No. That is very much not a legal or even sociological definition. There are plenty of people who live and work in America who have other nationalities and would prefer to not be considered American, even. A lot of Americans (I am one, before you assume something else) have a weird complex where they think everyone wants to be them. But that is very, very wrong to assume.
The original commenter says America is for Americans (assuming they mean citizens) and I was trying to point out that not all Americans are born in America.
I did not intend to imply that everyone wants to be an American.
The people who live here have a right, first and foremost, to opportunities. If they are vocally and statistically proving that opportunities are bad right now, the H1B needs to be pulled for their sake. It can be put back once balance has been achieved.
> Anyone living, working, or otherwise contributing to society in America is an American.
Absolutely not. If I export my new invention to Europe and it changes society, I am contributing to European society, but I am not European. If I take a visa to Europe and start doing contract work illegally, I am not European.
Because sometimes people need to be saved, because the current system is actually broken, unfair, and inordinately stressful.
Populism is the normal population yelling "you forgot about us." Nothing more. Where it goes from there, depends on the politicians grasping that fact, and what they offer as a solution. This is also why populists win - their clientele doesn't feel like they have much to lose; while the competing politician is yelling about abstract global principles and norms and basically saying "your situation is unfortunate, screw you; you don't get it, idiot; pull yourself up, bootstraps!"
Edit for reply: > Populism creates problems or do not solve them in order to exist.
This is just upper class elitism with a thin veneer. Upper classes have constantly, always accused the lower classes of exaggerating their problems; and have constantly, always accused those claiming to address those problems as making them up. It's also a defense mechanism - because it lets you conveniently accuse the lower classes of voting in Mr. Mustache while washing your hands of any responsibility, because the problems were made up and people are gullible, obviously.
Populism creates problems or do not solve them in order to exist. That's why there is a need to create "the enemy".
That is exactly why people tolerate to-be-dictators like the evil-mustache guy. People needs to be afraid. Populism depends on fearmongering.
This is why people like the evil-mustache German guy was able to work on his platform to have absolute powers.
Why is this unique to Populism? Most forms of power or organizations in general rely on there being a problem to solve.
Not an answer but an appendix. There is common misconceptions on the definition of politics. For the masses politics means to define policies through negotiation and prioritisation. For politicians, it means something related to exert political power.
Using the power definition of politics, it still seems to me that because the ability to exert power is only given when there is a need to be solved, a (for example) plutocrat has a similar incentive not to solve problems as a populist, and would be similarly likely to not be effective. I suppose an explanation that's consistent with both perspectives is that political leaders in general are not effective.
It said "Homeland Security: Fighting Terrorism Since 1492".
Anyone living, working, or otherwise contributing to society in America can become an American.
> America exists for the sake of Americans, not the world, first and foremost. ... opportunity for foreigners [...] exceeding opportunity for [...] people born here, and that is a legitimate injustice.
That is IMO an un-American statement. America is, in theory, the land of opportunity. Not only for the "right kind of people".