In threads on U.S. immigration policy, someone always argues that Latinos are different from other immigrant populations in that they are less likely to fully assimilate to American culture. Why would that be so bad? Worst-case scenario, we end up like Canada without the secessionism. Like Canada, we’ll have a substantial ethnocultural minority of people who do not speak English at home and never will, but most of whom can speak it perfectly well as a second language. Unlike in Canada, those people will not have any particular state or region they can regard as “theirs” and potentially independent. If the Latino population of the Southwest were twice its present level, the idea of an independent “Aztlan” would remain as laughable as it is now. Most Latinos wouldn’t want that anyway. They came to this country to get in on it. They just want to work and make money and be good citizens. So why is it so important that they “assimilate”?
But is it even true that they don’t assimilate? I find myself wondering if non-assimilation is just a myth. In my limited experience, second-generation Latinos speak a lot more English than Spanish, and some speak hardly any Spanish at all. I’m sure someone has a good cite on the subject.
Sounds right to me, Sal.
I think it’s safe to say that there are many who do thoroughly assimilate, but that you also have sizeable communities that don’t. I’m sure that this can happen when you have large local communities and a large support base. If there is less pressure to assimilate one’s self into the culture, then you can be sure that a sizeable number of individuals will invest less effort in doing so.
I think it is one thing for people in a particular area to keep the language it has historically used, this is Canada’s situation. In our (presumed) situation, we have people moving in and refusing to learn the existing language. In the US, in order to fully take advantage of our economy, you need to speak English. Sure, you can do a lot if you only speak Spanish, if you’re in the right neighborhood, but you can’t leave the hood, nor can you interact with the huge English-only population.
I suspect, however, that Sal is right, 1st generation Latinos may not learn much English, but 2nd and beyond will. I don’t think this is much different than the early 20th century immigration, except that most of the non-English speakers speak one language, instead of a dozen different ones.
But many are moving to states like California, New Mexico and Texas which were historically Spanish-speaking, and only changed to English after the Unites States Americans moved in. There always have been large minorities soeaking Spanish in those states.
I think Latinos are much more numerous in comparison to french canadians. Also they are reproducing much faster than other “minorities” and they have immigration to boost their numbers. So if they don’t assimilate that certainly will change the USA in some way. We can argue how much … but things will change if assimilation doesn’t happen. (I think Latinos assimilate in most aspects and not in others so I don’t agree with the OP in that).
My first impression is that the OP is imagining that its just an issue of spanish becoming more widespread and latino clothing and food taking over. I think you might be overlooking that with these more obvious cultural traits come other less desirable ones. Latin Americans like myself are much more focused on personal contact… and who knows who. This cultural trait I beleive leads more easily to corruption and less meritocracy. Comes with the package lets say.
I dunno if they were large minorities . . . I’m pretty sure that “New Mexico” was very sparsely settled at the time of the Mexican-American War. There were probably more Indians there than Mexicans.
I don’t know where folks are getting this non-assimilation thing WRT Latinos. Firstly, Latino culture (painting with a broad brush here) isn’t all that different from American culture; they’re Christians with European colonial roots, just like us. Secondly, there’s this thing called teenagers. Whether they’re first or second generation, teenagers are all about integrating. You usually conform to your peer groups in high school. I see Latino teenagers with cell phones, the latest clothes, etc…no different from any other teenagers. I see Latino families cooking out at the park all the time…cooking hamburgers and hot dogs.
Anyone who thinks Latinos aren’t assimilating has their head so far up their ass it’s coming out their throats.
Not relative to the size of the country’s population, no, they’re not. Hispanics represent about 15% of the U.S. population; Francophones are about 20% of Canada’s population, their language is an official language, and they control the country’s second most populous province and two of its largest cities.
The “They aren’t assimilating” accusation has been levelled at every major immigrant group in the history of the United States that wasn’t from nothern Europe. It was said of the Italians, the Jews, the Chinese, so on and so forth. There’s no truth to it.
And the Irish and the Germans.
I think the perception of “non-assimilation” occurs when you have sizeable numbers that have lived in the USA for years, and yet can still barely speak the language. There are probably other factors at play, such as a measure of ethnic cliquishness (which, let’s face it, is pretty much true of all cultures), but I suspect that the language is the main issue.
I suspect that we’ve all encountered individuals who appear unmotivated to adopt the vernacular, or to adapt to the culture. I’ve certainly encountered my share. As for the extent to which they represent their individual nationalities or races though, I wouldn’t care to guess.
By “Northern Europe” I meant Scandinavia, which got a pass from these criticisms (For the most part) despite rather obvious evidence that the Scandinavians didn’t assimilate any better than anyone else. But they’re the whitest of the white, and that’s really what this is all about.
But there simply isn’t a culture. My culture is significantly different than that of many US Dopers, and I’m sure their cultures vary too. We are in a free country more and less. Everyone is free to speak what they want, eat what they want, listen to the music that they want, etc. At one time, fairly recently, official and un-official discrimination discouraged that kind of freedom. It doesn’t anymore. And I think that some people have grown increasingly uncomfortable because of that freedom. They can no longer discriminate, and it bugs the heck out of them.
The most Hispanic Spanish speakers that I’ve encountered outside of Mexico has been in South Texas. Fairly large populations of historically US citizens that speak Spanish (and many English). You can spend the whole day in Laredo TX and not see another Anglo or hear English. Likewise, in other South Texas cities, like Edinberg, Falfurrias, Raymondville, etc. To tell you the truth, it kind of bugs me, but it’s a free country after all.
Why is it that when I call many businesses, they have an option to hit a button to continue in Spanish, but they don’t have that option for any other language? Or when I pick up the phone, I occasionally get “You speak Spanish” (or even worse, a barage of fast talking Spanish without even asking–just assuming I understand it)?
Because it’s a capitalist country.
But there is, Bull. America’s national culture is not as homogeneous as the culture of Japan or Iceland, but it does exist. It existed for at least a hundred years before we won independence from the UK.
From The Next American Nation, by Michael Lind – http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0684825031/sr=8-1/qid=1144680064/ref=sr_1_1/002-6905602-3394450?_encoding=UTF8:
From the same book:
The fact that we are not homogeneous means we have other cultures. Sure, we are all Americans. Being different doesn’t mean that you aren’t patriotic to the US.
As one example, it is widely claimed that the immigrants from the South are refusing to bother to learn English. Yet the numbers do not bear out that claim. Between 1990 and 2000, the number of people who Spoke Spanish as a primary language rose from 17,339,172 to 28,101,052. On the other hand, the number of Spanish speakers who spoke English “very well” is over half that number, at 14,349,796 and the number who spoke English “well” was recorded as 5,819,408. So, with an increase of over 10 million Spanish speakers, we still find 20,169,204 people who speak it well–2,830,032 people more than were even in the country in 1990. Since one would generally suppose that the most recent and poorest immigrants would be among those least likely to speak English, it is worth noting that only 7,931,848 Spanish speakers are in the “poor” or “none” categories (of whom only 2,801,448 are categorized as not speaking English, at all).
Census Bureau: Language Use and English-Speaking Ability: 2000 (.pdf)
Even if they do assimilate the country will change. It always has. Of course the “lazy Irish” and the “yellow peril” and the “ignorant slavs” and “papists” of all stripes that were going to ruin the country in previous waves seem to have actually strengthened the country even as they changed it. The only way that immigrants will harm the country is if we isolate them from the political process so that they choose to refrain from participating in the country.
You have obviously never spent much time reading about the daily exploits of every municipal government (and most state bureaucracies) in the U.S. We are quite capable of establishing our own “good ol’ boy” networks and patronage systems. The immigrants will simply have to figure out how to merge their graft with our graft (a process that all previous immigrant groups have successfully negotiated).
In the early 20th Century, nativists made quite similar arguments to prove Southern and Eastern European immigrants, having no tradition of democratic government back home, would not be able to adapt to it here.