English vs. Spanish

arbilad · Head Chef

English vs. Spanish

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

If English was good enough for God in the Book of Mormon, it's good enough for everybody!

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

I agree with you Arbilad. But, this is simply the free-market system at work. Companies are trying to tap into the ever increasing Latin market.

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

I do object to government agencies spending our tax $s printing various forms and signs in Spanish, but years ago when we lived in Germany I noticed many signs and forms were printed in several languages to accomodate the many foreigners in the country. Other countries arre doing the same, though perhaps to a lesser extent. A private person or company has the right to staff positions with people who understand and speak Spanish, whether it enhances their business or not. As bokbadok said, that's the free market at work.

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

From Arbilad:

Even if you're here legally and are entitled to stay, assimilate into the culture!

Arbi, in your view, what is "the culture" of America, and why is "assimilation" desirable?

I would argue that our culture is and should be based more upon the principle of accomodation rather than assimilation. Most people who do not have English as their first language will learn it in time: It's a requirement of our education system and necessary for survival in the U.S. Until they do gain fluency, what is the harm in providing for them content in their first language?

Anecdotal, I know: I recently participated on a project to print tens of thousands of our city's "Citizens Emergency Preparedness Guide" in Spanish and Vietnamese. We spent tens of thousands of government grant money to do so. To me, it's a good thing to have more of our citizens understand the basics of preparedness in their own language.

Another point to think about: Popultaion studies show that in all of the ethnic groups that make up this wonderful country, the birth rate continues to decline. There is one exception: That large lumped-together group we call Latino, who have Spanish as their first language and who continue to have children at over double the rate of other ethnic groups. Some studies suggest that if birthrate and immigration trends continue, Spanish will be the first language of the majority of people in the US within 50 years. Should our grandchildren be required to "assimilate" into the dominant American "culture" at that point?

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

So, spanish language has a direct correlation to fertility and birth rates?

In that case, the pro-choice crowd needs to get on board to promote english as the language for well, dealing with family planning.

All our non-english speaking ancestors who came to this country ended up having to learn English and live in an English speaking nation... so too can the immigrants of today.

arbilad · Head Chef

So, Roper, are you advocating that the offspring of the Spanish speaking peoples also learn only Spanish? Also, I don't agree with your assertion that learning English is inevitable for them. In many locations, now, you can get your education from kindergarten to 12th grade entirely in Spanish.
If the offspring of the spanish speaking people were to learn English in addition to Spanish, even if they didn't learn it as their first language, English would remain the primary language of this country. Even if they become the majority, they need to communicate with the other ethnic groups. Or are you suggesting we all learn Spanish to accomodate them?
English is the lingua franca of the US. It unites us. When we try to do everything in as many languages as possible, it divides us. United we stand, divided we fall.
And there are countless examples of Spanish speaking persons who never learn English. They stay in their insulated community and never feel the need to learn English.
Not to mention that, even if, for some reason, the government were to mandate that we all start speaking and communicating in Spanish tomorrow, the process would be slow and painful. The amount of new communication created every day in this country is staggering. Even as I complain about how much is in both Spanish and English now, the bare fact is that to fully effect a bilingual policy would require vast, staggering resources. And that's for new communications. We'd hardly be able to touch on translating the vast quantity of English language documents that existed before such a policy or eventual shift went into effect. People who only speak Spanish are cut off from a vast wealth of past experience and history about this country. Without a knowledge of the history of the country you live in, and the opportunity to research facts for yourself, you are ill equipped to help safeguard the freedoms of your country.
I've witnessed a shift from one language to another. In Ukraine they decided to make the official language Ukrainian after the Soviet Union fell apart. It has been a slow and painful transition, and is far from over even though it has been underway for almost 15 years now. And that is with a large portion of the native population knowing how to speak the language.
If they learn English, it will only help them. If they only know Spanish, it will hurt all of us, including them.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

yesterday, as a ward missionary, I was wishing I could speak spanish so bad...

Learn spanish people. Stop whining... It won't kill you.

--Ray

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Nein. Ich mag sehr jammern.
Für alles sonst, gibt es Babel Fish...

I propose implantation of a Universal Translator (or is it Translater... hmmm do I want them to become translated beings or to understand the words coming out of their mouth...) under the skin of all non-English speakers (and perhaps any English speaker who mumbles or I can't understand as well). That shall be the first move towards assimilation of all mankind into the collective... bwa-ha-ha...

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

Amperestunde ja, löst das alles.

arbilad · Head Chef

rayb wrote:

yesterday, as a ward missionary, I was wishing I could speak spanish so bad...

Learn spanish people. Stop whining... It won't kill you.

--Ray

Neither will it kill you to learn Russian. Your state, if I remember correctly, has a large Russian population. Granted, many more Russian immigrants choose to learn English, so it's not as big as a problem. But why should they be denied the benefit of being taught in their own language?
How about it, Ray? Are you willing to commit to learning both Spanish and Russian, as well as any other language you may conceivably have a need for in your calling as Ward Missionary?

Mattai · Member

Hey Ray, are you helping out the new Spanish Branch in Kent or are they going to need one in Maple Valley, too?

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

We may need a spanish branch shortly.

A buddy of mine told me a funny story yesterday. He speaks spanish, and when he ordered a milk at a coffeeshop when all his coworkers went out for Lattes, and when he could speak spanish to the barista, the barista knew instantly that he was mormon. They had a lengthy conversation about life and the church, turns out many of the baristas who sell you your coffee in the Redmond area, at least, were all Mormons!

I can just imagine what they're thinking, serving coffee all day, yet thinking it's a sinful beverage... Hee hee...

It's weird though that there are these "shadow mormons" in the area. I really wish I had a better link to them, because many of our neighbors are Latinos living in our area, many of which don't speak English well. I'd love to be able to learn Spanish better. (I speak Italian, and I don't imagine it'd be that different.)

--Ray

noel · Veteran Member

Ray,

If choices were based on what "would not kill me", we could find many situations which I believe you would object to.

The issue of assimilation carries with it an intrinsic affirmation. "Latinos" come to the ( culturally assimilated) United States due to the environmental/cultural advantages offered by the shift. They degrade those "cultural" paradigms the minute they set law aside to suck at the teats of an increasingly socialized state. Facilitating the use of Spanish undercuts assimilation, and the very benefits which attract illegals (primarily Spanish speakers).

Unhampered immigration, and socialism, are wholly incompatable. Insist on one or the other. A nation can not sustain both.

(edited for anatomical correctness)

-- Edited by noel at 13:51, 2006-09-14

Spotted Horse · Veteran Member

noel wrote:

Unhampered immigration, and socialism, are wholly incompatable. Insist on one or the other. A nation can not sustain both.

I'll cast my vote for... neither!

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

noel wrote:

Unhampered immigration, and socialism, are wholly incompatable. Insist on one or the other. A nation can not sustain both.

Our nation can sustain neither and remain a free nation... Both are wholely incompatible... with each other as well as the principles of rule of law and liberty.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

They degrade those "cultural" paradigms the minute they set law aside to suck at the tits of an increasingly socialized state.

Are we allowed to say "tits" in this forum? My mommy said that was a disrespectful word. "Boobies" is a much nicer word, and makes us all smile.

As for your supposition, Noel, I cry "BOOOO!! Booo!!! Bow! Bow! To her! Bow to your queen! The queen of filth! The queen of muck! The queen of putresence!"

Same arguments were used against massive hordes immigration of Irish and other europeans.

If anything, immigrations laws, as imposed in later years, are laws by immigrants to guarantee they get exclusive access to the Government's boobies.

--Ray

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

If we must reference mammary glands--and I sincerely hope that it will be very rare to do so--let us please at least use words that indicate non-human physiology. Teats, for example, would be a preferrable term to either of the terms thus used in this thread.

--bok, speaking as back-up moderator, and not a regular person

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Well, there was another discussion... hmmm which one was it... the one about mid-term elections and gas prices, where I mentioned the CEO was off on his yacht eating cavier and pea**** eggs, and the second half of the name of that bird was censored.

Yes, I'm glad that someone else noticed the use of this word which was not censored, for it was indeed used anatomically correctly, and not part of another word that is the proper name for a species of bird.

{Cat Herder speaking as individual and as member of moderation committee}

I don't mind the bleeping of specific words, as it can actually be quite comical at times (kind of like watching Patton in the Varsity Theatre at BYU), but perhaps we need more due diligence for consistency in what makes the list and how the filter is applied. We didn't pick up a used Varsity Theatre dubbing package, did we?

-- Edited by Cat Herder at 14:38, 2006-09-12

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Bleep me! Bleep me! You know I'm begging to be bleeped!

Not to derail this thread any further (:eyeroll:), but what is the level of comfort with say certain topics... I tend to be comfortable with level 5. But for the sake of the ladies, perhaps we should all back off to maybe a level 3?

mammary glands

breasts

teats

cha-chas

boobies

tits

Any objections?

So what about my really salient on-topic point about the Irish!?

--Ray

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Let's take it to level 0 and bleep any reference to female gender...

Or maybe level -1 and bleep any reference to gender at all... we could then really be in synch with those progressive european nations that have the unisex public restrooms.

Can't hear you on the statement about the Irish, cuz Michael Flately and his step dancers have just entered the stage for a stirring rendition of Lord of The Dance... (sorry, this is the closest thing we have to an Irish step dance emoticon... Arbi, is there anything we can do about that? )

Rocinante · Member

Learn spanish people. Stop whining... It won't kill you.

Learning spanish is good. Learning the main language of the country is better.
My DIL speaks very limited english. When she worked, all those about her spoke spanish. At home, they speak spanish. When she goes outside, people around her speak english.

She wants to become an ob nurse. Her spanish will be a great asset, but only if she can first speak english. Long years ago, when ESL was first picking up speed, there was a quote that supposedly came from a latino immigrant, "They want our children to learn in Spanish, so they can become maids and day laborers. I want them to learn English so that they can become doctors and lawyers.

You can learn a language in classes or with books, tapes and videos. But, you will never be fluent. You become fluent by using the language, by living in it. Isn't that why immersion programs are so sucessful?

I once lived in Germany, in an american ghetto. Yes, I learned some german - but, because I lived in an english speaking environment and when I went out, people were more than willing to speak english and I was willing to let them - I never became fluent. My shyness and their willingness to accomidate me prevented me from one of the greatest experiences - experiencing their culture in their language.

In short, you do your friends no favors by speaking their language. You open a world by encouraging them to use English.

arbilad · Head Chef

Cat Herder wrote:

Let's take it to level 0 and bleep any reference to female gender...

Or maybe level -1 and bleep any reference to gender at all... we could then really be in synch with those progressive european nations that have the unisex public restrooms.

Can't hear you on the statement about the Irish, cuz Michael Flately and his step dancers have just entered the stage for a stirring rendition of Lord of The Dance... (sorry, this is the closest thing we have to an Irish step dance emoticon... Arbi, is there anything we can do about that? )

I can see about just turning the filter off. It was automatically set up, and just contained a few words. I didn't add any words, nor did I think that some of the words could be part of legitimate words, such as pea****, so I didn't bother to turn it off.

arbilad · Head Chef

peacock peacock peacock

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

I'm okay with a filter. I think turning it off is a cockemamy idea!

--Ray

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Why can't we all just get along? We could all speak Spanglish!

--Raymbrero

noel · Veteran Member

"So what about my salient on-topic point about the Irish?"...Ray, am I to understand that Irish is a foreign tongue to be included in government documents, and public schools?

The "New Deal" post-dates the last Irish immigration surge (of many) by more than 40 years. There was not much in the way of a public teat (Pig teat) until Roosevelt's programs had thirty years to mature into the full blown Sow we know, and love today.

Which would you prefer? Liberal immigration laws, or a socialist state? We cannot do both, and the Irish did not come for the latter.

(edited for anatomical correctness)

-- Edited by noel at 13:53, 2006-09-14

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

"In short, you do your friends no favors by speaking their language. You open a world by encouraging them to use English."

Well said. Of course, that assumes that the individuals want to assimilate into the melting pot of the Great American Expiriment in the first place. And I don't doubt that most people who come here to do that work on learning English and use it wherever possible outside the home.

"the Irish did not come for the latter"

Aye, laddie! They came to bring us their love for celtic music and Riverdance...

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Well, it was a good thing that all those Irish got into the country before we decided to stop accepting the huddled masses...

--Ray

arbilad · Head Chef

rayb wrote:

Well, it was a good thing that all those Irish got into the country before we decided to stop accepting the huddled masses...

--Ray

Did you know that we still accept the huddled masses? Many, many legal immigrants come in. Heck, we even have a visa lottery program to let in as many as we feel we can absorb.

noel · Veteran Member

Cat,

Celtic music, Riverdance, and Politics!

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

arbilad wrote:

rayb wrote:

Well, it was a good thing that all those Irish got into the country before we decided to stop accepting the huddled masses...

--Ray

Did you know that we still accept the huddled masses? Many, many legal immigrants come in. Heck, we even have a visa lottery program to let in as many as we feel we can absorb.

Bingo! Why do so many people seem to think that we have cut off immigrants from coming legally into this country? You would think that the only immigrants coming into this country were coming illegally from south of the border.

As a business owner in the great state of Mexifornia I can tell you that not speaking English = Poverty. If you do not speak english it is very difficult to get a good paying job or be promoted. I get people who apply all the time who have great looking resumes but when they get in for the interview they don't understand my questions, can't answer the questions, or give an answer that is totally not related to the question I asked. On the other hand if you are Bi-lingual you have an advantage over someone who just speaks english.

Immigrants (legal or otherwise) who cannot speak the langage put themselves and their children at an extreme disadvantage. We had a young man in our ward with a heart of gold who only spoke spanish. He was a hard worker but could not get a job other than basic manual labor. He went on a mission to an English speaking country and came back still with very limited but improving. As he stayed in the area though his English never got better. Why? Because he didn't have to communicate in English here. He never advanced from his basic low wage job. Finally he moved to Utah and is doing much better. He is in an area where he has to survive using more English than Spanish.

California is loaded with ghetto like communities rife with crime, poverty, and no future because they are poor farming towns. The people who live there can live their lives speaking only Spanish. The stores, government services, schools, etc can all do business in Spanish so they aren't forced to learn. 30 people in a one bedroom house. Not learning English makes it so these families never able to improve their situation for themselves and their families because of a language barrier. The difference between the foreman on the farm and the minimum wage worker is almost always language. I have met foreman who could not read in either language but they could speak english as well as their native spanish so they got the promotion.

Even if there is a large population of spanish speakers in 50 years, they will be living in poverty if they don't speak english. English is not just the language of the U.S. and Britain, it is the language of international commerce. Those call centers and manufacturing facilities aren't moving to India because they only speak Hindu. They speak English and are educated. The manufacturers I sell for are scaling back or closing their NAFTA facilities in Mexico because they can't get enough people with enough skills and education in Mexico to run the plants. Even there, those that speak some English are a premium. Many Europeans speak English. English is spoken on nearly every continent due to the influence of the British Empire. Are we being mean or racist for asking those who come to this country to learn the language?

I can only guess that those who are against immigrants learning English want them to stay underfoot and poor. Why else would there be so much resistance to learning a shared language? When any proposal is made to have an official langage or to limit government business to be conducted in English there is a cry of racism. Is it racist to require children to learn english in our schools instead of allowing them to do their classes in their native tonge? What good is a highschool diploma for a young man or woman who cannot speak English.

This country was formed by a rebellion against another country. The people that formed the new nation spoke english, their history was english up to that point. Over time others came and the nation expanded. The Irish came, the Welch came, Italians, French, Portuguese, Dutch, and others. They brought they unique culture but learned English. It wasn't racist to learn english. They needed it to survive.

Not knowing english in this country is an economic death sentence. It also influences the health and well being of the people who do not speak english. To not do everything in our power to encourage them to learn the langage is cruel and smacks of elitism and classism.

bokbadok · Senior Bucketkeeper

What an interesting perspective on this whole immigration/language issue. Thanks for contributing, Jason.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Well said, Jason.

Some very valid points concerning real impact that too often are either ignored or usually not even known by all the folks making the noise in the political rhetoric arguments on TV and in the media.

I think everyone can benefit from taking on this paradigm. We want and encourage people to come and become a part of our nation, legally of course, and we want them to succeed. In order for them to succeed, they need to have some certain basic skill sets... including a minimum level of english language proficiency (either inherent or acquired).

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

I guess that education in Texas is different than in other border states. It's not possible for anyone to graduate from a public high school in Texas without demonstrating literacy competence in English (reading, writing, speaking.)

Current research in bilingual education strongly supports the idea that students perform better in the long run if they still receive content instruction in their first language while learning English. For example: A student whose first language is Spanish will fare much better academically learning History, Science, etc. in Spanish while learning English. When we force "total immersion," we may gain a few months in English literacy, but we lose a several months in every other subject. Current linguistic research rejects the efficacy of total immersion. I know, I was a missionary who did it, so I have anecdotal evidence as well. But that kind of learning is simply no longer supported as the most effective way to acquire another language.

From another persepective: Most of my father's ancestral lines begin in Blackfoot and Cherokee tribes. All ya'll freakin' Europeans should be speaking the language of my fathers. You murdered their language and culture when you murdered them, and forced my people who survived to speak the language and assimilate into the culture of the invaders. So let's all dismount from our high horses, shall we?

noel · Veteran Member

Roper,

I did not realize this topic had a personal aspect for you, and I do not mean to give offense...but the Cherokee were about the only Native American Nation that had advanced far enough to form what Europeans (your maternal half) would classify as the fundamentals of civilized society.

The balance of native american tribes were not really up to the challenge of polylingual education, or "education" at all for that matter.

The native culture vanished because they were essentially a nomadic stone age people that went to war with a flourishing early industrialized society. The end was very predictible, and the Book of Mormon does not seem to take issue with the outcome.

As an aside, how many languages would you be willing to accomodate to avoid the putative "immersion" drawback? Assuming everything you say is vindicated, at what price should the "new native americans" abandon facilitating this "invasion"?

-- Edited by noel at 23:21, 2006-09-15

arbilad · Head Chef

Roper, which do you think is better, being a few months behind on your academic lessons, but later in life being able to earn more than subsistence wages, or being up to grade in all subjects but English, but you'll never be able to get a job in anything other than menial labor because you never really learned English?
Immersion programs are, by and large, the only real way to become fluent in English. Jason illustrated that beautifully. I have seen this too; unless you associate with people every day in English, you're never going to become fluent. There are exceptions. One of the Russian teachers in the MTC when I was there had learned Russian entirely in college, and not by living amongst Russian speakers. But he was exceptionally gifter in languages. Most people are not that gifted, and are entirely incapable of learning the language just from ESL class in school.
So, they may stay up to date in their academic subjects, but they will never get a good job because of their English. Does it really hurt them that much to put them behind in their subjects a few months, but give them a real chance at a future?

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

noel wrote:

but the Cherokee were about the only Native American Nation that had advanced far enough to form what Europeans (your maternal half) would classify as the fundamentals of civilized society.

Well, not really... don't forget the Choctaw, or the Iroquois, or the Delaware.

Here's the ironic thing about it too... those tribes or Native American Nations that were viewed as "civilized" by the Europeans were also those that for the most part decided to ally themselves with the Europeans for the most part and/or willingly adopted European cultural and assimilated into as best they could and were spared much of the hatemonger fallout. The ones who didn't were the ones who were viewed as the epitomy of backwards savages and ended up causing the hatemongers to always end up with the upper hand (in both European and Native American circles).

Oh, and as to European's assimilating language from Native Americans... well, back here in the east, particularly in the Great Lakes area, lots and lots of place names are actually Native American words from the various tribes that lived in the area. So, it did happen kind of...

Roper and Arbilad, I don't think anyone here has requested or insisted upon total immersion from an educational standpoint. I think most reasonable people will agree that one can't learn total immersion cold turkey if there are not some other mitigating factors... e.g. for we who serve / served foreign speaking missions, we are given the gift of tongues and therefore, regardless of an individual's high school or college language experience, they are able to learn quickly how to communicate effectively. That same gift does not apply to everyone off the street. I agree with both concepts that have been presented.

First, the 'Is it really harmful to the student if they are behind a few months' due to the language curve? My question is if that is "No Child Left Behind" speaking. In theory, any student, regardless of language barrior, is supposed to be on the same metrics for advancement based on academics. Kids are held back due to performance all the time...

Second, Academics can be done bilingually, but is that the metric being measured? How far behind are they educationally to begin with? Are they on the equivalent level as their English speaking counterparts here, or are we placing them based on age? Too often, I think the bilingual aspect becomes we have a majority of students who do not speak English as their native language, so we'll just hold class in their native language instead of going from native language to English as a part of the class. A steady and graduated approach to x% native language and x% in English, the former getting smaller and the latter getting larger as a function of time... Otherwise, the result ends up being much like having German or Spanish or Japanese or Italian or Latin or Russian language classes in high school or college being conducted solely in English.

Now, the importance in total immersion can not be negated, even if educators do not like the approach. For foreign speaking missionaries, when was it that you finally felt you had a good handle on the language? For me, it was when I began to think conceptually in the language, not just rattle off a few memorized words / phrases. It was not until after being in total immersion for a while that I made that break-thru and not only could speak, but understand what was being said to me and think in similar patterns as native speakers.

And guess what... total immersion is even used to varying degrees for special-ed too!

arbilad · Head Chef

Cat, I will have to respectfully disagree that total, immediate immersion can't be effective. It's used all the time in schools - for those children unlucky enough to not be part of the privileged class of children that speak Spanish.
My son came to the US with his mom (now my wife) knowing pretty much no English at all. He started kindergarten and was soon speaking decent English. In a year, you weren't able to tell that he was Ukrainian. The school had absolutely no Russian language instruction. Later, when he was having behavior problems they did a language evaluation to see if the fact that English was a second language for him was the problem. He was at grade level as far as language skills. Now that he's homeschooled (in English almost entirely) his language skills are even better.
Anyway, my point is that he was quickly able to adapt to the language, despite absolutely no Russian instruction in school. Granted, he is intelligent. But he has also so far not shown any aptitude at all to learning other languages.
And my son is not an isolated example. Many couples adopt Russian children. Those children do not even have the advantage of a parent who speaks both languages fluently. Yet they pick up on the language very quickly in almost all cases.

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

Once again, I think some clarification is in order: I'm not familiar with bilingual education in other states, but I can speak with some knowledge about Texas (I'll be finishing my ESL certification in Elementary Ed this year.)

The goal of bilingual ed, at least in Texas, is fluency in English. Therefore, content is taught in both languages in the early grades (K-2) with a transition to exclusively English by grades three and four.

I have a minor in linguistics and was a firm supporter of total immersion--fifteen years ago, because the research showed that total immersion yielded adequate proficiency in the target language in the shortest amount of time. Adequate proficiency in the shortest time is no longer the goal. Our ESL students must be as fluent in English as their native-English peers--they have to demonstrate the same competency on standardized tests. Total immersion is no longer the best tool for that kind of fluency. The current research supports the concept that a graduated approach, with content instruction in the first language, yields more adept English-as-a-second-language speakers, in all areas of literacy--reading, writing, listening, and speaking.

Additionally, total immersion has negative political implications that I hinted at toungue-in-cheek in my previous post: When you don't allow children to communicate in their first language, you kill a big part of their culture and heritage. That's political suicide in a border state. The word "assimilate" has similar connotations. Am I the only one that thinks of the Borg?

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

Roper wrote:

Additionally, total immersion has negative political implications that I hinted at toungue-in-cheek in my previous post: When you don't allow children to communicate in their first language, you kill a big part of their culture and heritage. That's political suicide in a border state. The word "assimilate" has similar connotations. Am I the only one that thinks of the Borg?

Oh please, comparing cultural assimilation in the U.S. to the Borg? You have got to be kidding. We are not talking about stripping anyone's culture or identity away but about giving them a chance in life.

This last spring was the first in California that highschool students were required to pass an exit exam in the very basics. Basically a low ninth grade level. The kids had remedial classes to help them pass the test and were able to take it multiple times. The majority of the students who finally did not pass were.......those who had poor English skills because they hadn't been able to learn the language. Should we let them take the test in their native language, give them a highschool diploma, and send them out into the world. Hello povertyville!

So what did they do? They sued saying the test was racist because those who speak english do better on the test. Well hello? These were kids who had been here for years and had passed all their other classes and requirments including Bi-Lingual Instruction programs and classes.

As for the Native American tribes,

Most of the eastern U.S. tribes suffered heavilly because they were notorious at picking the wrong side. In the French and Indian War those tribes that chose the French got whooped up even after the war by those who sided with the British. When the American Revolution started the majority of tribes fought on the side of the British. Those that didn't go to Canada after the war stayed and continued to fight. They lost. Other tribes that were against westward expansion lost. Sorry to sound imperialistic but they got beat by technologically superior enemies and by eachother. How did you wipe out your enemy? You helped the white man's soldiers kill them. Was it brutal and ugly? You bet. There were brutal acts by both sides such as the Cherry Valley Massacre, Bradocks Defeat, or the Fort William Henry Massacre. My ancestors came here in the 1600s. I don't apologize for what happened to the native peoples because there was plenty of bad things going on with both sides committing atrocities. It was war, in a very hostile environment. People were fighting for resources in a very different time. It wasn't about cultural extermination although there were attempts to do that after the various tribes were defeated. It was about victory at all costs. It was about survival. I am not an apologist for those who are long dead. Those that did the bad things must pay the price. The idea though of some nobel savages living in a garden of eden like oasis until the evil colonists came is a bunch of hooey. Yea they had to learn the language but so what? Do you realize how many times Europe has been overrun and conquered? How many times people have had to learn a new language and culture just in the UK? First there was the Romans, then the Vikings, then the Saxons, then the Angles, then the French, the the on and on and on. This victim bull gets old. The tribes of the U.S. were not the first native peoples in the world to be defeated and be forced to learn a new language and culture. Sorry Roper, dig deeper into European history and you might see that what happened to your ancestors isn't unique in the history of the world or to people of color.

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

I'm sorry I even brought up the history of Native Americans. Every time I engage in a debate about it, I come away saddened. Yes, they engaged in warfare against a vastly superior invading force and lost, Noel. Yes, they committed atrocities in warfare as all societies who go to war do. And yes, Jason, I too studied European history. I learned that the surest way to destroy a culture is to supplant the language of the people. That still doesn't justify the fact that we lost a rich cultural heritage because of our treatment of the Native Americans.

For myself, I enjoy the (dare I use the word) diversity of modern America. I'm proud to live in a country that at least makes an attempt to accomodate the cultures of people from all over the world. I firmly believe that any kind of meaningful contribution as a citizen of this country demands competency in English. I just disagree with the methods proposed so far--I don't think total immersion and assimilation gets us the kind of patriotic and contributing citizen we hope our immigrants become.

-- Edited by Roper at 19:41, 2006-09-18

-- Edited by Roper at 19:44, 2006-09-18

noel · Veteran Member

Roper,

I did not intend to sadden you with my comments. My ancestry is Swedish. I am proud of that, and have transmitted this regard for ancestry to my children.

My progenitors knew that something would be lost in immigrating to America. Much of their culture continues within the family, but it is of the variety that transfers through parental values, and perceptions...not that which comes by waving the flag of an alien nation, or preference for a foreign tongue. The gains to be had by "total immersion" convinced most, not all, of our family to remain "American". (Some returned to Sweden, we still communicate.)

To be an American is to assimilate.

We are of many races, and creeds. The only thing which unites us is a common belief in the primacy of liberty (for all), and the willingness to take enormous personal risk in betterment of the individual. There is a precondition to assimilation, ie, there must be something to assimilate into. Multiculturalism, diversity, "salad bowl" thinking is anti-assimilation, and therefore anti-American...not in the perjorative sense, but in practical application.

The "Borg" compel uniformity, the American experiment invites self-expansion and actualization. The difference could not be more stark.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

it's a world of laughter, a world or tears
its a world of hopes, its a world of fear
theres so much that we share
that its time we're aware
its a small world after all

its a small world after all
its a small world after all
its a small world after all
its a small, small world

There is just one moon and one golden sun
And a smile means friendship to everyone.
Though the mountains divide
And the oceans are wide
It's a small small world
:sing"

its a small world after all
its a small world after all
its a small world after all
its a small, small world

--Ray

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! NOT THAT SONG. MUST NOT PLAY THAT SONG OVER AND OVER IN MY HEAD! ARGH! IT'S TOO LATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

it's a world of laughter, a world or tears
its a world of hopes, its a world of fear
theres so much that we share
that its time we're aware
its a small world after all

its a small world after all
its a small world after all
its a small world after all
its a small, small world

There is just one moon and one golden sun
And a smile means friendship to everyone.
Though the mountains divide
And the oceans are wide
It's a small small world
:sing"

its a small world after all
its a small world after all
its a small world after all
its a small, small world

--Ray

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

ARGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOT AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OH THE HORROR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! MAKE HIM STOP, PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

noel · Veteran Member

What has the world come to when cues are taken from a Disney ride?

(I like the visuals though Ray.)

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

It's my most powerful argument yet, for encouraging "immigrant love"... shall I sing it again!?

--Ray

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

rayb wrote:

It's my most powerful argument yet, for encouraging "immigrant love"... shall I sing it again!?

--Ray

NO, PLEASE, I'M BEGGING YOU, STOP THE MADNESS! NO MORE! I GIVE UP! YOU WIN! I'LL GLADLY PAY TO MAKE IT STOP! THIS IS WORSE THAN GITMO!