What is an American?

"n: a native of America" - Webster's New Dictionary c 1994

A rather concise description from Mr. Webster. It might even be expanded to include "a citizen, native or naturalized, of the United States of America", but somehow even this does not seem to be enough to answer the question "What is an American". My thoughts on this were stirred by a recent speech from former President George W. Bush I had liked on Facebook, and the following series of questions I received from a friend that deserved consideration. These thoughts, as always, are my own, and mostly harmless. 

Here is how our initial conversation went. My initial response to his question "What is an American" was the answer to that question was as diverse as every American themselves. He then asked if it was my understanding that being an American was to be divisive. Were there not some principles in being an American that were absolute, namely:

1. Support of the Constitution

2. Adherence to the laws of the land, and

3. Support of your country and its allies. (Just to name a few principles).

My initial answer was that I did not consider these items divisive, but within them was allowed diversity of thought, and this diversity was both the uniqueness and strength of America. (I might now add that it is a respect for that diversity that brings uniqueness and strength, something that seems to be rapidly disappearing in our culture, something else President Bush made reference to in his speech.)

As to the principles mentioned, and they are quite worthy, I believe they also point to my thoughts on diversity. Notice, I use the word diversity, not division. I believe there is a difference of attitude between those two similar words.

1. Support of the Constitution. Yes, this is an absolute. Yet, through its entire history, its interpretation has been subjective. That is what makes this governmental document so different from any other in history. Even in its creation, debate on what to include was great. Fighting between small vs large states on representation, agricultural vs industrial states as to financial support, should there be a federal bank, monies, militia and courts, or should those be ruled by the states with no federal oversight? Everyone saw it differently, and it almost kept us from becoming a United States. Compromise was finally achieved, but 100 years later these compromises helped to fuel a bloody Civil War. Had our Constitution been a strict, unyielding document, it could have ended this bold experiment. It wasn't , though. It was amended, re-interpreted, and became once again a governing document for the people of its time, not for a time past. It continues to be such a living document, and it is the diversity of opinion that allows ALL men and women to be heard. When voices are shut out of the discussion, we choke the life out of the very thing we love. While the Constitution is the foundation of our government, we are not a government of the Constitution. We are a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

2, Adherence to the law of the land. Again, absolute. Yet laws are meant to protect its people from others, and sometimes, themselves. If a law becomes oppressive, or if those enforcing the law become oppressive, then it becomes a law that, if not bad, is at least broken. The law must then be challenged. This usually takes place in the form of protests, both silent, and sometimes, quite vocal. Usually met by protests just a loud and vocal by those with differing opinions. What should happen at this point, but often does not, is that once protests are made, discussion is needed to correct the law. When neither side will listen, it just leads to more protests, even rebellion of a law used to harm its citizens. According to the Declaration of Independence, that is a right given to citizens of any government. Only by speaking out, can correction be made.

3. Support of the country and its allies. Absolute. But is blind support a true support of country? There was a song by Ken Medema years ago, called "I See America". The chorus went like this:

I see America through the eyes of love.

And long for all her people to be free.

If you can, put your hand to the job,

There is work that must be done.

Till freedom's song is sung from sea to sea.

Does speaking out against a wrong we perceive a rejection of our country? Or is it more patriotic to try and speak out against the flaws we see in country we love? While I don't agree with the methods of protest many are using right now, my charges against them are that the reason behind the protest is getting lost in the controversy of the method. If true discussion and solutions were made to correct the problems, the method of protest would be unnecessary. And support of our allies? That has unfortunately always been somewhat wishy-washy. I have a rather global view of support, much like WWII, fighting for a common cause kind of way. But even then, men such as Rockefeller, Kennedy, Lindbergh, and even Henry Ford, wanted no part of that little spot of trouble in Europe. We go from global, to nationalistic, to global again like a person in a revolving door. So I'm not sure we have a true support of allies, at least not one that's locked down, and like everything else here is fluid and changing along with its people.

Finally, being an American, to me, is intensely personal. It is, at various times a source of pride and sorrow, and sometimes even shame. Each person sees their place as an American through their own eyes Which brings me back to my original statement, that to be an American is as diverse as the individuals themselves. E Pluribus Unum - Out of many, one. And thank God our Constitution and laws were created to be flexible and adaptable. A society, or government, where the people are at the mercy of a rigid law, can only fail. But a law meant to serve and protect its people, will stand forever.

What is an American? A servant of his country, with open eyes, ears, and heart. A person his country serves equally. With Liberty and Justice for all.