The Progressive Case For WASP Studies

A famous and bitter maxim of the French left states, "Mythology is always on the side of the Right." For much of the world, this is true. Those who want social change find that they must fight not only entrenched economic organizations with a strong interest in the status quo; they confront a host of institutions and, worse, ideas and images that pull public opinion toward the values and ideas of the past.

In the English-speaking world, however, that ain't necessarily so. The political and religious conflicts that convulsed England, Scotland and Ireland in the 17th century led to a new kind of society in which the values of religion, tradition and identity were often on the side of innovation, change and reform. In the English-speaking world, reformers and innovators were able to identify their causes with tradition and religion rather than against them. Indeed, the most durable and even revolutionary changes in the English-speaking world have come when radicals were able to persuade the public that the changes they sought would defend rather than annul traditional social and religious values.

Take the American Revolution. Thomas Jefferson and his associates argued that they were true conservatives: they were fighting to defend their traditional rights against a usurping Parliament and King. Jefferson argued that George III and his ministers were subverting ancient liberties and laws of Englishmen based in Christian values and dating back to the thousand-year-old law codes of the Anglo-Saxons. The Declaration of Independence borrowed its logic and its language, as well as its title, from the Declaration of Rights that the revolutionaries who created the Glorious Revolution of 1688 in England wrote to justify their overthrow of James II. We are only doing in 1776 what the English did in 1688, argued the colonists: overthrowing a king who by a long train of abuses and misrule, has forfeited his right to rule.

Take the greatest, most important and ultimately the most successful movements for domestic reform in U.S. history: the abolitionist and civil rights movements. Under leaders like Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King Jr., both movements rooted their rhetoric and their aims in the religious and political traditions of Anglo-American history. Though both movements understood very well that Anglo-American history is full of injustice, both chose to summon Americans to live up to the ideals of that history -- rather than to renounce their history and their ideals.

Rather than rejecting Anglo-American history and society as racist and imperialist, they argued that the essence of Anglo-American history was a long effort to transcend its imperfections. The abolitionists and the civil rights campaigners triumphed by stressing the links between their agendas and the true core values of English-speaking liberal society.

Suffragettes, social reformers, labor activists: throughout our history successful campaigners for change rooted their message in progressive readings of the religious and civic mythology of the Anglo-American past.

It may sound paradoxical, but WASP studies -- the study of the religious, cultural and political foundations of Anglo-American history -- remains the essential study today for those who want to advance the concepts of liberty and equality in American politics. These values continue to attract immigrants -- especially Latinos; America's ever increasing ethnic diversity is unlikely to weaken the hold of these values.

Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and Martin Luther King Jr. were deeply schooled in these traditions. Through their understanding of these cultural roots they were able to inspire their contemporaries to advance into new territory. They identified priorities that resonated with the values of the American public. They were able to convince Americans that change was not a threat to American identity; change is the essence of American identity.

From the American Revolution forward, stand-pat conservatism has again and again been routed by movements of democratic change that defined themselves in the language and values of Anglo-American liberal tradition. The language of individual rights, human equality, tolerance rooted in the values of individualistic religion, equal representation and the rule of law over powerful individuals and interest groups trumps the language of privilege and exclusivity.

Those who ignore this history do so at their peril. The traditional values of American society, including the pluralistic but vigorous American attachment to Christianity, remain strong. Movements for social change that fly in the face of these values fail.

In America, mythology is on the side of the future. Those who understand these myths are those who will shape the future of our country.

Comments

[Qbear]

To me this sounds like the LAST GASP of a powerful majority, who are becoming a minority in their lifetime. They are terrified that the new majority will treat them as they treated others.....sounds vaguely Christian doesn't it?

[Qbear]

Maybe you mean your column to benignly embrace Anglo Saxon Christian philosophy...unfortunately there are those elements which will just read WHITE, and translate it imediately to their preferred term ARYAN.

[samlang]

I'm sure this author is a smart guy, and I must be missing his point, but this all seems to be based on some sort of straw man argument that people are ignoring the roots of our principles of justice, etc. I'm sure some small percentage of the population rejects anything "white" (regardless of their own skin colors), but gimme a break here. People like the Constitution. People like habeas corpus. (Well, not George Bush, but most people.)

There is no "WASP Studies" major on college campuses because that's essentially what any history class stretching back at least into first half of the 20th century constitutes.

[baseball101]

The Christian perspective part of the founders is so right on. It is not that we are a "Christian Nation" as many like to claim, but rather 'A Nation who for a long time, and still today, has a majority of people whose religious affiliation is Christian.' What that means is that those tradional values that wrote the Constitution and amended it in the ways that it has to make the "Great Experiment" a better society were based, as the article states on these principles.
"Movements rooted their rhetoric and their aims in the religious and political traditions of Anglo-American history...Rather than rejecting Anglo-American history and society as racist and imperialist, they argued that the essence of Anglo-American history was a long effort to transcend its imperfections...Suffragettes, social reformers, labor activists: throughout our history successful campaigners for change rooted their message in progressive readings of the religious and civic mythology of the Anglo-American past."
Instead what seems to be happening, is the division of society based on those "Old World" mindsets and the religious/aristocratic authorities in those old countries, that the colonists/revolutionaires/first Americans fought for to create in what from the begining was called the "New World". (Read Thomas Paine sometime)
That is why the 1st amendment regarding religion is phrased the way it, becuase they understood what happenes when the religion of the people also becomes the root of governmental authority.
So they literally thought they could create a new world, and eventually they and their successors did, creating essentially the example of what the whole world could be like if we tried let go of the old antimosities. With our republic, our values, equality, religious freedom and the tolerance (but not necessarity politcal correctness)/melting pot diversity, and all the rest.
I think there is still time to fix it, but the longer we keep dividing up based on those ways, the closer we come to a choice between--at worst case--a new revolution or a new theocratic tyranny.

[MsLiz]

The author correctly states that our principles are derived from English political theory going back to the Magna Carta. Those who deny this prove the author's point that this history should be studied.


I can't remember the German word for it, but it is the concept that societies should be judged against a concept of perfection. We do this in the USA. If we don't live up to the ideals of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, it is said to be due to the evil natures and hypocrisy of the WASP men who wrote those documents.

The USA is a work in progress. The founders were white men, of course, because at the time only white men were educated and allowed to own property. That was their starting point. However, they studied the works of the Enlightenment and history, and designed a government that has expanded it's boundaries.

The author is not claiming, as do fundamentalist preachers, that we have a government based on Christian laws, but that the founders had a Christian perspective. Our concept of social equality is rooted in the teachings of Christ. The founders knew that the Catholic Church and Church of England were the source of strife, and sought to limit their power in the new nation, as well as to limit the government's power over the individual's exercise of religious beliefs.

How anyone can seriously argue against education is beyond me. We should read history, philosophy and writers with whom we disagree. It is tragic that so many in the electorate have such a narrow perspective, and it is due to this narrow perspective that we are so ignorant about the rest of the world.

[bethinCary]

When you say mythology is at the core-I'd say your are correct-in that "us V. them" -"we-need-a-hero" mentality. Maybe it's because Hollywood and entertainment have become so enmeshed with promoting these ideas. I still think it is a basic change that took place in the thinking back then, when mythology took off though-and it's central theme was to look at the differences in people (to make it easier to create an enemy); rather than looking at the ways we are alike.
Just look at the way the GOP-from politics, social, economic, and religious groups have been able to capitalize on this key mantra of "differences"-which play into the fear card.

[sparkandy]

In language and literature, from Chaucer to the newest rap star, we are English. What I'm taking away from this is that regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, choice of veggies, and all the other things we use to fragment ourselves into little "us against them" groups, we share a common culture. Because my ancestors were WASPS does not mean I have any more claim on our wonderful heritage than someone whose ancestors were not WASP. It would be nice if we all embraced AMERICAN culture for what it is, warts and all.

[fpie]

Yep, it's mythos over logos every time. The myth of the go it alone rugged individul as defined by Hollywood westerns is the one that the GOP has sucessfully coopted to win elections for the last thirty years. It's the strong willed cowboy against the inside the beltway townsfolk who just want to jaw problems to death.
The myth is so well entrenched that one would hardly notice that it is pure BS both in how the west was won and in how these "rugged individuals " really operate. The truth is that the west (as well as everything else in america) was won and built by cooperative groups of people. And today the cons use their organised power to make eveybody else go it alone while the rich stick togeather to make sure the poor get poorer so the rich get richer.
It is indeed time to rally around the true traditions that America was built on. All for one, one for all instead of devil take the hindemost. Thom Hartman on Air America Radio is a great advocate for this true American tradition of thought. The real American myth.

[liberalrebuttal]

Don't take this the wrong way, but Diaries like these really make me look forward to 30 years from now.

[mommadona]

WHITE
ANGLO-SAXON
PROTESTANT

Ok, let's review:

WHITE (blank)
ANGLO-SAXON (pagan-heathen)
PROTESTANT (problem maker)

Yep - that about sums up the progress of this genepool elimination and the reason there for.

[Atticus]

Like it or not, we are, and always will be, influenced by WASP ethics and morality.

[Qbear]

For urbane and open minded people, WASPs were the punchline in Aunty Mame 50 years ago. You really are dating yourself.

[fmmcfarren]

Nice, BUT, it is well documented that "Christian values" played virtually no role in English or American laws. Moreover, some of the worst of our errors in our small history, are directly attributed to "Christian values", specifically by the religious decedents of the oppressive Puritans/Pilgrims. The mythology of our country does not mirror that or the UK. We are far more prone to be manipulated by mythology, and like the French say, it is absolutely controlled by the right in this country. e.g. Bush the War Hero vs. Kerry the traitor.

Your hearts in the right place but reality doesn't seem to support your thesis.

[jeskiley]

Where do you expect us to learn this history? They don't paint a clear picture in school, and once we graduate, who wants to look backwards anyway? I'm all about the future, man. Until they broadcast this stuff on TV (it's gotta be hotter than Tila), and start printing sacred quotes on my Doritos, I'll be content with dressing up in a toga during Fall rush and calling that tradition.

2cute4U

[realitytrumpsbull]

Um, you could shorten that up a bit if you
just said 'rich people run the country, most of em tend to be white, and every so often they
thin the herd'.