tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-227780861638767023.post1884427167844968058..comments2024-01-27T00:27:45.851+00:00Comments on race/history/evolution notes: Ethnic origins of presidents of the University of California systemn/ahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02378473351485233448noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-227780861638767023.post-87963247450173463862013-09-05T00:24:50.875+01:002013-09-05T00:24:50.875+01:00(part 2 of 2):
This isn't likely to be a very...(part 2 of 2):<br /><br />This isn't likely to be a very effective way to examine the issue because:<br /><br />* There's always the issue of how to get a representative sample<br />* This doesn't speak to the population as a whole<br />* Even if we found less liberal voices claimed to be more of the old Yankee stock, an open question would be <i>why</i>? Perhaps the more liberal Yankees were less averse to marrying outside their group (something with which I have direct, personal experience)<br /><br />Colin Woodard claims that the founding stock of each of the American nations set the "cultural DNA" of the region. I simply take that a step further and claim that the founders set the plain-old <b>DNA</b> of the respective regions. Even though the gene pools of the various regions have been diluted by newcomers, the fact that the colonial British genes remain expresses itself in the traits of the modern people, even if augemented by outsiders.<br /><br />Internal, self-sorting migration likely also played a role. If you were born in Kansas, and have a left-leaning mind, you might want to move to Massachusetts. This couldn't be resposible for <i>all</i> of what we see, however, because it doesn't answer: <br /><br />a) how the differences began <br />b) the historic data on regional voting habits other differences <br /><br />Now as for the precise origin of modern White liberal ethos of "inclusiveness" and "diversity", that's another matter. But the problem is hardly just an American one, because <i>that attitude is found all across Northwestern Europe</i> (especially in places like <a href="http://topconservativenews.com/2013/09/swedish-government-calls-for-ethnic-cleansing-of-the-native-swedes/" rel="nofollow">Sweden</a>, to many observers' dismay). But, that only fits with my explanation that such traits emerge from the traits of outbred Germanics – which includes the peoples of the Old American North (Yankees, Midlanders). And, as I've noted, such a trait didn't appear out of a vacuum in modern America; it was a distinctly Quaker trait.<br /><br />I will concede that yes, definitive proof of my claims would be <i>genetic data</i> of White Americans across the country, coupled with voting habits, political attitudes, and cultural/behavioral traits. It would be awesome if we had that, but I believe we do have enough evidence to make the case that the ideologies of the "Founding Fathers" lives on and is visible in the traits of today's White Americans.JayManhttp://jaymans.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-227780861638767023.post-25213343414658746782013-09-05T00:18:18.529+01:002013-09-05T00:18:18.529+01:00@n/a:
(part 1 of 2)
"If you weren't awa...@n/a:<br /><br />(part 1 of 2)<br /><br /><i>"If you weren't aware of this fact, you're definitely not in a position to be commenting (or recycling the commentary of others) on American culture."</i><br /><br />I've read your post. You do know about the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realigning_election#Possible_modern_realigning_elections_in_the_United_States" rel="nofollow">1960s realignment</a> in American politics, yes? New England has been solidly Republican for much of its history until then, while the Deep South was solidly Democratic. That the "Congregationalists" (the Puritans) would vote for the Republican is hardly surprising nor contradictory to what I've said.<br /><br />Indeed, touching on this fact brings us to something which reinforces the very thing you decry. <a href="http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1924&off=0&elect=0&f=0" rel="nofollow">For all of American history</a>, there has been a stark divide between the voting habits of Greater New England and the Deep South/Tidewater. The two nations are traditional rivals and have been long before the Ellis Island immigrants set foot in the country (never mind that they fought a war before these newcomers came with their supposedly liberal ways).<br /><br />Your earlier post illustrates what is perhaps the beginning of the realignment.<br /><br /><i>"The evidence [that primarily Catholics and Jews vote liberal] is every exit poll ever."</i><br /><br />You're kind of in a hard place here. Stated religion isn't an accurate gauge of ancestry (neither is, for that matter, even stated ancestry). There are certainly not enough Jews to explain the solid blueness of Yankeedom and parts of the Midlands. Even if certain groups who have some traditionally Catholic ancestry (that is, Catholic Irish/Southern Italian) were somewhat more liberal than people who claim to be of old-guard Yankee stock, that wouldn't mean much because: <br /><br />a) in reality, they are all Yankee, to some extent <br />b) they are probably all part Catholic, for the same reason.<br /><br />But on that point, it's worth noting that my rough investigation into the matter didn't find that to be the case (see <a href="http://jaymans.wordpress.com/2012/06/07/a-follow-up-ethnicity-and-politics/" rel="nofollow">A follow-up: Ethnicity and Politics | JayMan's Blog</a>). People who claim Irish or Italian ancestry aren't any more liberal than those who claim to be of British descent. Not that that means much for a variety of reasons, but, there it is, anyway.<br /><br /><i>"'SWPLs' are whoever happens to fall into whatever definition you happen to be using for 'SWPLs'. Under no even remotely meaningful definition would people of New England Puritan stock constitute a plurality (much less a majority or the entirety) of 'SWPLs'.</i><br /><br />OK, fair enough. Let's clear that up now. At least for now, when I use the term, I mean White American liberals (often, but not necessarily, of the "educated" classes), who are generally of New England or Left Coast extraction (and some from the Midlands).<br /><br /><i>"What fraction of whites in NYC do you think "Puritans" make up today? How about in Austin or Nashville (or Atlanta or L.A.)?"</i><br /><br />With the possible exception of remote corners of New England, there are probably few people of pure-blooded Puritan stock anywhere in the country. If we are to be more liberal, so to speak, and mean anyone who is ≥50% Puritan ancestry, I'd say a fair number. In many places across Greater New England, perhaps the majority.<br /><br />On that point:<br /><br /><i>"Pick a set of public figures (people still in public life in New England right now). Look at their genealogies. See what fraction have substantially unmixed New England ancestry."</i><br /><br />(cont'd part 2)JayManhttp://jaymans.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-227780861638767023.post-36696965027374569752013-09-04T21:13:56.475+01:002013-09-04T21:13:56.475+01:00"That's not my experience up here in Main..."That's not my experience up here in Maine. Do you have evidence to support this?"<br /><br />If you weren't aware of this <a href="http://racehist.blogspot.com/2011/11/jewish-liberalism-allinsmith-study.html" rel="nofollow">fact</a>, you're definitely not in a position to be commenting (or recycling the commentary of others) on American culture.<br /><br />The evidence is every exit poll ever.<br /><br /><br />"I'm sure they came from Mars. Where do you think they came from?"<br /><br />"SWPLs" are whoever happens to fall into whatever definition you happen to be using for "SWPLs". Under no even remotely meaningful definition would people of New England Puritan stock constitute a plurality (much less a majority or the entirety) of "SWPLs". <br /><br />What fraction of whites in NYC do you think "Puritans" make up today?<br />How about in Austin or Nashville (or Atlanta or L.A.)?<br /><br /><br />"I'd like to see your data supporting your claim."<br /><br />Pick a set of public figures (people still in public life in New England right now). Look at their genealogies. See what fraction have substantially unmixed New England ancestry.<br />n/ahttp://racehist.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-227780861638767023.post-72522098352843340672013-09-04T19:59:04.265+01:002013-09-04T19:59:04.265+01:00@n/a:
"'American White Liberals' hav...@n/a:<br /><br /><i>"'American White Liberals' have been disproportionately Jewish and Catholic for as long as there have been Catholics and Jews in America."</i><br /><br />That's not my experience up here in Maine. Do you have evidence to support this?<br /><br /><i>"Nor, even excluding Catholics and Jews, does it ever make sense to say shit like 'SWPLs are literally Puritans'"</i><br /><br />I'm sure they came from Mars. Where do you think they came from?<br /><br /><i>"'Yankees' (substantially pure New Englanders raised in the society of other actual New Englanders) don't exist in appreciable numbers today. The white Protestants who remain in New England remain to the right of their Catholic and Jewish neighbors."</i><br /><br />There are plenty of them here (well, intermixed with Scot). I'd like to see your data supporting your claim. <br /><br />JayManhttp://jaymans.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-227780861638767023.post-21730874541625450572013-09-04T19:00:52.178+01:002013-09-04T19:00:52.178+01:00"Modern American White liberals are a fusion ..."Modern American White liberals are a fusion of many groups, particular the largest two, the Yankees and the Midlanders."<br /><br />"American White Liberals" have been disproportionately Jewish and Catholic for as long as there have been Catholics and Jews in America. Nor, even excluding Catholics and Jews, does it ever make sense to say shit like "SWPLs are literally Puritans".<br /><br /><br />"I also shouldn't have to mention that American Whites have heavily intermixed with one another, particularly throughout Southern/Western New England and the Midlands."<br /><br />No shit? <br /><br />Note also that colonial stock whites didn't merely mix among themselves, but have substantially mixed with later immigrants (northern New England, too, is full of Irish Catholics and French Canadians). Nor is there any reason to believe identities or cultures neatly blend. Many people with fractional Irish or German ancestry identify simply as Irish or German. <br /><br /><br />"including that of today's Puritans"<br /><br />"Puritans" haven't existed in a couple hundred years.<br /><br /><br />"Do you not find it interesting that the exclusionist Yankees you note all come from way back when, almost a century or more ago?"<br /><br />"Yankees" (substantially pure New Englanders raised in the society of other actual New Englanders) don't exist in appreciable numbers today. The white Protestants who remain in New England remain to the right of their Catholic and Jewish neighbors.n/ahttp://racehist.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-227780861638767023.post-51137679311281576442013-09-04T16:54:32.355+01:002013-09-04T16:54:32.355+01:00"Chinegro?"
Actually, if you actually r..."Chinegro?"<br /><br />Actually, if you actually read some of the stuff I've written (which you can see <a href="http://jaymans.wordpress.com/2013/07/23/flags-of-the-american-nations/" rel="nofollow">here, Flags of the American Nations | JayMan's Blog</a>), you will find that I have said (as David Hackett Fischer and Colin Woodard have) that the Puritans were <i>intensely</i> xenophobic, many of them remain <a href="http://jaymans.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/pfa/" rel="nofollow">indifferent to outsiders today</a>. I have also said (see in the first link) that the ideas of inclusion and tolerance were actually <i>Quaker/Midlander (German)</i> (and, to a lesser extent, Dutch and French) values. Modern American White liberals are a fusion of many groups, particular the largest two, the Yankees and the Midlanders. I also shouldn't have to mention that <a href="http://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/10/04/being-the-dutch/" rel="nofollow">American Whites have heavily intermixed with one another</a>, particularly throughout Southern/Western New England and the Midlands. <br /><br />It would appear that modern liberal ideals – including that of today's Puritans – have embraced the ideas of tolerance and diversity. It is the modern Puritan cause. Mentalities can get hijack/redirected to other purposes – the secularism that has arose out of the deeply religious Puritan mind is one example.<br /><br />Do you not find it interesting that the exclusionist Yankees you note all come from way back when, almost a century or more ago?JayManhttp://jaymans.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com