 |
|
Natalinasmpf
|
|
Generally, shouldn't it be a general job requirement? It isn't the law, but its a general thing to do good business. It drives customers away.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Natalinasmpf
|
|
So, what if I have nerve stapled citizens to work for me? Sure, they're so submissive, they don't even collect their wages, but do I want the 50% production penalty?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999 time: 21:33
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Wernazuma III
I understand the general problematic, but I don't agree on Spanish. After all, Spanish speakers in the Southwest are, well, not really aboriginal but at least as aboriginal to that area as English speaking people are at the East Coast. That should mean their language should be as acceptable in public as is English, including double language schooling etc. I'd consider everything else repressive against a national minority. We have traditional Slovenian, Hungarian and Croatian minorities in Austria and they are given special rights for using their language at school etc., while in numbers they are much less than, say, Turks. |
More specifically, the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, formally ending the Mexican war and ceding what is now the southwestern US to the US, gave Mexican residents and their descendants the right to speak English in perpetuity. Same thing was done in the Lousiana Purchase with the grant of citizenship to any French inhabitants of the Louisiana territory.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000 time: 00:33
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Wernazuma III
I understand the general problematic, but I don't agree on Spanish. After all, Spanish speakers in the Southwest are, well, not really aboriginal but at least as aboriginal to that area as English speaking people are at the East Coast. That should mean their language should be as acceptable in public as is English, including double language schooling etc. I'd consider everything else repressive against a national minority. We have traditional Slovenian, Hungarian and Croatian minorities in Austria and they are given special rights for using their language at school etc., while in numbers they are much less than, say, Turks. |
Most of the people in question are NOT descendants of pre-1848 hispanic communities - most are in fact recent immigrants from Mexico and elsewhere. The only really large pre-1848 hispanic community is in Northern New Mexico, IIUC. I for one would not have a problem with granting special rights to the Spanish language in Northern New Mexico - id consider it rather problematic to establish such rights across the entire Southwest. Indeed, the prospect of such rights, and ultimately calls for autonomy or independence inspire some of the paranoia about hispanic immigration.
I would say that making claims for the Spanish language in the Southwest based on its pre-1848 history is NOT the way to get the US to take a positive approach to immigration and diversity.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33. Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|