That’s not a helpful lens because it overlooks the patterns of settlement. Nearly all the founding fathers were British. During the 18th century, German and Scandinavian immigrants formed their own communities across the midwest. Ethnic politics had little opportunity to arise in these communities, which were individually mono cultural. That result of that is quite different from a mass influx of a foreign population with a distinct group identity into an existing city or town.

In terms of what we could do now, we should stop illegal immigration and asylum entirely. We should also end family reunification. And skilled immigration should be spread out around the country (there are top universities everywhere). All that would prevent the development of ethnic enclaves, and over time lead to the weakening of disparate ethnic identities. That’s what happened during the immigration restriction from 1924-1965, when the foreign born population share dropped by 2/3, and the salience of ethnic identity among European Americans was greatly reduced.

▲

habinero 3 days ago | parent [-]

It's only "not helpful" because you don't have a good argument against it. :)

Also, the founders were not British. Most of them were second and third generation immigrants.

In addition, I don't think you realize how funny this statement is:

> Ethnic politics had little opportunity to arise in these communities, which were individually mono cultural

I wonder if you can spot the massive gaping hole in this logic. I doubt it.

▲

newfriend 3 days ago | parent [-]

Being born in a British colony in the early 1700s to British subject parents did in fact mean you were also a British subject. Several were also born in Great Britain proper. They were also nearly all ethnically English or Scottish.

Indeed, most of the founding fathers were British.

	▲	rayiner 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		The Washington family was British landed gentry dating to the 12th century. Their ancestral home dates to the late 1100s.