💥 THE GREAT AMERICAN IDENTITY WAR: WHY J.D. VANCE IS GETTING WHAT IT MEANS TO BE AN AMERICAN WRONG — AND THE FIGHT SPLITTING THE GOP.c1

At the heart of modern political conversation in the United States lies a simple yet profound question: What does it mean to be an American? For Ohio Republican gubernatorial candidate and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, the answer lies in shared ideals such as liberty, meritocracy, and universal principles that transcend ancestry, religion, and lineage. Opposing him in this intellectual battle is Vice President J.D. Vance, whose views critics say suggest that heritage and historical ties confer a deeper claim to national identity.

Ramaswamy’s challenge of Vance’s perspective has ignited debate within the Republican Party and beyond, with some viewers praising Ramaswamy’s emphasis on inclusion, while others see Vance’s focus on heritage as a defense of tradition. The conflict touches on an age-old American tension: Are we defined by our founding democratic principles — or by the history of our families and communities?

In a recent speech and published commentary, Ramaswamy directly confronted what he sees as the problematic elements of Vance’s vision. Ramaswamy contends that emphasizing a subgroup of Americans — such as those with family lines stretching back to major historical events like the Civil War — undermines the inclusive creed upon which the nation was founded. He labeled this idea “un-American at its core,” echoing concerns that such positioning mirrors nationalist ideologies with troubling historical precedents.

Instead, Ramaswamy argues, the true American identity lies in commitment to foundational principles like freedom, equality, and self-government — ideals that inspired global movements for democracy, not just the descendants of early settlers. He pointed to figures like Thomas Paine, a recent immigrant whose pamphlet Common Sense helped drive the American Revolution, as evidence that the fight for American values has always been universal rather than ancestral.

Vice President J.D. Vance’s critics suggest his emphasis on heritage reflects a worldview that gives special status to Americans with historical ties to the nation’s early days. While Vance has spoken about the importance of homeland and shared history, some interpreters of his message see it as flirtation with a “blood and soil” notion of identity — a phrase historically associated with European nationalist movements and rejected in mainstream American political thought because of its exclusionary implications.

Supporters of Vance argue instead that celebrating heritage — including the sacrifices and legacies of past generations — honors the nation’s roots. Across opinion pages and conservative media outlets, defenders frame his perspective as a call to acknowledge historical context and continuity rather than abandon tradition. The nuances in these debates show how the idea of heritage in America can be interpreted in multiple ways, even within the same political party.

Continue reading…