago
  The idea of Pakistan was created by Muslim intellectuals, not the British.

rayiner 4y ago

Remarkably ignorant post. Like saying that everyone in India/Pakistan/Bangladesh is homogenous because they're all subcontinental "brown" people. The conflict between whites on one hand and Asians/Latinos in modern America pales in comparison to the conflict that existed between different groups of northern european Christians at the time of the founding.

xyzzyz 4y ago

The “Protestant” Northern Europeans in colonial America were anything but homogenous. New England Puritans not only had laws requiring Quakers to stay away, they in fact whipped, mutiliated and even executed those that refused to do so. The four English cultures that settled colonial America were vastly different from one another. The idea that there existed some kind of “US religious identity” upon its founding is profoundly ahistorical, and, in fact, laughable.

skissane 4y ago

> USA used to be mostly Northern European and christian (protestant) You are completely ignoring here the huge role that anti-Catholic prejudice had in US history (and the rest of the Anglosphere as well). Indeed, the vast majority of historic anti-Irish sentiment was really anti-Catholic – "Irish" came to mean "Irish Catholic", and Irish Protestants in the US rebranded themselves as "Scots-Irish" (not only those Irish Protestants who had recent Scottish heritage through the Plantation of Ulster – Irish Protestants who lacked any recent Scottish heritage called themselves that too.)