Culture of Nativist America?

I was wondering how American culture would be today had there been rigorous restrictions on immigration since the early 19th century meaning a large majority of Americans are directly descended from pre revolution ancestors?

Would American culture with less immigrant influence be similar to today's WASP culture? Or would it be more similar to modern British culture?
 

Skallagrim

Banned
Rather depends on the circumstances. The idea of a truly isolationist USA is interesting in many ways; not in the least because lots of people migrated to the USA in OTL, so the question becomes: where do they end up instead? But it matters when this isolationist policy is enacted, and what shape it takes. A USA that goes isolationist in the 1840s will be different from a USA that goes isolationist at the very end of the 19th century. (And yet different from a USA that goes isolationist in the 1930s, as has also been opted as an ATL from time tot time, but which lies outside the pre-1900 scope of this discussion.)

To answer the question very generally: the ATL culture wouldn't be similar to either of those two examples, really. Superficially, perhaps. But consider that both OTL's Britain and USA are nations that have historically been involved in world politics. That have constantly interacted with the outside, and that consider themselves representatives of... well, "the West". There are a lot of unspoken assumptions in the general worldview of the USA in OTL. In many ways, American policy has often been based on the idea that "peace and democracy" can be exported. That they are the logical outcome of history. Americans (not all, of course) often come across as if they just assume - entirely without being self-conscious about it - that their values are universal. Or that they should, at least, be universal. And that if exported, they will become universal.

An isolationist country, I suspect, will tend to think more on what it is. It will not consider itself universal, and will not wish to actively share its culture with the world. It will consider itself elevated; set apart. Its culture will not be something to be unselfconsciously strewn about, but something to be carefully guarded and cherished. What that culture gets to look like will depend on the exact POD, but here's a big indication: during all eras where isolationism was prominent in the USA, it was directed against the influences of Catholics, non-whites, Jews, Eastern Europeans and other 'poor' white immigrants (mostly meaning those from Southern Europe and Ireland, who were also seen as unworthy because they were typically Catholics). So an isolationist USA will, at most, let in (protestant) whites immigrating from Britain, Germany, the Netherlands and Scandinavia. The ATL culture of this USA could end up being rather... Germanic.

In any case, I'd expect there to be more of a tendency towards uniquely American culture (in art, architecture, etc.), and since the uniqueness of 'american culture' will more self-consciously be stressed... it will probably be more likely to be highbrow culture. No global 'pop culture' emanating from this USA!
 
Rather depends on the circumstances. The idea of a truly isolationist USA is interesting in many ways; not in the least because lots of people migrated to the USA in OTL, so the question becomes: where do they end up instead? But it matters when this isolationist policy is enacted, and what shape it takes. A USA that goes isolationist in the 1840s will be different from a USA that goes isolationist at the very end of the 19th century. (And yet different from a USA that goes isolationist in the 1930s, as has also been opted as an ATL from time tot time, but which lies outside the pre-1900 scope of this discussion.)

To answer the question very generally: the ATL culture wouldn't be similar to either of those two examples, really. Superficially, perhaps. But consider that both OTL's Britain and USA are nations that have historically been involved in world politics. That have constantly interacted with the outside, and that consider themselves representatives of... well, "the West". There are a lot of unspoken assumptions in the general worldview of the USA in OTL. In many ways, American policy has often been based on the idea that "peace and democracy" can be exported. That they are the logical outcome of history. Americans (not all, of course) often come across as if they just assume - entirely without being self-conscious about it - that their values are universal. Or that they should, at least, be universal. And that if exported, they will become universal.

An isolationist country, I suspect, will tend to think more on what it is. It will not consider itself universal, and will not wish to actively share its culture with the world. It will consider itself elevated; set apart. Its culture will not be something to be unselfconsciously strewn about, but something to be carefully guarded and cherished. What that culture gets to look like will depend on the exact POD, but here's a big indication: during all eras where isolationism was prominent in the USA, it was directed against the influences of Catholics, non-whites, Jews, Eastern Europeans and other 'poor' white immigrants (mostly meaning those from Southern Europe and Ireland, who were also seen as unworthy because they were typically Catholics). So an isolationist USA will, at most, let in (protestant) whites immigrating from Britain, Germany, the Netherlands and Scandinavia. The ATL culture of this USA could end up being rather... Germanic.

In any case, I'd expect there to be more of a tendency towards uniquely American culture (in art, architecture, etc.), and since the uniqueness of 'american culture' will more self-consciously be stressed... it will probably be more likely to be highbrow culture. No global 'pop culture' emanating from this USA!

I was thinking the 1840s and before. Thanks for the long answer.
 
I've thought of raising this issue, but the main problem is that the easiest POD is that the British adopt a colonization policy more in line with the Catholic Continental powers (particularly France) and strictly limit who can settle in their American colonies. This obviously changes lots of things massively, so its a big topic.

That raises the question of whether in our timeline, the British are still importing African slaves into the North American mainland colonies.

OK, so it may be easier to just move the 1920s federal legislation curbing immigration to some point in the nineteenth century. Either the "know nothings" take off as the successor of the Whigs, or alternatively the Republicans adopt their platform, or something. The problem is that this is a less likely POD. The 1920s restrictions really came after pretty massive immigration and there is a good argument that the country really did need a pause to absorb/ Americanize them. This is just not so pressing in the nineteenth century, plus you have the 18th century precedent of the British taking the liberal approach, or if you prefer, using the colonies as a dumping ground. And you still get lots of butterflies from the later cut-off.
 
Top