The founding fathers knew what they were doing by not legislating an official language for the country.
IamFry said 03/21, 02:05 PM
Although it's been discussed since the country's formation, and in spite of the fact that the US has been the world's number one immigration destination for centuries, no "Official Language" legislation was introduced to the US until 1981, and it still hasn't passed.
The reasons for not including it initially range from respect for Native American tribes and considerable non-English-speaking populations to consideration for the value of learning multiple languages. No matter, the non-inclusion of an official language reflects the free-market spirit that makes our country great. Currently, Spanish is more widely-spoken than English in the US, but most everything you see is in English.
If economics suggest that advertisers start selling primarily in Spanish, then they will, but currently they don't. Likewise, since English is the official language of business, the market demands that one learn it to excel in American business. The market sorts out what is spoken when.
Look at France; they have the most astringent language laws in the world, and if anything, all it does for them is contribute to their reputation as a55h0les!
Junius Brutus said 03/21, 02:41 PM
I doubt the founding fathers could possibly have anticipated the degree to which the US has become 'the world's number one immigration destination', and I seriously doubt that the failure to name an 'official' language was a conscious one. I don't think they could or would have anticipated the need for such legislation.
(Whether such legislation is actually necessary or not is a separate argument, though, and is NOT the one you've posted, namely that "the Founding Fathers knew what they were doing" in not designating an official language).
Your arguments are basically (tenuous) arguments for opposing any legislation that would define an 'official' language, but that's not what you're asserting in your challenge. So - make the argument for your initial statement.
IamFry said 03/21, 04:06 PM
What are you not getting? I say the founding fathers, "knew what they were doing," as in, 'they made a wise decision,' and then I offer points of why it was a good decision (see: free-market), and why legislating language is a poor decision (see: France).
Now, to address your claim that the founding fathers would have made a different decision, had they known what the country would become - what are you talking about? First of all, who are you to speak on behalf of the FFs? Secondly, if the FFs saw the country that they started 200 years ago with 2.5 million people on a shoestring budget as it is today, they'd be beside themselves with glee.
Look at France, with their non-inclusive language legislation. Where has it gotten them? Look at China circa 1700 - a highly advanced society, but their xenophobic tendencies allowed Western cultures to run circles around them. Language legislation equates to an inhospitable environment for immigrants.
Currently, CANADA is boasting the highest per capita immigration in the world. Too much immigration may be a pain, but the last thing we want is for the well to dry up.
Junius Brutus said 03/25, 06:51 PM
A) You haven't established that was actually a conscious decision. Your subsequent remarks continue to avoid that point.
B) Your 2nd paragraph is a straw man. I didn't claim they would have made a different decision. I pointed out that there's no proof they actually *made* a decision - that in fact, the 'failure' to name a national language is more simply explained (Occam's Razor) by them not foreseeing a multilingual populace.
Once again, prove the failure to name a 'National Language' was in fact a conscious omission, rather than simply one of the myriad of things that they didn't address *at all*.
IamFry said 03/25, 10:11 PM
Not foreseeing a multilingual populace? They already HAD a multilingual populace (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Colonization_of_the_Americas_1750.PNG ).
In addition to being geographically surrounded by non-English-speaking colonial territory, a quarter of the heavily colonized Atlantic seaboard spoke a language other than English - and it's much higher if you count the "involuntary" immigrants.
In 1780, John Adams urged the government to establish an institution that would set language standards for the US, but it was REJECTED by the Continental Congress as undemocratic - http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_lang.html
I'm a big Adams fan, but a few of his positions were sketchy, such as his opposition to the separation of church and state, or his suggestion that the president be referred to as "His Majesty", but I digress-
It's absurd to think that the founding fathers failed to consider the possibility that foreign-language-speaking immigration would continue. Oddly enough, some of the people who say the FFs failed to consider modern ramifications think that they want us to walk around carrying semi-automatic weapons.
Junius Brutus said 03/26, 01:49 PM
Ah - I was unaware of the John Adams bit, although I note from the reference you cite that he attempted to set up an 'official academy' - unless you have a more detailed reference, it appears that you're embroidering the the bit about him urging 'the government' to set language standards.
But that's irrelevant - you've convinced me that my claim is sufficiently in question that I withdraw it.
Comments
Add Your Comment
About the speaking of Spanish in the US? Someone once told me that more people in the US speak Spanish than English, and that, I now realize, is a completely ridiculous assertion. They must have included Spanish 101 students or something; what I'm trying to say is that some people in this country speak only Spanish, but our mainstream society is entirely in English.
IamFry | 03/21/08
Report Offensive Comment
How can you determine which language is used more within the U.S.? I lived 20 miles from the Mexican-Arizonan border, and there was still more people speaking English, even among Hispanics. I'm not criticizing or railing against your assertion, but I'm curious as to where that information was obtained.
base89 | 03/21/08
Report Offensive Comment
There really is no way to determine that; I was just regurgitating something I'd heard without really filtering it, and I wish I could take it back. The real point is that, in spite of lots of US residents speaking a language other than English as their primary language, English prevails in mainstream society due to the "market".
IamFry | 03/21/08
Report Offensive Comment
Yeah, my mistake. I meant to say "widely-spoken." Thanks for clearing that up.
RTBA2A | 03/21/08
Report Offensive Comment
well, you can't hope to prove that the founding father's knew what they were doing unless you can state some source of information that gives insight into their thinking on the matter. Did one of them write about it or do we have some type of records of it being discussed? I don't know, I'm actually interested to see. At any rate, i agree with your other points (now that you have cleared up that whole Spanish being more widely-spoken statement). I think that's where the confusion about what your argument is comes in though. You give reasons why it is a good idea not to have an official language today, but not a whole lot of evidence that it was the reason the founding fathers left it out.
Skipper04 | 03/22/08
Report Offensive Comment
Have you heard the expression, "That guy really knows what he's doing,"? It means preforming a task with wisdom, acuity, and efficiency. That's what I mean by, "The founding fathers knew what they were doing..." I mean they considered the options and made a wise choice. If my opponent choses to debate whether there actually was a dialog about making English an official language at the time, then I'll be happy to address it.
IamFry | 03/22/08
Report Offensive Comment
I was curious to find out if there was, and I did quite a bit of research into all written accounts, personal and public from any Constitutional Convention, and there, to my knowledge was no such debate on language, just thought you'd like to know, and if I missed something please let me know.
base89 | 03/22/08
Report Offensive Comment
"I mean they considered their options and made a wise choice". Again why do you think that they considered their options? Without evidence to the contrary, it's possible that it just never came up at all. I find your claim that they had a certain amount of respect for the Native Americans to be a bit dubious, seeing as they had just fought a war with them, were continually driving them from their lands and subjecting them to unfair treaties, and certainly did not mean to give any of the rights that they had written so eloquently about to the Natives. But yes, i do see what you were really trying to argue and you do make some good points.
Skipper04 | 03/23/08
Report Offensive Comment
Well Iamfry, in order to win my vote your going to have to prove to me that the founding fathers talked about making national language or not and discussing reasons for it. Maybe it just slipped there mind with all the other, probably more pressing matters-- like organizing our structure of government and elections and the way to make laws, enforce them, and interpret them. To say that they knew what they were doing implies that they must have actually at one time thought about it and discussed it. If they didn't, it can just be an oversight that seems unimportant and probably was considering I think it is today too.
shrek | 03/24/08
Report Offensive Comment
Spanish is not spoken more than english in the United States. Call him out on it Brutus. It's a weak argument.
Ecyoj21 | 03/25/08
Report Offensive Comment
Yeah, we touched on that, bud. Here's the link that got cut off: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Colonization_of_the_Americas_1750.PNG
IamFry | 03/25/08
Report Offensive Comment
ah, well you've provided some proof that it was actually considered. that's all I asked for, and although I am always skeptical of internet links (especially the wikipedia ones), it seems the ACLU has published a paper on it. Being to lazy to actually read that, I will accept the claim. By the way though, just so we are clear I am not one to say that it's OK to walk around with semi-automatics. But the founding father's were always rather picky when it came to just who would enjoy their rights and didn't always stick to their principles, so no i don't think it would be absurd for them to have chosen to ignore such an obvious issue. They also weren't necessarily counting on those other foreign language speaking lands on being brought into their democracy. They were only fighting the British, and only for themselves.
Skipper04 | 03/26/08
Report Offensive Comment
The founding fathers did bring a language to the native Americans that the understood all to soon, Smallpox.
Harbing3r | 03/26/08
Report Offensive Comment
Harbing, What does smallpox have anything to do with this debate?
shrek | 03/27/08
Report Offensive Comment
I agree with Skipper on this issue. You provided evidense. Although I believe wikipedia to be one of the most biased information websites on the internet, if skipper finds enough evidense to change his decision than I guess that is good enough for me!
shrek | 03/27/08
Report Offensive CommentPost A Comment
Please keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.
CNN TOP POLITICAL STORIES
TOP STORIES on TIME.COM
TIME PHOTO ESSAYS
Israeli Soldiers Sweep Into Gaza
IDF tanks and infantry launch a ground offensive in the Palestinian enclave
(Uriel Sinai / Getty)
The Science of Snowflakes
Caltech physics professor Kenneth G. Libbrecht has turned his passion for the study of ice crystals into an art form. In his books and website, Snowcrystals.com, he breaks down some of the basics behind these miniature miracles of nature
(Kenneth G. Libbrecht)
IamFry, How do you define "Widespread"? By area, which is the usual when discussing geographically widespread, or by population speaking it, which is the usual for demographically widespread? Or by some other definition?
RTBA2A | 03/21/08
Report Offensive Comment