Why I am Afraid for America

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

Senator Obama won this election with broad support from all segments of American society, he even won a majority of the vote among families with incomes over $200,000 a year and he clearly won among lower income, and minorities. No doubt the reasons vary from the obvious among African Americans to the super wealthy with perhaps a sense of guilt.

The overwhelming reason I believe was simply that people were fed up with the current administration and were so afraid of the economy they indeed wanted change. Only time and the next election will tell.

But why I am afraid for America is the growing segmentation of our society. The paper today carries a large picture of a person holding a sign reading “Latinos for Obama. The story includes this quote from a 30 year old who recently became a citizen and voted for the first time and who said she had gone to the polls, “For us to count here as Hispanics, “ For “us as “Hispanics?

If there is us is there them, isn’t the them supposed to be Americans?

The fact I am referring to Hispanics is not the point, the true point and worry is that America is in fact, beginning to segment into the us and them, like the Arabs and Jews both Israeli citizens, the Catholics and the Protestants in Ireland, the Serbs and the Croatians, the Kurds and the Sunnis.

Of course, there are always segments to a society, but the moment America positions itself into segments first and on a permanent basis; the beginning of the end has arrived. The moment blocks of Americans vote because they believe they can achieve something for “us, the strength of America wanes.

The vision of a young man in a crowed shouting at the speaker, “I live in America, I work in America, I go to school in America, but I will never be an American haunts me to this day.

I have a photo in my office of a store at the turn of the century with a sign in the window that reads, “ Help Wanted – Irish Need Not Apply It reminds me that not everyone was always welcome. But while I am proud to have an Irish (and German and English and Swedish) heritage, all my ancestors wanted to become Americans, not to count in America as Irish. :-1

[Bryn Mawr]

QUINNSCOMMENTARY;1047589 wrote: Senator Obama won this election with broad support from all segments of American society, he even won a majority of the vote among families with incomes over $200,000 a year and he clearly won among lower income, and minorities. No doubt the reasons vary from the obvious among African Americans to the super wealthy with perhaps a sense of guilt.

The overwhelming reason I believe was simply that people were fed up with the current administration and were so afraid of the economy they indeed wanted change. Only time and the next election will tell.

But why I am afraid for America is the growing segmentation of our society. The paper today carries a large picture of a person holding a sign reading “Latinos for Obama. The story includes this quote from a 30 year old who recently became a citizen and voted for the first time and who said she had gone to the polls, “For us to count here as Hispanics, “ For “us as “Hispanics?

If there is us is there them, isn’t the them supposed to be Americans?

The fact I am referring to Hispanics is not the point, the true point and worry is that America is in fact, beginning to segment into the us and them, like the Arabs and Jews both Israeli citizens, the Catholics and the Protestants in Ireland, the Serbs and the Croatians, the Kurds and the Sunnis.

Of course, there are always segments to a society, but the moment America positions itself into segments first and on a permanent basis; the beginning of the end has arrived. The moment blocks of Americans vote because they believe they can achieve something for “us, the strength of America wanes.

The vision of a young man in a crowed shouting at the speaker, “I live in America, I work in America, I go to school in America, but I will never be an American haunts me to this day.

I have a photo in my office of a store at the turn of the century with a sign in the window that reads, “ Help Wanted – Irish Need Not Apply It reminds me that not everyone was always welcome. But while I am proud to have an Irish (and German and English and Swedish) heritage, all my ancestors wanted to become Americans, not to count in America as Irish. :-1


Having read many, many posts in the Garden I see an very US and THEM split - just think back to the discussions on illegal immigrants and the attitudes towards the Hispanics in general displayed there as an example (even before you address the bias against African Americans).

Whilst this attitude prevails on one side of the barrier it will, obviously, exist on the other side as well.

[mikeinie]

It is the media that drives that, and the way Americans view themselves.

For example: Obama is seen in the media as a ‘Black Man’, and OK he has darker skin, but what is a ‘Black Man’? His father left him like when he was three, his mother was white and was raised by her, and then his white grandparents, yet he is ‘a black man’.

I ask the same question back to you, why is he not just seen as an American by all, including the media?

When the settlers went to America, or during times when there was high immigration, do you really think people sat in their home countries and said ‘gosh I sure would like to be an American’, no I am sure they were happy with their own heritage, but what people did want, freedom, human rights, a chance to succeed as in the American Dream, maybe a chance to own land.

It takes a couple of generations to become ‘American’, people don’t leave their heritage at the door step.

And talk about a living example of the American Dream¦ Obama is a real representation of what the world use to, and thankfully now again, looks up to about America.

[Kindle]

mikeinie;1047624 wrote: ............When the settlers went to America, or during times when there was high immigration, do you really think people sat in their home countries and said ‘gosh I sure would like to be an American’, no I am sure they were happy with their own heritage, but what people did want, freedom, human rights, a chance to succeed as in the American Dream, maybe a chance to own land............


You are right and I know this first hand as I am first generation AMERICAN on my mother's side.

My grandparents came here for a better life and they worked hard when they came. Nothing was handed to them. They did not come for hand outs. They came for the opportunities this great country offered them.

Perhaps if immigrants today had to sustain themselves when they came here, as the immigrants of the early 1900's did, they would have more repect for America and themselves. I think too many people are coming here just because they are able to get so much for doing nothing more than arriving here. America was build through a strong work ethic -- a right to work, not a right to have things handed to them.

When you have alot of people who have struggled to get where they are through the freedom allowed them, they merge into one group. They become a proud people and repectful of the accomplishments of others, as this too is their roots. They begin to think: You are just like me. Then, the similarities bind them together -- as Americans.

Right now, so many come "like a thief in the night" and bond among themselves because they live through the generosity of others. They come for the American Give Away, not the American Dream.

[Galbally]

I don't live in America so its hard for me to talk about what its like on the ground. I think the example of Irish Americans is a interesting one though, and obviously one I have an interest in. Its true that at one time Irish people were not very welcome in America (a long time ago), but that eventually they became an integral part of society and a positive cultural part of the American melting pot, to this day many Irish Americans retain a stong sense of being "Irish" while also being "American", with their political loyalty to America, and some kind of racial and ethnic loyalty to their old European identity.

Its interesting, because for us in Ireland, we do consider Irish Americans as part of the Irish ethnic family (or diaspora as we call it), but when indivdual Irish Americans come here, they are percieved as being 100 percent Americans, because that is what they really are. Until they come and live in the real modern Ireland, sure how could they know anything about it?, its not the place that their granny told them about, that was the 1940s and is as close to modern Ireland as 1940s America is to the present day. Also, living on a small Island Republic off the Northwestern coast of Europe is a different experience from living in California or Massachusetts and always will be. So being an actual Irish person is a very different thing from being an "Irish American".

I think that Barack Obama's wife said much the same to her Husband in Kenya (Obama has Kenyan and Irish ancestory, and is a good represenation of the falseness of the "hyphenated American" idea) when they were there over there. It dawned on her that the African-American label that she had in America didn't mean she was actually an African or had much in common with actual "Africans", other than the superficial racial one.

Thats all an internal thing that Americans use to define each other and themselves, it bears little relation to the outside world. In reality people who are born, grow up, get educated, work, and have families in America are Americans, it just seems to be a cultural need in an immigrant society to maintain a kinship based on your previous ethnic identity, its probably not just an American idea, after all, you have French Canadians, and Greek Australians.

Quinn is right, ultimately there should only be Americans, it tends to happen anyway, but allowing the creation of self-isolating sub-cultures that demand people's allegiance is not with the idea that all Americans are "American" is a huge mistake. At the same time, people should be allowed to celebrate their own history and identity in a non-threatening and repsectful way, as its only human to want to know who you are and where you come from.

[cars]

Kindle;1047734 wrote: You are right and I know this first hand as I am first generation AMERICAN on my mother's side.



My grandparents came here for a better life and they worked hard when they came. Nothing was handed to them. They did not come for hand outs. They came for the opportunities this great country offered them.



Perhaps if immigrants today had to sustain themselves when they came here, as the immigrants of the early 1900's did, they would have more repect for America and themselves. I think too many people are coming here just because they are able to get so much for doing nothing more than arriving here. America was build through a strong work ethic -- a right to work, not a right to have things handed to them.



When you have alot of people who have struggled to get where they are through the freedom allowed them, they merge into one group. They become a proud people and repectful of the accomplishments of others, as this too is their roots. They begin to think: You are just like me. Then, the similarities bind them together -- as Americans.



Right now, so many come "like a thief in the night" and bond among themselves because they live through the generosity of others. They come for the American Give Away, not the American Dream.
Well said, agree!

I worked hard all my adult life to have what I have now, and "no one" (the government) gave me any unearned entitlements as many get today!!!

[mikeinie]

Galbally;1047765 wrote: I don't live in America so its hard for me to talk about what its like on the ground. I think the example of Irish Americans is a interesting one though, and obviously one I have an interest in. Its true that at one time Irish people were not very welcome in America (a long time ago), but that eventually they became an integral part of society and a positive cultural part of the American melting pot, to this day many Irish Americans retain a stong sense of being "Irish" while also being "American", with their political loyalty to America, and some kind of racial and ethnic loyalty to their old European identity.

Its interesting, because for us in Ireland, we do consider Irish Americans as part of the Irish ethnic family (or diaspora as we call it), but when indivdual Irish Americans come here, they are percieved as being 100 percent Americans, because that is what they really are. Until they come and live in the real modern Ireland, sure how could they know anything about it?, its not the place that their granny told them about, that was the 1940s and is as close to modern Ireland as 1940s America is to the present day. Also, living on a small Island Republic off the Northwestern coast of Europe is a different experience from living in California or Massachusetts and always will be. So being an actual Irish person is a very different thing from being an "Irish American".

I think that Barack Obama's wife said much the same to her Husband in Kenya (Obama has Kenyan and Irish ancestory, and is a good represenation of the falseness of the "hyphenated American" idea) when they were there over there. It dawned on her that the African-American label that she had in America didn't mean she was actually an African or had much in common with actual "Africans", other than the superficial racial one.

Thats all an internal thing that Americans use to define each other and themselves, it bears little relation to the outside world. In reality people who are born, grow up, get educated, work, and have families in America are Americans, it just seems to be a cultural need in an immigrant society to maintain a kinship based on your previous ethnic identity, its probably not just an American idea, after all, you have French Canadians, and Greek Australians.

Quinn is right, ultimately there should only be Americans, it tends to happen anyway, but allowing the creation of self-isolating sub-cultures that demand people's allegiance is not with the idea that all Americans are "American" is a huge mistake. At the same time, people should be allowed to celebrate their own history and identity in a non-threatening and repsectful way, as its only human to want to know who you are and where you come from.


I think that you are right, but the same happens in Canada. Ask someone where they are from there and often they will reply to their ancestry. But I think that is what people are actually asking.

We forget that on the global scale, North America is still a very young country. A couple of hundred of years, where most of Europe can trace it’s self back not only hundreds, but thousands of years.

Furthermore, it is a country of immigrants. People need roots, and I think that this is why North American’s particularly are fascinated with their heritage background. How many times have you heard, I am part Irish, part Italian, part Scottish or something.

North America is coming of age and it is torn now between those who now have multiple generations of American and those who may still be first or second generation American who still identify themselves by their heritage background.

Ireland will experience the same in the coming generations. With all the changes here, does a Child born from immigrant parents from China identify him/herself as Irish or Chinese? Or Irish/Chinese?

And I understand the debate between what the new immigrants get vs what our grandparent had, but would you really want to sit back and watch people struggle these days the way they had to back then?

[Oscar Namechange]

I really wanted to be American. I wanted to go to America, buy some land and raise cattle,

I was 5 years old and my dad wouldn't let me :wah: Besides, it was tea time.

[wildhorses]

Galbally;1047765 wrote: I don't live in America so its hard for me to talk about what its like on the ground. I think the example of Irish Americans is a interesting one though, and obviously one I have an interest in. Its true that at one time Irish people were not very welcome in America (a long time ago), but that eventually they became an integral part of society and a positive cultural part of the American melting pot, to this day many Irish Americans retain a stong sense of being "Irish" while also being "American", with their political loyalty to America, and some kind of racial and ethnic loyalty to their old European identity.

Its interesting, because for us in Ireland, we do consider Irish Americans as part of the Irish ethnic family (or diaspora as we call it), but when indivdual Irish Americans come here, they are percieved as being 100 percent Americans, because that is what they really are. Until they come and live in the real modern Ireland, sure how could they know anything about it?, its not the place that their granny told them about, that was the 1940s and is as close to modern Ireland as 1940s America is to the present day. Also, living on a small Island Republic off the Northwestern coast of Europe is a different experience from living in California or Massachusetts and always will be. So being an actual Irish person is a very different thing from being an "Irish American".

I think that Barack Obama's wife said much the same to her Husband in Kenya (Obama has Kenyan and Irish ancestory, and is a good represenation of the falseness of the "hyphenated American" idea) when they were there over there. It dawned on her that the African-American label that she had in America didn't mean she was actually an African or had much in common with actual "Africans", other than the superficial racial one.

Thats all an internal thing that Americans use to define each other and themselves, it bears little relation to the outside world. In reality people who are born, grow up, get educated, work, and have families in America are Americans, it just seems to be a cultural need in an immigrant society to maintain a kinship based on your previous ethnic identity, its probably not just an American idea, after all, you have French Canadians, and Greek Australians.

Quinn is right, ultimately there should only be Americans, it tends to happen anyway, but allowing the creation of self-isolating sub-cultures that demand people's allegiance is not with the idea that all Americans are "American" is a huge mistake. At the same time, people should be allowed to celebrate their own history and identity in a non-threatening and repsectful way, as its only human to want to know who you are and where you come from.

This is a very good point. Immigrants who came to America in the last 20 years do separate themelves from our culture. This is a big problem. They even separate themselves by not learning english and expecting everything to be copied for them in their native language.

I use to think that when immigrants held on to part of their culture, that this was a nice addition and added flavor to our country. But it has gotten to the point that those enclaves seem like they are not part of America at all. We have neighborhoods of immigrants where Americans don't really feel very welcome.

I am a third generation American (Irish/German/American Indian). My grandparents were first generation Americans and I know that they did not keep themselves separate from the rest of America. My great grandparents may have to some degree. But now I see first generation (Americans)offspring of immigrants keeping themselves separate. In some cases they still do not think of english as their first language....even though they were born here. Many dont think of themselves as American either....even though they are citizens. This division has caused much tension in our country.

[spot]

JAB;1048499 wrote: As an immigrant from Poland, I first and foremost consider myself an American. I'm proud of my heritage and do not shy away from it but it's this country that welcomed me to it's shore that has my allegiance.


It's a major difference in attitude between the US and UK. My family's lived in England since time immemorial and I've never considered that I owe it my allegiance. My country has to step very carefully to get my support.

[Accountable]

99% of the students at my high school are hispanic. They all call themselves Mexican, but only as an ethnic title. Ask any one of them and they'll tell you they are from San Antonio. Ask them their heritage or ancestry and most will simply look at you, waiting for you to speak English. Some speak a little Spanish; some are fluently bilingual; some only know English. They neither know nor care how many generations have been born there. They are simply San Antonians.

[spot]

JAB;1048522 wrote: What, if anything, would it take for you to do so?


It's an impossibility. Given the choice of betraying my country or betraying my conscience I'd consider myself an abomination if I betrayed my conscience. Fortunately, so far, my country's had the good sense not to stray too far from what I permit it to do.

[wildhorses]

Accountable;1048525 wrote: 99% of the students at my high school are hispanic. They all call themselves Mexican, but only as an ethnic title. Ask any one of them and they'll tell you they are from San Antonio. Ask them their heritage or ancestry and most will simply look at you, waiting for you to speak English. Some speak a little Spanish; some are fluently bilingual; some only know English. They neither know nor care how many generations have been born there. They are simply San Antonians.


If they are American then why do they call themselves Mexican? And I can tell you right now that they DO know how many generations of their family has been born here. Don't give me this bs. Half my friends and some of my family are Latino. Some were born here and some are immigrants. They ALL speak spanish....ALL OF THEM. Some speak pretty good english as well...but not very many. It's the ones who immigrated here 30 or 40 years ago that really speak good english.....or the ones who are born here. But the newer immigrants don't care to learn to speak english.

[gmc]

spot;1048517 wrote: It's a major difference in attitude between the US and UK. My family's lived in England since time immemorial and I've never considered that I owe it my allegiance. My country has to step very carefully to get my support.


Actually, I'm not english but I know exactly what spot means. Blind patriotism my country right or wrong started going out of the European psyche in ww1 and ww2 finished it off altogether. You will find I think very few Europeans that would be prepared to go to war or support one if they thought their leadership was in the wrong. The odd politician that claimed it was unpatriotic not to support the war in Iraq got laughed at. Here you can support the troops and still oppose the war and no one dare claim that if you oppose the war you don't support the troops.

Also we have a right to stand up and say what we damn well like about anything and anybody. Allegiance is not something anyone can claim as of right.

[Accountable]

wildhorses;1048567 wrote: If they are American then why do they call themselves Mexican? And I can tell you right now that they DO know how many generations of their family has been born here. Don't give me this bs. Half my friends and some of my family are Latino. Some were born here and some are immigrants. They ALL speak spanish....ALL OF THEM. Some speak pretty good english as well...but not very many. It's the ones who immigrated here 30 or 40 years ago that really speak good english.....or the ones who are born here. But the newer immigrants don't care to learn to speak english.
They call themselves Mexican as a shorthand for physical description, nothing more. "What did they look like?" "Well, there were two Mexican and one black kid. A white guy was driving." ... like that.

I'm starting to get used to your over-emphatic statements, saying you "know" things you can't possibly know, such as what goes on in my classroom 1700 miles away. I am speaking about 14 & 15 year-olds, of whom I have asked these things directly as part of a world geography lesson plan. I can't give an opinion of the ones you've apparently met in San Francisco. Maybe they're union. :D



My point was that these particular kids have a strong feeling of pride in being from San Antonio, so strong that any genealogical differences are rendered irrellevant. It is their identity. I think it would be good if we could have that sentiment among Americans.



Maybe the ones

[Accountable]

gmc;1048644 wrote: Actually, I'm not english but I know exactly what spot means. Blind patriotism my country right or wrong started going out of the European psyche in ww1 and ww2 finished it off altogether. You will find I think very few Europeans that would be prepared to go to war or support one if they thought their leadership was in the wrong. The odd politician that claimed it was unpatriotic not to support the war in Iraq got laughed at. Here you can support the troops and still oppose the war and no one dare claim that if you oppose the war you don't support the troops.



Also we have a right to stand up and say what we damn well like about anything and anybody. Allegiance is not something anyone can claim as of right.
You are very proudly Scottish. I read from his post that Spot is not proudly Welsh, only proudly Spot. His equating giving his country support to betraying his conscience makes it painfully obvious that, unlike you, Spot arrogantly takes his freedom for granted.

[Galbally]

Accountable;1048670 wrote: You are very proudly Scottish. I read from his post that Spot is not proudly English, only proudly Spot. His equating giving his country support to betraying his conscience makes it painfully obvious that, unlike you, Spot arrogantly takes his freedom for granted.


I think Spot has a Welsh allegiance, which is the country that everyone forgets about when discussing the UK.

I certainly don't have any time for this idea that we live in a post national, post ethnic, post racial age, we most certainly do not; these are basic human concepts and to ignore the realities that people tend to define themselves by them is a folly of a certain mindset.

I am Irish, I was born in England and feel affinity for England, but I am ethnically Irish, my people are all Irish, and I have lived in Ireland since I was 8 years old. Thats a default setting for me. The other one is that I am a European, and I feel that quite strongly, in that all of my core values are essentially European ones, not American, or African or Asian, and I want Europe to remain European, full stop. I am quite comfortable with that as its not blind nationalism (Europe is not a nation) its simply an allegiance to my own civilization and culture.

[Accountable]

Galbally;1048673 wrote: I think Spot has a Welsh allegiance, which is the country that everyone forgets about when discussing the UK. Thanks for the correction. I've edited my post and apologize to the English.



Galbally wrote: I certainly don't have any time for this idea that we live in a post national, post ethnic, post racial age, we most certainly do not; these are basic human concepts and to ignore the realities that people tend to define themselves by them is a folly of a certain mindset.



I am Irish, I was born in England and feel affinity for England, but I am ethnically Irish, my people are all Irish, and I have lived in Ireland since I was 8 years old. Thats a default setting for me, the other one is that I am a European, and I feel that quite strongly in that all of values are essentially European ones, not American, or African or Asian, and I want Europe to remain European, I am quite comfortable with that as its not blind nationalsm (Europe is not a nation) its simply an allegiance to my own civilization.I'm certain that your view very much mirrors the sentiment of the vast majority of Americans. I'm always saddened when someone's big dream is to leave the land of their birth to emigrate to the US and become an American. I understand it, but it still makes me sad. I wish everyone could feel about their home as I feel about mine.

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

You all raise good points, but something is different in America.

When my wife's grandparent came to America from Italy, her grandfather would not allow his children born here to learn or speak Italian because he was so obsessed with becoming an American. He even Americanized his name, Giuseppe became Joe and he was not alone. That was a shame, but not unusual.

Today, I go to a store in Northeast NJ and all the signs are in Spanish. Rather than encourage assimilation we are doing exactly the opposite by making it unnecessary to do so. When I use an ATM, before I can get into my account I am asked if I want it in English or Spanish (or occasionally in another language). This is fine in NYC or other place with a large tourist population, but I am talking a small town in the suburbs with a near zero minority population of any kind.

We are now talking about the Hispanic vote as if it was a country or state within a country. While I wasn't around in the days of large immigration, I have never heard any reference to the Italian, Irish or German vote in America.

[gmc]

Accountable;1048670 wrote: You are very proudly Scottish. I read from his post that Spot is not proudly Welsh, only proudly Spot. His equating giving his country support to betraying his conscience makes it painfully obvious that, unlike you, Spot arrogantly takes his freedom for granted.


Actually no. Neither of us take it for granted. He's probably talked about living in england rather than Wales to forestall someone asking what part of England Wales is in.

But I actually agree with him in this. If my government wants my support in a war they had better make a good case and if I want to object to it- or anything else it does-I would defy anyone that tells me I can't. So I suspect would spot. Blind nationalism I associate with the extreme right.

I also agree with galbally-though thankfully I escaped the ignominy of being born in England.

posted by quinns commentary

We are now talking about the Hispanic vote as if it was a country or state within a country. While I wasn't around in the days of large immigration, I have never heard any reference to the Italian, Irish or German vote in America.


Is it any different from talking about the black vote or the female vote or the white vote?

[Galbally]

QUINNSCOMMENTARY;1048688 wrote: You all raise good points, but something is different in America.

When my wife's grandparent came to America from Italy, her grandfather would not allow his children born here to learn or speak Italian because he was so obsessed with becoming an American. He even Americanized his name, Giuseppe became Joe and he was not alone. That was a shame, but not unusual.

Today, I go to a store in Northeast NJ and all the signs are in Spanish. Rather than encourage assimilation we are doing exactly the opposite by making it unnecessary to do so. When I use an ATM, before I can get into my account I am asked if I want it in English or Spanish (or occasionally in another language). This is fine in NYC or other place with a large tourist population, but I am talking a small town in the suburbs with a near zero minority population of any kind.

We are now talking about the Hispanic vote as if it was a country or state within a country. While I wasn't around in the days of large immigration, I have never heard any reference to the Italian, Irish or German vote in America.


I have to tell you, that in many bank machines here, and in other EU states, you can do your ATM banking in about 6 lanuguages, English, Irish, French, German, Spanish, and Italian. Of course Europe and America are competely different as each nation here has its own culture, history, government, legal system and the EU is only a loose intergovernmental organization, (despite what some people seem to believe). Most Europeans can speak at least two languages, though not everyone, (British and Irish people tend to be rubbish at dealing with other languages, which is maybe where you get it from). Also, if you live in say, Holland, you will be surrounded with English, French, and German culture as well as you own, so people tend to be able to navigate these things better.

I actually think in Europe its a hugely positive thing that the vast array of cultures and languages we have here are coming more into contact, (of course there has always been a hard to define "civilization" here, that is an amalgam of all these ingfluences, but national cultures didn't interact that much at the day to day level). On the continent its always been more multilingual and multicultural than Britain, and Ireland, which being Islands seem to have a problem learning any other European languages other than there own, or eating decent food.

There are many benefits to having one distinctive language, and medium of informational and cultural exchange between people, however, to my mind, Europe's crowning glory is its peerless and diverse cultural heritage, and I would be against any moves to degrade that into some sort of english speaking, mid-atlantic medicore lowest common demoninator culture, so I am all for European cultural diversity.

For America the issues are different of course, the question is whether to return to having a mono-culture based on the English language, or persue a more multi-cultual agenda. I would sympathize with the basic premise that the thing that holds America together is a common language, as well as a common idea of governance, law, and personal liberty. So I would agree with you, on the other hand, in an immigrant society (which is what America has always been); its important to allow people the right to express their past cultural heritage and not make the dominant white anglo-american culture a complete straight jacket, as that isn't how culture works anyway, so its pointless.

Complicated, this stuff, init?

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

Galbally;1049168 wrote: I have to tell you, that in many bank machines here, and in other EU states, you can do your ATM banking in about 6 lanuguages, English, Irish, French, German, Spanish, and Italian. Of course Europe and America are competely different as each nation here has its own culture, history, government, legal system and the EU is only a loose intergovernmental organization, (despite what some people seem to believe). Most Europeans can speak at least two languages, though not everyone, (British and Irish people tend to be rubbish at dealing with other languages, which is maybe where you get it from). Also, if you live in say, Holland, you will be surrounded with English, French, and German culture as well as you own, so people tend to be able to navigate these things better.

I actually think in Europe its a hugely positive thing that the vast array of cultures and languages we have here are coming more into contact, (of course there has always been a hard to define "civilization" here, that is an amalgam of all these influences, but national cultures didn't interact that much at the day to day level). On the continent its always been more multilingual and multicultural than Britain, and Ireland, which being Islands seem to have a problem learning any other European languages other than there own, or eating decent food.

There are many benefits to having one distinctive language, and medium of informational and cultural exchange between people, however, to my mind, Europe's crowning glory is its peerless and diverse cultural heritage, and I would be against any moves to degrade that into some sort of english speaking, mid-atlantic medicore lowest common demoninator culture, so I am all for European cultural diversity.

For America the issues are different of course, the question is whether to return to having a mono-culture based on the English language, or persue a more multi-cultual agenda. I would sympathize with the basic premise that the thing that holds America together is a common language, as well as a common idea of governance, law, and personal liberty. So I would agree with you, on the other hand, in an immigrant society (which is what America has always been); its important to allow people the right to express their past cultural heritage and not make the dominant white anglo-american culture a complete straight jacket, as that isn't how culture works anyway, so its pointless.

Complicated, this stuff, init?


Complicated indeed, but I don't mean to suppress ones heritage or culture and I think everyone should be able to speak at least two languages and we do a horrible job at that in America. In my family we still follow several holiday (not vacation) traditions from Italy and that's all fine as well.

But I think that is a bit different than holding on to the past and having second generation children struggle with English or having to have special classes in schools in Spanish. That does not help in the long run it enables the past and it also puts those kids at a disadvantage.

[wildhorses]

Galbally;1049168 wrote: I have to tell you, that in many bank machines here, and in other EU states, you can do your ATM banking in about 6 lanuguages, English, Irish, French, German, Spanish, and Italian. Of course Europe and America are competely different as each nation here has its own culture, history, government, legal system and the EU is only a loose intergovernmental organization, (despite what some people seem to believe). Most Europeans can speak at least two languages, though not everyone, (British and Irish people tend to be rubbish at dealing with other languages, which is maybe where you get it from). Also, if you live in say, Holland, you will be surrounded with English, French, and German culture as well as you own, so people tend to be able to navigate these things better.

I actually think in Europe its a hugely positive thing that the vast array of cultures and languages we have here are coming more into contact, (of course there has always been a hard to define "civilization" here, that is an amalgam of all these ingfluences, but national cultures didn't interact that much at the day to day level). On the continent its always been more multilingual and multicultural than Britain, and Ireland, which being Islands seem to have a problem learning any other European languages other than there own, or eating decent food.

There are many benefits to having one distinctive language, and medium of informational and cultural exchange between people, however, to my mind, Europe's crowning glory is its peerless and diverse cultural heritage, and I would be against any moves to degrade that into some sort of english speaking, mid-atlantic medicore lowest common demoninator culture, so I am all for European cultural diversity.

For America the issues are different of course, the question is whether to return to having a mono-culture based on the English language, or persue a more multi-cultual agenda. I would sympathize with the basic premise that the thing that holds America together is a common language, as well as a common idea of governance, law, and personal liberty. So I would agree with you, on the other hand, in an immigrant society (which is what America has always been); its important to allow people the right to express their past cultural heritage and not make the dominant white anglo-american culture a complete straight jacket, as that isn't how culture works anyway, so its pointless.

Complicated, this stuff, init?


How many languages does Ireland produce her voting materials in?

[wildhorses]

Accountable;1048666 wrote: They call themselves Mexican as a shorthand for physical description, nothing more. "What did they look like?" "Well, there were two Mexican and one black kid. A white guy was driving." ... like that.

I'm starting to get used to your over-emphatic statements, saying you "know" things you can't possibly know, such as what goes on in my classroom 1700 miles away. I am speaking about 14 & 15 year-olds, of whom I have asked these things directly as part of a world geography lesson plan. I can't give an opinion of the ones you've apparently met in San Francisco. Maybe they're union. :D



My point was that these particular kids have a strong feeling of pride in being from San Antonio, so strong that any genealogical differences are rendered irrellevant. It is their identity. I think it would be good if we could have that sentiment among Americans.



Maybe the ones


I know the latino cultures very well. I have latino friends and family...and ex family members in the following locations: Mexico, El Salvador, Guatamala, New York, Texas (Houston, El Paso...My father was from El Paso....he grew up there), Washington D.C., Maryland, California (L.A., San Francisco, Sonoma, Stockton, San Diego, Vallejo, Petaluma, San Jose, Sacramento, San Mateo), Ohio. I know that younger immigrants do not identify with being American. Even their own parents remark on this.

[Galbally]

wildhorses;1049599 wrote: How many languages does Ireland produce her voting materials in?


Two, Gaelic and English; though I think we also make provision for polish, as about 10 percent of our population is Polish now, so some of them must be voting in elections.

[Accountable]

wildhorses;1049634 wrote: I know the latino cultures very well. I have latino friends and family...and ex family members in the following locations: Mexico, El Salvador, Guatamala, New York, Texas (Houston, El Paso...My father was from El Paso....he grew up there), Washington D.C., Maryland, California (L.A., San Francisco, Sonoma, Stockton, San Diego, Vallejo, Petaluma, San Jose, Sacramento, San Mateo), Ohio. I know that younger immigrants do not identify with being American. Even their own parents remark on this.
I don't know the latino cultures very well. I'm only stating my observations of what's become a San Antonio culture, more accurately a South San Antonio culture. These guys might all be 6th or 8th generation American, for all I know.

[wildhorses]

Galbally;1049709 wrote: Two, Gaelic and English; though I think we also make provision for polish, as about 10 percent of our population is Polish now, so some of them must be voting in elections.


We do this too. Depending on the area...voting materials can be in several languages. But you have to be a citizen to vote here, and it takes five years at least to become a citizen. So it is very difficult for us to think that these new citizens are serious about being part of our country when they dont even bother to learn english. Lately though I notice that they have stopped....or mostly cut back on doing this. For awhile the voting materials looked like a telephone book...it was so thick to include all the languages. It was getting hard to even find the english section. In years past, this was no problem. Immigrants always learned to speak english as soon as possible. I have some family members who learned pretty good english in less than a year. If they can do it anyone can do it. If someone wants to become a citizen in any country then I think they should at least learn the language of that country. And if they dont like the country they are in enough to even do that, then they should go to another country that they like better.

[spot]

wildhorses;1050219 wrote: If someone wants to become a citizen in any country then I think they should at least learn the language of that country. And if they dont like the country they are in enough to even do that, then they should go to another country that they like better.


We Brits tend to go abroad to live in other countries, not learn the local language and retain our UK citizenship. I'm sure if we were to actually take up citizenship in another country we'd quite likely learn the languages spoken there but we'd be very unusual examples of British expatriates.

[wildhorses]

spot;1050226 wrote: We Brits tend to go abroad to live in other countries, not learn the local language and retain our UK citizenship. I'm sure if we were to actually take up citizenship in another country we'd quite likely learn the languages spoken there but we'd be very unusual examples of British expatriates.


Well its kind of different if you dont expect to become a citizen and vote. The main point is that I dont think that Brits go to live in another country and expect the entire country to change to suit them. At least they never have done that here.

What I am talking about is immigrants who come here and do become citizens, and then demand that voting materials be published in their language. Some have been here as long as 15 or 20 years...still dont speak english. They want to vote though. But they want to live in their own little separate neighborhoods. They want to vote, but dont want to participate in America in any other way. This is getting to be a problem, and is causing tension due to the separatism.

This started back in the late 70's with the "hyphenated American". This was to embrace the different cultures that had come here. At the time I thought it was a great idea...so did everyone else. It kind of highlighted the diversity..but in a positive way. Now it has become something very negative.

And only certain cultures are doing this. For instance, there are no French people here demanding that everything be in their language..... because they have all learned english. Same with Russian, Swedish and so on. People from India speak excellent english, they dont need translations. And now there is starting to be problems with religion....omg.

I dont understand people who go to a country that they feel in not conducive to their culture or religion, and expect the entire country to change everything for them. Instead they should go to a country that is conducive to their culture and religion.

[spot]

There are two models for immigration, the melting pot and the salad bowl. You favour the former, I love the latter. It makes towns here so much more exciting places to live. Both models have their attractive aspects and their downsides. Ethnic groups unable to preserve their cultures are less of a gift to a society than those which retain them.

Hyphenated America dates back at least to the First Word War.

[wildhorses]

spot;1050248 wrote: There are two models for immigration, the melting pot and the salad bowl. You favour the former, I love the latter. It makes towns here so much more exciting places to live. Both models have their attractive aspects and their downsides. Ethnic groups unable to preserve their cultures are less of a gift to a society than those which retain them.

Hyphenated America dates back at least to the First Word War.


No it does not date back that far. Thirty years ago immigrants who became citizens or children of immigrants, did not refer to themselves that way.

[spot]

wildhorses;1050249 wrote: No it does not date back that far. Thirty years ago immigrants who became citizens or children of immigrants, did not refer to themselves that way.


This is what I had in mind - Theodore Roosevelt, 1915:There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all... The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic... There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyphenated_American

It's exactly what the thread's complaining about except he wasn't talking about Hispanics.

[K.Snyder]

Much like the debate over whether or not American companies should place the Spanish language on their products while not even placing their products in English...

I for one have no problem with speaking another language in my country. I have an unlimited problem with people who cannot speak English in my country if those people in question are living here permanently. If you're going to drive down the highway; Learn English! As simple as that.

[K.Snyder]

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all... The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic... There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.


I disagree.

I reserve the right to call myself an affiliation of any creed so long as "you" do not place your own implications behind them.

Much like borders.

I don't believe in borders upon the world having non depleted resources. Upon a people moving into an area they otherwise could not go elsewhere the aggressors define "borders" not those who claim the right to live.

[wildhorses]

spot;1050252 wrote: This is what I had in mind - Theodore Roosevelt, 1915:There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all... The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic... There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyphenated_American

It's exactly what the thread's complaining about except he wasn't talking about Hispanics.


OK but then what happened after that? There were no hyphenated Americans till the late 70's again. This practice has not existed since that time. And it caused a problem then and it is now. But for many years in between there was not problem...or not many problems. A "salad" culture is separatism. It only sounds good in theory. Until the lettuce wants bleu cheese dressing, the carrot wants oil and vinegar, the cucumber wants thousand island....and the tomato wants spaghetti sauce, because it is a tomato. But the lettuce does not want spaghetti sauce, and the cucumber does not want bleu cheese...and so on. So then the salad is not so tasty anymore is it? This is what is happening.

[spot]

K.Snyder;1050254 wrote: I for one have no problem with speaking another language in my country. I have an unlimited problem with people who cannot speak English in my country if those people in question are living here permanently. If you're going to drive down the highway; Learn English! As simple as that.We Welsh say that to the English immigrants all the while. We even put up road signs in English as well as Welsh to make the roads safer. Most of the English who settle here never learn Welsh, they think English is all they need to get by.

[wildhorses]

K.Snyder;1050254 wrote: Much like the debate over whether or not American companies should place the Spanish language on their products while not even placing their products in English...

I for one have no problem with speaking another language in my country. I have an unlimited problem with people who cannot speak English in my country if those people in question are living here permanently. If you're going to drive down the highway; Learn English! As simple as that.


I agree. I have no problem with other languages. I know many people who speak other languages other than english. But they have also learned english. And I also agree with your statement about products made by American companies. If they are going to be sold in American stores, why are they in another language?

[spot]

wildhorses;1050256 wrote: OK but then what happened after that? There were no hyphenated Americans till the late 70's again. This practice has not existed since that time. And it caused a problem then and it is now. But for many years in between there was not problem...or not many problems.


Here's the relevant entries from the Oxford English Dictionary of dated usage:1948 Manchester Guardian Weekly 3 June ‘Hyphenated Americans’ - undigested immigrant stock.

1965 B. SWEET-ESCOTT Baker St. Irregulars i. 37 It was thought that, with the whole of western Europe under Nazi domination, hyphenated Americans might provide recruits for work in occupied territory.

1973 Times 17 Oct. 6/8 This did not go down well with the Greek community here [sc. in the U.S.], or with other groups of ‘hyphenated Americans’.

I suspect you might just not know the extent of continuity between 1890 and today.

[wildhorses]

spot;1050261 wrote: Here's the relevant entries from the Oxford English Dictionary of dated usage:1948 Manchester Guardian Weekly 3 June ‘Hyphenated Americans’ - undigested immigrant stock.

1965 B. SWEET-ESCOTT Baker St. Irregulars i. 37 It was thought that, with the whole of western Europe under Nazi domination, hyphenated Americans might provide recruits for work in occupied territory.

1973 Times 17 Oct. 6/8 This did not go down well with the Greek community here [sc. in the U.S.], or with other groups of ‘hyphenated Americans’.

I suspect you might just not know the extent of continuity between 1890 and today.




I live here so I do know if people are using a hyphenating or not. Now you are picking at straws. They had not done this for many years prior to the late 70's. I went to school here, had friends here, watched the news here. This was not in vogue till the late 70's. And your 1965 entry describes Nazie occupation....that was not in 1965 dear...the book was written in 1965?

[spot]

Yes, it was written in 1965 by Sir Bickham Sweet-Escott, published by Methuen in London and discussed the world as it was twenty years earlier - it's the author's memoirs of his time working for British Intelligence. All three are, as you might expect, genuine dated quotes of the same usage of the expression during the period you raised.

In Baker Street Irregular (1965) Sweet-Escott gives a reliable and entertaining account of SOE [Special Operations Executive]. His experience, outstanding ability, and knowledge of the secrets of the organization repeatedly frustrated his attempts to serve in the field. He was one of the few competent to deal at the top level with SOE's problems, whether in Whitehall, Cairo, Algiers, or Kandy. Whenever and wherever there was a call for staff reinforcement Bickham was the obvious choice.

Oxford Dictionary of National Biography

[wildhorses]

spot wrote: Yes, it was written in 1965, published by Methuen in London and discussed the world as it was twenty years earlier - it's the author's memoirs of his time working for British Intelligence. All three are, as you might expect, genuine dated quotes of the same usage of the expression during the period you raised.Yes but in 1965 natuaralized American citizens were not using this hyphenated form. In 1973 they may have. I remember it as later in that decade though. In 1948 they did not. I just asked my aunt....she said no they were not.

But this became popular thirty years ago. It has been to the detriment of our country. You have suceeded in convoluting the debate again....as usual. We are, or were, talking about what is going on now, and why. It does not really matter exactly what nano date it started. It has been going on for some time and has caused divisivness that did not exist before. That is the point.

You speak of two different types of immigration...one a melting pot and one a salad. But even a salad must intermingle, just not to the same degree as a melting pot. Once the ingredients want to remain separate it is not a salad anymore.

[K.Snyder]

wildhorses;1050259 wrote: I agree. I have no problem with other languages. I know many people who speak other languages other than english. But they have also learned english. And I also agree with your statement about products made by American companies. If they are going to be sold in American stores, why are they in another language?


Because there's a huge population of Spanish speaking peoples living in America who cannot speak English.

I'm not sure if America has established English as the official language yet or not but surely there is a cause for concern related to our government, not to mention our country, when we have a large incumbent not only of illegal immigrants who cannot speak English but legal citizens of the United States of America who cannot understand how to tell a dispatcher their child is convulsing.

What's left is which language would be more convenient to uphold for the majority of the country. Hell, make Texas and New Mexico Spanish speaking states for all I care just make sure people can understand each other so that lives are spared is all that I ask.

It's not secularism it's John doe don't have a damn Clue what Pablo is saying so he's not finding it convenient to call him a neighbor. The cynical are those that turn it into something it really isn't.

[spot]

wildhorses wrote: It has been going on for some time and has caused divisivness that did not exist before. That is the point.Since 1890. I do think if you feel the term went out of use for fifty years you need to show some evidence for it, given that I've provided three easily-available counter-examples.

As for the salad bowl, my town's a wonderful example. I have really-truly Somali families that I get to talk to, and Pakistanis and Indians and Jamaicans and Malaysians and Canadians and Chileans and Poles and they all retain their cultural distinctions. For some reason I haven't met any Americans here for the last ten years but I'm sure if I did they'd be very obviously American and speak that impenetrable dialect they use rather than pick up the Queen's English.

[wildhorses]

K.Snyder;1050279 wrote: Because there's a huge population of Spanish speaking peoples living in America who cannot speak English.

I'm not sure if America has established English as the official language yet or not but surely there is a cause for concern related to our government, not to mention our country, when we have a large incumbent not only of illegal immigrants who cannot speak English but legal citizens of the United States of America who cannot understand how to tell a dispatcher their child is convulsing.

What's left is which language would be more convenient to uphold for the majority of the country. Hell, make Texas and New Mexico Spanish speaking states for all I care just make sure people can understand each other so that lives are spared is all that I ask.

It's not secularism it's John doe don't have a damn Clue what Pablo is saying so he's not finding it convenient to call him a neighbor. The cynical are those that turn it into something it really isn't.


Yes it is difficult to develop relationships with someone if you dont have a common language.

And there are starting to be other problems as well. For instance, here in California some nurses do not speak much english. So you go to the emgergency room and they cant really understand what your symtoms are. And its not even one language. One nurse speaks one language and another speaks another language....and so on. Thankfully the doctors all speak pretty good english.

I went to the emergency room with an ear infection a few months ago. The nurse gave the doctor the wrong info because she did not really understand me. She told the doctor that I was having pain in my head, instead of in my ear. This is because I had to communicate with her mostly by holding my hand to my ear, which she misconstrued. We have to have a common language. I know that people cant speak english the very first day they get here, but at some point it gets ridiculous.

Speaking all different languages separates people, it does not unite people. Especially when there are large populations that dont have any idea how to communicate with each other.

[wildhorses]

wildhorses;1050275 wrote: [text temporarily removed - I'll put it back in a few minutes - spot]


Spot: Why are you removing my post?

[wildhorses]

spot;1050280 wrote: Since 1890. I do think if you feel the term went out of use for fifty years you need to show some evidence for it, given that I've provided three easily-available counter-examples.

As for the salad bowl, my town's a wonderful example. I have really-truly Somali families that I get to talk to, and Pakistanis and Indians and Jamaicans and Malaysians and Canadians and Chileans and Poles and they all retain their cultural distinctions. For some reason I haven't met any Americans here for the last ten years but I'm sure if I did they'd be very obviously American and speak that impenetrable dialect they use rather than pick up the Queen's English.


I cant really respond to this until you retrieve my post. No fair removing posts Spot.

[spot]

wildhorses;1050281 wrote: Speaking all different languages separates people, it does not unite people. Especially when there are large populations that dont have any idea how to communicate with each other.What benefit is there, in your opinion, for the world to have more than a single language?

[spot]

wildhorses;1050283 wrote: Spot: Why are you removing my post?


An inadvertent use of Edit instead of Quote, completely unintended. It's taking me a while to retrieve your text. I've not done that before, it was very slack of me.