What the hell is a "Heritage American"?
The "heritage American" label and the right's ongoing whitewashing ofAmerican history to erase nonwhite contributions.
In a recent article for The Atlantic, Ali Breland explores a troubling new term gaining traction on the American right. Tucker Carlson and Vice President J.D. Vancehave been using the phrase, "heritage Americans."
This is just the latest move in their old playbook. Minimizating and erasuring nonwhite contributions to American society. They also look to whitewash everything.
Are you Aray-in or -out?
This term sprang out of an August podcast with between Carlson and Blaze Media's Auron MacIntyre. MacIntyre providedthe initial deefiniton. He said heritage Americans are people "whose last names could be found in the Civil War registry."
This argues that America isn't "a collection of abstract things agreed to in some social contract" but it is a specific group embodying an "Anglo-Protestant spirit" with deep historical ties to the land. That means very white. Of course, it ignores the fact that were people in this land before any European even knew about it. (As they always do.)
This definition excludes millions of white Americans whose ancestors arrived after the Civil War, those who those heritage americans enslaved during it, or those whose contributions have been systematically marginalized throughout history. So blacks, Catholics, eastern Europeans, and Latinos can pretty much pound sand in their view.
veryone's favorite fake hillbilly, Vice President Vance, echoed these sentiments at the Claremont Institute. He suggested that "people whose ancestors fought in the Civil War have a hell of a lot more claim over America" than those who view American identity as purely ideological.
Ambiguity, deniability, and dog whistles
As The Atlantic piece reveals, proponents of the "heritage American" concept often speak in deliberately vague terms that allow theme to deny anything as insidious as what they actually mean.
C. Jay Engel, credited by Politico with popularizing the term, claims he's not a "racial essentialist." He makes room for "blacks of the Old South" and "integrated Native Americans." One wonders what their ancestors think about being allowed in his "white-man, color hating" treehouse. Because of course, he simultaneously argues that "the majority of blacks have demonstrated that they cannot function within the old European cultural standards." And what makes an Native American assimilated? He doesn't say, but maybe they own a casino.
Far-right writer Scott Greer explicitly made it clear the purpose of the term in The American Conservative. Writing there, he noted that "heritage American is more palatable to the public than 'white.'" This purposeful ambiguity fits a familiar pattern from this lot: creating terms that gesture toward racial hierarchies while maintaining enough distance to deflect accusations of racism.
Normalizing exclusion and remigration
The "heritage American" label connects to the right's broader project of ignoring nonwhite contributions to American society and history. By defining authentic Americanness through Civil War-era ancestry and Anglo-Protestant heritage, this idea systematically ignores the foundational role of enslaved Africans who built much of America's economic infrastructure, the Indigenous peoples whose lands became American territory, and the countless immigrants from Asia, Latin America, and elsewhere in Europe who have shaped American culture, innovation, and prosperity.
This isn't merely rhetorical. As Breland notes, such language often precedes policy shifts. The backlash against critical race theory led to bans on discussing racism in schools. "Great Replacement" conspiracy theories fueled support for mass deportations. Now, "heritage American" rhetoric sits alongside Trump's mass deportation efforts and attempts to end birthright citizenship.
The most extreme application of these ideas is "remigration"—the notion that nonwhite citizens who haven't "properly assimilated" should be deported. Trump, Stephen Miller, and Elon Musk (himsleft an immigrant) have floated this concept. And in May, the State Department announced an Office of Remigration, which is a fancy name for exiling non desirables.
Nicole Hemmer, a Vanderbilt historian interviewed by Breland, observes that "heritage Americans" serves as "a framework that gestures to an intellectual justification for policy." It's a way of codifying the belief that some Americans are more legitimate than others based on ancestry and race.
As usual, they are deadly serious
The "heritage American" discourse represents more than semantic games. It's another part of the sustained effort to redefine American identity to make it white. the fancy term is just a bullshit maintaining rhetorical cover. By centering Anglo-Protestant ancestry as the measure of authentic Americanness, it not only minimizes nonwhite contributions but also suggests those contributions are fundamentally foreign to America's true character.
This view ignores the reality that America has always been shaped by diverse peoples and cultures. The fight over who counts as a "real" American isn't new, but today's version comes with institutional power and policy implications that could affect millions of lives.
Understanding the exclusionary logic behind terms like "heritage American" is essential to resisting the erasure they promote. These folks are the heir to those who fought to keep the racial status quo over 150 years ago in a traitorous rebellion. We must remain vigilant and fight this every step of the way.
Non in cautus futuri.
