KFC Kickin For Christ KFC Kickin For Christ

How To Destroy America

How To Destroy America

Scary

A Frightening Analysis

This is a speech given about 2 years ago but still worth repeating. Have you heard this?

We all know Dick Lamm as the former Governor of Colorado. In that context his thoughts are particularly poignant. Last week there was an immigration-overpopulation conference in Washington, DC, filled to capacity by many of American's finest minds and leaders. A brilliant college professor named Victor Hansen Davis talked about his latest book, "Mexifornia," explaining how immigration — both legal and illegal — was destroying the entire state of California. He said it would march across the country until it destroyed all vestiges of The American Dream.

Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America. The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States. He said, "If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that 'An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.'"

"Here is how they do it," Lamm said: First to destroy America, "Turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country. History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar Seymour Lipset put it this way: 'The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans."

Lamm went on: Second, to destroy America, "Invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds.

Third, "We could make the United States a 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: 'The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved! Not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.'"

Lamm said, "I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America reinforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities."

"Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high school."

"My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of 'Victimology.' I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population."

"My sixth plan for America's downfall would include dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other - that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity! Unity is what it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshiped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic Games.

A common enemy Persia threatened their liberty. Yet all these bonds were not strong enough to over come two factors: local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell.

"E. Pluribus Unum" — From many, one. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the 'pluribus' instead of the 'Unum,' we can balkanize America as surely as Kosovo."

"Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits ~ make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of 'diversity.' I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century - that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist' or 'x! xenophobes' halt discussion and debate."

"Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-culturism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'Victimology,' I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra: That because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. I would make every individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them."

In the last minute of his speech, Governor Lamm wiped his brow. Profound silence followed. Finally he said, "Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis's book Mexifornia. His book is dangerous. It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America deserves to be destroyed, don't read that book."

There was no applause.

A chilling fear quietly rose like an ominous cloud above every attendee at the conference. Every American in that room knew that everything Lamm enumerated was proceeding methodically, quietly, darkly, yet pervasively across the United States today. Every discussion is being suppressed. Over 100 languages are ripping the foundation of our educational system and national cohesiveness. Barbaric cultures that practice female genital mutilation are growing as we celebrate 'diversity.' American jobs are vanishing into the Third World as corporations create a Third World in America — take note of California and other states — to date, ten million illegal aliens and growing fast. It is reminiscent of George Orwell's book "1984." In that story, three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth building: "War is peace," "Freedom is slavery," and "Ignorance is strength."

Governor Lamm walked back to his seat. It dawned on everyone at the conference that our nation and the future of this great democracy are deeply in trouble and worsening fast. If we don't get this immigration monster stopped within three years, it will rage like a California wildfire and destroy everything in its path, especially The American Dream.

Link

"
25,979 views 88 replies
Reply #26 Top
Actually, Baker is no more or less hostile than he usually gets with people who disagree with him on something he believes strongly in... this is just the first time you've probably been on the receiving end of it.
Reply #27 Top
then they should learn to speak the language of this country. I would expect no less myself if I moved to Brazil, Korea or Russia. I would learn the language and do my best to speak it out of respect for my new adopted country.


As you said yourself that's not easy for those who aren't schoolkids. Have you met a full citizen who cannot speak English whatsoever? Why should they have to speak broken English to each other when Spanish or Italian or Arabic or Japanese is so much easier?

And anyway, the country is enriched through a multilingual populace. It improves national security (a wider language base means a wider agent base) and it improves communicative efficiency, because borrowing of useful words from other tongues will become more common.

It's certainly nothing to fear unless you believe your children's development should be stunted by only teaching them English. You'll probably be dead soon (ie within the next 50 years or so), so there's no point worrying overly much about your generation's lack of language skills. The future is far more important.
Reply #28 Top
Actually, Baker is no more or less hostile than he usually gets with people who disagree with him on something he believes strongly in... this is just the first time you've probably been on the receiving end of it.


That's true enough. I've exchanged words with Baker on a number of topics and he doesn't sound much different here.
Reply #29 Top
" never said that. I think having traditions in one's own culture is great, and I love learning about other cultures. I have no problem with that even if they celebrate these things in this country. "


No, but rightwinger did, and yet you can't understand why I would react strongly to it?

"So you're saying what? We need to learn Arabic so we can learn to discuss with our Arabic neighbors? We need to learn Spanish and French as well so we can know how to ask for a towel in said language? "


No, but if you frequent areas that are predominately filled with people who speak spanish, it is irrational to stubbornly refuse to learn how to say "May I have a towel". Or you could call the front desk and have them ask.

"So you think that's the reason many don't speak a second, third or fourth language? Because they are bigoted and stubborn? Well in the school system I grew up in I was offered French and Latin. That's it. As you most likely know, the best time to learn a language is when one is young. I do not believe I was bigoted and/or stubborn because I cannot converse in another language. You're way out of line here Baker. "


So I am out of line for asking adults who live in a first-world, prosperous nation with education galore to learn a second language, and you are not out of line for expecting adults who come from impoverished nations to do so?

How much easier is it for you to learn a smattering of Spanish than it is for them to learn English? You certainly have a computer and access to the Internet, and therefore the free resources to learn how to ask for a towel. Do they? You can't take a few minutes a day to learn a second language, but they clean your toilet in the hotel for 8 hours, take care of their family, and still have the time and energy to learn English, no doubt.

"then they should learn to speak the language of this country. I would expect no less myself if I moved to Brazil, Korea or Russia. I would learn the language and do my best to speak it out of respect for my new adopted country. "


You'll find people in those nations, living with a much lower standard of living than you, already speak a lot of English. You'll find that when you ask for a towel in their hotels, they'll often understand what you are saying. They are much more accepting of people who bother visiting and migrating to their nations. Perhaps you should grant that respect to the people who fetch your towels.

Demanding that people educate themselves so that you can stay ignorant is sad, especially when those people are making your food, trimming your lawn, and picking your fruit. it's pretty hypocritical to laud how learning English is in their best interest when you at the same time admit that you encounter problem situations because you refuse to learn a little Spanish.
Reply #30 Top
One of the differences between the immigrants of yesteryear and today is the desire to learn our language."


As I said above, that's a myth. We have always had huge immigrant areas in every major city with lots of people who didn't speak English. In the past they were just too afraid of the attitudes portrayed here to wander out. Sadly, we've given them the impression that we're different now. Evidently, we aren't


Sorry baker but in this instance you're only partially correct. BTW most weren't just "immigrants" they were naturalized citizens!
From the US immigration page:



General Requirements: All naturalization applicants must demonstrate good moral character. The other naturalization requirements may be modified or waived for certain applicants, such as spouses of U.S. Citizens.
A period of continuous residence and physical presence in the United States
An ability to read, write and speak English
Good moral character
Knowledge of the principles of the U.S. Constitution
Favorable disposition toward the United States



Demanding that people educate themselves so that you can stay ignorant is sad, especially when those people are making your food, trimming your lawn, and picking your fruit. it's pretty hypocritical to laud how learning English is in their best interest when you at the same time admit that you encounter problem situations because you refuse to learn a little Spanish.


And "why" should he have to learn spanish? Does he live in a spanish speaking country? No. he lives in America, where we speak "English"! They want to immigrate here and do it legally? Fine. They want to keep their customs and language? Also fine. They want to work here? Then let them learn the damn language! It is neither right or fair to the rest of us that we have to learn their language to recieve decent service while in America. You want decent service in Mexico? Learn spanish! For those serving here, learn english!
Reply #31 Top
" Applicants exempt from this requirement are those who on the date of filing:

  • have been residing in the United States subsequent to a lawful admission for permanent residence for periods totaling 15 years or more and are over 55 years of age;
  • have been residing in the United States subsequent to a lawful admission for permanent residence for periods totaling 20 years or more and are over 50 years of age; or
  • have a medically determinable physical or mental impairment, where the impairment affects the applicant’s ability to learn English."


Oddly, the reality stated here and elsewhere is that people have to have translators to be sworn in as Americans, so I'm not sure how you can really point to that. Most of our modern immigration junk goes back to the 1950's, too, when all those scary feriners were sneaking in with thier pinko communism.

Needless to say, I'm unimpressed with a nation that can't stomach declaring a national language and yet makes petty technicalities in the fine print to enforce it. Not that they do...

Reply #32 Top
"And "why" should he have to learn spanish?


Because he needs a towel from someone who only speaks spanish. Welcome to reality, Mr. Cleaver. The Beav should probably also learn a bit of Spanish in case he needs a towel in the future.

"Does he live in a spanish speaking country? No. he lives in America, where we speak "English"!"


No, you speak English. I speak English. Not everyone here speaks English, as evidenced by KFC's towel tribulations, and my experience ordering food at almost every fast food restaurant I go to.

"It is neither right or fair to the rest of us that we have to learn their language to recieve decent service while in America. You want decent service in Mexico? Learn spanish! For those serving here, learn english!"


Lol, right and fair. Hrm. Which side is it in every discussion telling the Liberals that life isn't, and shouldn't always be fair? Lemme think...

How about if you go into a service industry that you know ahead of time is filled with people that speak spanish, why don't you learn to speak spanish? It really boggles the mind to hear people defending their right to be unable to communicate lambasting people who are unable to communicate.
Reply #33 Top
Again, I'll not bother imposing my wacko views on those enjoying their cultural protectionist banter here. I've expressed myself as about as well as I am able on my blog.

I'll just say here, as I have elsewhere, that never in American history have people been so pithy and dismissive of millions of people marching in the street in state after state. The visigoths weren't bad people, the Romans were just idiots.
Reply #34 Top
I would expect no less myself if I moved to Brazil, Korea or Russia. I would learn the language and do my best to speak it out of respect for my new adopted country.

Actually, have you tried to learn Korean? I've been trying for nearly 5 years. I'm finding it really hard and I'm quite a talented linguist. I live in Korea and let me tell you I haven't met many westerners here who can speak it at all. Most Koreans understand that few of us will be here long enough to make the herculean effort needed to master this very difficult (for a native English speaker) language.

It's very easy to make glib statements about learning foreign languages, as if a couple of weeks of night school will fix the problem. It's also a big mistake to assume that someone who doesn't speak another language well isn't really trying. Miguksaramhanteneun hangungmal chongmal eoreoweoyo!
Reply #35 Top
No I agree with you Chak but that wasn't the point. The point was if I were in another culture I'd do my best to learn the language especially if I'm serving clientel. In order to serve and help another, I'd first have to be able to understand them.

I have two people here in my church that grew up in Korea. They cook Korean dishes often for us and tell us bits and pieces of the culture they grew up in. They are American Missionaries and do understand the language.

Reply #36 Top
The point was if I were in another culture I'd do my best to learn the language

Yes, that's about as much as one can reasonably ask.
Reply #37 Top
School children in Asian countries are required to learn English.

I agree with drmiler. When in Rome......
Reply #38 Top
Sorry, I've been offline for a while.

No, but rightwinger did, and yet you can't understand why I would react strongly to it?


Baker, I don't recall saying there was anything wrong with it. In fact, here's what I did say:

if they wanted to speak their native languages and keep their traditions in their own homes and neighborhoods, fine. That's what America is built on, yes. Diversity. A whole lot of our traditions, foods and styles are based on those from other nations, after all. I love Chinese and Mexican foods.
But it's not good when they're encouraged to keep their loyalties to their native cultures and beliefs, even as they enjoy the benefits of American citizenship. That's what bothers me. They're not required to assimilate anymore; if you want to be American, it's okay to still be German, Russian, Arabian, whatever......that's what weakens us.


There's nothing "American" that's truly "American", but loyalty to one's country is loyalty to one's country.
KFC correctly pointed out that having everyone speak different languages would not be conducive to victory on, say, a battlefield. That's very true. It's also not very effictive in business, emergency services and simple conversation.
English IS, after all, the national language of America. Has been since 1776. You want to come and live here from somewhere else, GREAT!
But learn English, and don't coerce me into having to learn your tongue. Not doing it unless I want to. I'm not the one going to your country to live. If I go there for a visit, I'll take a translation dictionary and try to speak your language. That would be courteous. Extend the same to me.

As to American soldiers in uniform, no....you're right. I have no idea how many in uniform now might have Iraqi ancestry. That doesn't matter.
My point was mainly that I have yet to see all those "loyal American" Muslims (including Iraqis, who presumably came here to get away from the evils of Saddam and his thugs), who supposedly hate the way the Fundamentalists have taken their faith hostage, rushing out and lining up at Armed Forces Recruitment Centers.
If they're so loyal to this, their adopted nation, and so hate the Fundamentalists, they should be camping outside the Centers like "Star Wars" fans at a theater, eagerly awaiting the opportunity to join in and aid the defense of their country and faith, like the Japanese-Americans did back then.
But no, they sit idly back and watch utterly innocent people being executed by Fundamentalist thugs, and soldiers from their own nation, that are defending them, in reality, get killed, without lifting a finger.

But let a couple cartoons get published, and HOOO BOY. Lookout.

That's what bothers me.
Reply #39 Top
There's nothing "American" that's truly "American", but loyalty to one's country is loyalty to one's country.


So, you are saying what?

KFC correctly pointed out that having everyone speak different languages would not be conducive to victory on, say, a battlefield. That's very true. It's also not very effictive in business, emergency services and simple conversation.
English IS, after all, the national language of America. Has been since 1776.


English is not our national language. The United States does not have a national language.Lots of businesses do quite well in the US not speaking a word of English. As to emergencies, I grant it may be "common sense" that we find a common language, but in the US it is but no means assured that language will be English.

But learn English, and don't coerce me into having to learn your tongue. Not doing it unless I want to. I'm not the one going to your country to live.


No one is coercing you, but it might help to break down cultural barriers and increase understanding if we attempted to learn some of the language of our neighbors. "Your" country is an interesting choice of words, suggesting that immigrants are not as "American" as you.
My point was mainly that I have yet to see all those "loyal American" Muslims (including Iraqis, who presumably came here to get away from the evils of Saddam and his thugs), who supposedly hate the way the Fundamentalists have taken their faith hostage, rushing out and lining up at Armed Forces Recruitment Centers.
If they're so loyal to this, their adopted nation, and so hate the Fundamentalists, they should be camping outside the Centers like "Star Wars" fans at a theater, eagerly awaiting the opportunity to join in and aid the defense of their country and faith, like the Japanese-Americans did back then.
But no, they sit idly back and watch utterly innocent people being executed by Fundamentalist thugs, and soldiers from their own nation, that are defending them, in reality, get killed, without lifting a finger.


Since you do not have the numbers and have not camped out yourself at recruiting stations (assuming you live in a predominately Muslim neighborhood) how can you say this? As it turns out, "loyal American WASPS seem to be having the same difficulty getting to the recruiting stations. In another sense, let me ask this, why would an Iraqi immigrant who has (to go with your scenario) fled Iraq for refuge here in the US deliberately put himself back in Iraq where he would very likely be high on the hit list of insurgents? My sense is they are doing about the same as you, earning a living and paying the taxes that enable other poor youngsters to go out there and be targets.

As to the cartoon quip, I didn't see a lot of American immigrants protesting this, a few perhaps, but most of those protests were in Europe and the Middle East.

Be well.
Reply #40 Top

English is not our national language. The United States does not have a national language


And you woould be incorrect in "assuming" this. The language of a nation is usually the one printed on their "national" currency. Is ours printed in Spanish or something? NO!!! It's printed in "English"!

But learn English, and don't coerce me into having to learn your tongue. Not doing it unless I want to. I'm not the one going to your country to live.


No one is coercing you, but it might help to break down cultural barriers and increase understanding if we attempted to learn some of the language of our neighbors. "Your" country is an interesting choice of words, suggesting that immigrants are not as "American" as you.


And "this" works both ways!
Reply #41 Top
English is not our national language. The United States does not have a national language


And you woould be incorrect in "assuming" this.


Technically, Sodaiho is correct. There is legally no official national language of the United States, although it is clear that English has served that role de facto from since before the establishment of the nation.

WIKIPEDIA:
Official language(s): none at Federal level; English de facto.

CIA FACTBOOK:
English 82.1%, Spanish 10.7%, other Indo-European 3.8%, Asian and Pacific island 2.7%, other 0.7% (2000 census) [No official national language cited].

English First is an organisation that exists to establish English as the official national language. Link. Its very existence suggests that English is not yet legally the official national language of the United States.

The language of a nation is usually the one printed on their "national" currency.

Your point that for all practical purposes (just another way to say de facto ) English is the main language employed in the United States is obviously correct.
Reply #42 Top
yikes kfc, I did not se this till just now, I am glad we both think alike on the languege subject, also I am glad that I put the tower of babel spin on mine.
Reply #43 Top
So, you are saying what?


I'm saying that, if they want to be American, they should have loyalty to this country and no other. Increasingly, that is not the case. Read my posts above my last, and you'll get a clearer picture of my opinion.

English is not our national language. The United States does not have a national language.Lots of businesses do quite well in the US not speaking a word of English. As to emergencies, I grant it may be "common sense" that we find a common language, but in the US it is but no means assured that language will be English.
---Sodaiho



Technically, Sodaiho is correct. There is legally no official national language of the United States, although it is clear that English has served that role de facto from since before the establishment of the nation.

WIKIPEDIA:
Official language(s): none at Federal level; English de facto.

CIA FACTBOOK:
English 82.1%, Spanish 10.7%, other Indo-European 3.8%, Asian and Pacific island 2.7%, other 0.7% (2000 census) [No official national language cited].

English First is an organisation that exists to establish English as the official national language. Link. Its very existence suggests that English is not yet legally the official national language of the United States.
---Chakgogka

Your point that for all practical purposes (just another way to say de facto ) English is the main language employed in the United States is obviously correct.
---Chakgoka


Sorry, guys, but the above quotes are merely semantic arguments. The country was founded, officially, by English-speaking people. The Great Documents of our nation (Declaration of Independence, US Constitution) were written in English. This makes English the main language of the US.
Reply #44 Top
Sorry, guys, but the above quotes are merely semantic arguments.

Indeed. As is your argument BECAUSE
This makes English the main language of the US.

is EXACTLY the same as saying:
Your point that for all practical purposes (just another way to say de facto ) English is the main language employed in the United States is obviously correct.
Reply #45 Top
Come on, Chak...... you're ususally better than this.
To debate that the fact English is (okay, UNOFFICIALLY; it was never made OFFICIAL, because it didn't need to be. The debate would have been carried out in English, after all, and that propbably would have seemed a little redundant to the fairly common-sensical Founders) the language of the US is like saying surrender, collaboration and accepting military help from countries they later spit on, undermine and backstab isn't the UNOFFICIAL political position of France. It's what they do, for crying out loud.

So, in fifty years or less (probably much sooner), will the UNOFFICIAL language of the US be Spanish?
Reply #46 Top
Sorry, Sodaiho, I meant to put this in the above comment. Didn't mean to ignore you.

No one is coercing you,
---Sodaiho

Give it time. I worked for a while as a supervisor for a cleaning company in Fort Wayne, Indiana, and almost the entire crew was Spanish-speaking. So much so that, to facilitate things a little better, the Project Manager was a Mexican kid who, though very nice and a hard worker, was a little over his head. And he always had trouble understanding those of us who spoke English as our first language. It's coming. Most schools nowadays, as I understand, at least, require at least one year of foreign language class for graduation. I'd call that coercion.


but it might help to break down cultural barriers and increase understanding if we attempted to learn some of the language of our neighbors.
---Sodaiho

Okay.....if I want to go there, I'll learn their language, as I indicated somewhere above. I still say that, if they want to come here AND LIVE, they should have to learn our language, instead of making me hand-signal my way through checking out their order or telling them where the restroom is. As I also said somewhere above, that would only be courteous.

What the hell is so wrong with all this? I mean, according to Chak's own figures, over 82% of Americans speak English. Yet, he debates my point, too. Majority rule used to mean something in this country, you know?


"Your" country is an interesting choice of words, suggesting that immigrants are not as "American" as you.
---Sodaiho

Yes, they ARE less American than I am, because this is MY country; they're coming here to live from somewhere else. THEY'RE country, where they speak some other language. I was born and bred here. Were they?
No...they want to come here and enjoy the benefits of MY country. The same benefits that are my birthright, guaranteed by the sweat and blood of MY ancestors who worked to create and warred and defend those rights, because I was born into them. In MY country.

Since you do not have the numbers and have not camped out yourself at recruiting stations (assuming you live in a predominately Muslim neighborhood) how can you say this? As it turns out, "loyal American WASPS seem to be having the same difficulty getting to the recruiting stations.


I can say this because it's true. The Muslims who say they hate the Fundamentalists are just sitting by and letting them take the spotlight, representing all of Islam, instead of standing up and saying "no...we're not all like that". It's true that "WASPs" aren't exactly thronging the streets, either, but then, the Muslims have a God to fanatically defend, an ideal, rather than a country, which should mean more to them, overall. After all, it's pretty much all they have. But that's just my opinion.

In another sense, let me ask this, why would an Iraqi immigrant who has (to go with your scenario) fled Iraq for refuge here in the US deliberately put himself back in Iraq where he would very likely be high on the hit list of insurgents?
---Sodaiho

Because he left Iraq in the hands of a tyrant he hated, and possibly left family there, as well. Family he'd like to see enjoy the same freedoms he's enjoyed here in America, and so he should go there to defend them against the insurgents and aid in the establishment of those freedoms.
Iraqi immigrants should have more fire in their bellies for Iraqi independence than anyone else. Many German immigrants signed up to fight in the world wars for just that reason. Polish exiles and immigrants in England and the States enlisted in droves to help with the liberation of Europe and, subsequently, Poland. But then, that was a different time, more clearly-defined in ideals and there was no PC.
Also, they were Christians, not Muslims.


My sense is they are doing about the same as you, earning a living and paying the taxes that enable other poor youngsters to go out there and be targets.
---Sodaiho

Listen, pal.....don't try to make me feel bad because I'm not in there thick of battle. I'd be there if I could, but I can't, for medical reasons I've defined in other article threads. That's why I defend my country here on the Web, against liberal underminers and weak-kneed wafflers like you.

For this comment alone, you've shown me that you're not worth my time in defining my reasons for you. You've also shown me that you're probably running out of steam, because you're getting personal.


As to the cartoon quip, I didn't see a lot of American immigrants protesting this, a few perhaps, but most of those protests were in Europe and the Middle East.
---Sodaiho

Granted, but that doesn't change the fact that if so many Muslims are truly outraged by the attrocities and violent, sick extremes of Fundamentalism, they should all be protesting against it and its purveyors, with just the same pitched fervor.


Be well.
---Sodaiho

You, too. God Bless you and have a Happy Easter.
Reply #47 Top
they're coming here to live from somewhere else


So did your ancestors, didn't they?
Reply #48 Top
they're coming here to live from somewhere else


So did your ancestors, didn't they?


Yes but at the time there were no laws pertaining to "how" it needed to be done. There are NOW and they're breaking them! If I were to break the same laws by going the other way..."into Mexico", I'd end up in a federali prison damn quick. So why should it be wrong to do the same to them?
Reply #49 Top
Come on, Chak...... you're ususally better than this.

OK, I'll try and do better.
I don't want to comment now on the situation in the United States, a country that I have never visited and have no immediate plans to do so. We're lucky that we speak English, the new global language. I'm luckier than you, having just been appointed a professor of English at a leading Asian university.

My travels have shown me that we sometimes take this luck for granted. The stereotype of the American tourist (and sometimes British tourist) in a foreign country dealing with a waiter's incomprehension, by repeating their request in English, but shouting this time, is a cliche, but one that I have witnessed enough times to know the truth at the heart of it. Having the luck to speak the only language that (seems to) matter, we are notoriously bad at bothering with a second language.

Now, in my professional role as a language teacher I can tell you that some languages are harder to learn than others, but all foreign languages take years of study to master. The mistake that a lot of people are making here is to assume that the Mexican waiter who cannot understand your order is making no effort to learn English. In fact, this is highly unlikely; if true, it would be monumentally stupid. The most likely explanation is that the immigrant is somewhere on that great "English as a Foreign Language" learning curve - beginner, elementary, pre-intermediate, intermediate, upper-intermediate, advanced, proficiency. Getting through all that takes a lot of years, even for the most linguistically gifted. It may even take more than one generation. If English speakers (for all kinds of reasons) were not so notoriously bad at learning other languages, this would be obvious, but I think some of you really believe that everyone can learn English in a single semester of night school. Maybe a little civility and patience is all that is needed.
Reply #50 Top
Why would the founding fathers have chosen French? They were English colonies. The fact that they all spoke English doesn't prove they meant for it to be a national language, any more than your average curling team intendes to be monotone.

We can be like the piddly cultural supremacists in France and Canada if you want, passing laws to make sure that no one "corrupts" our precious non-culture with other people's cultures. We'll be just as lame and inconsequential eventually as they are.

** A Mexican comes to the United States, knowing they know no English, accepting the difficulties involved as a matter of course. We call him stupid.

** An American knows full well that a growing number of people in the US speak English *at best* as a second language, and know that they will very likely have to deal with them on a regular basis. Out of cultural obstinance, self-imposed ignorance, or just laziness we refuse to get the tools we need to communicate. We call ourselves morally right.

It's the same thing. Both people know that they are going to have situations where knowing something other than their home language is necessary, and both decide not to undertake educating themselves in a way that benefits them. What happens to segments of the population that don't have the tools to compete?

Both the Mexican and the American deny themselves, one out of hardship, the other out of obstinance, and both will take a back seat to people who can communicate however they like. Adapt, or die. We told that to the American Indian children when we beat their language and culture out of them. We tell that to Mexicans when they come here.

How are you going to feel when the majority of the population looks at you and says that? When you run a farm and you can't hire people to work with you because you are too ignorant or stubborn to learn their language? The guy down the road takes a course a few hours a week and can out manage you.

Adapt or die is just something the majority says to the minority. We've had 200 years of shoving it down other people's throats. We can be like France and become irrelavant with immigrants marching in the street, or we can embrace change and embrace enriching ourselves and let our culture honestly reflect our democratic composition.