“There ought to be no New England men, no New Yorker, &c., [sic] known on the Continent, but all of us Americans…” — Christopher Gadsen, 1765
What does it mean to be American? Or maybe, what did it mean?
We have a pretty good idea what that meant at our founding as our incredibly literate founders read and wrote extensively to each other and to the people, detailing and working out how to create a new type of nation.
“The name of AMERICAN, which belongs to you, in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of Patriotism, more than any appellation derived from local discriminations.” George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796
What I see that stands out here for Washington is the distinction between “local discriminations” and a national identity. There is value in both, but they should be placed in a hierarchy of differentiated value.
At the heart of that concept is an idea about identity relegated to the individual while also identifying with a collective identity, paradoxically putting something about the individual first. It seems like something almost impossible to do — to have a hierarchy of identity that encourages the position of the collective mission while still valuing the individual above all else. But if you get to the specifics of that concept, it makes sense.
The collective identity is a choice. It is a manner of thinking and seeing the world through a certain lens. That lens seeks to strip away the old prejudices towards bloodlines and social status, and focus on the usefulness of a person to his fellow man.
“We are laboring hard to establish in this country principles more and more national and free from all foreign ingredients, so that we may be neither ‘Greeks nor Trojans,’ but truly Americans.” (Emphasis per the original.) Alexander Hamilton, 1796
What can you do that will serve others? And in serving others, towards what end are we all aiming?
But to do that — to allow that — there must be an ability for each individual to voluntarily serve that purpose. To allow for voluntary decisions, the individual must be free to make them, and we must value the right of individuals to be free to make those decisions. This is how we value the rights of the individual while also pointing our attention in the same direction.
This is the consent of the governed. This principle seeks to have voluntary involvement of human beings as opposed to forcing them to be involved in a project they do not wish to be involved in.
“The distinctions between Virginians, Pennsylvanians, New Yorker, and New Englanders, are no more, I am not a Virginian, but an American.” Patrick Henry, 1774
This is the paradox we aim for that is perfectly captured in the relationship between our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution. That “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”, is a statement of ultimate human value that rises above any man made or conjured idea that then binds that individual value into a Constitution set up to protect the individual and guide the collective towards a unified good. That unified good is both voluntary and mutually beneficial.
“There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” — The Apostle Paul, from Galatians 3:28
This is how we value first and foremost the individual while collectively agreeing to move in the same direction. Each individual is valued based on a standard that we as humans cannot decide on or reason towards because it is embedded in the nature of reality and doesn’t change. It is not malleable to popular opinion any more than gravity is. What we can decide on, which our Constitution points to, is the manner in which we set up our civilization to help us move towards the good.