• mozz@mbin.grits.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    “It means you assimilate. You become part of America; America doesn’t become part of you.”

    This is a fascinating statement. I’m not sure how much Moreno really thought it through. But something about it seemed weird and I kept looking at it; the second part just didn’t make any sense to me. Like I couldn’t even parse the language.

    I think I finally figured it out: When you become part of America, he’s saying, you lose everything else about you. Being “American” doesn’t form one piece of your identity. It becomes your entire identity. For being American to be only a single part of your identity, and you to still have other parts, is forbidden, in his mind. That is, more or less, the literal meaning of what he’s saying.

    Then I thought, maybe I’m reading too much into it. I think he’s trying to say that you’re supposed to come to America and become part of what’s already there; America isn’t supposed to change to include part of what you brought with you. You’re supposed to change, and America’s supposed to stay the same. That’s not literally what the words mean, but I think that’s more likely what he was aiming to say and he just didn’t take the language seriously enough to get there successfully literal-meaning-wise.

    I’m not trying to make it more than it is. It’s just a weird little throw-away sentence. I just kept looking at it. One of those two things is what he meant. And they’re both just… wrong. Like the whole value and purpose of the American story is supposed to be the exact opposite of all of that. IDK. I know they’re trying to change the whole meaning of what it means to be American, but it’s weird to me that the most perfect distillation of what they’re getting wrong about the whole thing from start to finish came from their own explanation of how it’s supposed to be.

    Edit: I can’t let it go. America is the only big country in the world that works the way it does. Almost every country is an ethnic monolith. Italy is full of Italian people, Japan is full of Japanese people, but America is full of white/black/Asian/Hispanic/whatever else people all working somewhat more or less together. And, somehow, America wound up being by far the world’s dominant economic / military / diplomatic superpower (for now). To me those two factors are cause and effect. “Diversity is our strength” is very much a literal and serious geopolitical statement. But these guys don’t like it being that way. They want to undo everything that makes America a special type of country, for all its evils and all the stuff we do wrong or badly, just because they’re too insecure to get by without having a badge that says “my race is special.” Fuck 'em. I really don’t like it and I don’t like them.

    • Stovetop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      4 months ago

      America is the only big country in the world that works the way it does. Almost every country is an ethnic monolith.

      I’ll just disagree a tad there. A lot of the Americas are racially diverse, not just the US. Canada, Brazil, Cuba, just to name a few, have similar ratios of racial demographics to the US (maybe Cuba to a lesser degree, you don’t hear of many Asian Cubans).

      If we’re talking specifically big ones, Brazil still fits the bill. Brazil is not without its own problems, however.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah that’s accurate, maybe that would have been a better way for me to say it. Turkey is another multi-ethnicity country, and Turkey actually has the same sort of uniquely impactful presence in its area that the US has globally (with the US’s size and and its geography and some lucky accidents also propelling it to a position beyond just what its natural advantages would tend to get it.) Maybe it’s more accurate to say that the US’s multi-ethnicity combined with its other advantages to produce the position it’s currently in today.

    • Heavybell@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      I feel like America’s dominance has a lot more to do with its size (geographically and population-wise), access to natural resources, and coming late into WW2.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        This is accurate - I think you’re right; it would have been more realistic for me to list it as one of a number of important factors working in the US’s favor.

      • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Being late to WW2 helped and so did being distant from both fronts. Thus no widespread damage and ruin to recover from for decades.

        • Heavybell@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          And all that lend-lease money to collect :P (I assume, at least. If someone comes in and tells me the US wasn’t paid for all that gear I’ll be shocked, but prepared to believe it since stranger things have happened)

    • rambaroo@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Your edit is absolute horseshit. Almost every country on Earth is multiethnic. The fact that you chos Italy which has only been a unified country since the middle of the 19th century just shows how deeply ignorant you are. Stop making shit up and read a fucking book, instead of using far right nativist talking points to back up your American exceptionalism nonsense.