Subject: re : 6 . 933 , misc : english only , a footnote on banning of german

jack aubert writes : > in contrast with most of the topics discussed here , [ national language > policy ] is an > issue where the views of academic linguists have no greater value than the > views of laymen or practicing linguists i beg to differ . lay ( wo ) men 's misconceptions about language are poisoning the public debate about english only , and recognizing the greater value of the views of academic linguists might be just what is needed to improve that debate . is it merely an accident that the vast majority of academic linguists opposes ( while a majority of laypeople supports ) english only and related movements , or is it an indication that those academic linguists know something that the laypeople do not know ? > [ bilingualism in the us ] means making it easier for non - english speakers > to get through life without having to learn to speak english on the grounds > that this is more humane and fairer . i am not an expert on bilingualism , but i have a hunch that this is a very lopsided characterization of bilingualism as currently practiced in ( small pockets of ) the us . i would be good to hear from subscribers who actually are experts on bilingualism . > most " ethnic " conflicts . . . > trace back to language . basque and catalan separatism is based on language . language played absolutely no role in the biggest " ethnic conflict " of our time , i . e . the racist war of the germans against jews , slavs , gypsies and other " non-aryans " . where language does play a role in " ethnic conflicts " , it does so only as ( an important ) part of a different cultural itentity , whatever that is . most of the time , these conflicts are n't purely " ethnic " but also ( and sometimes please do n't freeze onexclusively ) based on other factors such as class . the " ethnic conflict " between hutus and tutsis is an excellent example for this , but the details would lead to far astray . > english - - by accident of history - - is the glue that keeps the u . s . > together as one nation . the glue that keeps the us together as one nation ( if indeed there is such a glue and such a unified nation ) contains many ingredients , among which brute force and economic interests play a much bigger role than english or some other linguistic phenomenon . the unifying powers of police batons and wageloss ( for which one can blame the japanese , or mexicans , or anybody except the american ruling class ) far exceed those of the poems of walt whitman . > by requiring all american children to attend > classes taught in english we are doing our non-native - english speaking > compatriots an enormous favor . clearly the " non-native - english speaking compatriots " cannot be included in the " we " who are doing " our blablabla " a favor when " we " ( and " we " alone ) require all american children to attend classes taught in english . this is what english only truly is about : maintaining or returning to a status quo where " we " make decisions for " our blablabla " whose benefactors " we " thereby are . best , bernhard rohrbacher
