Introduction
In the article “In both parties, fewer say now being Christian or being born in the U.S. is important to being ‘truly American’” by Aidan Connaughton, the author provides statistics of statements by the Republican Party of the United States and the Democratic Party. This data concerns critical philosophical themes, such as who can be considered a true American. The period of research is taken from 2016 to 2020. The main arguments for the true American are that a person should be born in the U.S. and/or his native language should be English. “The share of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents who say it is important to be born in the U.S. to be truly American has fallen by half, from 50% in 2016 to just a quarter in 2020” (Connaughton, 2021). Compared to 2016, the rhetoric of the parties in 2020 has changed.
Discussion
There is a similar downward trend in other statements, particularly in discussing the importance of speaking English to be a true American. The percentage in the article shows changes in Republican and Democratic statements about the essentiality of Christianity to being an American. “In 2016, majorities of Republicans said it was important for being truly American to be Christian (63%) and to have been born in the U.S. (60%); in 2020, around half of Republicans said each of these is important (48% and 46%, respectively)”. The particular interest to me was the percentage of statements by parties regarding the assimilation of migrants. The Republican Party began to say less that immigrants did not want to assimilate. In 2016, the percentage of Republicans who held this view was 59%, and by 2020 the percentage had fallen to 41%. I want to believe that such changes from 2016 to 2020, depicted in the percentage in the article, occurred because society, including government structures, became more tolerant.
The research presented in the article informed me that Christianity could be discussed in different contexts and at varying levels of society. An essential fact in the article, which I have noticed for myself, is that Christianity here speaks as a divisive concept. Republicans and Democrats debate whether a person should be Christian to be considered a true American. In this context, the attitude towards Christianity in the article goes against what I have. In my opinion, religion should have a unifying function. It should not be the subject of controversy in determining any human status and position in society.
After reading this article, I was interested in a more in-depth study of the rhetoric of two United States parties, Republicans and Democrats. First, there was a particular desire to address other aspects of the parties’ rhetorics. On what other topics were the changes observed, and for what period? I want to look at a broader timeline that includes important events that have received a public response. For example, this could be from 2000 to 2022, including 11 September 2001.
Conclusion
It is interesting to examine aspects of the rhetoric of US parties in the context of this tragedy, whether it has changed or remained the same. Second, in my view, a change in the opinions of Republicans and Democrats may be related to some political events, for example, in the election of the new President of the United States. Global events, such as the coronavirus epidemic, may influence government views on such philosophical questions as who the true American is. Studying such aspects will help better understand trends in changing US parties’ rhetoric.
Reference
Connaughton, A. (2021). In both parties, fewer now say being Christian or being born in U.S. is important to being ‘truly American’. Pew Research Center.