identity crisis?
jkinbote
What makes a Filipino a Filipino?
Both countries have ethnic diversity but still have national identity. What
is the most important part of the Filipino identity?
Moreland J Nagal
Filipino: The Philippines is like a teenager, it's still going through
an identity crisis. Hey but that's normal.
Rico
news:3D7B331B...@hawaii.rr.com...
> What makes an American: To be whoever you are makes an American.
and all other people of other nationalities are not really who they are?
MariaClara
news:alfs53$3pv$1...@nn-os106.ocn.ad.jp...
i think what he means is, in a free society like america, you can live life
the way you want to live it. no one tells you how to dress, who to marry,
which religion to practice, how many kids you should have, which gender is
preferred, which career paths to take---- okay except maybe your parents
:)---- but you get the idea... one can follow their true calling because
you alone have the final say on how you want to live your life... and
through honest, decent hard work one can actually reach their dreams... and
best of all, people of different ethnicities can live together peacefully
(well most of the times :))) and still able to retain and practice their
culture/religion if they so choose...
mc
GodBlessMyHaloHalo
>
Edna Sioson
What a crock of shit; in the US you are ONLY
free to follow the 'american way of life' and do
and adopt the values of everyone else; US life
isn't any freer than RP, only difference is there
are well paid JOBS
"MariaClara" <ma_c...@yahoo.comSMMSLT> a écrit dans le message de news:
JGMe9.350845$me6.40029@sccrnsc01...
Congenital Kano
"Edna Sioson" <edna_...@noos.fr> wrote in message
news:3d7c3c15$0$13600$79c1...@nan-newsreader-02.noos.net...
> 'free society' ?!!!!!!!
> What a crock of shit; in the US you are ONLY
> free to follow the 'american way of life' and do
> and adopt the values of everyone else; US life
> isn't any freer than RP, only difference is there
> are well paid JOBS
>
Hunh?
What values are those?
Are the values of the Hollywood insiders the same as the workers in
Dearborn, MI? Are the values of the Beltway Boys the same as the black
citizens comprising the majority of Washington? Are the values of Louis
Farakhan and Jesse Jackson the same as those of Deborah Sanchez and Michelle
Malkin? Are the values of Bill Clinton and Janet Reno the same as George W.
Bush and John Ashcroft? Are the values of Bill Gates at Microsoft the same
as Bill Jones at Domino's Pizza? Are the values of N.O.W. the same as those
of Focus on the Family? Are the values of Rush Limbaugh the same as Jim
Carville?
Please define these values you say they have in common. Should be easy,
since everyone in the US follows them. And define what the "American way of
life" is, and show how everyone is forced to live it.
I await your explication with eager anticipation.
Poly-sigh Pig
tansong Isda
> 'free society' ?!!!!!!!
> What a crock of shit; in the US you are ONLY
> free to follow the 'american way of life' and do
> and adopt the values of everyone else; US life
> isn't any freer than RP, only difference is there
> are well paid JOBS
>
There's a slight difference, you can complain without fear of dire repercussion,
like your life can be short if you do in the Philippines. The rule of law is
still king in the US, and devil-may-give-shit in the Philippines, tho' not
always if you are lucky.
It is a lot more free than England for example.
rvdg
Yeah, whatever Randy said on his reply on your clewless ranting.
Congenital Kano
"Tikki tikki tembo-no sa rembo-chari bari ruchi-pip peri pembo"
<calliope+use...@rescomp.stanford.edu> wrote in message
news:alirtb$fkl$1...@news.Stanford.EDU...
> >Hunh?
> >
> >What values are those?
> >
> >Are the values of the Hollywood insiders the same as the workers in
> >Dearborn, MI? Are the values of the Beltway Boys the same as the black
> >citizens comprising the majority of Washington? Are the values of Louis
> >Farakhan and Jesse Jackson the same as those of Deborah Sanchez and
Michelle
> >Malkin? Are the values of Bill Clinton and Janet Reno the same as George
W.
> >Bush and John Ashcroft? Are the values of Bill Gates at Microsoft the
same
> >as Bill Jones at Domino's Pizza?
>
> Burger King now.
>
The US remains the land of opportunity! Er, assuming you were talking about
Jones, not Gates...
Upwardly Mobile Pig
In Kognito
alone. So, there is freedom in that. In a more rural, tropical
setting, everybody is more nosy. I guess, that is the difference.
MariaClara
news:3d7c3c15$0$13600$79c1...@nan-newsreader-02.noos.net...
> What a crock of shit; in the US you are ONLY
> free to follow the 'american way of life' and do
> and adopt the values of everyone else; US life
> isn't any freer than RP, only difference is there
> are well paid JOBS
gudness... okay, emotional outbursts aside, i can see how filipinos raised
in the RP
would feel this way. my parents are good examples. they had to adjust and
eventually accept some of the american ways. i mean the same goes for
anybody who moves anywhere in the world, it's a given...
americans are generally raised to be confident, self-reliant, outspoken,
tolerant, future-oriented and believe it or not-- generous. :) and
sometimes these traits are viewed by foreigners as being "mayabang" or
arrogant and rude. i think foreigners need to understand where americans
are coming from instead of just seeing the surface and then comparing
american ways to theirs...
i remember my parents saying "here in america, they kick you out of the
house when you reach the age of 18". they see american parents as being
insensitive and uncaring. what they don't see are the reasons behind it...
that these parents are doing what's best for their kids... they're teaching
them how to fend for themselves and live independently of one another....
most of the times it's the kids who choose to leave home because they prefer
a better college located in another state... and so americans tend to move a
lot. it's not uncommon for americans to settle and live away from their
place of birth or where they grew up in. this moving about keeps them away
from a lot of their friends and away from their extended families.
naturally, foreigners see americans as not having many friends or that
they're not close to their families etc.. they only see their families
during the holidays... this is the kind of life you expect in a country
where you are free to go wherever your heart leads you. you worry less
about other family members like your siblings because they, also, were
brought up to be independent. so the people's main focus becomes their
career and to provide only for their nuclear family. usually their parents
and siblings can take care of themselves... it seems to work for everybody
especially dahil-kasi-because people value their privacy...
why do many immigrants choose to live in america? because they know that by
working hard, they will be able to afford homes, good schools... earn good
money... live a good life for themselves and their kids without the worry
of corruption, bombings, beheadings, kids attending schools that teach to
hate and
kill just because you don't practice the same religion... they can live in
an
environment where people are taught to be tolerant and accepting of other
cultures... this "good life" is an incentive that motivates and drive most
people to become educated, honest and law-abiding-hard-working citizens...
now how could anybody find fault in that... ;) oh just admit it, you want
america... :)
mc
ChoseUnemploymentChecks :)
Dirty Sick Pig
MariaClara wrote:
> <snippy>
> mc
> GodBlessMyHaloHalo
Yeeeeeeeech! Who put the yellow ice in there?
WillEatItAnywayPig
ExpatAuthority
> What makes an American an American?
Maputing balat. Mataas nga ilong.
> What makes a Filipino a Filipino?
Kayumangging balat. Pislat nga ilong.
ExpatAuthority
>
> What values are those?
>
> Are the values of the Hollywood insiders the same as the workers in
> Dearborn, MI? Are the values of the Beltway Boys the same as the black
> citizens comprising the majority of Washington? Are the values of Louis
> Farakhan and Jesse Jackson the same as those of Deborah Sanchez and Michelle
> Malkin? Are the values of Bill Clinton and Janet Reno the same as George W.
> Bush and John Ashcroft? Are the values of Bill Gates at Microsoft the same
> as Bill Jones at Domino's Pizza? Are the values of N.O.W. the same as those
> of Focus on the Family? Are the values of Rush Limbaugh the same as Jim
> Carville?
Well,we are not talking about political/or economic views on specific
issues here as much and also not about the radical
people/organizations which you have listed.
Philosophically speaking, there is no item that is completely similar
to the next. Even two atoms are not alike. However, there are many
similarities in most people in any given society and that is what we
call culture. So, the American culture is basically hard work,
thriftiness, independence, love of privacy, and great respect for
youth and material wealth. There is little respect for poetry and/ or
intellectualism, or non-Anglo Saxon cultures or languages ( except
French, maybe) for example. Practicality is more what people respect.
So, one can say that there are general priorities that most people
share.
>
> Please define these values you say they have in common.
Well, I did not interview them in particular but most people in the US
seem to have similarities in many things. To give you just a few:
Respect for youth
Great respect for achievement.
Rejection of most non-Anglo Saxon cultures( except French and
Scandinavian or Dutch) and languages as inferior. Except if they are
needed for a job or college credits. That includes lack of interest in
or outright repulsion of any music ( except classical for some),
movies, books, art, TV and radio programs, or history of most
non-Anglo countries ( except the ones listed). There may be an odd
individual who is into some exotic culture here and there, though.
Note: this does not go for food!
Therefore, an American who can speak a foreign language is an oddity.
(Immigrants not included.)
Great respect for work and career.
Fear of strangers unless they are customers or potential business
partners or extremely sexually attractive.
Privacy in favor of hospitality.
Respect for independent enterpreneurship, medical and legal
professions.
General disrespect for the teaching profession and academia.
Nuclear family.
Poor knowledge of history and geography even among the most educated
ones.
Being positive, persistent and punctual.
Respect for customers.
Efficiency and thriftiness.
Patriotism. Much more patriotic and trusting of the government than
Euros who are much more cynical about it.
Tolerance but not true acceptance of non-white races of people. Will
work with them and be polite to them but not really play with them or
get too close to them. Race/ethnicity is very important in after-work
social associations with other people. Note: cute young Asian girls
are an exception to the rule.
Tolerance of homosexuality.
Practicality over intellectualism.
TV over reading and prose over poetry.
Informality in interpersonal relations and less classism.
General affability.
Informal dress habits.
Cleanliness and good personal hygiene.
Good handling of finances.
Much more sexually repressed than Europeans or even the Japanese.
Conservative views on age differences in love. A 28 year old man is
already too old for a 21 year old woman.
These are some "values" among many others.
Should be easy,
> since everyone in the US follows them.
Easy to learn for one born into the culture or a similar culture.
Because you are a "clean slate" and have some 18 years to learn and
practice them and you have little exposure to alternative values by
virtue of just having so many people around you that inculcate similar
values into you. Should be easy for a Canadian to understand but not
as easy for a Mongolian for one.
And define what the "American way of
> life" .
Become independent. Study hard and get a good practical career. Don't
waste your time on impractical things such as foreign travel, or
literature unless you will get a well paying job in it. Get married
and buy a house. Make more money. Attain more success. Love America
and support your government. Don't be a puss. Don't write faggot
poetry. Don't talk other languages that is not English. No need to see
the world. Everything you want we've got it right here in the good
ole' US of A. Best girls are in the US. Be politically correct, and
do not use bad words to describe people who are different.
Homosexuality is legal. It just can't be helped...
>is, and show how everyone is forced to live it
Well, people are not physically forced to live any values at a gun
point or something like that, but there is peer pressure. But no one
likes to be scorned or ostracized or told: "Go back to your country!".
Try putting on Arab attire and walk a few blocks in any US city. You
will see what I mean.
There are also things that a society respects and does not respect as
a general rule. It seems to me that every person in any given society
carries values the way a vessel carries a liquid of sorts. Things
taught in school, the view of the world and the way things are
portrayed in the news in any given country has a profound effect on
how an individual member of any particular society behaves as a
general rule.
When an immigrant arrives, he may behave differently but the society
can show or not show tolerance. Generally, in the US people will just
leave you alone if you do not conform. That is tolerance and is good
enough for most. Usually, Americans will accept first and foremost any
person who acts, thinks, looks and talks as a white Anglo would. These
are liked. The more different you are, the less acceptance there will
be. Unless you are a romantic Frenchman ( fluent in English with a
cute accent), for one. Tolerance will still be aplenty, though.
I have lived in different cultures and while individuals are somewhat
different, the overall sum of all beliefs and views on the world (
read: culture) of any given society varies greatly as you go from
country to country.
Edna Sioson
"Dirty Sick Pig" <drtys...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
3D7D8FEF...@hotmail.com...
Congenital Kano
"ExpatAuthority" <expatau...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bd866d06.02091...@posting.google.com...
Geez, Expat, you spent a lot of time writing out your prejudices and TV
images of America without getting close to the truth.
>
> Well,we are not talking about political/or economic views on specific
> issues here as much and also not about the radical
> people/organizations which you have listed.
Unfortunately it is both a strength and weakness that the "radical" views
are widely held by large numbers of people. Homogeneous cultures have much
more uniformity of thought and philosophy, and small-minded or ignorant
people constantly try to fit America into a cultural mold patterned after
their own more limited model. Most attempts (like yours) lag some 30 years
behind history.
> Philosophically speaking, there is no item that is completely similar
> to the next. Even two atoms are not alike. However, there are many
> similarities in most people in any given society and that is what we
> call culture.
Yes, but there IS no culture like America anywhere else in the world, so
your model breaks down.
The intellectual trap you have fallen into is on one hand citing historic
values of a predominently European-based culture and on the other ignoring
the realities of the society as it stands today.
> So, the American culture is basically hard work,
> thriftiness, independence, love of privacy, and great respect for
> youth and material wealth.
Yes and no. Some of these were important in my grandparents generation, but
are not true today. Thriftiness, for example. America has one of the
lowest savings rates of industrial nation, and we are the nation that
invented the credit card.
America achieved what it did because it valued hard work, but that ethic,
alas, is no longer in vogue. Hard work has become much less a value in the
socialist cradle to grave support society the US is turning into. Hard work
and ability are less important today that ethnic background (assuming you
are one of the "preferred" races like black or hispanic, not Asian). The
politics of race has become big business, and various groups encourage
racial divisiveness for their own reasons (people like Jackson for money and
power, the Democrats as a tool to get more minority votes).
>There is little respect for poetry and/ or
> intellectualism,
Hunh? More poetry is generated and widely disseminated in the US every year
than in the rest of the world combined. Consider greeting cards and songs,
both based upon poetry. Perhaps what you are saying is that in a limited
view of poetry (say, limited to Norse epics) Americans are not as
appreciative as Scandinavians.
Quick, name the current Peruvian Shakespeare, or the Ruwandan Longfellow.
Poetry is a broad type of linguistic expression which has taken many forms
for many purposes. Poetry is a passtime even the most impoverished can
pursue. It has historically been a record of a groups history, or the
expression of feelings of individuals or groups, or sheer exercise of
language. Contemporary forms have evolved to expand the field, based upon
the same premise of verbal manipulation. You may not *like* various forms
of poetry due to content and form, but to claim they do not exist or are
undervalued is nonsense. My TV has 592 channels of poetry 24/7. American
poetry is imported eagerly across the world.
One of my favorite contemporary poems has a refrain of "I'm gonna hire a
wino to redecorate our home." Another is "A bearded lady tried a jar, now
she's a famous movie star." You have a problem with that? That's a matter
of taste, not genre.
Little respect of intellectualism? Not sure how you define
"intellectualism". Perhaps if you mean some interminable discussion of
esoterics a la undergraduate bull sessions ("What is the nature of
epistemology, Bob?") there is no general appreciation outside academia. But
intellectual discussion of issues and meanings? Of scholarship and the
expanding field of knowledge? Here's a clue -- who comprise the largest
group of participants in newsgroup discussions? Germans? French?
Guatamalans? Or Americans? Where can you find the greatest debate over the
values of Christianity vs Wahabism, with a real discussion of the merits of
both sides -- the Saudi street or the US street? Where have the majority of
international groups concerned with "intellectual" pursuits like the
environment or human rights been formed? What country has generated the
preponderance of textbooks on theology, philosophy, science and the arts in
the past 40 years?
> or non-Anglo Saxon cultures or languages ( except
> French, maybe) for example. Practicality is more what people respect.
This is a non-issue, especially when you add the caveat "except immigrants".
There are no native Americans, only immigrants. I forget the exact figures,
but some 25-40% of Californians today were born in another country, and that
percentage is rising. Are these not Americans? Are the German immigrants
who retain their language not Americans? The Iranians? The Vietnamese?
I get tired on this language canard, because it is a straw man. Europeans
do not learn more second languages because of intellectual curiosity or
superiority but
because of practicality. Europeans NEED other languages, for commerce and
social reasons. Having to learn the language of a neighbor does not confer
intellectual superiority. The bulk of the world's population only learns
secondary languages because of need; most folk are simply spending too much
time surviving to follow learning for its own sake. What it really boils
down to is that Joe Sixpack in Moline, Iowa, doesn't speak Chinese. Well,
Joe Sixpack doesn't NEED to speak Chinese. How many Josef Sechspacks speak
Chinese? He is much more likely to speak a European language he can use
either in daily life or work.
The "polylingualism" of much of the world consists of their native language
and English. Why? Because they need English to prosper. Does Joe Sixpack
need Tagalog (or Farsi, or Romansch) to prosper? Joe already knows the
language others learn.
I agree with my expat friend Clueless that languages provide unique insight
into a culture (don't let him read this) but this is NOT the reason the vast
majority of people learn languages. Some learn them for intellectual
stimulation or academics, but the vast majority learn because of necessity.
If it is not necessary for Americans to learn other languages, why judge
them for acting like the rest of the world?
> So, one can say that there are general priorities that most people
> share.
Alas, no. I wish Americans shared priorities (as long as they are MY
priorities). It is precisely because Americans lack cohesive priorities
that other nations view the US as weak and vulnerable. Look at the European
Union or the UN -- they have such a diverse system of priorities that they
are ineffectual and indecisive. The US is less divided, but enough
differences of opinion exist on important issues that needed action is
delayed or avoided altogether.
If Americans shared general priorities, the US would be running Iraq's oil
fields today, welfare-to-work would be the norm, and illegals from Mexico
would not have drinking fountains placed in the desert for their
convenience.
>
> Well, I did not interview them in particular but most people in the US
> seem to have similarities in many things. To give you just a few:
You are basing this on TV and movies. Not a valid sample, I'm afraid.
Should Filipino culture be judged by Filipino movies? Chinese culture by
what comes out of HK?
> Respect for youth
"Worship" would be a better term. And it would be better to include "and
beauty".
> Great respect for achievement.
True, in traditional value Americans, not in the economically
"disadvantaged" or ghettoized minorities. However, "traditional American
values" have eroded from the onslaught of uncontrolled immigration that has
overwhelmed the culture's ability to assimilate and from multiculturalism
that has destroyed the educational system and eliminated cultural values
from the public square.
> Rejection of most non-Anglo Saxon cultures( except French and
> Scandinavian or Dutch) and languages as inferior. Except if they are
> needed for a job or college credits.
Not a matter of inferior in the instance of languages, just non-essential.
Americans make no judgements of the value of other languages, just the
utility. In this they are no different from any other culture.
Here's where your ignorance of America really shines through. You are
preaching the multiculturalism sermon that arose out of the Franz Boas
school. All cultures are of equal merit in the scheme of things. All
cultures must be respected. All cultural practices must be valued. This is
an intellectual conceit of the first world. People living in cultures
considered "primitive" by modern standards in terms of sanitation,
education, public safety, technology, etc., are quick to embrace "cultural
improvements" that work within their circumstances. To say that cultures
where people die by age 40 after a lifetime of poverty, illness and dispair
are of the same value as cultures where people live twice as long, are
healthier and more prosperous is absurd, intellectual masturbation. This is
evidenced by the fact that the people who espouse such theories of equality
do so from their book-lined offices in Berkeley or Cambridge.
You say Americans reject cultural influences from other countries (aside
from food), yet this is patently absurd. America has incorporated languages
of the world into American English, as well as architecture, clothing,
music, theology, medicine and philosophy (to name a few). Sometimes this
acceptance leads to comical results, as when Muhammed Ali stepped off the
plane in Africa wearing a dashiki to be greeted by Africans in Western suits
and levis.
> That includes lack of interest in
> or outright repulsion of any music ( except classical for some),
> movies, books, art, TV and radio programs, or history of most
> non-Anglo countries ( except the ones listed).
This is not so simple as "rejecting". There are market forces at work here.
Americans have certain expectations of quality which many foreign films
lack. Americans have such a wide range of choices that it takes an
exceptional movie to inconvenience them to read subtitles ("Il Postino" and
"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" come immediately to mind). Americans are
not exposed to much foreign film, TV or music in mainstream venues because
promoters and distributors do not need to import talent. What would be the
purpose of Joe Sixpack watching a Russian documentary on tractor production
in the Ukraine? Of watching an Al Jazeera broadcast in Arabic? And the
brutal truth is that music and TV around the world are heavily influenced by
American media, so much of what is produced is a mixture.
I have employees who listen to their native music. Much of it is jarring to
my ears (just as rap is, I would note). Why do THEY listen to it? Because
they grew up with it, and are comfortable with it. When they move to the
US, they generally also come to appreciate American music in some form or
another. Here's the key -- if I moved to THEIR country, I would follow the
same pattern. However, what country in the world expects its citizens to
listen to music from around the world? In the US you can get Chinese music,
or Vietnamese, or Mexican, or Korean, but mainstream stations will not
routinely mix the music of the world in with the Top 40 hits -- just as
EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! In France, you do not tune in to hear
Debussy, reggae, rap and Ravi Shankar in the same hour. How much African
music is played in the Philippines? How much Chinese music is played in
Sweden?
More ethnic music, TV and movies from more countries are available if you
want them in the US than in any other country I know of.
> There may be an odd
> individual who is into some exotic culture here and there, though.
> Note: this does not go for food!
> Therefore, an American who can speak a foreign language is an oddity.
> (Immigrants not included.)
Nonsense. See above. Exclude English and the languages of neighboring
areas, and see how many people around the world speak multiple languages.
> Great respect for work and career.
In parts of society. In other parts of society, work and career are
rediculed.
> Fear of strangers unless they are customers or potential business
> partners or extremely sexually attractive.
Nonsense. America is a land of strangers.
What country accepts strangers outside your caveats above? Are strangers
welcomed in France (think Jews and immigrants)? In Greece (think
Albanians)? In Saudi Arabia (where
there is no such thing as a tourist visa)? In Mexico (which has a
militarized southern border to repel immigrants while seeking an open border
in the north with the US)? In Japan (where the restrictions on non-Japanese
are too legion to mention)?
One of the big differences between how the US treats "strangers" and the
rest of the world is that here we feed them, clothe them, give them drivers
licenses and medical coverage, whereas in much of the world they are killed.
You have to ignore the ongoing genocide of different "tribes" in countries
around the world (see Sudan, Ruwanda, Bosnia, Northern Ireland, Tibet, the
Czech Republic, Greece, Chechnya, etc.) to feel that the US is somehow out
of step in the treatment of strangers.
> Privacy in favor of hospitality.
America refuses to tighten borders or go after immigrants who overstay their
visas. How hospitible is that?
Name another country that has accepted more outsiders than America, and
explain how hospitality is not a cultural value here.
> Respect for independent enterpreneurship, medical and legal
> professions.
Again, within a portion of society. In general, the legal profession is
viewed with contempt here.
> General disrespect for the teaching profession and academia.
Nonsense. Just because YOU can't get a job here actually argues FOR
standards.
What is your measure of respect? The academy is routinely consulted in
matters of state (indeed, many top appointees in government come from
academia or rotate into academia after serving). Academicians are routinely
consulted by talking heads on news analysis shows and by the press.
Let's look at salaries. Teachers in California earn an average of $52,000 a
year. That's not too shabby. Undergrad college professors earn from
$48,000 to well over $100,000.
Parents are concerned about the quality of teachers and their
qualifications, but that argues for a respect for the position, not the
opposite. If you do not respect a field, you do not have high expectations.
> Nuclear family.
Again, this is a 1950s notion that has disintegrated on the past 40 years
because of birth control, no-fault divorce, and various government programs
that reward unwed mothers. Within some demographics, over 50% of households
are single-parent.
> Poor knowledge of history and geography even among the most educated
> ones.
We learn where places are when we bomb them.
> Being positive, persistent and punctual.
Again, this is part of the historic "American value system" but is not
reflective of American culture today. Too many promote the philosophy of
dispair, generally along class or race lines, for their own aggrandizement.
Rap music is a celebration of dispair, and is the dominent force in youth
music today. Academia promotes a negative viewpoint of the US along with a
general Marxist agenda (which causes problems when Marxists like Angela
Davis make well over $100k a year, and as much as $20k per speech). A large
portion of the American public now subscribes to the ideal, "If at first you
don't succeed, blame it on prejudice or the government."
> Respect for customers.
Patent bull. Customer service in the US is at al all-time low, as is
customer satisfaction.
> Efficiency and thriftiness.
Not at all. These have been replaced with political correctness and
political expediency. You cannot hire the best person for the job, you have
to follow rigid guidelines for diversity. You cannot test for competence,
because that may be exclusionary. You cannot take the most efficient route
because that may not be environmentally friendly, or may infringe on
someone's rights.
> Patriotism. Much more patriotic and trusting of the government than
> Euros who are much more cynical about it.
Since most Americans believe all politicians are corrupt and dishonest, I
can't imagine it being worse in Europe. Is America more nationalistic than
other nations? Consider the problems in both establishing and maintaining
the EU because of nationalism. Some German friends were discussing it with
me on 9/11, and they were pleasantly surprised at the display of American
flags after the attacks. For them, the symbol of Germany was not the flag
(an historical backlash against national socialism) but the DM. They really
resisted the idea of surrendering their DM for the Euro.
Are Americans more nationalistic than the folk in Northern Ireland? The
West Bank? Taiwan? The Philippines? Each is nationalistic in its own way.
Overt expressions differ, but all still honor the rodina.
> Tolerance but not true acceptance of non-white races of people. Will
> work with them and be polite to them but not really play with them or
> get too close to them. Race/ethnicity is very important in after-work
> social associations with other people. Note: cute young Asian girls
> are an exception to the rule.
OK. Since over 25% of the population (at least) is non-white, are these
folks intolerant, too?
What country practices true color-blind acceptance of others? What culture
has socialization that does not, to some degree, break along color lines?
In America, if you bother to look, you will find that socialization breaks
down along class and income lines, not race. It is true that class and
income are weighted in racial composition, with a relative disproportionate
inclusion of whites and Asians in upper levels, but I don't have time to
explain that here.
Bottom line is that you are completely wrong here. You only need to walk
down any street in the US to see that.
> Tolerance of homosexuality.
Over 50% of Americans oppose gay marriage and feel it is a deviance from the
norm. If by tolerance you mean we do
not execute them like some countries, this is true.
> Practicality over intellectualism.
America became propsperous because it integrated practicality and
intellectualism, from our founding documents forward. America remains
unsurpassed
in the world in finding practical applications of intellectual discoveries.
It is precisely our ability to integrate the practical and the intellectual
that has led to our world dominance.
> TV over reading and prose over poetry.
That's a no brainer. Please cite an industrialized nation that does not
follow this rule (i.e., where more books of poetry are published than
prose).
> Informality in interpersonal relations and less classism.
Classism is alive and well in the US. It affects who your friends are, who
you associate with, where you dine, what hobbie you pursue. Class is not
the rigid barrier it is in other cultures, however. Upper class may mix
with other classes without prejudice, but classes tend to socialize within
their class.
Many people (including those who know better) confuse class with race in the
US. They point out what they claim to be racial divides which turn out to
be economic or subcultural divides.
> General affability.
I'm too pissed to come up with a suitable response to that.
> Informal dress habits.
As opposed to....? If we are talking about leisure dress here, what
countries routinely wear formal attire? Perhaps since Americans have more
visible leisure time than many countries it creates a perception of casual
dress, but corporate dress codes are still very much in evidence.
> Cleanliness and good personal hygiene.
Again, this depends upon class, subculture, and economics. I have employees
who smell worse than the French.
> Good handling of finances.
Howse that, given the huge personal credit debt of Americans and the smaller
savings compared to other industrial nations?
Most Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck.
> Much more sexually repressed than Europeans or even the Japanese.
> Conservative views on age differences in love. A 28 year old man is
> already too old for a 21 year old woman.
Sounds like personal experience. She rejected you because you are UGLY, not
too old...
On one hand you say Americans are tolerant of gays, on the other we are
sexually repressed. What defines a lack or repression? Doing it like a dog
in the streets? Hookers in the window?
On the age issue, look at any movie with Sean Connerly, Warren Beatty or,
from an earlier era, Cary Grant. Older men with younger women are
celebrated (part of that worship of youth and beauty). Older women with
younger men is another story.
This is a complex issue. American media is rife with sexuality, and movies
and television are filled with sex. Sex is the main ingredient in
advertising. Yet Americans do still publicly hold taboos against certain
practices accepted elsewhere in the world -- adult-child sex, bestiality,
S&M, male gay sex (we like gal-to-gal, as evidenced by DSP continually
trying to get Ate Ros and MC together).
I would like to have a clear definition on the way Americans are repressed,
as this seems to be a European statement about us which goes undefined. I
am often left with the feeling that it has something to do with the
deification of Jerry Lewis, but I may be wrong.
How do you define Euros or Japanese as less repressed? By the videos they
produce? By attitudes towards prostitution? Sexual fidelity? Homo-bestial
necrofilia? Attend a Gay Pride parade or day in a major US city and discuss
repression with me.
> These are some "values" among many others.
No, they are your generalizations from movies and TV. America is neither
"The Beverly Hillbillies" or "Beverly Hills 90210".
> Easy to learn for one born into the culture or a similar culture.
> Because you are a "clean slate" and have some 18 years to learn and
> practice them and you have little exposure to alternative values by
> virtue of just having so many people around you that inculcate similar
> values into you. Should be easy for a Canadian to understand but not
> as easy for a Mongolian for one.
Hunh? You lost me there.
Americans are bombarded from birth with multiculturalism as in no other
society. They get in on TV, in school, in movies. They see it on the
street.
> Become independent.
This is not true in a society that seeks greater cradle-to-grave social
services.
> Study hard and get a good practical career.
American students do poorly when compared to other industrial nations in
part because hard study is frowned upon as discriminatory and unnecessary.
Why study when you can become a rock star or a web designer or a football
player? Somewhere along the line the backlash against European rote
memorization ("we teach our children to be creative, not regurgitate facts")
created a mindset that process was everything and content nothing. That is
slowly being reversed (whole language is not being taught any more, and
phonics are back), but we are decades away from overcoming the deficit.
One of the things that distinguishes the successful in America from the
whiners and welfare blodgers is a belief in the above, but it is far and
away not a general cultural belief. Would that it were.
> Don't
> waste your time on impractical things such as foreign travel, or
> literature unless you will get a well paying job in it.
Tourism figures show that in 2000, 26,853,000 Americans traveled overseas
(excluding Canada and Mexico). Some 21 million of these were pleasure
trips. That's about 10% of the population.
I assume you mean foreign literature here. Question: How many Germans read
Chinese poetry? How many Chinese read German fiction? What kind of
standard are you promoting here?
> Get married
> and buy a house.
The marriage rate among women has dropped 30% in the US since 1970.
Out-of-wedlock babies have grown from 4% in 1950 to 20% today.
> Make more money. Attain more success.
This is called capitalism.
> Love America
> and support your government.
While there is certainly a large group who believe in loving America and
supporting the government, Americans are more vocally critical of their
country and government than anywhere else in the world. The irony is that
those who are vocal against America can be so only because of the principles
enshrined in the Founding which they disdain so. Their protests in other
countries would lead to unmarked graves.
> Don't be a puss. Don't write faggot
> poetry.
"Puss"? I haven't heard that term used in 25 years.
I have never encountered the sentiment "don't write faggot poetry". I have
been writing and publishing poetry for some 40 years and have never
encountered that prejudice. But what do I know?
> Don't talk other languages that is not English.
In the business environment, yes. In private life, no. The only time
people in America tend to get upset with others speaking a foreign language
is when they are a) obviously disparaging you in a foreign tongue or b)
trying to take your order for a Big Mac.
> No need to see
> the world.
You already said that. Wrong and wrong. But don't let facts change your
mind.
> Everything you want we've got it right here in the good
> ole' US of A.
Name things besides specific architecture and natural resources which are
not found in the US.
> Best girls are in the US.
Not according to Tim Harvey.
> Be politically correct, and
> do not use bad words to describe people who are different.
OK, on one hand you are critical of a white-dominated society, and on the
other you want people to be able to verbalize their prejudices. Which is
better?
> Homosexuality is legal. It just can't be helped...
We are sexually repressed, but you are homophobic. I get it now...
> Well, people are not physically forced to live any values at a gun
> point or something like that, but there is peer pressure.
I see. Like there is peer pressure in the black community to not "act
white", in the Asian community to "study hard", and in the Irish community
to "become a cop".
You confuse peer pressure with observation of what succeeds. There is very
little peer pressure to follow the ideals you ascribe to Americans today
(unlike 50 years ago when church, school and government all espoused the
same ideals). Astute individuals, whether immigrants or native-born,
observe that successful people tend to exhibit certain characteristics.
Emulation of these characteristics (thrift, honesty, hard work, etc.) is a
choice (and often a choice that goes against your subculture, leading you to
be labeled "Uncle Tom" or the like) not a societal imperative.
There is actually more peer pressure, exerted by the media and special
interest groups, to deny the values you say typify America. Those who
adhere to these values are labaled "radical right" or "right-wing
conservative" and are marginalized by a popular culture that says anything
goes and all values are relative.
> But no one
> likes to be scorned or ostracized or told: "Go back to your country!".
How would a Jewish imigrant to, say, Jordan be treated? An Albanian in
Greece? An Englishman in Northern Ireland? Would a Chinese in Russia be
expected to learn the language, obey the laws, and participate in the
community?
> Try putting on Arab attire and walk a few blocks in any US city. You
> will see what I mean.
Bad example because of the war. Hundreds of thousands of Indians wear
traditional garb daily in the US. Millions of Mexicans wear their
traditional garb. Millions of blacks who have never set foot in Africa wear
dashikis and other "traditional" tribal wear. Hundreds of thousands of
Asians wear traditional garb or variations of it (just as variations are
worn back in their countries). I have Thais, Laos and Viets who all wear
all or part of their native attire to work and at play. I see barongs every
day. On occasion I see kilts. Welcome to America.
> There are also things that a society respects and does not respect as
> a general rule. It seems to me that every person in any given society
> carries values the way a vessel carries a liquid of sorts. Things
> taught in school, the view of the world and the way things are
> portrayed in the news in any given country has a profound effect on
> how an individual member of any particular society behaves as a
> general rule.
To a degree (less so in the US because of the multiplicity of heritages at
home which counterbalance the media).
What does the US respect -- hands on or hands off approach to timber
maintenance? Does the US believe in abortion? What about partial-birth
abortion? The US does not have a national language -- how many countries in
the world do not have, in their constitution or founding documents, an
official language? The US actually mandates that certain things be printed
in languages if a given percentage of residents are from that language group
(which makes for interesting problems when the group is an American Indian
language which does not have a written component).
Does the US believe in global warming? Does the US believe in evolution or
creation? Does the US believe in closed borders or open borders? Does the
US believe in racial preferences or not? Does the US believe in cloning?
Does the US believe in socialized medicine?
These are all issues where there is consensus among the main-stream media --
but no consensus among Americans.
> When an immigrant arrives, he may behave differently but the society
> can show or not show tolerance. Generally, in the US people will just
> leave you alone if you do not conform. That is tolerance and is good
> enough for most. Usually, Americans will accept first and foremost any
> person who acts, thinks, looks and talks as a white Anglo would. These
> are liked. The more different you are, the less acceptance there will
> be. Unless you are a romantic Frenchman ( fluent in English with a
> cute accent), for one. Tolerance will still be aplenty, though.
So, Americans are tolerant except when they aren't. I get it.
> I have lived in different cultures and while individuals are somewhat
> different, the overall sum of all beliefs and views on the world (
> read: culture) of any given society varies greatly as you go from
> country to country.
Well, duh.
I can't believe I spent so much of my day answering this...
Polonius Pig
rvdg
"Congenital Kano" <jrsdad...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
>"ExpatAuthority" <expatau...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:bd866d06.02091...@posting.google.com...
>
>Geez, Expat, you spent a lot of time writing out your prejudices and TV
>images of America without getting close to the truth.
>
>>>
>
>Polonius Pig
>
>
>
>
Geebeguz Randy.. write a book, will ya?
Short attention spanned old sow
Robert Chin
news:3D7D8FEF...@hotmail.com...
I can see my way to eat MC's yellow snow too.
Peter Picky Pig
Ferdinand Solis
> house when you reach the age of 18". they see american parents as being
> insensitive and uncaring.
I know. Coming to America this is what I had in mind from all these stories
I heard in the Philippines about family life in the US. But soon enough I
found it to be so untrue b/c when I was in boot camp my local fellow
recruits would get all kinds of packages containing food stuffs and such,
not to mention letters and greeting cards, from their parents almost
everyday while all I got were letters every two and a half weeks or so
without any hope whatsoever of getting a package b/c it was supposed to be
me that will send my family packages containing foodstuffs and such. And
that just broke my heart. We would be made to do pushups by our company
commanders for no reason at all and I would start crying and sobbing. I
tried my best to keep the sobbing sound to a minimum but I think I was not
very successful b/c I'd see all these people throwing glances at me. My
colleagues thought I couldn't handle the physical punishment. Yeah to some
extent they were correct but I was crying mostly b/c I wouldn't get food and
such from my family and most of the people around me would get a package
almost everyday. That was really sad. American parents love their children
and all that talk about them being insensitive and uncaring is a big lie.
Edna Sioson
go
and right about that time people.........
"Robert Chin" <bob...@shore.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
alo1b...@enews1.newsguy.com...
Renowl
Ferdinand Solis
for marriage much less being a parent.
ExpatAuthority
and TV
> images of America without getting close to the truth.
I admit that I cannot be completely right but at least I have some
general ideas.
> Unfortunately it is both a strength and weakness that the "radical" views
> are widely held by large numbers of people. Homogeneous cultures have much
> more uniformity of thought and philosophy, and small-minded or ignorant
> people constantly try to fit America into a cultural mold patterned after
> their own more limited model.
I agree with you on that to a point. Some Asians for one, see
Americans as an Anglo Saxon " race". However, you could not see the
similarities because you are from that culture yourself. Your own
culture therefore seems very diverse to you. However, someone else
would immediately notice the homogenuity that is also present there.
To most Japanese, their country is also "diverse". Mexicans do not
think of themselves as the same, either. Becuase they are within/ in
the thick of their culture and they take similarities for granted.
Japan has over 2000 religions, many dialects and many different points
of view depending on a person. But to someone from the outside they
look and act surprisingly similar.
Most attempts (like yours) lag some 30 years
> behind history.
But the core does remain the same to a great degree even while the
changes are taking place.
> > Yes, but there IS no culture like America anywhere else in the world, so
> your model breaks down.
Canada is very similar and so is Australia. Most non-English speaking
peoples cannot tell Americans from these. Culturally these two are so
much like the US. I was with my girlfriend and her brother in a movie
theater and they were showing some places in Australia and the people
there and all and I asked her brother as to what country it was.
Unflinchingly , he said' The United States".
And again, philosophically speaking, there is nothing like something.
Not even two peanuts are completely alike.
>
> The intellectual trap you have fallen into is on one hand citing historic
> values of a predominently European-based culture and on the other ignoring
> the realities of the society as it stands today.
About 75% of America is still very European by blood and even more of
it is Anglo-Saxon Protestant in mentality. Children of immigrants may
"add" their heritage to it but they are still very 'WASPinized'. You
may not see that but ask anyone coming from a non-Anglo culture and he
will tell you how it looks.
>
> Yes and no. Some of these were important in my grandparents generation, but
> are not true today. Thriftiness, for example. America has one of the
> lowest savings rates of industrial nation, and we are the nation that
> invented the credit card.
Still, most people do not just go there and splurge money without
thinking about tomorrow. Much less so than in so many other countries.
And the credit may be due to the fact that prices went out of reach
of the average people. Taxes are high. It is harder to make a living
without education or even with it. But people still budget their money
and save, even in order to pay rent or pay the minimum on the credit
card.
>
> Hunh? More poetry is generated and widely disseminated in the US every year
> than in the rest of the world combined.
Stats? Off the top of my hand I think the Japanese and the Chinese
would have more of those, albeit for local consumption.
Consider greeting cards and songs,
> both based upon poetry.
Well, yes, these are in a way. But most are really not that deep.
Japanese haiku is so much deeper.
Perhaps what you are saying is that in a limited
> view of poetry (say, limited to Norse epics) Americans are not as
> appreciative as Scandinavians.
Well, not as poetic as the Chinese or the Japanese.
>
> Quick, name the current Peruvian Shakespeare, or the Ruwandan Longfellow.
Well, I can name Pablo Neruda ( Chile). But again Longfellow is from a
very bygone era.
> Poetry is a broad type of linguistic expression which has taken many forms
> for many purposes. Poetry is a passtime even the most impoverished can
> pursue. It has historically been a record of a groups history, or the
> expression of feelings of individuals or groups, or sheer exercise of
> language. Contemporary forms have evolved to expand the field, based upon
> the same premise of verbal manipulation. You may not *like* various forms
> of poetry due to content and form, but to claim they do not exist or are
> undervalued is nonsense. My TV has 592 channels of poetry 24/7. American
> poetry is imported eagerly across the world.
I did not say that it does not exist. All I said that a poet does not
enjoy such a great deal of respect in society as a lawyer. A potry
writing man is a 'fag' in the US.
>
> One of my favorite contemporary poems has a refrain of "I'm gonna hire a
> wino to redecorate our home." Another is "A bearded lady tried a jar, now
> she's a famous movie star." You have a problem with that? That's a matter
> of taste, not genre.
OK. There is still a lot of it considering the 280,000,000 people in
the US. It is just that, again, being a poet is not that great of a
trait in societal terms. I am basing it in my observations on how
Americans react to poetry as compared to the awe that it generates
among Asians.
>
> Little respect of intellectualism? Not sure how you define
> "intellectualism". Perhaps if you mean some interminable discussion of
> esoterics a la undergraduate bull sessions ("What is the nature of
> epistemology, Bob?") there is no general appreciation outside academia.
A crude exaggeration. I was in Japan two weeks ago, and i spoke to the
average taxi drivers, clerks, etc. Very refined. I could never hold
such conversations with people of similar class in the US.
But
> intellectual discussion of issues and meanings? Of scholarship and the
> expanding field of knowledge? Here's a clue -- who comprise the largest
> group of participants in newsgroup discussions? Germans? French?
> Guatamalans? Or Americans?
I must agree with you on this. But there is also a lot of nonsense on
NGs.
Where can you find the greatest debate over the
> values of Christianity vs Wahabism, with a real discussion of the merits of
> both sides -- the Saudi street or the US street?
Why bring Saudi into this? Sheesh...Another extreme example. How
about, say Paris, Milano, etc?
Where have the majority of
> international groups concerned with "intellectual" pursuits like the
> environment or human rights been formed? What country has generated the
> preponderance of textbooks on theology, philosophy, science and the arts in
> the past 40 years?
We are talking about the average level of the average person. And
again, I think you are reacting with emotional patriotism and are
defending the US outof such feelings. It is not my goal todenigrate. I
am just trying to form an opinion based on my travels.
>
> > or non-Anglo Saxon cultures or languages ( except
> > French, maybe) for example. Practicality is more what people respect.
>
> This is a non-issue, especially when you add the caveat "except immigrants".
> There are no native Americans, only immigrants.
This is being taught in schools *now* as a result of another PC
onslaught. However, from my observations of the popular culture and
from what I have heard over and over again in the US, there are still
"Americans"- "born here/ talking without an accent" and immigrants, or
rudely " foreigners" "not born and raised here" . This is how it is
differentiated in real social and professional life. If you have an
accent or look and behave diifferently, and most importantly are
foreign-born, you are an "immigrant". You are not a real American. If
you are born and raised in the US, you are an "American". End of the
story. The books and dictionaries and politicians may print their PC
stories but the truth remains the same. Ask any immigrant to give you
an honest answer.
I forget the exact figures,
> but some 25-40% of Californians
LA county possible?
today were born in another country, and that
> percentage is rising. Are these not Americans?
Well, legally, if they have a US passport, they are. A lot of these
can be just migrant workers. Not in social realities. And most are
concentrated in neighborhoods where they associate with their own
kind.
Are the German immigrants
> who retain their language not Americans?
If they have a US passport, they are so by law. Few retain their
language. If you talk German in public in the SU, you will probably be
called a Nazi.
Also when people talk about any immigrant in social settings, they
just talk about place of birth and ' where his is originally from."
So, a German immigrant who became a naturalized US citizen is an
American on paper. Not one on real societal interactions. People just
ask him: "Where are you from?" End of the story.
The Iranians?
Well, they may have a passport, but if his name is Mirza Mohammad or
something like that , and he was born in Iran, and has an accent, now,
be honest with me, what will a common guy on the street think of him?
An American? DOn't make me laugh.
The Vietnamese?
Well, the issue has been solved with hyphenization to a point. They
became Vietnamese-Americans in the press and in documents. But when
people talk about them, they just say- "That VNese guy". By law they
are. But the nativism in the US is a very strong trend of thought. If
you were not born in the US and have a strange, foreign-sounding name,
now, be honest to me, what will people think? Ask anyone who got
beaten in a bar or killed for being a "Viet Kong" ( that has happened)
or told to go back to his country if he feels that people treat him
as' an American". That is one ( but not the only)reason why many such
people prefer to stay in ghettoes. And people say" This is a
Vietnamese area" not this is an American area. Come' on. Be real.
And again, the LA county ( if that is what you talk about)occupies a
small spot on the map of the US. Gosh, a drive through the country
will make anyone see how uniform the country is.
> I get tired on this language canard, because it is a straw man. Europeans
> do not learn more second languages because of intellectual curiosity or
> superiority but
> because of practicality.
True to a point. And a lot of Italians, for one, cannot speak English.
However, what I am stressing is the scornful and arrogant way I have
heard people utter" I am an American! I don't need to learn no damn
foreign language".
Europeans NEED other languages, for commerce and
> social reasons.
Also, there are aesthetic, cultural reasons...
Having to learn the language of a neighbor does not confer
> intellectual superiority.
But it confers a bit of cosmopolitanism and a bit of humility and
interculturalism, don't you think?
The bulk of the world's population only learns
> secondary languages because of need; most folk are simply spending too much
> time surviving to follow learning for its own sake. What it really boils
> down to is that Joe Sixpack in Moline, Iowa, doesn't speak Chinese.
I did not say that. It boils down to the fact that a Joe Six Pack in
LA says: F**k the MExicans!" "I don't need to learn Spanish." Or a Joe
Sixpack in Vermont saying" F**k the frogs! I am an American. When I go
to Quebec, they better talk English, these damn frogs!" It also boils
down to the fact that immigrants in the US very often do not want
their children to speak their "foreign" language simply because they
are afraid that the kids will suffer discrimination from their peers.
Well,
> Joe Sixpack doesn't NEED to speak Chinese.
No, he does not. Agreed. He can barely spell in English.
How many Josef Sechspacks speak
> Chinese? He is much more likely to speak a European language he can use
> either in daily life or work.
We are not talking about a blue collar slob in front of a TV. We are
talking about politicians and college professors who took foreign
languages in college and cannot speak them. If not out of need so
much, at least out of respect. Or interest in anything outside of
sheer practicality of things.
> The "polylingualism" of much of the world consists of their native language
> and English. Why? Because they need English to prosper. Does Joe Sixpack
> need Tagalog (or Farsi, or Romansch) to prosper? Joe already knows the
> language others learn.
Here is the lack of any aesthetic appreciation. And the definitions of
"prosper"? Make more money? You are just proving me right.
>
> I agree with my expat friend Clueless
No need to patronize me. I am not that clueless.
that languages provide unique insight
> into a culture (don't let him read this) but this is NOT the reason the vast
> majority of people learn languages. Some learn them for intellectual
> stimulation or academics, but the vast majority learn because of necessity.
Agreed.
> If it is not necessary for Americans to learn other languages, why judge
> them for acting like the rest of the world?
A lot of things are not necessary. Art for one is not. Even reading
fiction is not necessary. Again, this is where we talk about how
practicality is part of US culture. In Latin America, many students
study foreign languages and cultures and read numerous classics. So
the intellegentsia classes there are very rounded and well informed
and pleasure to speak with on a hige variaty of world issues. It may
not be practical for *you*, but it is most meaningful to *them*.
Again, if everything boils down to something being unnecessary if it
does not directly lead to a better job, bigger house, etc, well, then,
you again have proved me right.
> Alas, no. I wish Americans shared priorities (as long as they are MY
> priorities). It is precisely because Americans lack cohesive priorities
> that other nations view the US as weak and vulnerable. Look at the European
> Union or the UN -- they have such a diverse system of priorities that they
> are ineffectual and indecisive. The US is less divided, but enough
> differences of opinion exist on important issues that needed action is
> delayed or avoided altogether.
>
> If Americans shared general priorities, the US would be running Iraq's oil
> fields today, welfare-to-work would be the norm, and illegals from Mexico
> would not have drinking fountains placed in the desert for their
> convenience.
I was talking about different cultural rather than political
priorities as relative to other countries.
>
> >
> > Well, I did not interview them in particular but most people in the US
> > seem to have similarities in many things. To give you just a few:
>
> You are basing this on TV and movies. Not a valid sample, I'm afraid.
> Should Filipino culture be judged by Filipino movies? Chinese culture by
> what comes out of HK?
Not in its entirety. However, it shows the culture in a caricaturesque
way if you can read between the lines ( shall I say between the
frames?). It shows waht generally appeals to the people of that
particular society. What people admire. What they want to see. Britsh
movies are less action oriented than American ones. French movies are
very intellectual and mushy. Etcera.
>
> "Worship" would be a better term. And it would be better to include "and
> beauty".
But some societies value maturity over youth.
>
> > Great respect for achievement.
>
> True, in traditional value Americans, not in the economically
> "disadvantaged" or ghettoized minorities.
Agree with you on that.
However, "traditional American
> values" have eroded from the onslaught of uncontrolled immigration that has
> overwhelmed the culture's ability to assimilate
Agreed.
and from multiculturalism
> that has destroyed the educational system and eliminated cultural values
> from the public square.
Agreed.
> Not a matter of inferior in the instance of languages, just non-essential.
well, look, this is what I meant. Tell any American that you are from
Sweden or Holland or Australia. A smile will appear on their faces.
Tell them that you are from Korea or Thailand, and the smile will be
just a polite pretense. Tell them you are from Hungary and a tired nod
and a yawn will follow. Few people will be interested in talking to
you afterwards.
> > Here's where your ignorance of America really shines through. You are
> preaching the multiculturalism sermon that arose out of the Franz Boas
> school.
Really? Hmm.. I did not think I did that. You see. I am preaching
individual glabalism as it were. OK, here is the deal. An American
goes to Thailand and never even picks up a book to learn Thai well. Or
he is in the Philippines or japan. he is so culturally arrogant that
he thinks the world shoudl adopt to him and he therefore has no
respect for these cultures at all. I think that this kind of behaviour
is wrong and arrogant. And a person should be multilingual. What is
preached in the Us si that groups should be kind of separate each
persuing their won culture within the US scehme of things. I say that
a human should know most cultures of the globe abd speak several
languages such as Chinese, Spanish, Arabic, etc. To make him a true
human, not just one nationality who thinks he is a hot shot.
All cultures are of equal merit in the scheme of things.
Metaphisycally, yes.
All
> cultures must be respected.
Well, this is open to discussions.
All cultural practices must be valued.
Well, not all. And again, this is a complicated issue. We do not have
an absolute " paragon" to measure a culture against.
This is
> an intellectual conceit of the first world. People living in cultures
> considered "primitive" by modern standards in terms of sanitation,
> education, public safety, technology, etc., are quick to embrace "cultural
> improvements" that work within their circumstances.
And? We ambraced tobacco. And curry. And chewing gum. It worked for
us.
To say that cultures
> where people die by age 40 after a lifetime of poverty, illness and dispair
> are of the same value as cultures where people live twice as long, are
> healthier and more prosperous is absurd, intellectual masturbation.
Well, I do not think that it is that simple. Some people biologically
live less as is the case with pygmies, I think. Again, the measure
should be that indefinable level of happiness that people feel while
they are alive, don't you think?
And again, sometimes, these short lives can be the result of
unfortunate circumstances such as colonization by a selfish foreign
power ( which turned formerly powerful Incas into a very weak group
now, for one)or wars and bad dictatorships which turned a very
culturally rich country as Ethiopia into such a poor place. It does
nottake away the fact that there are great minds all over the owrld,
literary minds, artistic minds and many talents that await to be
discovered by us if we only step out of the mon-cultural frame of
mind.
This is
> evidenced by the fact that the people who espouse such theories of equality
> do so from their book-lined offices in Berkeley or Cambridge.
I agree with you on that. But generally I think that if people were
left alone and invasions and strife were not there, most culture would
be equal in many ways.
>
> You say Americans reject cultural influences from other countries (aside
> from food), yet this is patently absurd. America has incorporated languages
> of the world into American English, as well as architecture, clothing,
> music, theology, medicine and philosophy (to name a few).
Well, I am talking about average people, you know. I have met so many
foreign students and most complain that Americans just want to have
nothing to do with them. They are generally not interested in anything
that is not from the popular American culture. This is the reality.
Most nations incorporate something from somewhere all the time since
we are all interconnected.
Sometimes this
> acceptance leads to comical results, as when Muhammed Ali stepped off the
> plane in Africa wearing a dashiki to be greeted by Africans in Western suits
> and levis.
Well, again, this is an African-American trying to act cool. But how
many go to Africa or even know what a dashiki is?
> This is not so simple as "rejecting". There are market forces at work here.
Agreed.
> Americans have certain expectations of quality
Or theme as well?
which many foreign films
> lack. Americans have such a wide range of choices that it takes an
> exceptional movie to inconvenience them to read subtitles ("Il Postino" and
> "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" come immediately to mind). Americans are
> not exposed to much foreign film, TV or music in mainstream venues because
> promoters and distributors do not need to import talent.
What about the simple aesthetic curiousity to know a bit more about
the planet where one lives? I personally devoured Chinese books when I
was a kid. I was just so curious about how people lived there.
If people jsut want to see a glorified version of themselves and the
producers appeal to the lowest common denominator, what does it say
about the people's interests? Are you proving me right.
What would be the
> purpose of Joe Sixpack watching a Russian documentary on tractor production
> in the Ukraine?
Why such an extremely boring example? By the way Ukraine does not take
"the" anymore. Or do you mean, to you, it is a region of Russia? And
even most Russians would turn the TV off if it is a tractor thing.
How about some Czech love stories? Or something like that. It is not
just the quality thing. It is the subject matter. If it is not US, it
is crap and people are just automatically prejudiced and just get
bored and walk out.
And again, we are not talking about a Joe Sixpack. We are talking
about people with degrees that do not even know where places are let
alone want to see a movie about them.
Of watching an Al Jazeera broadcast in Arabic? And the
> brutal truth is that music and TV around the world are heavily influenced by
> American media, so much of what is produced is a mixture.
There are so many great Italian and French singers. Europeans would
listen to those. Few Americans would. They would just turn it off.
>
> I have employees who listen to their native music. Much of it is jarring to
> my ears (just as rap is, I would note). Why do THEY listen to it?
Because
> they grew up with it, and are comfortable with it. When they move to the
> US, they generally also come to appreciate American music in some form or
> another. Here's the key -- if I moved to THEIR country, I would follow the
> same pattern.
You would be an exception to the rule. Most Americans who do that, do
not really get into the local music. That is the point I am making.
However, what country in the world expects its citizens to
> listen to music from around the world?
It is a metter of degree. the Japanese know a lot oabout music around
the world.
The Russians listen to European music-Greek, Italian, german,
Spanish...alll the time.
In the US you can get Chinese music,
> or Vietnamese, or Mexican, or Korean, but mainstream stations will not
> routinely mix the music of the world in with the Top 40 hits -- just as
> EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!
Well, not really. Most Europeans would listen to their neighbours
music.
In France, you do not tune in to hear
> Debussy, reggae, rap and Ravi Shankar in the same hour.
How much African
> music is played in the Philippines?
Well, Africa is far. And again, the Philippines has some Spanish music
and plenty of British and US music.
How much Chinese music is played in
> Sweden?
Well, it is too far, admittedly. But i am sure, they would listenn to
Finnish music.
>
> More ethnic music, TV and movies from more countries are available if you
> want them in the US than in any other country I know of.
For the benefit of the 1st generation immigrants. Most Americans would
not even bother watching it.
>
> > Nonsense. See above. Exclude English and the languages of neighboring
> areas, and see how many people around the world speak multiple languages.
The intellegentsia class in Latin America, for one, speaks more of
those.
>
> > Great respect for work and career.
>
> In parts of society. In other parts of society, work and career are
> rediculed.
In *most* of it, it is not, though.
>
> > Fear of strangers unless they are customers or potential business
> > partners or extremely sexually attractive.
>
> Nonsense. America is a land of strangers.
>
> What country accepts strangers outside your caveats above?
Wait. i am not talking about the governemnt policies towards foreign
immigrants. i am talking about the cliquishness and of not knowing
your next door neighbor. Of being so scared of people you don't know
that hospitality is almost non-existent...
Are strangers
> welcomed in France (think Jews and immigrants)?
We are not talking about immigrants> and why bring France into this?
It is a well known g=fact that these rae not very friendly people
either.
In Greece (think
> Albanians)?
But most Orthodox brethren would be welcome with open arms. An Greeks
are generally very hospitable to strangers. Stranger does not eqaul
foreigner necessarily.
In Saudi Arabia (where
> there is no such thing as a tourist visa)?
Yes, now there is. But if you live in Saudi you can go into a store
and people will serve you tea. Beduins will bring you milk. Yep!
In Mexico (which has a
> militarized southern border to repel immigrants while seeking an open border
> in the north with the US)?
Again, we are talking abou a rank and file Mexican. He will be happy
to strike aconversation with anybody and even invite a stranger to his
house. Friends are easy to make there.
In Japan (where the restrictions on non-Japanese
> are too legion to mention)?
Well, that is a xenophobic nation. A red herring. You have seen the
hospitality of the Filipinos, haven't you? That is what I am talking
about.
>
> One of the big differences between how the US treats "strangers" and the
> rest of the world is that here we feed them, clothe them, give them drivers
> licenses and medical coverage, whereas in much of the world they are killed.
Agreed. But I am not talking about that. I am talking about just a
very cold attitude towards a person one does not know. People are much
warmer in Latin America. But the US gov't is admittedly very generous.
> You have to ignore the ongoing genocide of different "tribes" in countries
> around the world (see Sudan, Ruwanda, Bosnia, Northern Ireland, Tibet, the
> Czech Republic, Greece, Chechnya, etc.) to feel that the US is somehow out
> of step in the treatment of strangers.
Well, again, we are not talking about extreme examples.
>
> > Privacy in favor of hospitality.
>
> America refuses to tighten borders or go after immigrants who overstay their
> visas. How hospitible is that?
I am not talking politics but rather daily interactions in soceity on
a grass r oot level.
>
> Name another country that has accepted more outsiders than America, and
> explain how hospitality is not a cultural value here.
None, admittedly. But again, we are off topic here. Ok, here is a
Filipino. When a guest knocks on his door unannounced he will stop
most of his activities and receive the guest. Bring him coffee and
share food with him.An American would think that it would be very rude
to violate his privacy without a proper appointment. That is what I am
talking about.
>
> > Respect for independent enterpreneurship, medical and legal
> > professions.
>
> Again, within a portion of society. In general, the legal profession is
> viewed with contempt here.
More with jealousy. Becuase of the huge money they are making.
>
> > General disrespect for the teaching profession and academia.
>
> Nonsense. Just because YOU can't get a job here actually argues FOR
> standards.
>
I
> What is your measure of respect? The academy is routinely consulted in
> matters of state (indeed, many top appointees in government come from
> academia or rotate into academia after serving). Academicians are routinely
> consulted by talking heads on news analysis shows and by the press.
They are still not held in so much respect as they would be in Asia.
In Japan, for one, teaching is called TenShoku- a heavenly
profession...Not in the US.
>
> Let's look at salaries. Teachers in California earn an average of $52,000 a
> year.
That is with the gov't districts. Not in the private sector. Very very
low salaries.
That's not too shabby. Undergrad college professors earn from
> $48,000 to well over $100,000.
Still, if you are a teacher, it does not evoke the reaction it would
in Asia.And i think that US gorls would rather date a doctor, a lawyer
or a computer programmer than a teacher.
>
> Parents are concerned about the quality of teachers and their
> qualifications, but that argues for a respect for the position, not the
> opposite. If you do not respect a field, you do not have high expectations.
Well, you know. there are teachers striking and demanding respect and
recognition as professionals. They do not do it in Asia so much.
>
> > Nuclear family.
>
> Again, this is a 1950s notion that has disintegrated on the past 40 years
> because of birth control, no-fault divorce, and various government programs
> that reward unwed mothers. Within some demographics, over 50% of households
> are single-parent.
Half-nuclear. A split nucleus. Still not "extended". That is hwat I
meant. But the families that are not divorced still reamin nuclear,
don' they?
>
> > Poor knowledge of history and geography even among the most educated
> > ones.
>
> We learn where places are when we bomb them.
I am talking about people with college degrees that do not know where
malaysia is. I am talking about foreign students who go to study in
the US and even teachers have never heard of the countries they are
from.
>
> > Being positive, persistent and punctual.
>
> Again, this is part of the historic "American value system" but is not
> reflective of American culture today. Too many promote the philosophy of
> dispair, generally along class or race lines,
Agreed. Still, the positive go-getter is much easier to find in the US
percentagewise than in many other, more cynical or passive parts of
the world
for their own aggrandizement.
> Rap music is a celebration of dispair, and is the dominent force in youth
> music today.
Agreed. But just step into any office and you will see many bright
faces of people working happily. Or go to a college campus and you
will see a lot of confident faces there, too.
Academia promotes a negative viewpoint of the US along with a
> general Marxist agenda (which causes problems when Marxists like Angela
> Davis make well over $100k a year, and as much as $20k per speech).
Agreed to a point. But it seems to me that the mainstream majority is
still much more postive than in so many other parts of the world
A large
> portion of the American public now subscribes to the ideal, "If at first you
> don't succeed, blame it on prejudice or the government."
But is this the majority view?
>
> > Respect for customers.
>
> Patent bull. Customer service in the US is at al all-time low, as is
> customer satisfaction.
Not as high as it is in japan. But it beats a lot of countries still.
>
> > Efficiency and thriftiness.
>
> Not at all. These have been replaced with political correctness and
> political expediency. You cannot hire the best person for the job, you have
> to follow rigid guidelines for diversity. You cannot test for competence,
> because that may be exclusionary. You cannot take the most efficient route
> because that may not be environmentally friendly, or may infringe on
> someone's rights.
But I think people in their minds are still guided by those
principles. They just have more obstacles to deal with, that's all.
Still the main thrust is on those. The giverment sector may be
different, but the private sector in its fundamental menatlity is
still guided by those, don't you think?
>
> > Patriotism. Much more patriotic and trusting of the government than
> > Euros who are much more cynical about it.
>
> Since most Americans believe all politicians are corrupt and dishonest, I
> can't imagine it being worse in Europe.
Oh, this is a matter of observation. "America, love it or leave it".
This phrase is still very much alive and well. The working classes in
the US are very nationalistic. I cannot prove these things but a year
in the EU and then a trip back to the US will make you see the marked
difference.
Is America more nationalistic than
> other nations?
Well, there are 200+ nations in the world. I cannot really speak for
them all. But it seems to be pretty patriotic to me. The Brits and
Aussie seem much more cynical, for one.
Consider the problems in both establishing and maintaining
> the EU because of nationalism. Some German friends were discussing it with
> me on 9/11, and they were pleasantly surprised at the display of American
> flags after the attacks. For them, the symbol of Germany was not the flag
> (an historical backlash against national socialism) but the DM. They really
> resisted the idea of surrendering their DM for the Euro.
So, what does that prove? Maybe the DM was something that they were so
used to that they did not want to give it up? Aren't you proving me
right?
>
> Are Americans more nationalistic than the folk in Northern Ireland? The
> West Bank? Taiwan? The Philippines? Each is nationalistic in its own way.
> Overt expressions differ, but all still honor the rodina.
Well, yes. but you are listing very extreme examples here. The
Philippines is nationalistic, all right but it is a society where
people are more relaxed about the whole thing. Not many foreigners in
the Philippines complain of harassment or hate crime while there (
political kidnappings excluded).
>
> > Tolerance but not true acceptance of non-white races of people. Will
> > work with them and be polite to them but not really play with them or
> > get too close to them. Race/ethnicity is very important in after-work
> > social associations with other people. Note: cute young Asian girls
> > are an exception to the rule.
>
> OK. Since over 25% of the population (at least) is non-white, are these
> folks intolerant, too?
Well, yes they also have a high degree of intolerance towards others.
Blacks become intolerant of Asians, Hispanics begin to dislike Blacks,
etc. And on many cases the people that feel inadequate become more
closed within their own communities to protect themselves and their
self esteem.
>
> What country practices true color-blind acceptance of others?
Not true, but relative one. Brazil is much better at it. So is
Trinidad. So is panama, Dominican republic, the Philippines.
What culture
> has socialization that does not, to some degree, break along color lines?
It does in most , but it is a matter of intensity. In America it is
much more intense that in its southern neighbors.
>
> In America, if you bother to look, you will find that socialization breaks
> down along class and income lines, not race.
Both and race playing a huge role
It is true that class and
> income are weighted in racial composition, with a relative disproportionate
> inclusion of whites and Asians in upper levels, but I don't have time to
> explain that here.
I know what you are trying to say. But you see, in the US this racial
awareness has been elevated to the level of obsession.
>
> Bottom line is that you are completely wrong here. You only need to walk
> down any street in the US to see that.
I see that.
>
> > Tolerance of homosexuality.
>
> Over 50% of Americans oppose gay marriage and feel it is a deviance from the
> norm. If by tolerance you mean we do
> not execute them like some countries, this is true.
50% then think it is right? Wow! Try that in Italy, for one.
>
> > Practicality over intellectualism.
>
> America became propsperous because it integrated practicality and
> intellectualism, from our founding documents forward. America remains
> unsurpassed
> in the world in finding practical applications of intellectual discoveries.
> It is precisely our ability to integrate the practical and the intellectual
> that has led to our world dominance.
In modern times, a person will study computer programming rather than
become a tecaher of literature, won't you think?
>
> > TV over reading and prose over poetry.
>
> That's a no brainer. Please cite an industrialized nation that does not
> follow this rule (i.e., where more books of poetry are published than
> prose).
>
No time. It is 1:00 am soon.
> > Informality in interpersonal relations and less classism.
>
> Classism is alive and well in the US. It affects who your friends are, who
> you associate with, where you dine, what hobbie you pursue. Class is not
> the rigid barrier it is in other cultures, however.
Agreed. Class measn just more money, not more noble blood.
Upper class may mix
> with other classes without prejudice, but classes tend to socialize within
> their class.
Money usually crosses the barrier.
>
> Many people (including those who know better) confuse class with race in the
> US. They point out what they claim to be racial divides which turn out to
> be economic or subcultural divides.
It is intertwined. A Black man will staill be a Black man. He will
have harder time in penetrating social barriers than if he were a
white man but equally poor.
>
> > General affability.
>
> I'm too pissed to come up with a suitable response to that.
I am talking about a generally smiley society. "Hi dude, what's up".
Contrast it with France where people do not smile so much.
>
> > Informal dress habits.
>
> As opposed to....?
Go to Rome, Paris, Montreal, Milano and see how people dress. I would
really like you to see. And I am not talking about office attire. I am
talking about people putting on the latest fashions. You have got to
see it.
If we are talking about leisure dress here, what
> countries routinely wear formal attire?
Well, i am not talking about tuxedos here. Go to Italy and see how
well men dress there. In the US people would think they are gigolos.
Look at the crowd on the Montreal metro. Or in Madrid. Just have a
look.
Perhaps since Americans have more
> visible leisure time than many countries
Huh???
Are you joking? Most Americans work many more hours than Europeans.
And have 1-2 week vacations only.
it creates a perception of casual
> dress, but corporate dress codes are still very much in evidence.
>
> > Cleanliness and good personal hygiene.
>
> Again, this depends upon class, subculture, and economics. I have employees
> who smell worse than the French.
Still, you know. The majority.
>
> > Good handling of finances.
>
> Howse that, given the huge personal credit debt of Americans and the smaller
> savings compared to other industrial nations?
Again, better than many other nationas. And most people do carry the
debt well.
>
> Most Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck.
But still handle those small paychecks well.
>
> > Much more sexually repressed than Europeans or even the Japanese.
> > Conservative views on age differences in love. A 28 year old man is
> > already too old for a 21 year old woman.
>
> Sounds like personal experience. She rejected you because you are UGLY, not
> too old...
No, I am referring to so many convesrations that I have heard.
>
> On one hand you say Americans are tolerant of gays, on the other we are
> sexually repressed. What defines a lack or repression?
Go to Eastern Europe and see how effortlessly a guy can just get laid
and how naturally. Without paying. Same in Japan.
Doing it like a dog
> in the streets? Hookers in the window?
In the US you are not allowed to even touch a stripper or you will be
kicked out. that is what I mean.
>
> On the age issue, look at any movie with Sean Connerly, Warren Beatty or,
> from an earlier era, Cary Grant. Older men with younger women are
> celebrated (part of that worship of youth and beauty).
Only when it comes to celebrities. Becuase their younger versions are
so much on the screen. All others are called DOMs
Older women with
> younger men is another story.
Agreed. Totally unaccepted.
>
> This is a complex issue. American media is rife with sexuality, and movies
> and television are filled with sex. Sex is the main ingredient in
> advertising. Yet Americans do still publicly hold taboos against certain
> practices accepted elsewhere in the world -- adult-child sex, bestiality,
> S&M, male gay sex (we like gal-to-gal, as evidenced by DSP continually
> trying to get Ate Ros and MC together).
I agree with you on that. Many of my friends who have travelled round
the world and came back to the US say this: Americans talk about it
but they just don't do it. Mainly, the women are just so arrogant and
have so many hang-ups.
>
> I would like to have a clear definition on the way Americans are repressed,
> as this seems to be a European statement about us which goes undefined.
It is hard to define it unless you have dated girls in say the Czech
republic for one year and then went to the US and dated girls there.
You would see a marked difference in the attitudes towards dating,
sex, etc. Things would be much easier, the owmen would not be so
capricious, they would be much more into love and natural healthy sex.
Without much talking. Just doing.
I
> am often left with the feeling that it has something to do with the
> deification of Jerry Lewis, but I may be wrong.
>
> How do you define Euros or Japanese as less repressed?
You meet a girl. She likes you. It just develops into sex naturally
and easily. A girl in the US is more self-absorbed, more capricious
and less willing to do it. Some strange hang-up. Unless you have
actually particiapted in teh dating scene in these places, you would
really have no clue. I have so I am talking from experience.
By the videos they
> produce? By attitudes towards prostitution? Sexual fidelity?
Ability to integrate sex into their daily lives in a much more natural
way.
Homo-bestial
> necrofilia?
An extreme example. A hyperbole serving no purpose here.
Attend a Gay Pride parade or day in a major US city and discuss
> repression with me.
These are enclaves. And i am not talking about gays here. It sems that
it is much easier to be gay than straight in the US.
>
> > These are some "values" among many others.
>
> No, they are your generalizations from movies and TV.
Well, theye od reflect general tendencies albeit greatly distorted.
But i am talking from experinces of living in so many countries and
seeing America from the persectives of those cultures. There is no
substitute for international living to be able to judge cultures with
some kind of " accuracy".
America is neither
> "The Beverly Hillbillies"
But it shows that southerners are seen as Hicks and the wealthy
california living is worshipped...
or "Beverly Hills 90210".
It shows that rich white kids is where it's at.
>
> Americans are bombarded from birth with multiculturalism as in no other
> society.
Please give me a few examples. Maybe you mean showing Eddie Murphy and
a Hispanic and a Hawaiian cup is muliticulturalism? Ot images in the
movies of how the only difference between Americans and foreigners is
a slight accent?
They get in on TV, in school, in movies. They see it on the
> street.
Not in Burlington, Vermont. If you mean seeing a Black man in Missouri
is multiculturalism...well..
>
> > Become independent.
>
> This is not true in a society that seeks greater cradle-to-grave social
> services.
Very underdeveloped ones. No free medical care as in most
industrialized nations. Still kids do not stay with their parents at
26. And getting on welfare is not that easy. Try Germany.
>
> > Study hard and get a good practical career.
>
> American students do poorly when compared to other industrial nations in
> part because hard study is frowned upon as discriminatory and unnecessary.
Huh? How so? Where did the Filipinos get their love of education. From
the Chinese?
> Why study when you can become a rock star or a web designer or a football
> player?
In highschool years, yes. But once they get past 18 a lot of kids
start studying.
Really friendly people. Modest and friendly women among others.
>
> > Best girls are in the US.
>
> Not according to Tim Harvey.
>
> > Be politically correct, and
> > do not use bad words to describe people who are different.
>
> OK, on one hand you are critical of a white-dominated society, and on the
> other you want people to be able to verbalize their prejudices. Which is
> better?
Well, it is tricky. It is called hipocricy. Despise them in your heart
but do not voice it cause you can get sued.
>
> > Homosexuality is legal. It just can't be helped...
>
> We are sexually repressed, but you are homophobic. I get it now...
You are right. I do not want my son to be screwed in the butt by his
teacher. Do you?
>
> > I see. Like there is peer pressure in the black community to not "act
> white", in the Asian community to "study hard", and in the Irish community
> to "become a cop".
I am more referring to ridicule if you wear a certain color or a
certain fashion etc.
>
> You confuse peer pressure with observation of what succeeds. There is very
> little peer pressure to follow the ideals you ascribe to Americans today
> (unlike 50 years ago when church, school and government all espoused the
> same ideals). Astute individuals, whether immigrants or native-born,
> observe that successful people tend to exhibit certain characteristics.
> Emulation of these characteristics (thrift, honesty, hard work, etc.) is a
> choice (and often a choice that goes against your subculture, leading you to
> be labeled "Uncle Tom" or the like) not a societal imperative.
That much I agree with you on. However, there is also the much bigger
ridicule and ostarcism of those who are different, but again, America
is not alone in that...
>
> There is actually more peer pressure, exerted by the media and special
> interest groups, to deny the values you say typify America. Those who
> adhere to these values are labaled "radical right" or "right-wing
> conservative" and are marginalized by a popular culture that says anything
> goes and all values are relative.
Well, you are getting into politics. I am talking about daily life.
>
> > But no one
> > likes to be scorned or ostracized or told: "Go back to your country!".
>
> How would a Jewish imigrant to, say, Jordan be treated? An Albanian in
> Greece? An Englishman in Northern Ireland? Would a Chinese in Russia be
> expected to learn the language, obey the laws, and participate in the
> community?
So, do you mean to say that America is on par with these other
horrible societies that you have described? Again, i spent a lot of
time in latin America and it is very very different there. You speak
Spanish, you are mostly in.
> > Bad example because of the war. Hundreds of thousands of Indians wear
> traditional garb daily in the US. Millions of Mexicans wear their
> traditional garb. Millions of blacks who have never set foot in Africa wear
> dashikis and other "traditional" tribal wear.
Millions? I would not go as far. You would be hard pressed to see one
turban on a US street. Are you kidding. Someone would immediately
yell: Go back to your country.
And Blacks wearing dashikis? Well, not many.
Hundreds of thousands of
> Asians wear traditional garb or variations of it (just as variations are
> worn back in their countries). I have Thais, Laos and Viets who all wear
> all or part of their native attire to work and at play. I see barongs every
> day. On occasion I see kilts. Welcome to America.
Where is that? In their ghettoes?
> > To a degree (less so in the US because of the multiplicity of heritages at
> home which counterbalance the media).
>
> What does the US respect -- hands on or hands off approach to timber
> maintenance? Does the US believe in abortion? What about partial-birth
> abortion? The US does not have a national language -- how many countries in
> the world do not have, in their constitution or founding documents, an
> official language? The US actually mandates that certain things be printed
> in languages if a given percentage of residents are from that language group
> (which makes for interesting problems when the group is an American Indian
> language which does not have a written component).
These are governmental views. They are in stark contrast to their
behaviour of the average Joe.
>
> Does the US believe in global warming? Does the US believe in evolution or
> creation? Does the US believe in closed borders or open borders? Does the
> US believe in racial preferences or not? Does the US believe in cloning?
> Does the US believe in socialized medicine?
>
> These are all issues where there is consensus among the main-stream media --
> but no consensus among Americans.
>
> > When an immigrant arrives, he may behave differently but the society
> > can show or not show tolerance. Generally, in the US people will just
> > leave you alone if you do not conform. That is tolerance and is good
> > enough for most. Usually, Americans will accept first and foremost any
> > person who acts, thinks, looks and talks as a white Anglo would. These
> > are liked. The more different you are, the less acceptance there will
> > be. Unless you are a romantic Frenchman ( fluent in English with a
> > cute accent), for one. Tolerance will still be aplenty, though.
>
> So, Americans are tolerant except when they aren't. I get it.
Tolerant is different from accepting. Most people are still polite
enough not to attacke the person. But only the Anglos will enter the
main stream more or less effortlessly. The others will be expected to
keep a distance. Politely told to. With a tolerant smile.
>
> > I have lived in different cultures and while individuals are somewhat
> > different, the overall sum of all beliefs and views on the world (
> > read: culture) of any given society varies greatly as you go from
> > country to country.
>
> Well, duh.
Yes, duh. When you go and live in another country ( or come from
another country to the US), you will immediately see a commonness or a
certain something that most people share and that a national character
does exist. But you need to step outside to see it. Seeing it from
within is impossible.
>
> I can't believe I spent so much of my day answering this...
I appreciate it. You are a worthy "opponent".
>
> Polonius Pig
Congenital Kano
"ExpatAuthority" <expatau...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bd866d06.02091...@posting.google.com...
Short response -- you are so abysmally ignorant about the US that it pains
my eyes to read your garbage. I'll respond in detail in the next day or so.
Randy
Congenital Kano
"ExpatAuthority" <expatau...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bd866d06.02091...@posting.google.com...
> and TV
> > images of America without getting close to the truth.
>
> I admit that I cannot be completely right but at least I have some
> general ideas.
Unfortunately, those general ideas are rooted in media observations, not
facts. I exist to set you straight.
> I agree with you on that to a point. Some Asians for one, see
> Americans as an Anglo Saxon " race". However, you could not see the
> similarities because you are from that culture yourself.
An interesting observation. Thus the only accurate observers of a culture
must exist outside the culture. You should not expect a Filipino to be able
to discuss Filipino culture, you should ask an American or a Saudi or an
Ozzie.
This is, on the face of it, absurd. You are saying that there is no such
thing as academic detachment, or dispassionate analysis of facts,
observations and statistics. "Because you live there, you are not qualified
to talk about it." There is no such thing as "To know someone, you must
first walk a mile in their moccasins" (I know how you libs love Amerind
lore).
Let's carry this logic further. Because a scientist works in the lab, they
should not be counted upon to turn in accurate reports of what is going on
in the lab. Because the politician is involved in Washington, they are not
qualified to make observations as to what is going on in the government.
Because a police officer works in a city, she is not to be trusted in her
observations on what is happening crime-wise in the city.
See how dumb that is?
> Your own
> culture therefore seems very diverse to you.
Name a place in Beijing where you can get a good burrito, and Chicago-style
pizza, and tortellini, and schnitzel. I walk down the street every day and
hear literally dozens of languages, and can get the national cuisine of
virtually every country in the world in a half an hour. Ob cors, this is
not found everywhere in the US. But 75% of the US population is urban, and
over half live in the top 39 cities. Most Americans are exposed in a
personal way with diverse cultures every day, unlike the vast majority of
the world's population. To deny the diversity of the US is simple
ignorance. The US is a nation of immigrants from every country in the
world.
> However, someone else
> would immediately notice the homogenuity that is also present there.
Every country has homogeneity, and the vast majority have a much higher
degree, as evidenced by population, language and religious statistics.
Japan is 99.4% Japanese, with 84% practicing both Shintoism and Budhism.
Mexico is 60% mestizo and 30% Amerind, and 89% of the population is nominal
Catholic.
> To most Japanese, their country is also "diverse". Mexicans do not
> think of themselves as the same, either. Becuase they are within/ in
> the thick of their culture and they take similarities for granted.
> Japan has over 2000 religions, many dialects and many different points
> of view depending on a person. But to someone from the outside they
> look and act surprisingly similar.
Well, by that standard, the US has some 10,000+ religions and thousands of
languages and dialects, all regularly practiced and spoken.
Go to Mexico City. Will you find a Chinatown, a Japantown, a "Little
Kabul", a black ghetto, a Hispanic bario, a Filipino barangay, a "Little
Kiev"? You will find these and more in most major US cities. How about in
Beijing? Kyoto?
> Most attempts (like yours) lag some 30 years
> > behind history.
>
> But the core does remain the same to a great degree even while the
> changes are taking place.
Sorry, no. Stop watching "The Brady Bunch". In 1996, the last year the INS
publishes complete stats on, the top 10 countries of origin for legal
immigration were Mexico, the Philippines, India, Vietnam, China, the
Dominican Republic, Cuba, the Ukraine and Jamaica. From 1981 to 1996, the
top countries of origin for legal immigrants were Mexico, the Philippines,
Vietnam, China, the Dominican Republic, India, Korea, El Salvador, Jamaica
and Cuba.
Now pay attention.
In the 2000 US census, 28.4 million residents of the US were foreign born.
Not of foreign descent, but foreign BORN (see above list). This is 10.4% of
the population. In the census, 68% of the population was identified as
being of European descent. 36 million (13%) are black, 35 million (12.5%)
are South American Hispanic, 4 million (1.4%) are Amerind, 12 million (4.2%)
are Asian and 900k (.3%) are Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders. Those "whites"
include the above mentioned immigrants from the former Soviet Union (hardly
the Western Euro culture), Turks, Afghans, etc.
>
> Canada is very similar and so is Australia.
Sorry, wrong again. They have similar origins, but the cultures have
diverged in the last 50 years especially. Canada is still 92% white, as is
Australia. Their citizens have a much greater commonality of culture, even
granting the French/English divisions in Canada.
> Most non-English speaking
> peoples cannot tell Americans from these. Culturally these two are so
> much like the US. I was with my girlfriend and her brother in a movie
> theater and they were showing some places in Australia and the people
> there and all and I asked her brother as to what country it was.
> Unflinchingly , he said' The United States".
I cannot be held responsible for the ignorance of your friends. I have
heard that all _______ (fill in the blank -- blacks, Filipinos, Hispanics)
look alike.
> And again, philosophically speaking, there is nothing like something.
> Not even two peanuts are completely alike.
That's a big duh.
> > The intellectual trap you have fallen into is on one hand citing
historic
> > values of a predominently European-based culture and on the other
ignoring
> > the realities of the society as it stands today.
>
> About 75% of America is still very European by blood and even more of
> it is Anglo-Saxon Protestant in mentality. Children of immigrants may
> "add" their heritage to it but they are still very 'WASPinized'. You
> may not see that but ask anyone coming from a non-Anglo culture and he
> will tell you how it looks.
As I have shown, your figures are off (about 30 years, to be exact).
What you fail to comprehend is the cultural changes that entitlements and
set asides have created growing out of the Civil Rights movement. The
complexion of business, education, politics and religion have been altered
by minority quotas and multiculturalism that has enforced as politically
correct the notion that all value is relative. Traditional American values,
growing out of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture of Europe, have been
set aside. The concept of the nuclear family is disdained by the media and
liberal left, and kids are taught in school about how "alternative
lifestyles" with "two mommies" or "two daddies" are perfectly respectable.
> > Yes and no. Some of these were important in my grandparents generation,
but
> > are not true today. Thriftiness, for example. America has one of the
> > lowest savings rates of industrial nation, and we are the nation that
> > invented the credit card.
>
> Still, most people do not just go there and splurge money without
> thinking about tomorrow. Much less so than in so many other countries.
> And the credit may be due to the fact that prices went out of reach
> of the average people. Taxes are high. It is harder to make a living
> without education or even with it. But people still budget their money
> and save, even in order to pay rent or pay the minimum on the credit
> card.
That is a complete crock. How do you come to this statement?
Let's look at some facts. In 2000, Canada had 79,453 personal bankruptcies
(0.3% of population). The US had 1,217,972, or 4.3% of the population, or
11.5% of households. The number of personal bankruptcies increased 20.7%
between 2000 and 2001, with the March 2000-March 2001 period showing the
largest number of personal bankruptcies ever recorded in the US.
In 1945, Americans averaged ownership of 85% of the equity in their homes.
In 2001, that had dropped to 55%.
Disposable income increased 5.81% in 2001 over 2000. Personal debt grew by
9.18% in the same period, while inflation stood at 1.89%.
In 1990, there was $775 billion in consumer debt. 10 years later, that
number was $1.7 trillion.
In 1990, people were saving 7% of their earnings. In 2001, that had fallen
to under 2%.
From 1870 to 1930, the United States hadthe highest average net national
savingsrate of the big seven industrialized coun-tries. From 1960 to the
present we havehad the lowest average savings rate behindJapan, Germany,
France, Italy, Canada, andthe United Kingdom
From 1870 to 1930, the US had the highest personal savings rate of the big 7
industrialized nations. Since 1960, the US has trailed every year behind
Japan, Germany, France, Italy, Canada, and the UK.
> > Hunh? More poetry is generated and widely disseminated in the US every
year
> > than in the rest of the world combined.
>
> Stats? Off the top of my hand I think the Japanese and the Chinese
> would have more of those, albeit for local consumption.
This is what you get for thinking with your hand.
> Consider greeting cards and songs,
> > both based upon poetry.
>
>
> Well, yes, these are in a way. But most are really not that deep.
> Japanese haiku is so much deeper.
In your opinion. But you were not talking initially about critical merit
but volume.
There are 7 billion greeting cards sent in the US every year, 2.5 billion
being holiday cards. There are 2000 greeting card manufacturers.
The US produces about half the music CDs in the world (a major market for
poetry); China produces 12%.
> Perhaps what you are saying is that in a limited
> > view of poetry (say, limited to Norse epics) Americans are not as
> > appreciative as Scandinavians.
>
> Well, not as poetic as the Chinese or the Japanese.
An unsupported opinion. Again.
> > Quick, name the current Peruvian Shakespeare, or the Ruwandan
Longfellow.
>
> Well, I can name Pablo Neruda ( Chile). But again Longfellow is from a
> very bygone era.
Whoa. Isn't that MY point? That America has changed...
> I did not say that it does not exist. All I said that a poet does not
> enjoy such a great deal of respect in society as a lawyer. A potry
> writing man is a 'fag' in the US.
Hmmm. Say that to Joe Diffy, Johnny Cash, Chris Ledoux, Toby Keith or Tim
McGraw.
Mass market poets today in industrialized countries are involved in a
variety of media. They receive the adulation of rock stars... because they
ARE rock stars!
> >
> > One of my favorite contemporary poems has a refrain of "I'm gonna hire a
> > wino to redecorate our home." Another is "A bearded lady tried a jar,
now
> > she's a famous movie star." You have a problem with that? That's a
matter
> > of taste, not genre.
>
> OK. There is still a lot of it considering the 280,000,000 people in
> the US. It is just that, again, being a poet is not that great of a
> trait in societal terms. I am basing it in my observations on how
> Americans react to poetry as compared to the awe that it generates
> among Asians.
So? Staring at rocks resting in a sand box generates awe in Japanese. Is
that more appreciation than spending billions of dollars a year and
screaming your lungs out at different types of poets?
> > Little respect of intellectualism? Not sure how you define
> > "intellectualism". Perhaps if you mean some interminable discussion of
> > esoterics a la undergraduate bull sessions ("What is the nature of
> > epistemology, Bob?") there is no general appreciation outside academia.
>
> A crude exaggeration. I was in Japan two weeks ago, and i spoke to the
> average taxi drivers, clerks, etc. Very refined. I could never hold
> such conversations with people of similar class in the US.
You are confusing intellectualism with your version of refinement. Did
these drivers know how many bases Maury Wills stole in 1962?
Considering that the vast majority of cabbies in US cities are unlettered
immigrants with a rudimentary grasp of English, you cannot expect the level
of discourse you would get with people like DSP and me.
> But
> > intellectual discussion of issues and meanings? Of scholarship and the
> > expanding field of knowledge? Here's a clue -- who comprise the largest
> > group of participants in newsgroup discussions? Germans? French?
> > Guatamalans? Or Americans?
>
> I must agree with you on this. But there is also a lot of nonsense on
> NGs.
I'm glad you can be self-critical.
> Where can you find the greatest debate over the
> > values of Christianity vs Wahabism, with a real discussion of the merits
of
> > both sides -- the Saudi street or the US street?
>
> Why bring Saudi into this? Sheesh...Another extreme example. How
> about, say Paris, Milano, etc?
OK. Let's consider those two examples. Let's then discuss what advances
the state of humanity -- refined discussion or achievements?
Congenital Kano
"ExpatAuthority" <expatau...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bd866d06.02091...@posting.google.com...
> I admit that I cannot be completely right but at least I have some
> general ideas.
Unfortunately, those general ideas are rooted in media observations, not
facts. I exist to set you straight.
> I agree with you on that to a point. Some Asians for one, see
> Americans as an Anglo Saxon " race". However, you could not see the
> similarities because you are from that culture yourself.
An interesting observation. Thus the only accurate observers of a culture
must exist outside the culture. You should not expect a Filipino to be able
to discuss Filipino culture, you should ask an American or a Saudi or an
Ozzie.
This is, on the face of it, absurd. You are saying that there is no such
thing as academic detachment, or dispassionate analysis of facts,
observations and statistics. "Because you live there, you are not qualified
to talk about it." There is no such thing as "To know someone, you must
first walk a mile in their moccasins" (I know how you libs love Amerind
lore).
There is no such thing as sociology, or anthropology, or psychology.
Let's carry this logic further. Because a scientist works in the lab, they
should not be counted upon to turn in accurate reports of what is going on
in the lab. Because the politician is involved in Washington, they are not
qualified to make observations as to what is going on in the government.
Because a police officer works in a city, she is not to be trusted in her
observations on what is happening crime-wise in the city.
See how dumb that is?
> Your own culture therefore seems very diverse to you.
Name a place in Beijing where you can get a good burrito, and Chicago-style
pizza, and tortellini, and schnitzel. I walk down the street every day and
hear literally dozens of languages, and can get the national cuisine of
virtually every country in the world in a half an hour. Ob cors, this is
not found everywhere in the US. But 75% of the US population is urban, and
over half live in the top 39 cities. Most Americans are exposed in a
personal way with diverse cultures every day, unlike the vast majority of
the world's population. To deny the diversity of the US is simple
ignorance. The US is a nation of immigrants from every country in the
world.
> However, someone else
> would immediately notice the homogenuity that is also present there.
Every country has homogeneity, and the vast majority have a much higher
degree, as evidenced by population, language and religious statistics.
Japan is 99.4% Japanese, with 84% practicing both Shintoism and Buddhism.
That's homogeneity. Mexico is 60% mestizo and 30% Amerind, and 89% of the
population is nominal Catholic. That's homogeneity.
> To most Japanese, their country is also "diverse". Mexicans do not
> think of themselves as the same, either. Becuase they are within/ in
> the thick of their culture and they take similarities for granted.
> Japan has over 2000 religions, many dialects and many different points
> of view depending on a person. But to someone from the outside they
> look and act surprisingly similar.
Well, by that standard, the US has some 10,000+ religions and thousands of
languages and dialects, all regularly practiced and spoken.
Go to Mexico City. Will you find a Chinatown, a Japantown, a "Little
Kabul", a black ghetto, a Hispanic barrio, a Filipino barangay, a "Little
Kiev"? You will find these and more in most major US cities. How about in
Beijing? Kyoto?
> Most attempts (like yours) lag some 30 years behind history.
>
> But the core does remain the same to a great degree even while the
> changes are taking place.
Sorry, no. Stop watching "The Brady Bunch". In 1996, the last year the INS
publishes complete stats on, the top 10 countries of origin for legal
immigration were Mexico, the Philippines, India, Vietnam, China, the
Dominican Republic, Cuba, the Ukraine and Jamaica. From 1981 to 1996, the
top countries of origin for legal immigrants were Mexico, the Philippines,
Vietnam, China, the Dominican Republic, India, Korea, El Salvador, Jamaica
and Cuba.
Now pay attention.
In the 2000 US census, 28.4 million residents of the US were foreign born.
Not of foreign descent, but foreign BORN (see above list). This is 10.4% of
the population. In the census, 68% of the population was identified as
being of European descent. 36 million (13%) are black, 35 million (12.5%)
are South American Hispanic, 4 million (1.4%) are Amerind, 12 million (4.2%)
are Asian and 900k (.3%) are Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders. Those "whites"
include the above mentioned immigrants from the former Soviet Union (hardly
the Western Euro culture), Turks, Afghans, etc.
> Canada is very similar and so is Australia.
Sorry, wrong again. They have similar cultural origins, but the cultures
have diverged in the last 50 years especially. Canada is still 92% white,
as is Australia. Their citizens have a much greater commonality of culture,
even granting the French/English divisions in Canada.
> Most non-English speaking
> peoples cannot tell Americans from these. Culturally these two are so
> much like the US. I was with my girlfriend and her brother in a movie
> theater and they were showing some places in Australia and the people
> there and all and I asked her brother as to what country it was.
> Unflinchingly , he said' The United States".
I cannot be held responsible for the ignorance of your friends. I have
heard that all _______ (fill in the blank -- blacks, Filipinos, Hispanics)
look alike. I have never had that trouble.
> About 75% of America is still very European by blood and even more of
> it is Anglo-Saxon Protestant in mentality. Children of immigrants may
> "add" their heritage to it but they are still very 'WASPinized'. You
> may not see that but ask anyone coming from a non-Anglo culture and he
> will tell you how it looks.
As I have shown, your figures are off (by about 30 years, to be exact).
What you fail to comprehend is the cultural changes that entitlements and
set-asides have created growing out of the Civil Rights movement. The
complexion of business, education, politics and religion have been altered
by minority quotas and multiculturalism that has enforced as politically
correct the notion that all value is relative. Traditional American values,
growing out of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture of Europe, have been
set aside. The concept of the nuclear family is disdained by the media and
liberal left, and kids are taught in school about how "alternative
lifestyles" with "two mommies" or "two daddies" are perfectly respectable.
> Still, most people do not just go there and splurge money without
> thinking about tomorrow. Much less so than in so many other countries.
> And the credit may be due to the fact that prices went out of reach
> of the average people. Taxes are high. It is harder to make a living
> without education or even with it. But people still budget their money
> and save, even in order to pay rent or pay the minimum on the credit
> card.
That is a complete crock. How do you come to this statement?
Let's look at some facts. In 2000, Canada had 79,453 personal bankruptcies
(0.3% of population). The US had 1,217,972, or 4.3% of the population, or
11.5% of households. The number of personal bankruptcies increased 20.7%
between 2000 and 2001, with the March 2000-March 2001 period showing the
largest number of personal bankruptcies ever recorded in the US.
In 1945, Americans averaged ownership of 85% of the equity in their homes.
In 2001, that had dropped to 55%.
Disposable income increased 5.81% in 2001 over 2000. Personal debt grew by
9.18% in the same period, while inflation stood at 1.89%.
In 1990, there was $775 billion in consumer debt. 10 years later, that
number was $1.7 trillion.
In 1990, people were saving 7% of their earnings. In 2001, that had fallen
to under 2%. The Japanese average saving about 25% of their income.
From 1870 to 1930, the United States had the highest average net national
savings rate of the big seven industrialized countries. From 1960 to the
present we have had the lowest average savings rate behind Japan, Germany,
France, Italy, Canada, and the United Kingdom
> > Hunh? More poetry is generated and widely disseminated in the US every
> > year than in the rest of the world combined.
>
> Stats? Off the top of my hand I think the Japanese and the Chinese
> would have more of those, albeit for local consumption.
This is what you get for thinking with your hand.
> Consider greeting cards and songs,
> > both based upon poetry.
>
> Well, yes, these are in a way. But most are really not that deep.
> Japanese haiku is so much deeper.
In your opinion. But you were not talking initially about critical merit
but volume.
There are 7 billion greeting cards sent in the US every year, 2.5 billion
being holiday cards. There are 2000 greeting card manufacturers.
The US produces about half the music CDs in the world (a major market for
poetry); China produces 12%.
> Well, not as poetic as the Chinese or the Japanese.
An unsupported opinion. Again.
> > Quick, name the current Peruvian Shakespeare, or the Ruwandan
> > Longfellow.
>
> Well, I can name Pablo Neruda ( Chile). But again Longfellow is from a
> very bygone era.
Whoa. Isn't that MY point? That America has changed...
> I did not say that it does not exist. All I said that a poet does not
> enjoy such a great deal of respect in society as a lawyer. A potry
> writing man is a 'fag' in the US.
Hmmm. Say that to Joe Diffy, Johnny Cash, Chris Ledoux, Toby Keith or Tim
McGraw. Then collect your teeth from the floor.
Mass market poets today in industrialized countries are involved in a
variety of media. They receive the adulation of rock stars... because they
ARE rock stars!
> OK. There is still a lot of it considering the 280,000,000 people in
> the US. It is just that, again, being a poet is not that great of a
> trait in societal terms. I am basing it in my observations on how
> Americans react to poetry as compared to the awe that it generates
> among Asians.
So? Staring at rocks resting in a sand box generates awe in Japanese. Is
that more appreciation than spending billions of dollars a year and
screaming your lungs out at different types of poets? If all cultural
values are equal, the way Japanese react to their poets cannot be elevated
above the way Americans react to their poets. See the trap of
multiculturalism? We all have values -- so claiming that standards do not
exist is sophistry.
> A crude exaggeration. I was in Japan two weeks ago, and i spoke to the
> average taxi drivers, clerks, etc. Very refined. I could never hold
> such conversations with people of similar class in the US.
You are confusing intellectualism with your version of refinement. Did
these drivers know how many bases Maury Wills stole in 1962? Who defines
what is significant knowledge? The ancient Greeks considered pederasty to
be refined. I don't.
Considering that the vast majority of cabbies in US cities are unlettered
immigrants with a rudimentary grasp of English, you cannot expect the level
of discourse you would get with people like DSP and me.
> Why bring Saudi into this? Sheesh...Another extreme example. How
> about, say Paris, Milano, etc?
OK. Let's consider those two examples. Let's then discuss what advances
the state of humanity -- refined discussion or achievements?
What has France contributed to the world in the past century, other than
hundreds of thousands of "used, never been fired, dropped only once" rifles?
Italy? (Sheesh, they can't even generate Italian Popes any more).
Considering the ignorance of history and sociology demonstrated daily by the
press and governments of Europe, I am not inclined to accept that they are
my intellectual superior. The French lost their superiority in wine (even
the AUSSIES beat them in international competition, and California has been
cleaning their clock for years now). The Brits contemplate a failed empire
and disgraced monarchy, but they alone have any stones in the EU (perhaps
they remember Chamberlain and "Peace in our time"). The Germans have
created a two-tiered society (like much of Europe) where the lower
(immigrant) class has little chance at success, even to the point of being
tracked out of higher education. The greatest assets of the German people
(aside from architecture and music) were the DM and pride in craftsmanship;
they lost the first, and the second is being assaulted by a labor class that
does not share the Germanic ideals.
I'm afraid the socialism that has ruined the American education system
(which flourished after Sputnik and died after Woodstock, but still produced
the genius needed to transform the world technologically) has crippled
Europe.
> We are talking about the average level of the average person. And
> again, I think you are reacting with emotional patriotism and are
> defending the US outof such feelings. It is not my goal todenigrate. I
> am just trying to form an opinion based on my travels.
Of course it's your goal to denigrate. It's what you do.
That aside, this discussion began with you stating some 1950s idealized
aspect of WASP America that people are pressured to conform to. That
image must include creating the intellectual leaders of the world in a wide
variety of subjects (hint: more textbooks written by Americans are used in
Europe and the rest of the world than European books are used outside
historical literature in the US). Now you are saying that the gum-chewing
American is inferior intellectually to the average citizen of other
industrial nations. Since if you threw a rock in the population centers of
the US you would have a 1 out of 3 chance of hitting a non-WASP, and 1 out
of 10 chance of hitting someone not born or educated in the US, you are
whistling in the dark. There ARE the citizens from other countries. Their
presence should thus elevate the intellectual standards of the US, di ba?
> > There are no native Americans, only immigrants.
>
> This is being taught in schools *now* as a result of another PC
> onslaught.
First, you are acknowledging that the US has changed. There is hope.
Second, the PC way of thought is that the Amerinds the Euros encountered in
North America are natives. Anthropologists recognize that they are the
third wave of immigrants to the Americas, but PC history is revisionism.
This "PC" revolution started in the 1930s with cultural relativism. It
gained complete control of American academia by the early '70s.
> However, from my observations of the popular culture and
> from what I have heard over and over again in the US, there are still
> "Americans"- "born here/ talking without an accent" and immigrants, or
> rudely " foreigners" "not born and raised here" . This is how it is
> differentiated in real social and professional life. If you have an
> accent or look and behave diifferently, and most importantly are
> foreign-born, you are an "immigrant". You are not a real American. If
> you are born and raised in the US, you are an "American". End of the
> story.
If you immigrate to Germany as a child, are you "German"? If you move to
China as a child, are you "Chinese"? If you live from birth in Japan, are
you "Japanese"? If you live in France without having the fortune of being
born there, are you "French"? Or are you an "immigrant"?
The answer, ob cors, is that you are viewed as an immigrant in EVERY
country. It transcends language or ethnicity or appearance.
EVERY COUNTRY treats immigrants differently from people who were born there
and speak with different accents. Most countries kill them or discriminate
against them in blatant and unabashed ways. In the US, those immigrants can
attain wealth and status unavailable to them anywhere else -- it's why they
moved here!
> The books and dictionaries and politicians may print their PC
> stories but the truth remains the same. Ask any immigrant to give you
> an honest answer.
Hmmm. Well, my wife says that she is treated differently in the US than in
the Philippines. Here she is treated with respect even though she is
a divorced woman, here she has attained moderate wealth, here her children
fit in completely with their peers of all backgrounds.
Maybe she is lying to me.
> I forget the exact figures, but some 25-40% of Californians
>
> LA county possible?
No, California as a whole. 26% of the population were foreign BORN. Less
than 50% of the population is white.
> Well, legally, if they have a US passport, they are. A lot of these
> can be just migrant workers. Not in social realities. And most are
> concentrated in neighborhoods where they associate with their own
> kind.
Precisely! And as these communities enlarge to make up almost half of
places like California, you see major shifts away from European values to,
for example, Hispanic values.
> If they have a US passport, they are so by law. Few retain their
> language. If you talk German in public in the SU, you will probably be
> called a Nazi.
Do you mean "US"? If you call someone a "Nazi" because of their accent you
will be charged with a hate crime. You are only allowed to call white male
conservatives "Nazi" here.
Walk down any major metropolitan street and you will hear both business and
personal conversations being conducted in dozens of different languages.
That's the reality of urban life today in the US.
> Also when people talk about any immigrant in social settings, they
> just talk about place of birth and ' where his is originally from."
> So, a German immigrant who became a naturalized US citizen is an
> American on paper. Not one on real societal interactions. People just
> ask him: "Where are you from?" End of the story.
Yet you fail to grasp the enormity of the immigrant and foreign born/foreign
educated issue, and how it impacts all aspects of American society. Federal
elections laws require not only preparing voter materials and ballots in
foreign languages if a certain percent of the community is designated by
census as, say, "Hupa-speaking". It doesn't matter that Hupa is not a
written language...
The California DMV has translated the driver's handbooks and tests into 30
languages. What other nation has gone to such lengths to accommodate
non-natives?
WHEN THE IMMIGRANTS CONSTITUTE A LARGE ENOUGH MINORITY, THEY BECOME A PART
OF THE SYSTEM. This is the central fact of sociological change you fail to
grasp. Is my wife treated differently because she is a non-native? By
whom?
The Persian grocer? The Indian math prof? The Haitian mail man? The
Ukrainian dentist?
> Well, they may have a passport, but if his name is Mirza Mohammad or
> something like that , and he was born in Iran, and has an accent, now,
> be honest with me, what will a common guy on the street think of him?
> An American? DOn't make me laugh.
Arabs are a special case today (as Germans were in much of Europe during
WW2, and Japanese were until recently in China and Korea). There is more
suspicion, as well there should be. Arabs who are openly pro-American and
proud of the country that succors them are accepted without issue. I have
spoken at length with a number of Iranians and Yemenis thinking about this
post, and all dismiss the notion that they are discriminated against. They
simply laugh at the professional "Arab-American" groups who hog the
spotlight and claim discrimination. They are wary, for their culture is not
one steeped in trust, but they do not feel threatened or ostracized.
> Well, the issue has been solved with hyphenization to a point. They
> became Vietnamese-Americans in the press and in documents. But when
> people talk about them, they just say- "That VNese guy". By law they
> are. But the nativism in the US is a very strong trend of thought. If
> you were not born in the US and have a strange, foreign-sounding name,
> now, be honest to me, what will people think?
Like my very-American name, "Hornibrook"?
You just don't get the diversity here. Here are half of the first 100 last
names on my former client list:
ALSEMWGIE SHON THIEDE SPROAT COLOMBO WANG MASANGKAY
PUTKAEW HONG LAGORIO SCARPELLI SALAZAR NARDINI THANJARUT
DECASTRO WONG PENA SMYTHE RODRIGUEZ RUBIO TAI CAZAREZ
GLOSSER YOUK RAMIREZ TAUSCHEK FENIKILE CHIN ZELAYA
PAGULERAS SUAREZ SEN GUTIERREZ MAZON BUENAVENTURA
LIN BUFFENBURGER LAU BAL PHUO SRINIVASEN CHENG
ABARRA DAS CHOPNAK KIM HOLSOOR GUITRON JONG
GANTIMAHAPATRUN BOURGAULT
I'm in the newspaper business for an English-language paper. If half of my
customers have last names like the above, does it begin to penetrate how
meaningless it is to talk about "foreigners" and "immigrants"? Californians
(including most legal immigrants) are much more likely to make the
distinction not between immigrant and native, but legal vs. illegal
immigrants.
Yeah, we say "That Vietnamese guy", "that black guy", "that white guy",
because we are not blind and can spot differences and they make useful
referents. But since "that Chinese guy" might be our boss, we have to
be pretty open minded.
> Ask anyone who got
> beaten in a bar or killed for being a "Viet Kong" ( that has happened)
> or told to go back to his country if he feels that people treat him
> as' an American". That is one ( but not the only)reason why many such
> people prefer to stay in ghettoes. And people say" This is a
> Vietnamese area" not this is an American area. Come' on. Be real.
This is total bull. Give some specifics, please. Since 9-11, there has
been 1 -- count it, ONE -- killing based upon race in the aftermath of the
attacks.
And please, it is "Cong". We take our epithets seriously here. In fact, I
have both a former VC and a former ARVN major working for me.
People do get the "If you don't like it, go back to your own country" when
they say derogatory things about the country they are supported by. But
the wonderful thing about America is the odds are that the one exhorting the
other to go home is speaking with an accent. That's a part of the US you
just don't comprehend.
> And again, the LA county ( if that is what you talk about)occupies a
> small spot on the map of the US. Gosh, a drive through the country
> will make anyone see how uniform the country is.
I have driven across the country many times. How many times have you? What
route? I traversed it some 6 times a year while in college, varying my
route through the south and north. I've also traveled extensively through
42 states in a motor home.
> True to a point. And a lot of Italians, for one, cannot speak English.
> However, what I am stressing is the scornful and arrogant way I have
> heard people utter" I am an American! I don't need to learn no damn
> foreign language".
Again, I cannot help the class of people you hang with. I have never heard
an American say that outside TV or the movies. Most Americans I know and
have observed make a stab at speaking some words or phrases in the language
of the country they are visiting.
>> Europeans NEED other languages, for commerce and social reasons.
>
> Also, there are aesthetic, cultural reasons...
Bullshit. I have never met a Euro outside academia who studied foreign
languages outside business or general education. It surely happens, but it
is such a minor percentage as to be insignificant. Prove me wrong.
> Having to learn the language of a neighbor does not confer
> > intellectual superiority.
>
> But it confers a bit of cosmopolitanism and a bit of humility and
> interculturalism, don't you think?
Why should I learn Bantu? Does that make me more cosmopolitan?
Does speaking French help me understand why the French are so helpless in
world affairs and so arrogant?
What are the bare essential languages everyone should learn to be
cosmopolitan?
Language is a tool for communication. If you can communicate, it doesn't
matter what tool is used. There is a beauty to some languages, but that is
an aesthetic not universally shared (one's native tongue, no matter how
atonal or how full of glottal stops, is always music to your ears). Your
position seems to indicate that to be truly cosmopolitan, one should learn
all languages or else you are missing out on culture.
I have studied, at some point in my life, Spanish, German, French, Russian,
Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, Greek and Tagalog. Do they give me unique insights
into the cultures? Somewhat, but I can learn the same thing reading what
linguists explicate about words and phrases from those languages, and learn
it more efficiently. Do they really make me more sophisticated? Nothing
could ever accomplish that. Have they made me more cosmopolitan?
Nope. Travel and study have done that, until I are indistinguishable from a
real gentleman.
> I did not say that. It boils down to the fact that a Joe Six Pack in
> LA says: F**k the MExicans!" "I don't need to learn Spanish."
Pardon me. Is it beholden on someone who lives in Cowpie, Montana, which
has 17 Mexicans living there, to learn the language? Should he also learn
French and Arabic?
English is not the official language of the US, but it is the language of
business and politics here. If someone seeks success, they will need to
master English.
How many Swedes speak Arabic? Why only 6? Because it is not needed, and
those who did learned it out of academic curiosity or necessity.
> Or a Joe Sixpack in Vermont saying" F**k the frogs! I am an American.
> When I go to Quebec, they better talk English, these damn frogs!"
This is the "Ugly American" stereotype that began in the 1950s when
Americans first started traveling the world following WW2. It has long been
replaced by people who are not openly hostile to other cultures.
I have seen the counterpoint -- insecure foreign nationals in their own
country with jealousy and animosity towards the US who read into my words
and actions intent that is absent. If I ask a vendor, "Pardonne moi, do you
speak English?" I am not being arrogant but seeking their assistance in a
transaction that will benefit them.
In 47 years of living across the US, I have never heard anyone outside the
media or a joke refer to the French as "frogs".
As far as Joe Sixpack needing to learn the language of immigrants who have
moved to his country -- should the Greeks learn Armenian? The Germans
Turkish? The Canadians Farsi? or do all countries expect immigrants to
master the main language of the country they seek refuge in?
> It also boils
> down to the fact that immigrants in the US very often do not want
> their children to speak their "foreign" language simply because they
> are afraid that the kids will suffer discrimination from their peers.
No, this is NOT the reason parents want their kids to speak English. This
is complete nonsense. The reason is that they know, to fully take
advantage of the educational, recreational and professional opportunities,
English facility is a must.
Kids do not grow up bilingual (except, as Chris would say, passively
bilingual) primarily because parents are do not take the time. It requires
dedication and effort to teach your children to grow up with two languages,
one of which is the language of immersion by the culture. I know, I
struggle with it in my household.
> > Well, Joe Sixpack doesn't NEED to speak Chinese.
>
> No, he does not. Agreed. He can barely spell in English.
Hmmm. Do you want me to start pointing out your spelling and grammatical
errors? I agree that public education in the US is a disgrace. It is part
of the sweeping social change that you discount in one breath and
acknowledge
in the next.
> We are not talking about a blue collar slob in front of a TV. We are
> talking about politicians and college professors who took foreign
> languages in college and cannot speak them. If not out of need so
> much, at least out of respect. Or interest in anything outside of
> sheer practicality of things.
Look, you are in itinerant language teacher who moves from country to
country as your jobs die out. You naturally believe that this is important,
because it's what you do. Sorry, it just ain't that important. And the
question remains -- are you teaching people around the world to speak
English? If so, why? Because they NEED IT to prosper. College profs need
languages (outside language depts) to pass written exams and exchange
pleasantries with foreign academics. There was a time when languages
(particularky German, French and Latin) were important to access
international publications, but most scholarship is either in English
originally
or has been translated.
Dr. Owen, an esteemed scholar of Philippine history, does not speak
Tagalog. Even though he teaches at a Hong Kong university, I do not
believe he speaks Chinese. Is he not worthy of your respect? He is
50 times the academic that you or I am. Why does he not need to
learn these languages? Because English is the language of scholarship.
The effort he would spend, for minimal results, is much better
spent doing other work.
Again, what countries should I show respect to by learning their language?
I cannot learn them all. What is your list for "essential" languages that
everyone should speak. How did you generate this list? Might others
disagree with your list?
Question: do you speak fluently the native languages of every country you
have taught in? Or, since you are teaching ESL, did you get by with your
knowledge of English.
If you did not learn and retain fluency in all the languages of all the
countries you have taught in, you have shown them disrespect.
> Here is the lack of any aesthetic appreciation. And the definitions of
> "prosper"? Make more money? You are just proving me right.
Americans are, and should be, capitalists. Capitalism is at the core of
Western civilization, and even the socialists among us are capitalists
whether they want to be or not (Angela Davis gets about $20,000 a talk to
extol the virtues of socialism... I guess that money is part of her "need").
To call an American a capitalist is both an apt description and a
compliment. Without capitalism driving technology (tech is the wedding of
science and capitalism), medicines would not have been discovered,
high-yield crops not developed, and we would not be conversing now.
I will agree that capitalism is one core value that has not changed,
although some would argue that creeping socialism threatens this.
Give me prosperity over poverty any day. Give that same option to the vast
majority of the people in the world and they will also make the same choice.
There is nothing wrong with being prosperous. It means that my children go
to good schools, don't miss meals, can travel and see the country and world,
are not dressed in rags.
Americans lack aesthetic appreciation, you intimate. Yet the world buys
what we produce. The world cannot get enough of our books, music, TV shows,
movies. What does that say of the world, if they are so eager to appreciate
the products of a society that lacks aesthetic appreciation?
You cannot get past the idea that YOU should define what should be
appreciated aesthetically. This requires a rigid value system of inflexible
good and bad. This is inconsistent with your above stated stance
that multiculturalism is good. What you are really saying is that other
cultures are good, the US culture is bad. You don't really believe that, of
course. You wouldn't say the Massai culture is as significant as the French
culture, nor would you immediately think of learning Urdu to broaden your
cultural horizons.
You are saying that some preferences are superior to others -- and that you
are a natural arbiter of this. Haiku is in, tractor pulls are out. But
what intrinsic to these acts leads you to such an intellectual conceit?
Historical academic preference? If all cultures have equal value, the
tractor pull is of equal aesthetic merit.
> A lot of things are not necessary. Art for one is not. Even reading
> fiction is not necessary. Again, this is where we talk about how
> practicality is part of US culture. In Latin America, many students
> study foreign languages and cultures and read numerous classics. So
> the intellegentsia classes there are very rounded and well informed
> and pleasure to speak with on a hige variaty of world issues. It may
> not be practical for *you*, but it is most meaningful to *them*.
> Again, if everything boils down to something being unnecessary if it
> does not directly lead to a better job, bigger house, etc, well, then,
> you again have proved me right.
Ah, you are entering the area of "entertainment". Reading fiction is not,
by and large, necessary, but it is enjoyable. I happen to enjoy reading,
but I have friends who question the value of my building a special room for
a library in my house holding over 7000 volumes. Some of them prefer
to sail, or listen to classical music, or dance, or play competitive sports.
I have my preferences, but should I judge them? I enjoy art, but I can
view and appreciate a gallery in 1/4 the time my wife needs, because
she is an artist. Is she culturally superior to me?
You are now mixing your classes. Before you were talking about cultured
cabbies; now you are talking about "intelligentsia". You will find the same
self-inflated discourse among the American intelligentsia. You just never
met them, because they don't hobnob with ESL tutors.
(BTW, not sure what a "hige variaty of world issues" is, but I'm a product
of California public schools).
And, gee, what "hige variaty of world issues" do you not find me discussing?
What loftier subjects do they discourse upon?
I'm no "intelligentsia", but I have read Thomas Mann in German, and have
read the complete works of Dickens and Shakespeare. I have memorized
many poems by Longfellow and Poe, and have played Romeo and Hamlet's
father's ghost on the stage. I regularly discourse with best-selling
authors
on their political and sociological works, and have corresponded with
Arthur C. Clarke, Isaac Asimov and Ray Bradbury, who became a friend
in the late 60s because we shared a fondness for Poe. Read most of the
Russian masters (in English, my Russian was never that good), and have
a particular fondness for Chekhov. I have written a novel, and a college
textbook on technology. I don't care for most South American writers,
as they tend to simplistic socialism and naive social history. I have
studied
the writings of philosophers from around the world but find that you need
to keep both feet and most of your brain in the real world in order to
provide for your family and contribute to your community. Your
intelligentsia friends would probably not care for me, as I am a crude
American who doesn't share their views on life and social order, which
is infuriating to such chaps.
> I was talking about different cultural rather than political
> priorities as relative to other countries.
What are these cultural priorities? Frugality is not one. Hard work and
personal sacrifice are being replaced with a "let the gummint take care of
it" attitude. With the evolving welfare state, people no longer take pride
in making it on their own but expect Uncle Sugar to help. Rather than
taking responsibility for their actions, whole groups of people claim they
are victims, and see imagined insults in the most innocent discourse.
Progress is paralyzed by the growing power of radical environmentalists, who
block every attempt to improve life for citizens, and who brashly put the
needs of bugs and invertebrates above humans. The legal system has been
corrupted to the point that, unknowingly, average citizens bear the brunt of
frivolous lawsuits (who provides the money companies pay out in a suit? The
consumers who pay a higher price for goods and services).
Socially, the US is looking more like the EU, and that is frightening,
considering the rampant racism, ethnic hostility, and failed infrastructure
(most notably socialized medicine) found there.
> Not in its entirety. However, it shows the culture in a caricaturesque
> way if you can read between the lines ( shall I say between the
> frames?). It shows waht generally appeals to the people of that
> particular society. What people admire. What they want to see. Britsh
> movies are less action oriented than American ones. French movies are
> very intellectual and mushy. Etcera.
Movies show what people might wish reality to represent or fear that it
might represent, in the minds of writers and producers. Often it is pure
escapism, or the embodiment of moral clarity that is lacking in the real
world. You have talked of the cultural sophistication of the Japanese,
with their literate cabbies and haiku. Yet they also are the origin of the
most violent pornography and movies. Which is the real Japan? Or
does one undermine the other and show inherent contradictions within
a flawed people striving to maintain an illusion of sophistication covering
a core of aggression and brutality?
> But some societies value maturity over youth.
I have experienced several cultures that claimed this, and have found that
it is usually a superficial respect. I know of no culture which does not
elevate its concept of beauty as a core value.
> well, look, this is what I meant. Tell any American that you are from
> Sweden or Holland or Australia. A smile will appear on their faces.
> Tell them that you are from Korea or Thailand, and the smile will be
> just a polite pretense. Tell them you are from Hungary and a tired nod
> and a yawn will follow. Few people will be interested in talking to
> you afterwards.
That's back to just plain silly again. You do not know this, you simply
hypothesize it. If a Hollander said he was from Korea it wouldn't fly. One
look and even stoopid Americans recognize (most) Asian faces. To hear some
tell, American men are fascinated by Asian women, so that smile might well
be sincere.
Since you cannot have pretended to be all of the above, you are simply
stating this out of preconceptions, which are inaccurate. Anyone with any
real knowledge of Americans would know that, rather than a tired nod and
yawn, the detailing of Hungary as your birthplace would elicit "Where is
that located?"
> Really? Hmm.. I did not think I did that. You see. I am preaching
> individual glabalism as it were.
"Glabalism"?
Sorry, your lack of knowledge of cultural anthropology is no excuse. Do
some reading on the subject. It's the cultured thing to do. I can
recommend some books...
> OK, here is the deal. An American
> goes to Thailand and never even picks up a book to learn Thai well. Or
> he is in the Philippines or japan. he is so culturally arrogant that
> he thinks the world shoudl adopt to him and he therefore has no
> respect for these cultures at all. I think that this kind of behaviour
> is wrong and arrogant. And a person should be multilingual. What is
> preached in the Us si that groups should be kind of separate each
> persuing their won culture within the US scehme of things.
What do you base this on? All I ever hear you spout is your preconceptions
and prejudices. I live in a world of facts and reality, where what I do
affects real lives in a real way every day. I cannot afford pretty
intellectual conceits based upon whim and opinion.
> I say that
> a human should know most cultures of the globe abd speak several
> languages such as Chinese, Spanish, Arabic, etc. To make him a true
> human, not just one nationality who thinks he is a hot shot.
Do YOU speak fluent French, German, Chinese, Arabic, Spanish? If so, have
you mastered these while pursuing a full-time career not involving these
languages? We know the answer to that. For a language teacher to say the
most important intellectual credentials are languages is puffery. What
languages do you NOT speak? Might not these people feel you are
disrespecting them? I don't see Hebrew in your list, or Russian. Do they
not matter?
If you spoke to a math teacher, she might say that, to make him a true
human, everyone should be able to do differential equations. A history
teacher would probably say that a deep and insightful grasp of world history
is required for true humanity. A soccer coach might think that mastering
those skill is the true requirement. Call it vocational chauvinism.
Do you have this same standard for EVERY person, or just Americans?
How many people in the world qualify under this guideline?
How much time and productivity would this require? What would it do to the
world's economy? How much food production would be lost for the farmer and
farm hands to study these languages? How many medical breakthroughs would
be lost forever because of the time thus spent?
Frankly, this is patently absurd. I might as well say that you are not
fully human unless you can build a computer from transistors and other
parts, or program in assembler, or play the clarinet, or be able to explain
the inherent flaw in Liberation Theology, or know the best way to sheer a
sheep, or be able to diagram the inaccuracies of "Dianetics", or perform
redaction criticism on the Synoptic gospels. I would fail in the above,
because I've never sheered a sheep. How well would you fare in my list of
requirements to be fully human and intellectually competent?
> All cultures are of equal merit in the scheme of things.
>
> Metaphisycally, yes.
Bullshit. You don't really believe that. Metaphysics has no place in
evaluating cultures, which are specific adaptations to environment and
knowledge. Metaphysics is an intellectual exercise to explain core
reasons for that which is beyond direct observation, while culture
is always visible and accessible. Sacrificing virgins to a sun god is
not morally equivalent with praying to the earth goddess, and praying
to Gaia and letting your child die rather than getting him to a doctor
is not something one can point to with equanimity and say, "That's
cool, it's what the culture believes".
We don't live in a metaphysical world. You don't get paid in metaphysics,
or eat metaphysics, or sleep on metaphysics.
If I believe that a woman should not be stoned to death because her uncle
raped her, I am betraying my humanity if I say, "Well, it's a cultural
thang."
> Well, not all. And again, this is a complicated issue. We do not have
> an absolute " paragon" to measure a culture against.
That's another place I disagree with you. You are quick to point out where
Americans are "wrong", implying some set standard, but deny it exists.
That's hypocrisy.
I do believe in absolutes. I believe in the Golden Rule, but I also believe
that sometimes you have to treat people as you would not want to be treated
(i.e., kill them) to secure the greater good. I cannot look at slaughter
and remain detached. I cannot look at threats to my family and say there
are no absolutes. You hurt my family intentionally, you will pay. Period.
And I will do all I can to protect my family from you if you intend them
harm, no matter what your beliefs say you should do to them.
If you do not believe the same way, you either are not a parent or husband,
or you are a callous bastard.
> And? We ambraced tobacco. And curry. And chewing gum. It worked for
> us.
A matter of degree. Which has influenced the other more -- India or the UK?
The US or the Philippines? Belgium or Africa? France or Indochina?
> Well, I do not think that it is that simple. Some people biologically
> live less as is the case with pygmies, I think. Again, the measure
> should be that indefinable level of happiness that people feel while
> they are alive, don't you think?
No. If you can't define it, how can you say it is better? How can you know
he would not have been happier longer with sulfa drugs? Or quinine? Or
DDT? What might his mind have accomplished if exposed to Chaucer or
Thoreau? What could he have done with a medical education, denied him by
his culture?
> And again, sometimes, these short lives can be the result of
> unfortunate circumstances such as colonization by a selfish foreign
> power ( which turned formerly powerful Incas into a very weak group
> now, for one)or wars and bad dictatorships which turned a very
> culturally rich country as Ethiopia into such a poor place. It does
> nottake away the fact that there are great minds all over the owrld,
> literary minds, artistic minds and many talents that await to be
> discovered by us if we only step out of the mon-cultural frame of
> mind.
This is amusing, because you are looking at these cultures from a Western
perspective to say they have value from their own perspective.
There are reasons civilization has progressed in the areas where it has, and
not in others, and it has nothing to do with innate abilities or climate
(two discredited theories of the physical anthropologists of the 19th
century). Since I do not believe in the intellectual superiority of any
race over another, this leaves me with the belief that key concepts are what
dictate that one culture advances and prospers while another remains static
or decays. Inherent in this is the Western notion of perfectibility,
arising from the Judeo-Christian philosophy that you can improve your lot
through application and effort. Western Civ is rooted in a few key concepts
that took hold and fused for novel results.
The horse collar was invented in China, but it was only when it was imported
by Europe that it attained the significance of facilitating the Industrial
Revolution. The Chinese also invented gunpowder and printing, but these did
not transform Chinese society, arguably the most advanced (with the
Arab-Islamic world) in the 16th century. Why?
The inventions of the Chinese were closely held by the court, jealously
protected secrets. When they were adopted by Western civilization, they
transformed warfare, and printing allowed the Reformation because they were
accessible by the population at large.
Three key concepts can explain why Western civilization has brought more to
the world's table in the last 500 years -- democracy, science and
capitalism. These uniquely fused to enable Western cultures to expand,
develop hardier populations, and invent new technology which spurred social
revolutions. These concepts were simply not present together in other
cultures, such as sub-Saharan Africa.
> I agree with you on that. But generally I think that if people were
> left alone and invasions and strife were not there, most culture would
> be equal in many ways.
Nonsense. Take the sub-Saharan Africa cultures and compare them with
European cultures prior to European expansion. This is long before
colonialism. These cultures had remained static for thousands of years.
Consider, too, the cultures in the Pacific islands, or the vast rural areas
of Eurasia.
One mistake you make is that when people are left alone, they do not get the
needed influx of new ideas that spurs change and growth. The very isolation
of cultures insulated them from change and expansion.
> Well, I am talking about average people, you know. I have met so many
> foreign students and most complain that Americans just want to have
> nothing to do with them. They are generally not interested in anything
> that is not from the popular American culture. This is the reality.
> Most nations incorporate something from somewhere all the time since
> we are all interconnected.
I would estimate that in my 47 years in the US, 12 of which were spent in
undergrad and graduate institutions, I have met more "foreign students" than
you have. I've lived with them in dorms, frat houses, and off-campus
housing. The critical component is attitude -- people who are friendly and
open are welcomed into the student community (arguably the most liberal
culture on the face of the globe) no matter who they are. If they are aloof
and suspicious (which is inculcated by many cultures) they will feel
excluded. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Both Asian and Arabic cultures tend to be more reserved and suspicious.
Muslims, because they are raised within a philosophy that promotes a dual
standard (between men and women, between believers and non-believers) can
have a hard time adjusting to a culture where such a double standard is
overtly disdained. Cultural differences easily transform the impressions of
observers into negatives.
Consider how my wife's family initially (and to some extent still do)
reacted to this "bastos Kano". I come from a "guilt culture", where we
flagellate ourselves for real and perceived misdeeds, and hold ourselves
publicly accountable. The Philippines is a "face culture", where my very
basic desire to take on the blame of a circumstance is seen as rude. When
there was a family problem, I and my wife would say, "Let's talk about this
problem and fix it." The family would be aghast, preferring to ignore and
not address the issue. Who is right? By our differing cultural values,
both are. I prefer mine, because it seeks to fix the problem rather than
ignore it because addressing it will cause one or more people to lose face.
Bottom line is that, if you come to America expecting to be discriminated
against and expecting people to think as they did back home, you will be
uncomfortable and feel out of sync.
> Well, again, this is an African-American trying to act cool. But how
> many go to Africa or even know what a dashiki is?
I would wager that every black born in the US knows what a dashiki is. It's
part of the pervasive culture of restoring black identity that has been
broadcast by all media and black groups for 40 years.
And you are once again wrong in thinking that ethnic dress is worn to be
"cool". I tend to not notice it, because it is so prevalent, but this past
week I paid attention. I saw an elderly Chinese woman in typical peasant
garb sweeping the residential street in front of her home. I saw an Indian
woman, caste mark and all, walking down the street wearing a chiffon sari
and listening to a Walkman. I saw a Mexican working in his yard wearing a
broad-rimmed sombrero. I saw countless African hats and prints, both in
traditional dashikis and more Western attire. I saw some of my employees
coming to work in traditional Vietnamese footwear and tops.
A growing number of black Americans from the burgeoning middle class (today,
only 25% of blacks are lower economic class, as opposed to nearly 100% in
1950) are taking the pilgrimage to Africa, but more decline to because they
know what they will find and prefer to maintain their romanticized ideal
image of native African cultures. They do not want to visit the poverty,
disease, brutality and primitive conditions of Africa because it does not
fit with the noble history espoused vociferously by the Afro-Centrists.
As Muhammed Ali said after returning from Zaire, "I'm glad my granddaddy got
on that boat."
> What about the simple aesthetic curiousity to know a bit more about
> the planet where one lives? I personally devoured Chinese books when I
> was a kid. I was just so curious about how people lived there.
That was an interest. People have different interests. Are yours the
standard by which others should be judged?
You assume that Americans (stripping aside the hundred million or so who
personally experienced cultures different from the US) are not curious about
other cultures. What you fail to realize is that multiculturalism is
central to American education today. Diversity training and ethnic studies
are REQUIRED on the college level. Literature curricula at the most
prestigious colleges are throwing out Proust and Chaucer and Shakespeare to
be replaced by Jose Maria Arguedas, Ernesto Cardenal (and yes, Pablo
Neruda). Faulkner and Hemmingway are being replaced with Garcia Marquez and
Naipaul. Entire elementary and secondary school systems have been changed
to the Afro-Centrist curriculum, which teaches in part that the ancient
Egyptians were black, that these people were wizards who could fly through
the use of cocaine, and that all knowledge of the West actually came from
black Africans, rather than the Chinese, the Mediterranean Sea Peoples, or
the Greeks.
Tastes in movies are amorphous. When you say that someone living in Europe
watches with more regularity movies from neighboring countries, you are
talking about someone in California who watches a movie made in New York.
If you look at movie watching statistics from countries where the government
does not restrict content, you find the general pattern is that people watch
movies made in their own country, and those made in America. You thus have
the very natural ethnocentric films and American films (or Western Civ
films). In the US, the same pattern holds. You have ethnocentric films
(American) and American films. Yes, there are films from other cultures
that both capture critical and popular attention, but these are a smaller
percentage than the films that fit into the first two categories. As they
are in all other open-market countries.
> If people jsut want to see a glorified version of themselves and the
> producers appeal to the lowest common denominator, what does it say
> about the people's interests? Are you proving me right.
This describes the native films of every country. Each reflects the values
of the viewer. Some travel well to other cultures, others do not (ever
watched an Indian movie? Certainly not to my tastes).
Many top stars in American movies came to the American public's attention in
foreign films, which hold a small but significant niches in theaters in
urban centers.
> How about some Czech love stories? Or something like that.
Because a) people in America already have more choices than they have time
and b) cultural expressions of love are not universal. Movies are
entertainment to Americans, not cultural education, just as they are in all
other countries.
> It is not just the quality thing. It is the subject matter. If it is not
US, it
> is crap and people are just automatically prejudiced and just get
> bored and walk out.
That's simply not true. "Il Postino" with subtitles earned $80.5 million US
gross. "Trainspotting" earned $72.1 million. "Crouching Tiger, Hidden
Dragon" with subtitles grossed $108 million in the US.
You are the prejudiced one. Doesn't it bother you to simply invent opinions
without a factual base to support them?
> And again, we are not talking about a Joe Sixpack. We are talking
> about people with degrees that do not even know where places are let
> alone want to see a movie about them.
Gosh, no we're not. We are talking about gross popularity here, not limited
to some academic elite. Indeed, you will find that the American "academic
elite" are the main supporters of foreign films. Towns like Pohdunk,
Nebraska don't have theaters that exclusively show foreign films, but New
York, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Houston, Miami, Boston and New
Orleans (to name a few) all have multiple theaters exclusively dedicated to
showing foreign and "art" films.
Towns with major colleges almost always have foreign film theaters,
festivals, etc.
> There are so many great Italian and French singers. Europeans would
> listen to those. Few Americans would. They would just turn it off.
Nonsense once again (this is monotonous).
First of all, there is the competition. There are a bunch of great singers
in the US, who are competing with record labels and for shelf space which is
limited. For every great performer in the US who lands a contract and a CD
there are 100 who fail.
Second, performers like Pavarotti, Domingo, Klederer (piano), Cassals,
Enriquez (Julio and son), Estefan, etc. have made the bulk of their fortunes
off American audiences. Certainly it is tougher for a foreign entertainer
to penetrate the US market because they must stand above the competition and
have something unique to contribute to persuade distributors and stores to
replace another performer on the shelf with them.
> You would be an exception to the rule. Most Americans who do that, do
> not really get into the local music. That is the point I am making.
Name your sources for that, other than "Everyone knows that."
My point is that people who move to other countries still listen to their
native music. You are saying Americans are somehow wrong if they move to
Tangiers and still listen to Sinatra. That flies in the face of what
immigrants around the world do.
Here is a prime example. An Iranian friend owns a small up-scale grocery.
Six days a week he plays Western classical music in his store. On Sunday,
he plays Persian music. He has an appreciation for both, but his heart is
still with the music he grew up with, fell in love listening to, and made
his babies to.
> It is a metter of degree. the Japanese know a lot oabout music around
> the world.
The Japanese are social mimics. Their popular culture is based upon taking
ideas from other cultures and transforming them.
> The Russians listen to European music-Greek, Italian, german,
> Spanish...alll the time.
First, cite some statistics. What portion of the money spent in Russia goes
for European music? What portion for Russian music?
Americans listen to Russian, German, Greek, Italian and French music every
day. I can list 160 stations in the US that almost exclusively broadcast
music from these countries.
Every US record store has sections on foreign music, generally about 1/20th
of the shelf space. More is purchased online.
> Well, not really. Most Europeans would listen to their neighbours
> music.
Because of a) proximity and b) not enough music is generated locally to
satisfy consumers. Remember my figures above -- over half of the CDs are
created in the US, and 26% are created in Europe. This means that Europeans
are listening more to US music than their neighbor's music.
>> How much African music is played in the Philippines?
>
> Well, Africa is far. And again, the Philippines has some Spanish music
> and plenty of British and US music.
Come on. Distance is not a factor. If it were, your entire case about
inter-cultural infusion would be shot. It's as far from California to
Africa as it is from the Philippines to Africa, and as far from California
to Germany as it is from the Philippines to Africa.
That dog won't hunt.
> How much Chinese music is played in Sweden?
>
> Well, it is too far, admittedly. But i am sure, they would listenn to
> Finnish music.
Music travels by satellite around the globe. CDs are shipped
internationally. Music is available off the internet anywhere there is
power and a phone connection.
Unwittingly, you have destroyed with this distance argument your whole
belief that Americans should know more and appreciate more of other
cultures. America is geographically isolated from all but two nations. If
distance is a factor in relevance, then you have completely destroyed your
entire chain of prejudices.
> > More ethnic music, TV and movies from more countries are available if
> > you want them in the US than in any other country I know of.
>
> For the benefit of the 1st generation immigrants. Most Americans would
> not even bother watching it.
See above as to relevance.
And...
How can a foreign station be financially viable unless there are enough
listeners who patronize it? This means that there are bunches and bunches
(to use an exact number) of listeners in the area who speak the language.
Thus diversity. Thus your entire understanding of the US is flawed.
> The intellegentsia class in Latin America, for one, speaks more of
> those.
How much time have you spent with the American intelligentsia class?
How much are these intelligentsia contributing to their countries or the
world? Sounds like they are intellectual dilettantes, living off the effort
of others, who sit around congratulating themselves about how refined they
are.
What does South America give to the world besides drugs and coffee?
> > In parts of society. In other parts of society, work and career are
> > rediculed.
>
> In *most* of it, it is not, though.
Sorry, you're wrong. Welcome to the Welfare States of America. Welcome to
California, litigation capitol of the world, where you seek advancement by
getting others to pay you for imagined offenses.
> Wait. i am not talking about the governemnt policies towards foreign
> immigrants. i am talking about the cliquishness and of not knowing
> your next door neighbor. Of being so scared of people you don't know
> that hospitality is almost non-existent...
Hmmm. I know my neighbors. There is the Mexican immigrant family across
the street, the black family two houses down, the whiteboy and his wife
across the street, and the German/Japanese couple next door. I know their
names, what they do for a living, how many kids they have, what living
family they have, and what their dogs and cats are named. I know their
hobbies, their religious and political preferences. I do not, as a rule,
socialize with them outside annual parties. Our interests do not coincide.
50 years ago, there was more interaction with people you lived near because
these were also the people you worked with and played with. There were much
fewer entertainment options, and many were clustered within the community.
In today's mobile society, the geographic location of friends has expanded
dramatically, as has both work and entertainment locations. You still have
the same number of friends, they are simply not in your neighborhood.
The billions generated by Americans out of their own pockets for the victims
of 9-11, people they did not know of all races, religions and countries of
origin, gives a true picture of American friendliness.
> We are not talking about immigrants> and why bring France into this?
> It is a well known g=fact that these rae not very friendly people
> either.
In the US you are ALWAYS talking about immigrants. It's simply a matter of
how many generations removed. You simply cannot grasp this elemental fact
of American culture.
> > In Greece (think Albanians)?
>
> But most Orthodox brethren would be welcome with open arms. An Greeks
> are generally very hospitable to strangers. Stranger does not eqaul
> foreigner necessarily.
Every Greek I have talked with or corresponded with has nothing but contempt
for Albanians.
> In Saudi Arabia (where there is no such thing as a tourist visa)?
>
> Yes, now there is. But if you live in Saudi you can go into a store
> and people will serve you tea. Beduins will bring you milk. Yep!
Welcome to my web... You have inadvertently stumbled here upon a major
distinction between American virtue and Arab virtue.
Arabs practice Zakat, the Third Pillar of Islam. This duty acknowledges
that everything springs from Allah and belongs to Allah. The faithful are
required to be charitable, with specific prescriptions for treatment of
guests (including Sadaga, the charitable gift). This duty is not to the
guest, but to Allah -- you are not performing the hospitality for the guest,
but for Allah. Under Sharia, Muslims may be punished for failing to observe
this, along with other laws handed to the faithful from Allah by his Prophet
(including modesty in dress, which has been transformed over the decades
into the burqua). Death and dismemberment continue to be traditional
punishments for violations of these edicts.
Virtue is demanded of the faithful. It is not something freely given. In
America, charity is not required. Anything you get is freely given.
Americans have the choice. Hospitality is not a religious mandate, but a
personal expression. Because it is not rigidly imposed under pain of mortal
or eternal punishment, there is a wider variance in how hospitality is
extended. Remember that it was Americans who dropped food to the civilian
population of Afghanistan. The Arab states have declined to materially
participate in the rebuilding of Afghanistan. Where is the hospitality, the
charity in this? Where is the hospitality and charity in barring refugees
from integrating into their societies (such as in Jordan, where the
"Palestinian refugees" are ethnically and culturally identical to the
Jordanians but are refused citizenship or jobs).
Is a woman who is locked up her whole life virtuous? How does this compare
to the American woman who has the choice and chooses the moral path?
Americans give out of compassion and generosity. Arabs give out of
religious obligation. There is a big difference, in my mind.
Unfortunately, this is a dying value like so many others. Whole ethnic
segments of the US population hardly contributed to the charity work,
because they brought their cultural values with them.
> Again, we are talking abou a rank and file Mexican. He will be happy
> to strike aconversation with anybody and even invite a stranger to his
> house. Friends are easy to make there.
As they are in the US. I think you have this impression of Americans as
isolated, cocooned drones who never leave their homes or interact with
others. Simply false.
> Well, that is a xenophobic nation. A red herring. You have seen the
> hospitality of the Filipinos, haven't you? That is what I am talking
> about.
And my Filipino friends have benefited even more from my American
hospitality.
There are differences, to be sure. Filipino hospitality is much more freely
given than Arabic hospitality. It is essentially the same hospitality of
America 60 years ago.
> Agreed. But I am not talking about that. I am talking about just a
> very cold attitude towards a person one does not know. People are much
> warmer in Latin America. But the US gov't is admittedly very generous.
Here's a clue -- the USG *is* the people. When you say the USG is generous,
you are saying the American people are generous. If we don't approve of
what they do, at some point we get rid of them (although laziness does raise
our toleration).
It is *our* money that does all these things. The USG does not generate
substantial income outside taxes.
You also seem to be enamored with surface appearances. The same store owner
in Saudi who gives you the tea will try to rob you blind the next moment.
> I am not talking politics but rather daily interactions in soceity on
> a grass r oot level.
Perhaps all of this goes back to some experience you have had with Americans
where you weren't treated properly in your estimation?
Think this over -- if immigrants were not treated well in daily life, would
they try so hard to impose this country on their relatives remaining back
home?
> None, admittedly. But again, we are off topic here. Ok, here is a
> Filipino. When a guest knocks on his door unannounced he will stop
> most of his activities and receive the guest. Bring him coffee and
> share food with him.An American would think that it would be very rude
> to violate his privacy without a proper appointment. That is what I am
> talking about.
Americans have different lifestyles and duties than Filipinos. In a
household where there is always a nanny or three to care for kids, there may
be more opportunity to stop what you are doing for an uninvited guest.
You cannot discuss these things in isolation.
> > Again, within a portion of society. In general, the legal profession is
> > viewed with contempt here.
>
> More with jealousy. Becuase of the huge money they are making.
The vast majority of lawyers make less than high-end computer professionals
($80k a year according to the California State Bar Association). They make
less than doctors. They make less than tenured garbage collectors and truck
drivers, in many instances. There is much more to it than jealousy.
> > > General disrespect for the teaching profession and academia.
...
> They are still not held in so much respect as they would be in Asia.
> In Japan, for one, teaching is called TenShoku- a heavenly
> profession...Not in the US.
This is typical of your arguments. You go from "general disrespect" to
"still not held in so much respect".
There is a HUGE difference.
> > Let's look at salaries. Teachers in California earn an average of
> > $52,000 a year.
>
> That is with the gov't districts. Not in the private sector. Very very
> low salaries.
Hunh? What is a "gov't district"?
It is true that in certain types of private schools pay is lower by about
25%. This is reflective of a number of factors, including certification and
the willingness to take lower compensation (paid for by the student's
parents and not subsidized by the government) because of safety and
educational environment.
BUT -- the $52,000 I quoted averages BOTH public and private salaries...
On the collegiate level, private college and university salaries far
outstrip public schools.
> Still, if you are a teacher, it does not evoke the reaction it would
> in Asia.And i think that US gorls would rather date a doctor, a lawyer
> or a computer programmer than a teacher.
This is, ob cors, a much different question than the respect society in
general holds for an occupation.
> Well, you know. there are teachers striking and demanding respect and
> recognition as professionals. They do not do it in Asia so much.
That occurs in all fields of employment in the US. Thank you, Sam Gompers!
> Half-nuclear. A split nucleus. Still not "extended". That is hwat I
> meant. But the families that are not divorced still reamin nuclear,
> don' they?
Sorry, no. The "nuclear family" is a specific referent in America to
mommy-daddy-son-daughter households. A "half-nuclear" family (the term does
not exist) is a "broken home" in traditional American parlance.
Traditionally, American households have been two-generational. The massive
influx of immigrants, legal and otherwise, has brought the 3-generation home
into popularity.
> I am talking about people with college degrees that do not know where
> malaysia is. I am talking about foreign students who go to study in
> the US and even teachers have never heard of the countries they are
> from.
Well, can these students name and locate all of the US states? Of course
not. Can a Malaysian college prof locate New Mexico on a map without
labels? They're about the same size. Big deal.
> Agreed. Still, the positive go-getter is much easier to find in the US
> percentagewise than in many other, more cynical or passive parts of
> the world
That is less of a statement of the retention of traditional values in the US
than it is a reflection on cultural values around the world. One would also
note that the "go-getters" from many countries come to the US...
> Agreed. But just step into any office and you will see many bright
> faces of people working happily. Or go to a college campus and you
> will see a lot of confident faces there, too.
Uhhhh... how many office buildings have you been into? Aside from
receptionists and salesfolk, most US workers go about their business with
expressions far to the south of smiles.
You do see a great deal of confidence on college campuses. This is the
minority of the best, brightest and most motivated in society (or people
like me who just want to avoid getting a real job as long as possible). The
majority of kids are working in dead-end jobs with scowls on their faces.
> Agreed to a point. But it seems to me that the mainstream majority is
> still much more postive than in so many other parts of the world
This sadly declines every day.
Consider the backlash against the patriotism generated by 9-11. Many vocal
Americans, including politicians, media stars, etc., have become
increasingly vocal about how bad America is, how empty this patriotism is,
how we are the terrorists. See the full-page ad in the NY Times titled "Not
In Our Name!"
>> A large portion of the American public now subscribes to the ideal,
>> "If at first you don't succeed, blame it on prejudice or the government."
>
> But is this the majority view?
Hard to tell. It is a significant enough minority to skew elections, retain
entitlements and racial preferences, and feed the multi-billion dollar
litigation machine.
The black middle class has been the fastest growing economic segment in the
US since 1964. Yet a substantial percentage polled feel they are
discriminated against, that racism is institutionalized in the US, and that
non-blacks hate them, in spite of all the indicators that demonstrate
otherwise (i.e., black politicians elected in white districts, white
patronage of black businesses when faced with a choice). There is a
billion-dollar business of professional "advocates" who earn their living
promoting discord and seeding discontent.
> > > Efficiency and thriftiness.
>
> But I think people in their minds are still guided by those
> principles. They just have more obstacles to deal with, that's all.
> Still the main thrust is on those. The giverment sector may be
> different, but the private sector in its fundamental menatlity is
> still guided by those, don't you think?
No. That's not the world I live in, which is what I wrote prior to this.
If I agreed with you, I wouldn't take the time to refute you...
> Oh, this is a matter of observation. "America, love it or leave it".
> This phrase is still very much alive and well. The working classes in
> the US are very nationalistic. I cannot prove these things but a year
> in the EU and then a trip back to the US will make you see the marked
> difference.
I agree that nationalism in much of the EU is muted. This is the result of
moral relativism. Countries like Germany, which might have remained a rock
of nationalism and pride, have intentionally humbled themselves because of
the excesses of the past. If every idea is equal, if every culture is
equal, then there is nothing to feel pride about. Europeans have
emasculated themselves.
Pride in country and heritage is attacked if that country and heritage is
American. If you are from a piss-poor country that has contributed nothing
to the world except exotic fruits and you proclaim national pride, you are
lionized and applauded for your nobility. People look up from their poverty
and failed social and political systems at the US, with our power and wealth
and success, and say "You think you are so great!" Well, yes, we are. My
experience is that Americans, when dealing on a one-to-one basis with people
in other countries, rarely raise the flag or boast until the FN makes some
disparaging remark. Then, when the AmCit defends the US, they are accused
of hubris. Go figger.
> Well, there are 200+ nations in the world. I cannot really speak for
> them all. But it seems to be pretty patriotic to me. The Brits and
> Aussie seem much more cynical, for one.
And cynicism is a virtue?
> Well, yes. but you are listing very extreme examples here. The
> Philippines is nationalistic, all right but it is a society where
> people are more relaxed about the whole thing. Not many foreigners in
> the Philippines complain of harassment or hate crime while there (
> political kidnappings excluded).
Hate crimes are a business in the US. There are powerful interest groups
which generate billions of dollars promoting innocent actions as hate
crimes, or reinterpreting general crime as hate crime, and who inculcate
minorities to be hypersensitive and perceive normal interactions as biased.
I.e., if you are a minority and are turned down for a job (or a date) it
must
be racially motivated (when you may simply be unqualified). The media
also elevates trivial incidents to national importance. Day-to-day life is
not about discrimination or harassment. As I said, when the grocer, the
mailman, the dentist and the cop are all immigrants, who is there to harass?
An example -- twice in the past year, people (a teacher and an appointed
official) have been blasted as using "hate speach" for using the word
"niggardly". The teacher was fined, given a written reprimand, and forced
to go through sensitivity training. The official was fired. All out of
ignorance about a word meaning "stingy".
> Well, yes they also have a high degree of intolerance towards others.
> Blacks become intolerant of Asians, Hispanics begin to dislike Blacks,
> etc. And on many cases the people that feel inadequate become more
> closed within their own communities to protect themselves and their
> self esteem.
Your point was that non-whites are not tolerated by whites. Now you are
saying no one is tolerated.
> > What country practices true color-blind acceptance of others?
>
>
> Not true, but relative one. Brazil is much better at it. So is
> Trinidad. So is panama, Dominican republic, the Philippines.
These have several things in common. One is a relative lack of diversity
(the Philippines is 91.5% Christian Malay, the Dominican Republic is 73%
mixed white, Amerind, etc.) and religious homogeneity. They also are more
monolithic in cultural identity, with smaller immigration levels (and thus
more generations to enculturate into a common bond). Several examples are
small nations that hardly qualify as cities. None of these nations are
competitive in the world marketplace, None face significant military
threats. Most are isolated from other cultures by natural barriers. And so
on.
Crowded conditions, little homogeneity and great diversity, along with great
subcultural differences and recent immigrant status, serve to exacerbate the
problem.
> It does in most , but it is a matter of intensity. In America it is
> much more intense that in its southern neighbors.
Much of the intensity in the US is deliberately generated by the media and
special interest groups. And in the case of South America, the diversity
simply does not exist. If you are a small minority surrounded by a sea of
the majority, you don't complain too loudly.
> > In America, if you bother to look, you will find that socialization
> > breaks down along class and income lines, not race.
>
> Both and race playing a huge role
You are simply wrong here. Show me some facts to support your belief, and I
will show you how class and income factor in. You just don't know what you
are talking about.
> I know what you are trying to say. But you see, in the US this racial
> awareness has been elevated to the level of obsession.
Ibid.
> In modern times, a person will study computer programming rather than
> become a tecaher of literature, won't you think?
No. A little thought will get you to realize that those who have
traditionally gone into the field of teaching literature have done so not
out of pecuniary motivations but love of the subject. This has not changed.
What has changed is that people who would have gone into other trades for
the money now gravitate to new careers where the money is.
> > That's a no brainer. Please cite an industrialized nation that does not
> > follow this rule (i.e., where more books of poetry are published than
> > prose).
> >
> No time. It is 1:00 am soon.
Meaning you cannot.
>> Upper class may mix with other classes without prejudice, but classes
>> tend to socialize within their class.
>
> Money usually crosses the barrier.
In a capitalistic society with no aristocratic history, money determines
class.
> It is intertwined. A Black man will staill be a Black man. He will
> have harder time in penetrating social barriers than if he were a
> white man but equally poor.
Nonsense. It is simply a matter of money and attitude.
The top 10 endorsement personalities in the US last year were all black.
These are the people companies bet their livelihood on to sell product. If
there was such a racial bias as you propose, companies would steer clear of
blacks as spokespeople.
The market tells the truth. As Jimmy's friend Shane said, "Never argue with
the data."
> Go to Rome, Paris, Montreal, Milano and see how people dress. I would
> really like you to see. And I am not talking about office attire. I am
> talking about people putting on the latest fashions. You have got to
> see it.
I have. What you seem unaware of is that the studiously applied casual
attire worn for leisure in the US is often more expensive and more contrived
than these designer duds. My 18-year-old easily wears $500 worth of
clothing
and looks like a homeless person, which is the intent.
You are once again confusing personal taste with an absolute criteria. And
you earlier claimed there are no absolutes...
And... isn't this just a wee bit superficial? Personally, fashion is my
life, but others find merit in different pursuits...
> Are you joking? Most Americans work many more hours than Europeans.
> And have 1-2 week vacations only.
Voila! You are finally right (sorta)! Note that I said "visible leisure"
(American lives are visible internationally through the media).
The Europeans and Japanese do get more average vacation time and work fewer
hours. Which is one reason Europe is going nowhere fast.
> > Most Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck.
>
> But still handle those small paychecks well.
See waaaay above for debt and bankruptcy data. Wrong again, Expat!
> Go to Eastern Europe and see how effortlessly a guy can just get laid
> and how naturally. Without paying. Same in Japan.
What you are defining is moral decay in a society where there are still
values. This is not repression. It is a redefinition of morality along
hedonistic lines, made possible by contraception.
> In the US you are not allowed to even touch a stripper or you will be
> kicked out. that is what I mean.
Ever heard of a lap dance? And not touching naked dancers is not
"repression", it is following a certain standard of behavior.
> Only when it comes to celebrities. Becuase their younger versions are
> so much on the screen. All others are called DOMs
Is it painful to be wrong so often? A DOM would be a man in his 50s-80s
(awright Viagra!) going after an 18-year-old. REAL common to have a 10-15
year difference in age. A new trend? My grandfather married my grandmother
when he was 25 in 1924. She was 15.
> I agree with you on that. Many of my friends who have travelled round
> the world and came back to the US say this: Americans talk about it
> but they just don't do it. Mainly, the women are just so arrogant and
> have so many hang-ups.
That is such a ridiculous and inaccurate stereotype (usually voiced by sex
tourists -- your friends, perhaps?) that I'm not even going to bother
responding at this point.
> It is hard to define it unless you have dated girls in say the Czech
> republic for one year and then went to the US and dated girls there.
> You would see a marked difference in the attitudes towards dating,
> sex, etc. Things would be much easier, the owmen would not be so
> capricious, they would be much more into love and natural healthy sex.
> Without much talking. Just doing.
And it has nothing to do with the chance you as a foreigner offered the
girl?
I have never found American women to be capricious, and every woman I have
dated has been very much into love -- often to my regret. I've only dated
one non-native American.
> You meet a girl. She likes you. It just develops into sex naturally
> and easily. A girl in the US is more self-absorbed, more capricious
> and less willing to do it. Some strange hang-up. Unless you have
> actually particiapted in teh dating scene in these places, you would
> really have no clue. I have so I am talking from experience.
So the women are easy. That's a virtue? Sorry, not interested. It all
goes back to a lack of morality. I will not elevate that to the status of
an admirable quality.
>> These are enclaves. And i am not talking about gays here. It sems that
> it is much easier to be gay than straight in the US.
Yawn.
> Well, theye od reflect general tendencies albeit greatly distorted.
> But i am talking from experinces of living in so many countries and
> seeing America from the persectives of those cultures. There is no
> substitute for international living to be able to judge cultures with
> some kind of " accuracy".
How long and where did you live in the US?
> America is neither "The Beverly Hillbillies"
>
> But it shows that southerners are seen as Hicks and the wealthy
> california living is worshipped...
Not for 20 years or more. Welcome to 2002 and the exodus of those with
money and property from California.
> Please give me a few examples. Maybe you mean showing Eddie Murphy and
> a Hispanic and a Hawaiian cup is muliticulturalism? Ot images in the
> movies of how the only difference between Americans and foreigners is
> a slight accent?
Sigh. I have expended hundreds of words here trying to educate you.
Multiculturalism is cultural relativism. All cultures are equally valid.
You cannot take pride in the US. All religions are equal. All people not
only have the right to pursue happiness but should be guaranteed, by the
redistribution of wealth, that happiness. To believe otherwise is to be
racist. American culture in founded and steeped in institutional racism.
Children are not allowed to pray or read the Bible in school, but school
districts mandate students pretend to be Muslims for a month, reading the
Qu'ran, praying to Mecca and trying to convert other students. Curriculum
in high schools and college which minimize the importance of the Founders of
the US with their place being taken by unimportant people of color. Great
works of Western Literature being removed from surveys to be replaced with
the exposed fraud of "I, Rigoberto Menchu". Protests against Columbus Day,
with some municipalities changing it to "Indigenous Peoples' Day" (who
contributed more to America and the world - Columbus or the Amerinds?).
I could go on for pages.
> They get in on TV, in school, in movies. They see it on the
> > street.
>
> Not in Burlington, Vermont.
Heh, heh.
Burlington, VT. Home of the University of Vermont.
Home of mandated diversity and multiculturalism courses, including a
required Race Relations and Ethnicity course. The two most prominent campus
organizations are the African, Latino, Asian, and Native American group
(ALANA) and the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning, Intersexed
and Allied people (GLBTQIA). The web site for the on-campus Center for
Cultural Pluralism states 'We are all guilty [of racism] by partaking of the
benefits of a White society. '
Thank you for playing.
> > > Become independent.
> >
> > This is not true in a society that seeks greater cradle-to-grave social
> > services.
>
> Very underdeveloped ones. No free medical care as in most
> industrialized nations. Still kids do not stay with their parents at
> 26. And getting on welfare is not that easy. Try Germany.
Socialized medicine has failed everywhere it has been instituted. Canada
and the UK are among the worst care providers in the civilized world.
You seem to misunderstand me. Cradle-to-grave is not a good concept. Self
reliance is. Remember? That used to be the American value? The WASP norm
that you claims still exists and people are forced to conform to? The thing
that started this thread?
Being less socialistic than Europe is NOT being independent. Being compared
to Europe is like being saying "You're fine. Your cancer has metastasized
to a smaller extent than his."
> > American students do poorly when compared to other industrial nations in
> > part because hard study is frowned upon as discriminatory and
>> unnecessary.
>
> Huh? How so? Where did the Filipinos get their love of education. From
> the Chinese?
OK, I know this is hard to follow --
Q: When did the US impose colonial values on the Philippines?
A: Before 1950
Q: When did education begin to decline in the US following Sputnik?
A: The 1970s, when multiculturalism, "whole language" instruction, "new
math", bilingual education and "self esteem" became dominant in educational
circles.
The sad thing is that Filipinos exceed their colonial master in attitudes
and achievement. I have attended a number of high school and college
graduations in the past few years where the top 25 and more students were
all Asians and Filipinos.
Read the sad stats. The US has an atrocious dropout rate and growing.
Standardized test scores are a disgrace. Industry is finding that high
school and college grads cannot speak or write English adequately. Too few
qualified science degrees are being earned, so H-1B visas are required.
Parochial schools, disdained in my day as being vastly inferior to the
public system, are the preferred place today.
This is NOT the America I grew up in. This is not the WASP value system.
> In highschool years, yes. But once they get past 18 a lot of kids
> start studying.
Horseshit. I was on the admissions committee of a grad school, and I saw
hundreds of apps. I was appalled at the ignorance and lack of command of
English demonstrated by college graduates.
Colleges have had to dumb down graduation requirements, due both to the poor
preparation entering students have (including study skills) and minority
quotas with lower entrance qualifications.
> > Name things besides specific architecture and natural resources which
> > are not found in the US.
>
> Really friendly people. Modest and friendly women among others.
Translation: people who can tolerate you and slutty women. Sorry, those are
not traditional WASP values, but go onto any college campus. I'm sure you
can get laid.
> > OK, on one hand you are critical of a white-dominated society, and on
> > the other you want people to be able to verbalize their prejudices.
> >Which is better?
>
> Well, it is tricky. It is called hipocricy. Despise them in your heart
> but do not voice it cause you can get sued.
That's the great fraud of race relations in America. Whites do not despise
non-whites. But black "leaders" and exploiters NEED whites to hate blacks,
so they foment turmoil and incite division. If people -- of any color --
speak out, they are shouted down as racist.
Look at what has been accomplished in the US in the last 50 years. It was
WHITES who changed the laws, WHITE militia who protected the black students
going to school, WHITE voters who put blacks into political office, WHITES
who elevated blacks to the Supreme Court. Without white support, there
would have been no Civil Rights movement. Were you aware that is was whites
who created the NAACP?
You are a good little lemming, believing what you are told. Talk to LeeBat
about hypocrisy and being treated different because he is "non-white".
> You are right. I do not want my son to be screwed in the butt by his
> teacher. Do you?
No. But you are making a moral stand here. If all cultures are of equal
merit, you should not stand in the way of your son expressing his sexuality
in any form.
Me, I have it easy, being the arbitrary guy I am. I'll kill any man who
touches my son. It's called "moral clarity".
> I am more referring to ridicule if you wear a certain color or a
> certain fashion etc.
Maybe in Milano. In the US, you can get killed for wearing the wrong color
if you are on the wrong gang's turf, but you can even wear white after Labor
Day now.
> That much I agree with you on. However, there is also the much bigger
> ridicule and ostarcism of those who are different, but again, America
> is not alone in that...
I'll try to use small words. Certain cliques in school will have problems
with others, but in a nation composed of different groups you can always
find acceptance. Bigger ridicule than where? Give examples, please.
> > There is actually more peer pressure, exerted by the media and special
> > interest groups, to deny the values you say typify America. Those who
> > adhere to these values are labaled "radical right" or "right-wing
> > conservative" and are marginalized by a popular culture that says
> > anything goes and all values are relative.
>
> Well, you are getting into politics. I am talking about daily life.
I'm assigning "Wrong again" to a macro.
These are not just political labels but social labels. You do understand
that socialism is more than politics, right? You know that conservative
values are more than just about who you vote for. Right? Right?
How you live your life places you within a faction. People like me who
believe in "traditional American values" (the kind you claim everyone is
pressured to follow, but have been ridiculed and marginalized by the left in
the past 30 years) are labeled "conservatives" or "radical right" or
"racists" ("culturalist" would be a more apt term, but accuracy is not
required in pejorative labeling). I don't believe in sexual promiscuity. I
believe in legal, not illegal, immigration. I believe that schools should
be safe, and teachers and principles should be given the authority to insure
they are. I believe that lying is wrong, and that all people should have
equal opportunity but that not all people will have equal success. I
believe that if I am clever enough or work hard enough or am simply lucky
enough, I should be able to enjoy the fruits of my effort. I don't believe
that I owe the rest of the world a living. I believe that if you fail, you
take your lumps, learn from your mistakes, get back up and try again.
I am sadly isolated believing these things and living in California.
> So, do you mean to say that America is on par with these other
> horrible societies that you have described? Again, i spent a lot of
> time in latin America and it is very very different there. You speak
> Spanish, you are mostly in.
Yup. And if you advocate the overthrowing of the government publicly, if
you criticize the government, what happens? If you are an immigrant and you
break the law, how are you treated?
In America, it used to be that if you made the effort to learn English you
would be accepted, as millions of immigrants from around the world were.
Now, groups are making it so you should not have to learn English. Think of
your beloved South American countries -- how would mass movements by
immigrants to change national languages be viewed? Did the German war
criminals in Brazil force a change to German? Would they have been as
accepted if they had?
> Millions? I would not go as far. You would be hard pressed to see one
> turban on a US street. Are you kidding. Someone would immediately
> yell: Go back to your country.
Macro time.
I see turbans EVERY DAY. The one person killed following 9-11 was, as I
recall, a Sikh wearing a turban in Texas.
Go to NYC. Every other cab driver wears a turban.
There are more stores selling saris on University Ave in Berkeley than there
are "American" clothing stores.
Is the SF Bay Area atypical? Yes. But all major cities have ethnic
minorities (who usually, combined, either comprise a majority or approach
it) who practice their religious beliefs and cultural practices (read: wear
turbans or Muslim head coverings). The fact that you don't understand
this simply highlights your ignorance. This is why I'm here.
> And Blacks wearing dashikis? Well, not many.
I went to see a black performer last night. I lost track of the traditional
(or mock traditional) African clothing I saw.
You simply have no idea what you are talking about.
> Where is that? In their ghettoes?
No, Asians generally do not live in ghettos. They work hard and buy nice
houses in good neighborhoods.
People are free to dress as they wish in the US. This ain't Saudi...
> These are governmental views. They are in stark contrast to their
> behaviour of the average Joe.
Can you say "democracy"? I thought you could. Politics is an expression of
the will of the people, with certain leeway (basically, there is a threshold
of disagreement that will incite the populace to act). Politicians in the
US take opinion polls almost daily, especially in election years (every two
years for national elections).
The number one rule in American politics is "Thou shalt get re-elected".
Piss off the voters too much and you lose your cushy job and interns. Draft
legislation that varies too much from voter positions and you will be
recalled or voted out.
Politicians make decisions in large part because of what their constituents
tell them to do (called a "mandate from the voters") and what special
interest groups lobby them regarding. These special interest groups often
represent segments of the population -- environmentalists, pro- and anti-gun
groups, ethnic groups, religious groups -- and business interests. In the
case of Democrats, they often represent hostile foreign governments, but
that's another thing.
> Tolerant is different from accepting. Most people are still polite
> enough not to attacke the person. But only the Anglos will enter the
> main stream more or less effortlessly. The others will be expected to
> keep a distance. Politely told to. With a tolerant smile.
Bullshit. Explain the number of ethnic minorities who run major businesses
in the US. Explain the high number of minorities (including open
homosexuals) in elected positions. Explain black and Hispanic mayors in
predominantly white towns. Explain why billions are spent on endorsement
contracts with black celebrities to sell products to white folks. Explain
the rise of the black middle class in the last 30 years.
How can you tell others to keep a distance when you are surrounded by them?
When they are your boss, your employees, your relatives?
You simply don't get it...
> Yes, duh. When you go and live in another country ( or come from
> another country to the US), you will immediately see a commonness or a
> certain something that most people share and that a national character
> does exist. But you need to step outside to see it. Seeing it from
> within is impossible.
There is a certain amount of commonality, but that is degrading by the day.
Let's remember where this started. You claimed the US retains traditional
WASP values, which people are pressured to conform to. That is not true.
For one thing, diversity is much more an issue today. Example: schools are
being forced to change their names, sports teams are forced to change their
logos and mascots, because they use some referent to American Indians
("Warriors", "Chiefs", "Braves", "Red Skins", "Tomahawks"). Polls show
that the gumchewing Navajo or Hopi doesn't think these are denigrating,
but the professional race baiters do, and they blackmail business and
government.
Special preferences are given to minorities -- in gaining government
contracts, admission to schools, government aid, housing -- in a country
where people were once expected to earn these things without reference to
race or ethnicity. All men were created equal, but racial preferences mean
that whites are now less equal.
> I appreciate it. You are a worthy "opponent".
I wish I could say the same. But I enjoy putting my thoughts on the screen,
so it is not a waste.
Randy
Dirty Sick Pig
Congenital Kano wrote:
> "ExpatAuthority" <expatau...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bd866d06.02091...@posting.google.com...
> > shitsnip
Awshit, Randy, why spend your time replying in detail to Expat Dinosaur
Assholerity? For all we know, he's Osama-you-know-who.
Exphart, put back your head up yer ass and keep it there.
PIG
Congenital Kano
When I have the time I enjoy putting these things together. A lot of the
time my reaction is "That ain't right" but I don't have the facts to back it
up, so it forces me to research.
Won't have much time for this for a while (there, there, Tanso, I know it
will be hard on you). Friends want me to upgrade some programs I wrote in
1982 that they are still using... Forcing me back to learning the programs
JT sold me at a 400% markup.
Butt of the Spear Pig
ExpatAuthority
Thank you for your post. I will respond in a day or two.
ExpatAuthority
ExpatAuthority
>
> Unfortunately, those general ideas are rooted in media observations, not
> facts. I exist to set you straight.
OK. I appreciate this. I do not hold monopoly on truth and it alwyas
helps to see the world from another perspective.
An interesting observation. Thus the only accurate observers of a
culture
> must exist outside the culture. You should not expect a Filipino to be able
> to discuss Filipino culture, you should ask an American or a Saudi or an
> Ozzie.
>
> This is, on the face of it, absurd. You are saying that there is no such
> thing as academic detachment, or dispassionate analysis of facts,
> observations and statistics. "Because you live there, you are not qualified
> to talk about it."
I did not say that you are not qualified. I am saying that you will be
taking a great deal of things for granted and will not notice them.
> Let's carry this logic further. Because a scientist works in the lab, they
> should not be counted upon to turn in accurate reports of what is going on
> in the lab.
This smacks of sophism. We are talking about culture not a specific
realm of knowledge acquired after one grew up. A culture is so vast
and is a sum of so many beliefs and behavioural patterns that you
simply cannot compare those two. You grow up and learn rights and
wrongs and correct ways of behaviour in respect to one myriad things
after you are born into a particular culture. Hnce, you may do and see
things " automatically" for it is natural to you as you are from that
culture.
Because the politician is involved in Washington, they are not
> qualified to make observations as to what is going on in the government.
> Because a police officer works in a city, she is not to be trusted in her
> observations on what is happening crime-wise in the city.
Ibid.
>
> See how dumb that is?
No, I do not see it.
>
> > Name a place in Beijing where you can get a good burrito, and Chicago-style
> pizza, and tortellini, and schnitzel.
Beijing is an extreme example. How about London or Rome. very much the
same. HK? Singapore?
I walk down the street every day and
> hear literally dozens of languages, and can get the national cuisine of
> virtually every country in the world in a half an hour. Ob cors, this is
> not found everywhere in the US. But 75% of the US population is urban, and
> over half live in the top 39 cities. Most Americans are exposed in a
> personal way with diverse cultures
Maybe foods?
every day, unlike the vast majority of
> the world's population. To deny the diversity of the US is simple
> ignorance.
I am not denying the diversity. I am saying that it is a bit
overhyped. And it is not as diverse as it is portrayed to be.
The US is a nation of immigrants from every country in the
> world.
Not everyone will agree with you. An immigrant and a descendant of an
immigrant is not the same. Most people are descendants of immigrants.
Most are English speakers and have Anglo names.
> Every country has homogeneity, and the vast majority have a much higher
> degree, as evidenced by population, language and religious statistics.
> Japan is 99.4% Japanese, with 84% practicing both Shintoism and Budhism.
> Mexico is 60% mestizo and 30% Amerind, and 89% of the population is nominal
> Catholic.
And Mexicans call people from the US "Gringos". They surely do not
mean that a person like Brice Lee is a "Gringo". Hence, they see
Americans as blond Anglos. I wonder why?
>
> Well, by that standard, the US has some 10,000+ religions and thousands of
> languages and dialects, all regularly practiced and spoken.
Not in the second generation. Religions maybe, but not languages.
Being assimilated into mainstream Anglo culture is a prerequisite for
social acceptance.
>
> Go to Mexico City. Will you find a Chinatown, a Japantown, a "Little
> Kabul", a black ghetto, a Hispanic bario, a Filipino barangay, a "Little
> Kiev"? You will find these and more in most major US cities. How about in
> Beijing? Kyoto?
Admittedly, no. You are right on that.
> changes are taking place.
>
> Sorry, no. Stop watching "The Brady Bunch". In 1996, the last year the INS
> publishes complete stats on, the top 10 countries of origin for legal
> immigration were Mexico, the Philippines, India, Vietnam, China, the
> Dominican Republic, Cuba, the Ukraine and Jamaica.
Most of these headed for isolated ghettos to live with their own kind.
>
> Now pay attention.
>
> In the 2000 US census, 28.4 million residents of the US were foreign born.
> Not of foreign descent, but foreign BORN (see above list).
Does this include millions of undocumented Mexican migrants?
This is 10.4% of
> the population. In the census, 68% of the population was identified as
> being of European descent. 36 million (13%) are black, 35 million (12.5%)
> are South American Hispanic, 4 million (1.4%) are Amerind, 12 million (4.2%)
> are Asian and 900k (.3%) are Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders. Those "whites"
> include the above mentioned immigrants from the former Soviet Union (hardly
> the Western Euro culture)
, Turks, Afghans, etc.
>
But these people are not so much in the mainstream. Except some, maybe
and in very large cities
> >
> > Canada is very similar and so is Australia.
>
> Sorry, wrong again. They have similar origins, but the cultures have
> diverged in the last 50 years especially. Canada is still 92% white, as is
> Australia. Their citizens have a much greater commonality of culture, even
> granting the French/English divisions in Canada.
Still any small town in those is very similar to a small town in the
US.
> > > The intellectual trap you have fallen into is on one hand citing
> historic
> > > values of a predominently European-based culture and on the other
> ignoring
> > > the realities of the society as it stands today.
But wouldn't you say that the elite in the US as well as large
expanses from coast to coast are still very much Anglo?
>
> As I have shown, your figures are off (about 30 years, to be exact).
Interesting point. You may be right.
>
> What you fail to comprehend is the cultural changes that entitlements and
> set asides have created growing out of the Civil Rights movement. The
> complexion of business, education, politics and religion have been altered
> by minority quotas and multiculturalism that has enforced as politically
> correct the notion that all value is relative.
You are right. I am wrong.
Traditional American values,
> growing out of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture of Europe, have been
> set aside. The concept of the nuclear family is disdained by the media and
> liberal left, and kids are taught in school about how "alternative
> lifestyles" with "two mommies" or "two daddies" are perfectly respectable.
But the vociferous proponents of this new culture still seem to be
numerically small, don't you think? And leaning towards the left. Do
they represent the silent majority?
> > card.
>
> That is a complete crock. How do you come to this statement?
>
> Let's look at some facts. In 2000, Canada had 79,453 personal bankruptcies
> (0.3% of population). The US had 1,217,972, or 4.3% of the population, or
> 11.5% of households. The number of personal bankruptcies increased 20.7%
> between 2000 and 2001, with the March 2000-March 2001 period showing the
> largest number of personal bankruptcies ever recorded in the US.
Is it due to people becoming more spendthrift or the economy going
down and prices going up? Or the impossible standards of whta a good
life should be by TV and radio advertisers? Higher rents? Skyrocketing
prices on houses, etc?
>
> In 1945, Americans averaged ownership of 85% of the equity in their homes.
> In 2001, that had dropped to 55%.
>
> Disposable income increased 5.81% in 2001 over 2000. Personal debt grew by
> 9.18% in the same period, while inflation stood at 1.89%.
>
> In 1990, there was $775 billion in consumer debt. 10 years later, that
> number was $1.7 trillion.
Why? Change in personal habits or just sheer impossibility to live a
normal life and still be able to save?
>
> In 1990, people were saving 7% of their earnings. In 2001, that had fallen
> to under 2%.
> From 1870 to 1930, the United States hadthe highest average net national
> savingsrate of the big seven industrialized countries. From 1960 to the
> present we havehad the lowest average savings rate behindJapan, Germany,
> France, Italy, Canada, andthe United Kingdom
> From 1870 to 1930, the US had the highest personal savings rate of the big 7
> industrialized nations. Since 1960, the US has trailed every year behind
> Japan, Germany, France, Italy, Canada, and the UK.
Why is that, though? I found that when I tried to live in LA on your
average salary , it was hard to save anything. Maybe salaries were "
higher" then in comparison to the expenses?
ExpatAuthority
> poetry); China produces 12%.
>
> > Well, not as poetic as the Chinese or the Japanese.
>
> An unsupported opinion. Again.
I am talking about culture. And poets and songwriters seem to be
viewed as two different professions in the US. It seems that "a poet"
is not a very honorable calling in the US.
> Hmmm. Say that to Joe Diffy, Johnny Cash, Chris Ledoux, Toby Keith or Tim
> McGraw. Then collect your teeth from the floor.
Very few.
>
> Mass market poets today in industrialized countries are involved in a
> variety of media. They receive the adulation of rock stars... because they
> ARE rock stars!
I am talking about traditional poetry.
>
> So? Staring at rocks resting in a sand box generates awe in Japanese. Is
> that more appreciation than spending billions of dollars a year and
> screaming your lungs out at different types of poets? If all cultural
> values are equal, the way Japanese react to their poets cannot be elevated
> above the way Americans react to their poets. See the trap of
> multiculturalism? We all have values -- so claiming that standards do not
> exist is sophistry.
Ok, you may be right. I will need to study up on that.
> You are confusing intellectualism with your version of refinement. Did
> these drivers know how many bases Maury Wills stole in 1962? Who defines
> what is significant knowledge? The ancient Greeks considered pederasty to
> be refined. I don't.
Ok, I see you point.
>
> > Why bring Saudi into this? Sheesh...Another extreme example. How
> > about, say Paris, Milano, etc?
>
> OK. Let's consider those two examples. Let's then discuss what advances
> the state of humanity -- refined discussion or achievements?
To those people, refined tradition is the supreme value. In the US,
achivement is. Again, that is American culture.
> What has France contributed to the world in the past century, other than
> hundreds of thousands of "used, never been fired, dropped only once" rifles?
Movies? More wine? And maybe they see themselves as preservers of
tradition and not as innovators? To each his own.
> Italy? (Sheesh, they can't even generate Italian Popes any more).
Fashion? Those guys dress to kill.
>
> Considering the ignorance of history and sociology demonstrated daily by the
> press and governments of Europe, I am not inclined to accept that they are
> my intellectual superior. The French lost their superiority in wine (even
> the AUSSIES beat them in international competition, and California has been
> cleaning their clock for years now). The Brits contemplate a failed empire
> and disgraced monarchy, but they alone have any stones in the EU (perhaps
> they remember Chamberlain and "Peace in our time"). The Germans have
> created a two-tiered society (like much of Europe) where the lower
> (immigrant) class has little chance at success, even to the point of being
> tracked out of higher education.
You are right. But in their view they are the guardians of traditions.
The greatest assets of the German people
> (aside from architecture and music) were the DM and pride in craftsmanship;
> they lost the first, and the second is being assaulted by a labor class that
> does not share the Germanic ideals.
A lot of the above concentrated on creating socialistic governments
and preserving the cultural status quo.
>
> I'm afraid the socialism that has ruined the American education system
> (which flourished after Sputnik and died after Woodstock, but still produced
> the genius needed to transform the world technologically) has crippled
> Europe.
We will need to hear their take on that.
> Of course it's your goal to denigrate. It's what you do.
Just to show the positive and the negative the way I see it.
>
> That aside, this discussion began with you stating some 1950s idealized
> aspect of WASP America that people are pressured to conform to. That
> image must include creating the intellectual leaders of the world in a wide
> variety of subjects (hint: more textbooks written by Americans are used in
> Europe and the rest of the world than European books are used outside
> historical literature in the US). Now you are saying that the gum-chewing
> American is inferior intellectually to the average citizen of other
> industrial nations.
An American citizen seems to be very skilled in one particular area
but not very rounded outside of it. However, I cannot deny that
his/her knoweldge in that area is , in many instances, superb.
Europeans as well as latin Americans do seem to have a much more
generalist approach to knowledge. I will give you an example. A friend
of mine is an avionics instructor. A man very skilled in his field. He
did not know that Brazil spoke Portuguese and not Spanish and other
things that I knew since i was akid.
Since if you threw a rock in the population centers of
> the US you would have a 1 out of 3 chance of hitting a non-WASP, and 1 out
> of 10 chance of hitting someone not born or educated in the US, you are
> whistling in the dark. There ARE the citizens from other countries. Their
> presence should thus elevate the intellectual standards of the US, di ba?
If it is seen as practical, I guess. And if the people in the US want
their particular type of knowledge. It is a market,too, after all.
> First, you are acknowledging that the US has changed. There is hope.
Everything changes.
>
> Second, the PC way of thought is that the Amerinds the Euros encountered in
> North America are natives. Anthropologists recognize that they are the
> third wave of immigrants to the Americas, but PC history is revisionism.
>
> This "PC" revolution started in the 1930s with cultural relativism. It
> gained complete control of American academia by the early '70s.
> story.
>
> If you immigrate to Germany as a child, are you "German"?
No, not at all. Even if you lived there five generations, you are not
German. But we are talking about another extreme example. Even if you
have German citizenship but is not german ethnically, you are not
German.
If you move to
> China as a child, are you "Chinese"? If you live from birth in Japan, are
> you "Japanese"?
Forget about even coming there as a child. Your family can be born
there a 100 years and you are still not one of them
If you live in France without having the fortune of being
> born there, are you "French"? Or are you an "immigrant"?
Even if you are born there, you are still not French.
However, these countries are not " Lands of Immigrants".
>
> The answer, ob cors, is that you are viewed as an immigrant in EVERY
> country. It transcends language or ethnicity or appearance.
>
> EVERY COUNTRY treats immigrants differently from people who were born there
> and speak with different accents. Most countries kill them or discriminate
> against them in blatant and unabashed ways. In the US, those immigrants can
> attain wealth and status unavailable to them anywhere else -- it's why they
> moved here!
True. It is an excellent place for poor people or people with nowhere
else to go to start and attain things. However, this is not what I was
talking about. There are two schools of thaight in the US. One is the
official one, saying that all US citizens are Americans. Then there is
the reality in which socially only those 'born and raised' are seen as
' Americans'. This should not be but it is.
.
>
> Hmmm. Well, my wife says that she is treated differently in the US than in
> the Philippines. Here she is treated with respect even though she is
> a divorced woman, here she has attained moderate wealth, here her children
> fit in completely with their peers of all backgrounds.
Well, I guess, by being married to a professional as yourself, she was
shielded from a lot of things. Not everyone is so lucky.
> No, California as a whole. 26% of the population were foreign BORN.
How many of these are Mexicans who shuttle back and forth?
Less
> than 50% of the population is white.
Numerically, yes, but immigrants are concentrated in small areas. The
great expanses of the state are still very much white.
> Precisely! And as these communities enlarge to make up almost half of
> places like California, you see major shifts away from European values to,
> for example, Hispanic values.
Could be. But Hispanics become Anglocised just like Germans did before
them. It may take a few generations but it will happen.
> Do you mean "US"? If you call someone a "Nazi" because of their accent you
> will be charged with a hate crime. You are only allowed to call white male
> conservatives "Nazi" here.
Not among kids, though.
>
> Walk down any major metropolitan street and you will hear both business and
> personal conversations being conducted in dozens of different languages.
> That's the reality of urban life today in the US.
I must agree with you on that. LA and NY and SF are primary examples.
Not Seattle or Dallas, though
> Yet you fail to grasp the enormity of the immigrant and foreign born/foreign
> educated issue, and how it impacts all aspects of American society. Federal
> elections laws require not only preparing voter materials and ballots in
> foreign languages if a certain percent of the community is designated by
> census as, say, "Hupa-speaking". It doesn't matter that Hupa is not a
> written language...
>
> The California DMV has translated the driver's handbooks and tests into 30
> languages. What other nation has gone to such lengths to accommodate
> non-natives?
None! I must agree.
>
> WHEN THE IMMIGRANTS CONSTITUTE A LARGE ENOUGH MINORITY, THEY BECOME A PART
> OF THE SYSTEM. This is the central fact of sociological change you fail to
> grasp. Is my wife treated differently because she is a non-native? By
> whom?
> The Persian grocer? The Indian math prof? The Haitian mail man? The
> Ukrainian dentist?
Agreed. But we are talking about a very cosmopolita area, such as S.
California.
> Arabs are a special case today (as Germans were in much of Europe during
> WW2, and Japanese were until recently in China and Korea). There is more
> suspicion, as well there should be. Arabs who are openly pro-American and
> proud of the country that succors them are accepted without issue.
Not at first, though.
I have
> spoken at length with a number of Iranians and Yemenis thinking about this
> post, and all dismiss the notion that they are discriminated against. They
> simply laugh at the professional "Arab-American" groups who hog the
> spotlight and claim discrimination. They are wary, for their culture is not
> one steeped in trust, but they do not feel threatened or ostracized.
Hmm. Interesting. Would they admit it to you, though?
>
> Like my very-American name, "Hornibrook"?
>
> You just don't get the diversity here. Here are half of the first 100 last
> names on my former client list:
>
> ALSEMWGIE SHON THIEDE SPROAT COLOMBO WANG MASANGKAY
>
> PUTKAEW HONG LAGORIO SCARPELLI SALAZAR NARDINI THANJARUT
>
> DECASTRO WONG PENA SMYTHE RODRIGUEZ RUBIO TAI CAZAREZ
>
> GLOSSER YOUK RAMIREZ TAUSCHEK FENIKILE CHIN ZELAYA
>
> PAGULERAS SUAREZ SEN GUTIERREZ MAZON BUENAVENTURA
>
> LIN BUFFENBURGER LAU BAL PHUO SRINIVASEN CHENG
>
> ABARRA DAS CHOPNAK KIM HOLSOOR GUITRON JONG
>
> GANTIMAHAPATRUN BOURGAULT
>
> I'm in the newspaper business for an English-language paper. If half of my
> customers have last names like the above, does it begin to penetrate how
> meaningless it is to talk about "foreigners" and "immigrants"? Californians
> (including most legal immigrants) are much more likely to make the
> distinction not between immigrant and native, but legal vs. illegal
> immigrants.
Where do you live? I
>
> Yeah, we say "That Vietnamese guy", "that black guy", "that white guy",
> because we are not blind and can spot differences and they make useful
> referents. But since "that Chinese guy" might be our boss, we have to
> be pretty open minded.
Again is California the reflection of the entire country which is many
thousand miles wide?
>
Congenital Kano
> > I'm afraid the socialism that has ruined the American education system
> > (which flourished after Sputnik and died after Woodstock, but still
produced
> > the genius needed to transform the world technologically) has crippled
> > Europe.
>
> We will need to hear their take on that.
Heh, heh, heh. But you are the one who maintains that only outside
observers of a culture can offer an accurate analysis. Thus, by your
reasoning, it is immaterial what the Euros have to say about their
culture...
Remember writing:
> However, you could not see the
> similarities because you are from that culture yourself.
>
> An American citizen seems to be very skilled in one particular area
> but not very rounded outside of it. However, I cannot deny that
> his/her knoweldge in that area is , in many instances, superb.
> Europeans as well as latin Americans do seem to have a much more
> generalist approach to knowledge. I will give you an example. A friend
> of mine is an avionics instructor. A man very skilled in his field. He
> did not know that Brazil spoke Portuguese and not Spanish and other
> things that I knew since i was akid.
Again with the language bias. Do you think he might master other areas of
knowledge outside his field of expertise that you do not know about?
I would put my general knowledge up against yours any day, whether in
history, science, theology, mathematics, sociology, psychology, etc. Prove
I am atypical.
> However, these countries are not " Lands of Immigrants".
Hmmm. The US is the "Land of Immigrants" but we do not have diversity. I
see...
> True. It is an excellent place for poor people or people with nowhere
> else to go to start and attain things. However, this is not what I was
> talking about. There are two schools of thaight in the US. One is the
> official one, saying that all US citizens are Americans. Then there is
> the reality in which socially only those 'born and raised' are seen as
> ' Americans'. This should not be but it is.
Why should it be, when it is not anywhere else in the world? Why must the
US answer to a higher standard -- because at heart people believe we are
superior?
> Well, I guess, by being married to a professional as yourself, she was
> shielded from a lot of things. Not everyone is so lucky.
She was in the country for 6 years before we met, married to a Filipino 4 of
those years. Next question?
> > No, California as a whole. 26% of the population were foreign BORN.
>
> How many of these are Mexicans who shuttle back and forth?
These people are not represented in the census with any accuracy. The
census is reflective of legal residents who are willing to answer questions
(illegals refuse to respond to mailed census forms, fearing that responses
will be used to track them down and deport them).
> >Less than 50% of the population is white.
>
> Numerically, yes, but immigrants are concentrated in small areas. The
> great expanses of the state are still very much white.
Bwahahaha! Never been to California, have you?
Look at the 2000 Census. Just with Hispanics alone, in the top 52 US
counties with the largest Hispanic population, 17 are in California.
Looking at these counties, they comprise 17 of the top 21 counties
population-wise, with 28,588,300 of the state's 34,088,000 population. That
means that 84% of the population in California lives in the areas with the
highest comcentration of Hispanics.
> > Precisely! And as these communities enlarge to make up almost half of
> > places like California, you see major shifts away from European values
> > to, for example, Hispanic values.
>
> Could be. But Hispanics become Anglocised just like Germans did before
> them. It may take a few generations but it will happen.
I wish that were true. That is precisely the problem. Enculturation is the
natural assimilation through education and integration with the broader
community. Yet immigrant enclaves, when they reach a certain critical mass,
tend to preserve country of origin values in the face of a diminishing
influence by the "majority" culture. And when the majority culture becomes
the minority, as it has in New Mexico, California, Hawaii, etc., you find
that the immigrant enclaves become balkanized. You have entire communities
and miles-wide sections of towns where the signage is in foreign languages,
the language of commerce and on the street is foreign, the language in the
schools is foreign, etc.
Groups like Filipinos, which do tend to cluster together in certain areas,
nonetheless lose their language and culture by the second or third
generation. However, groups like Hispanics have a much higher retention of
their language because of use in the home and the street. The family across
the street has 3 generations of fluent Spanish speakers starting with the
immigrant parents through grandkids, which is virtually unknown with other
ethnicities. I know a number of Asian children of immigrants who have the
language buit their children do not. The vast majority of Filipino
second-generation I know have at best a passive recognition of Tagalog;
non-Tagalog groups have even a lower language retention rate in my
experience.
> > Do you mean "US"? If you call someone a "Nazi" because of their accent
you
> > will be charged with a hate crime. You are only allowed to call white
male
> > conservatives "Nazi" here.
>
> Not among kids, though.
What age kids are you talking about? Most younger kids are oblivious to
race and ethnicity, needing to learn from their elders. Kids have
throughout history made fun of other kids for whatever "differences" they
perceive, but these are independent of general prejudices and simply based
upon observable distinctions.
> > personal conversations being conducted in dozens of different languages.
> > That's the reality of urban life today in the US.
>
> I must agree with you on that. LA and NY and SF are primary examples.
> Not Seattle or Dallas, though
In the 2000 Census, 23% of Seattle's population were foreign born; 13% of
the population is Asian, only 68% is white.
Dallas ranks 8th in the US for number of Asian residents, with whites
comprising only 35% of the population. In Dallas, 24% of the residents are
foreign born.
> Agreed. But we are talking about a very cosmopolita area, such as S.
> California.
This is simply where you fail to comprehend. When the majority of people
live in cities, and those cities are diverse, you have a diverse culture.
It used to amuse me when driving through little podunk towns in Texas and
the South with populations of 500 to find a Thai restaurant run by Thais,
etc.
> Hmm. Interesting. Would they admit it to you, though?
Of course. Minorities are going public all the time disclaiming the
prejudice they experience. Minorities have no reticence of speaking out if
they want. Guilty whites opened the doors in the 1960s and professional
race mongers have kept the issues on the front page ever since.
> Where do you live? I
SF Bay area -- which with the Greater LA area holds 80% of the state's
population. When you talk about CA population, you are basically talking SF
and LA megaplexes.
> > Yeah, we say "That Vietnamese guy", "that black guy", "that white guy",
> > because we are not blind and can spot differences and they make useful
> > referents. But since "that Chinese guy" might be our boss, we have to
> > be pretty open minded.
>
> Again is California the reflection of the entire country which is many
> thousand miles wide?
Yes. All you have to do is go to www.census.gov and see for yourself.
Randy
tansong Isda
> When I have the time I enjoy putting these things together. A lot of the
> time my reaction is "That ain't right" but I don't have the facts to back it
> up, so it forces me to research.
>
> Won't have much time for this for a while (there, there, Tanso, I know it
> will be hard on you). Friends want me to upgrade some programs I wrote in
> 1982 that they are still using... Forcing me back to learning the programs
> JT sold me at a 400% markup.
>
> Butt of the Spear Pig
Don't get me into this conversation...
Congenital Kano
"tansong Isda" <ta...@hindiginto.ito> wrote in message
news:3D952321...@hindiginto.ito...
> > Won't have much time for this for a while (there, there, Tanso, I know
it
> > will be hard on you). Friends want me to upgrade some programs I wrote
in
> > 1982 that they are still using... Forcing me back to learning the
programs
> > JT sold me at a 400% markup.
> >
> > Butt of the Spear Pig
>
> Don't get me into this conversation...
Heh, heh. Just wanted to see if you had abandoned us completely for
egroups...
Beetlejuice Pig
Congenital Kano
> > This is, on the face of it, absurd. You are saying that there is no
such
> > thing as academic detachment, or dispassionate analysis of facts,
> > observations and statistics. "Because you live there, you are not
qualified
> > to talk about it."
>
> I did not say that you are not qualified. I am saying that you will be
> taking a great deal of things for granted and will not notice them.
What am I taking for granted? YOU are the one taking things for granted,
based upon what you see in the media, what you get from visitors, your
limited experience. I reflect what I see every day, focussing on what
stands out, not what is routine.
You are maintaining that there isn't as much diversity as I propose.
Diversity is a difference -- do you think I would notice people who are
different, or would I take that for granted?
> This smacks of sophism. We are talking about culture not a specific
> realm of knowledge acquired after one grew up. A culture is so vast
> and is a sum of so many beliefs and behavioural patterns that you
> simply cannot compare those two. You grow up and learn rights and
> wrongs and correct ways of behaviour in respect to one myriad things
> after you are born into a particular culture. Hnce, you may do and see
> things " automatically" for it is natural to you as you are from that
> culture.
But your logic breaks down when the argument I am presenting is that things
ARE NOT as I grew up with. Were I taking your position, that there is a
uniform culture relatively unchanged since 1950, then your argument might
have merit. *I* am the one arguing for change, that the "rights and wrongs
and correct ways of behaviour" that I grew up with are vanishing.
> > > Name a place in Beijing where you can get a good burrito, and
Chicago-style
> > pizza, and tortellini, and schnitzel.
>
> Beijing is an extreme example. How about London or Rome. very much the
> same. HK? Singapore?
Ah, but London is a very diverse place. That is what is being argued
here -- you maintaining that the US is not diverse, while I am arguing that
it is. London is similar to US cities in the variety of people living
there. I would still stand the ethnic varieties of restaurants in sheer
volume of NYC or Chicago or LA or SF over London. Or Rome. How many good
Mexican restaurants are there in HK? My guess is that it is heavy on Asian
food, light on Indian and Mexican and California cuisine...
>> Most Americans are exposed in a
> > personal way with diverse cultures
>
> Maybe foods?
Please pay attention. When 10% of the population was BORN OUTSIDE THE US,
there are a LOT of accents, a LOT of foreign languages, a LOT of foreign
cultural references in everyday life.
Foods is simply one minor aspect; you don't have to have a 6% Indian
population to have a couple of Indian restaurants in town, but the larger
the population the more stores selling saris, and the more turbans you see
on the street.
> every day, unlike the vast majority of
> > the world's population. To deny the diversity of the US is simple
> > ignorance.
>
> I am not denying the diversity. I am saying that it is a bit
> overhyped. And it is not as diverse as it is portrayed to be.
What are you talking about! When the DMV and voter handbooks are printed in
dozens of languages, what does that tell you about the population? That a
significant portion are more comfortable learning and making decisions in
their native language than in English. If there were not many people with
this language isolation, there would be no call for printing them in so many
languages. You only take care of a problem when it reaches some critical
mass.
My employees include 1 white boy, 6 Vietnamese, a Lao, a Chinese-Hawaiian, a
Salvadoran, a Filipino, an Indian, and a black. That seems like diversity
to me, and that is standard in California.
> Not everyone will agree with you. An immigrant and a descendant of an
> immigrant is not the same. Most people are descendants of immigrants.
> Most are English speakers and have Anglo names.
You're right. Ignore the census figures, ignore the immigration figures.
You think we're all Anglos, so that must be the case.
In America, we are all aware of our short history and the fact that most
people are only a couple of generations off the boat at best. The fact that
you don't understand this simply speaks to your ignorance of what Americans
feel. There is a growing tide of identification with country of origin
rather than the US (fly the Mexican flag rather than the US, for example).
You wouldn't see that, or the movement to gain critical voting mass in the
Hispanic Southwest and secede from the Union, but that movement is also
growing.
> And Mexicans call people from the US "Gringos". They surely do not
> mean that a person like Brice Lee is a "Gringo". Hence, they see
> Americans as blond Anglos. I wonder why?
Blond? Not so much except out of a bottle. But this is a stereotype going
back hundreds of years. No argument that the Anglo-Saxons predominated in
the colonies. It just isn't America today.
You can't have it both ways -- saying that everyone is forced into some
Anglo mold, and also saying immigrants are not accepted or integrated.
Please pick your position and stick with it. They are mutually exclusinve.
> Not in the second generation. Religions maybe, but not languages.
> Being assimilated into mainstream Anglo culture is a prerequisite for
> social acceptance.
OK. Now, try to follow -- immigration is not something that happens once
and stops. It is an ongoing thing. Each year, over a million immigrants
come into the US, bringing their language and culture with them in constant
waves which some have termed an invasion because of the numbers involved.
It's not like all the Mexicans come in, learn English, and 20 years later
Spanish is dying out. During those 20 years, another 20 million have
entered the country. It's a renewable resource.
> >
> > Sorry, no. Stop watching "The Brady Bunch". In 1996, the last year the
INS
> > publishes complete stats on, the top 10 countries of origin for legal
> > immigration were Mexico, the Philippines, India, Vietnam, China, the
> > Dominican Republic, Cuba, the Ukraine and Jamaica.
>
> Most of these headed for isolated ghettos to live with their own kind.
Which is it, they are ghettoized or integrated into society by peer pressure
as you initiall argued (you remember, the whole point of this thread...).
You are either arguing that there are no successful immigrants, because they
remain isolated with their own kind (and, given the numbers, there can be no
uniform American culture as you propose), or that they leave their ghettos
to find success. We aren't talking about a few people here -- Dallas, which
you consider white, has some 22,000 Asians living there. All in ghettos?
Along with the 200,000 Hispanics? We've got some big ghettos...
> > In the 2000 US census, 28.4 million residents of the US were foreign
born.
> > Not of foreign descent, but foreign BORN (see above list).
>
> Does this include millions of undocumented Mexican migrants?
Nope. Illegals don't fill out census forms. Attempts are made to estimate
them, but these are about as accurate as estimating the homeless population,
which runs between 5000 and 20,000 in San Francisco alone.
So the figure is actually higher, making HIGHER diversity. And most
"migrants" don't willy-nilly cross the border back and forth; once they get
here, they stay, for the risk is high and the point is to be here, not
there.
> This is 10.4% of
> > the population. In the census, 68% of the population was identified as
> > being of European descent. 36 million (13%) are black, 35 million
(12.5%)
> > are South American Hispanic, 4 million (1.4%) are Amerind, 12 million
(4.2%)
> > are Asian and 900k (.3%) are Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders. Those
"whites"
> > include the above mentioned immigrants from the former Soviet Union
(hardly
> > the Western Euro culture), Turks, Afghans, etc.
>
> But these people are not so much in the mainstream. Except some, maybe
> and in very large cities
Hunh? Again, over half the population lives in 34 cities. The US is not a
nation of small family-run farms any more. You are saying the black middle
class is not mainstream, all 24 million of them? Asians are not mainstream?
Hispanics are not mainstream? Are you aware that Arab-Americans have the
highest net-worth of any minority? Are they marginalized?
If 32% of the population is "not mainstream", how can you contend that
people cannot succeed without asimilating into the WASP culture. since
people from these communities obviously succeed? Your oversimplified view
simply doesn't hold together, and you are defending the indefensible out of
a refusal to admit you don't know dick about the real US of A...
> But wouldn't you say that the elite in the US as well as large
> expanses from coast to coast are still very much Anglo?
No. Look at politicians, business owners, movie stars, sports figures, etc.
Not Anglo dominated. Not for 40 years.
Look at the top 5 most important people in Bush's cabinet. Ashcroft and
Rumsfeld, white boys. Rice and Powell, blacks. Minetta, Japanese.
Powell would have been VP today if he'd taken the offer.
> Traditional American values,
> > growing out of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture of Europe, have
been
> > set aside. The concept of the nuclear family is disdained by the media
and
> > liberal left, and kids are taught in school about how "alternative
> > lifestyles" with "two mommies" or "two daddies" are perfectly
respectable.
>
> But the vociferous proponents of this new culture still seem to be
> numerically small, don't you think? And leaning towards the left. Do
> they represent the silent majority?
No. They dominate the media and education, the two most important
indoctrination points outside the home. Conservatives who go to college
campuses to speak on "traditional values" have to have security to protect
them, and are often shouted down in ways no liberal would be. Campus
newspapers that print conservative views are stolen en mass and torched.
Schools fund radical left speakers and refuse to allow conservatives to
speak.
You have senators like Ted Kennedy saying that immigration reform and
controlling the borders is racism. You have an insane national policy that
refuses to treat 18-28 year-old Arab males any differently in airline
security than 82-year-old Danish grandmothers because it would be
"profiling" and might offend people. You have billions of dollars in
entitlements going to minorities -- including construction jobs going out at
a higher bid because the owner of the company is a minority, special
financial aid for minorities, and quotas for jobs within government and
private enterprise -- as part of the new culture. You have a country so
morally bankrupt that selling secrets to foreign powers, using the US
military as a diversion from sexual impropriety, and lying under oath are
considered acceptable. Not to mention adultery and rape (the ultra-liberal
National Organization for Women continued to support CLinton even after
multiple charges of rape had been leveled against him, because he was
"supportive of women's issues").
> Is it due to people becoming more spendthrift or the economy going
> down and prices going up? Or the impossible standards of whta a good
> life should be by TV and radio advertisers? Higher rents? Skyrocketing
> prices on houses, etc?
No. These far outstrip inflation. The rest of your paragraph are just
reasons *why*, not arguments *against*. You maintain that Americans are
thrifty, when all of the data say theu aren't. It really doesn't matter
WHY, you are still wrong.
>
> Why? Change in personal habits or just sheer impossibility to live a
> normal life and still be able to save?
Again, not the issue, Stick with your arguments. You said Americans save
and budget. They don't. Doesn't matter WHY, just admit you are wrong.
Your attempting to set forward explanations means that you are acknowledging
without saying it that you were wrong in your initial premise.
>
> Why is that, though? I found that when I tried to live in LA on your
> average salary , it was hard to save anything. Maybe salaries were "
> higher" then in comparison to the expenses?
Again, recall what you wrote:
> Still, most people do not just go there and splurge money without
> thinking about tomorrow. Much less so than in so many other countries.
> ... But people still budget their money and save, even in order to pay
> rent or pay the minimum on the credit card.
Americans ARE NOT thrifty, although they were 50 years ago. All the data
show this to be true.
Again, you have a very distorted and inaccurate perception of America.
That's OK, but don't try to pass off ignorance as studied insight into the
culture. You simply end up looking foolish.
Mortal Pig
Lee...@optonline.net
>Again, you have a very distorted and inaccurate perception of America.
>That's OK, but don't try to pass off ignorance as studied insight into the
>culture. You simply end up looking foolish.
Actually, I liked Expat much better when he was posting his "Hey,
Joe!" and "Jesus in the RP" stuff.
LeeBat
but that's just me
tansong Isda
So they went from DOS to WinDos heh? Well just recompile the sucker on VC++ and
debug.
Dirty Sick Pig
Lee...@optonline.net wrote:
Remember his "International Watchdog Organization" and anti-Thai period? I
miss those days. I still have his lament post somewhere in a floppy.
Embalsamador
EA's Worst Nightmare
Congenital Kano
"tansong Isda" <ta...@hindiginto.ito> wrote in message
>
> So they went from DOS to WinDos heh? Well just recompile the sucker on
VC++ and
> debug.
I bought VC+ a few years back and was going to learn it, then decided that
everything I needed to do I could do in VB and VFoxpro (I've been using
Foxpro and dbase since '81, and still tend to hang old code instead of using
the nifty new features). Don't know that I ever got past "hello, world" in
VC+. I have to update some Embedded VB progs and have to relearn all that I
forgot over the last year (although development should go faster now that
I'm using XP and the virtual machine runs on it to fake the Pocket PC, which
only runs on 2K or XP).
What I'm really looking for is a decent report generator for a cheap
price -- VFP absolutely refuses to print in color, and no one seems to know
anything about it in the various groups. All I get is grayscale... I have
stuck with hardcoding forms and reports I need in color, but they are a pain
to change.
Code-Challenged Pig
tansong Isda
Crystal report that came with VC++ will do that report in color. But remember,
gots to pay JT royalty fer the use.
tansong Isda
Anti-tae period?!!
Lee...@optonline.net
>Remember his "International Watchdog Organization" and anti-Thai period? I
>miss those days. I still have his lament post somewhere in a floppy.
>
>Embalsamador
>EA's Worst Nightmare
I think you've used this "Embalmsador, EA's worst nightmare" sig at
least a hundred times. He keeps coming back like a song .....
LeeBat
...... but who's counting?
ExpatAuthority
> Well, by that standard, the US has some 10,000+ religions and thousands of
> languages and dialects, all regularly practiced and spoken.
> > Canada is very similar and so is Australia.
>
> Sorry, wrong again. They have similar cultural origins, but the cultures
> have diverged in the last 50 years especially. Canada is still 92% white,
> as is Australia. Their citizens have a much greater commonality of culture,
> even granting the French/English divisions in Canada.
I am not saying they are the same. I am saying that they are very very
similar. And the same ethnic representative groups can be found there,
as well. If these are not "similar" to the US, who is? This is about
as close as you can get. And with the immigration, they are becoming
more diverse. But there, as in the US, most diversity is around big
cities and ethnic enclaves. The rest is Smith and Jones etc.
>
> I cannot be held responsible for the ignorance of your friends. I have
> heard that all _______ (fill in the blank -- blacks, Filipinos, Hispanics)
> look alike. I have never had that trouble.
Neither have I. But when anybody in the Third world sees an Aussie or
a canadian, they ask him if he is from the US and vice versa. When
they see someone from China, they do not ask that. Why is that? He
coud be a Chinese American.
>
> As I have shown, your figures are off (by about 30 years, to be exact).
>
> What you fail to comprehend is the cultural changes that entitlements and
> set-asides have created growing out of the Civil Rights movement. The
> complexion of business, education, politics and religion have been altered
> by minority quotas and multiculturalism that has enforced as politically
> correct the notion that all value is relative. Traditional American values,
> growing out of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture of Europe, have been
> set aside.
In return for what culture? If it is no longer Anglo-based, what is
based on now? i would like to hear your point of view. And again,
while there are changes taking place in SF, and LA and NY, does that
mean that the huge geographical area moves along with those? Even if
there are Asian faces on TV now and different languages spoken in
ethnic ghettos, does that necessarily mean that now Oklahoma and
Nebraska and Indiana have lost the Anglo heritage? So what heritage is
there now? How would you define it? Not politically but culturally.
The concept of the nuclear family is disdained by the media and
> liberal left, and kids are taught in school about how "alternative
> lifestyles" with "two mommies" or "two daddies" are perfectly respectable.
But while there are such vocally permissive types who are advocating
this lifestyle, does it mean that the majority of people are accepting
it? I mean the silent majority. usually they remain silent.
> That is a complete crock. How do you come to this statement?
>
> Let's look at some facts. In 2000, Canada had 79,453 personal bankruptcies
> (0.3% of population). The US had 1,217,972, or 4.3% of the population, or
> 11.5% of households. The number of personal bankruptcies increased 20.7%
> between 2000 and 2001, with the March 2000-March 2001 period showing the
> largest number of personal bankruptcies ever recorded in the US.
>
> In 1945, Americans averaged ownership of 85% of the equity in their homes.
> In 2001, that had dropped to 55%.
>
> Disposable income increased 5.81% in 2001 over 2000. Personal debt grew by
> 9.18% in the same period, while inflation stood at 1.89%.
>
> From 1870 to 1930, the United States had the highest average net national
> savings rate of the big seven industrialized countries. From 1960 to the
> present we have had the lowest average savings rate behind Japan, Germany,
> France, Italy, Canada, and the United Kingdom
Still up there with these guys, though. Not behind Cameroon and other
such places, I presume. But is it necessarily the effect of the
change in personal savings habits or simply the change in the economy
and the loss of the standard of living. Even if you are thrifty, the
present level taxes and the prices will just eat you alive.
> This is what you get for thinking with your hand.
I humbly bow out of this topic because I do not have statistics to
back this statement up. I can only form opinions.
> In your opinion. But you were not talking initially about critical merit
> but volume.
Ibid.
>
>
> > Well, not as poetic as the Chinese or the Japanese.
You know, when I was in Japan, it was customary for me to hear my
Japanese friends compose haiku. It was just so natural to them. And
these were men.
> >
> Whoa. Isn't that MY point? That America has changed...
Everything changes. But is it a small change or a complete upheaval.
And also remember that there are people in their 40ies, 50ies and
60ies. Have these also just suddenly changed?
>
> > I did not say that it does not exist. All I said that a poet does not
> > enjoy such a great deal of respect in society as a lawyer. A potry
> > writing man is a 'fag' in the US.
>
> Hmmm. Say that to Joe Diffy, Johnny Cash, Chris Ledoux, Toby Keith or Tim
> McGraw. Then collect your teeth from the floor.
>
> Mass market poets today in industrialized countries are involved in a
> variety of media. They receive the adulation of rock stars... because they
> ARE rock stars!
>
> > OK. There is still a lot of it considering the 280,000,000 people in
> > the US. It is just that, again, being a poet is not that great of a
> > trait in societal terms. I am basing it in my observations on how
> > Americans react to poetry as compared to the awe that it generates
> > among Asians.
>
> I'm afraid the socialism that has ruined the American education system
> (which flourished after Sputnik and died after Woodstock, but still produced
> the genius needed to transform the world technologically) has crippled
> Europe.
>
Are these then trying to get into the US in droves? I do not think so.
Mostly, they are happy with their lives.
> That aside, this discussion began with you stating some 1950s idealized
> aspect of WASP America that people are pressured to conform to. That
> image must include creating the intellectual leaders of the world in a wide
> variety of subjects (hint: more textbooks written by Americans are used in
> Europe and the rest of the world than European books are used outside
> historical literature in the US).
Hmm. Interesting point. Then again, the US has huge marketing
efforts, writes in English and markets aggressively. Europeans do not
all speak one language and do not have such a concerted marketing
effort. AMybe that is the reason.
Now you are saying that the gum-chewing
> American is inferior intellectually to the average citizen of other
> industrial nations.
Shall I say that he is, on the average, less well-rounded? More
specialized in his chosen field? More practical? More
business-oriented? Less academic/humanitarian? Just a different
approach to life.
Since if you threw a rock in the population centers of
> the US you would have a 1 out of 3 chance of hitting a non-WASP, and 1 out
> of 10 chance of hitting someone not born or educated in the US, you are
> whistling in the dark.
Are these non-Wasps and foreign-borns really and truly the ones at the
helm of the country? Politically and culturally?
There ARE the citizens from other countries. Their
> presence should thus elevate the intellectual standards of the US, di ba?
Oo at hindi. If they are orchetsra conductors and scientists, it does.
If they are truck drivers, they are also contributing, but in a
different way.
> First, you are acknowledging that the US has changed. There is hope.
It is changing. But are the people in power, the ones with big money,
the ones that really run the country also changing along with it? And
to what degree?
>
> Second, the PC way of thought is that the Amerinds the Euros encountered in
> North America are natives. Anthropologists recognize that they are the
> third wave of immigrants to the Americas, but PC history is revisionism.
There are two schools of thought on this. But since we really do not
see many Amerinds in daily lives, there is another issue. You being
born in the US will not feel it. People write books about it. It *is*
an issue in the US. Check it out:
http://www.nyupress.org/product_info.php?products_id=425
>
> This "PC" revolution started in the 1930s with cultural relativism. It
> gained complete control of American academia by the early '70s.
>
> The answer, ob cors, is that you are viewed as an immigrant in EVERY
> country. It transcends language or ethnicity or appearance.
>
Wait a minute. Since the us is " a country of immgrants' then you
should be viewed just as anybody else, right? There should not be
"native-born" vs. foreign-born. That is emphacised all the time in the
media.
Look at this:
Please pay attention to the fact that CBS did not talk about "
citizens" vs. guest workers. It talked about immigrants vs. natives.
Now, where is that "Land of Immigrants" philosophy there? If they
represent the popular view, what is the point of the naturalization
ceremony? A passport is appreciated and all the leagl rights are OK,
but does social acceptance comes with it?
> EVERY COUNTRY treats immigrants differently from people who were born there
> and speak with different accents. Most countries kill them or discriminate
> against them in blatant and unabashed ways.
Agreed. Unless they are rich or economically self sufficient.
In the US, those immigrants can
> attain wealth and status unavailable to them anywhere else -- it's why they
> moved here!
For most it was a necessity rather than a dream. Agreed. But we are
not taliking about this. What you are trying to say is that the US is
a diverse land of immigrants. I am saying that immigrants are not
treated as Americans even if they are citizens.
Check this out:
A very popular opinion, indeed.
> Hmmm. Well, my wife says that she is treated differently in the US than in
> the Philippines. Here she is treated with respect even though she is
> a divorced woman, here she has attained moderate wealth, here her children
> fit in completely with their peers of all backgrounds.
Well, she obviously did not have to work her way up. Being a female
and Asian, people would not dare say anything openly. And a lot of the
stuff that goes on is not overt. Also, admittedly, the US is less
class concsious that the RP. RP is less race-conscious though. My
observation, of course.
.
>
> Precisely! And as these communities enlarge to make up almost half of
> places like California, you see major shifts away from European values to,
> for example, Hispanic values.
Well, at first it sounds like a possibilty, but as new immigrants move
in, the born here kids will be speaking English and inheriting a lot
of the established culture. The US did not become too Italian or too
Irish. The Italians became very Anglocized. The largest ethnic group
in the US is actally germans, but be honest with me, is the Us really
German or is it Anglo? The way it stands now.
>
> Do you mean "US"?
Sorry, a typo. LOL.
If you call someone a "Nazi" because of their accent you
> will be charged with a hate crime.
If you have witnesses.
You are only allowed to call white male
> conservatives "Nazi" here.
LOL. Agreed. Also, there are Femi-nazis.
>
> Walk down any major metropolitan street and you will hear both business and
> personal conversations being conducted in dozens of different languages.
> That's the reality of urban life today in the US.
I was once carrying a newspaper in one of NY neighbourhoods and it was
not in English. Two teenagers passed by and glanced at it. " Go back
to your country!" was a giggle and they strolled on. I had no
witnesses. I guess in some ethnic enclaves or such atypical ares as
downtown LA this can be true. Not in downtown Oklahoma city. Not in
downtown Indianapolis. Not at big business meetings in NY.
>
> Yet you fail to grasp the enormity of the immigrant and foreign born/foreign
> educated issue, and how it impacts all aspects of American society. Federal
> elections laws require not only preparing voter materials and ballots in
> foreign languages if a certain percent of the community is designated by
> census as, say, "Hupa-speaking". It doesn't matter that Hupa is not a
> written language...
This trend exists alongside nativist sentiments which I think are just
as strong albeit not as vocal. And again, what is behind all this?
Respect for these cultures or the sheer selfish desire to get more
votes?
>
> The California DMV has translated the driver's handbooks and tests into 30
> languages. What other nation has gone to such lengths to accommodate
> non-natives?
I must admit that none. So why alongside all this you have this:?
Taken from:
http://www.pat2k.com/immigration/basics_imm.htm
"...All of the polls on immigration show that over 80% of Americans
want immigration sharply curtailed or halted altogether.
(The DMV people must be in the other 20%)
Yet this is never reported in the mainstream media. We heard about
polls every day during the Clinton sex scandals, because they
presumably expressed the will of the people that he be left alone. But
when the will of the people is contrary to the interests of the media,
it is not reported at all"...
"
>
> WHEN THE IMMIGRANTS CONSTITUTE A LARGE ENOUGH MINORITY, THEY BECOME A PART
> OF THE SYSTEM. This is the central fact of sociological change you fail to
> grasp. Is my wife treated differently because she is a non-native? By
> whom?
> The Persian grocer? The Indian math prof? The Haitian mail man? The
> Ukrainian dentist?
Well, not by the people who running their small shops in ethnic
enclaves and certainly not against her. Few have anything against an
Americanized-Asian ( which is what Filipionos are compared to the
Chinese, VNese. Koreans, etc) female who is fluent in English.
However, when will immigrants ever constitute a sizable minority? And
in many cases when they did, the "native whites" just moved out. And
will it ever truly happen? If you take into consideration the sheer
size of the country and the 280,000,000 people in it, by the time they
become anything sizable, they will get old and their kids will become
' natives". Not much change. Again, look at 50,000,000 "Germans" in
the US. Octoberfest and all the beers is about what is left.
hamburgers and hotdogs. Did the mainstream Anglo culture *really*
become Germanized?
> Arabs are a special case today (as Germans were in much of Europe during
> WW2, and Japanese were until recently in China and Korea). There is more
> suspicion, as well there should be.
How would you like to be one under suspicion? Would you feel at home?
Arabs who are openly pro-American and
> proud of the country that succors them are accepted without issue.
Except for these. I am sure these did not even have a chance to open
their mouth to openly voice their pro-Americanism.
http://www.nadyalec.com/imagining/arab/casualties.html
And how would YOU know? You are not Arab-American.
I have
> spoken at length with a number of Iranians and Yemenis thinking about this
> post, and all dismiss the notion that they are discriminated against. They
> simply laugh at the professional "Arab-American" groups who hog the
> spotlight and claim discrimination. They are wary, for their culture is not
> one steeped in trust, but they do not feel threatened or ostracized.
As long as they keep theit faces down and not stick out too much.
Also, as long as they stick to their gas station know their place.
> Like my very-American name, "Hornibrook"?
>
> You just don't get the diversity here. Here are half of the first 100 last
> names on my former client list:
>
> ALSEMWGIE SHON THIEDE SPROAT COLOMBO WANG MASANGKAY
>
> PUTKAEW HONG LAGORIO SCARPELLI SALAZAR NARDINI THANJARUT
>
> DECASTRO WONG PENA SMYTHE RODRIGUEZ RUBIO TAI CAZAREZ
>
> GLOSSER YOUK RAMIREZ TAUSCHEK FENIKILE CHIN ZELAYA
>
> PAGULERAS SUAREZ SEN GUTIERREZ MAZON BUENAVENTURA
>
> LIN BUFFENBURGER LAU BAL PHUO SRINIVASEN CHENG
>
> ABARRA DAS CHOPNAK KIM HOLSOOR GUITRON JONG
>
> GANTIMAHAPATRUN BOURGAULT
Where is that? Not in Oklahoma. Not in Wisconsin. Where did you get
all these people from? And also, remember what i said about the born
-here, not-born-here point.
Californians
> (including most legal immigrants) are much more likely to make the
> distinction not between immigrant and native, but legal vs. illegal
> immigrants.
>
Totally disagree. Immigrant/ Foreigner- not born here. American- born
here. The most popular view. Again, please refer to the earlier CBS
48 hours thing. If the media does that, don't they express the popular
deep-seated views on that issue?
> Yeah, we say "That Vietnamese guy", "that black guy", "that white guy",
> because we are not blind and can spot differences and they make useful
> referents. But since "that Chinese guy" might be our boss, we have to
> be pretty open minded.
Not yet likely on the great expanses from Coast to Coast.
> >
> This is total bull. Give some specifics, please. Since 9-11, there has
> been 1 -- count it, ONE -- killing based upon race in the aftermath of the
> attacks.
Really? Hmm...I can count three. Source?
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/islam_in_the_us/80340
Hate crimes have occurred throughout the United States. An Islamic
bookstore was attacked in Virginia; a crowd of 300 marchers chanting
“USA, USA!” tried to march on a mosque in Chicago; in
Texas bullets shattered windows at the Islamic Center of Irving; in
Manassas, Virginia, a cab driver was chased and assaulted with a
bottle as he tried to pick up his daughter from school; in San
Francisco pigs blood was thrown at an Islamic community center; in
Ohio a man drove his car through the front entrance of the Parma
Mosque. And Muslims and Arabs have not been the only victims of the
backlash. On Saturday, an enraged gunman killed a 49-year-old Sikh who
owned a gas station in Mesa, Ariz. Family members believe he was
singled out because he looked “Middle Eastern.” That same
day, a Pakistani Muslim storeowner was shot and killed in the area of
Dallas, Texas. An Egyptian-American grocer was shot to death at his
store in the Los Angeles suburb of San Gabriel on Monday in what is
believed to be a hate crime.
>
> And please, it is "Cong". We take our epithets seriously here. In fact, I
> have both a former VC and a former ARVN major working for me.
Well, you must be a magnanimous man. What a true American should be.
The very fact that you are interested in Filipino culture says a lot
about you, too. Not all Americans share your internationalism.
From Civilrights.org
>>>>>>A 19-year-old Vietnamese American pre-med student in Coral
Springs, Fla., was beaten to death in August, 1992, by a mob of white
youths who called him "chink" and "Vietcong."50
On the afternoon of November 8, 1995, in the parking lot of a
supermarket in Novato, California, Eddy Wu, a 23-year-old
Chinese-American, was carrying groceries to his car when he was
attacked by Robert Page, who stabbed him twice. Chasing Wu into the
super market, Page stabbed him two more times. Wu suffered several
serious injuries, including a punctured lung. In his confession, Page,
an unemployed musician, said: "I didn't have anything to do when I
woke up. No friends were around. It seemed that no one wanted to be
around me. So I figured, "What the f- - I'm going to kill me a
Chinaman."" He also said he wanted to kill an Asian because they "got
all the good jobs." Page pleaded guilty to attempted murder and a hate
crime, and was sentenced to eleven years.51
In August 1995, at a nightclub in Orange, California, an Asian Indian
male was struck in the head with a metal pipe during a confrontation
with a group of skinheads.52
In October 1995, in San Francisco, California, a white male dressed in
skin head attire kicked a Pilipino male's leg, breaking his bone, and
declared to him, "Death to all minorities."53
On June 18, 1995, Thanh Mai, 23, and two other Vietnamese-American
friends visited a teen nightclub in Alpine Township, Michigan. At one
point during the evening, when he was sitting alone, Mai was accosted
by three drunken young white men who taunted him, "What the f-- are
you looking at, gook?" Mai tried to walk away, but one of the young
men, Michael Hallman, hit him in the face. Mai fell to the cement
floor with such force that his skull split open, sending him into
convulsions. He died five days later from major head trauma. Hallman
was tried in January, 1996, and sentenced to only two to fifteen years
for manslaughter. The prosecuting attorney did not seek hate crime
penalty enhancement, denying that adequate evidence existed under the
existing statute>>>>
I am sure that you do not treat your employees that way, but you know,
makes me wonder if people were exposed more to ther cultures in school
and learn the beautiies of those, maybe these incidents would not
happen so much...
>
> People do get the "If you don't like it, go back to your own country" when
> they say derogatory things about the country they are supported by. But
> the wonderful thing about America is the odds are that the one exhorting the
> other to go home is speaking with an accent.
10% odds. 90% it is said by the native. I have had students in the US
beaten ( one was an Iranian, 15 y.o.. He was just walking down the
street and teenagers approached him and asked him where he was from...
Then one Taiwanese girl and one Korean who were not even speaking were
yelled at in stores- "Go back to China! Go back to Vietnam...Get out
of my country now!!!" They did not even open their mouth and say
anything.
That's a part of the US you
> just don't comprehend.
I do not comprehend glossed-over idealistic misrepresentation of
reality. By you. And how would you know?
I have driven across the country many times. What
> route? I traversed it some 6 times a year while in college, varying my
> route through the south and north.
And you saw diversity? I sure did not see so much of it. Most of it
was in LA , SF and other such places. Most of America is still pretty
much WASP ( not numerically but territory-wise.
I've also traveled extensively through
> 42 states in a motor home.
So, tell me what diversity did you see? Outside of ethnic enclaves? i
am not challenging you cynically, I just want to know where you saw
diversity. And also, while "smaller" diversity may have caught your
eye, maybe you failed to notice the monolith-ness ( sp) of the
non-diversity that was also there?
>
>
> Again, I cannot help the class of people you hang with.
College students.
I have never heard
> an American say that outside TV or the movies. Most Americans I know and
> have observed make a stab at speaking some words or phrases in the language
> of the country they are visiting.
Hmm. really? Ok, here is an interesting discusion on this topic.
Our experiences are obviously different. That is why there are about
300 messages on this topic.
> > Bullshit. I have never met a Euro outside academia who studied foreign
> languages outside business or general education.
I have. Quite a few.
It surely happens, but it
> is such a minor percentage as to be insignificant. Prove me wrong.
"Q: What does a European call someone who
>speaks four languages? A: Gifted. Q: Three languages? A: Bright.
Q: Two
>languages? A: Normal. Q: One language? A: American." :-)
Just a joke. But anyway. In Europe, not every language is learned for
business. Foreign language instruction is school is superb. Plus
people go on vacations a lot and like living in and travelling to and
living in different cultures. Americans would also probably want to do
that but it is difficult because most states in America are so far
away from other cultures and most people do not have money to go
anywhere that far for that long. Plus most are still taught that
American culture is the best. But, hey, it would be nice if they did
travel outside.
Anyway. Here you go:
If all commerce can be conducted in English in Europe now which it
can, then why on earth are they wasting their time?
Oh, by the way, I found this opinion-on a slightly different topic,
but still related:
>
> Why should I learn Bantu? Does that make me more cosmopolitan?
Why something as exotic as that? Learning French to go to Quebec or
Spanish to make some friends "from the heart" in Mexico would help. I
caht in Spanish and french and russian on a variety of topics on the
web every weak.
>
> Does speaking French help me understand why the French are so helpless in
> world affairs and so arrogant?
There is a logical phallacy that you are utilizing here but I cannot
put my finger on it. And again, you're proving myself that to an
American , practicality is all there is to it. It is a beautiful
language. The literature is great. The poetry in original sounds so
wonderful. It beautifies one's soul.
>
> What are the bare essential languages everyone should learn to be
> cosmopolitan?
Whatever other culture that you are interested in.
>
> Language is a tool for communication.
It is also a window into the cultural aspect of the soul of the
nation...
If you can communicate, it doesn't
> matter what tool is used.
How deep is it, though? And do you really touch the heart of that
person? Unless you experience it, you would never know. Kind of like
telling you about flying.
There is a beauty to some languages, but that is
> an aesthetic not universally shared (one's native tongue, no matter how
> atonal or how full of glottal stops, is always music to your ears). Your
> position seems to indicate that to be truly cosmopolitan, one should learn
> all languages
There are 5000. You cannot learn all. Unless you live about 10,000
years. Did I ever say that? Learning one would really make a great
difference. I now read tagalog novels in original. the comlexity of
Tagalog thought is incredible. Plus they way people treat you when
you speak their native tongue is quite an experience. But if you are
such a practical person
or else you are missing out on culture.
You will miss out on a lot. When you learn it, it is as if you acquire
another soul. The xperinec is incomparable to anything else.
>
> I have studied, at some point in my life, Spanish, German, French, Russian,
> Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, Greek and Tagalog. Do they give me unique insights
> into the cultures? Somewhat, but I can learn the same thing reading what
> linguists explicate about words and phrases from those languages, and learn
> it more efficiently.
It is not the same. You can taste Italy by eating at Pizza Hut but it
won't be the same. Anyway, a practical man like yourself does not need
it. But you are replying in a very standard American way. Your logic
and reasoning are very non-aesthetic Anglo-Saxon now. Precisely what I
meant.
Do they really make me more sophisticated? Nothing
> could ever accomplish that. Have they made me more cosmopolitan?
> Nope. Travel and study have done that, until I are indistinguishable from a
> real gentleman.
Let others judge you. I have hob-nobbed with a lot of French people
and Latin Americans and Pinoys and Japanese and I am telling you,
learning languages opens up universes. But that's just me.
>
> Pardon me. Is it beholden on someone who lives in Cowpie, Montana,
No, not there. But living in LA and not speaking it out of arrogance
is not very praiseworthy.
> English is not the official language of the US, but it is the language of
> business and politics here. If someone seeks success, they will need to
> master English.
Sure.
>
> This is the "Ugly American" stereotype that began in the 1950s when
> Americans first started traveling the world following WW2. It has long been
> replaced by people who are not openly hostile to other cultures.
I have still met a lot of the earlier types.
>
> I have seen the counterpoint -- insecure foreign nationals in their own
> country with jealousy and animosity towards the US who read into my words
> and actions intent that is absent. If I ask a vendor, "Pardonne moi, do you
> speak English?" I am not being arrogant but seeking their assistance in a
> transaction that will benefit them.
If you are on a 2-day tour, no need. But again, you just seem to be
interested in purchasing things from a grocer.
>
> In 47 years of living across the US, I have never heard anyone outside the
> media or a joke refer to the French as "frogs".
Heard that in Vermont. About French Canadians.
>
> As far as Joe Sixpack needing to learn the language of immigrants who have
> moved to his country -- should the Greeks learn Armenian?
Agreed.
> No, this is NOT the reason parents want their kids to speak English. This
> is complete nonsense. The reason is that they know, to fully take
> advantage of the educational, recreational and professional opportunities,
> English facility is a must.
Well, they coould raise them bilingual. And a lot choose not to. That
is becuase they had experiences like this. And they did not want their
kids to have those. Did you ever have an experince like this?
http://www.library.arizona.edu/westside/062101_problem.html
Until you do, maybe you are not qualified to comment. Also, other kids
will make fun of them and call them names. Who wants to be called
names? As a kid? It hurts.
>
> Kids do not grow up bilingual (except, as Chris would say, passively
> bilingual) primarily because parents do not take the time. It requires
> dedication and effort to teach your children to grow up with two languages,
> one of which is the language of immersion by the culture. I know, I
> struggle with it in my household.
Please read the third line:
http://news.mpr.org/features/200209/23_druleyl_fittingin-m/
> Hmmm. Do you want me to start pointing out your spelling and grammatical
> errors? I agree that public education in the US is a disgrace. It is part
> of the sweeping social change that you discount in one breath and
> acknowledge
> in the next.
It was late. And I mistyped. And for someone who did not speak English
until age 18, I guess I am not doing so bad. And the issue is very
complicated. It is patchy. Some areas of education are very advanced,
other lag behind. Some changes occur and some don't.
> Look, you are in itinerant language teacher who moves from country to
> country as your jobs die out.
Poisoning the well?
>Sorry, it just ain't that important.
Neither is art. Or music.
And the
> question remains -- are you teaching people around the world to speak
> English? If so, why? Because they NEED IT to prosper.
this is the only field in which I can make any decent money. I would
much rather teach Spanish or Russian, but they are not needed.
College profs need
> languages (outside language depts) to pass written exams and exchange
> pleasantries with foreign academics. There was a time when languages
> (particularky German, French and Latin) were important to access
> international publications, but most scholarship is either in English
> originally
> or has been translated.
Well, you see, I do not need to learn any language to teach EFL.
Actually, most teachers don't. But I am an Earthling and I just want
to meet my fellow earthlings. It is a great experince. Has been worth
every word. Just trying to hsare my values with you.
>
> Dr. Owen, an esteemed scholar of Philippine history, does not speak
> Tagalog. Even though he teaches at a Hong Kong university, I do not
> believe he speaks Chinese.
Typical colonialist arrogance. And the colonial subjects would not
expect it any other way.
Is he not worthy of your respect?
In all his areas of expertise, yes. I would not just disrespect a
person outright for just one such quality. But, hey, this is the
Anglo-Saxon colonial cultureand he is its typical representative * in
that particular aspect only*. he may be a great man, but that is how
he was brought up. We are the masters. you speak our language .
He is
> 50 times the academic that you or I am. Why does he not need to
> learn these languages? Because English is the language of scholarship.
> The effort he would spend, for minimal results, is much better
> spent doing other work.
Ok, whatever you say. Again, practicality above all.
>
> Again, what countries should I show respect to by learning their language?
> I cannot learn them all.
I don't know. I would start with Tagalog. It is so beautiful.
What is your list for "essential" languages that
> everyone should speak. How did you generate this list? Might others
> disagree with your list?
Well, for one, of course, it is the one you need for your business for
we are living in the material world. If you do not need to learn a
foreign language to survive, i would start with the culture/s that you
personally like. Or places that you like to travel to.
>
> Question: do you speak fluently the native languages of every country you
> have taught in? Or, since you are teaching ESL, did you get by with your
> knowledge of English.
Just about. I *got by* with English but you cannot belive the
difference and the way it opens up the hearts of the natives when you
speak the lnaguges. Like a giant turn around. The difference is
amazing.
>
> If you did not learn and retain fluency in all the languages of all the
> countries you have taught in, you have shown them disrespect.
It is the effort that counts an not the degree of fluency. it is the
attitude that counts.
> Americans are, and should be, capitalists. Capitalism is at the core of
> Western civilization, and even the socialists among us are capitalists
> whether they want to be or not (Angela Davis gets about $20,000 a talk to
> extol the virtues of socialism...
Oh, sure! I think most people are everywhere.
I guess that money is part of her "need").
> To call an American a capitalist is both an apt description and a
> compliment.
Yes! Absolutely!
Without capitalism driving technology (tech is the wedding of
> science and capitalism), medicines would not have been discovered,
> high-yield crops not developed, and we would not be conversing now.
I agree wholeheartedly. It is a great system.
>
> I will agree that capitalism is one core value that has not changed,
> although some would argue that creeping socialism threatens this.
>
> Give me prosperity over poverty any day. Give that same option to the vast
> majority of the people in the world and they will also make the same choice.
> There is nothing wrong with being prosperous. It means that my children go
> to good schools, don't miss meals, can travel and see the country and world,
> are not dressed in rags.
Democratic capitalism is great!
>
> Americans lack aesthetic appreciation, you intimate. Yet the world buys
> what we produce. The world cannot get enough of our books, music, TV shows,
> movies.
Mass produced for the lowest common denominator?
What does that say of the world, if they are so eager to appreciate
> the products of a society that lacks aesthetic appreciation?
The working masses like it.
>
> You cannot get past the idea that YOU should define what should be
> appreciated aesthetically. This requires a rigid value system of inflexible
> good and bad.
Let me get back to you with other points. This is getting interesting.
But I need to get some sleep. Please allow me to reply first to all
your points so that you could respond to them then, if you so wish.
> > I appreciate it. You are a worthy "opponent".
>
> I wish I could say the same.
Randy! Tsk-tsk-tsk! Puh-lease! Let's keep it friendly.
ExpatAuthority
> Remember his "International Watchdog Organization" and anti-Thai period? I
> miss those days.
I grew up. You did not.
>I still have his lament post somewhere in a floppy.
I am flattered.
>
> Embalsamador
> EA's Worst Nightmare
At least I am open to change and improvement. Maybe slow change but I
am learning. You ,on the other hand are so engrossed in your own
perceived greatness and other people's faults that you really never
post anything productive at all. You are just a flamer. A stoker?
Dirty Sick Pig
ExpatAuthority wrote:
> >
> > Remember his "International Watchdog Organization" and anti-Thai period? I
> > miss those days.
>
> I grew up. You did not.
No shit?!
> >I still have his lament post somewhere in a floppy.
>
> I am flattered.
No crap?!
> At least I am open to change and improvement.
No bullshit?!
> Maybe slow change but I am learning.
Like what?!
> You ,on the other hand are so engrossed in your own
> perceived greatness.....
Compared to you, phart, I will be more than great.
> .....and other people's faults that you really never
> post anything productive at all.
Pharts like you, Luga and a host of others have soured me. Why don't you go away
and come back at the end of the next century?
> You are just a flamer.
Nah. Just your worst nightmare. Want me to repost your masterpiece?
> A stoker?
That is an honorable occupation, but I cannot stand the heat, English Teacher.
EMBALSAMADOR
Exphart's Worst Nightmare
joekerr
> Still, most people do not just go there and splurge money without
> thinking about tomorrow. Much less so than in so many other countries.
What other countries spend as freely or more so than the US?
It is currently the big knock by leftists that the US is just a bunch
of unfettered consumers- supposidly a bad thing bwahahahahaha!
> And the credit may be due to the fact that prices went out of reach
> of the average people.
Oh really? that would be the opposite of what is actually happening.
Taxes are high.
Not as high as Europes!
It is harder to make a living
> without education or even with it.
Yawn- not true... education simply makes life cushier.
>
> Stats? Off the top of my hand I think the Japanese and the Chinese
> would have more of those, albeit for local consumption.
Funny how they both have a strong preference for western poetry....
> Well, not as poetic as the Chinese or the Japanese.
Modern Chinese poetry has been non-existant outside of the official
party approved propaganda for many years- even today it's very
limited. And what you see now is clearly western influenced-
especially in Japan.
>
> > I did not say that it does not exist. All I said that a poet does not
> enjoy such a great deal of respect in society as a lawyer.
You have that backwards- lawyers are seen as scum by a large number of
people.
A potry
> writing man is a 'fag' in the US.
>
Only those that are fags are seen that way (Rod McKeun).
>
>
> OK. There is still a lot of it considering the 280,000,000 people in
> the US. It is just that, again, being a poet is not that great of a
> trait in societal terms. I am basing it in my observations on how
> Americans react to poetry as compared to the awe that it generates
> among Asians.
I've watched Japanese teenagers give similar reactions to American
teenagers to American poetry- hint they prefer it accompanied to
music. And respect is based on success- if your poetry sucks- so do
you... the same is said for every other trade... sorry but you need
learn that observation alone is useless without proper training to put
it into perspective.
> A crude exaggeration. I was in Japan two weeks ago, and i spoke to the
> average taxi drivers, clerks, etc. Very refined. I could never hold
> such conversations with people of similar class in the US.
>
That's because you're a boor.... if you pulled your head out of your
ass and stopped being an ignorant snob you could learn a great deal.
We don't put on airs- or place exaggerated emphasis on formalities...
you can hold wonderful conversations with "American" taxi drivers once
you treat them as equals... you might even learn what Pakistanis have
really experienced!
>
> Where can you find the greatest debate over the
> > values of Christianity vs Wahabism, with a real discussion of the merits of
> > both sides -- the Saudi street or the US street?
>
> Why bring Saudi into this? Sheesh...Another extreme example. How
> about, say Paris, Milano, etc?
>
You won't find it there either! If you're not a leftie wanker your
views won't be allowed to be expressed- and never mind mere facts when
stereotypes and BS are preferred.
> If they have a US passport, they are so by law. Few retain their
> language. If you talk German in public in the SU, you will probably be
> called a Nazi.
Hardly... most people no longer associate Germans with Nazis- if you
speak German you are a tourist.
> The Iranians?
>
> Well, they may have a passport, but if his name is Mirza Mohammad or
> something like that , and he was born in Iran, and has an accent, now,
> be honest with me, what will a common guy on the street think of him?
> An American? DOn't make me laugh.
But his kids who don't have an accent are considered Americans- this
won't happen anywhere in Europe or China or Japan.
> The Vietnamese?
Ask anyone who got
> beaten in a bar or killed for being a "Viet Kong" ( that has happened)
A rarity for sure... mostly they would be called Chinese or Chink....
And strangely enough your homeland now has one of the worst
reputations for racist attacks... ooops another fact that eluded you.
That is one ( but not the only)reason why many such
> people prefer to stay in ghettoes.
Few stay in ghettoes- most stay in ethnic neighborhoods just as the
Euros did before them... your ignorance is appalling!
And people say" This is a
> Vietnamese area" not this is an American area. Come' on. Be real.
No they say Little Saigon or Chinatown etc or little Odessa you have a
lot to learn!!!!
> And again, the LA county ( if that is what you talk about)occupies a
> small spot on the map of the US. Gosh, a drive through the country
> will make anyone see how uniform the country is.
Oh really? Then why will you find more scandinavian architechture in
Minnisota than Kentucky? Or Prarie style homes in Nebraska than
Colorado?
Why are there more blacks in New York than Idaho? Silly boy stop
driving and actually take the time to learn something.
> True to a point. And a lot of Italians, for one, cannot speak English.
> However, what I am stressing is the scornful and arrogant way I have
> heard people utter" I am an American! I don't need to learn no damn
> foreign language".
As well they should have scorn for someone who can't comprehend the
reasons for this or the reasons Euros need to learn multiple
languages.
>
> Europeans NEED other languages, for commerce and
> > social reasons.
>
> But it confers a bit of cosmopolitanism and a bit of humility
No you aren't humble! And neither are most Euros!
> I did not say that. It boils down to the fact that a Joe Six Pack in
> LA says: F**k the MExicans!" "I don't need to learn Spanish."
He doesn't need to DUH!
Or a Joe
> Sixpack in Vermont saying" F**k the frogs! I am an American. When I go
> to Quebec, they better talk English, these damn frogs!"
Oh please now you're just being stupid- I've never heard od anyone
saying such crap- and for your information they are called Cannucks
(sp?)
It also boils
> down to the fact that immigrants in the US very often do not want
> their children to speak their "foreign" language simply because they
> are afraid that the kids will suffer discrimination from their peers.
>
Bullshit! They're trying total emmersion in order to perfect their
English skills... usually they use their "foreign" languages at home
and English in public.
>
>
> > Alas, no. I wish Americans shared priorities (as long as they are MY
> > priorities). It is precisely because Americans lack cohesive priorities
> > that other nations view the US as weak and vulnerable. Look at the European
> > Union or the UN -- they have such a diverse system of priorities that they
> > are ineffectual and indecisive. The US is less divided, but enough
> > differences of opinion exist on important issues that needed action is
> > delayed or avoided altogether.
> >
An extreme over simplification- you demonstrate that you know very
little about the US.
> If Americans shared general priorities, the US would be running Iraq's oil
> > fields today,
Why? What makes you think we want that? Their oil isn't needed- in
fact it's the threat they pose to others that's driving this whole
thing... you're making the same stupid miscalculation that the Arabs
have been!!!! You really need to learn the facts!
welfare-to-work would be the norm,
It is becoming the norm- ever try reading a newspaper?
and illegals from Mexico
> > would not have drinking fountains placed in the desert for their
> > convenience.
Right if Euro-trash like you were in charge they could all die of
thirst instead!!! See how little you know or understans?
>
> All
> > cultures must be respected.
Even those that practice female circumcision or Taliban style human
rights violations?
>
> This is
> > an intellectual conceit of the first world. People living in cultures
> > considered "primitive" by modern standards in terms of sanitation,
> > education, public safety, technology, etc., are quick to embrace "cultural
> > improvements" that work within their circumstances.
As opposed to those that have been a failure for over a century?
Please you are so uneducated it's embarrassing!!!
ExpatAuthority
> If you did not learn and retain fluency in all the languages of all the
> countries you have taught in, you have shown them disrespect.
Depends on many situations. If you are a tourist with an interpreter
by your side or a foreign head of state on a brief visit, then it is
OK, I guess. If you are living in a society, at least you should make
an attempt of sorts. An immigrant to the US whose English is not
fluent is not exactly treated like a king. If you live in say, Puerto
Rico or Mexico long term and do not even make an attempt to learn
Spanish then it means one of the following:
1) You are lazy.
2) You do not think that the local language is important. Hence, local
culture is also not important.
3) You are not mentally capable of it.
> Americans are, and should be, capitalists. Capitalism is at the core of
> Western civilization, and even the socialists among us are capitalists
> whether they want to be or not (Angela Davis gets about $20,000 a talk to
> extol the virtues of socialism...
I agree.
> I will agree that capitalism is one core value that has not changed,
> although some would argue that creeping socialism threatens this.
I think a capitalist core with some ways to protect the poor from
bullying by the rich as well as some safety net and free medicine
should do the trick.
> > You cannot get past the idea that YOU should define what should be
> appreciated aesthetically. This requires a rigid value system of inflexible
> good and bad. This is inconsistent with your above stated stance
> that multiculturalism is good.
Yes, to a degree, you are right. However, if emphasis is on work and
practicality, what is so aesthetic about it?
Multiculturalism is good when a person is multicultural and not when a
nation is split into arrogant segments each clinging to its own "
culture".
What you are really saying is that other
> cultures are good, the US culture is bad.
Well, it is not as simple as that. There are good and bad aspects in
most cultures. I just wanted to show those.
You don't really believe that, of
> course.
I would not belive in such a simplistic picture of the world.
You wouldn't say the Massai culture is as significant as the French
> culture,
On world stage, it is not as influential, however, I would be
interested in it if I were interested in Africa. Actually, Masais are
quite famous.
nor would you immediately think of learning Urdu to broaden your
> cultural horizons.
Well, it is not a very major culture. I am however interested in
Sanscrit and often do researches on the subject.
>
> You are saying that some preferences are superior to others -- and that you
> are a natural arbiter of this.
I was just trying to describe American preferences without much moral
judgement. And tractors are not culture- it is technology.
> what intrinsic to these acts leads you to such an intellectual conceit?
Well, just the sheer beauty of it. And a lot of people admire haiku.
It is recognized as a great form of art. There must be something about
it.
> Historical academic preference? If all cultures have equal value, the
> tractor pull is of equal aesthetic merit.
Tractor is technology, not culture.
> Ah, you are entering the area of "entertainment". Reading fiction is not,
> by and large, necessary, but it is enjoyable. I happen to enjoy reading,
> but I have friends who question the value of my building a special room for
> a library in my house holding over 7000 volumes. Some of them prefer
> to sail, or listen to classical music, or dance, or play competitive sports.
> I have my preferences, but should I judge them?
No, you should not. But the ones who are sailing are into sports, not
culture.
I enjoy art, but I can
> view and appreciate a gallery in 1/4 the time my wife needs, because
> she is an artist. Is she culturally superior to me?
In her area she might be.
>
> You are now mixing your classes. Before you were talking about cultured
> cabbies; now you are talking about "intelligentsia". You will find the same
> self-inflated discourse among the American intelligentsia. You just never
> met them, because they don't hobnob with ESL tutors.
I am not a tutor. I have an MA. Right now I am training the military
of a certain foreign state to pass board exams.
> (BTW, not sure what a "hige variaty of world issues" is,
"huge variety of world issues"
but I'm a product
> of California public schools).
>
> And, gee, what "hige variaty of world issues" do you not find me discussing?
You may be an exception to the rule.
> What loftier subjects do they discourse upon?
>
> I'm no "intelligentsia", but I have read Thomas Mann in German, and have
> read the complete works of Dickens and Shakespeare. I have memorized
> many poems by Longfellow and Poe, and have played Romeo and Hamlet's
> father's ghost on the stage. I regularly discourse with best-selling
> authors
> on their political and sociological works, and have corresponded with
> Arthur C. Clarke, Isaac Asimov and Ray Bradbury, who became a friend
> in the late 60s because we shared a fondness for Poe. Read most of the
> Russian masters (in English, my Russian was never that good), and have
> a particular fondness for Chekhov. I have written a novel, and a college
> textbook on technology. I don't care for most South American writers,
> as they tend to simplistic socialism and naive social history. I have
> studied
> the writings of philosophers from around the world but find that you need
> to keep both feet and most of your brain in the real world in order to
> provide for your family and contribute to your community. Your
> intelligentsia friends would probably not care for me, as I am a crude
> American who doesn't share their views on life and social order, which
> is infuriating to such chaps.
You are not crude if you have read all of these and have corresponded
with all these people. However, I have not met many like yourself.
>
> What are these cultural priorities? Frugality is not one. Hard work and
> personal sacrifice are being replaced with a "let the gummint take care of
> it" attitude.
Well, to what degree. Maybe it is " being" replaced, but how much?
Most people are still busting their balls.
With the evolving welfare state, people no longer take pride
> in making it on their own but expect Uncle Sugar to help. Rather than
> taking responsibility for their actions, whole groups of people claim they
> are victims, and see imagined insults in the most innocent discourse.
I agree with you that groups of people do it and the tendency may be
growing. However, about 94 % are still employed and are working hard.
If they are not, they would be fired.
> Progress is paralyzed by the growing power of radical environmentalists, who
> block every attempt to improve life for citizens, and who brashly put the
> needs of bugs and invertebrates above humans. The legal system has been
> corrupted to the point that, unknowingly, average citizens bear the brunt of
> frivolous lawsuits (who provides the money companies pay out in a suit? The
> consumers who pay a higher price for goods and services).
In my original post I did not say anything about the non-existence if
these.
>
> Socially, the US is looking more like the EU, and that is frightening,
> considering the rampant racism, ethnic hostility, and failed infrastructure
> (most notably socialized medicine) found there.
OK, let's see if that is true:
http://www.undp.org/hdr2001/hdi.pdf
Actually, yes, most EU countries lack behind the US. Norway, Sweden
and Belgium are ahead. Australia and Canada are also ahead.
> Movies show what people might wish reality to represent or fear that it
> might represent, in the minds of writers and producers. Often it is pure
> escapism, or the embodiment of moral clarity that is lacking in the real
> world.
Often, yes. So, will you tell me that movies do not reflect the
culture of the country in which they are made and the values of it in
any degree?
You have talked of the cultural sophistication of the Japanese,
> with their literate cabbies and haiku. Yet they also are the origin of the
> most violent pornography and movies.
Well, yes, there is that genre. It is an aspect of their culture- the
"yang" end of it. There is the "ying" , too.
Which is the real Japan?
Both are. Just like the US. Violent movies, pornography, but these are
not mainstream.
Or
> does one undermine the other and show inherent contradictions within
> a flawed people striving to maintain an illusion of sophistication covering
> a core of aggression and brutality?
I do not think it is a core. I think both elements are present. More
like two ends of a stick. Human nature.
I have experienced several cultures that claimed this, and have found
that
> it is usually a superficial respect.
Well, it is not as superficial. China for one has a gerontacracy in
the government. In japan, pay increases by seniority. Even in France
and Latin America older people are treted with great respect.
I know of no culture which does not
> elevate its concept of beauty as a core value.
Well, yes. But beauty and youth are not necessarily interchangeable
unless you are talking about young girls.
.
>
> That's back to just plain silly again. You do not know this, you simply
> hypothesize it.
Seen it. Heard it.
If a Hollander said he was from Korea it wouldn't fly. One
> look and even stoopid Americans recognize (most) Asian faces. To hear some
> tell, American men are fascinated by Asian women, so that smile might well
> be sincere.
Mature American men are. Not young ones.
>
> Since you cannot have pretended to be all of the above, you are simply
> stating this out of preconceptions,
Post-conceptions.
which are inaccurate. Anyone with any
> real knowledge of Americans would know that, rather than a tired nod and
> yawn, the detailing of Hungary as your birthplace would elicit "Where is
> that located?"
Both have happened. Here is another one. Upon renting a room to a
Hungarian, an American landlord asked her if she had ever seen an
electric switch ( of course, there is no electricity in Hungary) and
if she knew how to use it. Happened to my friend.
> "Glabalism"?
Globalism
>
> Sorry, your lack of knowledge of cultural anthropology is no excuse. Do
> some reading on the subject. It's the cultured thing to do. I can
> recommend some books...
Please do.
>
>
> What do you base this on? All I ever hear you spout is your preconceptions
> and prejudices.
"Post-conceptions" and "post-judices". Personal experiences.
Complaints by many natives. All right,let me find something here: here
is a reaction of some Thai readers of some ad that they felt showed
their King in a dsirespectful light:
http://citypaper.net/articles/2002-07-05/mailbag4.shtml
I do not necessarily agree with that because their society can also be
hypocritical and disrespectful to other cultures.
Anyway, here is another article stating the ignorance about other
cultures:
http://www.watchingyou.com/stupidamericans.html
> Do YOU speak fluent French,
Pretty much
German,
No.
Chinese,
No, but Japanese, yes.
Arabic,
Upper elementary.
Spanish?
Finished my BA in Puerto Rico. Spanish being the medium there.
If so, have
> you mastered these while pursuing a full-time career not involving these
> languages?
I just lived there.
We know the answer to that. For a language teacher to say the
> most important intellectual credentials are languages is puffery. What
> languages do you NOT speak? Might not these people feel you are
> disrespecting them?
If I live in their country, I will at least try to communicate on the
basic level. Buy some books and cassettes
I don't see Hebrew
Not planning to live in that murderous country.
in your list, or Russian.
Fluent in that.
Do they
> not matter?
If you live there or near there, they do.
>
> If you spoke to a math teacher, she might say that, to make him a true
> human, everyone should be able to do differential equations.
Well, such esoteric math is not necessary. But Arithmetics is not. And
most people know it. Languages are living. Most of them are next door.
Why not learn at least one?
A history
> teacher would probably say that a deep and insightful grasp of world history
> is required for true humanity.
Not deep. Just basic would be enough.
A soccer coach might think that mastering
> those skill is the true requirement.
I played soccer and like watching it on TV.
Call it vocational chauvinism.
How about just knowing basic things about the owrld. Or , if you live
in S. california, learning Spanish so you could talk to people in
mexico or when they come here?
>
> Do you have this same standard for EVERY person, or just Americans?
Every person!
>
> How many people in the world qualify under this guideline?
Well, not all people claim that they are nations of immigrants and are
diverse and multicultural and international and cosmopolitan. If they
do, then they shoudl live up to the claim, don't you think?
>
> How much time and productivity would this require? What would it do to the
> world's economy? How much food production would be lost for the farmer and
> farm hands to study these languages? How many medical breakthroughs would
> be lost forever because of the time thus spent?
Hmm, good point. Practicality above all. One can pop a cassette in
while driving to work.
>
> Frankly, this is patently absurd. I might as well say that you are not
> fully human unless you can build a computer from transistors
Too esoteric.
and other
> parts, or program in assembler,
again, too specialized...
or play the clarinet,
Any instrument will do, even a little bit, to broaden your mind and
understand music.
or be able to explain
> the inherent flaw in Liberation Theology,
Too esoteric.
or know the best way to sheer a
> sheep,
Too specialized. I did work on a farm before and it was a great
experience.
or be able to diagram the inaccuracies of "Dianetics", or perform
> redaction criticism on the Synoptic gospels.
Gee, how can you compare those with languages- a required subject in
most schools around the world. Apples and Oranges.
I would fail in the above,
> because I've never sheered a sheep. How well would you fare in my list of
> requirements to be fully human and intellectually competent?
You rate quite high after you have described all the things you have
done and studied.
>
> Bullshit. You don't really believe that. Metaphysics has no place in
> evaluating cultures, which are specific adaptations to environment and
> knowledge. Metaphysics is an intellectual exercise to explain core
> reasons for that which is beyond direct observation, while culture
> is always visible and accessible.
All right, then let us use the metaphysical concepts of "positive" vs.
"negative". If people in any given culture experinec more positive
moments in their lives then negative, then we may say that the culture
is, overall, successful. There is even an organization in HK that goes
around different Asian countries polling people. Filipinos are the
happiest while the japanese and the HK Chinese are the least happy.
Sacrificing virgins to a sun god is
> not morally equivalent with praying to the earth goddess, and praying
> to Gaia and letting your child die rather than getting him to a doctor
> is not something one can point to with equanimity and say, "That's
> cool, it's what the culture believes".
Well, that creates a lot of suffering and is obviously a negative
aspect of that culture. But it is only one aspect.
>
> We don't live in a metaphysical world. You don't get paid in metaphysics,
> or eat metaphysics, or sleep on metaphysics.
Agreed. But if you are mostly stressed out and " negative" then, well,
maybe there is too much unhappiness-negativity in that culture.
>
> If I believe that a woman should not be stoned to death because her uncle
> raped her, I am betraying my humanity if I say, "Well, it's a cultural
> thang."
No, but again, that is an extreme example.
That's another place I disagree with you. You are quick to point out
where
> Americans are "wrong", implying some set standard, but deny it exists.
> That's hypocrisy.
I am just as quick to point out the bad points in other cultures. But
now we are talking about the american culture here. Bring up another
culture and i will try to give an analysis and it will be just as
frank.
>
> I do believe in absolutes. I believe in the Golden Rule, but I also believe
> that sometimes you have to treat people as you would not want to be treated
> (i.e., kill them) to secure the greater good.
In some extreme cases that is inavoidable.
I cannot look at slaughter
> and remain detached. I cannot look at threats to my family and say there
> are no absolutes. You hurt my family intentionally, you will pay. Period.
> And I will do all I can to protect my family from you if you intend them
> harm, no matter what your beliefs say you should do to them.
Exactly. But again, one should do his utmost to prevent those
situations from happening in the first place.
>
> If you do not believe the same way, you either are not a parent or husband,
> or you are a callous bastard.
Or a very careful man who also belives in Divine Protection.
A matter of degree. Which has influenced the other more -- India or
the UK?
> The US or the Philippines? Belgium or Africa? France or Indochina?
Well, colonial powers sure have more influnce than the more passive
areas where people just minded their own business.
>
> No. If you can't define it, how can you say it is better? How can you know
> he would not have been happier longer with sulfa drugs? Or quinine? Or
> DDT? What might his mind have accomplished if exposed to Chaucer or
> Thoreau? What could he have done with a medical education, denied him by
> his culture?
>
I guess we would have to bring him all that and ask him. His reply
would be what matters.
> This is amusing, because you are looking at these cultures from a Western
> perspective to say they have value from their own perspective.
>
> There are reasons civilization has progressed in the areas where it has, and
> not in others, and it has nothing to do with innate abilities or climate
> (two discredited theories of the physical anthropologists of the 19th
> century). Since I do not believe in the intellectual superiority of any
> race over another, this leaves me with the belief that key concepts are what
> dictate that one culture advances and prospers while another remains static
> or decays. Inherent in this is the Western notion of perfectibility,
> arising from the Judeo-Christian philosophy that you can improve your lot
> through application and effort. Western Civ is rooted in a few key concepts
> that took hold and fused for novel results.
Precisely and it is commendable. It is one great aspect of the Western
civilization. However, some people like their lives the
stagnat/traditional way. Prices are lower. Women are less stuck up.
>
> The horse collar was invented in China, but it was only when it was imported
> by Europe that it attained the significance of facilitating the Industrial
> Revolution. The Chinese also invented gunpowder and printing, but these did
> not transform Chinese society, arguably the most advanced (with the
> Arab-Islamic world) in the 16th century. Why?
Governments interested in presrving the status quo and not tolerating
dissent or new thoughts?
>
> The inventions of the Chinese were closely held by the court, jealously
> protected secrets. When they were adopted by Western civilization, they
> transformed warfare, and printing allowed the Reformation because they were
> accessible by the population at large.
>
> Three key concepts can explain why Western civilization has brought more to
> the world's table in the last 500 years -- democracy, science and
> capitalism. These uniquely fused to enable Western cultures to expand,
> develop hardier populations, and invent new technology which spurred social
> revolutions. These concepts were simply not present together in other
> cultures, such as sub-Saharan Africa.
Absolutely. But again, a lot of people there must have liked their
lives the way they were. Who is to say? Progress arises out of
dissatisfaction. maybe they were satisfied with their realtively
peaceful, tropical lives?
> Nonsense. Take the sub-Saharan Africa cultures and compare them with
> European cultures prior to European expansion. This is long before
> colonialism. These cultures had remained static for thousands of years.
> Consider, too, the cultures in the Pacific islands, or the vast rural areas
> of Eurasia.
But people there may have liked their rhythmic, traditional daily
lives and did not want the hassles.
>
> One mistake you make is that when people are left alone, they do not get the
> needed influx of new ideas that spurs change and growth. The very isolation
> of cultures insulated them from change and expansion.
Well, I am sure they traded with other tribes and had travellers from
various parts around them.
> I would estimate that in my 47 years in the US, 12 of which were spent in
> undergrad and graduate institutions, I have met more "foreign students" than
> you have. I've lived with them in dorms, frat houses, and off-campus
> housing. The critical component is attitude -- people who are friendly and
> open are welcomed into the student community (arguably the most liberal
> culture on the face of the globe) no matter who they are.
Well...I would argue with that. One may be friendly but there is
prejudice to deal with.
If they are aloof
> and suspicious (which is inculcated by many cultures) they will feel
> excluded.
The surrounding environment is not as simple as that. " Oh, you are
friendly, so I will be friendly to you". There are prejudices that
need to be tackled. Sure, an angry unfriendly Japanese student will
not make many friends, but also, a friendly open type will also run
into resistance.
It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
>
> Both Asian and Arabic cultures tend to be more reserved and suspicious.
> Muslims, because they are raised within a philosophy that promotes a dual
> standard (between men and women, between believers and non-believers) can
> have a hard time adjusting to a culture where such a double standard is
> overtly disdained. Cultural differences easily transform the impressions of
> observers into negatives.
Agreed. In richer Arab countries many people are like that. In Egypt,
they are very very open for the most part.
>
> Consider how my wife's family initially (and to some extent still do)
> reacted to this "bastos Kano". I come from a "guilt culture", where we
> flagellate ourselves for real and perceived misdeeds, and hold ourselves
> publicly accountable. The Philippines is a "face culture", where my very
> basic desire to take on the blame of a circumstance is seen as rude. When
> there was a family problem, I and my wife would say, "Let's talk about this
> problem and fix it." The family would be aghast, preferring to ignore and
> not address the issue. Who is right? By our differing cultural values,
> both are. I prefer mine, because it seeks to fix the problem rather than
> ignore it because addressing it will cause one or more people to lose face.
This is a hard issue to discuss. Both approaches seem to work within
their won cultural contexts.
>
> Bottom line is that, if you come to America expecting to be discriminated
> against
I do not think many people do. Most people expect to see these noble
creatures, astronauts and democratic human rights defenders.
and expecting people to think as they did back home, you will be
> uncomfortable and feel out of sync.
This I agree with.
I would wager that every black born in the US knows what a dashiki is.
It's
> part of the pervasive culture of restoring black identity that has been
> broadcast by all media and black groups for 40 years.
OK, I will ask around.
>
> And you are once again wrong in thinking that ethnic dress is worn to be
> "cool". I tend to not notice it, because it is so prevalent, but this past
> week I paid attention. I saw an elderly Chinese woman in typical peasant
> garb sweeping the residential street in front of her home. I saw an Indian
> woman, caste mark and all, walking down the street wearing a chiffon sari
> and listening to a Walkman. I saw a Mexican working in his yard wearing a
> broad-rimmed sombrero. I saw countless African hats and prints, both in
> traditional dashikis and more Western attire. I saw some of my employees
> coming to work in traditional Vietnamese footwear and tops.
Well, in a very cosmopolitan highly immigrant-saturated S. California,
this may happen.
>
> A growing number of black Americans from the burgeoning middle class (today,
> only 25% of blacks are lower economic class, as opposed to nearly 100% in
> 1950) are taking the pilgrimage to Africa, but more decline to because they
> know what they will find and prefer to maintain their romanticized ideal
> image of native African cultures. They do not want to visit the poverty,
> disease, brutality and primitive conditions of Africa because it does not
> fit with the noble history espoused vociferously by the Afro-Centrists.
I cannot comment on that for I do not know much about it but i would
like to learn more. My Black boss has gone to Ethiopia and he liked
it. There are prosperous countries there too. Senegal, for one.
>
> As Muhammed Ali said after returning from Zaire, "I'm glad my granddaddy got
> on that boat."
Well, Zaire is an extreme example. He should have gone to Senegal.
> That was an interest. People have different interests. Are yours the
> standard by which others should be judged?
Well, what can I say? To me it is like not knowing what a heart, a
liver, the lungs or kidneys are for.
>
> You assume that Americans (stripping aside the hundred million or so who
> personally experienced cultures different from the US) are not curious about
> other cultures. What you fail to realize is that multiculturalism is
> central to American education today. Diversity training and ethnic studies
> are REQUIRED on the college level. Literature curricula at the most
> prestigious colleges are throwing out Proust and Chaucer and Shakespeare to
> be replaced by Jose Maria Arguedas, Ernesto Cardenal (and yes, Pablo
> Neruda). Faulkner and Hemmingway are being replaced with Garcia Marquez and
> Naipaul. Entire elementary and secondary school systems have been changed
> to the Afro-Centrist curriculum, which teaches in part that the ancient
> Egyptians were black, that these people were wizards who could fly through
> the use of cocaine, and that all knowledge of the West actually came from
> black Africans, rather than the Chinese, the Mediterranean Sea Peoples, or
> the Greeks.
OK. I am defeated on this point. I have not witnessed this for most
people running the US today did not come from that educational
background.
>
> Tastes in movies are amorphous. When you say that someone living in Europe
> watches with more regularity movies from neighboring countries, you are
> talking about someone in California who watches a movie made in New York.
> If you look at movie watching statistics from countries where the government
> does not restrict content, you find the general pattern is that people watch
> movies made in their own country, and those made in America. You thus have
> the very natural ethnocentric films and American films (or Western Civ
> films). In the US, the same pattern holds. You have ethnocentric films
> (American) and American films. Yes, there are films from other cultures
> that both capture critical and popular attention, but these are a smaller
> percentage than the films that fit into the first two categories. As they
> are in all other open-market countries.
Well, in Hungary they watch Bulgarian, German, French and Italian
movies in addition to American ones. Theyare just used to having all
these cultures around. In Laos, they watch Russian, French and Thai
movies as well as Chinese and American.
> This describes the native films of every country. Each reflects the values
> of the viewer. Some travel well to other cultures, others do not (ever
> watched an Indian movie? Certainly not to my tastes).
Well, Indians are not a nation of immigrants.
>
> Many top stars in American movies came to the American public's attention in
> foreign films, which hold a small but significant niches in theaters in
> urban centers.
OK. I will agree with you on this. Still not cosmopolitan enough for a
'nation of immigrants from all over the world."
> Because a) people in America already have more choices than they have time
> and b) cultural expressions of love are not universal. Movies are
> entertainment to Americans, not cultural education, just as they are in all
> other countries.
Ok, so they are not interested, then?
>
> That's simply not true. "Il Postino" with subtitles earned $80.5 million US
> gross. "Trainspotting" earned $72.1 million. "Crouching Tiger, Hidden
> Dragon" with subtitles grossed $108 million in the US.
Great. I hope the trend continues.
>
> You are the prejudiced one. Doesn't it bother you to simply invent opinions
> without a factual base to support them?
Well, what can I say? I have seen Americans just walk out of the room
when they saw anything that was not American. I have heard people say
" If it ain't f**ing American, I ain't watching it."
>
>
> Gosh, no we're not. We are talking about gross popularity here, not limited
> to some academic elite. Indeed, you will find that the American "academic
> elite" are the main supporters of foreign films. Towns like Pohdunk,
> Nebraska don't have theaters that exclusively show foreign films, but New
> York, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Houston, Miami, Boston and New
> Orleans (to name a few) all have multiple theaters exclusively dedicated to
> showing foreign and "art" films.
OK, Then it is changing and becoming more cosmopolitan. Good!
>
> Nonsense once again (this is monotonous).
>
> First of all, there is the competition. There are a bunch of great singers
> in the US, who are competing with record labels and for shelf space which is
> limited. For every great performer in the US who lands a contract and a CD
> there are 100 who fail.
>
> Second, performers like Pavarotti, Domingo, Klederer (piano), Cassals,
> Enriquez (Julio and son), Estefan, etc. have made the bulk of their fortunes
> off American audiences. Certainly it is tougher for a foreign entertainer
> to penetrate the US market because they must stand above the competition and
> have something unique to contribute to persuade distributors and stores to
> replace another performer on the shelf with them.
But also, it is the customer who simply prefers something that is more
familiar and is along the traditional Anglo-Saxon lines. It is,
admittedly chaning now with latin influence coming in.
>
>
> My point is that people who move to other countries still listen to their
> native music. You are saying Americans are somehow wrong if they move to
> Tangiers and still listen to Sinatra. That flies in the face of what
> immigrants around the world do.
>
> Here is a prime example. An Iranian friend owns a small up-scale grocery.
> Six days a week he plays Western classical music in his store. On Sunday,
> he plays Persian music. He has an appreciation for both, but his heart is
> still with the music he grew up with, fell in love listening to, and made
> his babies to.
Well, Iranians are not a nation of immgrants from all over the world.
Americans who are such a great mixture could be expected to be just as
mixed culturally and have appreciation for so many other cultures.
>
>
>
> The Japanese are social mimics. Their popular culture is based upon taking
> ideas from other cultures and transforming them.
Great. Nothing wrong with that.
>
> > The Russians listen to European music-Greek, Italian, german,
> > Spanish...alll the time.
>
> First, cite some statistics. What portion of the money spent in Russia goes
> for European music? What portion for Russian music?
Go to msocow and just walk into any music store. There are so many
foreign singers. people there constantly listen to all the foreign
music on the radion even if they do not understand the language. You
can harly ever hera people say: Turn that s**t off. I don't understand
it!"
>
> Americans listen to Russian, German, Greek, Italian and French music every
> day. I can list 160 stations in the US that almost exclusively broadcast
> music from these countries.
On FM?
>
> Every US record store has sections on foreign music, generally about 1/20th
> of the shelf space. More is purchased online.
Gee, then why do I hear such contemtful comments from so many
Americans? And is that music for mainstream people or immigrants?
>
> Because of a) proximity and b) not enough music is generated locally to
> satisfy consumers. Remember my figures above -- over half of the CDs are
> created in the US, and 26% are created in Europe. This means that Europeans
> are listening more to US music than their neighbor's music.
OK. So, they are interested in a foreign culture ( US).
> Come on. Distance is not a factor. If it were, your entire case about
> inter-cultural infusion would be shot. It's as far from California to
> Africa as it is from the Philippines to Africa, and as far from California
> to Germany as it is from the Philippines to Africa.]
Well, aslo, Africans are too poor to do a far-reaching marketing
campaign in RP.
>
>
> Music travels by satellite around the globe. CDs are shipped
> internationally. Music is available off the internet anywhere there is
> power and a phone connection.
>
> Unwittingly, you have destroyed with this distance argument your whole
> belief that Americans should know more and appreciate more of other
> cultures. America is geographically isolated from all but two nations. If
> distance is a factor in relevance, then you have completely destroyed your
> entire chain of prejudices.
Well, Americans are a nation of immigrants from all around the world.
So, distances here do not matter that much. In those countries they
are not. So, distances do matter there more.
> >
> And...
>
> How can a foreign station be financially viable unless there are enough
> listeners who patronize it? This means that there are bunches and bunches
> (to use an exact number) of listeners in the area who speak the language.
Or Americans who like to listen to latest French music? If they do not
like to, then it means they are not interested.
> How much time have you spent with the American intelligentsia class?
Watched them on Spanish and French TV all the time.
>
> How much are these intelligentsia contributing to their countries or the
> world? Sounds like they are intellectual dilettantes, living off the effort
> of others, who sit around congratulating themselves about how refined they
> are.
Yes, but that is another point. We are talking about apprecaition of
other cultures.
>
> What does South America give to the world besides drugs and coffee?
Again, we are talking about your average individuals interest in and
openness to other cultures. No red herrings, please.
>
> Sorry, you're wrong. Welcome to the Welfare States of America. Welcome to
> California, litigation capitol of the world, where you seek advancement by
> getting others to pay you for imagined offenses.
Well, but do more than 50% of people do it? I see people working
around me all the time.
> Hmmm. I know my neighbors. There is the Mexican immigrant family across
> the street, the black family two houses down, the whiteboy and his wife
> across the street, and the German/Japanese couple next door. I know their
> names, what they do for a living, how many kids they have, what living
> family they have, and what their dogs and cats are named. I know their
> hobbies, their religious and political preferences. I do not, as a rule,
> socialize with them outside annual parties. Our interests do not coincide.
Good man. An exception to the rule.
>
> 50 years ago, there was more interaction with people you lived near because
> these were also the people you worked with and played with. There were much
> fewer entertainment options, and many were clustered within the community.
> In today's mobile society, the geographic location of friends has expanded
> dramatically, as has both work and entertainment locations. You still have
> the same number of friends, they are simply not in your neighborhood.
fair enough. Still does not change the fact that I postulated.
>
> The billions generated by Americans out of their own pockets for the victims
> of 9-11, people they did not know of all races, religions and countries of
> origin, gives a true picture of American friendliness.
I am with you on that. Agreed.
> > In the US you are ALWAYS talking about immigrants. It's simply a matter of
> how many generations removed. You simply cannot grasp this elemental fact
> of American culture.
I dunno. Not always. A topic like any other.
>
> Every Greek I have talked with or corresponded with has nothing but contempt
> for Albanians.
But not for his Orthodox brethren. they love Russians, Bulgarians,
Georgians, etc.
>
> Welcome to my web... You have inadvertently stumbled here upon a major
> distinction between American virtue and Arab virtue.
>
> Arabs practice Zakat, the Third Pillar of Islam. This duty acknowledges
> that everything springs from Allah and belongs to Allah. The faithful are
> required to be charitable, with specific prescriptions for treatment of
> guests (including Sadaga, the charitable gift). This duty is not to the
> guest,
Well, better than nothing. And also, I think that because they are
still rural folk ( at least at heart), the hospitality is just part of
rural culture and not religion alone
but to Allah -- you are not performing the hospitality for the guest,
> but for Allah.
You know I spoke with arabs and they said that it was wrong. They said
that it is just part of tradition and not just religion.
Under Sharia, Muslims may be punished for failing to observe
> this, along with other laws handed to the faithful from Allah by his Prophet
> (including modesty in dress, which has been transformed over the decades
> into the burqua).
You know, in so many arab stores people are just genuinely happy to
meet a custimer and they sit around and they want to talk to you. I do
not think it is becuase of Allah alone. They are just human. They want
to make friends. There is little crime there so there is not fear of
strangers.
Death and dismemberment continue to be traditional
> punishments for violations of these edicts.
For not giving a cup of tea to a customer? Nah!
>
> Virtue is demanded of the faithful. It is not something freely given.
It is for Arab rural folk. Many are great people. Family and friends-
oriented. Loving their neighbours. being very communal and hospitable.
Hey, where are you from? Welcome! Hey, Ahmed, bring some gahwa to the
customer. I just do not think it is the Koran alone.
In
> America, charity is not required. Anything you get is freely given.
> Americans have the choice. Hospitality is not a religious mandate, but a
> personal expression. Because it is not rigidly imposed under pain of mortal
> or eternal punishment, there is a wider variance in how hospitality is
> extended. Remember that it was Americans who dropped food to the civilian
> population of Afghanistan. The Arab states have declined to materially
> participate in the rebuilding of Afghanistan. Where is the hospitality, the
> charity in this?
Agreed, they can be as hypocritical as anyone else. However, we are
talking about leaders not common folks in the stores and in bedouin
tents.
Where is the hospitality and charity in barring refugees
> from integrating into their societies (such as in Jordan, where the
> "Palestinian refugees" are ethnically and culturally identical to the
> Jordanians but are refused citizenship or jobs).
Governments. Not common people.
>
> Is a woman who is locked up her whole life virtuous?
It is subjective. Many are not locked up. In Saudi and Iran that is
the case in some places, but not in most other liberal countries.
Women drive and owrk and go to school. Tunisia, Morocco, Kuwait, the
UAE is the example.
How does this compare
> to the American woman who has the choice and chooses the moral path?
To each his own. Freedom is commesurate with mental maturity. An
American girl who has slept and cohabited with 6-7 men by the time she
is in her twenties is not a good wife to me. Would she be a good wife
to you?
>
> Americans give out of compassion and generosity.
You mean the US government? Or the people?
Arabs give out of
> religious obligation.
But also, because most are just very warm people from the tropics. Th
Egyptians like to invite neighbours to their home and make friends
easily and invite you to dinner all the time. In the US people are not
as open to strangers...Arabs are mostly not different from Greeks or
Mexicans, etc.
>
> Unfortunately, this is a dying value like so many others. Whole ethnic
> segments of the US population hardly contributed to the charity work,
> because they brought their cultural values with them.
they are too busy trying to make ends meet.
>
> As they are in the US. I think you have this impression of Americans as
> isolated, cocooned drones who never leave their homes or interact with
> others. Simply false.
Less open to people they do not know. More mistrustful. More mindful
of privacy. Taking much longer time to build a friendship. More
business-oriented.
Sure, they leave their homes and interact but within a certain
"clique".
> .
>
> And my Filipino friends have benefited even more from my American
> hospitality.
Great! You must be an exception to the rule. Plus the very fact that
you are interested in RP culture says a lot!
>
> There are differences, to be sure. Filipino hospitality is much more freely
> given than Arabic hospitality.
In Egypt, it is just about the same as in RP. Not in Saudi, except
with the beduins.
It is essentially the same hospitality of
> America 60 years ago.
To other white English-speaking people, maybe.
>
> > Agreed. But I am not talking about that. I am talking about just a
> > very cold attitude towards a person one does not know. People are much
> > warmer in Latin America. But the US gov't is admittedly very generous.
>
> Here's a clue -- the USG *is* the people.
Well, this is open to disputes. it used to be that way but now the USG
is not a direct democracy.
When you say the USG is generous,
> you are saying the American people are generous. If we don't approve of
> what they do, at some point we get rid of them (although laziness does raise
> our toleration).
Get rid of them and elect someone else who has the money and power to
run and has his own agenda, no?
>
> It is *our* money that does all these things. The USG does not generate
> substantial income outside taxes.
Well, yes. Indirectly, it is the people.
>
> You also seem to be enamored with surface appearances. The same store owner
> in Saudi who gives you the tea will try to rob you blind the next moment.
>
Maybe a Yemeni or a Pakistani. Saudis have enough money not to rob
others.
> Perhaps all of this goes back to some experience you have had with Americans
> where you weren't treated properly in your estimation?
Mostly just comparing travels overseas and vibrant social life there
to many very distant and self-absorbed people one sees in the US.
>
> Think this over -- if immigrants were not treated well in daily life, would
> they try so hard to impose this country on their relatives remaining back
> home?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. That is the main reason. Jobs and money. An excellent
place for poor people to start. Buy cars and houses. Bring other poor
people over so that they can make some more $$$$$$$$$. Few come for
other reasons. And most do not give a hoot in hell about
discrimination at this point. Maslow's hierarchy of needs at work.
Saudi Arabia is another country where about 30% are foreigners. 50.000
Americans are there now. Why? $$$$$$$$$$$!
>
>
> Americans have different lifestyles and duties than Filipinos. In a
> household where there is always a nanny or three to care for kids, there may
> be more opportunity to stop what you are doing for an uninvited guest.
But also, you know, many very poor Filipinos with no nannies will stop
doing everything to bring you in.
>
> You cannot discuss these things in isolation.
Absolutely not. But here is an example. I am in a dorm/ I knock on a
Pinoy friend's door. He would never turn me away. mostly, it is kind
of sacred . He asks me to come in. Most of the time, he would offer
some cookies etc. An American friend would say- "I am busy, I am
reading a book". A Filipinow would just almost never never behave like
that.
>
> More with jealousy. Becuase of the huge money they are making.
>
> The vast majority of lawyers make less than high-end computer professionals
> ($80k a year according to the California State Bar Association).
Hey, that is great money! And with all the legal shows on TV. Jag, the
X-Files, The Parctice. there is glorification of lawyers.
They make
> less than doctors. They make less than tenured garbage collectors and truck
> drivers, in many instances.
But society glorifies them. When a father says that his son has passed
the bar exam, does it evoke the same reaction from people as when the
father says that his son is now a tenured garbage collector?
They are still not held in so much respect as they would be in Asia.
> > In Japan, for one, teaching is called TenShoku- a heavenly
> > profession...Not in the US.
>
> >
> > > Let's look at salaries. Teachers in California earn an average of
> > > $52,000 a year.
Not a starting salary. It is about $30,000 a year. Lawyers and Doctors
and even accountants start out with at least twice that much.
> >
> > That is with the gov't districts. Not in the private sector. Very very
> > low salaries.
>
> Hunh? What is a "gov't district"?
I mean, public schools. Private schools pay about $25,000-35,000.
Compare all those starting salaries with that of a brilliant young
attorney.
> It is true that in certain types of private schools pay is lower by about
> 25%. This is reflective of a number of factors, including certification and
> the willingness to take lower compensation (paid for by the student's
> parents and not subsidized by the government) because of safety and
> educational environment.
>
> > Well, you know. there are teachers striking and demanding respect and
> > recognition as professionals. They do not do it in Asia so much.
>
> That occurs in all fields of employment in the US.
Lawyers striking? Doctors striking?
>
> Sorry, no. The "nuclear family" is a specific referent in America to
> mommy-daddy-son-daughter households. A "half-nuclear" family (the term does
> not exist) is a "broken home" in traditional American parlance.
>
> Traditionally, American households have been two-generational. The massive
> influx of immigrants, legal and otherwise, has brought the 3-generation home
> into popularity.
I think the majority is still married and nuclear.
>
> Well, can these students name and locate all of the US states? Of course
> not. Can a Malaysian college prof locate New Mexico on a map without
> labels? They're about the same size. Big deal.
These are states of a union, not countries. And we are not talking
about locating them. They have never 'heard' of a country.
> That is less of a statement of the retention of traditional values in the US
> than it is a reflection on cultural values around the world. One would also
> note that the "go-getters" from many countries come to the US...
OK.
>
I must go. I will answer later. Do not know when, though.
ExpatAuthority
or Tim
> McGraw. Then collect your teeth from the floor.
Here is an interesting article:
http://www.citypaper.com/2001-04-11/books.html
What is your take on that?
> > > > There are no native Americans, only immigrants.
> The black middle class has been the fastest growing economic segment in the
> US since 1964. Yet a substantial percentage polled feel they are
> discriminated against, that racism is institutionalized in the US, and that
> non-blacks hate them, in spite of all the indicators that demonstrate
> otherwise (i.e., black politicians elected in white districts, white
> patronage of black businesses when faced with a choice). There is a
> billion-dollar business of professional "advocates" who earn their living
> promoting discord and seeding discontent.
>
Unless you yourself are Black, you do not know what it is like on a
day-to-day basis. Little things get you more than big ones.
> No. That's not the world I live in, which is what I wrote prior to this.
> If I agreed with you, I wouldn't take the time to refute you...
Well, let's consider this other fact: while young people may have
become more spoiled and less thrifty, what about the huge percentage
of the population that are over 50 and that *are* thriftier?
>
> I agree that nationalism in much of the EU is muted. This is the result of
> moral relativism. Countries like Germany, which might have remained a rock
> of nationalism and pride, have intentionally humbled themselves because of
> the excesses of the past. If every idea is equal, if every culture is
> equal, then there is nothing to feel pride about. Europeans have
> emasculated themselves.
Nationalism and patriotism are two different things. They may still be
quite patriotic. It is the nationalism that I am talking about. Are
you saying that not thinking that your country is better than every
other is being emasculated?
>
> Pride in country and heritage is attacked if that country and heritage is
> American. If you are from a piss-poor country that has contributed nothing
> to the world except exotic fruits and you proclaim national pride, you are
> lionized and applauded for your nobility.
National pride is patriotism not nationalism. for a piss-poor country
it is not so bad becuase they really have no power to look down on
others.
People look up from their poverty
> and failed social and political systems at the US, with our power and wealth
> and success, and say "You think you are so great!" Well, yes, we are. My
> experience is that Americans, when dealing on a one-to-one basis with people
> in other countries, rarely raise the flag or boast until the FN makes some
> disparaging remark. Then, when the AmCit defends the US, they are accused
> of hubris. Go figger.
Defending the US in a reasonable way will rarely create controversy.
However, calling people names and looking down on them does.
>
And cynicism is a virtue?
Gloomy, sarcastic cynicism is not. Healthy cynicism may be.
>
> Hate crimes are a business in the US. There are powerful interest groups
> which generate billions of dollars promoting innocent actions
Well, I am not sure that we are talking about innocent actions here.
Hate crimes are a reality.
as hate
> crimes, or reinterpreting general crime as hate crime, and who inculcate
> minorities to be hypersensitive and perceive normal interactions as biased.
Well, often they are biased.
> I.e., if you are a minority and are turned down for a job (or a date) it
> must
> be racially motivated (when you may simply be unqualified). The media
> also elevates trivial incidents to national importance. Day-to-day life is
> not about discrimination or harassment. As I said, when the grocer, the
> mailman, the dentist and the cop are all immigrants, who is there to harass?
Where are they all immigrants? In inner cities of huge metropolises
they may be. Not in Oklahoma city. Majority are still not immigrants.
>
> An example -- twice in the past year, people (a teacher and an appointed
> official) have been blasted as using "hate speach" for using the word
> "niggardly".
Well, this is definitely stupidity. However, hate calls to Arab
Americans or calling different people names are verbal assaults. Look
at this: Are these all innocent incidents?
http://www.janet.org/~ebihara/aavn/aav_rising_attacks.html
> Your point was that non-whites are not tolerated by whites. Now you are
> saying no one is tolerated.
Inter-ethnic tension results.
> > These have several things in common. One is a relative lack of diversity
> (the Philippines is 91.5% Christian Malay, the Dominican Republic is 73%
> mixed white, Amerind, etc.) and religious homogeneity. They also are more
> monolithic in cultural identity, with smaller immigration levels (and thus
> more generations to enculturate into a common bond). Several examples are
> small nations that hardly qualify as cities. None of these nations are
> competitive in the world marketplace, None face significant military
> threats. Most are isolated from other cultures by natural barriers. And so
> on.
Great places!
>
> Crowded conditions, little homogeneity and great diversity, along with great
> subcultural differences and recent immigrant status, serve to exacerbate the
> problem.]
Exactly.
> Much of the intensity in the US is deliberately generated by the media and
> special interest groups. And in the case of South America, the diversity
> simply does not exist. If you are a small minority surrounded by a sea of
> the majority, you don't complain too loudly.
>
But most people there, I mean common people are not so racist to begin
with. You can make friends, date, and integrate relatively easily
provided you have the money.
>
> You are simply wrong here. Show me some facts to support your belief, and I
> will show you how class and income factor in. You just don't know what you
> are talking about.
OK. Here is my take on it. A "different" person would have to
compensate for his " handicap" by being of a higher class then the
majority people that he associates with. And while he may win the
acceptance of people whom he knows, he may not escape stereotyping by
strangers. I used to live on Long island before and there were always
stories about Black doctors who lived in good neighbourhoods but would
always be harrassed by the police etc. Unless you were one, how would
you know?
One will have to be super rich and super famoust to totally overcome
it. You still have to go to stores, supermarkets, walk down the
streets and drive. A rich Black woman is still a black woman and will
often evoke negative reactions, looks etc. Tina Turner may not evoke
those reactions, but some lawyer still will.
> > In a capitalistic society with no aristocratic history, money determines
> class.
But if you are of a different race, it is harder to get money.
> Nonsense. It is simply a matter of money and attitude.
You will need more green to cover your Black.
>
> The top 10 endorsement personalities in the US last year were all black.
> These are the people companies bet their livelihood on to sell product. If
> there was such a racial bias as you propose, companies would steer clear of
> blacks as spokespeople.
Sports and entertainemnt personalities are in a class of their own.
Plus it took them many years to gain that level of acceptance.
> > Go to Rome, Paris, Montreal, Milano and see how people dress. I would
> > really like you to see. And I am not talking about office attire. I am
> > talking about people putting on the latest fashions. You have got to
> > see it.
>
> I have. What you seem unaware of is that the studiously applied casual
> attire worn for leisure in the US is often more expensive and more contrived
> than these designer duds. My 18-year-old easily wears $500 worth of
> clothing
> and looks like a homeless person, which is the intent.
OK, so dressing modestly and looking homeless is part of the
Protestant heritage. i.e. American culture.
Paragraph # 6 written by Americans.
http://www.modernetiquette.com/dress%20code%20article/informal.htm
> And... isn't this just a wee bit superficial? Personally, fashion is my
> life, but others find merit in different pursuits...
OK, so informal dress is another American custom.
>
> The Europeans and Japanese do get more average vacation time and work fewer
> hours. Which is one reason Europe is going nowhere fast.
They travel a lot. Can save more. What is so bad about that.
> See waaaay above for debt and bankruptcy data.
OK, but the majority is not declaring bankruptcy.
> > What you are defining is moral decay in a society where there are still
> values. This is not repression. It is a redefinition of morality along
> hedonistic lines, made possible by contraception.
>
But the girls there are so sweet.
>
> Ever heard of a lap dance? And not touching naked dancers is not
> "repression", it is following a certain standard of behavior.
You do not have to touch in a lewd way. Even holding hands is not
allowed.
>
> Is it painful to be wrong so often? A DOM would be a man in his 50s-80s
> (awright Viagra!) going after an 18-year-old. REAL common to have a 10-15
> year difference in age.
When in 40ies and fities, yes. Not a 21 year old dating a 36 year old
guy.
A new trend? My grandfather married my grandmother
> when he was 25 in 1924. She was 15.
Well, that was way back when these things did not matter so much.
> > Without much talking. Just doing.
>
> And it has nothing to do with the chance you as a foreigner offered the
> girl?
No. I am not going to get into that any deeper but local guys and
foreigners can find very friendly females there. Not sluts but just
romantic, amorous people.
>
> I have never found American women to be capricious, and every woman I have
> dated has been very much into love -- often to my regret.
You must be a real heart-throb. You the women you dated were over 30?
> So the women are easy. That's a virtue? Sorry, not interested. It all
> goes back to a lack of morality. I will not elevate that to the status of
> an admirable quality.
At least it does not create a class of sexually frustrated young men.
> How long and where did you live in the US?
Most of my adult life- NY, Vermont, Nevada, California.
> Not for 20 years or more. Welcome to 2002 and the exodus of those with
> money and property from California.
Would be interesting to see statistics on that. Sure, people are
leaving LA. But not Palm Springs and Palm Desert and other such
wealthy places. Not Palos Verdes.
?
>
> Sigh. I have expended hundreds of words here trying to educate you.
> Multiculturalism is cultural relativism. All cultures are equally valid.
> You cannot take pride in the US. All religions are equal. All people not
> only have the right to pursue happiness but should be guaranteed, by the
> redistribution of wealth, that happiness. To believe otherwise is to be
> racist. American culture in founded and steeped in institutional racism.
> Children are not allowed to pray or read the Bible in school, but school
> districts mandate students pretend to be Muslims for a month, reading the
> Qu'ran, praying to Mecca and trying to convert other students. Curriculum
> in high schools and college which minimize the importance of the Founders of
> the US with their place being taken by unimportant people of color. Great
> works of Western Literature being removed from surveys to be replaced with
> the exposed fraud of "I, Rigoberto Menchu". Protests against Columbus Day,
> with some municipalities changing it to "Indigenous Peoples' Day" (who
> contributed more to America and the world - Columbus or the Amerinds?).
The above is a sick backlash to what used to be a very conservative
society. Both are bad.
> Heh, heh.
>
> Burlington, VT. Home of the University of Vermont.
>
> Home of mandated diversity and multiculturalism courses, including a
> required Race Relations and Ethnicity course. The two most prominent campus
> organizations are the African, Latino, Asian, and Native American group
> (ALANA) and the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning, Intersexed
> and Allied people (GLBTQIA). The web site for the on-campus Center for
> Cultural Pluralism states 'We are all guilty [of racism] by partaking of the
> benefits of a White society. '
>
> Thank you for playing.
But you still walk down the street and you do not see an international
crowd. It is hard nosed Yankees just about everywhere. the Silent
Majority vs. the very vocal liberal minority.
> Socialized medicine has failed everywhere it has been instituted. Canada
> and the UK are among the worst care providers in the civilized world.
But when you are sick you can be treated for free. You will not run up
a $100,000 bill.
>
> You seem to misunderstand me. Cradle-to-grave is not a good concept. Self
> reliance is. Remember? That used to be the American value? The WASP norm
> that you claims still exists and people are forced to conform to? The thing
> that started this thread?
>
> Being less socialistic than Europe is NOT being independent. Being compared
> to Europe is like being saying "You're fine. Your cancer has metastasized
> to a smaller extent than his."
I think there must be a golden medium somewhere. All the good elements
from socialism and all the good elements from capitalism must be
combined. Socialism needs to become more capitalistic and capitalsm
needs to become more humane.
> >
> OK, I know this is hard to follow --
>
> Q: When did the US impose colonial values on the Philippines?
> A: Before 1950
>
> Q: When did education begin to decline in the US following Sputnik?
> A: The 1970s, when multiculturalism, "whole language" instruction, "new
> math", bilingual education and "self esteem" became dominant in educational
> circles.
>
> The sad thing is that Filipinos exceed their colonial master in attitudes
> and achievement. I have attended a number of high school and college
> graduations in the past few years where the top 25 and more students were
> all Asians and Filipinos.
>
> Read the sad stats. The US has an atrocious dropout rate and growing.
I agree.
> Standardized test scores are a disgrace. Industry is finding that high
> school and college grads cannot speak or write English adequately.
Absolutely. It is sad. Now how would anyone expect these people to
know where Malaysia is?
Too few
> qualified science degrees are being earned, so H-1B visas are required.
> Parochial schools, disdained in my day as being vastly inferior to the
> public system, are the preferred place today.
Sad.
>
> This is NOT the America I grew up in. This is not the WASP value system.
I understand what you are saying.
> Horseshit. I was on the admissions committee of a grad school, and I saw
> hundreds of apps. I was appalled at the ignorance and lack of command of
> English demonstrated by college graduates.
>
> Colleges have had to dumb down graduation requirements, due both to the poor
> preparation entering students have (including study skills) and minority
> quotas with lower entrance qualifications.
I agree. Please tell me how this is affecting the American economy and
world politics.
>
> That's the great fraud of race relations in America. Whites do not despise
> non-whites.
I would argue with that. There is still alot of it but hidden and not
vocalized.
> Look at what has been accomplished in the US in the last 50 years. It was
> WHITES who changed the laws, WHITE militia who protected the black students
> going to school, WHITE voters who put blacks into political office, WHITES
> who elevated blacks to the Supreme Court. Without white support, there
> would have been no Civil Rights movement. Were you aware that is was whites
> who created the NAACP?
Yes. The good ones amongst them.
>
> You are a good little lemming, believing what you are told. Talk to LeeBat
> about hypocrisy and being treated different because he is "non-white".
What is it in a nutshell?
> No. But you are making a moral stand here. If all cultures are of equal
> merit, you should not stand in the way of your son expressing his sexuality
> in any form.
While all cultures as a whole are worthy of respect, it does not mean
that they do not possess some sick elements which are not.
> I'll try to use small words. Certain cliques in school will have problems
> with others, but in a nation composed of different groups you can always
> find acceptance. Bigger ridicule than where? Give examples, please.
Brazil? Panama?
>
> > > There is actually more peer pressure, exerted by the media and special
> > > interest groups, to deny the values you say typify America.
Depends on the place again. Not in Middle America. Not in Orange
county.
Those who
> > > adhere to these values are labaled "radical right" or "right-wing
> > > conservative" and are marginalized by a popular culture that says
> > > anything goes and all values are relative.
I hear you. i have been called that way myself, strangely enough.
> These are not just political labels but social labels. You do understand
> that socialism is more than politics, right? You know that conservative
> values are more than just about who you vote for. Right? Right?
>
> How you live your life places you within a faction. People like me who
> believe in "traditional American values" (the kind you claim everyone is
> pressured to follow, but have been ridiculed and marginalized by the left in
> the past 30 years) are labeled "conservatives" or "radical right" or
> "racists" ("culturalist" would be a more apt term, but accuracy is not
> required in pejorative labeling).
Interesting. I have heard that term before.
I don't believe in sexual promiscuity.
Safe sex among consenting adults is what I believe in.
I
> believe in legal, not illegal, immigration.
I am with you on this second one.
I believe that schools should
> be safe, and teachers and principles should be given the authority to insure
> they are.
I am with you.
I believe that lying is wrong, and that all people should have
> equal opportunity but that not all people will have equal success. I
> believe that if I am clever enough or work hard enough or am simply lucky
> enough, I should be able to enjoy the fruits of my effort.
OK. Agreed.
I don't believe
> that I owe the rest of the world a living.
Well, I do believe that I should help the less fortunate who simply
cannot help themselves.
I believe that if you fail, you
> take your lumps, learn from your mistakes, get back up and try again.
>
Agreed.
> I am sadly isolated believing these things and living in California.
Gotta move out to Mission Viejo and thereabouts. Plenty of people like
that there.
> Yup. And if you advocate the overthrowing of the government publicly, if
> you criticize the government, what happens? If you are an immigrant and you
> break the law, how are you treated?
Well, Latin America is really not the place for poor immigrants. It is
a place to go to when you can support yourself.
>
> In America, it used to be that if you made the effort to learn English you
> would be accepted,
Provided it would be unaccented. My Dad who speaks with an accent
still complains of "scorn".
as millions of immigrants from around the world were.
To a degree.
> Now, groups are making it so you should not have to learn English.
They should not be doing it.
Think of
> your beloved South American countries -- how would mass movements by
> immigrants to change national languages be viewed? Did the German war
> criminals in Brazil force a change to German? Would they have been as
> accepted if they had?
Absolutely not. But there generally, even if yous peak with an accent,
you would be accepted socially. In the US accents are not that popular
( except Britsh. Aussie and French)
> Macro time.
>
> I see turbans EVERY DAY. The one person killed following 9-11 was, as I
> recall, a Sikh wearing a turban in Texas.
See? Not that much acceptance.
>
> Go to NYC. Every other cab driver wears a turban.
You mean London :).
>
> There are more stores selling saris on University Ave in Berkeley than there
> are "American" clothing stores.
Well, but these places are very radical.
>
> Is the SF Bay Area atypical? Yes. But all major cities have ethnic
> minorities (who usually, combined, either comprise a majority or approach
> it) who practice their religious beliefs and cultural practices (read: wear
> turbans or Muslim head coverings). The fact that you don't understand
> this simply highlights your ignorance.
These groups are not part of the American mainstream culture. They are
not visble in the movies, as entertainers or such people. They do not
represent America to the world. Whenever they do appear in the movei,
it is ina comical way, like some kind of freak.
> > And Blacks wearing dashikis? Well, not many.
>
> I went to see a black performer last night. I lost track of the traditional
> (or mock traditional) African clothing I saw.
Where was that? A Louis Farrakhan ralley?
>
> You simply have no idea what you are talking about.
You see. What seems to me is that you find really radical places where
small minorites of really " different" people live and try to pass
them off as representatives of the US culture. These are specks.
> No, Asians generally do not live in ghettos. They work hard and buy nice
> houses in good neighborhoods.
Gee. Korea Town. Monterey park. What do you call these?
>
> People are free to dress as they wish in the US. This ain't Saudi...
>
> Can you say "democracy"? I thought you could. Politics is an expression of
> the will of the people, with certain leeway (basically, there is a threshold
> of disagreement that will incite the populace to act). Politicians in the
> US take opinion polls almost daily, especially in election years (every two
> years for national elections).
>
> The number one rule in American politics is "Thou shalt get re-elected".
> Piss off the voters too much and you lose your cushy job and interns. Draft
> legislation that varies too much from voter positions and you will be
> recalled or voted out.
>
> Politicians make decisions in large part because of what their constituents
> tell them to do (called a "mandate from the voters") and what special
> interest groups lobby them regarding. These special interest groups often
> represent segments of the population -- environmentalists, pro- and anti-gun
> groups, ethnic groups, religious groups -- and business interests. In the
> case of Democrats, they often represent hostile foreign governments, but
> that's another thing.
OK,but again, most people just dress in very informal clothese. You
can dress any way you want by law but freakish clothes are just not as
accepted.
>
> > Tolerant is different from accepting. Most people are still polite
> > enough not to attacke the person. But only the Anglos will enter the
> > main stream more or less effortlessly. The others will be expected to
> > keep a distance. Politely told to. With a tolerant smile.
>
> Bullshit. Explain the number of ethnic minorities who run major businesses
> in the US.
1. General Motors
2. Ford Motor Company
3. Exxon Corporation
4. Wal-Mart Stores
5. General Electric
6. IBM
7. Chrysler
8. Mobil
9. Philip Morris
10. AT&T
Now which of these power houses are run by Jose Rodriguzes, Bharava
Mukhtanandas and Kin Hyun Byuns?
Explain the high number of minorities (including open
> homosexuals) in elected positions.
Polutics is easier to get to than the private corporate world.
Explain black and Hispanic mayors in
> predominantly white towns.
Ibid.
Explain why billions are spent on endorsement
> contracts with black celebrities to sell products to white folks.
Well, these are sort of like glorified clowns to many of those.
Explain
> the rise of the black middle class in the last 30 years.
It was very very VERY tough for them to rise. And they still live in
black areas.
>
> How can you tell others to keep a distance when you are surrounded by them?
> When they are your boss, your employees, your relatives?
Still a long way to go.
> >
> There is a certain amount of commonality, but that is degrading by the day.
> Let's remember where this started. You claimed the US retains traditional
> WASP values, which people are pressured to conform to. That is not true.
> For one thing, diversity is much more an issue today.
But the WASP matrix is still very strong even with all these new
things. I do not think it will be destroyed completely.
Example: schools are
> being forced to change their names, sports teams are forced to change their
> logos and mascots, because they use some referent to American Indians
> ("Warriors", "Chiefs", "Braves", "Red Skins", "Tomahawks"). Polls show
> that the gumchewing Navajo or Hopi doesn't think these are denigrating,
> but the professional race baiters do, and they blackmail business and
> government.
But these are sabotaging the already existing establishmnet. they may
modify it, change some 20% of it but not the bulk of it.
>
> Special preferences are given to minorities -- in gaining government
> contracts, admission to schools, government aid, housing -- in a country
> where people were once expected to earn these things without reference to
> race or ethnicity. All men were created equal, but racial preferences mean
> that whites are now less equal.
I agree. My niece, who is blond and immigrated to the US at age 14 was
shocked when she went to a school where she had to learn that she was
now 'white" and that a lot of students of color harrassed her.
Eventually she had to leave and now she is hanging out with other '
white' people at UCLA. You do not want to be racist but the other
people force you to.
>
ExpatAuthority
> observers of a culture can offer an accurate analysis. Thus, by your
> reasoning, it is immaterial what the Euros have to say about their
> culture...
I am not talking about culture here. I am talking about the living
conditions and life itself and whether they are satisfied with their
lives. Whether people there are genuinely (and generally) happy. With
the way the economy, the medical services are and things like that.
You do not see them trying to get into boats and scramble to come to
the US.
>
> Remember writing:
>
> > However, you could not see the
> > similarities because you are from that culture yourself.
What I meant is that you could not see how Anglo-Saxon Protestant you
are in many of your attitudes unless either you could experience
another culture in its totality and see your attitudes as being
different against its background or have someone from another culture
point them out to you. Otherwise, they will just seem natural to you
and go unnoticed.
> Again with the language bias. Do you think he might master other areas of
> knowledge outside his field of expertise that you do not know about?
Could be, but I have not encountered it. Maybe technical ones. Most
Europeans still state that most Americans just know very little
outside of America.
http://www.ups.edu/intlprogs/sahandbook/foreign.html
http://archives.thedaily.washington.edu/1996/022796/ced022796.html
>
> I would put my general knowledge up against yours any day, whether in
> history, science, theology, mathematics, sociology, psychology, etc. Prove
> I am atypical.
You are. I have met very few people like yourself. For one here is an
interesting article:
http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/07/06/9472.html
http://www.nas.org/print/pressreleases/hqnas/releas_23apr02.htm
Besides, I am still learning myself and am happy to be defeated by
anyone who knows more than I do.
>
> > However, these countries are not " Lands of Immigrants".
>
> Hmmm. The US is the "Land of Immigrants" but we do not have diversity. I
> see...
>
OK, please read this article. Very interesting. It was never
"diversity". It was more like dominance of the Anglo-Saxon way.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/foreign/divers.htm
> Why should it be, when it is not anywhere else
I beg to differ. In Germany and Ireland for one, you are German and
Irish if your ancestors were. You can go and apply for a passport. And
the people judge you by blood, not birthplace. But that is a different
story altogether.
>in the world?
Because the rest ( most of it, anyway) of the world is not " A Land of
Immigrants" from all over the world as you have said. Or are you now
saying that the US is the Land of the Native-Born and "Some"
Immigrants? The dictionary defines an American as a US citizen. So,
why is there so much nativism? If people talk about " becoming
American" and one can never become one in social realities, then what
is all this hype about becoming one?
Why must the
> US answer to a higher standard
Hey, who set the standard? US did. And you are the one who said that
the US is a Land of Immigrants from all over the world.
-- because at heart people believe we are
> superior?
Because it states so officially.
http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=American
> She was in the country for 6 years before we met, married to a Filipino 4 of
> those years. Next question?
Maybe luck plus being from a very Americanized country, fluent in
English and having lower expectations had a lot to do with it. Others
were not as lucky:
http://www.inq7.net/reg/2001/oct/05/reg_10-1.htm
http://www.eeoc.gov/press/3-2-99.html
http://www.filipinasmag.com/magazine/articles/3.shtml
Next rosy answer?
> These people are not represented in the census with any accuracy. The
> census is reflective of legal residents who are willing to answer questions
> (illegals refuse to respond to mailed census forms, fearing that responses
> will be used to track them down and deport them).
>
> > >Less than 50% of the population is white.
> >
> > Numerically, yes, but immigrants are concentrated in small areas. The
> > great expanses of the state are still very much white.
>
> Bwahahaha! Never been to California, have you?
>
> Look at the 2000 Census. Just with Hispanics alone, in the top 52 US
> counties with the largest Hispanic population, 17 are in California.
> Looking at these counties, they comprise 17 of the top 21 counties
> population-wise, with 28,588,300 of the state's 34,088,000 population. That
> means that 84% of the population in California lives in the areas with the
> highest comcentration of Hispanics.
>
Ok, I am defeated by your statistics. One thing I must say though is
that these people do not hold so much power in economic terms and are
marginalized socially.
> I wish that were true. That is precisely the problem. Enculturation is the
> natural assimilation through education and integration with the broader
> community. Yet immigrant enclaves, when they reach a certain critical mass,
> tend to preserve country of origin values in the face of a diminishing
> influence by the "majority" culture.
It may take them longer. Look at the Chicanos that cannot speak
Spanish.
And when the majority culture becomes
> the minority, as it has in New Mexico, California, Hawaii, etc., you find
> that the immigrant enclaves become balkanized.
Only for a little while. Look at the Japanese Americans in Hawaii. How
many can speak Japanese?
You have entire communities
> and miles-wide sections of towns where the signage is in foreign languages,
> the language of commerce and on the street is foreign, the language in the
> schools is foreign, etc.
But for how long? First generations will be like that. But then the
children and the grandchildren will stop being that way.
>
> Groups like Filipinos, which do tend to cluster together in certain areas,
> nonetheless lose their language and culture by the second or third
> generation. However, groups like Hispanics have a much higher retention of
> their language because of use in the home and the street. The family across
> the street has 3 generations of fluent Spanish speakers starting with the
> immigrant parents through grandkids, which is virtually unknown with other
> ethnicities. I know a number of Asian children of immigrants who have the
> language buit their children do not. The vast majority of Filipino
> second-generation I know have at best a passive recognition of Tagalog;
> non-Tagalog groups have even a lower language retention rate in my
> experience.
Hmm, do you think it may take five generations?
> > > Not among kids, though.
>
> What age kids are you talking about?
High school kids. There was an article about German exchange students
who got called "Nazis" in the US. Can't find it now.
Most younger kids are oblivious to
> race and ethnicity, needing to learn from their elders. Kids have
> throughout history made fun of other kids for whatever "differences" they
> perceive, but these are independent of general prejudices and simply based
> upon observable distinctions.
Ok here we go. Please read paragraph #6.
http://www.crede.ucsc.edu/about/news/CalVoice.html
> In the 2000 Census, 23% of Seattle's population were foreign born; 13% of
> the population is Asian, only 68% is white.
How well do these groups integrate, though? You see, the thing that
the US has been able to achieve is relative "tolerance". But it is
still exclusive, don't you think? I still see that people tend to keep
to their own and there is kind of " don't bother me and I won't bother
you" attitude. I do not think that it is solely because immigrants
want it that way. It is also because many Americans marginalize them.
It is not like Brazil, where people just don't care or care less.
>
> Dallas ranks 8th in the US for number of Asian residents, with whites
> comprising only 35% of the population. In Dallas, 24% of the residents are
> foreign born.
Ibid.
>
> > Agreed. But we are talking about a very cosmopolitan area, such as S.
> > California.
>
> This is simply where you fail to comprehend. When the majority of people
> live in cities, and those cities are diverse, you have a diverse culture.
> It used to amuse me when driving through little podunk towns in Texas and
> the South with populations of 500 to find a Thai restaurant run by Thais,
> etc.
>
> > Hmm. Interesting. Would they admit it to you, though?
>
> Of course. Minorities are going public all the time disclaiming the
> prejudice they experience. Minorities have no reticence of speaking out if
> they want.
I agree that some people get lucky. Others are just afraid because if
they complain, some guy can scream at them " Well, if you don't like
it, why don't you go back to where you came from?"
Guilty whites opened the doors in the 1960s and professional
> race mongers have kept the issues on the front page ever since.
Do you think this is bullshit?:
http://www.nnirr.org/projects/border_color.html
http://homewny.fairhousing.com/gohome_w01.htm
http://homewny.fairhousing.com/accent_w01.htm
Please read the plast five paragraphs in the following article.
Obviously these people were not as lucky and as respected as your
spouse. One such experience can really f**k up your mind.
http://www.tenantsunion.org/newsletter/200110/southwood.html
> > Where do you live? I
>
> SF Bay area -- which with the Greater LA area holds 80% of the state's
> population. When you talk about CA population, you are basically talking SF
> and LA megaplexes.
You know it all sounds good in statistics. I wish the daily life were
just as rosy. You can smile while passing by, say, a kimchi restaurant
but these people are facing difficulties that you could never face.
http://www.krccweb.org/html/his_kor.html
> > Again is California the reflection of the entire country which is many
> > thousand miles wide?
>
> Yes.
You really think so? How are these people integrating? Can they make
local friends easily? Are they being marginalized?
How would you like to be one of these people and have their
experiences
http://www.gwu.edu/~english/ccsc/2001_pages/JaedaPang.htm
?
Look what can happen when you leave the ethnic neighbourhood and go to
the real America:
http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/bh/hong.htm
http://www.saxakali.com/CommunityLinkups/hatecrimes1.htm
So, the rest of it is not as friendly and "diverse". Why don't these
haters know about the Land of Immigrants?
How about this: ( taken from
http://www.geocities.com/ylhao/adaptation.htm)
"...Meanwhile, The process of immigration is accompanied by a painful
cultural adjustment and adaptation. Having left home for America, the
immigrants face language handicaps and cultural barriers. To make
matters worse, despite their willingness to assimilate,..."
Yup...
..." the new immigrants confront a hostile public that questions their
willingness to assimilate and doubts their assimilability. They also
face the unrealistically high expectation that they should assimilate
quickly (Wong, 1982). It took earlier European immigrants two to three
to assimilate into the middle class, and such a pace was facilitated
by economic expansion, industrialization, and a long hiatus of
restricted immigration (Alba, 1986; Alba and Nee, 1997; Perlman and
Waldinger, 1997). Many of today’s immigrants feel alienated and
excluded in America. Some described their lives in America as " full
of deceit, dejection, marginalization and exploitation." (Mahler,
1995)..."
>All you have to do is go to www.census.gov and see for yourself.
The census does not detail the above reality. Numbers do not detail
feelings.
Plus it sucks being an immigrant, period. The best is to be a rich
foreign investor in some tropical country like RP, Costa Rica or
Brazil.
Congenital Kano
> I am not talking about culture here. I am talking about the living
> conditions and life itself and whether they are satisfied with their
> lives. Whether people there are genuinely (and generally) happy. With
> the way the economy, the medical services are and things like that.
> You do not see them trying to get into boats and scramble to come to
> the US.
One-seventh (4.4 million) of the foreign-born in the US according to the
2000 Census are Euros. That's a significant chunk, since they cannot walk
across the border like Latinos.
> What I meant is that you could not see how Anglo-Saxon Protestant you
> are in many of your attitudes unless either you could experience
> another culture in its totality and see your attitudes as being
> different against its background or have someone from another culture
> point them out to you. Otherwise, they will just seem natural to you
> and go unnoticed.
Heh heh. I'm married to a Filipina, yet I am unaware of how my cultural
values differ from others in the world.
Read my new book, "When Cultures Collide".
You presume an ignorance and provinciality that doesn't exist in urban
America today.
> > Again with the language bias. Do you think he might master other areas
of
> > knowledge outside his field of expertise that you do not know about?
>
>
> Could be, but I have not encountered it. Maybe technical ones. Most
> Europeans still state that most Americans just know very little
> outside of America.
>
> http://www.ups.edu/intlprogs/sahandbook/foreign.html
This piece says that US students (note that qualification) came in 8 out of
9 in knowledge of other cultures out of countries studied. No details of
the study are given (or the other countries involved, with their relative
rankings). What were the respective scores? Did the dirtribution look like
95%, 94%, 93%, etc.? Were other students tested on knowledge of American
culture as part of this (which they could be expected to know more about
because of media)? As stated this is worthless.
Also, what cultures were tested? Was knowledge of physically, politically
and economically distant cultures tested (i.e., all cultures tested on the
Bantu, or Tibet, or East Timor) or were Euros and Americans asked about Euro
cultures? So many unanswered questions.
However, I don't doubt that Euros think Americans are culturally ignorant.
From those I have had this conversation with, what it boils down to is a) we
don't know about THEIR culture as much as they think we should from their
own ethnocentrism (after all, they know all about American culture from TV
and movies), and b) we don't agree with their socialist political philosophy
(i.e., redistribution of wealth, hatred of Jews, views on how America should
surrender power and wealth).
> http://archives.thedaily.washington.edu/1996/022796/ced022796.html
This is just a silly letter to the editor in a college newspaper. It is
more reflective of the author's ignorance (he admits to not caring about
other cultures before joining the military) and opinion. The great joke is
that he castigates 3 Americans for speaking loudly in Japan, when Americans
will often feel uncomfortable with the volume level of general conversation
of Asians and Middle Easterners who exhibit the same cultural insensitivity
in the US.
> > I would put my general knowledge up against yours any day, whether in
> > history, science, theology, mathematics, sociology, psychology, etc.
Prove
> > I am atypical.
>
> You are. I have met very few people like yourself. For one here is an
> interesting article:
You hang with the wrong crowd.
> http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/07/06/9472.html
> http://www.nas.org/print/pressreleases/hqnas/releas_23apr02.htm
>
This is due to the destruction of the education system by liberals promoting
multiculturalism. History books are being gutted, and individuals are being
overlooked in the classroom, because of catering to minority activists who
believe Sacajawea needs more space in a history book than George Washington,
Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln combined (this was from my son's
history book).
Talk to people my age -- in their 40s or better -- to get a better picture
of what an American education used to be. No one my age or older, educated
in this country, would make the mistakes cited here.
This is my point all along -- the values that made America great, the
principles that built the nation, have been under constant attack since the
1960s, and we are reaping the whirlwind today. Unassimilated aliens are a
burgeoning problem, "social engineering" in the schools has failed, morality
has been outlawed by the courts, and without maintenance the very society
that attracts other people will be destroyed. Just like a ferry is a
wonderful invetion, taking people from island to island, if you crowd too
many people on it will sink and all will be lost.
> Besides, I am still learning myself and am happy to be defeated by
> anyone who knows more than I do.
To stop learning is death.
> OK, please read this article. Very interesting. It was never
> "diversity". It was more like dominance of the Anglo-Saxon way.
>
>
> http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/foreign/divers.htm
You missed the point of the article, which is also my point:
"For better or worse, the current fragmentation and directionlessness of
American society is the result, above all, of a disintegrating elite's
increasing inability or unwillingness to impose its hegemony on society as a
whole."
We had it, and we lost it. You maintain that it is still a WASP nation.
This author disagrees with you.
> Because the rest ( most of it, anyway) of the world is not " A Land of
> Immigrants" from all over the world as you have said. Or are you now
> saying that the US is the Land of the Native-Born and "Some"
> Immigrants? The dictionary defines an American as a US citizen. So,
> why is there so much nativism? If people talk about " becoming
> American" and one can never become one in social realities, then what
> is all this hype about becoming one?
>
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=we+scorn+immigrants&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=
UTF-8&selm=5e0d76a8.0207101323.1c37839%40posting.google.com&rnum=1
Again, you miss the point of the article. It points out that the
"nativists" include second-generation Americans who try to shut the door on
future immigrants. Hence they have become, or are accepted as, Americans.
The culture war in America is between those who think of themselves as
Americans ("nativists", if you will), and those who live here but still
consider themselves as being "other". THAT is the growing problem of the
culture's inability to assimilate the influx (what Michelle Malkin calls an
invasion), aided and abetted by a liberal conciousness that at heart hates
America out of some warped sense of guilt. Assimilation has become a nasty
concept, incredibly un-PC, because it stifles a person's heritage and seeks
to replace it with the terrible American culture.
> Why must the
> > US answer to a higher standard
>
> Hey, who set the standard? US did. And you are the one who said that
> the US is a Land of Immigrants from all over the world.
This is simply a fact -- everyone (including the "Native Americans")
migrated to the US. We continue to have the highest immigration rate of any
country in the world. We are, thus, a "nation of immigrants".
> -- because at heart people believe we are
> > superior?
>
> Because it states so officially.
>
> http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=American
"Officially"?
Where is your thread of thought here? You state that people with American
citizenship are defined as Americans, yet they are not accepted. This is
not in conflict. Saddam Hussein is, by definition, a "leader", yet he does
not "lead" his people, tend to their needs, make their lives better.
A person with a college degree is theoretically educated. This is not
always the case.
> > She was in the country for 6 years before we met, married to a Filipino
4 of
> > those years. Next question?
>
> Maybe luck plus being from a very Americanized country, fluent in
> English and having lower expectations had a lot to do with it. Others
> were not as lucky:
>
> http://www.inq7.net/reg/2001/oct/05/reg_10-1.htm
This is utter nonesense. Let's ask Fil-Ams about it -- DSP, Foolish Mortal,
Tansong Isda, LeeBat - not that anyone but you or me is reading this thread!
; )
A "brown Filipino" is prone to being killed in the US? 20 hate crimes a
day? What statistic does "prone" refer to? Define "hate crime". You will
find that these activists (who gain their power and furtune spewing hatred
and inciting diviciveness) have a very broad definition of "hate crime",
assuming that EVERY behavior by a non-Filipino (or non-whatever) is racially
motivated. If someone honks their horn at me because I'm daydreaming at a
changed stoplight, I don't view that as a "hate crime" or racially motivated
if he is non-white, but the professional hate mongers do. In EVERY CASE
where these groups are pressed to support their "facts" they fail.
I especially like this quote:
"But we do not want to make it appear that we are anti-US. We are just
against their policies that will not benefit us."
The US should always tailor policies to what will benefit others (this was
in reference to the "borderless war on terror" affecting the Philippines).
> http://www.eeoc.gov/press/3-2-99.html
Welcome to America, the land of the EEO lawsuit.
Lots of laughs (sad laughs, but bitterly funny nonetheless) here.
"However, contrary to its pledge, Woodbine paid the Filipino nurses about
$6.00 an hour less than their U.S. counterparts. Moreover, rather than
employing the Filipinos as registered nurses, they were assigned as nurses
aides and technicians. And even those Filipino nurses who were ultimately
assigned to registered nurse jobs received lower pay than the U.S. nurses at
Woodbine."
OK. First they say they were paid less than registered nurses, then they
say they were working lower level jobs which naturally pay less. Thus the
$6 figure is meaningless.
Having been through this with a niece, I know how this works. Filipino
registered nurses are not trained to the levels of American RNs, based
primarily on the techniques, equipment and facilities available in the
Philippines vs. the US. They have to be retrained and recertified. My
niece, a trained RN in the Pinas, was hammered by the curriculum here for a
couple of years.
Should people unqualified be paid the same as those who are qualified?
Another nasty little fact that does not make it into the EEO literature is
the fact that Filipinas often start working in convalescent facilities
rather than critical care facilities because of their lack of skills and
language. A surgical nurse MUST understand and speak English well enough
that there will be NO CONPUSION during surgery, di ba?
You also note that this was a "settlement", not a judgement. Nothing was
proven in a court of law -- the facility simply realized that in America you
start out on the losing end of any EEO complaint. The burden of proof is on
the sued party in a discrimination suit to prove that, all things being
equal, no discrimination was involved. This is virtually impossible to
prove.
Why so many suits like this? Does the $430,000 payoff to the attorneys give
a clue?
> http://www.filipinasmag.com/magazine/articles/3.shtml
Wow! A rash of hate crimes against Filipinos! No, wait, there was one by a
guy who set out to kill Jews and ran into a person of color as a target of
opportunity.
Let's look at the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics Hate crime data.
In 2000, ther following were reported. There is no breakdown of "Filipino",
just Asian/Pacific Islanders, a much broader category. But it suits our
purposes here:
2 hate-crime murders
2 hate-crime rapes
22 hate-crime aggravated assaults
57 hate-crime simple assaults
116 hate-crime intimidation
Wow! What a run-away problem!
Of course, whites are also subject to hate crimes:
5 hate-crime murders
1 hate-crime rapes
215 hate-crime aggravated assaults
280 hate-crime simple assaults
278 hate-crime intimidation
> Next rosy answer?
See above.
> Ok, I am defeated by your statistics. One thing I must say though is
> that these people do not hold so much power in economic terms and are
> marginalized socially.
See, this is where you are sucked in by the racial and cultural instigators.
Perfect example of this was what Harry Belefonte said about Colin Powell the
other day, saying he was a "house slave" doing the master's bidness. When a
black person succeeds, they are often marginialized by their own people --
whether they are Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Ward Connerly, or whomever. The
black middle class has had the most significant groth of ANY cultural or
racial group in the US since 1964, so that today only 25% of blacks live in
poverty (as opposed to some 90%+ in 1950). When you have that many people
in the middle class, you are talking about significant economic and social
power.
The fact that you don't WANT to believe something does not make it untrue.
> > I wish that were true. That is precisely the problem. Enculturation is
the
> > natural assimilation through education and integration with the broader
> > community. Yet immigrant enclaves, when they reach a certain critical
mass,
> > tend to preserve country of origin values in the face of a diminishing
> > influence by the "majority" culture.
>
> It may take them longer. Look at the Chicanos that cannot speak
> Spanish.
Latinos are one of the few communities which RETAIN their language through
the generations. You picked the wrong group. You would have been better
served looking at Russians, or Germans, or Haitians.
> And when the majority culture becomes
> > the minority, as it has in New Mexico, California, Hawaii, etc., you
find
> > that the immigrant enclaves become balkanized.
>
> Only for a little while. Look at the Japanese Americans in Hawaii. How
> many can speak Japanese?
Sorry, you just don't get it. These communities have existed since BEFORE
the US existed. They have only grown larger with the influx of immigrants.
They are not being assimilated. They are, indeed, talking about seceeding
from the US when they reach critical mass to form a nation called "Aztlan".
> You have entire communities
> > and miles-wide sections of towns where the signage is in foreign
languages,
> > the language of commerce and on the street is foreign, the language in
the
> > schools is foreign, etc.
>
> But for how long? First generations will be like that. But then the
> children and the grandchildren will stop being that way.
You're not paying attention. We are talking about third generation+, with
millions more foreign-born immigrants joining every year. The assimilation
process has all but broken down in California, to the extent that ESL is the
biggest course offering and classes are taught in Spanish so as not to
"disenfranchise" Hispanics.
> > Groups like Filipinos, which do tend to cluster together in certain
areas,
> > nonetheless lose their language and culture by the second or third
> > generation. However, groups like Hispanics have a much higher retention
of
> > their language because of use in the home and the street.
>
> Hmm, do you think it may take five generations?
Since I do not see any lessening, no.
> High school kids. There was an article about German exchange students
> who got called "Nazis" in the US. Can't find it now.
Ah. One incident. Great to generalize from that... good science.
> Most younger kids are oblivious to
> > race and ethnicity, needing to learn from their elders. Kids have
> > throughout history made fun of other kids for whatever "differences"
they
> > perceive, but these are independent of general prejudices and simply
based
> > upon observable distinctions.
>
> Ok here we go. Please read paragraph #6.
>
> http://www.crede.ucsc.edu/about/news/CalVoice.html
Do you see anywhere in the article the level of schools involved? Given the
cognitive requirements (requiring formal operations, analytical reasoning,
etc.) you are obviously not talking about "younger kids" here as I was.
Small children (0-7 or so) are oblivious that differences are "bad"; they
have to learn this from their parents, peers and society.
What this article does not dwell on is that, in schools where "diversity
education" such as this CREDE group advocates is done, racial incidents
INCREASE (see "Illiberal Education" and "The End of Racism" by Dinesh
D'Souza, or "Uncivil Wars" by David Horowitz).
Now, stop, take a deep breath, and think -- what do racial and ethnic
conflicts in schools indicate? Can you say "failure of assimilation"? Can
you say "diversity of philosophy"? I thought you could.
> > In the 2000 Census, 23% of Seattle's population were foreign born; 13%
of
> > the population is Asian, only 68% is white.
>
> How well do these groups integrate, though? You see, the thing that
> the US has been able to achieve is relative "tolerance". But it is
> still exclusive, don't you think? I still see that people tend to keep
> to their own and there is kind of " don't bother me and I won't bother
> you" attitude. I do not think that it is solely because immigrants
> want it that way. It is also because many Americans marginalize them.
> It is not like Brazil, where people just don't care or care less.
As I have noted again and again, these break down along economic lines more
than race, although economics may reflect racial distinctions. Low-end
economic people tend to hang with their "own kind"
> I agree that some people get lucky. Others are just afraid because if
> they complain, some guy can scream at them " Well, if you don't like
> it, why don't you go back to where you came from?"
Again, not the way it works in the US today. There are so many "advocacy
groups" and lawyers pandering to racial or ethnic "problems" that even the
slightest hint of prejudice may be acted upon. And the people who scream
that are actually more likely to be people of color or non-Anglo ethnicity,
because da white man be afraid, bery afraid today.
> Guilty whites opened the doors in the 1960s and professional
> > race mongers have kept the issues on the front page ever since.
>
> Do you think this is bullshit?:
>
>
> http://www.nnirr.org/projects/border_color.html
Professional race mongers, yes. Look at the signs in pictures on the
site -- "Abolish the INS", "Open the Borders". I have given you the hate
crimes stats for the 3rd-largest non-white group in the US, but look at
another summary of "hate crimes" by motivation:
4337 race (2884 anti-black, 875 anti-white)
1472 religion (1109 anti-Jew)
1299 sexual orientation (anti-gay)
911 ethnic
Look at their claims and the "may" and "possibly" qualifications. This
group has a definite political agenda -- open borders with Mexico (although
Mexico has the military on it's southern border), and amnesty for illegals.
Typical special-interest group.
>
> http://homewny.fairhousing.com/gohome_w01.htm
"Landlord after landlord voiced their concerns to the agency assisting her:
"Does she know the meaning of 'rent' and 'security deposit'?" "If I let her
move in, will I also be opening the door to an enormous extended family?"
"How can I rent to her if I can't communicate with her? I just can't take
that kind of chance." Fear and misunderstanding of another culture or people
who don't have English as their first language all too often lead to the
denial of housing and other basic civil rights like education, and
employment - things that most Americans take for granted."
This is what is known as "informed discrimination", i.e., discrimination
based upon experience. Facts are facts -- many immigrants place landlords
in violation of the law by housing more people in a space than is legal.
Many cook foods whose odors are offensive to neighbors (I used to do
security evaluations of retirement homes -- the things I encountered in the
Chinese homes were... odiferous, to say the least. Language problems exist,
and landlords have the right to be able to communicate effectively with
tenants. This isn't "misunderstanding" -- ask any NYC landlord who rents to
Puerto Ricans about renting to one person and having 15 move in. The above
implies that these things don't happen, or are generalizations based upon
prejudice, but they are in fact based upon experience. If you have two
applicants, one who speaks English well, one who doesn't, all else being
equal language will be a factor. It's not discrimination, it's choice. Do
you deliberately date ugly women to be fair-minded? Or do you discriminate
and chose people who appeal to you?
A better example is the frequent "racist" claim against cabbies in NYC that
they don't pick up blacks. The truth is, they don't pick up black males
from 18-30. Black women, elderly black people, etc., don't have problems.
Most cabbies are immigrants of color. Why don't they pick up black males
between 18-30? Because 25% of that population has a criminal record.
Because the majority of crimes against cabbies (robbery, assault, murder)
have come from that group. The facts indicate they have a much higher risk
from that group. So why tempt fate? They are not saying that particular
black 20-year-old is going to mug them, but the odds are astronomically
higher than if they pick up an elderly white woman.
>
> http://homewny.fairhousing.com/accent_w01.htm
>
> Please read the plast five paragraphs in the following article.
> Obviously these people were not as lucky and as respected as your
> spouse. One such experience can really f**k up your mind.
Try finding any reference in the news or on the web of car bombings in
"Black Rock" or the "lower West Side". You won't find them...
This is a group that makes money virtually extorting money from landlords
and businesses. It's big business in America.
> http://www.tenantsunion.org/newsletter/200110/southwood.html
Wow. One story about a man who feels he "may" have been discriminated
against because he had a Mid-East accent after 9-11. In case you hadn't
noticed, there was a lot of anger immediatly after 9-11. I take note of the
fact that a) he was not discriminated against prior to 9-11 by the story,
arguing for a lack of prejudice on the part of the inspector, b) he was
snippy and defensive when questioned (when he could have solved all problems
by saying he was Syrian and he thought those bastards would fry in hell for
what they did), c) he does not dispute that there were legitimate violations
cited by the inspector, d) you know nothing about the scheduling of the
inspector which might explain (rather than ethnic bias) why it was hard to
get an appointment (note: I have had inspectors give me the run-around;
maybe because I'm white?) and e) you only have one side of this story, from
a group that makes money suing "offenders".
There has been a deafening silence from Arab-Americans following 9-11.
Unlike the Japanese and Germans in WW2, Arab-Americans have not rushed to
the aid of their country, or been outspoken against terrorism. When you
hear from Arab-American advocacy groups, they are whining about fears of
reprisals and discrimination (not *actual* reprisals or discrimination, but
their *fear* that it will happen -- probably because that is what would
happen in their native culture).
Non-Muslims have openly embraced Muslims who have declared their allegiance
to the US over the Islamists. And if you had ever done any work with an
inspector, you know to say "Yes, sir" and not challenge them. That's as
stupid as talking back to a cop or an INS bureaucrat -- they have the power
to make your life miserable, and you better treat them nice.
> You know it all sounds good in statistics. I wish the daily life were
> just as rosy. You can smile while passing by, say, a kimchi restaurant
> but these people are facing difficulties that you could never face.
>
> http://www.krccweb.org/html/his_kor.html
Heh, heh. You know what 245(i) refers to? It allowed the adjustment of
status of illegal aliens. You know, people who broke the laws of the US to
enter illegally or overstay their legal visas. It kept them from being
deported, by paying a $1000 fine, and bypassed the normal procedure where
someone caught as an illegal is deported and barred from legal re-entry for
years.
You are right. I do not face the same issues as illegal aliens.
As to the rest, it is standard victimization rhetoric, where the statistics
(3 Koreans killed -- but why? Because they were Koreans? Or because they
were liquor store owners killed during a holdup?) are presented without
substantiation.
> You really think so? How are these people integrating? Can they make
> local friends easily? Are they being marginalized?
>
> How would you like to be one of these people and have their
> experiences
>
> http://www.gwu.edu/~english/ccsc/2001_pages/JaedaPang.htm
Well, let's see. You have the terrible situation where Asians are viewed as
superior by whites to other ethnicities. You have a person claiming racial
discrimination because a neighbor objected to her hanging clothes on a
common fence into her yard (guess what -- that LOL would have complained if
it were George Washington hanging his knickers on the fence -- that just
isn't a racial or ethnic issue, unless it is the offender believing that her
customs should be respected by others). You have people feeling isolated
from their own race as they become successful. You have complaining about
representation in the highest offices of the land, when nothing is said
about the qualifications, poilitics or available people to fill such posts.
You get debunking the "myth" (without support) that Asians are better off
financially because in reality more people in the household work and
contribute to the household income (hint: a household with 4 members, 3 of
whom work, that brings in $150k a year has the same purchasing power and
lifestyle of a household of 4 where 2 work to bring in the same amount).
It's similar to women complaining that women only make $ .76 to a man's $1.
Closer examination shows that women do not take degrees in those fields
where men often make the big bucks (I believe a weighted figure I recently
saw was $ .96, not parity but not bad), and the same is true for advanced
degrees and minorities (for example, the vast majority of blacks getting
doctorates get them in education, not a well-paying field).
Last Saturday I took the Law SAT at UC Berkeley. First time in my life I
felt old (I overheard comments about the "old guy" -- coulda been worse,
coulda been the "old fat guy"), but I got my revenge when those kids were
sweating and I finished each section 5-10 minutes early and just leaned
back, hands behind my head, and smiled... What I noticed was the diversity
of the students. I have attended business school graduations twice at UC
Riverside in the last 3 years. Each time, as the top students were named,
they were predominently Asian. In general, the graduation order was Asian
and PIers like Pilipinos, then whites, then Hispanics and blacks. In this
test I just took, OTOH, at a school with a huge Asian contingent, there were
exactly 2 in a classroom of 100 people. There were no blacks. There was
one Indian. The rest were white. That tells me that the legal profession,
which has a relatively high (and potentially astronomical) pay grade, is
predominantly white. Thus the pool for judges will be predominantly white.
Politicians are often lawyers, ditto. Why is this? My theory is that the
law (and particularly, the LSAT) is extremely focussed on comprehension of
the English language. Even Asians-Ams born in the US score lower on verbal
standardized tests (higher on math). This is not discrimination, but
reality.
>
> Look what can happen when you leave the ethnic neighbourhood and go to
> the real America:
>
> http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/bh/hong.htm
Yes. You can get killed for calling someone a name and pounding on their
car. If you are a minority (other than black) you will be able to hide
behind a smokescreen of oppression to minimize your sentence.
Tell me, who is the victim here, the stupid, drunk white boy who was killed
or the Asian who he insulted but never touched who killed him? Sounds to me
like an Asian-on-white hate crime...
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/census2000/profiles/place/1605350570.pdf
6% of the population of Ocean Shores, WA is non-white. Ob cors, total
population is 3836, so the 200-odd non-whites are outnumbered, but odds are
there is not a lot of hate crimes going on.
Look, stupidity and hate exist. I'm not denying that. You get some drunks
hunting trouble of any type and trouble will find them. But isolated
incidents like this should not be generalized, because they are rare.
>
> http://www.saxakali.com/CommunityLinkups/hatecrimes1.htm
This is a childish screed that ignores the facts. Every news story I
accessed (including Time and Newsweek) mention that Ileto was Filipino.
This kid who wrote this "yellow journalism" (heh, heh) says we should know
the names of an Asian killed in a race riot in 1930, and the fact that we
don't indicates we are marginalizing violence against Asians. What is
ironic is that he comes up with 7 Asians killed in hate crimes in 72 years!
Wow, what an epidemic!
"Postal worker Joseph Ileto mourned as President Clinton sends condolences"
"The families of those wounded that day in the shooting at the North Valley
Jewish Community Center and of Joseph Ileto, the Filipino-American postal
worker gunned down by the same alleged perpetrator, came up to the podium
and tried to bring meaning to their personal tragedies."
Jewish Journal
"Joseph Ileto, the letter carrier who was slain August 10 in California by a
gunman from Washington State, will be honored at a memorial service in
Seattle August 31. The Filipino Community of Seattle, Branch 79 of the
National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC), Local 316 of the National
Postal Mailhandlers Union, the Greater Seattle Area Local of the American
Postal Workers Union (APWU), and the Seattle Chapter of the Asian Pacific
American Labor Alliance (APALA) are sponsoring the observance."
Seattle Press
> So, the rest of it is not as friendly and "diverse". Why don't these
> haters know about the Land of Immigrants?
Name a single country where there have not been murders or violence against
others because of race, religion or ethnic origin.
How about England?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/919994.stm
Germany?
http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/germany/03/03/nazis.protests/
France? Norway? Sweden?
http://www.mpa.gov.uk/downloads/cdo-010424-06-appendix01.pdf
See, you are getting twisted in your positions here. Remember where we
started? You said there was a uniform American culture, that people were
forced to conform to. I explained that that culture has been under assault
for 40 years, and pointed to the diversity of the culture and the
unassimilated immigrants. You said most everyone was WASP in the US, and
that there was little diversity (you said I only *thought* it was diverse,
being the ignorant provincial I am. Now you keep showing examples of
cultural diversity and cultural clashes. Make up yer mind!
> How about this: ( taken from
> http://www.geocities.com/ylhao/adaptation.htm)
>
> "...Meanwhile, The process of immigration is accompanied by a painful
> cultural adjustment and adaptation. Having left home for America, the
> immigrants face language handicaps and cultural barriers. To make
> matters worse, despite their willingness to assimilate,..."
>
> Yup...
I'm sorry, but define "willingness to assimilate". Does this mean spending
all of your time with people from the old country speaking the old language?
Does this mean joining "X-American" groups in college? Does this mean
flying the flag of your home country instead of the American flag? Does
this mean demanding driving licenses for illegal immigrants, and in-state
tuition for illegals (when legal residents of the next state pay 10 times
the rate)? Does this mean demanding voter pamphlets printed in your native
language? Does this mean seeking preferential treatment through set-asides,
racial preferences and special aid programs? These are all the ingredients
that today's immigrants expect, which were unavailble historically to those
who immigrated in the past.
> ..." the new immigrants confront a hostile public that questions their
> willingness to assimilate and doubts their assimilability.
Due to observations of how certain immigrants remain in balkanized enclaves,
and how several generations often stay on public assistance and remain with
their ancestral tongue as their main language.
>They also
> face the unrealistically high expectation that they should assimilate
> quickly (Wong, 1982). It took earlier European immigrants two to three
> to assimilate into the middle class, and such a pace was facilitated
> by economic expansion, industrialization, and a long hiatus of
> restricted immigration (Alba, 1986; Alba and Nee, 1997; Perlman and
> Waldinger, 1997).
And, ob cors, there has been no economic expansion and industrialization in
the last 40 years?
This also speaks to my point that the ability to assimilate immigrants has
broken down under the overwhelming assault of the past few decades.
>Many of today’s immigrants feel alienated and
> excluded in America. Some described their lives in America as " full
> of deceit, dejection, marginalization and exploitation." (Mahler,
> 1995)..."
>
> The census does not detail the above reality. Numbers do not detail
> feelings.
Yeah. "Some" described their lives...
You have bought into the victimization mentality that "advocates" have
foisted on certain communities. Again, I suggest you ask Fil-Ams here to
share THEIR experiences in the US. I know of only one who has ever
entertained the notion that he was discriminated against because he was
Filipino.
You see, in America today it is popular to blame your failure on some
external factor, rather than accepting responsibility. This cuts across
race and ethnicity (just watch any of the daytime talk shows; you'll see
white trash overrepresented in the whiner category). But minorities have a
built-in excuse, and sharks like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc., have
built fortunes exploiting and promulgating this. Meanwhile, those people
who DO assimilate are branded as race traitors.
> Plus it sucks being an immigrant, period. The best is to be a rich
> foreign investor in some tropical country like RP, Costa Rica or
> Brazil.
I know plenty of immigrants who are quite happy here. None of them would
turn down the rich part, however.
Randy
Dirty Sick Pig
Congenital Kano wrote:
> Read my new book, "When Cultures Collide".
Will there be pics of nekkid women colliding? ISBN?
HorniPig
joekerr
> "ExpatAuthority" <expatau...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bd866d06.02101...@posting.google.com...
>
renowl must be his sock puppet...lol!
Dirty Sick Pig
joekerr wrote:
> Now this jackass Exfart is almost as stupid as matthews is!!!! In fact
> renowl must be his sock puppet...lol!
Please apologize to my friend Expat Authority for ........? Duh?
Fuck it! Call a spade a shitshovel.
BaboyChin
Congenital Kano
"Dirty Sick Pig" <drtys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3DA7BAEB...@hotmail.com...
>
>
> Congenital Kano wrote:
>
> > Read my new book, "When Cultures Collide".
>
> Will there be pics of nekkid women colliding? ISBN?
>
I made the mistake of hiring Bob Chin as the photog for the book. He spent
weeks taking pix of nekkid wimmin colliding, only to find out he had
forgotten to load film into the camera. I'm sure it was an honest mistake.
I'm awaiting the return on the $17,653 I advanced him for film.
Photo-generic Pig
ExpatAuthority
> One-seventh (4.4 million) of the foreign-born in the US according to the
> 2000 Census are Euros. That's a significant chunk, since they cannot walk
> across the border like Latinos.
Well, I would like to see how many of these are the " real" Euros, not
Eastern Euros or Armenians, Portuguese and Greeks who do not count.
Why not? Because these come from relatively poor countries. Italians?
Well, these used to be poor. That is when they came. So some
Neapolitan grandma still counts in the census. Not anymore. Anybody
from Belgium, Switzerland, Norway, Luxembourg? 89-year old Swedes from
Minnesota do not count. We are talking about here and now.
.
>
> Heh heh. I'm married to a Filipina, yet I am unaware of how my cultural
> values differ from others in the world.
Not too much. A Filipina, a product of a Christian, Americanized
educational system, from a country which is almost a holographic copy
of the US in Asia? And another English-speaking person? Nah! It is
like a Spaniard who went to Mexico and now is talking about a "culture
shock" my a**. Different cultures but not "too" different. Go to China
or Russia and stay there for a while. You will see what I mean by
"different". The difference between a Filipina and an Irishwoman is
not that great.
> Read my new book, "When Cultures Collide".
Maybe you should re-title it to " When relatively similar cultures
collide".
>
> You presume an ignorance and provinciality that doesn't exist in urban
> America today.
I am just quoting things that I heard, saw and experienced myself and
heard other people's experiences. America has changed a bit. It has
become a bit "less" insular but it is still quite insular. Sheet! You
go to New York and people there ask immigrants ( from Budapest and
Moscow) if they have electricity in their country and if they have TV.
They ask African students as whether they bought their clothes at the
airport, since all of them are naked back home. They ask Arabs if they
go to school on camels.
But again, most of the world is still ignorant but Americans should
not be that way.
I'll be back later. Got to finish some projects here.
Congenital Kano
"ExpatAuthority" <expatau...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bd866d06.02101...@posting.google.com...
> ">
> > 2000 Census are Euros. That's a significant chunk, since they cannot
walk
> > across the border like Latinos.
>
> Well, I would like to see how many of these are the " real" Euros, not
> Eastern Euros or Armenians, Portuguese and Greeks who do not count.
> Why not? Because these come from relatively poor countries. Italians?
> Well, these used to be poor. That is when they came. So some
> Neapolitan grandma still counts in the census. Not anymore. Anybody
> from Belgium, Switzerland, Norway, Luxembourg? 89-year old Swedes from
> Minnesota do not count. We are talking about here and now.
The stats show that the majority of foreign born are in their 20s and 30s
(which makes sense, since the major magnet for immigration is work).
The top Euro countries of birth are Germany and the UK.
> > Heh heh. I'm married to a Filipina, yet I am unaware of how my cultural
> > values differ from others in the world.
>
> Not too much. A Filipina, a product of a Christian, Americanized
> educational system, from a country which is almost a holographic copy
> of the US in Asia? And another English-speaking person? Nah! It is
> like a Spaniard who went to Mexico and now is talking about a "culture
> shock" my a**. Different cultures but not "too" different. Go to China
> or Russia and stay there for a while. You will see what I mean by
> "different". The difference between a Filipina and an Irishwoman is
> not that great.
Oh, jeez. Here's the guy who promotes language as a requirement to
understanding a country, then denies that the multiple languages of the
Philippines have anything to do with culture (a grafted language is more
important).
"Holographic copy"? This makes me doubt you have ever been to the RP. I
suppose you believe Hong Kong is a "holographic copy" of the UK?
Aside from the differences in food, dress, entertainment, lifestyle,
housing, religion (you ARE aware that, while nominally Catholic, the RCC of
the Philippines had appropriated the animist beliefs of the pre-existing
culture), politics, and family values, I agree that they are carbon copies.
The fact that the Philippines is a "face" culture as opposed to a "guilt"
culture like the US seems to escape you, with all of the social,
philosophical, economic and moral implications.
I'm sorry. Expat, here you have not only demonstrated your ignorance of the
US but of the rest of the world. Russia has more commonalities with the US
than the Philippines has - including linguistic, social and cultural roots.
Just a hint -- Russian classical music is thematically, instrumentally and
tonally compatible with European and American classical music, while the
indigenous music of the Philippines is not.
> > Read my new book, "When Cultures Collide".
>
> Maybe you should re-title it to " When relatively similar cultures
> collide".
Ah, ignorance is bliss.
> > You presume an ignorance and provinciality that doesn't exist in urban
> > America today.
>
> I am just quoting things that I heard, saw and experienced myself and
> heard other people's experiences. America has changed a bit. It has
> become a bit "less" insular but it is still quite insular. Sheet! You
> go to New York and people there ask immigrants ( from Budapest and
> Moscow) if they have electricity in their country and if they have TV.
> They ask African students as whether they bought their clothes at the
> airport, since all of them are naked back home. They ask Arabs if they
> go to school on camels.
This is simply stupid slander. Americans are stupid, but not *that* stupid.
Black Americans are likely to ask arrivals from Africa why they are not
wearing tribal garments (because they are so popular in the Afrocentrist
black population in the US), but they have an idealized understanding of
life in Africa which is much higher than the brutal reality. They
OVERESTIMATE rather than UNDERESTIMATE (just as many Americans do about the
"native American" culture).
> But again, most of the world is still ignorant but Americans should
> not be that way.
>
> I'll be back later. Got to finish some projects here.
Don't bother. I had been willing to concede you some knowledge of other
cultures, but your ignorance of them is as vast as your ignorance of
American life.
Randy
tansong Isda
> >
> > Heh heh. I'm married to a Filipina, yet I am unaware of how my cultural
> > values differ from others in the world.
>
> Not too much. A Filipina, a product of a Christian, Americanized
> educational system, from a country which is almost a holographic copy
> of the US in Asia? And another English-speaking person? Nah! It is
> like a Spaniard who went to Mexico and now is talking about a "culture
> shock" my a**. Different cultures but not "too" different. Go to China
> or Russia and stay there for a while. You will see what I mean by
> "different". The difference between a Filipina and an Irishwoman is
> not that great.
Huh?
The only similarity would be their religion, other than that, you would be
flat-out wrong! A Filipina would strain trying to understand the English spoken
by the Irish. A Spaniard would not be able to acclimate that quickly to Mexico
outside of the city proper. Mexico is actually more like the US where many
different cultures exist, outside of the big cities the influences of the
indigenous tribes are obvious.
Do not assume that language is enough of a cultural marker, there are more.
ExpatAuthority
> cultures, but your ignorance of them is as vast as your ignorance of
> American life.
I will come back whenever I want to. You do not own this ng. It is
public. Don't be so bossy and overbearing, please! Unlike you who seem
to know it all, I am open to accepting other people's knowledge.
Here is an excerpt about American business culture. It agrees with a
lot of things that I was saying ( paragraph 6 and 8).
http://www.executiveplanet.com/business-culture/92783609828.html
As far as the Philippines being heavily influenced by the US, let's
take it in relative terms. Go to Thailand, China, some Arab countries
where people are non-Christians, non-Americanized, then we will talk
about the true collision of cultures.
Russians are closer to Americans than Filipinos? Well, this is
interesting. LOL. Well, they are if they end up in some 3d world
non-white country and people see them and say " Americano". For one
99% of Russians cannot speak English and they use the cyrillic
alphabet. Secondly, their culture is family-oriented and
non-individualistic. Then, they are Greek Orthodox. The eastern
church. Their culture is Greek-based not Roman-based. Again, you would
need to go to Russia and compare. Otherwise there are two many factors
to consider. I have lived there, and I find Filipinos to be very close
to Americans. With all the education, signs, and newspapers and laws
looking like they do in the US, it ( the Philippines) is.
Anyway, do you still think these people are closer to Americans than
Filipinos?
http://zhenya.freeyellow.com/undrus1.htm
Hong Kong is very Anglicized. The people's names are John Woo and
David Lee, etc. Go to mainland China and then stay there and then come
back to HK. You will see just how Westernized/Anglicized it is.
On another topic, what would you say about these?
http://www.wab.org/prodigy/summer2001/piece53.html
And this is also very true:
ExpatAuthority
>
> The stats show that the majority of foreign born are in their 20s and 30s
> (which makes sense, since the major magnet for immigration is work).
>
> The top Euro countries of birth are Germany and the UK.
And these are immigrants who came to settle or just workers? And since
when did the US start attracting young Germans? Gee, where in the US
will you see a young German immigrant? I thought their salaries were
higher. UK, maybe, but I just do not see that many Brits in the US.
>
> Oh, jeez. Here's the guy who promotes language as a requirement to
> understanding a country, then denies that the multiple languages of the
> Philippines have anything to do with culture (a grafted language is more
> important).
Yes it is because most cultural life in newspapers and movies etc is
done in English or Tagalog. Again, we are a bit off point here. We are
talking about mainstream Filipino culture which is heavily
Americanized.
Hong Kong is a "holographic copy" of the UK?>
> Aside from the differences in food, dress, entertainment, lifestyle,
> housing, religion (you ARE aware that, while nominally Catholic, the RCC of
> the Philippines had appropriated the animist beliefs of the pre-existing
> culture),
Yes, I am aware of that. So what? Still very close to the US as
compared with other countries in the region.
politics, and family values, I agree that they are carbon copies.
Go to China, stay there for a while and go back to RP. You will sigh
with relief: "Ah, this place is just like America".
> The fact that the Philippines is a "face" culture as opposed to a "guilt"
> culture like the US seems to escape you, with all of the social,
> philosophical, economic and moral implications.
Sure, there are differences, but they are not as profound. Let's use a
factor system. Say, US is different from Canada by the factor of 1. It
is different from the Arab world by ,say, a factor of 150. The
Philippines would be different from the US by a factor of say, 8. And
no two places are exactly the same, anyway. A New Yorker will go
through a "culture shock" in California. So? Still would not be *too*
different.
>
> I'm sorry. Expat, here you have not only demonstrated your ignorance of the
> US but of the rest of the world. Russia has more commonalities with the US
> than the Philippines has - including linguistic, social and cultural roots.
How so?
> Just a hint -- Russian classical music is thematically, instrumentally and
> tonally compatible with European and American classical music, while the
> indigenous music of the Philippines is not.
Geez. I listened to Philippines folk music. "Paru paru" for one.
Sounds a lot like Russian, by the way. All major tones, though.
>
> > > Read my new book, "When Cultures Collide".
> >
> > Maybe you should re-title it to " When relatively similar cultures
> > collide".
>
> Ah, ignorance is bliss.
Is that why you seem so blissfully smug?
>
> > > You presume an ignorance and provinciality that doesn't exist in urban
> > > America today.
> >
> > I am just quoting things that I heard, saw and experienced myself and
> > heard other people's experiences. America has changed a bit. It has
> > become a bit "less" insular but it is still quite insular. Sheet! You
> > go to New York and people there ask immigrants ( from Budapest and
> > Moscow) if they have electricity in their country and if they have TV.
> > They ask African students as whether they bought their clothes at the
> > airport, since all of them are naked back home. They ask Arabs if they
> > go to school on camels.
>
> This is simply stupid slander.
Nope. My African classmates complained to me. You are not an African
foreign student, are you? So, how would you know? You see, it is easy
for you to make all these high and mighty statements but you are the
fortunate one.
http://www.stolaf.edu/depts/cis/wp/oliha/new_page_4.htm
You would never know what those people go through and what "sh*t" they
have to hear. It is not easy to come to America and be misunderstood
like that. You would never never know that just like a man would not
know what it is like for a woman to give birth.
Americans are stupid, but not *that* stupid.
http://www.geocities.com/whisperzz.geo/jokes2.html
Read paragraph 8 of this:
http://www.reporternews.com/2000/opinion/future0522.html
Well, here it is:
"....Americans fall far short of the rest of the world in knowledge of
geography. We not only don’t know about events in the rest of
the world, we don’t know where the rest of the world is. In
1988, the National Geographic Society commissioned a survey of the
geographic knowledge of citizens from many nations. The American team
came in last...."
YUP!!!!!!!!
"...Most Americans couldn’t find the Persian Gulf; about half
knew the location of Central America; 15 percent reversed North and
South Korea; 43 percent were unable to locate England; and 14 percent
of Americans couldn’t find their own country on a map. A
different survey found only 48 percent of Americans know that the
Earth goes around the sun once a year..."
It is not stupidity. These people would be very knowledgeable in their
own field, maybe. It is ethnic insularity and arrogance as well as
lack of interest in foreign cultures. That is the way the US culture
as projected "out of" the average Joe. Maybe not "out of" you. My
African classmate just told me over and over again, how they would ask
him why he has clothes. And how people would recoil when he would tell
him that he was from Africa.
>
> > But again, most of the world is still ignorant but Americans should
> > not be that way.
> >
> > I'll be back later. Got to finish some projects here.
>
> Don't bother. I had been willing to concede you some knowledge of other
> cultures, but your ignorance of them is as vast as your ignorance of
> American life.
As I said before, I will be back whether you want it or not. You may
own your company but not this ng. Or do you think that now you own the
Internet, too?
>
> Randy
H.M.
Congenital Kano
"ExpatAuthority" <expatau...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bd866d06.02101...@posting.google.com...
> > cultures, but your ignorance of them is as vast as your ignorance of
> > American life.
>
>
> I will come back whenever I want to. You do not own this ng. It is
> public. Don't be so bossy and overbearing, please! Unlike you who seem
> to know it all, I am open to accepting other people's knowledge.
Plonk!
Try to find some sites that aren't by adolescents. You protest American
ignorance based upon citing ignorant children's misunderstandings of the
world. Perhaps because you are a teen in your own education and maturity?
C'mon, Exfart, can't you support yourself with anything more substantial
than student term papers? UNDERGRAD term papers at that! Gib me a break!
And if you had read my post, I'm not telling you not to come to SCF, I'm
simply saying you are ignorant. Prattle on all you want, it's just not
worth my time to educate you. You can't afford my rates.
Randy
Dirty Sick Pig
ExpatAuthority wrote:
> Well, I would like to see how many of these are the " real" Euros, not
> Eastern Euros or Armenians, Portuguese and Greeks who do not count.
> Why not? Because these come from relatively poor countries. Italians?
> Well, these used to be poor. That is when they came. So some
> Neapolitan grandma still counts in the census. Not anymore. Anybody
> from Belgium, Switzerland, Norway, Luxembourg? 89-year old Swedes from
> Minnesota do not count. We are talking about here and now.
Expat Authority, just what kind of a fucking animal are you, you cocksucker?
Animal Pig
Dirty Sick Pig
Congenital Kano wrote:
> "ExpatAuthority" <expatau...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bd866d06.02101...@posting.google.com...
> > I will come back whenever I want to. You do not own this ng. It is
> > public. Don't be so bossy and overbearing, please! Unlike you who seem
> > to know it all, I am open to accepting other people's knowledge.
>
> Plonk!
Hehe. Now you know why I consider exfart lower than the dogshit I step on every
day.
> Try to find some sites that aren't by adolescents. You protest American
> ignorance based upon citing ignorant children's misunderstandings of the
> world. Perhaps because you are a teen in your own education and maturity?
"Perhaps" is not the right word. The right term is the Irish "fershure."
> C'mon, Exfart, can't you support yourself with anything more substantial
> than student term papers? UNDERGRAD term papers at that! Gib me a break!
>
> And if you had read my post, I'm not telling you not to come to SCF, I'm
> simply saying you are ignorant. Prattle on all you want, it's just not
> worth my time to educate you. You can't afford my rates.
>
> Randy
Please! exfart was born that way. It's congenital.
~Pig
ExpatAuthority
> Try to find some sites that aren't by adolescents. You protest American
> ignorance based upon citing ignorant children's misunderstandings of the
> world.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/genetic-fallacy.html
This could be a very intelligent young person. And also that person
did a research of other adults' works. We cannot discredit a person
because of his /her age. It was not written by a child ( definition?
under 18).
OK. If that is unacceptable to you, here we go.
http://www.vidaamericana.com/english/culture.html
Perhaps because you are a teen in your own education and maturity?
Few teens have an MA.
>
> C'mon, Exfart, can't you support yourself with anything more substantial
> than student term papers? UNDERGRAD term papers at that! Gib me a break!
OK. Here is your break: Read paragraph six. She is no undergrad.
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/0701/family.html
>
> And if you had read my post, I'm not telling you not to come to SCF, I'm
> simply saying you are ignorant.
In many areas I am. So are you. So is everybody else.
However, you know what. In some things, you are right: this article is
very interesting:
http://www.giarts.org/conf_01/Keynote_Ken.htm
Prattle on all you want, it's just not
worth my time to educate you. You can't afford my rates.
I am educating you, too. You have not been an immigrant to the US so
you do not know what it is like. I am letting you know what it has
been like.
ExpatAuthority
>
> > http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/07/06/9472.html
> > http://www.nas.org/print/pressreleases/hqnas/releas_23apr02.htm
> >
> This is due to the destruction of the education system by liberals promoting
> multiculturalism. History books are being gutted, and individuals are being
> overlooked in the classroom, because of catering to minority activists who
> believe Sacajawea needs more space in a history book than George Washington,
> Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln combined (this was from my son's
> history book).
However, while this trend is definitely on the way, what about all the
people in their 40ies and 50ies abd 60ies? They are still there, with
money and many in positions of power. While America is chanGING , it
has not yet really changED and many attitudes still remain.
>
> Talk to people my age -- in their 40s or better -- to get a better picture
> of what an American education used to be. No one my age or older, educated
> in this country, would make the mistakes cited here.
Hmm. I will try.
>
> This is my point all along -- the values that made America great, the
> principles that built the nation, have been under constant attack since the
> 1960s, and we are reaping the whirlwind today.
I agree. However, don't you think that the people that run America
today, the ones who were educated in those times still preserve them?
Unassimilated aliens are a
> burgeoning problem,
When my family came ( 'went', actually) to the US in the 1970ies,
there was very little tolerance towards non-assimilation. It has
changed a lot, I admit. Politicians need votes, I guess.
"social engineering" in the schools has failed, morality
> has been outlawed by the courts, and without maintenance the very society
> that attracts other people will be destroyed. Just like a ferry is a
> wonderful invetion, taking people from island to island, if you crowd too
> many people on it will sink and all will be lost.
I mostly agree with the above. However, the resistance to the above
should not prevent someone who wants to assimilate from assimilating
or socializing with the " natives" just because s/he has an accent. It
is still happening, alas.
> To stop learning is death.
Agreed.
> > http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/foreign/divers.htm
>
> You missed the point of the article, which is also my point:
>
> "For better or worse, the current fragmentation and directionlessness of
> American society is the result, above all, of a disintegrating elite's
> increasing inability or unwillingness to impose its hegemony on society as a
> whole."
>
> We had it, and we lost it. You maintain that it is still a WASP nation.
> This author disagrees with you.
Well, many people got sick and tired of being treated as outcasts and
rebelled. Hence the present backlash was generated by the WASP elite's
dominating tactics. However, while this may not be a fully WASP nation
at this point, you would agree that WASPs and WASpinized Euros are
still dominant in corporate business. Look at any large executive
office from coast to coast.
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?q=we+scorn+immigrants&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=
> UTF-8&selm=5e0d76a8.0207101323.1c37839%40posting.google.com&rnum=1
>
> Again, you miss the point of the article. It points out that the
> "nativists" include second-generation Americans who try to shut the door on
> future immigrants. Hence they have become, or are accepted as, Americans.
>
> The culture war in America is between those who think of themselves as
> Americans ("nativists", if you will), and those who live here but still
> consider themselves as being "other".
You know, you may come here at an early age and think of yourself as
"American" but if you have a slight accent or people find out you were
not born in the US all kinds of comments start pouring in. So, it is
not what you "consider yourself" alone that matters.
THAT is the growing problem of the
> culture's inability to assimilate the influx (what Michelle Malkin calls an
> invasion), aided and abetted by a liberal conciousness that at heart hates
> America out of some warped sense of guilt.
Hmm. This is an interesting point. I am aware of the "guilt" thing. I
have also noticed that this primarily applies towards immigrant people
of color-Hispanics, Africans, Asians, etc. Kind of like assigning to
them a "protected species" status, if you will. It does not apply to
European/Canadian, etc. immigrants. These are not protected, there is
no guilt towards them, and they are basically left in the
"sink-or-swim" situation.
Assimilation has become a nasty
> concept, incredibly un-PC, because it stifles a person's heritage and seeks
> to replace it with the terrible American culture.
Hmm. I think this is happening in large immigrant areas such as LA,
SF, Chicago, etc. In smaller towns if you want to be accepted, you
still need to assimilate. My folks live in Palm Springs and that and
most surrounding towns are pretty much *mainstream*. If your English
is heavily accented, or you act "foreign", it is still not that well
accepted.
> This is simply a fact -- everyone (including the "Native Americans")
> migrated to the US. We continue to have the highest immigration rate of any
> country in the world. We are, thus, a "nation of immigrants".
Yes, historically, it is correct. In books and all that. However, I
have noticed that very often people are still dividing themselves into
"Americans"- born here and "foreigners"- not born here. I just saw it
everywhere and experienced it at work and all. People just ask you
where you are from originally. So, you could have the US citizenship
and none other and have been living in the US for 30 years but this "
originally" thing often changes people's attitudes towards you.
In European countries, it is not the birth but bloodline that counts.
But that is another story.
> Where is your thread of thought here? You state that people with American
> citizenship are defined as Americans, yet they are not accepted.
As such... If they were not born here. So, you have a discrepancy
between what books teach and the people's actual attitudes.
This is
> not in conflict. Saddam Hussein is, by definition, a "leader", yet he does
> not "lead" his people, tend to their needs, make their lives better.
Is this a correct analogy, though? He is a "bad" leader. He chose to
be that way. However, many foreign born people are 'good' citizens.
So, why is that " originally" thing so important? A US citizen should
be a US citizen and an American with this " birth " thing being
irrelevant. If one is a not a dual national, why should people call
him a "furrener"?
>
> A person with a college degree is theoretically educated. This is not
> always the case.
If s/he barely got by on "C's", or did not take enough good courses
s/he is educated 'badly'. But again, that is something that s/he could
have helped. Here, the place where you parents gave birth to you is
nothing that you could have helped. Documents say you are an American
by naturalization, so why is the popular definition different? People
can tell you to " get out" and "go back where you came from" and say,
you "furrener, you were not born here" and all that. Had this happen
to my friends and relatives and all. Also, the media does not talk
about US citizens vs. other nationalities. They talk about " US-born
vs. other nationalities". So, is the naturalization ceremony and
accepting America as your home just some kind of farse? Few of these
people can go back because thay are US citizens and most of their
countries will not accept them back( some will, though). Empathy,
please!
> >
> This is utter nonesense. Let's ask Fil-Ams about it -- DSP, Foolish Mortal,
> Tansong Isda, LeeBat - not that anyone but you or me is reading this thread!
> ; )
>
Cannot comment on that.
> A "brown Filipino" is prone to being killed in the US? 20 hate crimes a
> day? What statistic does "prone" refer to? Define "hate crime". You will
> find that these activists (who gain their power and furtune spewing hatred
> and inciting diviciveness) have a very broad definition of "hate crime",
> assuming that EVERY behavior by a non-Filipino (or non-whatever) is racially
> motivated.
I understand your point. It is without a doubt that special interest
groups exaggerate things. Some minority people are also being
paranoid. However, my ex- Pinay girlfriend in LA told me that at an
employment agency she was told " I doubt that they would hire an
Oriental". I do not think she lied to me. While they are axaggerating,
it does not mean there is no discrimination.
If someone honks their horn at me because I'm daydreaming at a
> changed stoplight, I don't view that as a "hate crime" or racially motivated
> if he is non-white, but the professional hate mongers do. In EVERY CASE
> where these groups are pressed to support their "facts" they fail.
Well, it is hard to prove discrimination especially in the US where
many people express it covertly. But it is not all hype. Believe me.
It is easy for you to say that it is all just inventions by liberal
leftists and lawyers wanting to line their own pockets with you not
being a Filipino or an immigrant period. With history like this:
http://opmanong.ssc.hawaii.edu/filipino/discrimination.html
do you think nothingl,attitidewise, remains? The tradition is weaker
but it is till there. Do you think that now people are suddenly very
friendly and accepting? The situation has improved but there is still
plenty of work that needs to be done. If you do not mind my making a
personal observation about you...it seems that you lack empathy or
what is the correct name for the ability to see the world through
someone else's eyes and visualize what it would be like to be one of
them.
>
> I especially like this quote:
>
> "But we do not want to make it appear that we are anti-US. We are just
> against their policies that will not benefit us."
Well, not all in this article was to the point.
>
> Welcome to America, the land of the EEO lawsuit.
While a lot of this has been exaggerated, it is still no picnic being
different in the US. And those things happen.
>
> Lots of laughs (sad laughs, but bitterly funny nonetheless) here.
>
> >
> Should people unqualified be paid the same as those who are qualified?
No, they should not. I agree with you on this.
> Another nasty little fact that does not make it into the EEO literature is
> the fact that Filipinas often start working in convalescent facilities
> rather than critical care facilities because of their lack of skills and
> language. A surgical nurse MUST understand and speak English well enough
> that there will be NO CONPUSION during surgery, di ba?
Yes, absolutely. Agreed. But how do we know that all the Filipinas
were this illiterate in English. I met some that were very very
fluent.
>
> You also note that this was a "settlement", not a judgement. Nothing was
> proven in a court of law -- the facility simply realized that in America you
> start out on the losing end of any EEO complaint. The burden of proof is on
> the sued party in a discrimination suit to prove that, all things being
> equal, no discrimination was involved. This is virtually impossible to
> prove.
Why then did not they use the argument that you used just now? Sounds
logical to me.
>
> Why so many suits like this? Does the $430,000 payoff to the attorneys give
> a clue?
>
>
> 2 hate-crime murders
> 2 hate-crime rapes
> 22 hate-crime aggravated assaults
> 57 hate-crime simple assaults
> 116 hate-crime intimidation
>
> Wow! What a run-away problem!
>
> Of course, whites are also subject to hate crimes:
>
> 5 hate-crime murders
> 1 hate-crime rapes
> 215 hate-crime aggravated assaults
> 280 hate-crime simple assaults
> 278 hate-crime intimidation
>
> > Next rosy answer?
>
> See above.
OK, wait, we are forgetting one important factor here. Asians/PI
people are how many percent of the population? About 4%? And the
whites are 68%. So, that means that if the crime percentage were
equal, then they should have suffered from the following:
34 murders
> 17 rapes
374 aggr. assaults
969 simple assaults
1972 intimidations.
Again, admittedly, there have to be enough non-whites riding around
the country beating and raping people but these events do not happen
too often. In any event, just the fact that these things are racially
motivated is a cause for concern.
> See, this is where you are sucked in by the racial and cultural instigators.
> Perfect example of this was what Harry Belefonte said about Colin Powell the
> other day, saying he was a "house slave" doing the master's bidness. When a
> black person succeeds, they are often marginialized by their own people --
> whether they are Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Ward Connerly, or whomever. The
> black middle class has had the most significant growth of ANY cultural or
> racial group in the US since 1964, so that today only 25% of blacks live in
> poverty (as opposed to some 90%+ in 1950). When you have that many people
> in the middle class, you are talking about significant economic and social
> power.
Yes! I agree with you on this. Great progress has been made.
Undoubtedly so. A lot remains to be done, though.
>
> The fact that you don't WANT to believe something does not make it untrue.
Agreed. Still there is a lot of work that needs to be done.
>
> Latinos are one of the few communities which RETAIN their language through
> the generations. You picked the wrong group. You would have been better
> served looking at Russians, or Germans, or Haitians.
You know, I have met many Chicanos in East LA who do not speak Spanish
that well. Many cannot even qualify for bilingual jobs in LA.
Ironically, I was able to break into the market but many of them did
not. They speak it but it is rudimentary.
>
> Sorry, you just don't get it. These communities have existed since BEFORE
> the US existed. They have only grown larger with the influx of immigrants.
> They are not being assimilated. They are, indeed, talking about seceeding
> from the US when they reach critical mass to form a nation called "Aztlan".
I see. Well, there is a movement like that. But is it populous and a
cause for concern? In order to get any kind of good job in the US,
they will still need to speak English well. This still holds true
until today.
> You're not paying attention.
Yes, teacher!
We are talking about third generation+, with
> millions more foreign-born immigrants joining every year. The assimilation
> process has all but broken down in California, to the extent that ESL is the
> biggest course offering and classes are taught in Spanish so as not to
> "disenfranchise" Hispanics.
At a very early age, Spanish may be used. But then all of my students
at vocational schools in LA were Mexican Americans and they spoke
English very well. I think that everyone who finishes highschool in
the US learns English. I am not aware of any highschool in the US
where you get your Highschool Diploma in Spanish only, outside of PR.
>
> Since I do not see any lessening, no.
Ibid.
>
> Ah. One incident. Great to generalize from that... good science.
> .html
>
> Do you see anywhere in the article the level of schools involved? Given the
> cognitive requirements (requiring formal operations, analytical reasoning,
> etc.) you are obviously not talking about "younger kids" here as I was.
> Small children (0-7 or so) are oblivious that differences are "bad"; they
> have to learn this from their parents, peers and society.
Agreed.
>
> What this article does not dwell on is that, in schools where "diversity
> education" such as this CREDE group advocates is done, racial incidents
> INCREASE (see "Illiberal Education" and "The End of Racism" by Dinesh
> D'Souza, or "Uncivil Wars" by David Horowitz).
>
> Now, stop, take a deep breath, and think -- what do racial and ethnic
> conflicts in schools indicate? Can you say "failure of assimilation"?
Yes. There is one thing though. You see, if you had a society like
say, Brazil or Panama, or, yes, the Philippines, where people are just
relaxed about the whole thing, the immigrants would tend less to
cluster in protective groups. In the US I find the "assimilated mass",
"Mericuns" , "born-here" are just very suspicious and not willing to
associate with anyone even with a slight accent. At least on a
highschool level. Kind of intolerant and very uptight about the whole
thing.
Can
> you say "diversity of philosophy"? I thought you could.
They aggravate the whole thing. You see what I am saying is this,
essentially:
The US was established by the British and they basically set the
foundation for the national character. It has changed, ob course, but
the essential British snobberies, intolerances and suspicions have
been inherited through the centuries. They still dominate the
mainstream American mentality. Hence, socially, it is not a very easy
place to fit into. That explains why the Brits, the Aussies and
Canucks just fit in and everybody else has a hard time ( except ,
maybe a "rrrrromantiqueee" Frrrrenchman. These are, by the way, the
only non-Anglos that are allowed to fall in love with American women
in movie plots.
>
> As I have noted again and again, these break down along economic lines more
> than race, although economics may reflect racial distinctions. Low-end
> economic people tend to hang with their "own kind"
This is true. In some cases it is a catch 22. Not assimilated- no good
job- no assimilation. Private businesses and software jobs are an
exception.
>
> > I agree that some people get lucky. Others are just afraid because if
> > they complain, some guy can scream at them " Well, if you don't like
> > it, why don't you go back to where you came from?"
>
> Again, not the way it works in the US today. There are so many "advocacy
> groups" and lawyers pandering to racial or ethnic "problems" that even the
> slightest hint of prejudice may be acted upon.
If you have witnesses, it can be. Many times you do not. And people
cannot be sued for saying:" Well, if you do not like it here, why
don't you go back?" It is just a question. Still unpleasant but you
cannot sue people for that.
> > Do you think this is bullshit?:
> >
> >
> > http://www.nnirr.org/projects/border_color.html
>
> Professional race mongers, yes. Look at the signs in pictures on the
> site -- "Abolish the INS", "Open the Borders". I have given you the hate
> crimes stats for the 3rd-largest non-white group in the US, but look at
> another summary of "hate crimes" by motivation:
>
> 4337 race (2884 anti-black, 875 anti-white)
> 1472 religion (1109 anti-Jew)
> 1299 sexual orientation (anti-gay)
> 911 ethnic
>
> Look at their claims and the "may" and "possibly" qualifications. This
> group has a definite political agenda -- open borders with Mexico (although
> Mexico has the military on it's southern border), and amnesty for illegals.
> Typical special-interest group.
I think that special groups are opportunists but you see, still it
does not mean that things do not happen and that there is no hostility
going on.
> > "Landlord after landlord voiced their concerns to the agency assisting her:
> "Does she know the meaning of 'rent' and 'security deposit'?" "If I let her
> move in, will I also be opening the door to an enormous extended family?"
> "How can I rent to her if I can't communicate with her? I just can't take
> that kind of chance." Fear and misunderstanding of another culture or people
> who don't have English as their first language all too often lead to the
> denial of housing and other basic civil rights like education, and
> employment - things that most Americans take for granted."
>
> This is what is known as "informed discrimination", i.e., discrimination
> based upon experience. Facts are facts -- many immigrants place landlords
> in violation of the law by housing more people in a space than is legal.
Well, but again, he should just inform her that it is not allowed and
have her sign a statement that she would not do it.
> Many cook foods whose odors are offensive to neighbors (I used to do
> security evaluations of retirement homes -- the things I encountered in the
> Chinese homes were... odiferous, to say the least.
Again, this is America, the land of diversity and immigrants(?) So,
why are landlords so surprised? Then they should have some regulations
concerning odours.
Language problems exist,
> and landlords have the right to be able to communicate effectively with
> tenants.
Can't argue with that.
This isn't "misunderstanding" -- ask any NYC landlord who rents to
> Puerto Ricans about renting to one person and having 15 move in.
There should be provisions in the lease to that effect. Still one
cannot generalize to the extent that one now does not rent to Puerto
Ricans at all. Where do we stop? No renting to gays- they die of AIDS
and stink up the apartment with their corpses? No rent to Iranians,
they will start an Islamic jihad in the apartment. No rent to rednecks
they will spit their chewing tobacco all over the carpet? Pretty soon
who do we have left? Rich Western Europeans?
The above
> implies that these things don't happen, or are generalizations based upon
> prejudice, but they are in fact based upon experience. If you have two
> applicants, one who speaks English well, one who doesn't, all else being
> equal language will be a factor. It's not discrimination, it's choice.
I understand your point here. It still hurts the person who is
discriminated against like hell. Empathy, please!
Do
> you deliberately date ugly women to be fair-minded? Or do you discriminate
> and chose people who appeal to you?
False analogy. Not being fluent does not equal to being "ugly". All is
fair in love and in war, not in housing.
>
> A better example is the frequent "racist" claim against cabbies in NYC that
> they don't pick up blacks. The truth is, they don't pick up black males
> from 18-30. Black women, elderly black people, etc., don't have problems.
> Most cabbies are immigrants of color. Why don't they pick up black males
> between 18-30? Because 25% of that population has a criminal record.
But the other 75% does not. It is still not fair. They now have
bulletproof windows. You want to discriminate? Don't drive in America.
If you were black and not picked up like that, would you like that?
> Try finding any reference in the news or on the web of car bombings in
> "Black Rock" or the "lower West Side". You won't find them...
>
> This is a group that makes money virtually extorting money from landlords
> and businesses. It's big business in America.
So, you still did not comment about a woman being spat in the eye.
>
>
> There has been a deafening silence from Arab-Americans following 9-11.
> Unlike the Japanese and Germans in WW2, Arab-Americans have not rushed to
> the aid of their country, or been outspoken against terrorism. When you
> hear from Arab-American advocacy groups, they are whining about fears of
> reprisals and discrimination (not *actual* reprisals or discrimination, but
> their *fear* that it will happen -- probably because that is what would
> happen in their native culture).
>
Hmm, interesting point. Agreed.
> Non-Muslims have openly embraced Muslims who have declared their allegiance
> to the US over the Islamists.
Yes, among people that you know, no problem. It is the strangers that
give them the hardest time.
And if you had ever done any work with an
> inspector, you know to say "Yes, sir" and not challenge them. That's as
> stupid as talking back to a cop or an INS bureaucrat -- they have the power
> to make your life miserable, and you better treat them nice.
I agree. Still if the accent is irrelevant to the point of inquiry, it
is annoying to say the least.
> > http://www.krccweb.org/html/his_kor.html
> > You are right. I do not face the same issues as illegal aliens.
>
> As to the rest, it is standard victimization rhetoric, where the statistics
> (3 Koreans killed -- but why? Because they were Koreans? Or because they
> were liquor store owners killed during a holdup?) are presented without
> substantiation.
Agreed. you are right on this point.
> > http://www.gwu.edu/~english/ccsc/2001_pages/JaedaPang.htm
>
>
You did not address any of this:
...Jeb blames his aggravation on the alleged self-isolation of
minorities from white society, "They’ve forgotten me. I feel
felt out, left behind…They got their money, their family
networks, and their secretive languages". Jeb suggests that these
migrant groups are purposefully and spitefully separating themselves
from white society as a way of asserting their superiority. On the
contrary, in cyclical immigration patterns, this self-isolation is
really an adaptation to survive the initial forced segregation by
whites. For example, many of the self-sustaining minority settlements
in America, such as Chinatown, were created to protect immigrants from
the problems that social separation caused. It was understood in the
early 19th century, that Chinese immigrants couldn’t find work
outside the physical confines of Chinatown streets nor without the
help of the "welcome wagons" networks of Chinese employers. These
types of connections have assisted Asian Americans in becoming
economically successful...
What I am trying to say is that, they make all this money but still
people kind of keep distance from them.
This phrase is also very true:
The lessening of racial exclusion on the level of official state
policy", asserts Rachel Lee, "does not translate into a lessening of
informal exclusions that occur in American society".
> It's similar to women complaining that women only make $ .76 to a man's $1.
> Closer examination shows that women do not take degrees in those fields
> where men often make the big bucks (I believe a weighted figure I recently
> saw was $ .96, not parity but not bad),
Maybe they believe that they will not be able to obtain jobs in those
fields?
and the same is true for advanced
> degrees and minorities (for example, the vast majority of blacks getting
> doctorates get them in education, not a well-paying field).
>
Is it the chicken or the egg here, though? Maybe they just feel that
it would be a waste of time or a very painful experience to work in a
racially hostile corporate environment.
> ...(and potentially astronomical) pay grade, is
> predominantly white. Thus the pool for judges will be predominantly white.
> Politicians are often lawyers, ditto. Why is this? My theory is that the
> law (and particularly, the LSAT) is extremely focussed on comprehension of
> the English language. Even Asians-Ams born in the US score lower on verbal
> standardized tests (higher on math). This is not discrimination, but
> reality.
>
Agreed. I think it is cultural.
>
> > http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/bh/hong.htm
>
> Yes. You can get killed for calling someone a name and pounding on their
> car. If you are a minority (other than black) you will be able to hide
> behind a smokescreen of oppression to minimize your sentence.
Well, wait, all of it was started by the white boys.
>
> Tell me, who is the victim here, the stupid, drunk white boy who was killed
> or the Asian who he insulted but never touched who killed him? Sounds to me
> like an Asian-on-white hate crime...
Nah. The other white man punched him in the face first. It was an
attack>
> http://www.ofm.wa.gov/census2000/profiles/place/1605350570.pdf
>
> 6% of the population of Ocean Shores, WA is non-white. Ob cors, total
> population is 3836, so the 200-odd non-whites are outnumbered, but odds are
> there is not a lot of hate crimes going on.
>
> Look, stupidity and hate exist. I'm not denying that. You get some drunks
> hunting trouble of any type and trouble will find them. But isolated
> incidents like this should not be generalized, because they are rare.
To you they are. But you see, the point is how can one feel at home in
the US after these things happen? Why do they happen at all?
>
> >
> > http://www.saxakali.com/CommunityLinkups/hatecrimes1.htm
>
> This is a childish screed that ignores the facts. Every news story I
> accessed (including Time and Newsweek) mention that Ileto was Filipino.
> This kid who wrote this "yellow journalism" (heh, heh) says we should know
> the names of an Asian killed in a race riot in 1930, and the fact that we
> don't indicates we are marginalizing violence against Asians. What is
> ironic is that he comes up with 7 Asians killed in hate crimes in 72 years!
> Wow, what an epidemic!
>
> > So, the rest of it is not as friendly and "diverse". Why don't these
> > haters know about the Land of Immigrants?
>
> Name a single country where there have not been murders or violence against
> others because of race, religion or ethnic origin.
>
> How about England?
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/919994.stm
Mother of America? An insular nation always at war with other
countries and hating all these "bloody wogs" Sheet! This is where
hatred started to begin with.
>
> Germany?
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/germany/03/03/nazis.protests/
Oh , my God. What else is new? That is *Germany* for heaven's sake!
They are not a nation of Immigrants. The country is for German people.
One should be nuts to even go there for a visit.
>
> France? Norway? Sweden?
>
> http://www.mpa.gov.uk/downloads/cdo-010424-06-appendix01.pdf
Not "nations of immigrants" and not "melting pots". That is to be
expected.
>
> See, you are getting twisted in your positions here. Remember where we
> started? You said there was a uniform American culture, that people were
> forced to conform to.
There is standard General American English. There is American
literature, the news and all that. Most of it is still WASPish. The
traditions are still largely Protestant *in their majority* for it is
mainly the WASPS and other WASPinized Europeans that run the country.
Try working your way up if you are not following the majority of those
traditions and beliefs. Or of you speak with a thick or even slight
accent. It will be very very hard. Try making friends and dating if
you do not behave/talk as a non-WASP ( cute Filipinas excluded). It
will be tough.
I explained that that culture has been under assault
> for 40 years,
It has been under assault and it is no longer maybe "fully" WASP. It
has been modified. Softened. But the core of America, its business
ethics, etc,its money is still WASPy. This much I will conceed. It was
interesting when I was in French Canada, the people there referred to
Americans as " English Colonial Culture". This English Colonial
Heritage will often elude the perception of a native-born person
because it is so much part of him that it is basically "him."
and pointed to the diversity of the culture and the
> unassimilated immigrants.
yes, you did.
You said most everyone was WASP in the US,
The WASPs started this country and they are still the most powerful
group. People like Donald Trump and Bill Gates are WASPs. Presidents
have most often been WASPs. Or WASpinized Dutch or Irish. So, they are
the powerhouse. Corporate America is still run by people with British-
sounding last names. Hi tech companies excluded. So, they have been
under assault, agreed, and have "shared off" many of their powers but
they are still in command. Other whites had to WASpinize themselves to
move up. And they became the other Americans, with very WASpy
characteristics. The fabled mainstream. So, that culture is what still
forms the American stronghold. Everybody else are just like icing in
the cake, while they are still "the cake". Before it was just cake
without the icing.
Huge tracts of land from coast to coast, farm after farm and small
town after small town are *predominantly* still homogenous-looking. An
odd Thai restaurant is like a gad-fly on the butt of an ox. Sure, many
people used to be Swedes and Germans and Norwegians and Poles, but now
most are very Anglicized in manners and speach and habits and all
that. There are pockets of Blacks and Mexicans and Asians but again,
the main crowd you see in the American heartland is still a white,
English-speaking crowd. Seen it. Edges of America are "frayed" with
"diversity" but not the thousands upon thousands of miles that you
see. You talk with an accent and they will make a wry face and say "
Wha-aaat?"
Only recently have American movies allowed non-WASPs to look like
heroes. It is changing, I agree, but it's got a lo-ong way to go
still.
> that there was little diversity (you said I only *thought* it was diverse,
> being the ignorant provincial I am. Now you keep showing examples of
> cultural diversity and cultural clashes.
The clushes are mainly between these groups:
WASPs and WASPInized native- born whites vs. Blacks.
All native born vs. "furreners"- not born here.
Everybody against everybody else.
Well, that is diversity, all right. Maybe I WAS wrong :)
>
> I'm sorry, but define "willingness to assimilate". Does this mean spending
> all of your time with people from the old country speaking the old language?
An extreme example. Many low class people do that. But some try and
there is a wall, believe me,
> Does this mean joining "X-American" groups in college?
Ibid.
Does this mean
> flying the flag of your home country instead of the American flag?
Ibid.
Does
> this mean demanding driving licenses for illegal immigrants, and in-state
> tuition for illegals (when legal residents of the next state pay 10 times
> the rate)?
This is wrong, but not all immigrants do that. You see, one of the
main things that many of my relatives complained about is that if you
speak with a foreign accent, (even if the English is gramatically
correct) on the phone and socially, quite a few people grow cold and
turn their noses up ( well, you cannot se that over the phonelines,
but you get the drift). So, one is trying but one gets snobbed. You
have not experinced that, I am sure.
Does this mean demanding voter pamphlets printed in your native
> language? Does this mean seeking preferential treatment through set-asides,
> racial preferences and special aid programs? These are all the ingredients
> that today's immigrants expect, which were unavailble historically to those
> who immigrated in the past.
But even those who immigrated in the past and tried to assimilate were
still often treated with hostility by the native-born ones. It is not
like the society is this figure with open arms ready to accept you
when you are willing to step in. English snobberies and suspicions
have permeated it throughout its history.
>
> > ..." the new immigrants confront a hostile public that questions their
> > willingness to assimilate and doubts their assimilability.
>
> Due to observations of how certain immigrants remain in balkanized enclaves,
> and how several generations often stay on public assistance and remain with
> their ancestral tongue as their main language.
But is it fair to generalize? Is it fair to say: "You people are all
like that?"
>
> And, ob cors, there has been no economic expansion and industrialization in
> the last 40 years?
>
> This also speaks to my point that the ability to assimilate immigrants has
> broken down under the overwhelming assault of the past few decades.
>
> Yeah. "Some" described their lives...
>
> You have bought into the victimization mentality that "advocates" have
> foisted on certain communities. Again, I suggest you ask Fil-Ams here to
> share THEIR experiences in the US. I know of only one who has ever
> entertained the notion that he was discriminated against because he was
> Filipino.
>
> You see, in America today it is popular to blame your failure on some
> external factor, rather than accepting responsibility. This cuts across
> race and ethnicity (just watch any of the daytime talk shows; you'll see
> white trash overrepresented in the whiner category). But minorities have a
> built-in excuse, and sharks like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc., have
> built fortunes exploiting and promulgating this. Meanwhile, those people
> who DO assimilate are branded as race traitors.
Not always the case. This is an overgeneralization. I understand what
you are saying. Still, one thing is certain. It is very very difficult
for anyone who looks "furren" or talks with an accent, to be accepted
socially just like any other human being and just live a normal life
as a member of the community. making friends, dating, etc. That is one
of the reasons why a lot of immigrants choose the easy way- hang out
with your own in ethnic enclaves.
> I know plenty of immigrants who are quite happy here.
As long as they know their limitations. Again, I must acceed that
plenty are. that is why they are there. I will give you an example of
Koreans in the US and those from Brazil. I have met both groups. Those
who came from Brazil looked relaxed and friendly. They told me about
the friends and girlfriends they had in Brazil. Now, the ones in the
US seem very race-conscious and tight-jawed. Something must be going
on.
It seems that the formula for any immigrant-destination country is:
Friendly people+pretty girls :)*economic opportunities+infrastructure=
constant.
None of them would
turn down the rich part, however.
I hear you,
Exfart.