Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Two countries separated by a common language. You crazy Americans

In other news, I've heard that Trump Jr. is holding informal talks with the Russians on the thorny issue of Syria.

Credit where credit's due - it's a smart move by Trump...

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
So wait, when you brits sing the alphabet song, do you end it with "zed"? That's horrible, it throws off the rhyme with "vee", and the "wont you come and sing with me".

I think you mean "ved" and the "won't you come and sing with me" bit rhymes with "Now I know my A, B, C's" so the pronunciation of Z doesn't really matter there.

that's the wrong song, over here its:

"every letter makes a sound and zee says zed"

it's horrible, it's worse than nails on a chalkboard.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Two countries separated by a common language. You crazy Americans

In other news, I've heard that Trump Jr. is holding informal talks with the Russians on the thorny issue of Syria.

Credit where credit's due - it's a smart move by Trump...

Is it? I don't think that private citizens who do not represent a country in any legal or official capacity should have anything to do with negotiating with foreign countries on their countries behalf, informal or not.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Two countries separated by a common language. You crazy Americans

In other news, I've heard that Trump Jr. is holding informal talks with the Russians on the thorny issue of Syria.

Credit where credit's due - it's a smart move by Trump...

Is it? Nothing says transparency like a secret meeting with someone who holds no official position yet holds the presidents ear. What kind of pay for play is going on here?

Who all believed trump when he said him and his son wouldn't be in collusion about trumps business dealings. Blind trust indeed.

America is doing fine this holiday!



56 Days until President Donald Trump takes office

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Two countries separated by a common language. You crazy Americans

In other news, I've heard that Trump Jr. is holding informal talks with the Russians on the thorny issue of Syria.

Credit where credit's due - it's a smart move by Trump...

Is it? I don't think that private citizens who do not represent a country in any legal or official capacity should have anything to do with negotiating with foreign countries on their countries behalf, informal or not.

Technically, it's all third party

Trump Jr is meeting somebody who knows somebody who knows somebody who knows Putin

Yes, you are right, it's technically a violation of US law, specifically the Logan act, but seeing as Nixon and Kissinger blatantly flouted it in 1968, when they secretly held talks with North and South Vietnam (Nixon was still a candidate at this time and thus a private citizen) and neither men were prosecuted for this far more damaging act, I doubt if Trump Jr. has anything to worry about...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Two countries separated by a common language. You crazy Americans

In other news, I've heard that Trump Jr. is holding informal talks with the Russians on the thorny issue of Syria.

Credit where credit's due - it's a smart move by Trump...

Is it? Nothing says transparency like a secret meeting with someone who holds no official position yet holds the presidents ear. What kind of pay for play is going on here?

Who all believed trump when he said him and his son wouldn't be in collusion about trumps business dealings. Blind trust indeed.

You call it pay to play, I call it normal practice

I mean, c'mon, the idea that a billionaire New Yorker was going to turn up at 1600 and turf people out a la Andrew Jackson, was never going to happen...

The American people will learn the hard way that Trump has principles, and if you don't like them, he has other principals...

Mitochondria wrote:
When any government functionary interacts with a person who does not speak English an immigration status check should be performed.

If you want govt officials to do something productive about illegal immigration you should have them examine our protectionist labor policies and laws. There are pros and cons to protecting labor, if we want to protect workers and raise the cost of legal labor then we're gong to incentivize lower cost illegal labor which in turn incentivizes illegal immigration. It's not so much that illegal immigrants come and take our jobs it's that everyone involved benefits from the lower labor cost of illegal labor so we continue to have people working against the system. An objective analysis of policy should be able to determine if the costs are outweighing the benefits and if we need to make adjustments.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Two countries separated by a common language. You crazy Americans

In other news, I've heard that Trump Jr. is holding informal talks with the Russians on the thorny issue of Syria.

Credit where credit's due - it's a smart move by Trump...

Is it? Nothing says transparency like a secret meeting with someone who holds no official position yet holds the presidents ear. What kind of pay for play is going on here?

Who all believed trump when he said him and his son wouldn't be in collusion about trumps business dealings. Blind trust indeed.

Envoys having private unofficial talks prior to the official on the record meetings isn't necessarily bad as it's a good way to set the table and avoid any surprises or confusion when negotiations begin in earnest. I am more concerned with the uncertainty of Trump Jr having had the time and inclination to be properly briefed and being knowledgeable on all the facets of Syria than I am with the occurrence of off the record preliminary meetings.

 LordofHats wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
I don't really agree with the "papers please" response to non-English speakers.

I don't really care that you disagree.

Over and over again, people propose absolutely bonkers ideas to halt illegals from entering the country, or to find and deport them. Many of these proposals can only result in discriminatory practices, which I might point out is why conservatives keep getting accused of racism so if you don't like the accusation, you might start by not proposing discrimination as state policy. Not being able to speak English is not against the law. It never should be, because the only reason to pass such a law is in furtherance of discrimination against anyone "not like me." Lots of Americans don't speak English. Many more speak it poorly. It's a stupid measure for investigating people. It's a policy whose only products is witch hunts, and I will happily start a protest movement to clog the system and waste tax payers dollars spent on this stupidity because it would be so god damn easy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

Mitochondria wrote:


No one said anything about speaking another language.

Anyone who does not speak English,

Seriously. Reread these two statements, and see if you can spot the ludicrousness.
.

You do know those two things aren't mutually inclusive, right?

So we're now expanding this policy to include the mute and signers?

The fail is real.

I think you misunderstood what I posted. I never proposed " discrimination as state policy" as you put it. In fact, I was stating that I actually opposed it. As in " I don't really agree with the "papers please" response to non-English speakers". In other words, I do actually agree with you. I feel that anyone should be allowed to speak any language they want without repercussions. However, I do think that an official English language for official acts and paperwork would be a good idea.

As for the "not mutually inclusive" statement, you are misinterpreting that as well, and possibly viewing the statement backwards. Just because someone is speaking something other than English does not mean they can't speak English. I believe the poster that was originally quoted meant that as a basis for his views, which mean his views (although I don't necessarily agree with them) are not "ludicrous" as was accused.

Russians are doing a pretty good job at kicking Isis by themselves.

If all it takes from the US is to park an aircraft carrier somewhere for optics, while not getting involved in another 3rd world brushfire and letting Russia own the region, great.

 cuda1179 wrote:
However, I do think that an official English language for official acts and paperwork would be a good idea.

Why?

 Peregrine wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
However, I do think that an official English language for official acts and paperwork would be a good idea.

Why?

Honestly, it's a bit controversial. While I would like other cultures to preserve their traditions there is some benefit to forced assimilation. Lower crime rates being one of them. The US is a unique, wonderful mess. Our variation and diversity is wonderful on many levels, but it has also been shown to be a cause of conflict. Many Europeans that immigrated 150 years ago weren't really seen as "white", even though today we couldn't point out the difference. Much of that came from forced learning of English. Once a common language is shared, a common respect can build.


Then there are street signs. I live in an area with a large Hispanic population, many are illegal or new immigrants and a good portion do not speak English. Driving for them is.......interesting to say the least. How many ever got a license is beyond me. Signs posting one-way streets, no parking, no left turns, and cross traffic does not stop are all routinely ignored. Our police force has willingly turned a blind eye to much of it in order to not look like they are profiling. In cases like this, I absolutely think that driving tests should only be given in English with no translator.

 Peregrine wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
However, I do think that an official English language for official acts and paperwork would be a good idea.

Why?

Simple. It gives the xenophobic trailer trash a sense of superiority.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
However, I do think that an official English language for official acts and paperwork would be a good idea.

Why?

Honestly, it's a bit controversial. While I would like other cultures to preserve their traditions there is some benefit to forced assimilation. Lower crime rates being one of them. The US is a unique, wonderful mess. Our variation and diversity is wonderful on many levels, but it has also been shown to be a cause of conflict. Many Europeans that immigrated 150 years ago weren't really seen as "white", even though today we couldn't point out the difference. Much of that came from forced learning of English. Once a common language is shared, a common respect can build.


Then there are street signs. I live in an area with a large Hispanic population, many are illegal or new immigrants and a good portion do not speak English. Driving for them is.......interesting to say the least. How many ever got a license is beyond me. Signs posting one-way streets, no parking, no left turns, and cross traffic does not stop are all routinely ignored. Our police force has willingly turned a blind eye to much of it in order to not look like they are profiling. In cases like this, I absolutely think that driving tests should only be given in English with no translator.

So you require a "common language" with another human being to establish a "common respect"? -So absolutely sad.

"Many Europeans that immigrated 150 years ago weren't really seen as "white", even though today we couldn't point out the difference. Much of that came from forced learning of English." -WHAT!? So, it's learn English and become "white". WOW!

If your signs rely on knowledge of the language then you've got a serious flaw right there.

I mean, a no left turn sign? That is surely just a an arrow turning left with a line through it? That is understandable and recognisable in any language with the application of a bit of critical thinking and common sense.

Does the DMV have highway code literature in multiple languages? Surely there is a written part of the test which requires them to demonstrate knowledge of the rules of the road?

If they've got their licence then it means they understand the rules. They're choosing not to follow them. Making english an official language will not change that, if these people who are routinely breaking the traffic laws can't get their licence due to your language laws then they'll just drive without a licence.

I've never seen a particular problem with the idea that if you're moving to another country whose parent language isn't your own, that you should have lessons in said language and a test as part of immigration to make sure you can speak it to a passable degree. It doesn't have to be perfect, but you should be able to communicate with the local population. I would have thought this shows some respect to the country you're moving too.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
If your signs rely on knowledge of the language then you've got a serious flaw right there.

I mean, a no left turn sign? That is surely just a an arrow turning left with a line through it? That is understandable and recognisable in any language with the application of a bit of critical thinking and common sense.

Does the DMV have highway code literature in multiple languages? Surely there is a written part of the test which requires them to demonstrate knowledge of the rules of the road?

If they've got their licence then it means they understand the rules. They're choosing not to follow them. Making english an official language will not change that, if these people who are routinely breaking the traffic laws can't get their licence due to your language laws then they'll just drive without a licence.

And all our signs are symbols anyway. No left turn is a arrow pointed left with a "no" sign over it. At least here in NY.

 sourclams wrote:
Russians are doing a pretty good job at kicking Isis by themselves.

If all it takes from the US is to park an aircraft carrier somewhere for optics, while not getting involved in another 3rd world brushfire and letting Russia own the region, great.

If by ISIS, you mean everyone but ISIS, you're absolutely right.

A list of nations with an official language, but here in America it's racist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_official_languages_by_country_and_territory

 djones520 wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
Russians are doing a pretty good job at kicking Isis by themselves.

If all it takes from the US is to park an aircraft carrier somewhere for optics, while not getting involved in another 3rd world brushfire and letting Russia own the region, great.

If by ISIS, you mean everyone but ISIS, you're absolutely right.

A list of nations with an official language, but here in America it's racist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_official_languages_by_country_and_territory

Not having an official language sure has gotten in our way of leading the world, hasn't it?

 sourclams wrote:
Russians are doing a pretty good job at kicking Isis by themselves.

If all it takes from the US is to park an aircraft carrier somewhere for optics, while not getting involved in another 3rd world brushfire and letting Russia own the region, great.

We can’t sit back and let Russia “own” anything of strategic importance in the ME. Neither the US nor Russia seem to really want to make a go of more casual relations.

Regarding each other, we pursue conflicting foreign policy pretty aggressively. And there's the whole Putin wanting to get the band back together thing... With his literal invasion of another sovereign country. (No matter how you slice it, Russian troops aren't "on vacation" in Ukraine with their tanks and artillery.)

Pretty much, because of how we postured after WW2, Russian interests are direct threats to US hegemonic interests. Revamping that dynamic means someone's economy is taking a blow somewhere, and neither of us are willing to take that blow just so we can all get along.
All the news stories coming out about Russia recalling expats, prepping for nuclear attack, etc., are ploys to consolidate nationalism in Russia, especially among the youth who're being sold on a strong Russian national identity in hopes that they'll get behind Russia becoming the superpower they once were. Putin is currently trying to rebuild the Soviet Union. Not in ideology, but in spirit. Nationalism, which has always been Russia's most powerful weapon, is at an all time high in the country. He's stoking the egos and telling Russians they can be on top again. And they're believing him.

It's the natural order of things. They want a great Russia, i want a great America. But with how everything is currently situated, those two things can't exist at the same time without a return to the cold war... Which isn't a situation where anyone wins.
The only way Russia and the US are going to get along is if they become one world government. As separate states, they are pursuing the exact same resources and the exact same spheres of influence and will never truly be friendly. Europe is a big piece of contested ground that both sides want to be "closer" to, and by closer I mean control.

I don't think we're letting China get off scot-free either. I think our policy is to make Vietnam and Japan viable military threads to Chinese expansion. China's foreign policy is a lot more subtle than Russia's. Russia generally directly competes with US interests in markets we're heavily invested in. They're done this since WW2. (We need oil... Hmmmm... Let's support the communist party in Iran and convince them socializing their oil industry that's owned by US and British companies is a good idea.) China focuses on emerging markets (Rare earth metals in Africa, uranium in Afghanistan, etc.), and i think oil is the driving force behind their South-China sea expansion. (Which is why we're getting concerned.) China has another trick up their sleeve in that they heavily tied their economy to ours. Aside from their heavy investment in our government, where they hold an insane amount of bonds (Which is all the "OH EM GEEEEE, CHINA OWNS OUR DEBT!" gak you see the right flip out about. It's not like they can cash it in when they want or anything.), they're also our largest trading partner. It doesn't behoove them to directly compete against the US the same way Russia does.

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
Russians are doing a pretty good job at kicking Isis by themselves.

If all it takes from the US is to park an aircraft carrier somewhere for optics, while not getting involved in another 3rd world brushfire and letting Russia own the region, great.

If by ISIS, you mean everyone but ISIS, you're absolutely right.

A list of nations with an official language, but here in America it's racist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_official_languages_by_country_and_territory

Not having an official language sure has gotten in our way of leading the world, hasn't it?

Note that not every country on that list has an official language (which seems...odd, given the title of the page) and that the vast majority of the ones that do have multiple official languages.

I honestly don't see the need for one. It wouldn't make people better drivers or whatever cuda wants out of it, it wouldn't make a stronger 'national identity' or anything...why do people want the government interfering in how we speak?

Many Europeans that immigrated 150 years ago weren't really seen as "white", even though today we couldn't point out the difference. Much of that came from forced learning of English. Once a common language is shared, a common respect can build.

I'm sure you didn't mean to type 'I don't respect people I don't see as 'white'', but that's what this reads as. Just so you know.

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
Russians are doing a pretty good job at kicking Isis by themselves.

If all it takes from the US is to park an aircraft carrier somewhere for optics, while not getting involved in another 3rd world brushfire and letting Russia own the region, great.

If by ISIS, you mean everyone but ISIS, you're absolutely right.

A list of nations with an official language, but here in America it's racist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_official_languages_by_country_and_territory

Not having an official language sure has gotten in our way of leading the world, hasn't it?

Having an official language that everyone is incentivized to learn and therefore also be able to effectively communicate with each other, allowing people to better understand each other and weakening the ability to create political and social divisions based on pandering dehumanizing fear of demographic groups sure would ruin everything, wouldn't it? It's not like the Feds would round people up and ship them off to English language education camps. Having official govt paperwork done primarily or exclusively in English doesn't force people to do anything, it just incentivizing knowledge of the language. Trying to get anything done, either with a private business or any level of govt without being able to understand English and relying on the possible availability of an interpreter is already an arduous task. Taking a de facto official language and making an actual official language isn't a big deal.

Ah, small government through regulating language.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Having an official language that everyone is incentivized to learn and therefore also be able to effectively communicate with each other, allowing people to better understand each other and weakening the ability to create political and social divisions based on pandering dehumanizing fear of demographic groups sure would ruin everything, wouldn't it? It's not like the Feds would round people up and ship them off to English language education camps. Having official govt paperwork done primarily or exclusively in English doesn't force people to do anything, it just incentivizing knowledge of the language. Trying to get anything done, either with a private business or any level of govt without being able to understand English and relying on the possible availability of an interpreter is already an arduous task. Taking a de facto official language and making an actual official language isn't a big deal.

This may shock you, but people already are Incentivized to learn English, by the fact most people know it, and they would like to communicate. But going "feth you" to anyone who doesn't know English and doesn't have the time or resources to lean is moronic.

Removing the means of communication between government and legal residents and citizens "doesn't force anyone to do anything"...

Prestor Jon wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
Russians are doing a pretty good job at kicking Isis by themselves.

If all it takes from the US is to park an aircraft carrier somewhere for optics, while not getting involved in another 3rd world brushfire and letting Russia own the region, great.

If by ISIS, you mean everyone but ISIS, you're absolutely right.

A list of nations with an official language, but here in America it's racist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_official_languages_by_country_and_territory

Not having an official language sure has gotten in our way of leading the world, hasn't it?

Having an official language that everyone is incentivized to learn and therefore also be able to effectively communicate with each other, allowing people to better understand each other and weakening the ability to create political and social divisions based on pandering dehumanizing fear of demographic groups sure would ruin everything, wouldn't it? It's not like the Feds would round people up and ship them off to English language education camps. Having official govt paperwork done primarily or exclusively in English doesn't force people to do anything, it just incentivizing knowledge of the language. Trying to get anything done, either with a private business or any level of govt without being able to understand English and relying on the possible availability of an interpreter is already an arduous task. Taking a de facto official language and making an actual official language isn't a big deal.

"English language education camps"...so going to the usual reference of hyperbole, I see? Okay.

Firstly, don't kid yourself thinking that an "official language" would do anything to eliminate social divisions, pandering, or anything else along those lines. An official language would cater to and empower the small minded boobs that think this country was founded by legions of white, English-speaking immigrants coming across the pond and checking into Ellis Island with the ability to speak and read the native language perfectly and their certainty that anyone that doesn't isn't of the same status as them. Absurd xenophobia at it's worst. People come here to make a better life for themselves and their family, they learn the language de facto. Hell, I've got a neighbor whose elderly mother, a naturalized citizen, still speaks almost exclusively Greek...with enough English to get by...and her and her family occupy the most expensive house on the block and own probably a dozen restaurants in the Chicago area.

"Incentives"? I think the incentive to learn the language of the land, which is English...any debate on that?...has been, and is, as strong as it always has been without the government officializing anything. Simply, it allows for access to wealth and education, which are pretty much the drivers for everyone coming to our country. Proof? The largest increase in College/University enrollment in the past 15 years has been Hispanics. From 1996 to 2012, college enrollment among Hispanics ages 18 to 24 more than tripled (240% increase), outpacing increases among blacks (72%) and whites (12%). Pretty sure they're just one, or less, generation from not being English as a first language. And that impressive accomplishment and statistic comes without any official language driving them.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Ah, small government through regulating language.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Having an official language that everyone is incentivized to learn and therefore also be able to effectively communicate with each other, allowing people to better understand each other and weakening the ability to create political and social divisions based on pandering dehumanizing fear of demographic groups sure would ruin everything, wouldn't it? It's not like the Feds would round people up and ship them off to English language education camps. Having official govt paperwork done primarily or exclusively in English doesn't force people to do anything, it just incentivizing knowledge of the language. Trying to get anything done, either with a private business or any level of govt without being able to understand English and relying on the possible availability of an interpreter is already an arduous task. Taking a de facto official language and making an actual official language isn't a big deal.

This may shock you, but people already are Incentivized to learn English, by the fact most people know it, and they would like to communicate. But going "feth you" to anyone who doesn't know English and doesn't have the time or resources to lean is moronic.

You're being hyperbolic. Is changing English from the de facto language of the US to the official language of the US terribly important? Not really. Are people already incentivized to learn English? Yes. Is officially recognizing that English is the de facto language of the US a big FETH YOU to anyone? No. Recognizing an already obvious truth isn't a big deal, the incentive to learn English will remain either way. It's nothing worth getting worked up over.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
Russians are doing a pretty good job at kicking Isis by themselves.

If all it takes from the US is to park an aircraft carrier somewhere for optics, while not getting involved in another 3rd world brushfire and letting Russia own the region, great.

If by ISIS, you mean everyone but ISIS, you're absolutely right.

A list of nations with an official language, but here in America it's racist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_official_languages_by_country_and_territory

Not having an official language sure has gotten in our way of leading the world, hasn't it?

Having an official language that everyone is incentivized to learn and therefore also be able to effectively communicate with each other, allowing people to better understand each other and weakening the ability to create political and social divisions based on pandering dehumanizing fear of demographic groups sure would ruin everything, wouldn't it? It's not like the Feds would round people up and ship them off to English language education camps. Having official govt paperwork done primarily or exclusively in English doesn't force people to do anything, it just incentivizing knowledge of the language. Trying to get anything done, either with a private business or any level of govt without being able to understand English and relying on the possible availability of an interpreter is already an arduous task. Taking a de facto official language and making an actual official language isn't a big deal.

"English language education camps"...so going to the usual reference of hyperbole, I see? Okay.

Firstly, don't kid yourself thinking that an "official language" would do anything to eliminate social divisions, pandering, or anything else along those lines. An official language would cater to and empower the small minded boobs that think this country was founded by legions of white, English-speaking immigrants coming across the pond and checking into Ellis Island with the ability to speak and read the native language perfectly and their certainty that anyone that doesn't isn't of the same status as them. Absurd xenophobia at it's worst. People come here to make a better life for themselves and their family, they learn the language de facto. Hell, I've got a neighbor whose elderly mother, a naturalized citizen, still speaks almost exclusively Greek...with enough English to get by...and her and her family occupy the most expensive house on the block and own probably a dozen restaurants in the Chicago area.

"Incentives"? I think the incentive to learn the language of the land, which is English...any debate on that?...has been, and is, as strong as it always has been without the government officializing anything. Simply, it allows for access to wealth and education, which are pretty much the drivers for everyone coming to our country. Proof? The largest increase in College/University enrollment in the past 15 years has been Hispanics. From 1996 to 2012, college enrollment among Hispanics ages 18 to 24 more than tripled (240% increase), outpacing increases among blacks (72%) and whites (12%). Pretty sure they're just one, or less, generation from not being English as a first language. And that impressive accomplishment and statistic comes without any official language driving them.

You're only proving my point. Your Greek neighbors were going to learn English at least enough to get by and make sure their children became fluent in it when it wasn't the official language just the de facto language so nothing would have changed if English was the official language. Again, recognizing an already obvious truth isn't bad policy, it's a high priority or a necessity because primacy of the language is already established but it's not inherently racist or prejudicial.

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Ah, small government through regulating language.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Having an official language that everyone is incentivized to learn and therefore also be able to effectively communicate with each other, allowing people to better understand each other and weakening the ability to create political and social divisions based on pandering dehumanizing fear of demographic groups sure would ruin everything, wouldn't it? It's not like the Feds would round people up and ship them off to English language education camps. Having official govt paperwork done primarily or exclusively in English doesn't force people to do anything, it just incentivizing knowledge of the language. Trying to get anything done, either with a private business or any level of govt without being able to understand English and relying on the possible availability of an interpreter is already an arduous task. Taking a de facto official language and making an actual official language isn't a big deal.

This may shock you, but people already are Incentivized to learn English, by the fact most people know it, and they would like to communicate. But going "feth you" to anyone who doesn't know English and doesn't have the time or resources to lean is moronic.

You're being hyperbolic. Is changing English from the de facto language of the US to the official language of the US terribly important? Not really. Are people already incentivized to learn English? Yes. Is officially recognizing that English is the de facto language of the US a big FETH YOU to anyone? No. Recognizing an already obvious truth isn't a big deal, the incentive to learn English will remain either way. It's nothing worth getting worked up over.

How is saying that government business can only be conducted in English not a big feth you to people who don't speak English?

 d-usa wrote:
Removing the means of communication between government and legal residents and citizens "doesn't force anyone to do anything"...

If you walked into my local county courthouse to get some paperwork done and you were only able to communicate in Tagalog, for instance, your chances of being able to effectively communicate with the county clerk or find an interpreter would be pretty slim. Whether English is the official language or not doesn't alter that equation. It's not like the govt, on all levels, would fire every interpreter just because we made English the official language and its not like we'd stop teaching ESL classes.

Recognizing the truth is good. You want the US govt to recognize climate change because it's an obvious truth but you don't want the govt to recognize the obvious truth that English is the dominant language of the country?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Ah, small government through regulating language.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Having an official language that everyone is incentivized to learn and therefore also be able to effectively communicate with each other, allowing people to better understand each other and weakening the ability to create political and social divisions based on pandering dehumanizing fear of demographic groups sure would ruin everything, wouldn't it? It's not like the Feds would round people up and ship them off to English language education camps. Having official govt paperwork done primarily or exclusively in English doesn't force people to do anything, it just incentivizing knowledge of the language. Trying to get anything done, either with a private business or any level of govt without being able to understand English and relying on the possible availability of an interpreter is already an arduous task. Taking a de facto official language and making an actual official language isn't a big deal.

This may shock you, but people already are Incentivized to learn English, by the fact most people know it, and they would like to communicate. But going "feth you" to anyone who doesn't know English and doesn't have the time or resources to lean is moronic.

You're being hyperbolic. Is changing English from the de facto language of the US to the official language of the US terribly important? Not really. Are people already incentivized to learn English? Yes. Is officially recognizing that English is the de facto language of the US a big FETH YOU to anyone? No. Recognizing an already obvious truth isn't a big deal, the incentive to learn English will remain either way. It's nothing worth getting worked up over.

How is saying that government business can only be conducted in English not a big feth you to people who don't speak English?

Because having all the official documents in English doesn't preclude the continued use of interpreters. It's not like first generation immigrants get their passports, green cards, marriage certificates, drivers licenses, property deeds, social security paperwork, W-2s, tax returns, utility bills, etc. all in the whatever language they choose, now is it? I can't go to the local DMV office and get my DL reissued in Portuguese just because I was raised by Brazilian immigrants can I?

The government should speak the language of the people, this will happen naturally and organically. When the majority of people in this country speak Spanish, the government should speak Spanish. Again, that will happen organically and naturally.

Making a language official only retards that process, or eliminates it completely in favor of a current majority that feels their culture is more important than any future culture.

Prestor Jon wrote:
It's not like the govt, on all levels, would fire every interpreter just because we made English the official language and its not like we'd stop teaching ESL classes.

No, but many places, particularly at the local level, would likely do away with them and tell non-english speaking residents "tough gak", lets not pretend this wouldn't happen, often for very petty or purely political reasons. I can go down to the DMV right now and get literature covering all sorts of topics a person may need to know in a dozen different languages or more for a wide array of citizens and residents, which almost certainly would no longer be provided if an official language was adopted.

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Ah, small government through regulating language.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Having an official language that everyone is incentivized to learn and therefore also be able to effectively communicate with each other, allowing people to better understand each other and weakening the ability to create political and social divisions based on pandering dehumanizing fear of demographic groups sure would ruin everything, wouldn't it? It's not like the Feds would round people up and ship them off to English language education camps. Having official govt paperwork done primarily or exclusively in English doesn't force people to do anything, it just incentivizing knowledge of the language. Trying to get anything done, either with a private business or any level of govt without being able to understand English and relying on the possible availability of an interpreter is already an arduous task. Taking a de facto official language and making an actual official language isn't a big deal.

This may shock you, but people already are Incentivized to learn English, by the fact most people know it, and they would like to communicate. But going "feth you" to anyone who doesn't know English and doesn't have the time or resources to lean is moronic.

You're being hyperbolic. Is changing English from the de facto language of the US to the official language of the US terribly important? Not really. Are people already incentivized to learn English? Yes. Is officially recognizing that English is the de facto language of the US a big FETH YOU to anyone? No. Recognizing an already obvious truth isn't a big deal, the incentive to learn English will remain either way. It's nothing worth getting worked up over.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 sourclams wrote:
Russians are doing a pretty good job at kicking Isis by themselves.

If all it takes from the US is to park an aircraft carrier somewhere for optics, while not getting involved in another 3rd world brushfire and letting Russia own the region, great.

If by ISIS, you mean everyone but ISIS, you're absolutely right.

A list of nations with an official language, but here in America it's racist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_official_languages_by_country_and_territory

Not having an official language sure has gotten in our way of leading the world, hasn't it?

Having an official language that everyone is incentivized to learn and therefore also be able to effectively communicate with each other, allowing people to better understand each other and weakening the ability to create political and social divisions based on pandering dehumanizing fear of demographic groups sure would ruin everything, wouldn't it? It's not like the Feds would round people up and ship them off to English language education camps. Having official govt paperwork done primarily or exclusively in English doesn't force people to do anything, it just incentivizing knowledge of the language. Trying to get anything done, either with a private business or any level of govt without being able to understand English and relying on the possible availability of an interpreter is already an arduous task. Taking a de facto official language and making an actual official language isn't a big deal.

"English language education camps"...so going to the usual reference of hyperbole, I see? Okay.

Firstly, don't kid yourself thinking that an "official language" would do anything to eliminate social divisions, pandering, or anything else along those lines. An official language would cater to and empower the small minded boobs that think this country was founded by legions of white, English-speaking immigrants coming across the pond and checking into Ellis Island with the ability to speak and read the native language perfectly and their certainty that anyone that doesn't isn't of the same status as them. Absurd xenophobia at it's worst. People come here to make a better life for themselves and their family, they learn the language de facto. Hell, I've got a neighbor whose elderly mother, a naturalized citizen, still speaks almost exclusively Greek...with enough English to get by...and her and her family occupy the most expensive house on the block and own probably a dozen restaurants in the Chicago area.

"Incentives"? I think the incentive to learn the language of the land, which is English...any debate on that?...has been, and is, as strong as it always has been without the government officializing anything. Simply, it allows for access to wealth and education, which are pretty much the drivers for everyone coming to our country. Proof? The largest increase in College/University enrollment in the past 15 years has been Hispanics. From 1996 to 2012, college enrollment among Hispanics ages 18 to 24 more than tripled (240% increase), outpacing increases among blacks (72%) and whites (12%). Pretty sure they're just one, or less, generation from not being English as a first language. And that impressive accomplishment and statistic comes without any official language driving them.

You're only proving my point. Your Greek neighbors were going to learn English at least enough to get by and make sure their children became fluent in it when it wasn't the official language just the de facto language so nothing would have changed if English was the official language. Again, recognizing an already obvious truth isn't bad policy, it's a high priority or a necessity because primacy of the language is already established but it's not inherently racist or prejudicial.

To quote the Lady:

'New Colossus'
(statue of liberty poem)

"Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”


Just feth yeah! Still looking for the "...and we speak English here, bitches!" bit. Sorry, but you must see that the tone and message behind the whole "English as official language" movement is more than just a debate between "de facto" and "official", otherwise it wouldn't register on anyone's radar. If you can't see that, then I think you're missing the point here.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
It's not like the govt, on all levels, would fire every interpreter just because we made English the official language and its not like we'd stop teaching ESL classes.

No, but many places, particularly at the local level, would likely do away with them and tell non-english speaking residents "tough gak", lets not pretend this wouldn't happen, often for very petty or purely political reasons. I can go down to the DMV right now and get literature covering all sorts of topics a person may need to know in a dozen different languages or more for a wide array of citizens and residents, which almost certainly would no longer be provided if an official language was adopted.

I doubt it. All of those pamphlets at the DMV in different languages aren't all equally utilized. I'm sure some of them barely get used yet they're still there. With all the govt programs that continue to get funding long after their usefulness ends I don't think that the foreign language assistance is the one place where we get govt spending cuts and programs eliminated. Immigrants are already faced with the forces of practical necessity and peer pressure to learn English and will continue to exist whether or not the govt officially acknowledges it or not. With the current level of govt involvement in our lives it seems odd to balk at changing the official position from you don't HAVE to learn English *wink wink* but you really REALLY should learn English to you need to learn English as the straw to break the camel's back.