On the Fence and Trying to Avoid the Tomatoes

Lingo Jingo and even the quotes in the news articles bring up the idea of us vs. them. A lot of issues are presented this way in news articles, even though they probably aren’t meant to be often times. This tendency brings up the comforting idea of a black-and-white world, this is wrong, this is right. However this doesn’t work, because it does account for shades of gray. There is the extreme view on both sides of the argument, but there are also so many views stuck between the two sides without a crystal clear side to them. This causes the simple right-wrong system to fail, because it doesn’t account for all these people that can’t side with either the English-only side or the side that wants to legalize all illegal immigrants. Although the articles focus on the immigrant debate, the main issue in these articles is language. The idea of basically outlawing the Spanish language seems unfair, not only do some illegal immigrants speak it, but quite a few legal immigrants speak it too. English isn’t “endangered,” so there shouldn’t be a problem making at least some basic things bilingual, such as driving manuals and hospital signs and the directions inside of hospitals (this would definitely be useful on occasion). Trying to basically outlaw a language will achieve nothing except getting part of the country very unhappy, part of the country just shaking their heads at the stupidity, and a very small proportion cheering at what they consider a ‘win.’ Mayor Barletta in Hazleton seems to think that the “we” in the situation is English speakers and the “they” is Spanish speaker, since this is not true and since when has anything ever been that cut and dry, Mayor Barletta is going about “fixing” the problem the wrong way. Yes, there is an immigration problem and the country has to figure out a solution of sorts for it, but the language is preventing anything being done about the actual problem. Language itself is a touchy subject, simply because of its relevance and irrelevance to a culture. Many people feel that language is deeply rooted in their sense of their own culture; however, language does not necessarily define a culture. Spanish-speaking doesn’t tell about a family or where that family can form or went through; there are different countries and cultures that speak Spanish in different dialects. There are different countries that speak English, but in different dialects that seem very different to English-speakers, but many sound very similar to people that don’t speak English. All the different local dialects give a sense of individual culture, but culture both unifies and divides the United States. Even the name of ‘our,’ meaning Americans, country exemplifies the way that we see ourselves as Americans; united, but still separate with individual places and cultures. To deny someone their culture seems like a crime. It doesn’t really matter what language people are speaking as long as they are being heard by someone somewhere, the same as it doesn’t matter what language is on the voting ballot they are reading, as long as they are trying to be represented in the way the government is run. It goes back to the concept of “us” and “them;” it seems like some people are afraid that if there is no “them,” then there is also no “us.” If they accept a different culture as part of their own national culture, then they might be afraid that their own culture will be blurred into a large group until all that’s left is melted goop on the side of the pot. While it seems irrational, people on both sides of the argument are afraid of this happening. So I still remain in the shades of gray of the argument of illegal immigration and how to handle it in my nice little shades of gray world.