English! English! When did America stop speaking English?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Thanks MtG .

Boris, I don't think it is disputed that population groups have displaced population groups throughout history. And I made an exception for small tribal groups. In most places those had been displaced by bigger population groups. The areas they exist in are difficult to reach (ie, Amazon River).

And may I remind you that you said:

Can you prove that the Amerinds who were forcibly displaced by European settlers had previously "stolen" the land they occupied?

Amerindians who were forcible displaced had displaced other groups in their expansion. Those groups that had not displaced other groups had been already taken over by the ones who were still around when the Euros came over on their boats.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo
Before I respond, I'd like to point out that A. I'm a second generation South Asian (Bangladeshi) immigrant and that B. You know didly about Austin.

University, hi tech, yuppies, and all that - the liberal island in Texas. But I still thought, surrounded by San Antonio and other heavily hispanic cities you might exaggerate the number of hispanics compared to other blue collar immigrants. And yes, I recalled vaguely you were of Bangladeshi origin - but living in Austin, you may forget how many blue collar Asians there are in the US, as opposed to be people drawn to high tech employment.

Yes, plane fare is a cost to immigrants. But then so is the cost of getting past immigration, including paying immigrant runners, the chances of dying in the desert, etc.


In any case this is academic, as we ARE assimilating hispanic immigrants.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Yes it was. But you're exaggerating it...it's not about Americans speaking the language, it's about them learning some basics and attempting to speak it when abroad. It's simply incredibly rude to be in a foreign country and walk up to its citizens and jabber away in your own tongue, expecting them to know what you're saying. It's presumptuous to say the least. If you had been in NY and started talking to shop keepers in Finnish, they would probably have treated you pretty poorly. Well, more poorly than usual.

I was once in Israel on an exchange program that included among others, a Finnish young lady. Said young lady was fluent in Swedish and English, and knew some French, and I think German and Italian. (Finnish multilingualism ) Said young lady was riding a bus in Tel Aviv. Buses in TA (at the time, anyway) involved purchase of tickets, with spot checks driver didnt check) Said young lady was riding without a ticket, for reasons I forget. Well, sure enough, the spot checker got to her - it was of course NOT expected that a foreigner speak Hebrew (dont remember if she said hed guessed she was foreigner from her Nordic appearance, her non response to Hebrew, or if she showed her passport) it WAS expected that any foreigner traveling in Israel would speak ENGLISH. Not wanting to get in trouble for not having a ticket, she responded in, you guessed it, FINNISH. Frustrated, the ticket checker went away.


But of course she was from Turku, IIRC, so maybe she didnt count

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

You are going to have a hard time establishing that, Imran.

So according to you there can't even be the concept of "stealing land," since someone occupying empty land is the same as someone forcibly removing its prior inhabitants.

Has there ever been a country which has JUST occupied 'empty land'? Every country has started from a small tribe or city taking over other tribes/cities. An example is Russia. People from Moscow took over the land of all its neighbors and eventually defeated Novgorod which had taken over the land from all its neighbors, to establish 'Russia'.

How many countries out there haven't engaged in any conquest, counting the proto-country days (the formation of the country itself)?

Iceland.

I believe there were a few scattered eremitic Irish monks, but no settlements- terra nullius indeed.

[St Leo]

Re: English! English! When did America stop speaking English?

I will pretend that I haven't read the thread and blame Daniel Webster for America not speaking English. Americans can't spell thanks to him.

[molly bloom]

Re: Re: English! English! When did America stop speaking English?

Originally posted by St Leo
I will pretend that I haven't read the thread and blame Daniel Webster for America not speaking English. Americans can't spell thanks to him.

Noah. He's the one who's guilty.

Noah Webster that is, not the floating zoo guy.

http://www.ctstateu.edu/noahweb/biography.html

You're thinking of Canadian actor Raymond Massey in 'The Devil and Daniel Webster'. Great film.

[St Leo]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

So what you're saying is, we stole it from them.

Only if every single country which has every existed is considered to have 'stolen' land from some other group.

Hmm. I hate to say this, but the Finns haven't stolen their land from anyone. In fact, much of modern Russia used to be Finland.

[St Leo]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
That certainly is debatable. University is not for everyone, even if it's entirely free.

Everyone should go to University or be shot NKVD-style for failing the entrance exam.

[St Leo]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
Conquest was legal and socially acceptable untle the 20th century. If fact it had been good form and even laudable for almost all of human existance.

Cultural relativism is a load of bunk. **** the past. Long live the Republic.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Boris, I don't think it is disputed that population groups have displaced population groups throughout history.

I would like evidence it is always the case. And not just displacement, but violent overthrow. Remember that such displacement can occur peacibly, either by the vacancy of the are by previous occupants, or by an intermingling and subsequent cultural overpowering. Neither of those cases would be the same as outright conquest.

The fact is, there HAD to be original occupiers of any land, as no people have been where they are for all eternity.

And may I remind you that you said:

Can you prove that the Amerinds who were forcibly displaced by European settlers had previously "stolen" the land they occupied?

Amerindians who were forcible displaced had displaced other groups in their expansion. Those groups that had not displaced other groups had been already taken over by the ones who were still around when the Euros came over on their boats.

That's not proof, that's you claiming it to be the case. I sincerely doubt that every Amerind tribe in North America was where it was thanks to violently overthrowing the previous occupants. That one group may have replaced another over the course of centuries is not, in and of itself, evidence for violent conquest.

Regardless of all of this is the point that, just because it happened all the time, doesn't mean that it was right. Just because one group's ancestors may have slaughtered previous occupants doesn't make their own slaughter at the hand of invaders right or just. As I mentioned before, saying that there was no contemporary notion that how the Europeans treated the natives was morally repugnant is a very dubious claim, because there were plenty of Europeans at the time who expressed outrage over it. Given that the moral tenets of Western civilization at the time were very much based on Christian concepts of morality, any claim that what was done to the people was moral by their culture's standards is, I believe, disingenuous.

[Pekka]

UR; Thaat's right! I was thinking 'who did we steal from', but we didn't! We got them cave paintings made by us too!

LOTM; yes, she was smart . Turku rules.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Pekka
UR; Thaat's right! I was thinking 'who did we steal from', but we didn't! We got them cave paintings made by us too!

LOTM; yes, she was smart . Turku rules.

smart, and very pretty too. But she had a boyfriend back in Finland

[Tiamat]

**walks in and blinks** Damn! Make a post get the flu and stay away for two days and watch it explode! Still recovering from the flu so ....... obviously it's gonna take a minute or two to read through this.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by St Leo

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
Conquest was legal and socially acceptable untle the 20th century. If fact it had been good form and even laudable for almost all of human existance.

Cultural relativism is a load of bunk. **** the past. Long live the Republic.

So that which really existed is bunk, while standards thought up centuries after the events occured are 'real' with respect to such events. Stay in cyberspace, you would be completely hopeless in the real world.

[Az]

Cultural relativism is a load of bunk. **** the past. Long live the Republic.