ID:36683
 
http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2007/11/ how_to_succeed_in_america.html

September 1950: I'm five and a half years old entering kindergarten. As it happened I spoke mostly German (we lived in Germany for two years before coming to America) although I pretty well understood almost everything in English. Some kid called me a foreigner and although I wasn't exactly sure what that meant at the time, I didn't like his tone...


Digg it?
Just because it's on an internet blog doesn't mean it's not a weirdo right-wing late 50s guy grumbling racistly about black people. Shame on you for being suckered into that stuff!

(No, I do not digg it)
I don't digg anything...so I can't either.
Meh, I completely disagree with this article in its entirety. I kinda like Teddy Roosevelt for his personality and his progressive politics he brought to America but the one thing that makes me despise him is his comment about hyphenated Americans. Prior to WW1, there was a very rich German culture in America but nearly all of it disappeared due to peer pressure during the war years. Being a History major who is interested in cultures and ethnic groups, I can honestly say that I view the rise of America to power as one of the worst events in history when you consider diversity in cultures. I cheer for the day when Belgium splits into separate Flanders and Walloon regions and when Scotland becomes an independent country once again, as examples. And unlike my disgraceful ancestors who ran away from their family, homeland and culture for whatever reason (No matter how just the reason be, it still doesn't change the fact that they spat upon their prior identity), I plan to eventually immigrate back to the Yorkshire region of England where centuries ago my ancestors emigrated from. People cheer about the fact that America is the Great Melting Pot but no one really considers the first half of that process, the destruction of all prior cultural identity and sympathies.

So to reiterate, I don't agree with the author of this blog and I won't digg it.

Edit: Lifted from Wikipedia article concerning pressured German assimilation during 1917-1918: "Similarly, foods with German names such as sauerkraut and bratwurst were renamed 'liberty cabbage' and 'liberty sausage'." You know, that sounds awfully similar to that brain dead decision to change French Fries to Freedom Fries because we threw a hissy fit about France not agreeing with us on Iraq.
America was one vote away from endorsing German rather than English as the official language back in the days of early colonisation.

That's an example of how differently the country could have turned out, using a different language can in fact have a big impact on what a nation becomes, especially if it also follows the culture. Being English speaking, the US despite the war of Independence was rather "british" in culture.

Regardless, the US does well because it has a rather large deal of multiculturalism, and because it welcomes skilled immigration.

Just to hype up my own corner, American Muslims in the US are actually on average higher earners and higher educated than the national average, something they aren't as fortunate to have in Europe, where it is near the opposite.
Acebloke wrote:
America was one vote away from endorsing German rather than English as the official language back in the days of early colonisation.

Not quite true, thats a urban myth that's been aggrandized over the last couple centuries. For the real story check here:

http://www.snopes.com/language/apocryph/german.asp
i stopped reading that blog post when the guy said "I have Russian-, Chinese-, Mongol-, Italian-, Spanish-, Hindu-, Arabic-speaking". hindu isn't a language, hinduism is a religion.

also, english isn't the "official" language of america, its just the most popular one.

cyberhound, england hasn't existed forever, so your ancestors weren't always english. you may not know where your ancestors lived before england because that was a very long time ago, but your ancestors must have abandoned some culture when they moved to england.
OneFishDown wrote:
cyberhound, england hasn't existed forever, so your ancestors weren't always english. you may not know where your ancestors lived before england because that was a very long time ago, but your ancestors must have abandoned some culture when they moved to england.

True but the European continent as we know it was largely established by 1500. That and I'm a Europhile so I'd rather view myself as an European culture than something predating that.

Edit: Basically what I'm trying to say is, if you go back far enough, all our ancestors were just roaming forage-gatherers who have more in common with cavemen then they do with us. I'll only trace my ancestry as far back as I deem my ancestors to have finally settled in a particular region which for me based off my last name points to the Yorkshire region of England.

An example I'm thinking of in my mind is people who have pride in their Celtic ancestry. When people talk about Celtic culture nowadays, they talk about the Six Celtic Nations of Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Brittany, Cornwall and Isle of Man. Yet during the times of the Roman Republic and Empire, the Celtic people roamed across the broad expanse of Europe. Celtic pride only goes as far back as when their people became settled.

Edit2: I mean, if you want to go far back enough, we're all apes. So lets celebrate our ape culture! ......*blows raspberry*
Edit2: I mean, if you want to go far back enough, we're all apes. So lets celebrate our ape culture! ......*blows raspberry*

Prove it.
F34R wrote:
Edit2: I mean, if you want to go far back enough, we're all apes. So lets celebrate our ape culture! ......*blows raspberry*

Prove it.

Its a theory so it isn't completely infallible, however I personally think its far better than anything else out there. If all else fails, fall back on 'Uncertainty' and just go on with your daily life.
F34R: you're the proof that we're decended from apes. =P
The thing is, I bet none of you have first hand experience with multiculturalism. I do, and he does and we both hate it.

When we see these people erect Mexican flags on their lawns after they come into America to enjoy the benefits of our prosperity and society it pisses us off immensely.

I could erect a Union Jack on my front lawn, but the fact that I'm English doesn't matter to me. I'm American, I've assimilated, I'm not going to seclude myself in a barrio or ghetto.
No, yeah, using words like "assimilate", "destroy" and "crush" is definitely going to endear your proposed social programme to us. =P
Worldweaver wrote:
The thing is, I bet none of you have first hand experience with multiculturalism. I do, and he does and we both hate it.

When we see these people erect Mexican flags on their lawns after they come into America to enjoy the benefits of our prosperity and society it pisses us off immensely.

I could erect a Union Jack on my front lawn, but the fact that I'm English doesn't matter to me. I'm American, I've assimilated, I'm not going to seclude myself in a barrio or ghetto.

American isn't its own ethnic group though, its more a sub-sect of the English ethnic group. The same can be said of Australians, English Canadians, etc. Quebecers (French Canadians) are a sub-sect of the French ethnic group. Sure, you can say you're American, but that's more a secondary put-upon identity, there's something more behind it then that. I guess what I'm getting at is I feel hyphenated Americanism is a better system. Maybe not economically, politically and for unitary and centralizing purposes, but it is when you consider the cultural heritage and background and to me, thats what matters most.
The thing is immigrants shouldn't come to America to take its wealth and establish their own little autonomous states. Historically immigrants have come to America because they want to be American.

You should value your heritage, but if your loyalties lie to another place you're not truly a citizen and shouldn't steal from a some benevolent country.
OFD, Hindi (rather than hindu) is actually a language - maybe that's what he meant?

Worldweaver wrote:
The thing is immigrants shouldn't come to America to take its wealth and establish their own little autonomous states. Historically immigrants have come to America because they want to be American.

I mean, its not like the precedent hasn't been set before. Texas, anyone?

Although I would agree on what has happened in Northern Ireland since 1607 to be asinine but in that case there is clear physical boundaries that make the situation stand out like a sore thumb.
Jp wrote:
OFD, Hindi (rather than hindu) is actually a language - maybe that's what he meant?

i'm sure that is what he meant, but if he's trying to claim that he knows and understands other cultures and that he isn't racist and just wants people to assimilate to the american culture (which is a rather stupid statement to be making anyway), he should make sure that he does come across as being someone who understands other cultures.

as it is, his blog post sounds like an elaborate version of the joke, "i'm not racist, i have a colored TV."
he isn't racist and just wants people to assimilate to the american culture

Why is that stupid?
Worldweaver wrote:
he isn't racist and just wants people to assimilate to the american culture

Why is that stupid?

his blog post has almost no purpose or direction. its the typical racist rant where no statement really leads to another.

he wants people to assimilate but he doesn't give any good reasons why they should. "because i did" is the closest he comes to giving a reason, but that's not a good one. people do things so that their children will have a better life than they did. we reap the benefits of our ancestors' work. if people can make a living in america without being able to speak english, that's not a problem, that's progress, and the author is terrified of it.

the title implies that he wants people to assimilate for their own sakes so that they can be successful. but he makes it seem as though you're either successful (whatever that means) or you're living on welfare. to a poor immigrant, having a place to live and having food on the table could be success. while you're probably not going to get a great job if you can't speak english, you can still live well above the poverty line.

he claims to not be racist. as evidence, he employs non-whites and even allows them to speak their native languages during lunch. that's fair, i suppose. lunch time is free time, let them do what they want. but then he is disgusted by the way that black people act on their free time. the consequence of freedom is that people might not act, talk, or dress how you want them to.

i'm pretty sure that its contradictory to call an entire color of people "ignorant savages" and claim to not be at all racist in the next paragraph. the author is the worst kind of racist: the kind that thinks he isn't.