Without immigration US is in the same boat as Japan with a falling population. Long term I suspect cultures with positive population growth to beat the competition, but that may take a long time.
Each one of those chip away at American culture. It _is_ in danger IMO.
edit: To clarify, I'm not saying whether or not this is a good or bad thing. All I'm saying is that our culture is changing massively, the fundamental norms of our culture are shifting, and an argument can be made that common American culture is "under attack" by forces changing it into a completely different direction.
I would argue, rather, that American culture isn't under attack. It's merely changing with the beliefs and ideals of newer generations, both native and immigrant. That's perfectly normal, as culture isn't and shouldn't be static, nor should it serve to maintain the status quo of power for any particular race, religion or political ideology.
If fundamental changes to a culture isn't a culture under attack, then what would you consider an attacked culture look like?
(Your use of words like "under attack", "our", and "danger", and negative examples of multiculturalism really make it sound like you wish women stayed at home and everyone was Christian.)
I used "our" because I am an American in the midwest that is part of majority American culture, and I assume most readers are too. These changes affect me.
I used negative examples of multiculturalism because people tend to react more strongly to negative stimuli, so these are the changes that most people are going to react negatively to, emphasizing the "under attack" portion of my statement.
I did edit my original comment to emphasize that I'm not trying to attach my belief of whether or not it's a net positive or negative to the situation, so hopefully that will help a bit.
However, it doesn't necessarily follow that the influence on American culture made by the demographic minority is less legitimate than that of the majority. As immigration to the US has increased and with it the political power of different ethnicities and religions, the locus of American identity has become distributed to reflect that greater complexity.
And that's what's happening - an increase in cultural complexity reflecting an increase in demographic complexity and distribution of political and social power.
Therefore, I submit that it's not possible to attack a culture from within that culture, as a participant of that culture.
What you consider to be under attack are echoes of a traditionalist past we're trying to put behind us. And good riddance.
Along the same vein, there can be legal freedoms provided to us while having cultural limitations placed on those freedoms. Social pressures are powerful and occur in every group.
Holidays, religious traditions, and to some extent language are artifacts of where the earliest American founders happened to be from, not bedrocks of culture nor the only foundations upon which communities can be built.
Edit: The alienation you imply is happening is a direct result of our collective inability to let go of outdated traditionalism and give people space to explore who and what they truly are.
----
If "American culture" means women should stay in the kitchen [1] and I should pretend to be Christian [2], then good. I hope "American culture" dies.
[1] "women in the workforce are splitting families apart"
[2] "Our workers don't have common holidays anymore"
just because things are from the past doesnt mean theyre automatically invoked in the least charitable way you can interpret them.
Really? So the population has to always increase? When does it end?
> American population and culture is in no danger of dying off
Neither is japan's. You could argue that japan's population and culture will last longer than america's.
I look at say Japan and they've got all this history, art, literature, customs, even essentially their own religion. Their culture is very distinct.
I look at Russia, Austria, England, France, most of the rest of Europe and Asia and see the same thing. They have their own art, history, customs and behaviours that are quite distinct from one another.
But I don't see America's culture. I suspect the problem is that American culture has been exported throughout the western world so much that it's hard to tell it apart but I'm not sure.
* Philosophy: the concept of philosophical pragmatism and big contributions to economic and political liberalism
* Music: Aron Copland, Leonard Bernstein, Gershwin, Duke Ellington, Jazz, ...
* Architecture: Frank Loyd Wright and a lot of contributions to modernism
* Literature: Hemingway, Faulkner, ...
If you want to talk about "customs", a mindset typical of a country that sets them apart from the other cultures you described, the most typical American trait is a pioneer belief, a radical optimism with very little regard for traditions. That attitude permeates the list above.
In that sense it lacks some inherent culture because it's a collection of different people who came here from all over the world. Japan (and most other older nations) has a shared ethnic and religious identity that goes back centuries or millennia, whereas America by definition doesn't really have that. Instead it's an amalgamation of all of the different people who live here. To me, "American culture" means going to downtown Mountain View, CA for dinner and getting to choose from dozens of amazing cuisines from all over the world (with varying degrees of authenticity, but still).
Even food/cultural artifacts/etc. which are strongly associated with America tend to be things brought here from other places and cultures and adapted to local tastes.
The "blood and soil" people are especially alarming to me because what they're most passionate about is attempting to retcon America into being based on religious/ethnic/geographic identity politics rather than what actually makes America somewhat unique and successful, which is simply the fact that it's based on ideas rather than tribalism, and was designed as a haven from tribalism in other countries.
I'm sure someone will read this and get all up in arms about the gazillion times America has done horrible things that went against the very ideals that I just described. Trust me, I know. I'm not trying to idealize everything and sweep that stuff under the rug. Every country has always and will always deviate from its own principles, but it falls on patriots (as opposed to nationalists) to do whatever they can to help steer it back in the right direction. Patriotism should be about fixing things when they go wrong, not "my country right or wrong".
I doubt Japanese culture will survive this century, but it is only seventy-odd years old.
If your panda bears are failing to breed, surely the solution is not to just import grizzly bears and pretend the panda bears never existed there? I guess it's a type of solution to the problem of "lack of bears", but is it really a good thing?
2. With regards to here, yes you're correct. If anything I should be calling the people in question out for using HN like Reddit (i.e. I downvote that which I disagree with).
Culture is not fixed at birth. People both adopt the surrounding culture and change it.
Fixing that problem by further overpopulating certain regions seems like a rather odd fix and mostly motivated by some kind of "genetic egoism" along the lines of "My genes are so great, can't have future humanity live without them!".
It is weird how you make it sound so bad and insulting. Do you want to suggest that we humans live for no other reason than to procreate?
Don't you think we, as a species, should be able to think a bit further ahead, instead of basing all our behavior and goals on procreating, like we are some kind of mindless virus?
Rabbits might not be sentient or "smart" enough to realize when they are overpopulating a region and having a negative impact on the environment. But we humans most certainly are "smart" enough to realize it, yet we still act like rabbits to it.
So the smart thing to do, as supposedly the "smartest beings on the planet", would be to come up with another, maybe even sustainable, reason for existing than merely "propagating ourselves" like there are no limits to those finite resources we are mostly wasting to do that, at least right now.
In those rare cases where we decide to agree to "live for bigger and more complex reasons" we often manage to build amazing things; Like whole Empires, a "Land of the free" or space stations zipping across the skies at 17.000 miles per hour. Imho that's one of the reasons why people like Elon Musk can have such an, sometimes nearly cult-like, impact: He offers visions for a "unified humanity goal" without using the clutches of religious dogma or much nationalistic fervor.
His ideas appeal because they still hold true to your original "biological cause" for existing: Colonizing Mars would be an epitomal achievement for "terrestrial life".
Wow, just wow. But I'll assume you're talking about the bigger picture of - if the country is to survive long term we'll need to have a higher birth rate, what could be done to encourage that. I'd say the first thing we have to do is get people off the economic treadmill. Stop encouraging people to pile on debt. When everyone is too busy trying to pay the rent there's a disincentive to have children.