Whites versus Anglo-Saxons

In the current main article, “Vanishing Anglo-Saxons”, Andrew Fraser frames his appeal to Anglo-Saxons rather than to the “‘thin’ statistical abstraction” of White.” Further, in his book The WASP Question he argued that the concept of Whiteness “always implied the inherent equality of anyone passing” for White (p. 222), a logic that repelled conservatives who were attracted to the talented of other races and capitalists who cared more about the cost of their workers than their race. Fraser advises WASPs to shed the label of ‘White’ in favor of reasserting their ancestral identity as Anglo-Saxons.

I do think that quite often White subgroups should continue to remain separate, particularly in Europe where it would be a very large loss to lose the different languages and cultures of the various European groups. In the former colonies of England that were settled predominantly by people of British stock (i.e., Canada, Australia, New Zealand), a good argument can be made that a resurgence of Anglo-Saxon ethnic identity is the key to reclaiming their rightful inheritance. Until the very recent upsurge in immigration, as Fraser points out, these societies had a very strong ethnic and cultural identity as Anglo-Saxon. Even at this late date, a successful appeal to these identities would have powerful political implications. Moreover, non-Anglo-Saxons of European descent have seen themselves in opposition to an Anglo-Saxon Australia. In Part 2 he notes that in Australia, Irish Australians “played a militant role in the rise of the Australian republican movement” aimed at severing ties with the British monarchy. One is reminded of Teddy Kennedy.

Such an argument is less compelling in the United States. Here it is certainly nice to see celebrations of Scottish, Irish, and other European cultures by their descendants. However, it would be foolish indeed to organize politically, culturally, or economically solely on the basis of these sub-groups. The term ‘White’ in the American political context refers to all 200 million people of European descent—a very large and politically powerful group, whereas the descendants of Anglo-Saxon Protestants are a much smaller group. The most common European ancestry of Americans is German (~28% of Whites), and many of us are already hybrids. I recently went to a meeting of racially conscious Whites. Only one person said he had the same European background on both sides of his family, and he was from the UK. In my case, I am ¾ German and ¼ Scottish.

As Fraser notes in The WASP Question, “in the first ‘white man’s country’ (i.e., the U.S.), age-old ethnic differences between English, Scotch-Irish, Scots, Welsh, German and French Huguenot colonists literally paled into insignificance” (p. 216).  These differences are indeed insignificant and, because of the presence of Africans, there is a long history where European-Americans have defined themselves as White. We think of ourselves as Whites first and foremost. In the American context, the label ‘White’ is certainly not a thin statistical abstraction. It evokes strong emotions—these days most often among non-Whites who have taken advantage of the contemporary zeitgeist to openly hate us as Whites. Americans are acutely aware of phrases like ‘White flight’ and the multicultural left (that loves all cultures except the traditional culture of White America) never tires of talking about “White skin privilege.” We are targeted as Whites and that is potentially a very powerful rallying point for us.

This does not mean that Jews or immigrants from the Middle East should be considered White in an American context. These groups do not identify as White Americans, and Jews in particular have a long history of seeing themselves as persecuted outsiders in all Western countries—outsiders who do not identify with the predominantly Christian peoples they have lived among, even for centuries. Historically they have taken an oppositional stance toward Europeans and their culture, so there is no reason to include them among White Americans. The population genetic data clearly show that Ashkenazi Jews are predominantly a Middle Eastern group with some European admixture.

The obvious strategy is to legitimize a sense of White identity and White interests in the current climate of hostile elite domination of the media, politics, and the academic world. Having an identity as White need not compromise identifications with sub-groups of Whites. There are important differences among these groups. However, we are all quite closely related—indeed, Europeans are the most genetically homogeneous continental group on Earth (see Cavalli-Sforza & Bodmer, 1999, Fig. 2.9.1, p. 122). And we should all have a sense of our common cultural heritage, spanning from the ancient Greeks, the Italian Renaissance, the German Baroque, and the English novel.

Such a rational construction of our ethnic interests in the contemporary world is therefore not without a strong biological basis of near kinship, but also carries with it an intense emotional appreciation of the common European culture and its accomplishments. My hope is that these two strands can eventually win the day despite the current very large threat to our people and culture.

169 replies

Comments are closed.