PLEASE! BE HONEST!!!!
It’s almost impossible to joke about anything this utterly ignorant, but…
What do you do when members of Congress appear ready to sign onto – or actually authorized - a document that reads “The treasure trove of data they have collected from Americans have given them powers….”
Teachers of America, break out your red pens and circle that phrase; then write “’Trove’ is a singular subject and requires a singular verb – ‘has given them….’”
Social studies (especially history and geography) teachers, when you read “America is a nation with a border…,” use your red pen to question “What about Canada?”
And when members of Congress attempt to tell you “America is a nation with a border, and a culture, strengthened by a common respect for uniquely Anglo-Saxon political traditions…,” please, teachers of America, take a Xanax. You deserve it.
The Anglo-Saxons were Germanic and southern Scandinavian peoples who attempted to invade Roman occupied southern and eastern England in the Fourth Century; they were beaten back by the Romans and only returned after Honorius abandoned the island at the beginning of the Fifth Century - the early 400s.
Sailing wooden crafts from present-day Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands, they were not a unified people and didn’t enjoy a common language or culture. The term Anglo-Saxon seems to have made its appearance among Continental writers in the late 8th Century to distinguish the Saxons of Britain from those on the European continent, whom Bede the Venerable referred to as “Old Saxons.” Over time, their distinct dialects merged and evolved into “Old English.” In fact, the term “Anglo-Saxon” only gained popularity in the 1700s to 1800s as a means of connecting White people with their supposed origins.
In trying to claim control of their lands, the Anglo-Saxons experienced regular conflicts with the Vikings and were forced to concede power to a number of Danish kings, including Canute, who, in 1016, initiated 26 years of Viking rule. Ultimately, various Anglo-Saxon groups settled in different parts of England, forming several kingdoms that were constantly at war with each other
The Anglo-Saxon reign came to an abrupt end with William of Normandy’s triumph at the Battle of Hastings in 1066, establishing a Norman rule that has lasted through to today’s reign of Elizabeth II. By the time of William’s victory, the kingdom had developed from the realm of the Anglo-Saxons to England and the term for the region’s people became “English.”
In short, the Anglo-Saxons some members of Congress want Americans to emulate were immigrants who lost to the Romans, intermittently lost to the Vikings and a number of Dutch kings, and were permanently trounced by William of Normandy. Like the army of the Confederate states and despite all the waving of Confederate battle flags in 2020-2021, they were losers.
What those members of Congress from Arizona, Texas and George did not say but meant is that, besides being losers, the Anglo-Saxons shared another characteristic with the Confederate losers – they were all white.
The same document from these members of Congress also called for a national infrastructure program that “reflects the architectural, engineering and aesthetic values that befits the progeny of European architecture….”
In all honesty, we have no idea what that means.
Frequent warfare and violent invasions, particularly by the Vikings in the period from 800 to 950, left almost no examples of Anglo-Saxon architecture. Anglo-Saxons stone construction was generally reserved for churches and monasteries; secular structures were built using thatched roofing and wattle and daub walls (consisting of a network of interwoven rods or sticks and twigs and covered with mud or clay). Most of the larger religious structures were rebuilt following the Norman Conquest. The approximately fifty churches of Anglo-Saxon origin that survive today - like Westminster Abbey - do so because of major alterations over time, having been built over and around the primitive Anglo-Saxon efforts.
Domestic structures were generally small – 10 x 12 feet to as much as 75 x 260 feet -and built of wood with a fire pit in the center and a hole in the roof for smoke to escape; even the largest structures rarely had more than one floor and one room.
In the area of the arts, the Anglo-Saxons were generally illiterate (written communications were not introduced until the mid-700s) and amused themselves with clever riddles and tales of brave warriors and their adventures, gifting us with Beowulf – the epic account of the great hero who fought and killed the monster Grendel and his mother, becoming a great king, only to meet his death fighting an enraged dragon.
So, these “uniquely Anglo-Saxon political traditions” hailed by some members of Congress were not democratic. They were simply small collections of peasants and warriors and repeatedly failing and losing kings and kingdoms.
And they were certainly not Christian – at least in the beginning.
Woden was one of their chief gods. Penda, who ruled from AD 626 to 655, waged war on and ransacked many other Anglo-Saxon realms, amassing great personal treasures and personally offering up the body of King Oswald of Northumbria to Woden. Perhaps (and we are only conjecturing here), it was the unique importance Anglo-Saxons gave to warrior elites that appeals to some members of Congress who have never fought in a real war.
While many trace the development of Christianity in Anglo-Saxon lands to the arrival of Augustine of Canterbury in 597 CE, Christianity was present in Roman Britain from at least the third century – arriving with Roman tradesmen, immigrants and legionaries; in the early Fourth Century, three bishops from Britain attended the Council of Arles (314). Conversions to Christianity came in part because missioners promised that the Christian God would assure Anglo-Saxons victories in battle - a promise that failed so badly that some kings apostatized.
So, these “uniquely Anglo-Saxon political traditions” members of Congress are purportedly urging upon Americans consist of:
Invading immigrant hordes;
Constant war;
At least originally, no common language;
Kings, warriors and peasant serfs;
An absolute absence of anything resembling modern day democracy and constitutional government;
Paganism in the beginning and – as a percentage of the population – only slightly Roman Catholic; the Protestant Reformation did not begin in England until 1534; and
A surprising ability to lose wars.
One more note about the “architectural, engineering, and aesthetic value that befits the progeny of European architecture” – whatever that highfalutin phrase means. We can only suppose that the politicos from Georgia, Texas and Arizona were referring to the Classical, Medieval and Renaissance works of Greeks and Italians. Greeks and Italians?
Greeks and Italians?!?!?!?
Don’t these congressional progeny of the Ku Klux Klan and the Native American Party – a.k.a. the “Know Nothings” - realize that their political and philosophical ancestors considered “white” too inclusive. They wanted to ban nearly all ethnic groups, including the Irish, Jews, Italians, Greeks, Russians and all people of color. Greeks and Italians were too dark-skinned – not quite white enough – and Irish and Italian were too Catholic.
So, the next time someone proposes an “America First Caucus Policy Platform” or just anything “America first” built on “uniquely Anglo-Saxon political traditions,” it’s time to recognize they are speaking a language of prejudice and discrimination.
A recent candidate for the Presidency of the United States appealed to voters with what many considered the racist slogan “America First.” He was hardly original. Presidents Woodrow Wilson, Calvin Coolidge, Warren G. Harding and William McKinley all used the phrase in their campaigns and, depending on the circumstances, the catchphrase was used to promote isolationism and/or protectionist foreign policies as far back as McKinley’s 1896 campaign. It’s also been associated with trade protection, outright racism and anti-Semitism and was a favorite in Ku Klux Klan rhetoric.
In 2016, the Anti-Defamation League reflected on the long history of “America First” before and during World War II, including Charles Lindbergh’s pro-Nazi and anti-Semitic and offensive assertions that Jews posed a threat to the U.S. because of their influence in motion pictures, radio, the press, and government:
“The undercurrents of anti-Semitism and bigotry that characterized the America First movement – including the assumption that Jews who opposed the movement had their own agenda and were not acting in America’s best interest – is not a major concern today. However, for many Americans, the term ‘America First’ will always be associated with and tainted by this history. In a political season that already has promoted a national conversation about civility and tolerance, choosing a call to action historically associated with incivility and intolerance seems ill-advised….”
Jonathan A. Greenblatt, ADL, CEO
Really, members of Congress from Texas and Georgia and Arizona and other “America Firsters,” do you want us to go back to the values of constant war for pagan kings, while we live in houses of sticks and mud? Is your this is your vision of America’s future.
Or is your “America First Caucus Policy Platform” for all Americans to look like Germans and Danes and Scandinavians. That’s your vision of America’s future. Isn’t it?
Please, if that’s what you want, be honest and say so.
If not, abandon historically ridiculous and blatantly prejudiced phrases like “Anglo-Saxon heritage” and “America First.” Please!
[On Friday, April 16, Nick Dyer, spokesperson for a Georgia Congresswoman issued the following statement: “Be on the lookout for the release of the America First Caucus platform when it’s announced to the public very soon.”
The seven-page “America First Caucus Policy Platform” cited above was obtained by Punchbowl News and cited by a number of major mainstream media. The following day, the same spokesperson for the Georgia Congresswoman emailed CNN, “The Congress woman wants to make clear that she is not launching anything. This was an early planning proposal and nothing was agreed to or approved.”]