"First of all, we haven't always welcomed immigrants"
About this Quote
The bluntness is the point: Huntington opens with a scolding reset, as if correcting a national fairy tale mid-sentence. “First of all” isn’t a throat-clearing nicety; it’s a tactical move to seize the frame before anyone can retreat to the feel-good civics of Ellis Island and a permanent “nation of immigrants” self-image. By insisting “we haven’t always welcomed immigrants,” he turns memory into an argument, making history itself the witness for the prosecution.
The subtext is equal parts realism and warning. On one level, Huntington is deflating a moral claim that America has always been uniquely open. On another, he’s normalizing backlash as a recurring feature of the American story, not a shameful exception. That’s where the line’s politics hide: if hostility has precedent, then today’s anxieties can be cast as tradition rather than deviation. The vague “we” does work too, collapsing elites and ordinary citizens, policy and sentiment, into a single national actor whose mood swings are treated as natural.
Context matters because Huntington’s broader project, especially in Who Are We?, is about cultural cohesion and the perceived fragility of an “Anglo-Protestant” core. This sentence functions like a preemptive strike against critics who would shame restrictionists with America’s immigrant mythology. He doesn’t need to argue yet; he just needs to puncture the halo. Once the myth is cracked, his larger thesis can enter as pragmatic stewardship rather than cultural panic, even if panic is the fuel.
The subtext is equal parts realism and warning. On one level, Huntington is deflating a moral claim that America has always been uniquely open. On another, he’s normalizing backlash as a recurring feature of the American story, not a shameful exception. That’s where the line’s politics hide: if hostility has precedent, then today’s anxieties can be cast as tradition rather than deviation. The vague “we” does work too, collapsing elites and ordinary citizens, policy and sentiment, into a single national actor whose mood swings are treated as natural.
Context matters because Huntington’s broader project, especially in Who Are We?, is about cultural cohesion and the perceived fragility of an “Anglo-Protestant” core. This sentence functions like a preemptive strike against critics who would shame restrictionists with America’s immigrant mythology. He doesn’t need to argue yet; he just needs to puncture the halo. Once the myth is cracked, his larger thesis can enter as pragmatic stewardship rather than cultural panic, even if panic is the fuel.
Quote Details
| Topic | Human Rights |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Samuel
Add to List



