basis of ethnic background.” Groupnidentity has been drained of any largernmeaning, reduced to a label. Almostnthe only remaining ethnically homogeneousnorganizations are churches.nThe result of all this is that “ethnicity,nonce transmitted by a communalnweb enmeshing families, neighborhoods,nand informal networks, is nowndependent on the identities of individuals.nEthnic identity has becomen”Americanized,” no longer a given butna free assertion of individuality.nYet Alba finds that the voluntarynways in which people still define theirnethnic identity, such as ethnic cuisinenand traditions, the use of words ornphrases from an ancestral language,nvisits to an ancestral homeland, and sonon, turn out to be “symbolic assertionsnof little practical consequence … anfragile and thin layer alloyed to a largernbody of common American culture.”nMany respondents who initiallynclaimed that they kept ethnic traditionsnseemed unsure what those traditionsnwere. Only 25 percent had had six ornmore “ethnically defining” experiences,nwhile an equal percentage had hadnnone. Only 27 percent had discussedntheir ethnic background with their childrennduring the past five years.nNot surprisingly, ethnic identity isnmore important, or “salient,” amongn”new stock” Americans — Irish, Italians,nPoles — than “old stock” Americans—nthe Dutch, English, and Scotsnwhose ancestors arrived in the countrynbefore 1800. Among the groups of thenold stock, only 10 to 20 percent feelnethnic background is “very important”;namong those of the new, 40 percent.nThe 20 percent of whites who choosenno ethnic identity, describing themselvesnsimply as American, are mainlynof old stock, as are the one-third ofnAlba’s respondents who were unable tonidentify the ethnic identity of theirnspouse. The strong appeal of ethnicnidentity is seen in the fact that individualsnwho are mixtures of old and newnstock are more likely to identify asnItalians or Poles than as English ornScots, “despite the higher percentagenattached to early American origins.”nIn seeking to account for the persistingnattractiveness of ethnic identitynamong whites in the absence of traditionalnethnicity, Alba hardly mentionsnwhat may be the most obvious explana­ntion— the mounting numbers andnpower of nonwhite groups with highprofilenethnic identities. According tonthe “Diversity Project,” a study of studentnattitudes at the multiracial campusnof the University of California at Berkeley,nwhite students feel that not havingnan ethnic identity is a liability in a worldnwhere nonwhite students are “discoveringnand strengthening” their own identities.nWhiteness, the students indicated,nmeans “being without identity, withoutnculture, ‘without color.'” One studentnremarked:nMany whites don’t feel like theynhave an ethnic identity at allnand I pretty much feel that wayntoo. It’s not something thatnbothers me tremendously but Inthink that maybe I could benmissing something that othernpeople have, that I am notnexperiencing.nSuch considerations lend force to Alba’snmost interesting suggestion — that thenfunction of white ethnic identity todaynis to claim membership in a new ethnicngroup embracing all white Americans.nThe members of this newngroup do not define themselvesnsolely in termsnof an “American”nidentity. . . . Rather, theyncontinue to define themselves,nto some extent at least, in termsnof European points of origin.nBut, in contrast to the past, thendifferent European ancestriesnare not seen as the basis ofnimportant social divisions;ninstead, they create a potentialnfor social bonds having annethnic character, founded onnthe perception of similarnexperiences of immigration andnsocial mobility. This new groupncan be called, for lack of anbetter term, the “EuropeannAmericans.”nThe European Americans also fit thenthree classic criteria of an ethnic group:nthey define themselves in terms ofncommon history {i.e., European origin,nimmigration, assimilation, and upwardnmobility); membership in the group isna badge of “social honor” by virtue ofnsymbolic participation in that history;nand the group is a carrier of economicnor political interests.nnnHowever, Alba sees the European-nAmerican identity less as a carrier ofnparochial interests than as a model ofnassimilation for today’s Third Woddnimmigrants. “The thrust of European-nAmerican identity is to defend thenindividualistic view of the Americannsystem,” portraying the society as opennto those who work hard and pull themselvesnup. The assimilation of Europeannimmigrants then becomes the newnnational ideal, preserving what is bestnin America by defining “a prototypicalnAmerican experience, against whichnnon-European minority groups . . .nare pressured to measure themselves.”nThe fatal flaw in Alba’s theory isnthat it ignores a key component ofncultural assimilation — the adoption ofnthe historical heritage of the host peoplenas one’s own. As Renan said, annation is defined not by blood ties asnsuch but by a shared historical memorynand a common heritage. If the influencenof the new stock Americans hasnresulted in the immigration story supplantingnthe Founding heritage as thendefinitive American idea, then to thatnextent, cultural assimilation has failed.nIt was once thought that assimilationnmeant becoming an American, whichnincluded identifying with Americann(and Western) history and its prototypicalnfigures; now Alba tells us thatnassimilation only means becomingnHomo economicus. Immigration, alongnwith an attenuated view of assimilationnthat encourages the maintenance ofnancestral identities, thus becomes thencentral American idea.nAnd as we all should know by now,nit is only one small step from then”Nation of Immigrants” to the “UniversalnNation” — a radical redefinitionnof America that mandates perpetualnopen borders and cultural suicide. “Diversity,”na vacuous concept that clearsnthe way for every sort of ethnic imperialismnand separatism, replaces thenFounding tradition along with thenAnglo-American virtues which thatntradition honors. In the final analysis,nthe secular sanctification of the immigrantnstory, far from serving the cohesivenand normative role that RichardnAlba envisions for it, may only benleading the way to the ultimate submergencenof both the Anglo-Americannand the European-American culturalnidentities in this country.n<^nMARCH 1991/33n