Blood and the land
Kathleen Parker’s syndicated column last week about the “full-blooded American” voter appears to have had an impact. “We love to boast that we are a nation of immigrants — and we are. But there's a different sense of America among those who trace their bloodlines back through generations of sacrifice,” she wrote. *
This has led to quite a stream of denunciation of the column as offensively nativist.
In the interest of framing the discussion within a broad perspective, I offer a sentence from Paul Theroux’s The Old Patagonian Express: “We’re English, say some citizens of Charlottesville, Virginia, referring to the fact that their ancestors abandoned soot-grimed mining towns in Yorkshire and made enough money raising pigs to set up as gentry and keep Jews out of the local hunt clubs.”
If blood and sacrifice and long tenure on the land are indeed the crucial factors that Ms. Parker identifies, then perhaps we should allow Native Americans to choose our political leadership.
* Disclosure: It is possible that I, a native-born white American whose family has owned land in Kentucky continuously since 1862, am just the sort of neglected citizen to which she refers.