> > > > >Just what constitutes the core of "America" ideologically (in the
>> >> >ideology of American patriotism)?
>
>> >> The Constitution, of course.
>
>> >And the Federalist Papers. Maybe even more so.
I'm halfway thru Michael Lind's "The Next American Nation," which has a lot to say about the evolution of identity. It is clear from the book that slavery was not the original motive for white supremacy, because a more narrow bigotry preceded white supremacy and suffused the founding of the U.S. The Founders were saturated in an Anglo-Saxon identity which saw all other nationalities as inferior. The original vision of the U.S. was as Anglo-Saxon, not white. There are almost no good guys in this crowd, though there are differences on other matters of policy.
'Whiteness' develops ironically with the Civil War, as what is sometimes characterized as a bourgeois revolution as well as industrial progress requires a broader sense of participation. The white race is the artifact of an agreement to protect 'white' labor (within limits, obviously) against non-white and immigrant. The development of Jim Crow and immigration law is the secret constitution of the U.S., wherein class struggle is suppressed by its translation into 'race.'
Most of what we would regard as insurgency against these developments had their own fatal flaws. Some abolitionism was premised on removing blacks to Africa. Some trade unionism was premised on racist and anti-immigrant economic interests. Some populism inherits these chauvinisms. In the last regard, arguments I've had w/Chip and others rests on my premise that some economic ideas of 1870-1900 populists ought not to be judged by some of the social undercurrents of populism. Just as we wouldn't reject 19th century socialism and trade unionism categorically because of racism in the roots.
mbs