And who were these “people”?

In Federalist No. 2, John Jay writes of them as “one united people … descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs. …”

If such are the elements of nationhood and peoplehood, can we still speak of Americans as one nation and one people?

We no longer have the same ancestors. They are of every color and from every country. We do not speak one language, but rather English, Spanish and a host of others. We long ago ceased to profess the same religion. We are evangelical Christians, mainstream Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Mormons, Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists, agnostics and atheists.

Federalist No. 2 celebrated our unity. Today’s elites proclaim that our diversity is our strength. But is this true, or a tenet of trendy ideology?

After the attempted massacre of Republican congressmen at that ball field in Alexandria, Fareed Zakaria wrote: “The political polarization that is ripping this country apart” is about “identity … gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation (and) social class.” He might have added – religion, morality, culture and history.

Zakaria seems to be tracing the disintegration of our society to that very diversity that its elites proclaim to be its greatest attribute: “If the core issues are about identity, culture and religion … then compromise seems immoral. American politics is becoming more like Middle Eastern politics, where there is no middle ground between being Sunni or Shiite.”...

With this July 4 long weekend, many writers have bewailed the animus Americans exhibit toward one another and urged new efforts to reunite us. Yet, recall again those first words of Jefferson in 1776:

“When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them …”

Are we approaching such a point? Could the Constitution, as currently interpreted, win the approval of two-thirds of our citizens and three-fourth of our states, if it were not already the supreme law of the land? How would a national referendum on the Constitution turn out, when many Americans are already seeking a new constitutional convention?

All of which invites the question: Are we still a nation? And what is a nation? French writer Ernest Renan gave us the answer in the 19th century:

“A nation is a soul, a spiritual principle. Two things … constitute this soul, this spiritual principle. One is the past, the other is the present. One is the possession in common of a rich legacy of memories; the other is present consent, the desire to live together, the desire to continue to invest in the heritage that we have jointly received.

“Of all cults, that of the ancestors is the most legitimate: our ancestors have made us what we are. A heroic past with great men and glory … is the social capital upon which the national idea rests. These are the essential conditions of being a people: having common glories in the past and a will to continue them in the present; having made great things together and wishing to make them again.”

Does this sound at all like us today?

Watching our Lilliputians tearing down statues and monuments, renaming buildings and streets, rewriting history books to replace heroes and historical truths with the doings of ciphers, are we disassembling the nation we once were?

“One loves in proportion to the sacrifices that one has committed and the troubles that one has suffered,” writes Renan, “One loves the house that one has built and that one passes on.”

Are we passing on the house we inherited – or observing its demolition?

Happy Fourth. And God bless the USA.

http://www.wnd.com/2017/07/is-america-still-a-nation/print/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3665282&forum_id=2#33700021)

Carthago delenda est.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3665282&forum_id=2#33722452)

that article was devastating. a truly sad summation of the complete absence of an american people

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3665282&forum_id=2#33700031)

are you saying our destruction is sort of like a native american curse? i don't get the red man line

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3665282&forum_id=2#33700046)

The Germans had already been immigrating to America in sizeable numbers for a century as the German communities in Pennsylvania and central Maryland can tell you. As a whole the German communities were pacifists and remained neutral during the Revolutionary War but quite a few still fought for the independence. They were regarded as a thrifty and hard working people and probably the closest comparison today would be the Asian Americans. As you can infer, while there was some suspicion, on the whole they assimilated very well, a pattern that continued with the vast waves of German immigrants in the 19th century. The religious Germans like the Amish retreated into their communities but posed no threat to the status quo and accepted the laws of the land and were far better behaved than many of the Anglos, especially Scots Irish settlers.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3665282&forum_id=2#33722571)

Russia's foreign policy is brilliant I'm sure, but look how they live.

Even in Israel, people don't live nearly as well as we do. Hell even in most of Western Europe, people kind of live like crap by comparison.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3665282&forum_id=2#33703256)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3665282&forum_id=2#33703277)