Diversity's Oppressions

[kimba1]

I call myself yeller trash myself
the main problem I get here is trying to explain I understand engrish.
the big thing about the chinese here their trying to make us all alike.
back at the mother land we`re too different
toi san(my people)
are just simply lowly farm people.
we tend to not mention that in U.S.
the class system is much more distinct in china.
ex. my mother got dragged by a bus and went to the general hospital.
it probbly has the second most chinese staff in the country.
not a single one of them could understand a word my mother said.
It finally dawned  to me if maybe they to get a janitor to translate it ,that might help.
the chance of a toi san getting a upper staff job is slim to none
I only one lawyer ,one doctor in the 2000 plus member of my family here in the u.s.

[Plane]

My Father was the first member of our Family to attend Colledge .

His degree opened a lot of doors for him but none of those doors were in his hometown , so I grew up a little separated from my cousins and developed a difference in accent and habit somewhat on purpose of my Father , I learned to speak very properly in standard English as a Child and when I would visit my Cousins it was something like wearing a raincoat all the time.

I grew up in an Air Force town where Friends dropped in from all over the world and all over the country accents were mixed and shuffled , a strange sort of kinder urbanity prevailed.

This was greatly aggravated by my watching a lot of Television , my accent was affected by a case of Croncitus , if you watch a lot of TV your accent starts sounding like Walter Cronkite's.


I notice that this seems to be happening to everyone now , we are all watching9g the same movies and sharing vicarious experiences and speaking to one another across wide spaces , the regional differences are being blended and a sort of standard American speech is slowly starting to jell.

Will we have lost something we need when the accents of Cajuns and Bostonians are identical?


BTW I just ran this thru Spellcheck to make it more accessable to the spelling prudish.

[Universe Prince]

   The danger of diversity is scism and an attitude of "I'll get mine".

The danger is that some people won't agree with us? Oh no! What ever shall we do? Are we so fragile that we need everyone to agree to the same social ideals?

      There is a brotherhood amoung Americans , it allows us all to be Irish on St. Patricks day while in Ireland itself not even the Irish are entirely Irish if you ask one about another.

A brotherhood. Is this the same brotherhood that has some people claiming Republicans are greedy and self-centered while other claim Democrats want American soldiers to die and America to lose?

        When we have the brotherhood thing going on we are invincible and willing to self sacrifice our comfort , wealth and even lives to the comon good as volenteers . Volenteers have always gotten a lot done in America.

       Is Assimilation joining the brotherhood? The fellow feeling is the important part , the accent , clothing , minor customs , religious prefrences and etc. are secondary to the central idea that America is a nation .

        WE do things for each other , when in need especially or when under threat most especially. We garuntee for each other a certain minimum respect and mutual protection for each oters rights.  Some of our worst problems have been caused by drawing a line around the tribe and trying to be exclusive , Americans who speak strangely and beleive strange things and do strange things or look diffrent can actually be good Americans if they have the Affection for the ideal that makes America America in the first place.

Okay, you're starting to sound a little creepy, like you're recruiting for a cult. Anyway... The central idea that America is a nation? Is that really the central idea? I hope not. And what is this guarantee of mutual protection for others' rights? We take other people's liberty away any time it suits us. Gun bans. Smoking bans. Proposed amendments to ban homosexual marriage. Mutual protection of others' rights? No, not really. And I gotta say, the whole they can be good Americans if they agree with us about American ideals, well, it's just creepy. You spoke of "drawing a line around the tribe and trying to be exclusive", but isn't that what you're doing? Drawing a line and declaring these are the good Americans?

         A lot of immagrants arrive with a good idea of how to assimilate into this brotherhood scheme , some even have an exaggerated idea of how good it is , guys like that refresh our idealism , reinvigorate the affection we feel for our American way.

Our American way? What is our American way?

         Are some immagrants a threat to this fellowship?  Maybe some are , if they can't or won't respect the rights of their fellows and help to build the ideal why do we want them and why do they want to be here?  But who is this?

And help to build the ideal? What ideal? Whose ideal? The Republican ideal? The Democrats ideal? The Libertarian ideal? And what is this about why do we want them here? Maybe I'm crazy, but I was under the impression that an American ideal was freedom. What you're talking about doesn't sound like freedom to me. You sure sound like you're preaching conformity to some (as yet vague and undefined) American ideal. Sure, you're willing to tolerate little differences so long as the people submit to whatever this ideal is supposed to be and agree to be part of the "brotherhood". I'm half expecting you to start talking about the "common good" and the "enemies of the people". You're talking as if there is some sort of ideological test to see if someone has really chosen to be part of the "brotherhood" and anyone who doesn't pass is not or should not be wanted here.

Are some immigrants a challenge to the status quo of our society? Sure. But we only need fear that if we have a rigid and inflexible society. But we are not that way, are we? We are a society of freedom, right? Not of ideological purity, right? As I asked before, are we so fragile that we need everyone to agree to the same social ideals? I hope we are not.

Oh, and thank you for helping to illustrate the importance of the assimilation issue to the immigration debate.

[Lanya]

I`m using me to point out being creative is tough.
And I think being innovative require greater exposure to non related ideas.
ex. steve jobs travelled and studied eastern philosophy.
our engineers tend to be too speacialized.
we need to be exposed varied concepts to get the creativity going.

___________________________
So did the Beatles.  So do many artists and writers.  I agree, travel and exposure to new ideas does get creativity flowing, or at least can help.

[BT]

We are a society of freedom, right?

No.

We are a society based on the rule of law.

[Plane]

I did mention the common good , but you have taken my arguments in a direction I didn't expect.

The rights that belong to a Human Being by natural right should always be a matter of discusson between citizens.

The enjoyment of a right in the context of a society is often a compromise ,  the social order can be a tool for the protection of rights and the production of priveledges the enhancement of safety.

With no social order only the strong and intellegent and welthy would have a full set of rights , the less advantaged become by one means or another enslaved.

With a social order there can be a structure that protects rights and safety mutually up to the amount that there can be a consensus of what is needed and right , this consencus ought to involve fair and strong debate open to all.

[Plane]

"Are some immigrants a challenge to the status quo of our society? Sure. But we only need fear that if we have a rigid and inflexible society. But we are not that way, are we? We are a society of freedom, right? Not of ideological purity, right? As I asked before, are we so fragile that we need everyone to agree to the same social ideals? I hope we are not."

[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]

Rigidity has seldom been a problem to American Society , the adzorption of peoples from all quarters of the world has created an ever evolveing blend of new and old ideas and produced a society so open that closed societys can be established within it with no harm to it.

The most necessary common ideal might be to "Live and let live " or to " Let all go to hell in their own way " as sort of a minimum requirement . What is the solution for a person or set of persons who do not share this minimum and live amoung us?

An improvement on "Live and let live" is to Live and help live , which is more like the genuine American way. This help should not be reserved strictly for the brothers of us who are in perfect agreement , but should be extended to all of the brothers of us without requireing conformity .


I consider conformity to be a thing with a proper place and proper times , it is most proper when it is volentary , forced conformity is so unAmeircan it ought to be avoided in any circumstance short of deadly necessity.

[sirs]

Sirs, did you by chance read this article before you posted it?

Yes

Clearly Sowell states, in very plain English, that he does not accept the notion that diversity benefits America

I do believe we have the continued diverging ideas of what diversity means, the way Sowell is using it.  Meaning, if you have a negative perception of Sowell, prior to even reading his piece, you're going to assume he's anti-ANY diversity, regardless of how the term being used.  For those who have a positive understanding of his work, it's very easy to understand how he's using the term.  A) it has nothing to do with racism  B) it has everything to do with embracing one's country, and that country's culture vs embracing their own at the expense of the country that happen to reside in.  

I would opine that diversity used in the former, by folks like Js & Prince, believe that it references one's embrace of their own culture, while happening to live in America, thus Sowell must be against such "diversity".  I'd opine, that Sowell believes such an embrace at the expense of supporting America as their new home, with avoidance of assimilating into this country, is the cornerstone of his criticism in the term "diversity".  I'd opine that THAT's the "diversity" that Sowell believes doesn't benefit America.....and he'd be right

What are the oppressions of diversity?

I think that's already been addressed.  Once again, IMHO, it appears to reference a prioritising of one's culture they came from over that of being an American.  No one, incl Sowell, is arguing that one not embrace their own culture.  Simply that it fall in line after that of supporing and assimilating into American culture.  I don't think I need to repeat the the point about immigrant stories, coming to America, with the dream of being an American

How are you and I being oppressed by diversity?

Personally I'm not.  My country is however, when the theme is to embrace one's own culture, over that of American culture.  Do you think I can go to any other non English speaking foreign country, and demand that all my reading materials be provided me in English?  More importantly, SHOULD they be required to?  Why would I be so special?  Because I'm an American?

[Xavier_Onassis]

There are many dialects of Chinese. The official language is Mandarin, but Cantonese, Hakka and Wu are also spoken by many millions of people. Hakka is what is spoken in Fukien Province, across the straits from Taiwan.

There is also a Taiwanese language. Everyone who graduates from school in Taiwan speaks Mandarin, and most speak Taiwanese.

My friend Ying was born in Taiwan, and speaks Taiwanese and Mandarin and can understand Hakka. But when we eat at the South Gasrden restaurant, where we like the Yakamein soup for $3.50, he has to speak to them in English, because they speak Cantonese and don't understand almost any Mandarin, Taiwanese or Hakka.

They do understand Shi Shi (thanks).

I think most education in the PRC in the cities nowadays involves learning Mandarin. It has been the official language since before the days of the Gupomindang (Sun Yatsen and the Nationalist party).

Pretty much everyone can READ Chinese, either traditional (as taught in Taiwan) or simplified (the PRC).
The written form is unrelated to the spoken forms.

[_JS]

Sirs, did you by chance read this article before you posted it?

Yes

OK. I wanted to establish this for certainty.

Clearly Sowell states, in very plain English, that he does not accept the notion that diversity benefits America

I do believe we have the continued diverging ideas of what diversity means, the way Sowell is using it.  Meaning, if you have a negative perception of Sowell, prior to even reading his piece, you're going to assume he's anti-ANY diversity, regardless of how the term being used.  For those who have a positive understanding of his work, it's very easy to understand how he's using the term.  A) it has nothing to do with racism  B) it has everything to do with embracing one's country, and that country's culture vs embracing their own at the expense of the country that happen to reside in. 

I would opine that diversity used in the former, by folks like Js & Prince, believe that it references one's embrace of their own culture, while happening to live in America, thus Sowell must be against such "diversity".  I'd opine, that Sowell believes such an embrace at the expense of supporting America as their new home, with avoidance of assimilating into this country, is the cornerstone of his criticism in the term "diversity".  I'd opine that THAT's the "diversity" that Sowell believes doesn't benefit America.....and he'd be right

Let's address a few points here.

1. I have no idea who Sowell is. I have no perception about him whatsoever other than what I've read in this article. Any conclusions I draw are only from this article. What you are trying to introduce here is a red-herring. You are trying to claim that I have a negative bias towards the author. Poor show, with a hint of desperation.

2. Now, you are trying to define how others are defining diversity. Good try, but the author defines it for us when he gives us historical examples: Rwanda, Bosnia, the Armenian Genocide. Clearly race is a huge aspect of diversity for the author. Bosnia was a conflict heavily determined by race and religion. The Armenian genocide, again race and religion. Rwanda, purely ethnic. Read the article. It is all in context Sirs. You seem to be pulling ideas from the air to defend this Sowell and yourself, but everything is right there in black & white with no need for some sort of mystical defense.

Look at your defense and apply it to Sowell's historical examples. You're saying that the Armenians were partly to blame for their genocide because they did not assimilate to Ottoman culture. The Bosnian Serbs, Bosnian Croats, and Bosniaks were to blame because they did not assimilate properly into Yugoslav society. Instead they embraced their own culture at the expense of their new home. Certainly the same could be said for the Roma in Germany of 1939 to 1945. In fact, the same could be said of the Roma in Europe today. What shall we do with them?

Sowell is mostly correct in the second part of the article, in that Imperialism basically drew arbitrary maps as it collapsed as a system. Though he greatly simplifies the issue. Also, he is absolutely wrong in that it had nothing to do with diversity or an attempt to encourage diversity, but was more of a complete and arrogant disregard for the native peoples.

What are the oppressions of diversity?

I think that's already been addressed.  Once again, IMHO, it appears to reference a prioritising of one's culture they came from over that of being an American.  No one, incl Sowell, is arguing that one not embrace their own culture.  Simply that it fall in line after that of supporing and assimilating into American culture.  I don't think I need to repeat the the point about immigrant stories, coming to America, with the dream of being an American

That doesn't answer the question. How is that oppressive to anyone? You do know what "oppression" means, correct?

How are you and I being oppressed by diversity?

Personally I'm not.  My country is however, when the theme is to embrace one's own culture, over that of American culture.  Do you think I can go to any other non English speaking foreign country, and demand that all my reading materials be provided me in English?  More importantly, SHOULD they be required to?  Why would I be so special?  Because I'm an American?

Yes. You can go to any European Union country and receive any government form in English. In fact, you can receive them in any of the accepted languages of the European Union (I'm not sure that this includes the countries about to enter the EU such as Cyprus).

And yes, I do think that is great. I'm proud of the EU for taking such strides to make these available. They are using the internet and computer technology to make it far less costly as well. While we argue about it, they do something about it.

[Lanya]

The most necessary common ideal might be to "Live and let live " or to "Let all go to hell in their own way"  as sort of a minimum requirement . What is the solution for a person or set of persons who do not share this minimum and live amoung us?

If you believe in those maxims, you'd be completely against the current crop of "My way or the highway" Republicans.    Gay marriage?  Terry Schiavo?  Abortion?  Prayer in school, 10 commandments on the courthouse steps...on and on.

[BT]

Gay marriage?  Terry Schiavo?  Abortion?  Prayer in school, 10 commandments on the courthouse steps...on and on.

Um i don't see where any of those issues are my way or the highway. Perhaps you could expand on that charge.

[kimba1]

I think most education in the PRC in the cities nowadays involves learning Mandarin. It has been the official language since before the days of the Gupomindang (Sun Yatsen and the Nationalist party).

mandarin is the main language,but here is california alot of the chinese came here before it became that so they never learned it.
I called them (with affection & respect) old world chinese.
I`m one of them,but I do know alittle mandarin.
dow jeh is cantonese for thank you.
also here a funny fact because so many southern chinese came here to the U.S.
americans think chinese eat rice.
but the majority don`t eat rice.
due to the simple fact rice is a swamp plant and just not that available to everybody.
most eat wheat or millet based foods
my sister visited northern china once and complained "where`s the fu(%&n rice"
rice cost extra in most places in china

[_JS]

I took the time to reply Sirs. I think you can certainly do the same. I'm interested in how you will continue to defend this author's and your point of view.

[sirs]

I took the time to reply Sirs. I think you can certainly do the same. I'm interested in how you will continue to defend this author's and your point of view.

I think I've said my peace Js.  I appreciate the time, but it's obvious you're not going to understand my POV, be it on purpouse or not, the position that this isn't about being against diversity.  It's about beng against diversity for the sake of simply being for diversity. It's about being against support of an immigrant's own culture over that of American culture.  And the wreckless allegations and innuendo that Sowell is simply against anyone embracing their own culture & diversity, simply reinforces how this disagreement is not going to be solved

But if I have time & energy tonight, I'll endeavor to look at this, 1 more time