OK, so I stretched a bit in coming up with the title above, but it helps me to make a point. Recently the following reader comment was made:
. . . I oppose Tagalog in Alaska and French in Lousiana and Maine if used for official government purposes. And in New Mexico Spanish language rights are actually enshrined in the state Constitution (which I oppose). Census figures about language ability do not relate directly to the issue of official language use. The attempt to prove that there are few non-English speakers raises a provocative question: if it’s a non-issue, why am I confronted with Spanish in all sorts of official government settings? Whom is it serving, if the non-English speaking population is so small?
Sometimes history is the answer that gives the key to the answer to a conundrum. This is one of the cases in which a knowledge of history is very important. Let’s look back at history. Folks need to remember that in the southwest, in Florida, and in Puerto Rico, Spanish-speakers were present before the first Anglophone colony was set up in this country. Sadly, too many of those who argue today either make it seem as though the Spanish-speakers came here second or make it seem as though it is a purely immigrant issue. But, Spanish-speaking populations that date to before the arrival of Anglophones have preserved their heritage in all three places. But, with the possible exception of Puerto Rico, and as the 2000 Census pointed out, the vast majority of Latinos are bilingual and quite Anglophone. So what is the big deal?
Well, we are in the same position as the Scots, the Welsh, and the Irish. Just like them, we were invaded by the English–in this case the USA. And just like in Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, regular and constant attempts have been made by those English (Anglophones) to eliminate our language and our culture. [Remember I, too, was born in a country that was a colony of the USA for a very short time.] For the Scots and the Welsh, the road back to their language and culture has been very difficult. At one point, Welsh was a fading language. But now it is finally a growing language again. And, yes, many signs and forms in Wales are now present or available in both languages in spite of the fact that all the Welsh speak English. In Scotland there is a freedom party that is non-violent but argues for the independence of Scotland. It is called the Scottish National Party. They are a peaceful and well organized party unlike some of the extreme Latino parties in the southwest. In Puerto Rico, up to 1/3 of the population has favored independence at various time, again a parallel to the Scottish experience. The Puerto Rican Independence Party is a full parallel to the Scottish National Party.
Here is the bottom line. If you support the Welsh and the Scots and the Irish in their efforts to preserve their language and culture, then you should be willing to support Latinos in their drive to preserve their language and culture. Should I mention that both the Scots and the Welsh quite often display “their” flags either alone or alongside the Union Jack? And yet, in time of war, the Welsh and the Scots show themselves to be faithful British subjects, just like the many Latinos that have faithfully and willingly served in the Armed Forces of the United States.
Yes, the Census shows that the overwhelming majority of us are bilingual. But that is not the point. We are as unwilling as the Scots and the Welsh to have our culture and our language suppressed by the “English.” That is why it is such a big deal.
Here is a fun quote from the movie Braveheart to finish with:
King’s Advisor: [to Princess] Sanguinarius homo indomitus est, et se me dite cum mendacia. [He is a bloody murdering savage. And he’s telling lies]
William Wallace: Ego nunquam pronunciari mendacium! Sed ego sum homo indomitus. [I never lie. But I am a savage]
William Wallace: [to Princess] Ou en français, si vous préférez? [Or in French if you prefer?]
An excellent parallel! You have touched the same nerve in these posts that I stumbled upon in a college speech class years ago. I was really shocked to encounter the level of raw emotion tied to these issues on the part of English speakers. It took me took until graduate school to learn that language issues aren’t just about intelligibility and communication — language is intimately tied up with identity, and the imposition of one language over another is often a tool to express dominance. “Confronted with Spanish” is kind of strong language…it isn’t as if one is being asked to conduct his or her business in Spanish rather than English, so why is the mere presence of Spanish perceived as a confrontation? I find it odd that it is English speakers who get really angry and defensive about this issue, not the Latinos and others who want their languages to be used and recognized.
As a person who has had to search for forgotten heritage, I can say that I wish it had not been forgotten. That being said, at this point, I am so muttly that there is no clear heritage to recapture. I think that we will probably get there at some point. I have a friend who is of Irish and Spanish extraction. Her Spanish ancestors were here in the southwest before anyone else but the so-called native peoples who were as we know just immigrants from further back in hsitory. She is also the presumed heir to her clan in Ireland. She is just as “anglo” as anyone but still celebrates her heritages and has studied up on them. Her husband is a mix of German and English. SO her children are just as muttly as I am. The longer you stay here, the muttlier you are. So I say everybody celebrate them all!!
I have no problem celebrating them all. And, in the geographically, culturally, and religiously mobile United States of America “mutts,” as you call them, are the majority. My argument is not against people who do not wish to keep up the culture of their forebears or who inevitably marry into other cultures. That is individual choice. My problem is when there is a deliberate policy that forcibly suppresses other cultures that were there before the current one, such as the Native Americans, and the Spanish-speakers, or other cultures that may appear through immigration, such as Irish or Italian, etc.
As the Census clearly points out, assimilation happens with immigrants. But, as the Australian bishops pointed out, assimilation works better and much more peaceably when it happens at the speed of the immigrant rather than under compulsion. With pre-existing cultures, there may be no full assimilation, but both Great Britain and Switzerland give some good examples of how to mix languages and cultures, but end up with one peaceful country. [I deliberately did NOT say the United Kingdom because Northern Ireland is an example of how to really mess up.]
“But, as the Australian bishops pointed out, assimilation works better and much more peaceably when it happens at the speed of the immigrant rather than under compulsion.”
I think this is a key element of the tension. Many, if not most, fully support appreciation of heritage in our “melting pot” nation. However, there is concern about the willingness of certain groups to partake in that assimilation. It brings up the difference between multiculturalism and assimilation. GB has been more of a multicultural nation, while the US is more one of assiliation under the banner of a common goal/dream.
Your point about pre-existing cultures is very good, and needs to be taken into account. The treatment and condition of native Americans is a dark stain on our history.
LOL, here is the secret that most of the extreme advocates of multiculturalism fail to recognize. Like it or not, by the third generation, they will be assimilated. That is why I do not worry much about them. The question has more to do with the ability to deliberately preserve the language and certain parts of the culture. But, to give you a silly example, many Cubans behave one way in Little Havana in Miami and another way when they are away from the city and dealing with non-Latinos. The same is true of the Welsh, the Scots, the French-speaking Swiss who visit a German-speaking area of Switzerland, the Creole speaking Louisianan, etc.
The reality is that most people can maintain more than one culture within themselves. In fact, look up the term Third Culture Kid and you will see how it can work, both to the good and to the bad. Not wanting to lose my culture (as in Little Havana), and wanting it to remain recognized does not mean I am not able to function in another culture.
The extreme multiculturalists are the other extreme from the English-only people. Both extremes are equally mistaken.
My children went to a school in the Washington Metro area where everything was labeled in 6 0r 7 languages. All the kids learned English just fine–some of the parents needed the signs…..what is wrong with that? No one gets upset if someone needs an ASL translator.
You write –
‘In Scotland there is a rather extreme “freedom” party that is non-violent but argues for independence for Scotland.’
Would you please clarify exactly what you mean by that. There is an inference that the only way that Scottish independence will be achieved is through the use of violence. That is total nonsense.
I have been an active member of the Scottish National Party for over 35 years. The following is from the aims of the SNP –
‘Self-Government for Scotland – that is, the restoration of Scottish National Sovereignty by the establishment of a democratic Scottish Parliament within the Commonwealth, freely elected by the peoples of Scotland, whose authority will be limited only by such agreements as may be freely entered into by them with other nations or states or international organisations for the purpose of furthering international coooperation, world peace and the protection of the environment.’
NOTE: Under Scottish Constitutional Law sovereignty rests with the people.
You are correct, sir. Please re-read the post and see some of the changes I have made. I have placed them in blue to help distinguish them. Would you find this a more acceptable wording?
Thankyou Father. Your amended wording is now more representative of the actual situation here in Scotland.