Visit Your Ancestral Homeland
The best sort of travel is that which confounds our expectations rather than confirms our prejudices.

This is part of Reason's 2025 summer travel issue. Click here to read the rest of the issue.
Last year I honeymooned in Rome, which was a long day trip from the tiny 2,500-year-old village in the Campania region of Italy that my maternal grandparents left in the 1910s. Of course I had to go—it was surely my only chance to see where that side of my family had come from.
It's a very American thing to travel to ancestral hometowns, especially if your ancestors were fleeing poverty or political repression. Perhaps more than ever, as America grows less sure of its exceptionalism, we want to be reminded that we are lucky to have grown up in the glittering New World rather than the tarnished old one.

But the best sort of travel is that which confounds our expectations rather than confirms our prejudices. And that's what I experienced on a drizzly day in Fragneto Monforte, population 1,700, known for a relic of the 3rd century martyr Saint Faustina, for an ancient and revered tiglio tree in the town square, and, go figure, for a hot air balloon festival that started sometime around the turn of this century.
I had heard only fleeting references to this speck of a town throughout my childhood, and the stories always drove home how backward, stultifying, and impoverished the place was, even for notoriously poor southern Italy. My mother and her siblings rehearsed a particular narrative about why their parents had emigrated; it was persuasive if uncheckable even before my grandparents died in the 1980s. (They didn't speak English; I didn't speak Italian.) The story went like this: There was no future in Italy back then, especially for peasants like my ancestors. Everyone who could leave, did.
Incredibly, my wife had tracked down a relative of mine via Facebook groups and Google Translate. Part of me worried that we were being scammed—I've seen the second season of White Lotus, where Italian-Americans seeking to connect to their roots in the old country are suckered on multiple levels. We took a surprisingly efficient and well-appointed high-speed train from Rome to nearby Benevento (post-Mussolini, it seems, the trains still run on time) and then a cab to Fragneto Monforte, where Pasqualino, my previously unknown second cousin, met us. He was a tall, strapping 50-something construction engineer. He met us with his wife and daughter, who was training in Rome to become a doctor. With his daughter translating, he explained that he was the grandson of my grandmother's sister and his own mother was still alive at 93.
They gave us the grand tour, which took less than an hour, showing us the houses where my grandfather and grandmother had grown up. I searched for my grandfather's initials in the bricks surrounding the tiglio tree. (Family lore had it that he'd scratched them in before he left for America as a teenager.)
I was eager to meet Pasqualino's mother Anna, a cousin my mother had never known or spoken of before dying in 1999. She was spry for a nonagenarian—and though she spoke no English, her gestures, expressions, and sounds instantly reminded me of my mother and grandmother. She lived in a beautiful house that had been in the family for generations; truth be told, it was far nicer than the house I grew up in, or those of my Italian-American relatives, which occasionally veered into plastic-covered couches, mirrored walls, and gold-foil wallpaper. She brought us drinks and snacks and showed me photos from the '70s, when my grandparents had visited.

I told her I was taught that my grandparents (her uncle and aunt) had left for economic reasons and to avoid war. No, said Anna, they were all doing pretty well, even during World War I and World War II and the rebuilding afterward. They and one other were the only family members who left, she said, and it was never clear why.
Did she ever wish her parents had gone to America? No, she answered: This was always a good place to live.
As I hugged this ancient woman with whom I share a real but tenuous connection and whom I will never see again, I felt for a second like I was hugging my own mother one last time. I was also saying goodbye to family stories that may or may not have ever been true.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Shrike lives in his incestral homeland. Dog Dick, Georgia. It’s all relative there.
How is their local support for DEI and MAPs?
Close to full saturation.
“Anything that doesn’t confirm my prejudices is leftist.”
/every Trump defender in these comments
What a sad sad life you lead. Jan 20 2028 is going to be horrific for you.
As I see it one of two things will happen. Democrats will sweep the Republicans out of office because Trump’s policies fucked up the economy and commence to continue his abuses of power, or Trump will begin his third term in defiance of the election and the Constitution to the cheers of you and the rest of his mindless zealots.
So yeah, it will be horrific. Because either way the republic is lost. Thanks to one man.
Oh, bullshit. If one man could destroy the republic, then the republic was already on its last legs.
But anyway, I was referring to you losing your guide star, your purpose in life.
Mad dog 2020?
Hand sanitizer and Aqua Velva.
Oh, bullshit. If one man could destroy the republic, then the republic was already on its last legs.
Any democracy which cannot survive "wrong" choices like Trump wasn't worth defending on it's own merits. But typical of the drunkard to defend shit for the sake of itself.
It's not so much that the Republic can't survive wrong choices, but rather the Republic will have a difficult time surviving if there is a succession of terrible leaders which is more or less where we're at today.
And I suppose even more relevant is the fact that most American's have figured out they can vote themselves largesse from the treasury, which many people before me have noted is likely the last gasp of any Democratic system of governance.
That last is what will bring it down. People might be interested in across the board cuts if they knew that everybody was being cut, but politicians can't resist carving out favors for themselves and their friends, so we're on a ratchet upwards into oblivion. Sooner or later fiscal reality will stop the spending, one way or another. Bush, Obama Trump, Biden, just more and more favoritism. Trump #2 has made more effort than anyone since Clinton to cut spending, but it's not even 10% of the deficit.
Trump's mean tweets? His mercantilism? Just a drop in the bucket compared to the parade of politicians cutting favors.
While I agree that that was the start, I’m talking about raw contempt and hatred for the law, for the Constitution, and the principles on which the nation was founded. Yeah there has been some in the past, but never to this degree. And never with this much support. Forget people voting for free shit. Now it’s normal for the winner to use the power of government to punish the loser. The great American experiment has come to an end. We’re a banana republic now.
Yes, we know you hate the law, the constitution and the principles On my way! High this nation is founded. You’re an open borders Sorosite, and a slave to the democrat party.
Stop pretending you’re anything else. No one believes you.
What makes you think Obama or Biden had any greater respect for the Constitution? Or any President since Washington? Adams threw newspaper editors and publishers in jail just seven years after the First Amendment was ratified with its freedom of the press. Jefferson embargoed all trade. Lincoln unilaterally claimed habeas corpus didn't apply any more. Wilson, FDR, the list covers them all. I cut Washington some slack because I don't believe he wanted to be President, and he set the two term trend which FDR raped.
I’m talking about open contempt. That’s a step or two beyond a lack of respect.
It is sad that you have to resort to “Whatabout Biden! Whatabout Obama!”
Just another Trump defender.
Even Washington wasn’t immune, ie: the Whiskey Rebellion.
There was nothing unconstitutional about the tax on spirits to pay revolutionary war debts. It was unpopular, and a great example of a temporary tax that never died, but it was within the scope of enumerated powers.
"I’m talking about open contempt. That’s a step or two beyond a lack of respect."
There was open contempt for the last four years, you piece of shit.
And YOU, Sarcasmic celebrated it, cheered it, reveled in it, pulled out your little dick and tugged to it.
You cheered when protesters were shot, you cheered the Hollywood produced kangaroo court, you cheered the novel charges and dubious arrests, you cheered the FBI intimidating parents and illegally spying on journalists, you cheered the administration's mass social media censorship campaign, you cheered the soldiers and health care workers being fired for refusing your clot shot, you cheered illegally removing the political opposition from the ballots, YOU DID NOTHING BUT CHEER OPEN CONTEMPT AND HATRED FOR THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAW.
What a hypocritical swine you are, Sarkles.
Bud, it ain't whataboutism to bring up counterexamples to disprove your statement that Trump is the worst. By your definition, no current event could ever be disproven if that required showing historical counterexamples. Your own assertion relies on historical comparisons, and mine are the same, but with specifics.
Clinton and Obama were reelected with higher percentages than Trump, and Biden was elected with a higher percentage than either of Trump's wins. Clinton raped interns, both as governor and as president. Obama's pen and phone "legalized" millions of illegal immigrants for having young illegal immigrants in their families. Biden tried several times to shift a trillion of student debt on to taxpayers, even after publicly saying it was unconstitutional, after his advisors told him it was unconstitutional, and after the Supreme Court told him it was unconstitutional.
Shut up about whataboutism. You haven't got a clue what it means.
"Bud, it ain't whataboutism to bring up counterexamples to disprove your statement that Trump is the worst."
This exemplifies what a total piece of shit Sarcasmic is.
1. He never says exactly what Trump is doing that's egregious.
2. When you press him he'll lie about it, redirect or run away.
3. The things Obama and the Biden junta did were actually anticonstitutional, and far worse than the shit he lies about Trump doing, and he celebrated them and made excuses.
Sarcasmic has to be the first guy in history to become a totalitarian fascist and antisemite just to tweak the people on the internet he's mad at.
@ sarc: I was referring more to the putting down of the Rebellion and less the tax they were fighting over.
You can’t deny that people viewed that as authoritarian, especially in light of the recent revolution that was at least partially over taxation.
(I tend to think Washington made the right call because doing anything but put it down would make the fledgling government look weak as hell to the global superpowers of the time.)
SBT your stupid whataboutisms are stupid and you’re deliberately missing my point. The past presidents you are whatabouting about did not hold the law and the Constitution in contempt like Trump and his defenders. He could murder someone on 5th Ave and lot lose a single vote. Can’t say that about the Democrats you’re plainly trying to use to excuse him. All of them worked with Congress. They recognized limits to their power. They didn’t do whatever they wanted and then waited for lawsuits like your Dear Leader who thinks he is above laws and limitations. And judging by your whataboutisms, I think you’re fine with it. Because all you’ve got is Democrats did it first.
Nate, again I disagree. What was he supposed to do? Let a tax revolt overthrow the nation? Then what?
Your biggest complaint about Trump is execution of the law. When he executes you scream Maddow narratives about illegal and unconstitutional. How many times have you agreed with an inferior judge who was overturned on appeal now?
This is hilariously the opposite of your defense of laws against Trump, his lawyers, j6, whose legal constructions were actually ruled unconstitutional. Yet you still defend those.
You don't know what the law or constitution even fucking says. You, with jeff, see lawfare as a political tool to help democrats. See yours and his comments from immigration threads just this week.
This is why youre called a leftist.
It's interesting. Speaking purely hypothetically, academically, the empire could survive quite a bit longer as an autocracy after democracy has failed because an autocrat could make the tough changes needed.
An autocrat could do it because the empire becomes their own private estate and the autocracy is invested in protecting for them self and their heirs. They just severely limit who gets the special favors to a sustainably small elite. I think the "2 party" oligarchy had their wheels in the ruts to make this change for their own benefit until Trump interfered.
But Trump didn't interfere to save democracy for us. He intervened for his own glory and I think Trump shows these same inclinations and shows them more openly than his predecessors: His golden shares and nationalized companies; his armed forces as law enforcement, but at least so far does not seem to be lining up a family heir. As I've said, I think Trump is too incompetent and almost certainly too old to do it.
On the other hand, if he does, at least we get our Caligula phase over early on. Kristi Noem and RFK may as well be horses...still a step up from Brandon who was more like a goldfish president though.
That's the only thing which is really different about Trump, that he does the quiet parts out in the open that all the others set up and were too constipated to do. Clinton raped interns? Bush lied about excuses for war? Obama's got a pen and phone? Biden ignored his own claims about what was constitutional? Trump's not inventing any new abuses of power, he's just not hiding it.
We have long since ceased being a democratic republic limited by the Constitution. We slipped into elected dictators long ago.
I take it you are unfamiliar with the Tytler Cycle?
Government turns corrupt, collapses in anarchy, anarchy turns into gangs, gangs consolidate into one master gang, and voilá, you've got government again.
Chinese dynasties are somewhat similar. Hundreds of years if increasingly corrupt emperors, hundreds of years of warlords, repeat.
I don't know enough ancient Egyptian history to know what came between their several dynasties.
By name, yes, but a recognize the pattern from history.
Question for discussion: how did increasing "democracy" in the US affect (degrade) the republic? IMO too many people, either naive or evil, pushed more and more direct voting which in some critical ways defeated the republican design of the founders. That was certainly not perfect but it did try to limit populism as much as autocracy.
The Constitution is a great first draft, but the founders assumed politicians could be set against each other in the three branches. What they did not reckon with was how much they would protect each other when the power itself was threatened.
The proper fix would have been some way for individuals to sue to overturn every government law, regulation, and action. My usual remedy is to pay for a jury of 12 random adults who separately write down their interpretation of the law, regulation, or action, and if more than one or two differ, the law, regulation, or action is thrown out as unclear, confusing, defective, and the author is barred from ever working for the government again, no matter how indirectly.
But there are other ways. The key is not letting government define itself.
“What they did not reckon with was how much they would protect each other when the power itself was threatened.”
Yup. They expected the branches to compete for power. They didn’t expect them to collude.
That’s an interesting idea.
The ultimate test of any government is having the consent of the governed. If that consent is absent, then it is only a matter of time until revolution ensues.
Keep in mind, at the time of the American Revolution, everyone in America considered themselves subjects of a monarch. Meaning, that for the overwhelming majority of people, their only way to express their consent was with an occasional vote for members of Parliament, and back then, Parliament was frequently overruled by the monarch anyway. So for the typical person, there was very little expectation of being fully and fairly represented by their government. As time went on, the people's expectations of their government changed because they became more aware of their own rights and their own liberty and their own dignity. It became absurd to think that anyone ought to be content being merely a subject of some monarch! So those elements of the Constitution which imposed limits on the people's will started to be chipped away, such as with universal suffrage and direct election of Senators. This was inevitable because the government would no longer have the consent of the people if the status quo had remained, because they would rightly feel like their voices were not being heard.
So the solution IMO is not to try to take 21st century Americans and attempt to impose an 18th century mentality upon them, expecting them to be content with very little direct power. The solution instead is to respect the dignity of each person and to try to persuade them to use their power in constructive ways. It won't always work but it is the only possible solution that retains the liberty of the people.
Can anyone give a good example of a polity that ended its democratic system of governance because the polity had progressed to the stage of everybody "loot everybody else before you get looted first"?
The Roman Republic? It's my understanding that at some point, grain in Rome and the surrounding area was free or heavily subsidized as a means of keeping the peasants from revolting.
Fairly good one. Interesting that the attempt to restore and un-corrupt it ended it.
Others?
I think a case can be made that this is what happened to many latin/south American nations that voted in socialistism.
What ended western Rome was the admission of Visigoths who were fleeing the Huns. Sound familiar? The Romans expected to tax them and get them to sign up as soldiers. A century later Rome was sacked by the Germans. Eastern Rome (Constantinople) lasted another millennium under a theocratic monarchy.
The Eastern German tribes ended the Roman empire. The republic was long gone by then.
At this point, I don’t think it’s your average citizen who’s realized they can live large off the government tit. It’s all those bureaucrats that live in the greater DC metro area and Northern VA.
The payout numbers from social programs in the United States would suggest otherwise. Also, in terms of human inclinations, few possess the moral strength of character to vote for someone who promises to reduce their payouts.
DOGE being the most obvious recent example, but examples abound of grandma being thrown off a cliff.
That’s fair. I was thinking more on an individual level, like your average welfare or social security recipient isn’t bringing in 6 figures plus, where as your average bureaucrat in VA is.
I think that's right. The ruling class maintains their welfare by providing welfare to the proletariat. But they pay themselves enough that when the whole scam collapses they will not be personally affected.
It does seem there's a terrific push for as many as possible to get on disability, though it's not getting the recipients "large".
How about a Damocles amendment? At random intervals everyone working for/with the feds in D.C. is put to death. So go ahead and suck on the tit, but it has a cost.
Seems fair.
“then the republic was already on its last legs.”
I never said otherwise.
If Colt 45 discontinued forty bottles, it would be appropriate to put the broken boomer on suicide watch.
I sincerely hope the democrats nominate one of their notorious geniuses like AOC, Newsom, Schiff, Pritzker or Whitmer.
They these people the very epitome of what the democrats want for the US, incompetence, corruption and failure in order to get what is needed to turn the US into a socialist Stalinist slave state.
Oh, please, democrats, run a radical leftist like Omar or ilk.
It's time for the democrats to come out of their fascist closet.
I don’t. Our government is a one way ratchet. Whatever those clowns do will not be undone.
Oh the fucking hilarious projection here.
You literally defend the one way ratchet. When dems and Biden click yesterday ratchet you ignore or even cheer it. As soon as a president comes in and tries to cut and deregulate you scream to slow down, dont do that, etc.
Youre a defender of the one way ratchet you leftist shit.
They won’t call it fascism, even though that’s what they’ve basically practiced since Wilson.
Lol. Yet 2 posts above sarc cries about being called a leftist. The guy predicting an economic collapse after defending the Biden economy. The guy defending tax increases. The guy who thinks managed trade agreements are free trade.
Fucking. Hilarious.
Let me guess. You have never defended Trump's tariffs, which are also tax increases.
Cool story, bro.
Poor, pour sarc.
Poor sarcbot needs a reboot.
His OS should be replaced with something other than Retard 12.3.
Poor Maddow watching, Biden defending, drm defending, leftist sarc.
This is why we say you have a terrible case of TDS, dumbass. The article had nothing to say about Trump one way or the other. Chumby's initial comment was a joke about Shrike (who should be ridiculed to Hell and back, twice or more). YOU were the first person to drag Trump into this thread just so YOU could denigrate the man and anyone who might just support any (even if not all) of his policies.
YOU, dipshit.
You have a lot of things going on but from what I've seen posting comments designed to get attention is the biggest one. Did no one pay attention to you as a young person?
If you get the chance, visit Italy. Good place.
Great falafels and beautiful mosques, I've heard.
I thought that was France? Or maybe it's England?
You would think that libertarians prioritize reason, independence, and autonomy, and not cultural and tribal legacy. I suppose they could travel to see current and past examples of how NOT to live, including in their own families.
Truth be told, his grandfather left for america because everyone in his hometown hated him because of his penchant for leather jackets.
We have a winner.
Mystery solved.
Not sure which 'ancestral homeland' is the 'real' one for my family since we're some combination of Irish, German, and French. I'd guess it's the same for much of America, in fact, and we all probably choose the story we like best which rarely has much grounding in reality.
It's actually dumber than that.
"Turns out I'm 1/32 Italian! Now I know why I like spaghetti!"
*eyeroll*
It's one thing to show interest in your genealogy. It's a whole other thing to pretend there's any social/cultural identity to be found there. Let alone to wear it like a skinsuit and pretend it's heritage.
"Take off that sombrero, you look ridiculous."
"It's my culture esse, my great-great-abuela is from Mehico!"
"Yea, but you're a white American. Your name is Eugene for pete's sake!"
It's one thing to show interest in your genealogy. It's a whole other thing to pretend there's any social/cultural identity to be found there.
Wait wait wait but I've been told many times that immigrants from south of the border are just not welcome here because they have terrible cultures there. If immigrants from Europe can transcend their cultural milieu and "become American", why can't immigrants from Guatemala do the same?
In lower volumes, they do. Just not in the volumes you want.
why can't immigrants from Guatemala do the same?
First step would be to stop waving Mexican and Guatemalan flags in America.
Why? Why can't they be proud of their heritage?
I kid you not, only a few blocks away from my house there is a house which perpetually has an Irish flag in front of their house. Does that mean they are disloyal traitors?
And what about the people waving Confederate flags?
Do they want to be Americans with Guatemalan heritage, or do they want to be Guatemalan's living in America?
Either way, what's wrong with flying flags?
https://youtu.be/hYeFcSq7Mxg?si=eg7UbVst_lIVL60L
If immigrants from Europe can transcend their cultural milieu and "become American"
Stated without evidence.
Mass movement of people from one culture into another rarely works out well for the people already in the geographical constraints of the receiving social construct.
For examples, refer to anywhere massive amounts of Californians have moved as they flee the crippling economic hellscape that is their regulatory apparatus.
Your ancestral homeland is Europe. Mine too.
My ancestral homeland is pretty close I think. We have been here since before America was a thing.
No thanks.
My ancestors left the tyrannical rock called England centuries ago, and I have no inclination to go back to that fascist hell hole to visit Londonistan or any other dump there.
I’m glad I went to Scotland in ‘03. Wish I’d made the trip to London before it was conquered.
I made many trips to England and Scotland between the 1980s and 2010s. What I mostly saw was the creeping expansion of the nanny state.
I also lived in France in the 80s (Brittany) and made several trips to Paris. When I visited the city again around 2005 I thought I was in Algiers. I can't imagine what it looks like today.
I’m deadly serious when I say the Brits should overthrow their government. Then they can finally clear out all the Muslims.
"She lived in a beautiful house… far nicer than the house I grew up in, or those of my Italian-American relatives, which occasionally veered into plastic-covered couches, mirrored walls, and gold-foil wallpaper."
In a realization of the American dream, they just got to redecorate the Oval Office.
Visit Your Ancestral Homeland
I'm already in America.
Boom
Great article, nicely written.
…we want to be reminded that we are lucky to have grown up in the glittering New World rather than the tarnished old one.
Dad’s parents, who immigrated from Germany just prior to WW2 never failed to remind us rotten kids, especially the part about eating bark.
Never made it to Germany, but spent some weeks in Sardinia while in service in the 90’s. Absolutely wonderful, so much so that some of the guys re-enlisted to stay stationed there, then went native when they got out.
On one side my family has been here before America was founded having moved south into the upper Connecticut River headwaters. On the other for a few thousand years prior to that. Guess we have been hanging around for a bit and have no need to travel anywhere to visit.
Mister Nick dun homomooned in Daego-land, jus' like Robbie got engaged dar'