Re: If you\'re causcasian you\'re in big trouble
WVBill, Thats a big, YUP! Sounds about right to me. Someone would have to be pretty far into the conspiracy theory fringe to turn your succinct outline into an embryonic **** police state instrument.
Tower of babel anyone? We need a single language of comerce and law. Anyone here ever talk to any higher placed Canadian armed forces folks about the advantages of having French speaking troops in their ranks? Way back in colonial times there were different currencies proliferating and it made for a great deal of restriction on commerce, a basic pain in the a$$. I embrace multiculturalism to a degree and feel that our culture is enritched by an infusion of the best that other cultures has to offer (hybrid vigor again). On the lighter side it gives us more holidays and excuses for parties. On the serious side, I trully believe we need a common language to help unite us and I decry the tendency so prevalent of late to see groups demanding to be equal but separate. Are immigrants coming here to become Americans, found a new country, or to try to make us a colony of their country?
Back in the bad old days of slavery in the US, votes were cast when states formed to decide on whether to be slave or free. In advance of these votes, huge groups of people were mobilized and moved into the area to effect the outcome of the vote. As some areas of our country become heavily impacted with separatist minded immigrants they become defacto colonies of "the homeland". The ability to communicate in English lessens the need to band together to survive as survival is enhanced by being able to communicate with the rest of the adopted country. Making English the official language fosters and encourages the use of English especially in the case of contracts and other legal documents. Truly, having contracts and legal documents in many languages and combinations of languages would be a quagmire in parallel with the tower of Babel. Why encourage it?
In the US we publish voting materials in more languages and dialects than I care to count. If those voters can't understand English, how is it that they learn enough to cast an informed ballot? We need to ween folks a bit toward a basic ability to communicate in the language of the land, English. Making English the official language of the land is a good positive step toward keeping our contry united through commumications between and amoung all our peoples.
In California there are many suporters of a movement to take back the state. No, to my knowlege they are not planning an armed revolution even if at rallies you hear things like, "viva la raza, viva la revolucion!" Acording to what I could glean from their posters and talking to "folks" in the bario, it is a movement to remake/retake Califia for spanish speaking hispanics. Anyone out there know more they would share? I haven't been there in over a year.
I have seen nothing, even from the most radically conservative or the lunatic fringe white supremacists to indicate that anyone wants to make speaking a foreign language a crime.
Try to imagine what it would be like to tune in to CNN and watch the house or senate in session trying to legislate and debate in all the languages that could be spoken by representatives. If English is not formally the official language of the US then a representative from the bario could reasonably expect to make his presentations in Spanish and let everyone deal with it. Likewise any of the various asian American reps could expect the same. Should we have live simultaneous translations for all the possible languages that could be used. What about the congressional record? Print the foreign AND translated versions. What about dissagreements over the translation? What counts, legally, the translation or the original "foreign" text? Why would a sane person want to go down this road?
We need a common unifying language of state and commerce. We need it guaranteed now and in the future! English is accepted as that language internationally and for the most part in the US. What sort of misplaced ideal of "treating everyone fairly" could possibly be worth the horendous confusion and wedge which would be driven between citizens of this nation if we made all languages legal. Canada had quite enough trouble with just one state and one other language. How would it be if all languages were legal in all 50 states? Not reasonable you say? How do you decide which languages to discriminate against? You can't just have English and Spanish. What about Latvian immigrants or Botswanans? This soon becomes the argument of the beard or at least reductio ab adsurdum if not both.
WVBill, thanks for your clarifying comments. It forced me to think a bit more and realize just how truly one sided the logic really is on this issue. I'm still waiting to hear a clear explanation of why recognizing all languages as legal in the US would be better than just one.
Patrick
