Old RP View on Interracial Marriage

Status
Not open for further replies.

Afterthought

Puritan Board Senior
Alexander Mcleod in his famous tract against slavery makes modern arguments, including against racial inferiority. He even argues that the institution as then practiced led to a severing of natural affection.

Having undermined the basis upon which interracial marriage might be opposed, I wonder what his views were on interracial marriage. Does anyone have any sources on what his or the old RP views were on that matter? I'm having difficulty finding sources. He does mention mulattos in his tract, but it is not clear if he views interracial marriage as evil, since he only speaks of the fornication that produced them in attendance with slavery as evil.

Bonus points on the old RP view on segregation?

Negro Slavery Unjustifiable

Alexander Mcleod also cites Samuel Miller when arguing against racial inferiority. Here is Miller's piece, in which he argues in much the same way as Mcleod.
A discourse, delivered April 12, 1797, at the request of and before the New-York Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves, and Protecting Such of Them as Have Been or May Be Liberated.
 

Here you go. This is the kind of primary source-based work you only see from someone (in this case 2 someones) deeply embedded into a culture. The bibliography is pretty impressive, with lots and lots of letters and tiny historical church records. It and highlights how much things got recorded and passed down among this community.

Dr. Copeland's wife's uncle had written a master's thesis in the 1940s about the RP's views on slavery, drawing from church records, family letters, and so on. Dr. Copeland then finished and expanded the book a couple of years ago.

Summary: Interracial marriage, no issue. Segregation, no. I believe McLeod himself performed an interracial marriage, but I could be mixing that up.
 
Last edited:

Summary: Interracial marriage, no issue. Segregation, no. I believe McLeod himself performed an interracial marriage, but I could be mixing that up.

Wow. In the context of that era of American church history, approval of interracial marriage in a conservative denomination is truly shocking.

In a good way.

A positive note about my own personal experience with the RPCNA and racial issues: Over two decades ago, I was attending an RPCNA church since it, and another RPCNA congregation in a different direction, were the only confessionally Reformed churches in less than an hour's drive from the newspaper for which I was then working. This was back before the internet and cell phones were widely used, and although I had access to both, most people in the church probably didn't, and there was no easy way to notify people that church had been cancelled due to snow in a community where most people were very used to snow and it took REALLY extreme weather conditions to cancel church.

I made my usual drive along major paved roads which were fine, and then turned onto gravel roads which were not-so-good but still okay for me as a native Michigander used to far worse weather, and then came to the side road with the church visible but several hundred yards down a road that had not been plowed but had significant drifting. I parked my car with my Korean wife waiting inside (her ethnicity becomes important later), walked down the road, and it was obvious that despite some tire tracks, nobody was there and there wasn't going to be church that morning.

This was in the middle of farm country with few houses, but a neighbor came out, asked what was happening, and I explained that I was seeing if church was going to be held or not, but the church was closed so we'd be going back home. The farmer asked me to turn around in his driveway. I said I didn't need to do that and was concerned I'd get stuck. He insisted, and I did what he said, and as I had expected, I got stuck. He then said he'd go inside to get some salt and shovels to get me unstuck.

He came out a while later, got me unstuck, and we went back home.

I later received a very apologetic phone call from the church leadership. The neighbor, who didn't go to church anywhere, after getting me stuck in his driveway, had called someone he knew from the church to see about some guy and "his foreign woman" who he was afraid were trying to steal from the church. Apparently, it never crossed his mind that a very rural farm church would have Asians attending, so he had deliberately gotten me stuck so he could call the police on me and my wife.

The church leadership was horrified and made absolutely clear they had zero problem with my interracial marriage, no matter what the neighbors might think of it.

Yes, these things do happen and are within the last few decades, not the 1800s.

I could cite a lot less positive examples I've seen firsthand in other conservative Reformed denominations, but to their credit, not one single issue, ever, in the RPCNA due to interracial marriage. On the contrary, a lot of people liked to point out the RPCNA's history of mission work in China and the work of the Chao family with Chinese translation after the fall of the mainland Chinese into Communism. (Yes, I'm also aware of the RPCNA's work in Japan, but RPCNA people often know enough about Asian history NOT to speak positively of the Japanese to a Korean.)

Salvation is by grace, not by race. We forget that at our peril.
 
Last edited:
Interracial marriage between white folks (especially Scots and Scots-Irish) and American Indians was common from a very early period. I live near New Echota, which was the capitol of the Cherokee Nation before their removal Westward. At the historic site, you can see where the homes of prominent Cherokees such as Elias Hicks and Alexander McCoy once stood. Of course, the most famous of the Cherokees was Principal Chief John Ross, who was 3/4 Scottish.

None of these were Reformed Presbyterians, but some were mainline Presbyterians. My main point is that interracial marriages were not uncommon among these conservative Southerners. Indeed, most folks in my area will tell you they're part Cherokee.
 
I recently ran across a book on this subject. It's still in the "To Read" stack, so I can't comment on whether it is any good or not. Just thought you might like to know about it.

This is a good and insightful book. I have not ready it recently and don't recall if it addresses this issue, but if you're studying RPs on this issue I'd recommend giving it a read.
 
Interracial marriage between white folks (especially Scots and Scots-Irish) and American Indians was common from a very early period. I live near New Echota, which was the capitol of the Cherokee Nation before their removal Westward. At the historic site, you can see where the homes of prominent Cherokees such as Elias Hicks and Alexander McCoy once stood. Of course, the most famous of the Cherokees was Principal Chief John Ross, who was 3/4 Scottish.

None of these were Reformed Presbyterians, but some were mainline Presbyterians. My main point is that interracial marriages were not uncommon among these conservative Southerners. Indeed, most folks in my area will tell you they're part Cherokee.
Yes, I've heard about the openness of the Cherokee to such things. A Cherokee history professor friend of mind mentioned to look into the history of Cherokee baptists who wrote to Southern ministers to cease from their slavery and racism, though I wasn't given a source, so it's something to look into someday.
 
Yes, I've heard about the openness of the Cherokee to such things. A Cherokee history professor friend of mind mentioned to look into the history of Cherokee baptists who wrote to Southern ministers to cease from their slavery and racism, though I wasn't given a source, so it's something to look into someday.
Interesting. There were differing views among the Cherokee on the question of slavery, though. Many of the wealthier ones were slaveholders themselves. They also fought on the side of the Confederacy, with pro-removal Principal Chief Stand Watie holding the rank of general--the last Confederate general to surrender!
 
Interesting. There were differing views among the Cherokee on the question of slavery, though. Many of the wealthier ones were slaveholders themselves. They also fought on the side of the Confederacy, with pro-removal Principal Chief Stand Watie holding the rank of general--the last Confederate general to surrender!

If I recall, I think he was the inspiration for the character Chief Dan George played in The Outlaw Josey Wales named Lone Watie in the film (I never read the novel the film was based on).
 
Quick google search: 5% of Americans approved of interracial marriage in the 50's.

Five. Five percent. Crazy!
 
Quick google search: 5% of Americans approved of interracial marriage in the 50's.

Five. Five percent. Crazy!

I'm surprised support for interracial marriage was as high as 5 percent in the 1950s. I don't think most people today realize just how strong the opposition was, and it included opposition from minorities objecting to "race-mixing." It was widely assumed that many interracial relationships were white men preying on black women, and the disgusting behavior of segregationist Senator Strom Thurmond with his family's black servant that led to a hidden interracial daughter was more common than most wanted to admit. The opprobrium that today's #MeToo movement vents upon men who prey upon their employees, students, and others in a subordinate position was, back then, the way white men in interracial relationships were viewed.

We also need to remember that in many states, including my own, interracial relationships were literally illegal. Black people often supported those laws because it was a way to use the legal system protect black women from abuse by white men.

Just about the only even SLIGHTLY tolerable exception was "war brides," but the Sayonara movie, set in the 1950s during the Korean War and involving two soldiers who fell in love with Japanese women and the problems they faced, shows just how bad things were even with that exception.

That barely tolerated exception for war brides predated the 1950s. Some interracial marriages happened during World War II, World War I, and even before that. In my rural county in the Missouri Ozarks, one of the REALLY old families had a son who was in the military during the Spanish-American War, was stationed in the Philippines, and as a member of the Quartermaster Corps who had to deal regularly with a local Filipino merchant, fell in love with his daughter, married her, and brought her back to Missouri. All it would have taken would have been a single complaint and they could have been arrested at any time. Our whole county flat-out refused to enforce the law, and their children ended up becoming successful business owners in the days before World War II when Fort Leonard Wood was built, bringing a lot more minorities to Pulaski County, which led to the state and local governments often deciding to ignore a lot of the laws on the books as part of a "support the troops" approach.

But we shouldn't minimize how serious the problems were, and how recent they were, and not just in the South.

My parents were both fairly progressive on racial issues. Both sides of my family had lived in Michigan for several generations. On my mother's side, her father's grandfather had been an abolitionist, volunteered to fight for the Union, and was a POW in the notorious Andersonville prisoner of war camp. I grew up with a framed photograph of him on the wall, along with his young daughter (my mother's grandmother) and I was regularly reminded of how horrible the Confederacy was and why my family fought for abolitionism. My father, like a lot of Italians, loved jazz music and made friends with a number of Black soldiers and NCOs in the 1950s when that was rare.

But both my parents were very upset when I brought my Korean fiancee home to meet them. It didn't matter that we had met in graduate school and my wife was already a well-educated woman with two American masters degrees and a career as a professional translator for a Korean Christian publishing company. My mother had already heard rumors of my relationship with a "Chinese woman" (yes, cue the stereotypes of "all Asians look alike" -- I can tell the difference but many Americans can't), but my mother hoped the rumors weren't true and she knew enough not to tell my father anything at all until the truth couldn't be hidden anymore. As people who grew up during World War II, with posters all over the place saying, "Wipe that Jap Right Off the Map," my parents couldn't understand that lots of Asian nations were victims of the Japanese too and blamed all Asians for what was done to our soldiers by the Japanese imperialists, North Koreans, Chinese Communists, and North Vietnamese.

My parents had no problem with black friends, and very unusually for their generation, both had longstanding friendships with black people long before I was born. My mother had even defended a black couple who came into the restaurant where she was working as waitress in college, and served them when every other waitress was afraid to do so. (She got a very nice tip, and as it turned out, the restaurant owner actually had no problem with black customers, but none had ever come into his restaurant before so the employees didn't know how he would react.)

But interracial dating and marriage was a whole different ball game from friendship and employment. Bringing an Asian into my family shocked pretty much everyone.

I met my wife in the 1980s, not the 1950s, and ran into a buzzsaw even from parents who were quite progressive on racial issues.

Now imagine what the 1950s were like.

I'm attaching a church directory photo from a few years ago. My parents are long since dead. But neither was ever happy with my marriage and I have to recognize that I was treated FAR better than a lot of other people would have been.

BTW, my wife's family is even more of a break with her Korean culture's attitudes toward interracial marriage. Her father was a sergeant first class in the South Korean Army, a combat medic, and a combat veteran of the Korean War. My brother-in-law was in the South Korean Special Forces. As far as they are concerned, the United States saved Korea from Communism and while they probably wish my wife had found a Korean to marry, my father-in-law, now deceased, refused to allow any criticism of his daughter's interracial marriage to be made in his presence. That's REALLY unusual for a conservative Korean of his generation. Racism is not just a "white people problem" and lots of Asians are far more opposed to interracial marriage than most modern Americans are today.
 

Attachments

  • 220912 Church Photos-DTM and Anne 09_ES_9647 EDIT.jpg
    220912 Church Photos-DTM and Anne 09_ES_9647 EDIT.jpg
    592.4 KB · Views: 22
Interesting. There were differing views among the Cherokee on the question of slavery, though. Many of the wealthier ones were slaveholders themselves. They also fought on the side of the Confederacy, with pro-removal Principal Chief Stand Watie holding the rank of general--the last Confederate general to surrender!
Yes, I had read about that when trying to track down the source (cause that's more fun than asking my friend). There is some question about to what degree such was a development and also to what degree it was the pretend assimilation that the Cherokee have done throughout their history to appear more like the culture around them. At least, that's what I found in my search; I'm sure there's plenty more detail to look into that could nail that down. But yes, there did appear to be differing views.
 
with my Korean wife
Society in general focused on black - white relationships although most of the misegenation laws did focus on white/nonwhite distinctions. In the south, at least, a soldier coming back with a Japanese or Filipina wife might be a source of gossip, but not at risk of prosecution. And as @TylerRay pointed out Cherokee blood is proudly claimed (sometimes falsely) in northwest Georgia. This was true even the of segregation of the 1960s.

I expect Asians might have faced more discrimination in places like California; in the former Confederacy it was more of an oddity than a threat. Indeed, before YKK (Japanese) opened a facility in Macon, Georgia in the early 1970s, the company received assurance that Japanese executives would be treated as white.
 
Society in general focused on black - white relationships although most of the misegenation laws did focus on white/nonwhite distinctions. In the south, at least, a soldier coming back with a Japanese or Filipina wife might be a source of gossip, but not at risk of prosecution. And as @TylerRay pointed out Cherokee blood is proudly claimed (sometimes falsely) in northwest Georgia. This was true even the of segregation of the 1960s.

I expect Asians might have faced more discrimination in places like California; in the former Confederacy it was more of an oddity than a threat. Indeed, before YKK (Japanese) opened a facility in Macon, Georgia in the early 1970s, the company received assurance that Japanese executives would be treated as white.

Yes, with some interesting qualifications on the role of Asians in the South.

Anna Chennault, a Chinese reporter during World War II who married an American general, Claire Lee Chennault, returned with him to his home in Louisiana and flagrantly defined the laws against race-mixing and against mixed race children in segregated "white" schools and against living in segregated "white" neighborhoods. LTG Chennault and his wife basically dared the Louisiana government to prosecute a well-known war hero who had commanded an American unit of pilots who had volunteered to help China fight the Japanese. But after her husband died, she knew what she would face with her children in Louisiana without the protection of her deceased husband, and moved to Washington DC.

I could cite a number of similar cases, but LTG and Mrs. Chennault are the highest-ranking couple who used their military service to say, "Don't you dare try to use your laws against us." Sadly, it didn't always work and in a number of cases people did unwillingly what Mrs. Chennault did voluntarily, i.e., leave for the North.

There actually had been an Asian population in the South for over a century before World War II.

Chinese "coolie labor" had worked on the railroads even in the 1800s, doing work that nobody else would, and thereby leading to downward pressure on wages that made other "white" groups upset. (Italians had the same problem -- if a company owner couldn't find Americans willing to do a job, he'd hire immigrants, and if he couldn't get "normal" immigrants, he'd hire Italians. The Bishop of St. Louis actually played a role in rescuing a group of Italians who had been hired after the Civil War to work on an Arkansas plantation when the freed slaves refused to work under the horrible conditions, so the plantation owner imported Italians and treated them as badly as he had been treating the ex-slaves, leading to almost a third of them dying during the one year of their employment immigration contract.)
Because Italians from Sicily were widely understood to have some Moorish blood from Africa, Italians were often regarded as "not fully white." If this were pre-1965 and Missouri still had its old laws against race-mixing, and someone tried to prosecute me for my marriage, I'd turn the tables and say, "Prove I'm white according to the 'one drop' rule." Now the reality is my family is from North Italy, not South Italy, and the Maurinas probably mixed only with Aryans out of Austria and places north of the Alps, but I'm not at all sure about some of the ancestry of some of the Italian women my Maurina male ancestors married once they came to the US.

The result was that in the late 1800s and early 1900s, Chinese-owned and Italian-owned businesses in the South were sometimes the go-betweens, buying from white businesses and selling to or serving black customers who the white business owners didn't want to serve. I can't find the article without some research, but I remember reading about the "Louisiana Chinese" population of Chinese brought over to work on the railroads who bought farms or started businesses and sometimes had to start their own Chinese schools and churches because missionaries knew they needed Chinese-speaking churches for the first generation, and the "white schools" wouldn't take the children, and the Chinese parents didn't want their children going to the segregated black schools. The Italians usually went to Catholic parochial schools or didn't go at all, so that problem got solved by Italian-speaking parishes having their own schools for their own Italian children.

Let's all be glad this stuff is history, and not present.

And let's remember this bad history when we see some in conservative Christian circles who want to dig ethno-nationalism out of its well-deserved grave.
 
@darrellmaurina South Louisiana has always been an interesting place when it came to race. Culture played a bigger role than appearance because there was so much mixing of the bloodlines. While there was a 1/32 rule well into my adulthood (a liberal reform in the 1970s from an earlier, stricter standard), there were people who were raised as white and treated as white who had darker pigmentation and features than folks who were identified as black.

And I recall one interesting case of a woman who had always thought she was white, looked white, and was raised white. She married a white man and as he prospered, he wanted to take her to Europe, which required a passport, which required a birth certificate. And her birth certificate said she was black. Five years of litigation later, and the courts said that the birth certificate couldn't be changed without clear proof of an error. The legislature did liberalize the law further following that case. A fairly recent story about that case can be found here: https://www.ktalnews.com/news/louis...ed as a white,forced to confront her ancestry.
 
Spot on, @Edward . And this is a huge part of why our identity needs to be based on our faith, not the color of our face.

And yes, I'm well aware that it's not just white Americans, or Europeans in general, who have racial issues. Go ask a German in the 1930s who was absolutely convinced he was better than Slavic races or Polish people whose skin tones were usually as white as his.

It's a worldwide problem that only the Gospel can solve.
 
@darrellmaurina South Louisiana has always been an interesting place when it came to race. Culture played a bigger role than appearance because there was so much mixing of the bloodlines. While there was a 1/32 rule well into my adulthood (a liberal reform in the 1970s from an earlier, stricter standard), there were people who were raised as white and treated as white who had darker pigmentation and features than folks who were identified as black.
My understanding is your typical black American is somewhere from between 25-35% white European in ancestry, so it seems to me the races are already pretty well mixed.

Re. Asians and interracial marriage, some of my wealthy, SE Asian Chinese students, on finding out my wife is ethnically Chinese herself, told me "My parents would never let me date or marry a white person."

My in-laws themselves, although fine with our relationship, had some trouble with the extended family because "everyone knows white people are sexually immoral."

Thanks for that, Hollywood. :rolleyes:
 
Re. Asians and interracial marriage, some of my wealthy, SE Asian Chinese students, on finding out my wife is ethnically Chinese herself, told me "My parents would never let me date or marry a white person."

My in-laws themselves, although fine with our relationship, had some trouble with the extended family because "everyone knows white people are sexually immoral."

Thanks for that, Hollywood. :rolleyes:

We agree on the reputation of American men for immorality and American women for being "easy," but I wish it were just fake movie storylines out of Hollywood.

American men have a horrible reputation in Japan and Korea for two reasons. American soldiers in previous generations had far more money than the local population, got involved with local women who were hoping to get out of a horrible post-war situation of dire poverty, and too often got local women pregnant and abandoned them. More recently, American men in Korea who are teachers of English as a foreign language, often recent graduates of an American university, have developed a reputation for "yellow fever" and use of illegal drugs.

The drug issue may be considered minor on American college campuses, but it is a VERY serious issue in much of Asia, and can bring REALLY long prison sentences. As for the "yellow fever" accusation that American men like Asian girls... well... given who I married, I would have no credibility if I tried to deny that. I do, however, point out that my reason for liking Anne was that she was both highly educated and a hard-right conservative Christian, which is a combination not often found in American conservative church circles. That is **VERY** different from the stereotypical reasons of why American men like Asian women.

Maybe, for those men going to Asia to find a quiet submissive Asian wife, it might have worked back in the 1940s in Japan and 1950s in Korea when both countries were in dire poverty, with bomb craters and war debris all over the place, and a significant number of women who were orphans or widows who looked to an American man as a way out of a nightmare.

Men who go to Asia looking for that today are making a major mistake. A man who wants a quiet submissive Asian wife needs to read up on the Korean term "kimchi temper," which is well known in the US military. It doesn't describe every Korean woman, obviously, but the reality is nothing like what men with "yellow fever" think they'll find, and the men who are looking for that are going to be avoided, for good reason, by decent Korean women.

I can't speak from direct experience with Japan or the ethnic Chinese community elsewhere in Asia or other Asian ethnic groups (Thai, Filipina, etc.) who are often sought out by American men today, but military personnel are pretty clear that men who expect the "shy submissive Asian wife" stereotype will find themselves in a lot of trouble.

Interracial Asian-American military marriages can and do work. My wife did her doctoral dissertation on that subject, and she has spoken at a number of conferences on it, and on its history in the years following World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. But far too often, American men are operating with stereotypes of Asian women which are significantly different from the current reality, and Asian women have a stereotype of American men which is, sadly, all too close to true in far too many cases.
 
Last edited:
We agree on the reputation of American men for immorality and American women for being "easy," but I wish it were just fake movie storylines out of Hollywood.

American men have a horrible reputation in Japan and Korea for two reasons. American soldiers in previous generations had far more money than the local population, got involved with local women who were hoping to get out of a horrible post-war situation of dire poverty, and too often got local women pregnant and abandoned them. More recently, American men in Korea who are teachers of English as a foreign language, often recent graduates of an American university, have developed a reputation for "yellow fever" and use of illegal drugs.

The drug issue may be considered minor on American college campuses, but it is a VERY serious issue in much of Asia, and can bring REALLY long prison sentences. As for the "yellow fever" accusation that American men like Asian girls... well... given who I married, I would have no credibility if I tried to deny that. I do, however, point out that my reason for liking Anne was that she was both highly educated and a hard-right conservative Christian, which is a combination not often found in American conservative church circles. That is **VERY** different from the stereotypical reasons of why American men like Asian women.

Maybe, for those men going to Asia to find a quiet submissive Asian wife, it might have worked back in the 1940s in Japan and 1950s in Korea when both countries were in dire poverty, with bomb craters and war debris all over the place, and a significant number of women who were orphans or widows who looked to an American man as a way out of a nightmare.

Men who go to Asia looking for that today are making a major mistake. A man who wants a quiet submissive Asian wife needs to read up on the Korean term "kimchi temper," which is well known in the US military. It doesn't describe every Korean woman, obviously, but the reality is nothing like what men with "yellow fever" think they'll find, and the men who are looking for that are going to be avoided, for good reason, by decent Korean women.

I can't speak from direct experience with Japan or the ethnic Chinese community elsewhere in Asia or other Asian ethnic groups (Thai, Filipina, etc.) who are often sought out by American men today, but military personnel are pretty clear that men who expect the "shy submissive Asian wife" stereotype will find themselves in a lot of trouble.

Interracial Asian-American military marriages can and do work. My wife did her doctoral dissertation on that subject, and she has spoken at a number of conferences on it, and on its history in the years following World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. But far too often, American men are operating with stereotypes of Asian women which are significantly different from the current reality, and Asian women have a stereotype of American men which is, sadly, all too close to true in far too many cases.
Funny, I've lived overseas as an international schoolteacher for most of my adult life, working with the wealthy, privileged children of 'crazy, rich Asians,' so a lot of those stereotypes feel quite remote to me. Thinking of any of my students as "submissive Asians" is definitely amusing. In my circles, they're definitely informed by Hollywood, not by experience with military or EFL teachers. Though I suppose the situation you depict is still more widespread.
 
To the OP, would add that when thinking about interracial marriage or interracial matters in general, people in the US tend to be far too restrained by old categories that don't actually map on to the real world very well.

Generally these are framed by an inherited legacy of still thinking of "race" as composed of 3 clusters: Negroid, Caucasian, and Asian. Even people that know better will fall back on these almost as a default framework when approaching "interracial" issues.

The reality is, of course, quite different, as can be observed when you try to fit that classification to Central Asians, Mexicans, Middle Easterners, etc. E.g., is a Middle Easterner and a white American an "interracial marriage"? How about an Indian and a Central Asian? Etc.
 
Funny, I've lived overseas as an international schoolteacher for most of my adult life, working with the wealthy, privileged children of 'crazy, rich Asians,' so a lot of those stereotypes feel quite remote to me. Thinking of any of my students as "submissive Asians" is definitely amusing. In my circles, they're definitely informed by Hollywood, not by experience with military or EFL teachers. Though I suppose the situation you depict is still more widespread.

I think you're correct. The common Western stereotypes of Asian women are largely wrong today, however much or little truth there may have been to them in the past. (Not trying to single out women here, just that it's the subject under discussion. Stereotypes of Asian men may be even farther from the facts.)

That could be said about most stereotypes of **ANY** group. By definition, a stereotype takes a group of people and says a common characteristic applies to all of them merely because it applies to some of them, or the person talking thinks it applies to some of them. Now of course stereotypes have to have SOME basis in reality, or they wouldn't ever have become widely believed. But since we're talking about Asians, today's common stereotype of Asians as very smart and highly educated is the near-exact opposite of the stereotype of Asians in the 1800s, who were regarded as dirty, uneducated, "inscrutable Orientals" who were prone to criminality and vice. The term "Chinatown" today has a completely different connotation than the term in movies of just a generation or two ago.

I think what's going on here is that you are -- your words -- "working with the wealthy, privileged children of 'crazy, rich Asians.'" (Yes, I caught the movie allusion.)

That is a very different category from most of the women who American soldiers were encountering in Japan of the 1940s and 1950s, Korea of the 1950s and 1960s, and Vietnam of the 1960s and 1970s. It was a small subset of the Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese population who had a reason for extended contact with Americans during those eras, and while Japan entered the modern world economy by the 1960s and Korea did so by the 1980s, both countries continued to have serious internal economic problems for a very long time which to some extent still exist. The "Asian Tigers" are not all furry and nice, and there are serious income disparities, even today, that led to social problems that caused some women to seek out American men, and seeking employment on or near American military bases was one way to do so.

While the majority of the American population, even at the height of wartime, never wore the uniform and many of those who did were not deployed to Asia -- even during and following the "shooting wars" in Korea and Vietnam, the Cold War required a HUGE military footprint in Europe and smaller numbers elsewhere -- American military personnel who came back from Asia related their experiences or their beliefs about Asians and that created a perception of Asians in the broader population of the United States that never applied to more than a small portion of Asians. That portion was disproportionately poor and seeking opportunities that could be found by contact with Americans.

Today, the wealthier an Asian is, the more likely he (or she) is to travel overseas, to work overseas, to study overseas, or to want to learn English while staying in his or her own country. An Asian woman today who is willing to marry a Western man is likely to have met him in a professional context in business, or while studying together in school. That means she may very well be a highly educated woman who, at least by the standards of her country, is quite "progressive" or even "liberal," and there's a good chance she's going to oppose her parents' objections to an American son-in-law.

Before someone accuses me of stereotyping "poor vulnerable Asians who were seeking out American soldiers because of neo-colonial military expeditionism," there's an entire song written in the 1950s by an Italian band leader, "Tu Vuo Fa' L'Americano," commonly translated as "The American," ridiculing and mocking Italians who cozied up to American soldiers during the American occupation of Italy. That song continues to be sung today in Europe because there are a lot of people in countries all over Western Europe who love to say bad things about Americans and mock people who like Americans, forgetting that it was largely the United States and Britain that saved Europe from Hitler and Mussolini.

Here's a video of the original Renato Carosone song, L'Americano, from the 1950s:

Here's a "cover" by a Hungarian group that really ought to be a lot more grateful to Americans given Hungarian history:

And here's a modern "cover" of the same song, performed by an Italian band that performs in southern France for French tourists who have their own reasons for mocking Americans:


Here's a (rough) translation into English of the Italian lyrics, not all of which are in these videos and some of which have been changed in the modern performance by Italians for a French audience.

You're wearing trousers with a tag on the back
and a cap with the visor turned up,
parading around Toleto
like a dandy trying to show off

You're acting all american,american, american,
listen here: who's asking you to?

You want to be all trendy,
but if you drink "whisky and soda"
you always end up sick!

You're dancing rock and roll,
and playing baseball,
but where'd you get the money
for the Camel cigarettes?
Mummy's handbag!

You're acting all american, american, american,
but you're born in Italy, listen here:
there's nothing you can do,
ok napoletano?!

You're acting all american, american, american,
How can your loved one understand
if you're speaking half american?
When you're out loving under the moon,
where do you get a phrase like "I love you"?

You're acting all american, american, american,
but you're born in Italy, listen here:
there's nothing you can do,
ok napoletano?!

You're acting all american,american, american...
whisky soda, rock and roll.

The song "Tu Vuo Fa' L'Americano" has nothing to do with race. It was originally written by white Italians mocking white Americans and is now popular among white liberal Europeans who mock white Americans who are viewed as foolish backwards and uncultured "rubes."

It has everything to do with a very proud people who fought and lost a war, and were mad when the winners sent soldiers who brought their culture with them and caused people to want to be like the victorious Americans. Sorry, guys -- you lose a war, there are going to be consequences. Losing a war to Americans is a lot less bad than losing wars to a lot of other people. Renato Carosone would be dead or in a Siberian prison camp if he had lived in East Germany and tried writing a song like that about the Russians in the 1950s.

Furthermore, I find it interesting that some of the Italian singers in the third video have blonde hair -- positive proof they are descendants of some of the "barbarians" who fought and defeated the Italian troops of the Roman Empire fifteen centuries ago. A jazz singer doesn't really matter, but some of the most ethno-nationalist figures of modern Europe have ancestries quite different from their current nationalist rhetoric. That's fine in America which has been a nation of immigrants for centuries. It's not fine for people in Europe who advocate a "blood and soil" ethno-state.

I don't know very many liberal Europeans who will argue that Europe would have been better if America had lost the war that prompted Renato Carosone's song. Now granted, Mussolini wasn't Hitler, and a case can be made that history would have been quite different, and quite a bit better for Italy, if Mussolini had followed Franco's model of avoiding a military alliance with Hitler. But Mussolini was "bad news." He needed to be defeated, and Americans deserve the credit for doing so.

The people who blame America for stereotyping Asian women based on their contact with Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese and Filipina "war brides" ought to remember that lots of American soldiers met, had relationships with, and sometimes married Italian and German women, too.
 
Last edited:
Furthermore, I find it interesting that some of the Italian singers in the third video have blonde hair -- positive proof they are descendants of some of the "barbarians" who fought and defeated the Italian troops of the Roman Empire fifteen centuries ago.
Maybe not. Italy ended up with a chunk of Austria after World War I. And while most of the Austrians it got were Alpine in appearance, at one point the Austrian Habsburgs had controlled territory as far north as the Baltic and North seas.
 
Maybe not. Italy ended up with a chunk of Austria after World War I. And while most of the Austrians it got were Alpine in appearance, at one point the Austrian Habsburgs had controlled territory as far north as the Baltic and North seas.
A good number of them came here to Peru, to found a community in the remote Andes.
 
Maybe not. Italy ended up with a chunk of Austria after World War I. And while most of the Austrians it got were Alpine in appearance, at one point the Austrian Habsburgs had controlled territory as far north as the Baltic and North seas.

I didn't go into detail here, but yes, I do know about the World War I fight over and annexation of former Austrian territory. My own family, which fought on the Italian side, is from Trentino and South Tyrol. The Maurinas are ethnically Italian -- and some of my family members still living in Italy have traced our genealogy back to medieval Florence -- but with baptismal records dating back many centuries, there's documented proof they'd been living in that region of Alpine mountain passes, a major trade route between Venice and Innsbruck, long enough that it's all but certain there is some mixed ancestry with people from north of the Alps and people in Trentino and South Tyrol who today would identify themselves as being of "Austro-German" or "Austrian" ancestry or simply "German speaking." There are also several regional dialects spoken in that region that are often considered to be their own languages, not a mixed Italian-German dialect, though as far as I know, they aren't spoken in the places where the Maurinas lived.

The former County of Tyrol and the former Prince-Bishopric of Trent (yes, site of the Council of Trent) is an interesting example of historical ethnic and linguistic diversity beyond the normal boundaries of what's considered historically Italian. Mussolini tried to "Italicize" the region and largely failed.

The other major example, also in the Alps, is the historic Protestant region known as the Waldensian Valleys in the far northwest of Italy on the other end of the Alps, where the local dialect is a mixture of French and Italian and the locals are able to understand both languages. God in His providence caused the first European vernacular translation of the Bible since the Vulgate, paid for by Peter Waldo in the 1170s, to be in a dialect that could be understood on both sides of the Alps. Mussolini also tried to "Italicize" the Waldensian Valleys, but the main thing he did was to force the Waldensians to preach and teach in Italian, and that actually helped by making it easier for indigenous Italian Protestants to communicate with Italians elsewhere in Italy. (Yes, I know the issues of the Italian Synod of the Waldensians -- most of the older European Protestant denominations have the same issues, but like most of them, the Italian Waldensians also have a conservative Reformed group within the denomination that refuses to leave on the grounds that "we didn't change, you did.")

Every so often when I deal with a Dutchman who is overly proud of his ethnicity and Reformed heritage, I remind that person that the Waldensians in Italy were teaching sola scriptura and sovereign grace when the Dutch were dedicated to their rosaries, and that John Calvin was first introduced to the Reformed faith by his landlord in law school, a Waldensian cloth merchant, and that Calvin's cousin Olivetan, the translator of the Bible into modern French, was probably a Waldensian (there is some dispute on that point, and since Waldensians were a persecuted underground church, it wasn't unusual for people to externally conform to Roman Catholic practices while secretly being Waldensians).

I'm not a huge fan of ethnic pride in churches, but if we're doing to play that game, some Italians can actually play it a lot better than a lot of the new-fangled ethno-nationalists. Not going to go down that road, but if someone wants to, I'll join their fight, and most won't like the facts of history.
 
Last edited:
A good number of them came here to Peru, to found a community in the remote Andes.
Italians from Sicily, Naples, or other warm regions of South Italy, or Italians from the Alps? I'm curious.

The Maurinas emigrated from the Italian Alps to Michigan's Upper Peninsula after initially moving to Argentina and Paraguay and Uruguay because they hated the heat and disease conditions, and thought the snow and ice of the Upper Peninsula was much better weather.
 
Italians from Sicily, Naples, or other warm regions of South Italy, or Italians from the Alps? I'm curious.

The Maurinas emigrated from the Italian Alps to Michigan's Upper Peninsula after initially moving to Argentina and Paraguay and Uruguay because they hated the heat and disease conditions, and thought the snow and ice of the Upper Peninsula was much better weather.
From South Tyrol. The ones we've got here seem pretty Austrian. They're more lederhosen than spaghetti.
 
From South Tyrol. The ones we've got here seem pretty Austrian. They're more lederhosen than spaghetti.

Here's something funny: As I was writing this, and shortly before I hit "enter," my wife decided to make homemade spaghetti noodles and homemade spaghetti sauce and brought it down for me to eat. If a Korean can make spaghetti noodles from scratch, along with the usual homemade Italian spaghetti sauce and toppings -- well, that's positive proof that food choices can be learned by anyone, regardless of ethnicity!

You're pretty much right in describing Sudtirol in Italy, and even more so when describing the parts of the old County of Tyrol that remained under Austrian rule after 1919. That's not everyone, however. There are ethnic Italians living in Sudtirol, and even more in Trentino, who have been there for centuries. My own family can trace its ancestry nearly a thousand years to early Italian garrisons in purpose-built towns created to supply castles that were constructed to enforce military control of the mountain passes. Family lore says our family traces our origin to an Italian soldier who went on crusade with a powerful noble against the then-pagan tribes controlling what are now Lativa and Lithuania, and in return for his military service, received from that noble a hereditary land grant in the Italian Alps with a feudal obligation to provide food to the castle garrison. We don't have the records to show that, but it's quite plausible and would explain the departure from Florence and resettlement in the Italian Alps. Record-keeping in the medieval period was spotty at best, so while family lore shouldn't be trusted without corroboration, absence of records is not unusual.

The roots of the ancient population of the Italian Alps are actually of pre-Roman and of Celtic origin, though the modern (meaning the late medieval era and following) population largely identifies as Austrian or Germanic with an ethnic Italian minority, including my own family. There are, however, remnant populations that speak local languages that probably date to the Roman imperial period if not earlier, and are probably a blend of classical Latin with the pre-Roman languages of the original Celtic population.

Out of curiosity -- did these Sudtirol emigrants come prior to World War I or after it, and if after World War I, how much after? Mussolini began an aggressive program of Italianization of the Tyrol, the local German speaking population appealed to Hitler for help, and Hitler told them that they were welcome to move to Austria, but the Alps would be considered by the German Reich to be a natural dividing line between Germanic and Italian spheres of influence, so Hitler wouldn't stop Mussolini's program to force Italianization of the South Tyrol. A lot of Tyrolese emigrated to Austria during that period, and some emigrated out of Europe entirely, often moving to places with a long history of Germanic and Italian emigration such as Argentina. Given the mountainous climate of Peru, it would make sense that Tyrolese from the Alps who didn't want to be forced to assimilate into Italian culture would select the Andes as a place to go.

The Alpine border regions of Italy on the mountain passes leading to France and to Austria look a lot like Switzerland -- a mix of ethnicities and languages with regional dialects and local traditions. It's important to remember that neither Italy nor Germany had an organized national government until the mid-to-late 1800s, and in the case of Italy, the "central government" began with the House of Savoy, a relatively minor family of regional nobility in the border region between France and Italy that, through a centuries-long process of marriage, annexation, and conquest, ended up as the ruling monarchy of the entire Italian peninsula. An example of that is the city of Geneva had once been under the control of the Duchy of Savoy before the local bishop, prior to the Reformation, had declared the independence of his city from rule by the Duke, in the era when the Duchy of Savoy didn't consider itself to be Italian rulers, but rather rulers of a border region between Italy and France.

Since this is a Reformed Christian discussion board, a little side point is in order. That history of how the City of Geneva had been ruled by the bishop after he declared independence from the Duchy of Savoy helps explain why the Genevan City Council claimed religious rights to control the church of Geneva and fought over that with John Calvin. The city council's argument was that they had the same control over the religion of the city, as well as the city government, that the bishop had previously exercised. The last thing the Genevan City Council wanted was to let John Calvin become a Protestant bishop like the Catholic bishop who they had expelled. That bit of ecclesiastical and political history explains why the city council thought they had the right to expel Calvin, and then to invite him back.

A lot of things about early Reformed church government start to make more sense when we realize that the Genevan consistory, or "company of pastors," functioned very much like a late medieval "cathedral chapter" advising the bishop and helping him govern his diocese -- of course, with the key difference that there was NOT a bishop. John Calvin didn't want to be a bishop, and was regarded as "first among equals," but in many ways the Genevan consistory operated according to practices in Geneva that long predated the Reformation and were not unusual in smaller cities that had their own bishops, and due to geographic or historical factors, were able to operate with a fair amount of ecclesiastical and political independence from both civil authority and the broader Roman Catholic church.
 
Last edited:
I think they first arrived in 1857. I don't know when the last settlers would have come though.

Interesting. It sounds like they may have been part of an early wave of emigration out of the Alps that was unrelated to the later political turmoil of the Italian reunification, though it wouldn't surprise me if, after their initial settlement succeeded, they then received numerous later immigrants as family and friends said, "Let's try our luck in a new land where our relatives and friends now live."

You may be aware that a group of Italian Waldensians left for South America during that same time period, not primarily because of political or religious problems (the King had decided in 1848 to grant religious freedom to the Waldensians and to Jews as pre-existing religious groups in his realm that were more ancient than the ruling House of Savoy itself) but because of population growth and trouble raising enough food in the Alps to supply increasing numbers of people. Those Waldensians went to Argentina and Uruguay, which already had significant numbers of Italian emigrants, and some of them later moved to Missouri where they founded what became known as the "mother church" for American Waldensians. The church still exists and I'm working with them to help them produce a historical booklet on their origins.

Nearly all of the other Waldensian churches in North America died during and following World War II, due largely to wartime anti-Italian prejudice, and then in the 1950s, failure of the churches to make the necessary transition for the second generation to preaching in English. Two still exist, the Waldensian church in Monett, Missouri (near Springfield) and one in the town of Valdese in the western part of North Carolina. The others -- which included several in Texas, in Chicago, in Rochester NY, in New York City, and elsewhere, died decades ago, with the last one in New York City finally shutting its doors in the 1980s.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top