So what would the solution be? Kick out "all" immigrants that came from non-English speaking countries? What rights would then be given to the original Americans(the indigenous)? Would they still be overrun, or would they stand as the real Americans? What about their languages? Many countries, like the US, have been dependent on immigration for a long time. Without it, the modern day America would not exist. Cant both have the cake and eat it, hehe. (Not trying to start a fight, just curious )
Your confusing multiculturalism with immigration policy. And the people you refering to as " indigenous" are anything but. They displaced people, just as they were displaced by Europeans.
Because Spanish people think they are superior.. well over here in my area thats how it is.. they do what they please without regard to anyone else..!
My question was simply why have we created a different set of rules for those who speak Spanish as their native language and why is that so? I was hoping for some sound answer from someone who had Spanish for a native language. The responses were interesting. As for the economics of it, the thought was that it makes sense if you are in business. A point I agree on completely, but still doesn't address the question of why we have to have that option. Another response was that we invaded Mexico in the mid 1800's. Yep, I guess we did, but again I don't see any relevance to my original question. Our imperialistic past does not answer the current question of why we are turning into a two language country. The point was brought up that English is a hard language to learn. Yes, that is true, but English is somewhat based on Latin which would make it easier for someone who speaks another language based on Latin to learn as opposed to say, someone from Eastern Europe who's language has practically no relevance to English. So I don't again see why this one ethnic group has a different set of rules. Another point was brought up that when the Europeans came here they did not learn Algonquin or Seneca or any other native tongues. Again a true point but one that also ignores that conquering armies usually do not adopt the language of their conquered lands, but force the new conquered lands to adopt their language. Hence the reason most of the Western world speaks a language based at least somewhat on Latin. The term "lingustic imperialists" was also brought up in regard to Americans and those who speak English. I must admit that I do like the term even though it lacks the real world relevance. The reality is that English has been the dominant language of commerce for the better part of the last 300 years through the British, the Americans, the Canadians, and even the Aussies. That doesn't make us or anyone who speaks English an imperialist, it just makes sense to learn the language of commerce. It is the same reason that many businesses in the US give you the option to press 2 for Spanish. It was also mentioned that others have not learned English. Again, this is true, however they have not sought to impose their language on us. When I call the IRS or any government agency my choices are to press 1 for English and 2 for Spanish, not those two options and 3 for Bantu and 4 for Farsi and so on. As for limiting immigration, that is not my point at all. My point is that when a nation loses one of its most common features, such as language, it can start to unravel. Again, I use Canada as an example where part of the country says you must learn French if you are going to be in Quebec, but the rest of the country must learn French. Dos Equis mentioned the Quebec language police which is a very real set of circumstances one can find in Quebec. How far are we from something similar here in the US? So I pose my original question, Why Spanish? I think it is political pandering and setting a different set of rules for one group as opposed to the rest of the country. That is a practice which is counter productive and just downright dangerous for the continuity of any country.
Here's my answer: -Easy Access - You have 2 borders... One with us and the other with the world's largest speaking Spanish population. -Economical & Political Growth - 44+ million, or 15% of your population are Hispanic by origin. Adding the "Press 2" could be a huge increase in both revenue and votes. -History - Many of your SW states were part of Mexico -Origins - Some of your states were colonized by Spain -Lack of "protection" (a.k.a. enforcement) - You don't have language police What do I win? Can you ship it across borders? That could be another reason - similar climates... People leave here for the climate... not normally the other way around.
There is a common theory that 50 years from now, only English, Spanish and Mandarin will be spoken across the globe .. most other languages will cease to be! Agree with Waste, makes sense to me!
Waste, you have just won a full season's subscription to Hockey Night in Canada's broadcasts. Of course that will be both in French and English! The response to why people who speak Spanish will not learn English when they move here is "They don't have to." The reason they don't have to is that politicians have been pandering to that segement of the voting population for the last 30 years or so without any regard to the damage it may do to the country.
Ben and Lisa: But multiculturalism comes from immigration, right? The acceptance of several ethnic groups, religions etc. Its a product of the same. So who were the original inhabitants of America? I only ask because Im unsure. This could be tricky, regarding the timeline and when one decides to count. Could it be that the Natives were the "first" ones to divide the land in various territories/"states"? In an organized form, that is.
Personally, I see way more pros than cons to not having an official language. If I had a business in a state/city that houses a lot of Hispanics, Id make sure to give them the option, just like most hotels, tour sellers, bartenders etc, do here in Cancun for English speaking visitors.
Princess, that is my point exactly. When you establish a different set of rules for one group then you give them an entitlement to ignore other rules.
