This is not a sports post — hey, I’m on vacation. This also is not a political post. It is a post about language. Recently, an anonymous Romney adviser said of Romney, “We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage, and he feels that the special relationship is special.”
Everyone got outraged. Democrats attacked the statement and Romney distanced himself from it. The New York Times wrote an opinion piece mostly saying whoever made the remarks should come forward and after that criticizing Romney. But it never addressed the remarks themselves. I would like to ask these questions.
1. What is wrong with what the speaker said? Is there, in fact, something wrong with what the speaker said? Remember, we don’t know the speaker’s intent.
2. If the speaker had substituted “English heritage” for Anglo-Saxon heritage, would that have been better or would it not have made any difference at all?
Please don’t get political and talk about Romney and Obama. Just talk about the words in the statement.
For more background, here are two articles. To read the NY Times piece, click here. To read a piece from The Telegraph in England click here. The Telegraph writer defends the statement. You may not agree, but he’s smart and makes interesting arguments worth thinking about.
And please don’t get angry at me for bringing this up. I’m at a Shakespeare festival and I’m thinking about English stuff.
htwaits
Words take on different meaning depending on the context. If Romney, while visiting England, want’s to identify with England and it’s current greatly diversified population, that’s great.
If Romney and his handlers want to get out a racial point via code, then it’s not so great. In fact it’s something the Republicans have been doing for much of my long life. It fits right in with “reverse discrimination”, “poll tax” and “voter registration”. They are very clever, those Anglo-Saxon boys.
As you said, we don’t know who said it, or their intent. It’s a case where implying that “I’m one of you.” needs a context. Since everything either party does now is political, I read it as a political message to the “good ol’boys” back home.
Enjoy your plays. We’ve been doing that in Ashland for the past twenty years.
July 26th, 2012 3:08 pm
Stan
Easy Lowell, It’s too much like Aryan superiority and keeping blood lines pure. As a matter of fact,it screams it.
July 26th, 2012 3:34 pm
Zak
It would seem to be the use of the collective “we” rather than an individualized statement that is the issue. Any campaign rep speaking for the candidate in particular has the burden to be inclusive of all his supporters in the context of we. Clearly not all the members of the campaign or supporters are of anglo-saxon heritage.
To put it more simply – many very similar statements were probably uttered around 1939 in Germany – no one should feel akin to that.
July 26th, 2012 3:41 pm
cara
I.E. “I’m not a Black guy”
July 26th, 2012 3:56 pm
Capts
I don’t understand when all people of European descent are labeled “Anglo” by some in this country. Are the Irish, Italians, Russians, Polish, Greek, etc. all “Anglo?’ It seems lazy and very much incorrect.
July 26th, 2012 4:19 pm
Geoffrey Zuma
Not Afro-American.
Anglo-Saxon.
Not a Jew.
Alien underpants.
July 26th, 2012 5:51 pm
"The Mick"
I’m an American of Irish/English/German/Jewish descent. That’s a fact but my father raised us green Irish. My mother’s families came to the New World between 1618 and 1632, Protestants through and through. Their names are the bedrock of American history. I’m a direct relation to Sir John Hawkins, the only man more evil than Hitler; Jefferson Davis is a distant cousin. I’m related one way or the other to east-coast politicians of all stripes.
.
I’ve had a hard time embracing my English heritage — it is no easy task; having and Irish dad will do that. What I am comfortable with is being white. I have no problem with that, I feel zero guilt about anything and pee-cee stands for a computer platform in my book.
.
Most white Americans are the progeny of people who came here to get away from horrific conditions. Ask any Irish-American worth his or her salt and they can tell you stories. We all suffered, same as the rest of the rainbow of people here as well. But, damn, the Brits sure have a way with words.
.
As an English major, I learned to love Shakespeare, Dickens, Shelley, the Romantic Poets. I also love No plays, Kabuki, a mess of stuff from Japan. BB King, RL Burnside, Howard Tate are off the charts as is Flacco Jimenez. But it’s okay to be white and cherish the craft and culture of your ancestors. It’s all good…
July 27th, 2012 6:25 am
Dennis
Let’s see – most of our ancesters came from Europe, as opposed to Africa or Asia, our founding fathers were for the most part English and our laws our based on English law. Oh, and we speak English! I am not sure what the problem is here? We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage. That doesn’t mean that we haven’t added to our hertiage over time, but to suggest that we are not part of an Anglo-Saxon hertiage is to deny reality.
July 27th, 2012 6:51 am
starburst
As an Irish American, I find the comment extremely offensive. John F. Kennedy was not an Anglo Saxon.
It is also inaccurate. Capts made the point well.
“I don’t understand when all people of European descent are labeled “Anglo” by some in this country. Are the Irish, Italians, Russians, Polish, Greek, etc. all “Anglo?’ It seems lazy and very much incorrect.”
Thank you.
July 27th, 2012 7:03 am
NeverWrong
No, “starburst,” President Kennedy was not an Anglo Saxon. He was a Hahvahd Preppie, which all of us, whether, like me one of the hoi polloi, or like you a quasi-Anglo Saxon descendent of the Auld Sod, or any veritable Anglo Saxons, always find annoying, or even, as you say, extremely offensive. No more preppie presidents, please.
July 27th, 2012 12:55 pm
neverwrong
neverwrong – who cares? Not the point.
July 27th, 2012 6:24 pm
Frippertopia
“The White House didn’t fully appreciate the shared history we have.”
But it never addressed the remarks themselves. I would like to ask these questions.
1. What is wrong with what the speaker said? Is there, in fact, something wrong with what the speaker said? Remember, we don’t know the speaker’s intent.
Dear, Dear Lowell;
WE don’t know the speakers intent? PLEASE!!
Nothing in the relm of biology or society exists in isolation of its context. Only those wishing to obfuscate the issue would even try (or perhaps those on vacation who may have had too much sun, sex and mind altering substances: Lowell? Lowell? Dude what are you up to?)
This is blatent “identity politics”: There’s a non-white person in the white house; latinos, arabs and asians are a rising, prominant segment of the American population and the utterance expresses the unspoken fear that the country will never be the same (i.e. white-dominated).
Thanks Goodness for That! What these small minded, fearful, elitists always forget is the fact that all of these folks WANT to be Americans and become part of our culture. And we are all better for it. If you don’t think so, then please move from the Bay Area to Nebraska, Alabama or Upstate NY and see how you like it.
July 27th, 2012 8:32 pm