Anglo-American: the New Racial Slur
You know what really sticks in my craw? Liberals that expressed indignation over Jeff Session’s right-and-proper use of the term “Anglo-American.” Their charges of racism prove the resistance has allowed hatred to force wisdom from their collective brains – because they let loose with some really stupid sh*t.
Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) tweeted: Do you know anyone who says “Anglo-American heritage” in a sentence [except] to pit Americans against each other? To use a dog whistle like this is appalling. Best NO vote (on Sessions’ confirmation) I ever cast?
The NAACP issued a response in the Washington Post: “The comment was racially tinged and, in the opinion of the NAACP, qualifies as the latest example of dog-whistle politics.”
Slate magazine writer Daniel Horwitz wrote: “Given Sessions’ appalling personal legacy and the special place that sheriffs’ offices hold in the hearts of right-wing extremists, Sessions most recent dog whistle was simply too loud to ignore…Americans who value civil rights should continue to demand his removal from office every single day.”
And there you have it: the American resistance declaring jihad over factual information. It is 100% true England and (presumably white) colonials had almost everything to do with the essential constructs of America law and order. When I write of Anglo-American judicial traditions, it is not to imply white Anglo-Saxon protestant superiority, or denigrate other nationalities or ethnicities. No, I am simply crediting English jurisprudence as the foundation of our laws and civil order. If people are offended that Napoleonic law or sharia did not make the cut in 1787, it is not Jeff Sessions' fault.
The PC jihadists should be embarrassed. The National Sheriffs Association invited the US attorney general to be the keynote speaker at their convention. It is accepted dogma that keynote speakers sprinkle some pride-and-prestige comments onto such gatherings. Speaking before the large NSA audience, Sessions spoke of the longstanding existence of sheriffs in America and their critical role, including these two sentences: “The Office of sheriff is a critical part of the Anglo-American heritage of law enforcement. We must never erode this historic office.”
A student of the English language would know the word “sheriff” derives from shire (which is English for “county”) and reeve (which is English for “chief magistrate”) – and a student of jurisprudence would know the "sheriff heritage” is a locally elected chief law enforcement officer, who is not appointed like the local police chief. In an open democracy like America, this distinction is a big deal – especially to sheriffs that have run for elected office.
This most recent example of the resistance playing identity politics is wrong-minded because it attacks the very language spoken in the USA: that would be English. It is imbecilic because it assumes only white supremacists refer to our English heritage – when even their favorite son, Barack Obama, referred to the Anglo-American legal system. On the Senate floor in 2006, Obama said, “I hope we can protect what has been called the ‘great writ’ – a writ that has been in place in the Anglo-American legal system for over 700 years.”
OK – I understand certain so-called liberal institutions need to keep their followers engaged, but why persist with made-up enemies? By demonizing others through identity politics, they must now accept some blame for the reactionary violence that has become routine in America. By attacking the significant truths of America’s past, they are inviting disregard for the heritage and traditions that hold all social systems together. Trust me: when the Stalins, Pol Pots, and Maos of the world disregard heritage and tradition, it is not a pleasant situation.
Anglo-American: it refers to any construct that began in mother England, was modified in 1787 by the Constitutional Convention, which created America’s system of government, and was perfected in 1789 when James Madison introduced nine amendments (the Bill of Rights) to the Constitution in the US House of Representatives. Real American patriots should not sit in silence and allow a confederacy of liberal dunces to trash what came before – because we stand on the shoulders of great minds that just so happened to be white and male, such as Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. These English philosophers introduced the social compact in which the government is the creation of the people as a whole – not the will of God (Louis XVI of France) or the extraordinary ability of a great warrior (Genghis Khan).
Perhaps Thomas Hobbes was a nasty nose-picker, and John Locke kicked his hounds. We know Thomas Jefferson owned slaves and pressed himself sexually upon one of them. However, when we speak of these men, it is not the color of their skin or their ethnicity that makes them consequential Anglo-Americans. Rather, it is how they channeled the Reformation and the Enlightenment into words and deeds that created the great American experiment. These men were imperfect, and their eras were replete with injustices towards humanity - but their ideals and words were just and hopeful, and the American founding fathers did mostly the right thing. I just think it is petty to pick the ancients apart from the comforts of the 21st century.
Senator Schatz sits in a chamber made possible by Madison’s concept of bicameral legislation. The NAACP meetings follow English parliamentary procedure. Daniel Horwitz’s comments are protected by Madison’s First Amendment to the US Constitution. This is true; and it is because of these Anglo-American constructs they are able to make false claims about Jeff Sessions, their make-believe racist. Is this a great country or what?