We are NOT a nation of immigrants

[Treedbear]

By this argument one would gather, then, that we are all (all humans on Earth) African Americans (every 'modern' human came from Africa) ... to deny that is to perpetuate racism in America.

I deny being an "African Immigrant", not in an attempt to perpetuate racism, but to avoid useless labels that apply to every living being that serve no purpose.

But that response only makes sense if you read the statement "We are a nation of immigrants" in a completely context-free manner. It was originally said, and still completely used, as a response to anti-immigration rhetoric which was trying to drive a wedge between current residents and new ones. It's telling them that they should consider their wedge invalid because if they go back a few generations, their family would be on the other side of that wedge. It's a response to the useless labels that you're complaining about.

Some Americans currently argue against accepting any more immigrants. But I think most of the time the discussion revolves around illegal immigrants. And that if you go back a few generations their own family arrived legally. If that's (the former case) ostensibly the context then the phrase is just a platitude in order to obscure the real and complex issues.

Of course it's the case that if you take a phrase who's meaning is almost entirely dependent on the context in which it's made and remove that context, the phrase loses a lot of its meaning and can be picked apart due to that lack of meaning as a result. However, that's really nothing more than a strawman argument because the people who actually use the phrase are never using it in the context-free manner that you're picking apart.

If you're addressing a group of newly naturalized immigrants then its completely inspirational. Otherwise its probably only valid as a response to an argument against all immigration. But these days the context is usually with regard to illegal immigration, or else involves only some particular group, so the point is lost anyway. By the way, I love legal immigrants but think the illegal kind is very corrosive to our society. We need to make it easier to go the legal route. And I'd grant amnesty to all those who are here in a second, if only there was a way it wouldn't encourage more to come by the same means.

 

[scombrid]

I do not mean to imply that 'after the cut off date' you are an immigrant, and not a "real" American. I can see how that was interpreted.
Let me rephrase... ANY person who was born here, and has no living relatives here that were not born here, are not 'immigrants' in the sense of the word in this context ("America is a nation of immigrants", that is).

There was a time in American history where there was a mass exodus of Europeans into America... at that time, we certainly were a nation of immigrants.. but that time is over...

You mean that in spite of the rhetoric and hostility that was directed at my ancestors that arrived in the late 19th and early 20th century, rhetoric that is echoed today about the immigrants from the south, those people assimilated and became Americans?

 

[Speakpigeon]

Let me rephrase... ANY person who was born here, and has no living relatives here that were not born here, are not 'immigrants' in the sense of the word in this context ("America is a nation of immigrants", that is).

There was a time in American history where there was a mass exodus of Europeans into America... at that time, we certainly were a nation of immigrants.. but that time is over... you might as well say that we are a nation of slave owners... a relic of the distant past.

And I already replied to that, in the very post to Adamwho you chose to comment.
EB

 

[whichphilosophy]

We escaped from the English fort in 1755 and fought a rear guard action in Nova Scotia living on nothing but moose poop.... or so the legend goes.

I didn't realize you're that old.

 

[Malintent]

I do not mean to imply that 'after the cut off date' you are an immigrant, and not a "real" American. I can see how that was interpreted.
Let me rephrase... ANY person who was born here, and has no living relatives here that were not born here, are not 'immigrants' in the sense of the word in this context ("America is a nation of immigrants", that is).

There was a time in American history where there was a mass exodus of Europeans into America... at that time, we certainly were a nation of immigrants.. but that time is over...

You mean that in spite of the rhetoric and hostility that was directed at my ancestors that arrived in the late 19th and early 20th century, rhetoric that is echoed today about the immigrants from the south, those people assimilated and became Americans?

They may or may not have... but you, a distant relative of them, are not an immigrant, just because they (and ultimately everyone else) were.

 

[Malintent]

Funny how this notion still perpetuates. The Civil war was no more about black people's rights as it was about state versus federal rights to set laws. It was an industrial war.. a war to preserve the cotton industry. Hemp was as much an 'enemy' of the South as the notion of having to raise wages of their workers (from next to nothing to a 'living wage' at the time). Ship building was one of the most lucrative and prevalent industries at that time as well... and ships needed MILES of (then) cotton fiber rope. The development of (Hemp) a lighter weight, cheaper, stronger, more renewable resource for making a superior rope was a major threat to the cotton industry.

In retrospect, the US Civil War motivations were not very much different than the Gulf war motivations... then it was Cotton, and 'today' it was Oil.

Well, the people in the Slave Holding States may have an issue with your ignoring the plain and straightforward reasons they gave for starting the war.

The war was not about "freeing the slaves" it was about creating a level economic playing field, which meant the loss of free labor (slaves). You say it yourself right there... the slave holders STARTED the war. Not the (not) freedom fighters of the north... they were not fighting for black people's freedom, they were fighting for their jobs.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Well, the people in the Slave Holding States may have an issue with your ignoring the plain and straightforward reasons they gave for starting the war.

The war was not about "freeing the slaves" it was about creating a level economic playing field, which meant the loss of free labor (slaves). You say it yourself right there... the slave holders STARTED the war. Not the (not) freedom fighters of the north... they were not fighting for black people's freedom, they were fighting for their jobs.

If your civil war hero ancestor were alive today, he'd slap you in the face for saying the new order as much as you do.

 

[Playball40]

Why does the GOP call anyone that has dark skin or speaks more than one language "immigrant"? As you say, MOST are NOT.

From what I am reading, nobody here is an immigrant but rather just likes calling themselves one....

I am not an immigrant nor is anybody in my family.

Why is it that 87% of people in the US are native born and still cling to this mythos that they are immigrants?

 

[Malintent]

I never called him a hero. I thought his story of how his horse died was a touching one... but that didn't make him a hero. Such misclassifications to help promote an idea or agenda is quite prevalent around here, however it just damages people's ability to consider your ideas, when you base them on vapid, false declarations.