Now, in the wake of the upcoming Obama’s inauguration, when the dust and fog of electoral battles got settled, and euphoria or bitterns of the victory or defeat faded away, time has come to assess the meaning and consequences of the Obama’s presidential victory. The victory in itself is not an event of great importance, counting in that, despite of the pleas of liberals not to engage in horse trading with Republicans, Obama immediately started sacrificing his loyal people as a part of the political game of his new term.
Really, what was important in the outcome of the last elections, was not the Obama’s victory per se, but the WASPs’ defeat. For the first time in Country’s history WASP voters found themselves to be an electoral minority, the realization of which came as a big shock and provoked mourning after the waning Country.
However, what a not-WASP, not-black, not-latino, not-gay, not-other-reason-oppressed-for person should think about the Presidential election outcome?
First of all, the not-WASP should not have an illusion of the inclusiveness of the former WASP majority. At the beginning of twentieth century Irish and Italians in the US were not considered White folk; not even talking about Jews, whose belonging to the Whites was an innovation of last decades. There is no need as well to strive to claim a commonality or connectedness to WASPs to be a part of Western civilization.
Anglo-Saxons, as well as other German tribes (Goths, Franks, Normans, etc.), of course, played their important role in the development of Western civilization, being armored fists for the brain center in Rome, which came up and implemented the Church Reform of tenth-eleventh centuries. The reform which created the science and the higher education in today’s form and shape; organized Crusades, which opened a door for the Renaissance (through the access to Byzantine and Arab repositories of Classical knowledge), and which gradually got transformed in the endeavors of the Age of Discoveries.
However, tribal “barbarian” migrations of the beginning of the first millennium, which gave the rise of the medieval European states, were not complete replacements of nations, but rather replacements of elites, when new-comers’ nobility established their rule over indigenous Celtic, Baltic, Slavic, Greek or Latin substrates. Even the Indo-European status of German folk is nominal, pure culture-linguistic. “Genetic” Indo-Europeans have a shorter mutation path in their Y-haplogroup to Iroquoian Indians than the path to Germans.
Protestantism as well is a very important element of the American WASP self-identity. No surprise that all, but one, American Presidents were Protestants. Though, one could nit-peak on the Protestant status of the Founders, most prominent of whom (Franklin, Washington, Jefferson, Monroe and Madison) were Deist, and, strictly speaking, could not be called even Christians, however, they, at least formally, belonged to Anglican Church (to which, by the way, 2/3 of the Constitutional Convention deligates belonged, too).
And there is where the important line comes across the ranks of Protestants. If Anglicans appeared (without major theological conflicts with Catholics) due to the effectively polygamy of Henry VIII, bulk of the other Protestant flavors have emerged from the bitter and principal disputes with Pagano-Papism (how Catholicism was called by insurgent Protestant groups).
Catholicism, and, in general both Western and Eastern Orthodox Churches, were accused in polytheistic teaching about Trinity, in adopting Platonic concept of the soul immortality, and, as a consequence, concept of monastical search for God in inner self. And, as additional points of departure, were charges of copying of the Church hierarchy and ceremonial after the ancient Roman models (Smith 1990 13-25).
Of course, the formal inclusion of Anglicans and radical concepts as Calvinism, Presbyterianism, Methodism, Unitarism, Puritanism, etc. into single category of Protestantism is completely artificial. Especially, the very Anglicans were battling both zeal of radical Protestants-Puritan (see the Civil War of times of Cromwell), and the dogmatism of Catholics, who, during the Counter-Reformation, moved into the extreme of conservatism trying to battle Protestants’ accusations.
Essentially, the term Protestant became non-popular as self-identification in everyday use, especially among the radical Protestants, who prefer to call themselves Judeo-Christians. That term perfectly reflects the central idea of Reformation – rejection of the pagan tradition of the Orthodox Churches and return to the pristine springs of Judean sources of Christianity.
And Judeo-Christians are absolutely right in their identification of the Orthodox tradition with the pagan legacy.
To be continued…