WASPs’ declining power

It’s often implied,  or explicitly claimed, that some kind of cabal of ‘WASP elites’ run America (if not the world) from behind the scenes. It seems futile to try to combat this myth, though I try in my small way.

Where’s the evidence for this group of powerful ‘White Anglo-Saxon Protestants’ who secretly wield power? Names? Positions?

Nobody ever has details on just who these people are. The idea is firmly lodged in many (usually other-than-WASP) Americans’ minds, though they don’t know exactly who, where, and how these people supposedly dominate America. Sometimes someone will mention the likes of the Rockefellers or even the Vanderbilts as part of this WASP elite. Never mind that the name ‘Rockefeller’ is not exactly the typical Anglo-Saxon surname, and that it’s identified as being a Palatine German name; many people think that White+rich+powerful=WASP. Likewise the Vanderbilt family; here’s a clue (which was once common knowledge in this country): any name beginning with ‘Van’ or ‘Vander-” is generally Dutch or perhaps Belgian. ‘Van’-somethings are not WASPs.

Every election year there are these ridiculous fluff stories about how this or that Presidential candidate is of ‘Royal lineage’, especially that they are kin to the Windsors. Even the current White House occupant, despite his ‘exotic and diverse’ origin, is claimed to be descended from the British royal houses, and kin to various contemporary British royals. However the modern use of these unconvincing Genealogy fables is to establish the idea that race is inconsequential; we are all kin to each other, six degrees of separation and all that.

On some blog or forum I read today, someone commented that if any of the proposed Republican Vice-Presidential possibilities, there were no candidates of British Isles origin. I would offer a link to that comment but I’m unable to find it. In any case I doubt whether the GOP vice-presidential hopefuls are all of non-British Isles origin. Newt Gingrich, for instance, is reportedly at least partly Scots and Irish, but mostly German, according to some sources. He apparently is not of English ancestry, at least, and that is what is relevant to this blog. Likewise, Mike Pence is said to be of German and Irish ancestry. Again, there is apparently no known or very little English ancestry.

Is this something unprecedented, this noticeable lack of WASP ancestry amongst the various candidates? Is this by design or simply chance? It does seem that the favored candidates will emphasize their (comparatively) recent immigrant ancestry, like Joe Biden and his Irish roots, similarly, Paul Ryan, though the latter is claimed to have some English ancestry. Still, it isn’t politically advantageous to claim such ancestry; no doubt it’s a liability in these strange days of diversity-worship.

Although the official party line in post-American America is that race does not exist, and that ethnicity doesn’t matter because ‘we’re all one race, all of us are Americans’, there is a glaring emphasis on being ‘diverse’. The best White candidates can do is to assert some ethnic European ancestry:  Irish, Italian, Eastern European (like Kasich), or Latino. Anglo-Saxon Protestants? Pale,  male, and stale.

If present trends continue, it will soon be de rigueur to be at least mixed-race, if not nonwhite altogether. Look how race (mixed) figured so strongly in the last couple of elections.

Bill Clinton was half-jokingly referred to as ‘the first black president’ (and the title was conferred on him by a black woman, flatteringly), but there may have been some truth behind that title. He himself claimed that ‘we are all mixed race’ because evolution, because ‘out-of-Africa’, and so on. In doing genealogical research some years ago I came across an assertion from a genealogist who worked in Southern genealogies that Clinton’s mother, a Cassidy, had black forebears who were listed on census records as colored. I found those records, and they do exist. I find it plausible, and I am sure the Clintons should be happy to claim that ancestry, given their belief system.

In any case, Clinton’s actual ancestry is very much open to conjecture. The media, of course, will continue to make unfounded assertions about Clinton’s royal paternal ancestry, when in fact it’s all a big question mark. The lapdog media also, for some reason, take on faith the ancestry of the current occupant of the White House, despite lack of proof of anything.  Amazing how much faith they have.

It does seem that Anglo-Saxon Americans are becoming scarcer in the halls of  power; there is what? One Anglo-Saxon Protestant on the Supreme Court,  along with the mandatory affirmative action diversity?

As for the presidential candidates, there is nobody there who really represents the founding stock of this country; though Hillary Clinton’s maiden name, Rodham, is English, she is not of colonial stock; her Rodham ancestry is of fairly recent immigrant provenance. Trump is of course Scottish on one side, and of at least some German ancestry, though at least he is not hostile to the old-stock WASP America as many politicians today are, implicitly or explicitly. Whenever these pandering politicians start to tell hard-luck stories of how their immigrant ancestors were ‘discriminated against’ by those horrible nativists, it’s an attack, direct or indirect, on the original stock Anglo- Americans. If only they had been such hard-line nativists, we would not be in the multicult dystopia that we find ourselves in today.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “WASPs’ declining power

  1. angloprotestantamerican

    No Protestants on the Supreme Court anymore just Jews and Roman Catholics. You are probably thinking of John Roberts who is Roman Catholic. An article online about him and his wife at irishamerican.com claims that John Roberts is “of Welsh, Czech and Irish stock.”

    http://irishamerica.com/2009/08/jane-sullivan-roberts-rules-for-success/

    While I knew he was Catholic I always assumed that his male lineage was probably a Protestant line which went Catholic due to intermarriage but after a short search it seems that might be incorrect. It appears that the farthest Roberts male line can be traced back is the relatively recent date of 1858 in Pennsylvania and his male ancestor is buried in a Catholic cemetery.

    http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=49853327

    He does appear to have descent from a Glover family that goes back to Lancashire, England. His immigrant ancestor Richard Glover was born in 1832 and apparently came over sometime in the 19th century marrying an Irish woman. It seems Ricard became Roman with his marriage because he is buried with his wife in a Roman Catholic cemetery while his parents in England are buried in a dissenting chapel burial ground.

    So John Roberts is not very much of a WASP with only a bit of English ancestry none of it which he seems to be interested in claiming and lots of Romanism all the way back into the 19th century which is also the time period his earliest traceable lines seem to appear without any evidence of colonial ancestry.

    The piece you wrote made me want to check the US Senate for English ancestry. The South definitely has people of English descent representing it. I found it interesting to see Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton’s ancestry traces back to 17th century Virginia and then from there to Huntingdonshire in the Southeast of England.

    After searching for a while the senators below are the only ones I found with colonial New England ancestry. For Orrin Hatch and Dan Coats (Indiana) that ancestry is from their male lines.

    Orrin Hatch
    Harry Reid
    Joni “nee Culver” Ernst
    Sheldon Whitehouse
    Dan Coats

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    1. bonnyblue1607 Post author

      Thanks for the information. I was probably thinking of Roberts as possibly of some Anglo-Saxon descent.
      It’s not surprising that some Southrons are of English descent; I know that the name Cotton is that of one of the old Virginia families, if not of the FFV then one of the oldest Virginia families (of English descent).
      I’m not surprised that Hatch has at least some colonial New England ancestry, as many of the founding Mormon families of Utah were of old New England stock. Sadly though most of these modern-day descendants are liberal and not people that I would like to claim.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s