AMERICA, Modern Day Tower of Babel?

A small comparison between America and a biblical event.

Published on April 15, 2006 By Moderateman In Politics

http://www.ldolphin.org/babel.html

All of this language mixing once destroyed a proud nation, {read the link}

Having a multi language separated man and woman from each other in the Bible!

This demanding of some of our Immigrants that we accommodate them by learning there language, write things so they can understand them, instead of insisting all immigrants speak, read and write this countries language is leading America along the same path as the tower of babel did, destroying the country as it destroyed mans ability to communicate long ago in just ONE LANGUAGE.

WE as a nation must stop this politically correct behavior and start insisting, you want to be an American? and live in this country, learn our language! Period. Keep your countries language, teach you children the customs and spirit of your homeland, do not let that die, but!!!!! blend in and learn English first.

Do not let America go the way of the Tower of Babel, those that do not heed history is doomed to repeat it.

Comments (Page 4)

cactoblasta

on Apr 18, 2006

multi-language contries fall.. quickly, historically a truth.

And yet the united kingdoms of Switzerland have stood unconquered and hardly undermined for centuries. They have three different languages.

As Bakerstreet points out the Roman Empire had a number of languages, with pure Latin merely being the language of governance. Of course even in Rome linguistic purity didn't exist to any real extent; The Latin of the Subura bore little resemblence to the Latin of the Palatine or the Carinae even in Republican days.

Then there's China; a consistent cultural force for millenia, and yet having enormous linguistic diversity and several major language groups.

Then there's Persia, an incredibly strong Middle Eastern power for centuries. The Ottoman caliphate of course. The Ummayid caliphate, Imperial England, the Aztecs (dubious, sure, but who knows what would have happened had they been left alone for more than a few short centuries?) etc etc.

Multilingual societies are often the strongest because they adapt so easily to new arrivals and have the capacity to take advantage of the newcomers strengths. There's certainly no historical reason to assume them weak unless you believe history began with Fukuyama.

Dr Guy

on Apr 18, 2006

Dunno about you, but after 10 years at least of having people at McDonalds straining to understand me, I think eventually you have to read the writing on the wall. When they walk into your house and want to buy your lawnmower, you can sit back and refuse to sell it because you don't understand them.

Otherwise, it sounds like in this case you are wanting something they are selling, which would make it your problem. If you think there is an moral point more valid in a transaction than getting your hamburger, you are, of course, free to do without.

You missed my point. I am fully aware that I do not need to patronize that establishment, and indeed, their lack of English is an exclusion in and of itself. I dont think that is the thrust of this article anyway. The thrust is should they be required to learn english? On the one hand, we already have laws that require it. It is called Citizenship. But the next question then becomes should they be required to learn english to transact business here. I beleive that is the ultimate question of this article. And note while I observed reality, I did not make a judgement call on whether that should or should not be a requirement.

But the final question is far wider and I beleive much deeper. If we are not going to require english as a tongue of the immigrants, then are we to be required to be bi-lingual in our own homes? For while many bemoan the fact that Americans are very poor in the bi-lingual area, the truth is there is virtually no countries where the entire population is bi-lingual. There are many countries, Island Gurls's comes to mind, where the vast majority is bi-lingual. But even in the tightly packed land of babel called Europe, many native citizens of their country are not bi-lingual, and function very well with only their native tongue.

bakerstreet

on Apr 18, 2006

The only reason I could see that you would have to be bi-lingual in your home would be if you live with someone that can't speak english, or if you entertain yourself with media of another language. You guys are the one making things "official" and saying you have to do this or that. I'm not saying you have to be multi-lingual, I'm saying that if you aren't, don't blame other people when you can't understand them.

I agree that people who come to you for something who can't speak your language have caused themselves hardship. In turn, when you know that you are going to come across people in everyday life that won't understand you, you are in the same boat. The one-language nation is a fantasy. Embracing it or trying to legislate it is just asking for the kinds of hardship you describe.

The pretense of this article, though, is simply false. The assertion that nations of a single language are by some law more apt to survive than nations with multiple languages doesn't add up when we look at history. It's more likely that nations that try to keep an artificial culture alive while forcefully subliminating the REAL culture of the people who live there are apt to become antiquated.

bakerstreet

on Apr 18, 2006

P.S. I think it would be slipshod to ignore the reason the languages were confounded in the first place:

"Now the whole earth had one language and few words. And as men migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. And they said to one another, 'Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly.' And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar. Then they said, 'Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.' And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the sons of men had built. And the LORD said, 'Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do; and nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down, and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.' So the LORD scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city.' Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the LORD confused the language of all the earth; and from there the LORD scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth."

Evidently God isn't all that pleased with cultural supremacists who believe that they should 'make a name for themselves'. There's something to be said for a bit of humility. The irony, to me, is that MM is writing this in fear that we will be splintered and forgotten like the folks who built babel. That fear is what led them to build their tower, that in turn led to their judgement and scattering.

So, I think you can see in this story that perhaps an obstinant need to cement one's one place in the world can lead to your downfall.

Moderateman

on Apr 18, 2006

I just wanted to thank everyone for their opinions and the passion making your points, what a great debate!

I am pleased.

KFC Kickin For Christ

on Apr 19, 2006

Now this I can agree with!!! Nicely said Baker. And in reality we should all put on a bit of humility in dealing with these subjects that can so inflame us as well.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!