Most of us in the metapolitical game have heard about the Amerimutt: This idea that we as Americans are this rootless mass of randomised genetic strands floating about in a stew. Or a melting pot. Or a salad bowl. The status of being American does not mean much, it simply is. Or better still, when you come to America you become American. The former I think of largely as a bit of a projection, but that is just me. The latter is well meant, but asinine. Regardless, opinions vary. And as with most, they are in their nature quite reactionary.
So. Before I attempt to come to the crux of this article, allow me to me to address the implication above, that Americans are rootless. The inference to the implication, especially in identitarian politick, is that the American is inferior to the European because his roots are shallow, and not homogenous. I have encountered this thinking myself in my discourses, whether by way of troll or misinformed individual, the case remains open. So. *Is* the (White) American really inferior to the European in terms of homogeneous history? No, quite adamantly no. Allow me an illustrative story.
Consider every classically European ethnicity. Not one of our tribes ended where they began. I, Seax, am an Anglo. What is this? The Anglo-Saxon (in proper nomenclature) is a distilled composite. Long ago, two Germanic mercenaries by the names of Hengist and Horsa came to the British Isles at the invitation of Vortigern who was a high ranking Briton in the late Roman presence there. They came in a fashion made traditional by late Rome, the foedus, which was a treaty made with tribal Europeans. Their express purpose was to assist the Britons in repelling the Picts and Scots. It did not play out as was intended and Hengist and Horsa with their mercenaries remained, inviting more of their allies. Their allies came from a confederation of loosely allied Germanic tribes, largely constituted by Anglos (from Angeln), Saxons (from Sachsen), and Jutes (from Jutland.) The tribes worked in solidarity and with relative rapidity annexed the island in the wake of disintegrating Roman might. Thus the British Isles embraced their English destiny. The people that took the British Isles, at this time we were the race of Beowulf, the finest example of Old English diction.
If I may continue the story in this vein before making a digression, I shall go on. In time, the minutiae of differences this foedoratii had in comparison to the Britons dissolved. The Anglos and Saxons came to be conflated. In Latin they had been called Angli-Saxones. Our own language adopted the term of convenience, and we went on. We assumed a new religion, called Christendom (Catholicism) and our Gods Wōden, Thunor and Frīja became patron saints of a kingly legacy of Christians. In time, a one such great king by the name of Alfred decided that no longer should the Anglo-Saxon race be comprised of squabbling petty kingdoms, but should instead unite and form a bulwark. One Folk, one Kingdom, one King. (Ein Völk, ein Reich, ein Führer, anyone?) England, they tell us, was born from Alfred the Great’s legacy. The Anglo-Saxon legacy was condensed later after 1066 into what was called Englishry by the French, who, under William the Conqueror decided that England would look better wearing a Frenchie’s crown.
Though suppressed, our race continued onward. When we emerged again sometime later, we were now English. History had foreseen the stabilisation of our genome with components of the other Germanic Tribes, an influx of the local Celt, regulated by the last wave of Norman (read Nordic) blood. Our language changed, Ealdseaxe (old English) gave way to Middle English. This was to be the language of Chaucer. It was an English influenced to a degree by the modified French speaking overlords. Eventually Norman rule would give way. The resistance of our kind against the Normans was too costly to maintain, despite the savagery employed by said Normans in trying. The throne was returned and again made English. Eventually we saw the universalist appeal of Catholicism waver under the perverse King Henry VII. Then Protestantism happened, along with many great religious schisms. A schism which Catholicism found herself on the losing end of (perhaps lamentably.) The Anglican Church replaced Catholicism, but the seeds of freedom were sewn, and is so often the case the tree of liberty is watered with blood.
It was after the time of Shakespeare, who gave us our finest examples of Early Modern English that the religious stirrings reached a climate. There appeared in England a band of dissidents calling themselves Puritans. They were English who reviled the politicisation of the Word of God by the hand of Statesman, they disliked the public chicanery and they detested the invasion of their conscience. So, with cooperation they endeavoured to leave. It was a likely story. The mainstream English could rid themselves of a pest which they could keep tabs on. It was agreed that the Puritans could have their religious liberty, elsewhere. As it so happened there was an explorer by the name of Christopher Columbus who had paved the way for a colonial effort in the New World, Rumour had it they were calling this land America.
The first Colonies were English. The oldest and best parts of America came to be called New England. The English survived the harsh winters and overcame elements. We even began to slowly push westwards. Our genetic destiny had made a full circle, you see. Our ancient ancestors formed a travelling band and established a colony of what became England, New England would be no different. Our efforts had not gone unnoticed. It was allowed that others from other tribes should come and capitalise on this land grab. The Irish came. The Italians came. The Germans came. The French came.
The Anglo remained, though he called himself American now, in large part. He wished to distance himself a bit, in some ways, from the crown. Though it must be said that not all Anglos were truly dissidents, for when it came to pass that the colonies stirred and planned sedition, many Anglos could not fight in themselves the racial prejudice toward law and order. They were called Loyalists, and were considered entirely separate from this new breed of American Anglo. In time, the Revolution passed into history books. The peoples remained. There were upheavals. We Anglos had an instinct to keep what we had earned, but time oversaw a peculiar change. The Irish, despite their temperament, were not so dissimilar. They assimilated, they settled. They married in, and we married out. We were still American, just as the Anglo and the Saxon were destined to become Anglos. The Italians had a similar story to tell, though they were dissimilar enough from the Irish and Anglo that they maintained independent communities. So it went with the Germans. The Scandinavians who had begun to emigrate. And countless other European extracts: all of whom went into making the Ethnic American, what is often referred to as the White American, or, up until fairly recently, simply American.
The American Ethnic had been born, and so as Anglo destiny made manifest came full circle, so does this article. The American Ethnicity was composed of pairings that were by no means historically novel, a point that protagonists of the Amerimutt trope rarely tell you. I could spin the same tale with the French, those sons of the Normans who altered the trajectory of our racial destiny. They too comprised originally of Germanic Tribes who would seize the assets of the Roman Empire that had made them foedoratii. The word French comes to us from the old word Francesca’s, which like the old word Seax, referred to the type of weapon this tribe carried. The Saxons carried Seaxes, the Franks carried Francescas, an axe. The Franks absorbed the culturally dominant Roman culture and became Latinised, just as the Anglos eventually would (to a lesser degree.) Most of the modern European tribes have a similar story to tell. Nobody ends up where they begin, exactly.
That, generally, is what I think when confronted with the rather snobbish and uncritical idea that American Identity has less weight than a “European” one. We are, after all, a European foundry. The dire straits of modernity do nothing to change the imposition of history, only how these soundbites are marshalled is what changes. Now. The other major point that is often dredged up is that the American Identity is erratic, which was and is true. However, I think one of the major problems is that people do not have a holistic approach to the question. When I consider America, I consider her in relation to world history, relative to my own ancestral background. On the surface level this makes me guilty of atomising and compartmentalising. It would seem that my orientation is biased toward my Anglo bias. And it is.
However, an Anglo-American and a Hiberno-American at this late stage in the game are liable to have far more in common with each other than the Anglo-American might with the Englishman proper, or the Hiberno-American with the Irishman. This is because the distillation of the European backdrops into the American identity have underwent the beginning stages of equanimity. To be quite honest, a great deal of syncretisation of the subethnic backdrops had already occurred before the immigration reforms of the 1965. Even now, White Americans are far more likely to drop their hyphenation in lieu of the common American identity than are, say, African-Americans or Hispanic-Americans. (In my experience most Hispanics opt not to hyphenate at all, suggesting assimilation for them is far more difficult than for the African extracts who had no choice in the matter til but recently.)
And there is to be argued a shared American Identity. We can view it as a composite of the various subethnic strata and influences as they are filtered by the genetic markers of a rugged individual, and so on. The influencers are tacit, true, and easily corrupted, but the results are sublimated in indigenous specimens. Consider the supposed American love of liberty. We think of it as a trope, but of the major early contributors to the American genepool the idea of liberty was paramount. The English who started wanted religious liberty of conscience. The Irish early birds sought liberty from poverty, among other things. So it went with the Scots who followed. And the Germans. Each prized a notion of liberty. Like it went with the French Revolution, the American Revolution sublimated and codified liberty so that their descendants would be free to take it for granted. Now freedom and liberty are tropes, layered with a very delicious and fattening coating of sweet irony.
For a time, the colony was the major agora of American Identity. The insular factors of New England colonial life allowed for a spark of unique cultural evolution to endure. It was shadowed by the Anglos who predominated, and by the other relative strains that followed. Then, when the Colonies had stabilised and expansion was inevitable, the Frontier became the next iteration of the American Soul. Unfettered by the relative sanctity of the Colony and settled life, the Rugged Individualism of which we hear so much came to pass. I understand that the restless Celts undertook much of the travelling, spreading into the Southwest, where the Germans and Scandinavians went as far as the Midwest and seemed to find their equanimity.
At some point, something happened. Something that has been happening to the Anglo for ages. After giving the heart of America his soul, the Anglo in America diffused into the landscape. The other ethnicities based their parameters around him. But the American Ethnicity, owing so much to a classically European adoption of Graeco-Roman values, felt that their betrayingly ethnocentric experiment could be universalised. Like all colonial efforts, an attempt was made to “civilise” the other races. We began to attempt to assimilate the coloureds. And a peculiar (but not objectively surprising) thing happened. It was revealed that our cultures were mutually exclusive. More dissimilar than alike.
We now live in a polite society where we have this idea that “we are all Americans,” and “it doesn’t matter what the colour of your skin is but for the content of your heart,” and yada yada. One of the main problems with the American Ethnicity is the short-sightedness of it. The whole thing is treated analogously to a videogame character suddenly spawning in 1776. (As my wife says “poof!”) Most Americans tend to begin American history with the revolution, or the Mayflower. People are allowed to go on in life with this astounding notion that America as it is (in the year this piece was published) as it always was. The idea that the entire substrate of world ethnicities were always represented, along with every religion and every political predilection, is a disservice. My time spent in public school taught me to call it an “unrealistic expectation.” When people come to the conclusion that it is untenable it leads them to irrational, erratic and inhospitable attitudes.
History is never so simple as exacting a date. It is a measure of tracking the movement of people, their contributions; but also the attitudes and the prejudices, the achievements and trepidations of the groups of people involved. It does an injustice both to American History and American Identity to downplay the role of antecedence in our cultural makeup. I posit that American history is as old as the history of individual tribes coming here, contributing to the original colonial expanse. The American Anglo, the original universal solvent of this country, became the armature around which the rest of the sculpture was made. And this sculpture, with the calculated blend of polymers and clay worked. It worked because the cultures that originally contributed were themselves relatable, in degrees.
But now? Now we attempt to assimilate cultures that are worlds apart. (First and third world, namely.) And we expect that the process will happen immediately and garner similar results as crossing English and Germans, or Irish and Scots. Except what is neglected is that the standard deviation of performance and IQ between the average Anglo and Scot is considerably less than either of those and an African, either of those and a Hispanic. The outlier here is the Asian who has considerably less difficulty integrating into Eurocentric society owing his higher mean IQ.
The obvious result is that (White) Americans are left scratching their heads. They have been indoctrinated with the notion that “American” is a title you can confer. It does not occur to them because this portion of our history is weaponised, that it is an inheritance. The ethnicity of the White American comes in question only when it is used to beat Whites into pacification or submission. In the earlier stages of America, the melting pot and salad bowls would have eventually worked out. However this process was stultified when the immigration question opened to include the Third World. The level and rate at which Americans were expected to assimilate exponentially increased in difficulty, as did the content of their assimilation.
Now, assimilation does not occur, so much as pocketing and depression. With the option of embracing your destiny as a White American largely disbarred because it was formerly politically incorrect, but now considered borderline terroristic by a hysterical classification agency… Americans have little option but to become increasingly insular and adopt increasingly fabricated identities that the norm deems safe.
Moreover, it has led many Americans to become despondent. Especially those with Nationalistic tendencies. When they begin to assess the march of history, they feel left out. They begin to realise that the beautiful tapestry of their ethnic enclave has been traded for cheap tinsel wrapped in materialistic dreams. For many, we see the celebrations of the aliens in our midst. We see the glorification of Black culture and feel it is at the expense of our own. I am acutely aware of this as an Anglo writing, in that because everyone here speaks my language, drives on my roads, goes to my schools… and yet does not recognise for whom the bells tolled… it is tough to remain objectively kind.
Consider the Irish. As annoying as they can be, they have a fascinating culture. But in America that culture has been successfully reduced to green beer and green plastic garbage that you put out for recycling the Monday after Saint Patty’s Day. A shirt you wear once a year with a stupid slogan on it. Brava, Mr. Potato Head. And I? I’m an Anglo – we hedged our bet on America. We are America. Now that they’ve sold that out from under us, there’s nothing left. To my knowledge there is no Anglo Heritage Festival. There is no Anglo Awareness month. You wanna know what we have in these parts? Bean suppers and clam chowder, and nobody knows that’s an Anglo thing but Spergs like me.
That all being said, the catalyst for my writing this, actually, is my father. A significant dormant variable has been conversations with my brothers from the Männerbund in which I hypothetically operate within online in Minecraft. As I mentioned, the American Ethnicity is problematic because it is in contention between several forces. Like Asatru, this is a battle between Folkish and Universalist forces. As for my father, he was raised by his father, whom I knew as my Grandfather. Now, my Grandfather considered himself an Englishman. Quiet, reserved, sensible. Even today when I am too sensible for my father’s liking he will say; “you’re just like your grandfather.” So it goes. However, my father was raised with the topheavy emphasis on Americana. He was explained in terms of outliers, and came away with the impression that ‘we are all just mutts.’ Because someone who was theoretically Irish married in, and another theoretical Frenchman somewhere else this somehow means you have no identity. You are a mutt, having been euthanized by globalism.
This is the unenviable reality many uninitiated Normies live with. They do not understand ethnography. To them, they do not see the relations. I, on the other hand, possess documents which instruct otherwise. I have also studied history and understand that the chain is much longer than American education chooses to emphasise. It is easy to understand why men like my father clamp down on the American Identity, but theirs is ill defined. To them, America is a title that can be conferred. This is problematic because it brings us back to a factor I mentioned earlier. Americana is approached ethnically. We tend to see a Good American in terms of expected behaviour. My father bases this on Anglo behaviour, but he has no appreciation for his subethnic background and thereby sets himself up for neverending disappointment. He defines American attitudes in Anglo-Saxon mentalities, but when no reciprocity is achieved, he flounders and wonders “what the hell happened to this country?” I myself have this same issue, however, being ethnically aware, I understand what it is I look for, and when it is I am floundered. All I have to do is adjust my parameters when working with others and I can often find fair ground with them.
Still it remains, mutt or not, there is a simple answer. Our family is English, its name is English. In my possession is a family tree which betrays our English origins. Our family left England at around the time of the Clearances and stayed in the area of Dedham, Massachusetts until my Grandfather acquired land in Maine. Here I am. Identity cannot be achieved without a solvent. That is the Anglo, now made invisible by the overwhelm of ethnic options. The American Identity owes its soul to the Anglo into whom all the others were dissolved and taught English, to operate in Saxon rhythms and think in Anglo attitudes. This brings me back to the question of my White brothers of mixed ancestry who struggle with their own identity in the context of American nationalism. Many tell me with exact percentiles what they are. 56% Anglo, 88% awesome. Whatever. Some feel that their myriad of ethnic options makes them somehow less legitimate than someone with a straight identification. Why? Because of the programming. Why else?
That is the struggle for many White Nationalists, who, like me, have a keen eye for ethnography. They understand words in a different metalanguage than do Normies. Normies think American is an inherited condition, WNs understand it is a pre-existing condition. However, even many White Nationalists struggle with the intricacies of the American question. They too fall prey to the Mutt trope. I would peradventure to assume that understanding ethnic archetypes changes your opinion and understanding. This would implicitly allow for a greater capitalisation of phenotypic and emotional characteristics in an individual basis. However, this also assumes the average WN has done enough introspection to understand what they are in order to look for what their charisms are.
Percentages matter. I believe that a man with a predominance of one gene exhibits an expected display of traits therefrom. If one is 70% Slavic and 30% Anglo, I see no reason to hold on to the English percentile unless it is important, for obviously, it stands to reason that you yourself are mainly Slavic into whom some English was dissolved. Of course, being a proud Anglo, I am willing to grant honorary status to White men of good character with interesting syntax and logical thinking. That said. Another way of dealing with it is to find the earliest origin point of your family, that is an efficient way of ending an internal discourse. When I received my papers from my Uncle, it instructed me as to what elements make me. This cleared up many misconceptions. I had been led to believe I was some kind of bastardised Mickey Mutt being some conglomeration of French and Irish and “other.” The fact remained I could have asked my Grandfather, and he would have told me what the papers revealed, if only his ungrateful wife hadn’t nagged him to death.
A lot of White folk live this way, denied a connection to what they are by this retarded opinion that being a mutt is good enough. For me, I had to fight nature to satisfy a status quo that college later told me didn’t exist to begin with. Why bother? It’s a lot of energy thrown to the drink. For example, I lived for years with the idea that I was supposed to be Irish for years yet found much of what Irish culture had to offer to be strange and inherently repellent, as did many of the popular Irishisms and slang disconcert and disorient me. To this day I have an outsider’s appreciation for Irishness. I enjoy Irish music in the same vein I do German. Eventually I would meet my (Irish) wife who without trying would teach me how ultimately un-Irish I am. Attempting to assimilate into her family life put the nail in that coffin. ForEVER. She herself is roughly 85% Irish and 15% Scandinavian. Let me tell you, reader, that 15% accounts for almost nothing except for, apparently, an irrational, unquantifiable love for IKEA. She assumes no outstandingly Scandinavian traits and herself gives that Scando influence no credit. (She does have seasonal depression, if that counts.)
Choose, Whitey. So many of us fall into a uniquely pitiful insecurity trap. The impression I have is that many live in fear of being kicked out of White Nationalism for failing their genetic tests. (Which is categorically ridiculous and patently comical.) Why? We all know what White is. Decide what you are and live the life you choose. It is simple. It is within your purview to tell your friends what your destiny shall be, the vice does not come to versa here. What shall they do to the contrary? You are arbiter, not others. It cleared up so much baggage for me to once and for all settle upon the answer to what I am, so much more satisfying than the cheap and unfulfilling answer of being a mutt. Granted, receiving my documents was an added blessing that only confirmed suspicion, but there you go.
So. What’s a mutt to do? I don’t have an easy answer. I don’t have a fun answer. Well, not fun in the traditional sense. Do some reading seems to be my first answer for everything. But really, pay attention to the calendar pages. American History is deeper than the stereotype, longer lasting than plastic. Consider our holidays. Thanksgiving, Fourth of July. Read about American life, what it was. Decided for yourself what it is. Don’t let what the enemy has taken deter you. You take these things by taking them back. Celebrate Columbus Day, Thanksgiving. Do it in style, do it with a smile. That is, my friend, what holidays were for – remembrance. We live life in a fish tank, artificially, waiting in vain for someone to provide us with an answer. But there is no answer but the ones we supply ourselves.
If you have a wife, put a baby in her belly. While you’re waiting on that incubation phase bring her up to speed. You can give your children the America that was robbed you. You have friends? Talk shop. Remind them what their heritage is. Or if they are ignorant of ethnography, educate them. To understand America in terms of a pro-patria setup can completely change your appreciation of the tragedy that modernity has wrought. Cultural resistance has weight. You dislike the multiculti garbage? Have an answer prepared for why it is awful, and what you have that can replace it. Have a care to understand where it went so dreadfully wrong. It doesn’t need to be about who specifically was and is right and wrong, nor need it be about conspiracies. (Though the argument for all of the above can certainly be made.) Not everyone can handle that. But certain facts can’t be traded in for. Your ancestry has meaning, own it. Ownership is holistic, it implies that you shall define it for yourself and decided how it shall be used. Work your way up from there, whatever your angle. That, that is simple.