Thoughts on a Teddy Roosevelt quote....

Post Reply New Topic

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...

There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

--Theodore Roosevelt, 1919

-----------------------------------


i find that quote to be interesting and wonder how things have changed since then and if it's for the better or not.

i also think hiring illegals is BS...not necessarily from the point of taking jobs from me but just that it's people taking advantage of others and taking jobs that people on welfare should work (so that they're earning money and can get off welfare).

Hmm....well, one thing to remember, is that English still isn't an official language of the United States. Actually, I'd say we're well on our way to becoming bilingual, like Canada. And not speaking English isn't unique to illegal immigrants. I have heard of many first generation immigrants from Europe, among them my ancestors, who only spoke their native language, and their children were bilingual. And I'm not sure exactly about assimilation...our culture is a blend of many different cultural traditions from all over the world, and always has been....everyone brings something into the mix. In the Mexican border states, the two cultures seem to have blended quite harmoniously. Also, the whole thing is just a wee bit nationalist...fine for back then, but nowadays borders are becoming more open and more blurred, and I think-hope-that the concept of a nation will become more symbolic than anything, as I don't think human civilization can evolve much-in fact, it may even wipe itself out-if we continue our existence as hostile nation-states. All that being said, I can see the many problems associated with massive, unchecked immigration, and I agree that it does take jobs away from people who need them and can't get anything else, and I'm sure it's an awful and frustrating situation. However, I don't think the immigrants are taking advantage of others so much as they are being taken advantage of. They work very long hours and get little money for it. Not far from where I used to live, there was a canning factory with housing for immigrants nearby. It was an old, run down building, and each occupant got a little tiny room with a toilet at the end, and I don't even think it had indoor plumbing because the stench was pretty awful. I'd hardly call that taking advantage of anything. They are just doing what they have to to survive; there is no life for them where they come from. I'd be willing to bet that any one of us would do the same in that situation, but it's so easy for us to say we wouldn't because it's too hard for us to imagine what that's like. It's the people who hire them because they can get away with paying them hardly anything who should be held accountable. That's where at least part of the solution lies. The only way that mass immigration will stop, I think, is if conditions in their home countries improve, as they are quite bad right now-quite a bit of homelessness, poverty, and despair, and, when one carefully studies the history of the region-which anyone making any sort of policy about the issue should do-it's easy to see why.

This is the "melting pot" ideal: E pluribus Unum. "Out of many, one".

Checking the spelling for that, I quickly hit an interesting site:

http://www.assumption.edu/ahc/ which looks at the historic debates and tensions. In their very introduction they have the line: "The challenge of seeking unity while respecting diversity..." but respecting diversity isn't in the Roosevelt quote at all, at first sight.

The dangers of the two extremes are apparent. A fragmented society in little (or large) exclusive huddles who cannot even talk to each other due to language and cultural differences at one end, and at the other the tyranny of "normal", where every sign of individuality and being "un-American" is pounced upon.

It's an historic tension. It would take a very educated and flexible culture to to do better than maintain a varying balance point of discomfort between the two.



But then if English is to be spoken and written, then the sooner you rebels go back to spelling tyre, centre, colour, programme etc. correctly, the better.

you know i wrote a semi-lengthy reply and basically ditched it because i couldn't find what i wanted to convey properly. i'd read it and it'd seem wrong...worded wrong or just not having the right way to say it...

Have a go. We can always polish it up in debate.

I know a writer who said, faced with the horror of an empty page, that he types out "Mary had a little lamb..." And then just edits it up from there.