Russell Fehr, UC Riverside
In considering the question “Does America have a distinctive identity?”, there are two ways I wish to interrogate it. The first of these involves the way in which the question is phrased. By asking if America has a distinctive identity, it implies that this is a question that can be addressed in quantitative terms. Rather, I would argue that what is essential is the widespread belief in an American identity. Viewing American history, there have been many issues that have been shaped by the belief in a distinctive American identity, with public policy being especially influenced by this concept. As a result, I would argue that the belief that there is an American identity is key, as this belief has had an impact that makes debating whether or not this is the case moot.
The second point I wish to question involves an implied aspect of the question. By asking if there is a distinctive American identity, there is an implication that there is a singular American identity and that it has been static over time. Neither of these concepts are tenable when looking at the length and breadth of American history. Instead, the American identity has been heavily contested, with much fighting concerning who is incorporated into this identity. Paralleling these fights is a sense that the meaning of the American identity has shifted over time, with these disputes serving to shape the American identity.
A case study for considering the American identity can be found in the Detroit of the mid-1920s. During that time, the Ku Klux Klan became a major force in the city’s political life, only failing to elect a mayor in 1924 when thousands of votes were thrown out on dubious grounds. Looking at the Klan and its opponents, we can see two different visions of American identity with different logics behind them. The Detroit Klan responded to several conditions present in Detroit during the mid-1920s, including the illicit liquor trade becoming the city’s second-largest industry, the rising significance of Catholics in Detroit society and politics, and a system of municipal politics where the working-class Protestants whose electoral support had been responsible for restructuring local government in the previous decade had their interests neglected by those in elected office. The Detroit Klan responded to these conditions in its political practices with somewhat vague anti-vice and anti-boss messages and with more specific efforts to defeat Catholic politicians and shut down Detroit’s parochial schools. In these regards, the Klan had an exclusive vision of the American identity, fighting to support a core set of values against its perceived enemies.
The foes of the Detroit Klan were more diffuse in nature. Some were targets of the Klan, such as Detroit’s Catholic, Jewish, and African-American populations. Others had concerns about their own religious schools being shut down as a result of the anti-parochial education campaign, such as most of Detroit’s German-heritage Protestant denominations. Still others found the Klan to lack any appeal- Detroit’s Protestant elite generally found the Klan unappealing in policy terms and a threat to their political influence, leading them to strongly oppose it. These foes lacked a common message against the Klan, using everything from economic arguments to invective against it. However, this was all ultimately underpinned by a vision of the American identity different from that of the Klan. Whereas the Klan was exclusive in their understanding of American identity, its foes offered an inclusive vision in which all of these groups had a role in Detroit civic life. While the Klan was animated by concerns over various issues, its foes saw these issues either as too complex for the solutions proposed by the Klan or as too insignificant to merit being treated as major concerns. Overall, this vision of American identity differed strongly from that of the Klan by not being restrictive in terms of either audience or general purpose, instead offering an American identity with room to incorporate large numbers of people.
Ultimately, these dueling visions are relevant in several ways for understanding the concept of American identity. It demonstrates how exclusive and inclusive visions of this identity have developed through competition with each other. Moreover, this competition has had continued relevance in the decades since the mid-1920s. There have been shifts in this competition: cultural pluralism (to say nothing of multiculturalism) was just emerging as a concept during the mid-1920s, and many of the groups who are at the front line for disputes concerning American identity now are ones that were on the fringes (if that) at this point in time. Overall, these competing visions of American identity hold two pieces of significance that have continued to the present day. The very fact that the concept of American identity has been so heavily contested demonstrates its importance, as it shows how various groups have found it important to claim to be a part of this identity. Finally, these disputes demonstrate how American identity, rather than being unitary and unchanging, is instead perpetually contested and perpetually shifting, leading to far differing interpretations over time.