A Lesson From US on Why Official Bi-Lingualism is Terrible Idea

[jbg]

The New York Sun article (link to article), which I have excerpted below, highlights the career of one of the first Hispanic politicians to make an impact in New York politics. In the late 1960's he was Bronx Borough President. He has recently been explaining, and in fact made the theme of his new book, that insisting on using other than the prevailing language (in both our countries' cases, English) is just another way to isolate yourself from the mainstream and to seek to continue to reap the benefits.

When reading this article, substitute "French" for "Spanish". The main beneficiaries of "language politics" are politicians, such as the Bloc and PQ in Canada, and Fernando Ferrar in the US. The problem is the victims are the ones they're allegedly "helping". These people would be best served by learning English at a fast and furious rate, the same way my ancestors did. I doubt that Joseph Pulitzer, the father of the Pulitzer Prize, focused on lingual rights of Hungarians. Excerpts below:

Publication:The New York Sun; Date:Jan 9, 2007; Section:Editorial & Opinion; Page:6

Brave Badillo

ANDREW WOLF

Herman Badillo and his new book, “One Nation, One Standard,” will be celebrated today at a luncheon held by the Manhattan Institute, where he will be introduced by Mayor Koch. Even before it hit the stores, the ideas expressed in the book have been a source of controversy because Mr. Badillo takes his fellow Hispanics to task for not stressing the importance of education to their children. “Education is not a high priority in the Hispanic community. … Hispanics have simply failed to recognize the overriding importance of education.”

Mr. Badillo’s standing comes not only from his own ethnic background and service as Bronx president and a member of Congress but also from his service as the chairman of the board of trustees of the City University of New York.

*snip*

A scandal erupted upon discovery that Hostos was graduating students who could not pass the CUNY writing competency exam. That year, of 104 graduating students, only 13 passed. The trustees made passage a prerequisite for obtaining a degree.

That Mr. Badillo was willing to demand that Latino students learn English didn’t sit well with the current generation of Bronx political leaders. Fernando Ferrer, then the Bronx president, and Roberto Ramirez, who was the “boss” of the Bronx Democratic Party, showed up at the Hostos graduation and turned it into what the Daily News called little more than a “four hour political rally that passed as a graduation exercise.” Mr. Ramirez exhorted the students to “honor our Spanish” and described Mr. Badillo as “someone who is one of us and forgot where he came from.”

*snip*

Another slap came from Assemblywoman Carmen Arroyo, who for years enjoyed near total control over schools in the south Bronx’s underperforming District 7 under the old decentralized system. “Badillo is an insult to the Hispanic community. I am ashamed of him. … He’s blanquito,” Ms. Arroyo said, according to the Post. She used the Latino equivalent of taunts of “acting white” that are sometimes directed at high achieving students in the African-American community.

[jbg]

Little is gained by turning a country into a Tower of Babel. This is particularly true where the primary language is also the world language of business.

Economic development and progress should, in most cases, trump the political ambitions of politicians who seek to be a "big fish in a small pond" (think Levesque, Parizou and the like).

[mikedavid00]

Little is gained by turning a country into a Tower of Babel. This is particularly true where the primary language is also the world language of business.

Economic development and progress should, in most cases, trump the political ambitions of politicians who seek to be a "big fish in a small pond" (think Levesque, Parizou and the like).

I completely agree.

[August1991]

When reading this article, substitute "French" for "Spanish". The main beneficiaries of "language politics" are politicians, such as the Bloc and PQ in Canada, and Fernando Ferrar in the US. The problem is the victims are the ones they're allegedly "helping". These people would be best served by learning English at a fast and furious rate, the same way my ancestors did.

In Canada, that statement is utter nonsense and it denotes one of the main differences between Canada and the United States.

[Riverwind]

Little is gained by turning a country into a Tower of Babel. This is particularly true where the primary language is also the world language of business.

When the British conquerered Quebec they could not make the Quebequers abandon French anymore than they could get the East Indians to abandon Hindi. When Canada was formed, French was the language spoken by many of the founding fathers and sizable proportion of the population. That makes French a fundamental part of the Canadian national fabric. Now there are legimate criticisms of the the official coast-to-coast policy of bilingualism, however, no force on the planet could ever convince the Quebequois to give up French. That means as long as Canada remains united then French will be part of the picture.

[Shakeyhands]

Little is gained by turning a country into a Tower of Babel. This is particularly true where the primary language is also the world language of business.

Economic development and progress should, in most cases, trump the political ambitions of politicians who seek to be a "big fish in a small pond" (think Levesque, Parizou and the like).

I completely agree.

jbq... this should be of concern to you.

[geoffrey]

When reading this article, substitute "French" for "Spanish". The main beneficiaries of "language politics" are politicians, such as the Bloc and PQ in Canada, and Fernando Ferrar in the US. The problem is the victims are the ones they're allegedly "helping". These people would be best served by learning English at a fast and furious rate, the same way my ancestors did.

In Canada, that statement is utter nonsense and it denotes one of the main differences between Canada and the United States.

Agreed. English isn't always the best language to do business in either in all cases. I regularly talk to our parent company (based in Montreal) as my French is better than most of their English, which is saying alot. There are alot of successful business people and companies in Canada that operate in French.

[Catchme]

When reading this article, substitute "French" for "Spanish". The main beneficiaries of "language politics" are politicians, such as the Bloc and PQ in Canada, and Fernando Ferrar in the US. The problem is the victims are the ones they're allegedly "helping". These people would be best served by learning English at a fast and furious rate, the same way my ancestors did.

In Canada, that statement is utter nonsense and it denotes one of the main differences between Canada and the United States.

Agreed. English isn't always the best language to do business in either in all cases. I regularly talk to our parent company (based in Montreal) as my French is better than most of their English, which is saying alot. There are alot of successful business people and companies in Canada that operate in French.

I agree with both of you.

[jbg]

When reading this article, substitute "French" for "Spanish". The main beneficiaries of "language politics" are politicians, such as the Bloc and PQ in Canada, and Fernando Ferrar in the US. The problem is the victims are the ones they're allegedly "helping". These people would be best served by learning English at a fast and furious rate, the same way my ancestors did.

In Canada, that statement is utter nonsense and it denotes one of the main differences between Canada and the United States.

You may be right about that statement being utter nonensense in parts of Quebec. But, pray tell, explain how that justifies laws which, under threat of fines or jail, prohibit "apostrophes" in signs, i.e. "Bob's Radiator", regulate at all what language privately operated signage is in, or provides for French-only signs on major highways.

And more to the point, why should provinces as poor as Saskatchewan have to fund "equalization" payments to a province which drives businesses away with their hostile and downright nasty attitude towards English?

While you're at it, why should merchandise in stores in Calgary or Saskatoon have to bear bi-lingual labels? What's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander. If French-speaking people insist on ramming their language down the throats of others, why shouldn't the majority in Canada be allowed to ram at least limited doses of English down the throats of Quebeckers?

[mikedavid00]

If French-speaking people insist on ramming their language down the throats of others, why shouldn't the majority in Canada be allowed to ram at least limited doses of English down the throats of Quebeckers?

I agree. I feel having these 2 languages holds us back. When I was in Montreal for the holidays a couple weeks back, there were those definite french Canadians that refused to speak English. They just refused. Had a chip on their shoulder.

I've lost out on so many job oppertunities because I couldn't speak French. Anyone who speaks french in the GTA have no problem finding work with good pay. That's why my fiance moved here.

I feel it's a negative having 2 languages in Canada. I wonder how many other first world countries have 2 offifical languages?

And wasn't Luisianna a french state that used to speak french? Ah but they settled in and took part in a unified country. They still have their cajun culture, they just aren't speaking French. Why can't quebec just do the same?

[jbg]

I feel it's a negative having 2 languages in Canada. I wonder how many other first world countries have 2 offifical languages?

Belgium and Ukraine. With similarly dysfunctional results.

And wasn't Luisianna a french state that used to speak french? Ah but they settled in and took part in a unified country. They still have their cajun culture, they just aren't speaking French. Why can't quebec just do the same?

Louisiana was required to adopt English as its official language to enter the Union, in 1812. We saw what was going on to the north of the New York/Vermont/New Hampshire/Maine border and had no appetite.

[Remiel]

From Wikipedia:

Switzerland has four official languages: German (64%) in the north and centre; French (20.4%) to the west; Italian (6.5%) in the south; and Romansh (a Romance language), that is spoken locally by a small minority (< 1%) in the southeastern canton of Graubünden. (Some dialects of Franco-Provençal have speakers in rural communities in the region where French is spoken. This language has no legal status.)

Resident foreigners and temporary foreign workers make up about 21% of the population. Most of these are from European Union countries (Italians being the largest group, at 4%), with smaller numbers from the rest of the world, including refugees from the former Yugoslavia (5%) and Turks (1%).

Switzerland Constitution], article 70, "Languages": (1) The official languages of the Federation are German, French, and Italian. Romansh is an official language for communicating with persons of Romansh language. (2) The Cantons designate their own official languages. In order to preserve harmony between linguistic communities, they respect the traditional territorial distribution of languages, and take into account the indigenous linguistic minorities.

They do seem to take a more regionalized approach than us, but that does not change the fact that they have FOUR official languages, spoken by portions of the population widely differing in size! Their federal government is obliged to be able to communicate in all four. On top of that, it notes that many people in Switzerland speak English better than their non-first national languages. So, to say that our system of two official languages is ruinously cumbersome is preposterous, given what the Swiss can manage.

[Argus]

They do seem to take a more regionalized approach than us, but that does not change the fact that they have FOUR official languages, spoken by portions of the population widely differing in size! Their federal government is obliged to be able to communicate in all four. On top of that, it notes that many people in Switzerland speak English better than their non-first national languages. So, to say that our system of two official languages is ruinously cumbersome is preposterous, given what the Swiss can manage.

Yes, the Swiss "manage", but like our system, theirs is ridiculously expensive and repetitive, and does not promote any degree of unity. Like here, I imagine the successful officials and bureaucrats there are not the ones who are actually skilled in politics or administration, but simply have a facility with language or were lucky enough to grow up in a house with more than one language.

[mikedavid00]

They do seem to take a more regionalized approach than us

Sorry. YOu haven't researched deep enough.

Official Language could mean that only gov't documents are printed in x language.

Here in Canada, a gov't building not even near quebec must be filled with French speaking people even though it really has nothing to do with the jobs.

Does this happen in Sweden? Do they have sign laws? Does the head of x Crown Corperation or Hostpital Board *MUST* be able to speak x language?

Or do they just print gov't documents in x language.

Do more research into the issue and stop trying to push your far left, self-hating, Liberal Ignatieff agenda.

[August1991]

I feel it's a negative having 2 languages in Canada. I wonder how many other first world countries have 2 offifical languages?

Belgium and Ukraine. With similarly dysfunctional results.

Similarly dysfunctional?

Canada has avoided a civil war which is more than I can say about the United States.

I am proud that I live on one of the most civilized continents in the world - a continent that has largely avoided war. I am particularly proud to be a citizen of arguably the most civilized country in the world - a country that has almost always found peaceful ways to resolve its differences. (A country, by the way, where a democratic vote was held on secession, lost by a few thousand votes, and yet the losing side accepted in mature fashion the verdict.)

There will always be people who speak a different language or have a different accent. We cannot make 'others' disappear by fiat. A federal system that ensures constituent governments are sovereign in their jurisdiction is a practical way to deal with these differences in a single country.

At the level of the central government, where all of these differences clash, it takes compromise and a spirit of generosity. At key points in Canadian history, both compromise and generosity on various sides admirably defused tensions.

My feelings about Canada wax and wane. The arguments of Argus and MikeDavid above are simplistic versions of arguments made by sovereigntists. But as one one well known sovereigntist said, "We can't fold up Quebec under our arm and take it out in to the Atlantic Ocean and lay it down there. Whatever happens, Quebec is part of this continent. We have to live with that fact."

[cybercoma]

Canada has avoided a civil war which is more than I can say about the United States.

I am proud that I live on one of the most civilized continents in the world - a continent that has largely avoided war. I am particularly proud to be a citizen of arguably the most civilized country in the world - a country that has almost always found peaceful ways to resolve its differences. (A country, by the way, where a democratic vote was held on secession, lost by a few thousand votes, and yet the losing side accepted in mature fashion the verdict.)

There will always be people who speak a different language or have a different accent. We cannot make 'others' disappear by fiat. A federal system that ensures constituent governments are sovereign in their jurisdiction is a practical way to deal with these differences in a single country.

At the level of the central government, where all of these differences clash, it takes compromise and a spirit of generosity. At key points in Canadian history, both compromise and generosity on various sides admirably defused tensions.

My feelings about Canada wax and wane. The arguments of Argus and MikeDavid above are simplistic versions of arguments made by sovereigntists. But as one one well known sovereigntist said, "We can't fold up Quebec under our arm and take it out in to the Atlantic Ocean and lay it down there. Whatever happens, Quebec is part of this continent. We have to live with that fact."

Canada didn't avoid a war. That ship has sailed and the French lost. The fact of the matter is, anglophones should be able to function just as well in Québec as francophones can in any other part of the country. The ROC caters to french speaking people while Québec goes out of its way to make things difficult for the english. A little equality (like signs on the highway in french AND english, like they are in Ontario) would be nice.

[Fortunata]

Re: Switzerland, a friend of mine immigrated from there. In his school, growing up, there was a day devoted to each language. They spoke french one day, italian the next, english, german.... it's very easy to be bilingual when that is part of the curriculum.

As far as bilingualism is concerned, if were were really truly bilingual it would benefit each one of us. It helps to know more than one language; it is usually easier to pick up a third, fourth etc. than if you just start late from one. Here's a little tidbit on ctv this morning: Bilingualism may delay dementia

http://video.sympatico.msn.com/v/en-ca/v.h...91b&f=37&fg=rss

[mikedavid00]

Re: Switzerland, a friend of mine immigrated from there. In his school, growing up, there was a day devoted to each language. They spoke french one day, italian the next, english, german.... it's very easy to be bilingual when that is part of the curriculum.

Are you suggesting that everyone in Sweden can speak English, German and Italiian?

You aren't going to make me go spend time proving you wrong are you?

[Black Dog]

You may be right about that statement being utter nonensense in parts of Quebec. But, pray tell, explain how that justifies laws which, under threat of fines or jail, prohibit "apostrophes" in signs, i.e. "Bob's Radiator", regulate at all what language privately operated signage is in, or provides for French-only signs on major highways.

That has nothing to do with the federal policy of official bilingualism.

While you're at it, why should merchandise in stores in Calgary or Saskatoon have to bear bi-lingual labels? What's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander. If French-speaking people insist on ramming their language down the throats of others, why shouldn't the majority in Canada be allowed to ram at least limited doses of English down the throats of Quebeckers?

It is quite amusing watching people like md00 and jbg take Quebec to task for doing the very things to protect its identity that, in another context, those posters would applaud.

[mikedavid00]

It is quite amusing watching people like md00 and jbg take Quebec to task for doing the very things to protect its identity that, in another context, those posters would applaud.

I said in another post that Quebec had the right to defend it's language and I did call them a nation within Canada.

I personally believe that the language part is not good for Canada.

What's so wrong with that?

[blueblood]

I wonder what Quebecers would say if Manitoba passed a law that was like Bill 101 but switching French with English in the context???

[seabee]

I wonder what Quebecers would say if Manitoba passed a law that was like Bill 101 but switching French with English in the context???

If this were to happen, what would be the practical consequences? How many unilingual french signs would have to be changed? are there any today? Would French-speaking students have access to a complete education system, from kindergarden to post-doctoral level, in French, as the Anglophones have in Québec? Would Francophones have garanteed access to health care in French, as the Anglophones in Québec have?

In fact, I don't think anyone in Québec, except a few politicians out to get votes, would even talk about it, as such a law in Manitoba would change nothing to its present situation.

[Fortunata]

Are you suggesting that everyone in Sweden can speak English, German and Italiian?

You aren't going to make me go spend time proving you wrong are you?

Well, numero uno, I said HIS school. I don't know about other schools. I just assumed, perhaps wrongly, that they all would be like that.

Sweden? I have no idea about what languages Swedes speak other than Swedish. But then I was talking about Switzerland.

And as far as you going to prove me wrong, I say go for it. By the look of some of your posts lately, you need a holiday.

[blueblood]

I wonder what Quebecers would say if Manitoba passed a law that was like Bill 101 but switching French with English in the context???

If this were to happen, what would be the practical consequences? How many unilingual french signs would have to be changed? are there any today? Would French-speaking students have access to a complete education system, from kindergarden to post-doctoral level, in French, as the Anglophones have in Québec? Would Francophones have garanteed access to health care in French, as the Anglophones in Québec have?

In fact, I don't think anyone in Québec, except a few politicians out to get votes, would even talk about it, as such a law in Manitoba would change nothing to its present situation.

There are a lot of francophones in Manitoba, there are a lot of bilingual signs, and francophone communities. That having been said they are fairly assimilated into the "English" Canada. No law would change my situation, but Pierre in St. Adolphe or Francois from St. Lazare might have something to say about it. At least though they have an opportunity to put up a sign in only french and not have to worry about prosecution. They do have access to education and health care in French.

[jbg]

I feel it's a negative having 2 languages in Canada. I wonder how many other first world countries have 2 offifical languages?

Belgium and Ukraine. With similarly dysfunctional results.

Similarly dysfunctional?

Canada has avoided a civil war which is more than I can say about the United States.

******

My feelings about Canada wax and wane. The arguments of Argus and MikeDavid above are simplistic versions of arguments made by sovereigntists. But as one one well known sovereigntist said, "We can't fold up Quebec under our arm and take it out in to the Atlantic Ocean and lay it down there. Whatever happens, Quebec is part of this continent. We have to live with that fact."

I think you're in severe denial about the history of both countries. Yes, the US had a bloody Civil War, five years or so in length. The way I analyze your countries' history is that at least since WW I, when the French resisted conscription despite enjoying the benefits of living in a prosperous, safe, and burgeoning young country, you've had a "slow motion Civil War".

The difference is that we have ended up as a proud, solid nation. Yours has wound up as a country with a pale self-image, and one constantly riven by "separation" referenda, and the resulting political and business uncertainty. During WW I and II, the French resisted conscription, and I believe that either Quebec was exempted from conscription officially or unofficially.

During the 1960's the separatist movement gained steam, with De Gaulle's "Vive Le' Quebec Libre" rant being only a part of the problem. The FLQ crisis, and educational restrictions passed in 1974 solidified Quebec's hostility to the rest of the country. Levesque was of course elected in 1976, and put the Canadian currency into a free fall, since it made obvious to the rest of the world that Canada's federal arrangement could easily unravel. Even the Civil Rights crises of the 1950's and 1960's did not come close to restarting serious secessionist sentiment (I do not take seriously such nutbar groups as the "Republic of Texas" or various militias). The secession referenda of 1980 and 1995, together with the continuation of restrictive language policies in Quebec (i.e. abolition of bi-lingual road signs and effective banning of signs that are primariliy in English on private property) made it clear that Quebec wants the countries' money, but does not want to grant its people the rights of Canadians.

Thus, the lack of a civil war, and the lack of a solid national definition of Canada, has come at a severe price.