Independence Day Reminds Us You Can Be American by Choice

Despite our problems, the U.S. offers the sort of freedom, liberty, and opportunity that is anathema to many places around the world.

Like many holidays, talk of July Fourth immediately summons to mind the ways in which you'll celebrate. Barbecues. Potlucks. Fireworks displays. Parades. All delightful celebrations. I'd like to add another to the list: naturalization ceremonies.

Society has been missing out by omitting these from the classic Independence Day festivities. The events—during which immigrants are sworn in as U.S. citizens—are infectiously happy occasions generally. (They are free and open to the public, and you can easily find any happening near you via a quick Google search.) But the ones scheduled yearly on the Fourth also serve as a particularly relevant reminder that people can, and do, choose to be American. 

There are many reasons someone might do so, chief among them the very reasons we celebrate the Fourth of July in the first place: Despite our problems, the U.S. offers the sort of freedom, liberty, and opportunity that is anathema to many places around the world. Naturalization ceremonies shine a spotlight on American exceptionalism in a way that most other events cannot.

Not everyone agrees, particularly as we continue sitting in a time of intense polarization around most everything, but especially around immigration. On Tim Pool's Timcast IRL show last week, for example, the popular podcaster told me that New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani should be stripped of his citizenship and deported, while the remainder of his panel added that we should stop accepting immigrants entirely, at least temporarily. (Mary Morgan, one of the commentators at Timcast, applied this same logic to former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, despite the fact that he was born in Ohio, but I digress.)

The pushback, however, is worth confronting in good faith, especially as it intersects with a holiday that effectively exists to celebrate what makes America great. "I reject the idea that the only way you can be American is by being born here," I told them. This country, after all, stands for a litany of beautiful things: freedom of expression, property rights, economic opportunity, and equality under the law. Those things are often not guaranteed elsewhere around the globe. Even in countries like the United Kingdom and Germany—supposedly free places—we're witnessing law enforcement arrest people over peaceful expression and online posts, and that's to say nothing of countries like Venezuela and Cuba, where centrally-planned economies have left many without even a shot at real success.

"​​I think it's beautiful that some people are Americans by choice," I said. "And I don't think that makes them any less American."

There is data to support that naturalized Americans are, on the whole, prouder to be here than the native-born. A 2019 study found that 79 percent of naturalized citizens agreed when asked if "America is a better country than most other countries," compared to 73 percent of the native-born. And when asked, "How proud are you of being American?" 75 percent of naturalized American citizens said they were "very proud," versus 69 percent of the native-born. That gap shouldn't be surprising, given that the former chose this country.

This discussion is also often dogged by the claim that immigrants are imported to vote for Democrats. While I don't place much stock in voting patterns generally, it remains true that naturalized citizens—about 9 percent of the electorate—split very evenly between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris in 2024, with some researchers concluding those voters favored Trump by one point.

President Ronald Reagan presciently weighed in on this debate decades ago. "You can go to live in France, but you cannot become a Frenchman. You can go to live in Germany, Turkey, or Japan, but you cannot become a German, a Turk, or a Japanese," he said. "But anyone, from any corner of the world, can come to live in America and become an American."

It may be a corny quote. That doesn't make it less timeless.

Comments

[Fist of Etiquette]

There is data to support that naturalized Americans are, on the whole, prouder to be here than the native-born.

And the nation is by and large proud of our naturalized citizens. They put in an effort beyond walking across the border and, though not requisite, proud immigrants usually wave the flag of their new home.

I do think making the legal process easier while still requiring them to learn what it is to be American would be, to me, ideal. Illegal immigrants have made sure that's all but a nonstarter in today's politics.

[NCMB]

Well said.

[5.56]

Is there a correlation between "being particularly out of touch" and "never making it into congress"? Because this would seem to help explain the fate of the common libertarian pundit and politician to a great extent.

[Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment]

There certainly is a correlation between having only one brain cel and being a lying pile of steaming lefty shit, lying pile of steaming lefty shit.

[5.56]

Did you intend for "one bra incel" to be a substring of your message, one bra incel? Cell happens to be spelled with dubble ell.

[5.56]

[MasterThief]

Correct. Unfortunately that isn't where Reason is coming from. They'll use any half assed dishonest rationale to advocate for dragging the entire third world here.
It's actually hilarious to me that Billy finally mentions his Timcast appearance where they exposed him for being a mental midget who basically just repeated surface level talking points.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

LOL this is too funny.
I listened to the first part of the Timcast episode where Tim and Binion got into it over immigration.

The Timcast chick on the show could be fairly characterized as a blood-and-soil nativist. She wants ZERO immigration. She thought Mamdami should be denaturalized because in her view he is not "meaningfully American". Why? Because he has wrongthink according to her. She wants an ideologically pure America. She wants the state to be policing wrongthink.

Tim himself sure sounded like a communist. He continually blurred the distinction between public and private property. He tried to argue that if Binion's grandfather came to this country and built an estate, and decided to hand it down to his children, that his decision to choose to whom his property went, is no different than *the nation as a whole* deciding who gets to own property here. He truly wants to collectivize property and treat all of it as if it is all owned by the collective.

If these are your intellectual heroes then you don't belong at a libertarian forum like Reason. You should go to marxist.org and hang out with your buddies there.

[Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)]

You are in no position to say who should be here or not.

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

He is a Marxist. Takeover of enemy institutions is kind of their thing.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

And the nation is by and large proud of our naturalized citizens. They put in an effort beyond walking across the border

Are you kidding? It's the legal immigration system that encourages people to come here for economic reasons. Take your H1B visas. They typically go to people from relatively privileged backgrounds in advanced developing countries like India or China or South Korea. For many of them, an H1B visa for them is a career move, not some deep-down heartfelt desire to become American. If the UK or France or Germany offered the same economic opportunities that the US does, I'm sure they would be applying to go there instead. Take Trump's "Golden Visa" proposal. He literally wants to sell citizenships. How committed do you think a person is going to be to "American values" if that person just bought his way in? In fairness Trump is not the one who came up with the idea of selling citizenship, but he did embrace the idea and expand upon it.

By contrast, many of the recent migrants who came here came from South America via the Darien Gap. Do you know how dangerous the Darien Gap is?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dari%C3%A9n_Gap

It's a 100-km stretch of land separating the northern and southern branches of the Pan-American Highway. There is no road that crosses the gap because it's too challenging to build a road there. So, to cross, you have to either hike or take a small ferry. You are at great risk of dying from wildlife, from tropical diseases, or from bandits and human smugglers.

So, which type of migrant do you think really wants to be here: the one who sees it as a good career move, or the one who literally risked his life crossing 100 km of swamp to come here?

[Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)]

So, which type of migrant do you think really wants to be here: the one who sees it as a good career move, or the one who literally risked his life crossing 100 km of swamp to come here?

I think the kind that can afford an airplane ticket is best. Preferably flying business class.

[Fist of Etiquette]

Visas and naturalization are two different animals. And while I'm sure crossing South and Central America is no picnic, it can't hold a candle to the planning and stamina required to navigate the United States of America's bureaucratic jungle.

[Vernon Depner]

And some come here to denigrate and destroy America. Or just to plunder and rape.

[5.56]

Yeah, and that paranoia is particularly emphasized in highly obese, very unattractive, inviable, obsolete right-wing dropouts of evolution. They project their rape fantasies onto larger parts of the immigrant population.

The elephant in the room? They are socially inept, fat and have small dicks.

[Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment]

Fortunately, they have more than one brain cell, which makes them incomparably better than steaming piles of lying lefty shit like you.
Fuck off and die, asswipe.

[TJJ2000]

“Those who come to enjoy our country must love our country,” Trump said during a speech at the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s conference in Washington, adding, “We’re going to keep foreign, Christian-hating communists, Marxists and socialists out of America.”

Trump says it a lot better.

[sarcasmic]

“Only WASPs allowed.”

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

No drunks?

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

Stop projecting yours and jeffs racism.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

Lefties also hate Christians and love communism.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

"But anyone, from any corner of the world, can come to live in America and become an American."

This is exactly right. Anyone can be an American. There is no ideological litmus test for what constitutes being a "meaningful American". And it is obvious why: because the benefits of America are all around once you are here. We don't have to exclude people based on wrongthink because the "wrongthink movements" die out on their own, because they cannot possibly offer an alternative vision that is superior to what we already have.

America has never been some united place with some overwhelmingly shared culture. It has always been a land of microcultures, even in colonial days. Many of the original colonies were established on explicitly religious lines (Massachusetts for Protestants, Maryland for Catholics, etc.). The northern colonies were always culturally different than the southern colonies. That is a big reason WHY we have a Constitution with a decentralized, federalist structure in the first place, because the Framers were wise enough to understand that we DON'T all have to agree on everything, and trying to force everyone to agree on everything, or even on most things, would just inevitably lead to oppression.

Throughout American history there have always been large groups of Americans who disagreed with each other, on virtually every conceivable issue. Even in the 1950's, which is mythologized nostalgically as some great period of national unity, there was an active Communist Party, there was organized crime, there were labor unions who often had violent strikes, there were civil rights activists in the South fighting against Jim Crow, there was substantial disagreement even then.

Outside of wartime, we have never been one united people with one united singular purpose and one united culture. And that is FINE. We don't have to agree with each other. All we have to do is just learn to live with each other. We can do that with a government that does not permit one group to impose its will on any other group. That is what we should be fighting for. Not for some mythical unity based on some ideological litmus test that will never work.

[Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)]

And yet you are telling people that don’t think like you do to no longer come to this very comment section.

[rswallen]

> There is no ideological litmus test for what constitutes being a "meaningful American"
Really, none? Not even something as milquetoast as "I think America is, despite its imperfections, awesome and its good that it exists"

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

There is no ideological litmus test for what constitutes being a "meaningful American".

And notice how Uncle Jeff adds the qualifier 'meaningful'. This allows all migrants, legal and illegal, to join the ranks as 'Americans' under Uncle Jeff's umbrella of love. Never mind the legal process to actually become an American, as the article states. Uncle Jeff says all it takes is to come here and be 'meaningful'.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Read above. It was the Timcast chick who brought up the concept of "meaningfully American". She wants Mamdami denaturalized because, in her view, he is not "meaningfully American" because he has views that she disagrees with.

Do you think naturalized citizens should be denaturalized over speech?

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

Do you think naturalized citizens should be denaturalized over speech?

I don't agree with her assessment of Mamdami or Rameswamy. But, as usual, you assert that one extreme point of view is attributable to all. Funny, it's the same accusation you use against the other side when they point out how every one that enters the country, without any vetting, may have extremist agendas too.

[minus the clever name]

That is very perceptive of you. "meaningful' is a word used far more by really hate-filled and disgusting people than by anybody else.
And it is shorthand for "If you don't take it to mean what I mean , you will be treated by me as less than human.

“This lesson, in a nutshell, says: the abuse of political power is fundamentally connected with the sophistic abuse of the word, indeed finds in it the fertile soil in which to hide and grow and get ready, so much so that the latent potential of the totalitarian poison can be ascertained, as it were, by observing the symptom of the public abuse of language. The degradation, too, of man through man, alarmingly evident in the acts of physical violence committed by all tyrannies (concentration camps, torture), has its beginning, certainly much less alarmingly, at that almost imperceptible moment when the word loses its dignity.”
― Josef Pieper, Abuse of Language—Abuse of Power

[minus the clever name]

Legally , it must be : I will not work to destroy the American government or work against its First Principles.

So , if you have a problem with religion and you are not just a conscience-less liar, you need to leave
"The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man: and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate." —James Madison, 1785.

"Driven from every other corner of the earth, freedom of thought and the right of private judgment in matters of conscience direct their course to this happy country as their last asylum." —Samuel Adams, Speech on August 1, 1776.

"While we are contending for our own liberty, we should be very cautious not to violate the conscience of others, ever considering that God alone is the judge of the hearts of men, and to Him only in this case are they answerable." —George Washington, in a letter to Benedict Arnold.

"Conscience is the most sacred of all property." —James Madison, 1792.

[Vernon Depner]

Is Jeffy writing with AI now? That was pretty bland.

[Jerry B.]

Of course, a lot of people come to America with no intention of being an American. How often do you see someone on the news who's been here 20 years and still needs an interpreter to talk to the reporter?

[Vernon Depner]

You don't usually have to wait 20 years to spot them. Plenty of them come here and immediately begin engaging in anti-American rhetoric and actions.

[D-Pizzle]

My grandmother from central Italy moved to the US in 1914, lived in this country for 70 years, and never learned English. She also raised three productive children, including one who became very wealthy, hundreds of millions wealthy. She lived her entire life in a neighborhood where almost everyone spoke Italian, so between that and having three bilingual children, she never needed to learn English. I can assure you that she loved this country, precisely because she could raise her children in a country that enables success.

[Uncle Jay]

"Independence Day Reminds Us You Can Be American by Choice."

Providing you're not a criminal or a terrorist.
Then you have to register as a progressive.

[Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment]

[Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment]

"Independence Day Reminds Us You Can Be American by Choice."

We have a due process for accomplishing that, and it is easier by far than most counties.
Please do so, and we will welcome you.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

What about like Michael Scott shouting "Bankruptcy!"?

[sarcasmic]

Can’t be an American without government papers.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

And they’ll come to your house if you abuse your children, isn’t that right sarc?

[5.56]

Did your kid kill themselves cuz you were too shitty?

[Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment]

This from a steaming pile of lying lefty shit.
Fuck off and die, asshole.

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

Can’t be an American without government papers.

The first true statement we've heard from you in awhile. My trailer park brethren will be impressed.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Ah, the core liberal-libertine ethic: if you wish for something, it must be true (and yours). The concept of "earning" is just so archaic and oppressive.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Tell you what: anyone who really wants to be American, which means embracing both personal freedom and personal responsibility while letting others do the same, can come here. And in return, every American-hater, including those born here, will leave. Deal?

[AT]

Like many holidays, talk of July Fourth

July Fourth isn't a holiday. Say it Billy. Say "Independence Day."

You piece of slime.

But the ones scheduled yearly on the Fourth also serve as a particularly relevant reminder that people can, and do, choose to be American.

Yea, but we get to approve it. After vetting.

When we don't vet, when we get people to pay lip service to "be American" - we get Minneapolis.

And when asked, "How proud are you of being American?" 75 percent of naturalized American citizens said they were "very proud," versus 69 percent of the native-born.

That's because Media/Academia/Democrats have pushed a message of "be ashamed of being American" on native-born Americans for the last two decades. This is also why, sorry not sorry, Barack Obama's skeleton should be dangling from a tree on the White House lawn.

"But anyone, from any corner of the world, can come to live in America and become an American."

Yea, that was the 80s. Now they're all waving latin american flags (or in the case of Minneapolis, changing it outright to recognize their Somali conquest) or openly supporting palestinian terrorists while wearing their garb and waving their colors.

Reagan would stand by those words in 2025. He would not at all apply them to non-Americans in America in 2025.

[JEP41]

"And some come here to denigrate and destroy America. Or just to plunder and rape."

What percentage of those who come to America can be described that way? Do you really believe it's a statistically significant number?

Do you believe (can you demonstrate) that that percentage is greater than the percentage of native-born American citizens who denigrate and try to destroy America? Or who steal and rape?

[Social Justice is neither]

Remittances to Mexico would be the very definition of coming here to plunder, care to look up how much that is each year? You can do the same exercise for other Latin American countries.

[creech]

How is it "plunder" if the money being remitted was honestly earned? If one left home and took an oilfield job in North Dakota and sent some portion of the earnings home to the aged parents in Pennsylvania, would that be plunder??

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

What percentage will you accept?

[Vernon Depner]

I don't care what the percentages are.

[VULGAR MADMAN]

Why is it that these retarded fucks don’t understand the word “illegal “?

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Dude, haven't you seen the "No People are Illegal" bumperstickers? And don't you understand that requiring people to pay for stuff is what creates crime?

[Rick James]

Despite our problems, the U.S. offers the sort of freedom, liberty, and opportunity that is anathema to many places around the world.

That's why it's so important to bring millions of people from those nations into our country who literally remain loyal to that country, and continue to wave their country's flag while disparaging the freedom we have in this one.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

You're right. The native-born citizens in this country who fly the Confederate flag are far superior.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Compared to the native-born who wave Palestinian, Mexican, or Venezuelan flags, probably yes.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

WTF? Do you understand that the Confederates were literal traitors? Flying almost any other flag is better than flying a flag of literal treason.

It is hilarious to watch you guys on the one hand complain about people who "hate America", and then on the other hand excuse people who fly flags of treason.

[minus the clever name]

NO, they are not superior, and that view marks you as inferior.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

And you're right, a significant lack of loyalty to the state really is a problem. I suggest that the government mandate displays of loyalty in public. Perhaps, like, a salute, consisting of an outstretched arm. That would indicate to everyone that the citizen is sufficiently loyal. What do you think?

[Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)]

Poor Jeffy. Coming apart at the seams.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Hey, even those plus-sized pants can't hold forever.

[Vernon Depner]

Why do you assume he's wearing pants?

[InsaneTrollLogic (Muting Sarc like he mutes us)]

He's probably wearing a mumu.

[minus the clever name]

I know that you don't know history. That is NOT what that was.

There is no God, cry the masses more and more vociferously; and with the loss of God man loses his sense of values — is, as it were, massacred because he feels himself of no account.

Karl Jaspers

[Daddyhill]

From the Worth Remembering Dept.:

"He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands."

"He", of course, was George III, and this is one of the long list of indictments leveled against him by the Declaration Of Independence. I don't know the details of the incidents or policies Jefferson/Mason regarded as royally abusive. I do know that westward expansion was definitely on the founders' minds. Some of them were already engaged in massive Appropriations of Lands beyond the Appalachians and wanted few or no limits on their real estate schemes. Worth remembering, too, is that the Lands these people wanted as Appropriations were already being used by the people living there.

Sadly, both the Declaration and the Constitution were flawed in their understanding of who The People are. Slaves and natives weren't regarded as humans, and so their interests didn't need to be considered and protected. No inalienable rights for them.

[minus the clever name]

UTTERLY BASELESS

The Constitution and Declaration are against you ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL ...and the Constitution NEVER uses the word 'slave'.
IN order to advance freedom for all it insituted the 3/5 clause , which you interpret in the opposite sense : Every slave freed would be 5/5 !!!

As to natives you are just ignorant
": From founding-era descriptions of Indian tribes
as “nations,” some scholars have concluded that European-Americans
recognized tribes as sovereigns, and therefore did not apply state law
to them. In fact, this particular use of “nation” was a Latinate usage
deriving from natio—meaning an ethnic group. Robert G. Natelson,
The Original Understanding of the Indian Commerce Clause, 85 Denv.
L. Rev. 201, 259 (2007). In"

Be thrilled to publicly debate this with you.

[minus the clever name]

Billy really gets me going. He never seems to know what he is alluding to Just being here and NOT being a citizen, not sharing the background that makes liberty possible -- that terrified the Founders

"With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people--a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.

This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence, that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a band of brethren, united to each other by the strongest ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties."

[minus the clever name]

Lincoln too is against Daddyhill fully

"the Founders made compromises on slavery in the Constitution out of a sense of prudence, believing it was more crucial to establish a union based on just principles than to risk the Southern states forming a separate nation where slavery could persist indefinitely."

DECLARATION
Jefferson’s “original Rough draught” Declaration gives further evidence of his universal
intent for equality. One of the grievances against the King which justified independence was the
introduction of slavery to the colonies and his protection of slavery from any attempt by a colony
to restrict slavery. Further, Jefferson refers to the slaves as “MEN” and “people.”4

And you are wrong even directly : The Constitution, through Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1, explicitly prohibited Congress from banning the importation of slaves before the year 1808.

YOU ARE THE KIND OF PERSON EDMUND BURKE THOUGHT SO POORLY OF
"Nobody makes a greater mistake than he who does nothing because he could only do a little"