A friend pointed me to a post on one of her favorite blogs, The Gnosis of Now. The author makes an excellent point about a primary aspect of the “American experiment”: that our society is, in a sense, founded on pluralism. The U.S.A. is not a single people, but a collection of peoples. Our social and governmental structures are meant to allow persons from any and every cultural background to live together in peace.
The fact that this ideal has never, even from the very beginning, found full realization raises the question of whether it is at all possible. One could ask whether this is an impossible goal that should be abandoned, or rather an ideal to strive for despite the fact that it is always beyond perfect attainment. One could also argue that, over the past two centuries, a distinctive “American people” and “American culture” has in fact grown and taken root, and that the opportunity for this pluralistic ideal has passed (though the constant influx of immigrants – both legal and illegal – provides new opportunities every day).
In any case, it’s a good reminder to someone like myself who is delving into my medieval and Catholic roots that the Founding Fathers had an entirely different set of problems they were addressing. I’m trying to grow toward personal virtue and social unity; they were trying to find peace and safety for their plurality of faith and cultural traditions.
I suppose I should pray that these are not incompatible goals.
“One could also argue that, over the past two centuries, a distinctive “American people” and “American culture” has in fact grown and taken root, and that the opportunity for this pluralistic ideal has passed”
Hmm…I’m not so sure, Rob. Ever been to the Mid-West and hung out in Amish/Mennonite country? Been to the Hassidic area of New York City? Chinatown in any large city?
We are living the pluralism and that drives other cultures a bit bonkers. Al-Quida usually relies on local operatives to carry out their mission. 9/11 required the importation of operatives. Other than a few literal nut cases, most Islamic immigrants have few complaints about their new home. (And in part it is because we are far more religious than our European counterparts.)
And do you remember immediately after 9/11? Ultra Texan George Bush came out with speech specific urging Americans to look at Muslims as fellow Americans. I don’t recall us torching Islamic places of worship, which given the circumstances, was probably a reaction that the planners of 9/11 were hoping for. (I’m sure there were a few nutballs cases here and there — my focus is on the mass reaction.)
By the way, did you know that the headquarters of a large American Islamic association is in rural Indiana??
So gunslinger George W Bush has figured out pluralism. So has rural Indiana.
And for all Europe’s “enlightenment” I don’t think they’ve figured out how to handle multi-culturism. Immigrants from muslim countries are usually afforded 2nd class status in most European countries. I’m convinced the reason that Sweden and Germany are clamping down on homeschooling is that they are plain old scared of the immigrants coming through their doors. They literally are trying to stamp out “parallel societies”, which are of course Muslim. Thus, every child has to go to school to “make them” German/Swedish, etc.
On the whole, it is not surprising that Americans have come the furthest in embracing ideas like homeschooling. Most of us are so used to looking at the patch work that makes up our society (even in here in lily white VT) that we forget that many cultures in one place is a somewhat foreign notion to much of the planet. (Canada, Mexico, and much of South America can relate to our experience.)
That we have common language and “simple” common culture (Americans always seem to get seen as the idiots) is just a requirement to make pluralism work. It’s like Jazz – music is improvised over a common bass line and time signature. Without those common ties, it all descends into chaos, rather than music.
Anyway, I guess I’d rather see the sun as rising, rather than setting on us as a country. I see us as living pluralism in the now (and doing it arguably better than Europe) than a time that has past us by.
Amy, I have never thought of pluralism as jazz, as improvisation over a simple framework. That is a brilliant analogy! As with any creative effort, a large percentage of improvisation is just schlock–pedestrian and functional, perhaps, but not inspired or inspiring. And so it is with pluralism in a culture; sometimes we just plug along on our ordinary way making uninteresting things continue to happen. It is a gift to see that process, at least once, for the miracle it is. And sometimes there are moments of glory that make all the mundane slogging worth the effort.
Robert, I can’t think of any ideal worth striving for that has ever been fully realized. But that does not make any of them become not worth striving for. We keep trying, because that’s what ideals are for. And each successive approximation an individual or society makes toward an ideal is a victory, to be appreciated, then improved upon.
@Amy -
I’m not making the argument for an “American people” myself, but I can see how an argument can be made. I just wanted to show that John’s approach was not without possible objection.
(Besides, as my friends point out, I’m a contrarian by nature!)
I would, however, stand by the argument that there is a distinctive American culture. Even the examples you give (Amish, Hasids, etc.) distinguish themselves as being “outside” mainstream American culture. And pluralism as a positive value is one aspect of American culture.
I also like the jazz analogy (and I’ll steal it from you the next chance I get!) It seems to me that the foundation on which we all can improvise is human nature itself. As long as we riff on that, we’re going to end up with harmony and beauty.