Large Scale Central

Teddy Roosevelt on immigration

General Discussion
#21
Ken Brunt said:
Ralph Berg said:
And there are a few things I would change if I could. That being said.......It does annoy me when people from "other" parts of the country retire here and then do their best to change things so it is like where they came from.

Ralph


We have the same problem here. One newspaper editor calls them “encroachers”. They seem to feel that their idea of utopia is moving to the country. Then reality sets in. Farmers tilling and harvesting their fields till the wee hours of the morning. Spreading the fertilizer from the barn floor on a hot summer afternoon. Cows that make a god-awful racket as it nears milking time. The Amish that live around here seem to have the right idea. They post big signs on their property along the roads with warnings; Caution! Night Noises; Caution! Bad Smells; Caution! Slow moving vehicles.

Causes the developers to have a heart attack…:wink:


“Encroachers”
First time I’ve heard that. But it seems to fit.
They fail to understand that the reason I live here is because it is nothing like where they came from and I’d like to see it stay that way.
I remember when they built DFW airport in Irving years ago. Of course development around the airport followed soon after. People bought new homes…and then proceeded to raise hell about the noise from the airport.
Ralph

#22

There’s a quote similar to the TR quote from Woodrow Wilson: “any man who carries a hyphen around with him [i.e. german-Amerian, iris-american, etc.] carries a dagger which he is ready to plunge in the vtals of the republic.”

If the point of being american is freedom–freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc.–then how in the world can you justify the insistence that everyone has to speak English, or that they can’t be welcome unless they adopt “American” ways of life, whatever that means? Surely freedom means you can do as you like as long as no one else is hurt? So you don’t have to “assimilate.”

Speaking for myself I find, say, the presence in my neighborhood of large numbers of Vietnamese immigrants troubling. I can’t understand them, they have ways that are strange to me. But I can’t find any good grounds for insisting that they have to change to avoid threatening my self-esteem or the self-esteem of people like me. Either we believe in freedom of self expression or we don’t.

#23
mike omalley said:
There's a quote similar to the TR quote from Woodrow Wilson: "any man who carries a hyphen around with him [i.e. german-Amerian, iris-american, etc.] carries a dagger which he is ready to plunge in the vtals of the republic."

If the point of being american is freedom–freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc.–then how in the world can you justify the insistence that everyone has to speak English, or that they can’t be welcome unless they adopt “American” ways of life, whatever that means? Surely freedom means you can do as you like as long as no one else is hurt? So you don’t have to “assimilate.”

Speaking for myself I find, say, the presence in my neighborhood of large numbers of Vietnamese immigrants troubling. I can’t understand them, they have ways that are strange to me. But I can’t find any good grounds for insisting that they have to change to avoid threatening my self-esteem or the self-esteem of people like me. Either we believe in freedom of self expression or we don’t.


I, for one, never said they need to adopt our way of life. I said “I don’t expect an immigrant to forget their culture or language. But I do expect them to learn our Culture and language.”
Learn our language and learn our culture is a far cry from"adopting our ways."
If I move to a foreign country it is a matter of respect that I educate myself in the language and the culture. It would also be in my best interest to do so.
If you don’t assimilate, then don’t be surprised if you are treated like an outsider. Whether moving from one country to another, or one neighborhood to another.
Ralph

#24

Mike, the difference is the Vietnamese aren’t insisting that we change to suit them. They make an effort to at least educate their children in the American culture and learn the language. They made an effort to leave a way of life they didn’t need or want and they don’t expect us to change for them.

#25

With regard to the Vietnamese, after their ‘Democratic’ system fell into the hands of the Communists, the initial immigrants to the west, had no where else to go, but to the countries involved in their affairs.
This was mandated by the UN and I remember there was a lot of distrust, at the time, of their (the Vietnamses immigrants) political affiliations (were they really South Vienamese refugees or Cummunists). 20 years on, no-one seems to be fussed over them and there are other immigrants to mistrust. At least the majority of Vienamese learnt the local language and customs.
Just my 2c worth
Dave

#26

In a free country, it’s not my business to tell other people what their best interests are–they are free to choose them. Speaking English is obviously a good idea, but freedom should mean the right to choose not to learn English, just as it would mean the right to, say, open a business which had a high risk of failure. If a Vietnamese run sandwich shop near mean hires no English speakers, they lose my business. They’re free to make that choice
.
Ralph, you and I can say what we think other people should do, but the TR and Wilson quotes suggest an element of coercion–that they MUST do it. It’s that element that bothers me–it’s at odds with the idea that freedom of choice and self expression is what we’re all about.

Ken, “the vietnamese” are insisting that we change to suit them. All around me there are Asian supermarkets–in fact, the growth of big and small Asian markets is really noticeable. Asian immigrants are “demanding” the chance to buy food that’s familiar to them. I often shop at the big Asian markets. They’re pretty amazing. They have aisles for Asian Indians and for Phillipinos and also for Koreans and Chinese. Some of them have a “hispanic” side and an “asian” side.

But anyway, there’s my wolrd being changed by immigrants. I think what you’re imagining is some situation where, say, Mexican immigrants demand that you learn Spanish. This never actually happens, to the best of my knowledge

#27

I’ve always thought that America was a great nation because it welcomed people from other places and took advantage of the ideas they brought with them. An America without German ideas would be an America without beer. The Italians added pizza. The Chinese added chop suey. The French brought humility and cultural tolerance (just kidding).

Is America now so perfect and complete that it no longer needs fresh ideas?

#28

I think perhaps we’re talking apples and oranges here. Certainly people can pretty much do as they please within the limits of civility. The problems arise when some groups insist that everyone else make changes to accomodate their preferences while showing only disdain for the existing customs and values.

For the purpose of sustaining a nation we must all be on the same page as to “official language” and laws. Nations that are based on dual language and dual laws cannot long exist. The differences and lack of understanding between the sides eventually lead to conflict and breaking apart. Austria-Hungary is a prime example of a nation with two heads, indeed multiple heads, each looking out for its own interests without unity of the whole. It was built through marriages and treaties but lacking national unity could not be held together except by force and even that eventually failed.

“Demands” for multi-cultural grocery stores has nothing to do with forcing anyone else to change. That is an economic demand that someone can fill or not as they choose. We’ve had many “foreign” style businesses in the US for as long as I can remember and they didn’t divide the country or cause any problems. Like choosing a hamburger joint or a French restaurant it’s your choice. There are Chinatowns in major cities everywhere and look how well the Chinese have assimilated. To me they’re a real asset to the country. You don’t have to wear certain clothing or eat certain food or become a stamped copy to assimilate. That’s not what TR’s statements were about at all.

The US is a sovereign nation and as such has a right to pick and choose who comes here and for what reason. We are under no obligation to become a dual society in any sense of the word. We have only the obligation, that once allowed to become a part of this nation, the rights of the new immigrant be respected as it is for any citizen and conversely the immigrant, as the citizen, has a responsibility to respect our laws and exisiting institutions. Beyond that they may do as they please. There’s absolutely nothing oppressive or coercive about that.

#29
Richard Smith said:
SNIP For the purpose of sustaining a nation we must all be on the same page as to "official language" and laws. Nations that are based on dual language and dual laws cannot long exist. The differences and lack of understanding between the sides eventually lead to conflict and breaking apart. Austria-Hungary is a prime example of a nation with two heads, indeed multiple heads, each looking out for its own interests without unity of the whole. It was built through marriages and treaties but lacking national unity could not be held together except by force and even that eventually failed.

SNIP


Hi Richard.
Not wishing to pick too many nits.

One example of where multiple official national languages has not caused disunity is Switzerland, which has four.

French, German, Italian and Romansh

#30

That’s true Tony as does Canada but they do have a sense of national unity through the uniformity of their laws. Even so there have been problems in Canada that fortunately have not resulted in the country being torn apart.

I should have been more lucid. I was referring to separate cultures within a culture each following their own rules. Language is just the most obvious part.

#31

If you’re interested in how the concept of dual citizenship has evolved in the US, especially in recent times, check out

http://www.richw.org/dualcit/law.html

#32

The Chinese as model citizens is an interesting idea. Here’s a quote from Senator and presidential candidate James Blaine, 1879: The “Chinese have no regard to family, do not recognize the relation of husband and wife, do not observe the tie of parent and child. They have nothing in common with us, and so we must choose…whether we will have for the Pacific Coast the civilization of Christ or the civilization of Confucius.”

In 1882 we passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which specifically made impossible for a Chinese person to come to the US and be naturalized as a citizen. Persons of Chinese descent born in the US were citizens, automatically, but after 1882 a Chinese immigrant could ever become a citizen. That law lasted into the late 1940s.

Law and language are different things. A red light is indifferent to the speaker’s language. You can have a common basis in law without sharing a language.

Can some one show me instances of demands that “we” be forced to change? I gave the example of Asian markets–Asian immigrants demand the foods they grew up with and the market responds. No one forces me to go to an Asian market, but my world has been changed. Can someone show me an example of the kind of political coercion that several people keep hinting about? I’ve never seen it. Richard, can you show me an example of the kinds of demands you’re talking about?

#33

Sure Mike…just look at an ATM machine…“press 2 for spanish”…

#34
Ken Brunt said:
Sure Mike....just look at an ATM machine................."press 2 for spanish"............
Ken,

That is because someone decided that the Mexicans aren’t smart enough to learn English. Isn’t it odd that every other immigrant group is able to learn English sufficient to get along, but the poor Mexican’s can’t? (Well, maybe the Scotts and the Irish, too.) :lol:

That ESL crowd has done more to keep the Mexican’s down on the plantation that any other group.

#35
mike omalley said:
The Chinese as model citizens is an interesting idea. Here's a quote from Senator and presidential candidate James Blaine, 1879: The "Chinese have no regard to family, do not recognize the relation of husband and wife, do not observe the tie of parent and child. They have nothing in common with us, and so we must choose...whether we will have for the Pacific Coast the civilization of Christ or the civilization of Confucius."

In 1882 we passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which specifically made impossible for a Chinese person to come to the US and be naturalized as a citizen. Persons of Chinese descent born in the US were citizens, automatically, but after 1882 a Chinese immigrant could ever become a citizen. That law lasted into the late 1940s.


Mike,

Why do you keep bringing up “stuff” from two centuries ago as an argument about why today the USA is such a bad place? Is there nothing more current?

#36

Steve, when did I ever say the US was such a bad place? Why do you accuse me of this? I didn’t invent the Chinese Exclusion Act, I only brought it up in response to Richard’s point that the Chinese were a model for immigration–that may well be true, in the present, but the history of American attitudes towards the Chinese suggests that it took 10 years for that condition to develop. That’s my point. Here, check this link out–and follow it through to the end, there’s a very funny surprise

http://chnm.gmu.edu/exploring/19thcentury/alienmenace/index.php

The point of that is exactly the same-not that the US is a bad place, but that the present debate about immigration repeats many of the terms and issues about past debates. It’s not an argument that the US is a bad place, unless you take the position that saying anything negative about the US is unacceptable.

I’m actually arguing the OPPOSITE, if you pay attention–I’m arguing that the US is a place where no one is or should be coerced into assimilation/conformity–for example, I asked someone to show me an example of immigrants demanding that we change to accept them and the best anyone’s come up with so far is Ken’s example of “push 2 for Spanish.”

Seriously–do you guy really think that’s some kind of coercive demand? I’m trying not to chuckle.

#37

Well, I could have brought up the group 'La Raza" but I figured you already knew about that.

#38

I do know a little about La Raza, but I have yet to experience any kind of coercive demand from any member of La Raza.I looked at their website and it seems pretty harmless to me. What exactly is so troubling about them?

#39

personally I haven’t had an experience with any kind of coercive demand from them either. But then again I don’t live in California. What they proclaim on their website is 180 degrees from what they proclaim in public. How about taking back California, New Mexico, Nevada and Arizona and returning it to Mexico? How about raising the Mexican flag on high school flag posts in California? How about full amnesty for all illegal immigrants from Mexico? La Raza supports complete amnesty for illegal aliens as well as the reconquista movement, which aims to flood the American southwest with Mexicans, essentially “reconquering” the land. “The “Reconquista” movement Recently, The Patriot Post provided in-depth analysis of the “immigration reform” issue. We noted the rise of radical Latino identity groups composed of both naturalized immigrants and illegal aliens. These groups are being organized by World Communist Party apparatchiks, who are providing the ethnic incitement behind protests in Los Angeles and other cities from coast to coast. What are illegal alliens demanding in protests on U.S. soil? These were protests not just on behalf of “amnistia” – demanding amnesty and all rights shared by U.S. citizens; for many, they were a means of promoting the reunification of the southwestern United States with Mexico. The “reconquista” movement is marked by the flying of the Mexican flag over the American flag and has all the elements of a violent nationalist movement with the terrorist implications. If they do in fact resort to violence, all bets are off in regards to the status, guest worker or otherwise, of any illegal alien in this country from south of the border.”

(http://patriotpost.us/news/images/Mexican_Nationalists.jpg)

#40

Ken Brunt said:
personally I haven’t had an experience with any kind of coercive demand from them either. But then again I don’t live in California. What they proclaim on their website is 180 degrees from what they proclaim in public. How about taking back California, New Mexico, Nevada and Arizona and returning it to Mexico? How about raising the Mexican flag on high school flag posts in California? How about full amnesty for all illegal immigrants from Mexico? La Raza supports complete amnesty for illegal aliens as well as the reconquista movement, which aims to flood the American southwest with Mexicans, essentially “reconquering” the land. “The “Reconquista” movement Recently, The Patriot Post provided in-depth analysis of the “immigration reform” issue. We noted the rise of radical Latino identity groups composed of both naturalized immigrants and illegal aliens. These groups are being organized by World Communist Party apparatchiks, who are providing the ethnic incitement behind protests in Los Angeles and other cities from coast to coast. What are illegal alliens demanding in protests on U.S. soil? These were protests not just on behalf of “amnistia” – demanding amnesty and all rights shared by U.S. citizens; for many, they were a means of promoting the reunification of the southwestern United States with Mexico. The “reconquista” movement is marked by the flying of the Mexican flag over the American flag and has all the elements of a violent nationalist movement with the terrorist implications. If they do in fact resort to violence, all bets are off in regards to the status, guest worker or otherwise, of any illegal alien in this country from south of the border.”

(http://patriotpost.us/news/images/Mexican_Nationalists.jpg)

Yeah, I keep hearing about this “reconquista movement” but I can’t really see any evidence that it exists except as a fantasy and a scare tactic–seriosuly, the “Word Communist Party?” I’m supposed to worry about that? I’m sure there are some people of Mexican descent who would argue for this, just as there are some white people who support white supremacy. There’s a lot of people in the world, and some of them are nuts. But where’s the movement? Where’s the political force? Where are the terrorist acts? Every immigrant group has had its moment when it’s denounced as an enemy, incapable of assimilation, engaged in a conspiracy, etc. Every one. I like this cartoon:

(http://chnm.gmu.edu/exploring/images/nast1.jpg)

It’s a Thomas Nast Cartoon showing the Pope, on the Dome of St Peter’s, planning to conquer America by sending catholics As far as I can tell, there is no “reconquista movement.” There are just few nuts and fear mongers trying to gin up fear and anxiety