Skip to main content

View Diary: "Native languages in 'a state of emergency'" (256 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thank you for citing for us (11+ / 0-)

    perfect rationalizations of why the dominant culture thinks it is OK to finish the work of the Final Solution.  

    She nourishes us; that which we put into the ground she returns to us. Big Thunder

    by Winter Rabbit on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 03:14:40 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Well that was kind of a nasty response (5+ / 0-)

      to what was plainly an attempt to open a discussion.

      What exactly do you propose to keep these 70 languages "alive" if their speakers don't want to speak them any more?

      I am really enjoying my stimulus package.

      by Kevvboy on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 03:24:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's rather like asking endangered species (9+ / 0-)

        who have been violently forced to the edge of extinction why it's important to keep them alive if they can't do it themselves.

        <div style="color: #a00000;"> Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshal

        by bronte17 on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 03:36:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No it's not. (3+ / 0-)

          The endangered species are presumably being killed by forces outside themselves. In the examples cited above, native speakers are not teaching the language to their children.  How do you propose to make them do it?

          I am really enjoying my stimulus package.

          by Kevvboy on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 03:37:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Quite correct, all American Indians are not (4+ / 0-)

            teaching their children their language.

            She nourishes us; that which we put into the ground she returns to us. Big Thunder

            by Winter Rabbit on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 03:44:09 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Like many issues, there are complexities to this (9+ / 0-)

            There are probably 15 million Americans who have Native American bloodlines. Probably more.

            But the intermarriage, ravaging of homelands and forced assimilation have diluted the cultural markers and heritage.

            And the Native American culture has been killed by forces outside themselves. Genocide is the only term that can be used for the decimation of the Native Americans.

            When you have hundreds of years of forced assimilation where native language and custom is not only forbidden, but severely punished... that culture slowly is ground down.

            Free and equal education is important, but that requires funding that has been either squandered or withheld from the Native American nations.

            <div style="color: #a00000;"> Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshal

            by bronte17 on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 03:54:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  So, in your view, indigenous people (0+ / 1-)
          Recommended by:
          Hidden by:
          renzo capetti

          are like nonsentient animals, and their individual wishes are to be subordinated to an elitist view of what is good for them?

          Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

          by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 03:54:40 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  This country will be much stronger (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            4Freedom, Nulwee, Fresno

            when we all speak english.

            She nourishes us; that which we put into the ground she returns to us. Big Thunder

            by Winter Rabbit on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 03:56:24 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Don't take it too hard, Winter Rabbit (8+ / 0-)

              there's a couple of them in every NA diary.  I feel sorry for them.  They don't know the history, and our government has done all it can to destroy as much of it as possible.

              Our lives depend on our love for our earth, and all she gives and has given to us for milleniums. Without her support, we will not survive.

              by Tyto Alba on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 04:09:22 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Thanks. (9+ / 0-)

                I know, but if I don't respond then it's "the diarist isn't responding" kind of stuff. I ignore it when I can.

                She nourishes us; that which we put into the ground she returns to us. Big Thunder

                by Winter Rabbit on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 04:11:49 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  "Them" - what a bigoted atitude. (0+ / 0-)

                Exactly what "Them" am I, Tyto Alba?

                Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

                by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:20:05 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Quit offending from the victim position, (7+ / 0-)

                  it's boring.

                  She nourishes us; that which we put into the ground she returns to us. Big Thunder

                  by Winter Rabbit on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:27:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Do you have a substantive response (0+ / 0-)

                    to the questions I posed?

                    Can you present it without personal attacks or judgment, in the spirit of two equal individuals exchanging ideas on the Internet with the view of mutual benefit from such an exchange?

                    If so, I look forward to your response, and will read it without being tainted by your prior insults or condescension, purely on the merit of your arguments.

                    Hopefully, you will choose to do the same.

                    Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

                    by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 07:22:55 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  If it describes your attitude, why not? (5+ / 0-)

                  You're like Andy Breibart calling his victims racist.  Stop it.

                  But by now, we know how the Obama administration deals with those who would destroy it: it goes straight for the capillaries. --Krugman

                  by mbayrob on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:29:15 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  So, exactly what "Them" am I? (0+ / 0-)

                    What ideology, position, or policy do I support?

                    In particular, what is my position vis a vis preservation of native languages?

                    Since you prefer not to address what I actually have discussed in my comments in this diary, why don't you make explicit the presumptions you make about what I represent - besides "Andy Breibart"?

                    Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

                    by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 06:41:40 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You appear to be an ideological descendent of (4+ / 0-)

                      John Locke, putting forward an atomistic view of radically isolated individuals who possess universally recognized human rights.  Locke's view of individual property rights (including the individual's right to intellectual property) downplayed the notion of communal rights -- as does your view.  

                      This is the same ideology that drove the forced assimilation policies of the Dawes Act and Indian boarding schools, with their suppression of Native languages.  Late nineteenth-century and early twentieth-century reformers liked to call it "killing the Indian to save the man."

                      •  I see. (0+ / 0-)

                        And you derive this comprehensive view of my beliefs, and the policies I support, and their similarity to past policies, based on what, exactly?

                        And why the preoccupation with me and my beliefs - a classic ad hominem - rather than addressing directly and substantively the questions I raised vis a vis thinking about the most effective policies to pursue with regard to preserving native languages?

                        Let's assume for the moment that I am every bit the White Devil I have been portrayed here, and that my sole motive for commenting in this diary is to promote the forced assimilation of Native Americans in order to bring about a Final Solution and erase any trace of anything but pure Arian English language and culture.

                        How does that address the questions I raised?

                        Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

                        by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 08:45:57 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  You asked, "what is my ideology," and I answered. (0+ / 0-)

                          I directly addressed a question you raised.  Do you have an issue with my answer?  Have I mischaracterized your ideology?

                          •  Yes, you have. (0+ / 0-)

                            But

                            a) my ideology is irrelevant in this discussion, and

                            b) you clearly have absolutely no interest in my ideology, and

                            c) ideology does not, history teaches us, necessarily (ever?) yield practical solutions for real people.

                            What really underlies the hysterical response to questioning whether individual choice fits into a discussion about cultural preservation?

                            If you insist on engaging in meta-discussion, that is a far more interesting question than what you presume to define as my personal ideology.

                            After all, it is a crucial, practical question underlying the debate about Muslim women's veils, indigenous children's hairlength in Canadian schools, and virtually every other debate around the tension between preserving the old and embracing the new.

                            So, why the nearly pathological evasion and defensiveness about a simple, nonpersonal, nonideological question?

                            Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

                            by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 09:11:59 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                •  The kind you express yourself with. (0+ / 0-)

                  YOU figure it out.

                  Our lives depend on our love for our earth, and all she gives and has given to us for milleniums. Without her support, we will not survive.

                  by Tyto Alba on Mon Aug 02, 2010 at 08:29:09 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Perhaps you could condense (0+ / 0-)

                    your points in a paragraph or two.

                    Then perhaps we could catch on to your meaning.

                    In the meantime, all I see is Random Acts of Reasoning, just as your name promises.

                    Take care.  I mean no harm.

                    Our lives depend on our love for our earth, and all she gives and has given to us for milleniums. Without her support, we will not survive.

                    by Tyto Alba on Mon Aug 02, 2010 at 08:33:32 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  Even with a common language the real problem (10+ / 0-)

              is deep listening.  It's far more than just understanding words and forming sentences.  Listening with heart, mind and soul takes a serious focus.  Too many hear others filtered with bias--bias determined by their own agenda and refuse to take necessary time or spend the energy required to fully understand others having different cultural histories.  To many of 'us' live in cultural 'silos', trying to stay in hives of like-minded people, and don't try to maintain or build bridges of understanding.

              When life gives you wingnuts, make wingnut butter!

              by antirove on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 04:39:07 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Excellent points! Thank you antirove. (8+ / 0-)

                She nourishes us; that which we put into the ground she returns to us. Big Thunder

                by Winter Rabbit on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 04:46:37 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  I'm not sure Winter Rabbit (0+ / 0-)

                or others here understand how your comments apply to their approach to this discussion, ironically.

                I have asked some questions here, prefaced by a discussion of the complexity of human situations, and bracketed by a reminder of how past well-intentioned policies failed, or even proved counter-productive, because they were driven by simplistic, ideological motives, and did not take into account individual diversity and complex circumstances.

                For that, I have been treated to a remarkable display of bigotry, prejudice, stereotyping, caricature and attacks on a straw man messenger.

                Quite a remarkable display of ends justify the means mentality, which leads me to further concerns about how this particular group of commenters might approach developing or supporting policies designed to address native language and culture.

                Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

                by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:26:33 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Where did I make such an argument? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Bouwerie Boy

              Are you capable of getting out from behind your prejudice and viewing a fellow member of this community as an individual human being, and addressing them on the merits of their own comments - not lumping them into some bigoted stereotype you have of "Those people"?

              Here's a hint - when someone raises the issue of individual freedom to choose, it is less likely that they support mandated single solutions to anything.

              I doubt I can penetrate your prejudice enough to be respectfully addressed as a human being rather than a "Them", however.

              Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

              by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:22:47 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  prejudice? (4+ / 0-)

                I'd say you're calling the kettle black, but these people aren't doing anything of the kind.

                Stop playing the victim.  It's laughable.  Make you look silly.

                But by now, we know how the Obama administration deals with those who would destroy it: it goes straight for the capillaries. --Krugman

                by mbayrob on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:31:56 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Then let's address substance (0+ / 0-)

                  How does individual choice fit into a discussion about preserving native languages?

                  Is there any value to common language in today's global society?

                  Are all languages equal in value, and are all endangered languages equally worthy of preservation?

                  Who speaks for a community?

                  How are dissenting views treated?

                  Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

                  by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 06:40:06 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  What's substinative about that? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    capelza

                    Sounds like a great deal of ideological, glibertarian self abuse to me.

                    This diary concerns the survival of minority languages, which is a problem internationally.  To talk about "choice" the way you do and to ignore that the choice to speak a language including the language your parents spoke is a choice that's been taken away from people in these communities is, well, just about the most trivial, pseudo intellectual nonsense I can imagine.

                    Not everybody chooses to speak the language of their ancestors if given the opportunity, but to blabber on about people who never had that opportunity in the first place and claim that facilitating people in those communities so they can make that choice is somehow coersive?

                    Arrant nonsense.  You're not a serious person, and worse, you seem to lack the insight to realize how laughable that makes you.

                    Stop acting like such a schmuck, and stop acting like you're a victim.  You're getting ridiculed because you're trolling this diary and acting ridiculous. Go find some other place to play with yourself so folks that actually have something interesting to say can discuss a serious issue with frivolous folks like yourself interfering.

                    But by now, we know how the Obama administration deals with those who would destroy it: it goes straight for the capillaries. --Krugman

                    by mbayrob on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 07:50:04 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You seem to have no problem (0+ / 0-)

                      resisting the terrible lack of choice that afflicts other, presumably stupider or weaker or more helpless individuals.

                      Just as you presume to speak on behalf of a wide diversity of people holding a wide diversity of beliefs and opinions - including opinions about the best way to preserve indigenous culture.

                      Considering the balance between individual freedom and cultural preservation is neither trivial nor ridiculous.

                      It is at the heart of the discussion about Muslim women's veils, for example - as it is at the heart of the discussion about the length of hair Native American students choose to preserve in school, or about the slaughter of whales by the Japanese.

                      I asked serious questions, respectfully, and was immediately met with arrogance, hostility, prejudice and condescension.

                      Everything but substantive response to substantive questions.

                      That will not make the questions go away, nor will your arrogance make me go away. I've long since come to realize that the dominant culture here is one of intolerance of dissent and maintenance of a status quo, while holding the pretense of being "progressive" and forward thinking.

                      Nothing changes in cultures that fear to question their assumptions.

                      Policies in the real world don't work if they are not tempered by the lessons of history, and by the humility that good intentions do not guarantee good results.

                      We are all equal here - all pseudonymous people exchanging ideas over the Internet. Claims of superiority are no more persuasive than arguments from authority. Intimidation is a tactic of the weak and fearful.

                      A confident, contemplative person is never afraid to encounter different ideas nor to welcome intellectual challenges to bold assertions.

                      Keep trying, though. You aren't the only person on Daily Kos who thinks attempts at rhetorical bullying are an adequate substitute for substantive thinking, or that doubling-down on dogma constitutes real growth.

                      Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

                      by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 08:54:36 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

          •  No cigar for you to twist extinction (9+ / 0-)

            into an elitist paradigm.

            There are millions of Native Americans and the poverty levels of their sovereign nations are renown. The guarantees from the United States' government are sidestepped or delayed or pocketed by corruption.

            Transferring norms and mores down to the next generations requires education and schooling. Without funding or with forced assimilation the transfer slows down or does not take place.

            <div style="color: #a00000;"> Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshal

            by bronte17 on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 04:10:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You made the flawed analogy, not me (0+ / 0-)

              I merely asked how individual choice fits into a discussion about language preservation.

              You extrapolated your own demons from that, based on your own prejudices.

              Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

              by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:27:40 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Ever the reasonable one... aren't ya? (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Winter Rabbit, Tyto Alba

                You stepped in it big time this time around.

                <div style="color: #a00000;"> Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshal

                by bronte17 on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 06:48:17 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  He doesn't think this is the right room for an (0+ / 0-)

                  argument.

                  He think's that's down the hall, and that this is Abuse.

                  But by now, we know how the Obama administration deals with those who would destroy it: it goes straight for the capillaries. --Krugman

                  by mbayrob on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 07:50:58 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  So, no response to actual substance (0+ / 0-)

                  and nothing but personalizing all arguments, bronte17 - you're doing the same thing in multiple diaries all at once, with multiple people.

                  Seems to be your modus operandi.

                  Generally one employed by people incapable of intellectually defending their positions.

                  People who have arrived at their convictions thoughtfully, after a process of engaging in challenge and contemplating alternatives, are generally less aggressive and defensive, and more welcoming of dissent.

                  Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

                  by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 08:57:12 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  there you go, random. take a hide. (6+ / 0-)
            I'm supposed to give a reason for this. So I'll just confirm how much I abhor the analogy you twisted, your continued belligerence and falsity, coupled with the reality that I know from this blog that Haitians and native americans are barely surviving at all in too many areas of proximity to policy and idiocy, and corporate control on one hand and state governor indifference on the other. And I want to be a little clearer about 1 thing. We (or a lot of us) are the immigrants. We got here last. Not the indians or mexicans or creole or others from the americas. And the africans were kidnapped and beat down ugly just the same/murdered/raped/you know, bought and sold. And the Haitians fought and won freedom - still paying a crippling price for it, right up to today. I like to be clever too. But not when lives and lineage and unspeakable atrocity is the topic. So you have it. And it is explained.  

            support the conscience of information. Ruining lives and water for shale gas, sea oil and quick mountain coal is sick. Stop The Gasastrophe.

            by renzo capetti on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 04:49:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  And exactly what policy proposal of mine (0+ / 0-)

              are you railing against, exactly?

              You, too, are manifesting prejudice, failing to address my individual comments as an individual, preferring instead to make prejudicial assumptions and erecting straw men to battle.

              I asked, where does individual freedom fit into a discussion about preserving native languages?

              Do you have a response - one that does not rant and rail about how I'm a genocidal apologist?

              Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

              by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:29:46 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Don't be bandying that word "elitist" around (5+ / 0-)

            It definitely does not mean what you think it means.

            There's nothing more elitist that prescribing cultural assimilation to cultural and ethnic minorities.

            But by now, we know how the Obama administration deals with those who would destroy it: it goes straight for the capillaries. --Krugman

            by mbayrob on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:12:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  There is nothing more elitist (0+ / 0-)

              than assuming one is inherently superior, by virtue of one's lineage, than another, by virtue of what you presume to be theirs.

              Unless, of course, it is presuming the right to reinterpret the argument of another to suit one's agenda.

              Kindly point me to a comment of mine that "prescribed cultural assimilation to cultural and ethnic minorities".

              Is anyone commenting in this diary capable of rising above petty prejudice and condescending assumptions of superiority, to engage in an honest discussion with people without prejudging them or responding to stereotypes and straw men?

              You are a pseudonymous individual on the Internet, presenting an opinion.

              I am a pseudonymous individual on the Internet, presenting an opinion.

              Discussing different opinions is the whole purpose of a site like this.

              The beauty of it is that we have the ability, if we choose, to respond purely to the actual content of another human being's argument, without prejudging them based on skin color, religion, sexual preference, ethnicity, body type, gender, etc.

              If we choose.

              I have asked about how individual right to choose fits into considerations of proposed policies with regard to language preservation.

              I have couched my question in an observation about the complexity of human situations, and by noting the historical lessons of well-intentioned policies that were imposed without due consideration of such complexities, particularly individual diversity and individual choice.

              If you build housing for the homeless, you better consider whether they will want to live in it. Often, more consideration is given to how cool the architect's design is.

              We learn from failed policies of the past, as well as by understanding policies that work.

              One of the lessons is that it is useful to ask as many challenging questions as possible, so as not to be trapped by one's own assumptions and ideology.

              What I see here are a bunch of smug people assuming they speak for all others in their "tribe" (used in the anthropological, not derogatory term, to describe all self-identifying groups of people), pretending there is only one answer to all questions, and that anyone who suggests thinking broader is "The Enemy", who supports "forced assimilation" and "Final Solutions", who can "never understand" and who is fatally trapped in an inferior worldview of "individualism for individualism's sake" and who needs help from superior native thinkers - oh, and I almost forgot, "there is always one of 'Them' in these diaries and we have to 'tolerate' them or they will say the diarist is not responsive".

              What supercilious, prejudiced bullshit. And what inability to address substantive issues substantively.

              Just address the question respectfully, without hyperbole and ad hominems, and perhaps, just perhaps, we will all - myself included - learn something from the exchange.

              Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

              by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 06:32:13 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  "if their speakers don't want to speak them any (7+ / 0-)

        more?"  Hiya

        She nourishes us; that which we put into the ground she returns to us. Big Thunder

        by Winter Rabbit on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 03:38:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Presumably (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mjshep, RandomActsOfReason

          if the grandparents aren't teaching it to their children, there is some reason.  How do you propose to make them start speaking languages they have stopped speaking?  I dont understand what you would have anyone do about this problem.

          I am really enjoying my stimulus package.

          by Kevvboy on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 03:43:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  One major reason in Canada (13+ / 0-)

            for the loss of native languages was that a generation of First nations children were forcibly sent to schools (usually boarding schools) where speaking their native languages was forbidden (enforced by some brutally abusive corporal punishment in some cases) and where even if they could get away with it, most of the other children were from other tribes who didn't speak the same language.

            It's my understanding that this happened to a lesser degree in the U.S. too. And for tribes who were affected by this, it's quite absurd to treat the language loss as a matter of parental "choice."

            These people - kids who grew up in the middle portion of the 20th century - are now the grandparents of today's young children. They speak only a little of their native language and were not equipped to pass it on to their children. Their children, today's parents, don't speak the language and can't pass it on, whether or not they want their kids to speak it.

            The remedy is to teach the languages in the schools.

            •  Less violently, that is how immigrants lose their (8+ / 0-)

              native language. Their children learn English in school, and the third generation can't speak the grandparents' language. That is how it went on both sides of my mother's family, though I know more about the Italian side than the Irish side.

              My great-grandparents came over from Italy, and my grandfather was (I think) their first child born in this country. He spoke English perfectly and Italian brokenly. None of his children could speak Italian at all.

              I've studied French and Spanish, and picked up a smattering of Italian from opera librettoes(!), but I will never be able to speak the language fluently. And I deeply regret that.

              If it's
              Not your body
              Then it's
              Not your choice
              AND it's
              None of your damn business!

              by TheOtherMaven on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 04:29:12 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Wasn't Ghost Dancing in part to do with language? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kyril

              Or at least with the singing of a certain song, which is in the same family as suppressing language.  This was in the Great Plains, I believe, a heartbreaking story of the death throes of a culture, the agony bleeding out through defiant engagement in Ghost Dances.

              As for you, RoaR, since this is your thread.  I have to admit I know what you mean about a lot of things.  But there is more to this story than argument.

              It would be interesting to see what kinds of responses you had gotten if you had left off the entire diatribe predicting disaster.  Simply state your case.  Imho, the diatribe shut off respectful response from people who are not guilty of the sins you notice in others, and who would have discussed your ideas with you, even though they may still disagree.  At least it would make an interesting experience.

              Don't believe everything you think.

              by geomoo on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:26:41 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Lack of time, lack of resources (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            capelza, dharmafarmer, Nulwee

            Generally, these communities are in deep economic trouble.  You want to call poverty a "choice", then you're probably commenting in the wrong place.  I'm not sure if Andrew Breibart lets you comment on his site, but that's the kind of attitude you're showing.

            But by now, we know how the Obama administration deals with those who would destroy it: it goes straight for the capillaries. --Krugman

            by mbayrob on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:14:39 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Deeply ignorant comment (4+ / 0-)

        Some people may want to not learn, and that is their right.

        But if you had a clue about what happens in a community that is in that decline, you'd shut your damn mouth and slink away to hide a while.  Because if you did, you'd realize the kind of regret and even shame that many of these people feel.

        It's not an issue of "wanting".   It's having the opportunity to learn when these languages are not taught in schools, where communities are poor and people don't have the means to make passing on their cultural background to their children.  And where the economies of media mean that mass culture is the only kind of culture available.

        As for this garbage:

        What exactly do you propose to keep these 70 languages "alive" if their speakers don't want to speak them any more?

        I can't treat it with the deep contempt it deserves, but I welcome other folks to try.

        But by now, we know how the Obama administration deals with those who would destroy it: it goes straight for the capillaries. --Krugman

        by mbayrob on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:09:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'll take that challenge, (5+ / 0-)

          employing satirical paraphrase:

          What exactly do you propose to keep these 70 languages "alive" if their speakers have been starved out, shot down, set up, and killed off?

          Don't believe everything you think.

          by geomoo on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:31:06 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't think they'd get your point (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            capelza, dharmafarmer, Nulwee, geomoo, kyril

            which is why they are such fun to make fun of.

            The talk about "individual choice" as if anybody would choose to be

            starved out, shot down, set up, and killed off

            My version of this is the old line popular with my ancestors back in the old country, that if G'd said the Jews were the Chosen People, would G'd maybe choose somebody else for a change?

            But by now, we know how the Obama administration deals with those who would destroy it: it goes straight for the capillaries. --Krugman

            by mbayrob on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 05:35:43 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Interesting, if sadly predictable response (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Junior Bug, justalittlebitcrazy

      I asked, essentially, whether an individual's right to choose should be subordinated to a society's opinion about preserving ancient cultures.

      Your reaction seems to imply that your answer is yes.

      How is that any different than forcing individuals to speak a dominant language against their will?

      Where is the individual's right to choose their own language taken into account in your self-righteous narrative?

      Not only did I not "rationalize" any particular policy, but your reference to a "Final Solution" is HR worthy - even if I weren't the son of a Holocaust survivor.

      I won't HR you, but you should reflect whether your own behavior represents the values you tout.

      Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

      by RandomActsOfReason on Sun Aug 01, 2010 at 04:01:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site