In a December speech at Turning Point USA’s America Fest and in a subsequent op-ed in The New York Times, Vivek Ramaswamy, a Republican running for governor of Ohio, sparked a great deal of political discourse when he rejected the use of “heritage American,” a phrase he says suggests that “the truest format of an American is somebody who is a descendant of the American Revolution period or before.”
The usage of “heritage American” appears to be increasing in popularity among some conservatives, and Ramaswamy attributes it to the spread of Nick Fuentes and Groypers, who Ramaswamy points out seek to create a “white-centric identity.” The former presidential candidate has taken this stance as he and other conservatives of color recently found themselves subjected to torrents of racism from people on the right.
The former presidential candidate and other conservatives of color have found themselves subjected to racism from the right.
Ali Breland of The Atlantic points out that Tucker Carlson is among the influential figures on the right who’ve supported the idea that being an American can be defined at least in part by one’s lineage. That’s the idea that the 40-year-old Ramaswamy, who was born in the U.S. to parents from India, stridently opposes, and he’s been using his platform to argue against it.
In addition to questioning the Americanness of people like Ramaswamy, the “heritage American” idea marks a return of inter-white bigotry, once common in the early 20th century when recent white arrivals weren’t considered as white as the white people whose families had been here longer. None of the descendants of Ellis Island immigrant waves — not the Irish, Italians, European Jews nor others from around the world — would count as “heritage Americans.”
As Politico’s Ian Ward reported in July, “in its most basic sense, the phrase refers to present-day Americans who trace their ancestral roots to the colonial period, or shortly thereafter.” Although, as Ward points out, terms originating from online discourse “can get a bit fuzzy around the edges, and its exact meaning remains the subject of some debate.”
That’s because, like all forms of bigotry, especially the bigotry that cosplays as philosophy, heritage American is an incoherent concept. In the sense that Ramaswamy frames the term, “heritage American” can be understood as white people of British Isles descent, but the founding of the United States was not a purely British Isle descendants endeavor. The most obvious proof is that some African Americans and Indigenous people fought for the colonies and against the British in the Revolutionary War.
But that’s not the only reason the phrase is problematic. In his rebuke of the concept, the Cato Institute’s Alex Norwrasteh makes a list that includes the founders of Jamestown in 1607, the enslaved Africans who arrived in 1619, the Puritans in 1620 and the Spanish in St. Augustine, Florida, in 1565 and asks whose descendants would be considered more “heritage American.”
As Ezekiel Kweku reminds us in The New York Times, the debate over who is, can be, and should be an American is a foundational one that America has replayed multiple times throughout its history. Our current debates are happening amid profound clashes between pro- and anti-immigration movements that touch every aspect of American life.
youtube.com/watch?v=IoSK0q5GBnI&t=341s↗
As Ramaswamy argued in his New York Times piece and in his speech at America Fest, heritage American defines itself in terms of blood and soil, that is, it suggests that the epitome of Americanness traces back to a specific time and place. His usage of this term should not be taken lightly. “Blood and soil” was an early slogan of Nazi Germany, but it’s most infamous use in the American context was as one of the chants in the white supremacist tiki torch parade in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August 2017. They chanted “Blood and soil” along with “Jews will not replace us.”
After linking the phrase “heritage American” with neo-Nazism, Ramaswamy argued that the correct “vision of American identity is based on ideals.” He added: “You are an American if you believe in the rule of law, in freedom of conscience and freedom of expression, in colorblind meritocracy, in the U.S. Constitution, in the American dream, and if you are a citizen who swears exclusive allegiance to our nation.”
After linking the phrase “heritage American” with neo-Nazism, Ramaswamy argued that the correct “vision of American identity is based on ideals.” This is an understanding of Americanness invoked by groups and individuals as diverse as Abraham Lincoln, the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute, former President Ronald Reagan and the leaders of the American Civil Rights Movement. It’s not incidental that the Civil Rights Movement’s influence led to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 and the removal of national immigration quotas. The current divide over American identity can be understood as one between a lineage paradigm and the creed paradigm most of us were taught in elementary, middle and high school social studies classes. The creed paradigm counts as American those born on American soil, as stated in the 14th Amendment, and those drawn to this soil as immigrants. Consider the words of Emma Lazarus enshrined onto the Statue of Liberty that generations of school children learn: The American story of identity is so complicated because of the myriad reasons peoples have come here: by choice, as refugees and, as is the case with my ancestors, in bondage. Each of those groups arrived to a land already inhabited by indigenous peoples and the political landscape they had created over millennia. A creed-based understanding of Americanness recognizes that millions of people from across the world have been drawn to our soil, because of the Bill of Rights and civil rights laws and because there are no castes here. That is to say that millions of people continue to come to the United States to escape those “ancient lands” that elevate or humiliate people based on their lineage. The creed-based idea of American identity undergirds the national motto found on the great seal of the United States: E pluribus unum or “Out of many, one.” It is important that Americans realize that the debate over who is an American is a culture-wide debate, not a partisan one. As America moves closer to the day when it becomes a minority-majority country, these debates will intensify. Perhaps heritage American is the concept around which this debate will coalesce. But even if it’s not, some aspect of the debate will — because, as Americans, it’s a part of our inheritance.
Nicholas Mitchell
Nicholas Mitchell is an assistant professor of curriculum studies at the University of Kansas. He is a curriculum theorist whose scholarship focuses on the intersection of education theory, policy and practice. He is the author of "On Bigotry" by Bloomsbury Publishing. 
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she with silent lips
Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”