Why so? There are so many influences and identities that people associate with in the modern age that cross national boundaries because of the level of interconnection. The differences that make up the daily lives (interactions with school, government etc), as I said, can come from different modern political systems. The culture that makes a major city unique can be relational to its location, but that is easily as varied within the US.

As an example, the awesome art scene in Berlin is certainly a highlight of the culture there. Artists may take influence from German history and make a uniquely German piece of modern art. Someone in the former Antebellum South could produce an equally unique piece of art about their history. These kind of uniquely cultural differences are equally distant to me personally. However, the broad daily occurrences could be uniquely similar. Get up, take the metro to work, read the paper, have lunch with your coworker, meet up with friends after, go to the cinema, have a drink, come home and play a video game (maybe even the same one).

There are of course also broad cultural aspects which don't apply which tend to be more politically oriented. A good example would be gun culture in Texas or protest culture in France. People in both places, however, can hold the views of another. There are plenty of Europeans who like the American outlook on economy and capitalism, while there are plenty of Americans who want a more European style with more days off. Those systems may have emerged from rooted cultural ideas but they have expanded beyond that to integrate with the political systems and economy.

My point on modern cities is, there are so many crossing aspects of culture that this notion of "not adopting your ancestors culture" goes out the window. In any decent modern city you can find food from anywhere on earth. You can listen to music from any genre. You can experience a multitude of cultures within the greater construct of that city's unique culture. The minor differences in attitudes and daily ritual for your average Parisian, which can absolutely be part of the culture, are as different to northern NJ as the daily rituals of someone in the deep South or near the beach in LA. Yes, historical events, in the long run, contributed to the modern culture of those areas. But this plays similarly to the notion of identifying with a heritage in America as the concept of "a nation of immigrants" plays so heavily in our culture. It is less about identifying with the modern culture of the city/nation, and identifying with the historical nature which shaped the uniquely modern American culture by that heritage.

That brings my original point full circle. Just because a French businessman thinks the American capitalist system is better, does that make him American? No. Does it make him any less French? No. People in these comments are confused/laugh at the concept of people identifying with a heritage and not adopting the culture. What does that even entail? Since I claim my heritage is Scottish, do I need to wear a kilt everyday and learn the bagpipes? Only eat haggis?

It is the nuance of "identity" between the American cultural aspect of looking at your heritage and having an understanding of it and the seemingly misinformed view by non-Americans who think we claim to be the same as those people. There is also level of belief in that identity which varies across the entire spectrum from person to person.