My understanding is that the parents may still be deported but generally are not. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 08-20-04, 03:33 PM Elexina You would be surprised at how many immigrants come to America pregnant for just that reason. Anyone born on American soil is an American and can't be deported, and we would really be heartless for deporting a poor defenseless baby's parents, wouldn't we? That is why I think there ought to be more to citizenship than that.
08-20-04, 04:09 PM doñadiana
quote:Originally posted by honilov: If two illegal immigrant parents had a child born in the US, would the child be a US citizen? Would that be enough reason for them not to be deported?
I am under the impression that it used to be that way but, because of the abuses, it is no longer so. The child would have the citizenship of his parents.
08-20-04, 04:39 PM Sarai Doña Diana, you are mistaken. Children born in the US definitely are citizens. Perhaps they could also be citizens of the country of their parents (that would depend on that country's laws), but the US would certainly recognize any child born in the US as a citizen.
"The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
Anyone born inside the United States Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S. Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21 Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time) A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example."
08-20-04, 05:31 PM doñadiana Technically you are right. However, please read this article.
It seems that this is a bone of contention and we have not heard the end of this unless Congress has made some decision about the 14th Amendment since this article was published.
DD
08-20-04, 05:56 PM honilov Thanks for all the replies, but now I'm sorta confused. Just as I was understanding that the baby would be a citizen, Diana points in the direction that that wouldn't necessarily be the case. I guess that's why that article is entitled 'The Fourteenth Amendment Mess'.
08-20-04, 06:50 PM FredPuli If so then that is most unusual. Interestingly the Irish Government has had to ask that the law there be changed for this reason viz. pregnant foreigners were coming into Ireland to give birth there just so the baby was Irish, quite regardless of their own nationality or status . The law there was written that way at a time when Ireland was losing population through mass emigration; it's only in recent years that Ireland has had a net gain from migration. An Irish born citizen of course has not only full rights as a citizen there but also as a citizen of the European Union, so such a lax rule did not endear the Irish Republic to the rest of us Big Grin
If the US law is as simple as to admit anyone born in the US a citizen then we may assume that anyone born on any merchant ship or cruise ship, even a private yacht, then sailing under the US flag is an American citizen too; such a vessel is simply a mobile piece of the United States for legal purposes in general Smile.
Perhaps, like Ireland, the USA regarded all increase in the citizenry desirable but it seems unlikely, considering how immigrants were scrutinised and even restricted from time to time, that this attitude prevailed throughout her history.The interpretation suggested in the last link sounds consistent with it not being intended to grant citizenship simply through place of birth. That whole amendment makes little sense unless what is intended is that the child hold allegiance to the United States. This would come through the allegiance of the parents, specifically the father, by analogy with the international law of 'domicil' (below)
If the question were one of 'domicil', the status which matters most in international private law, then the child would not have a domicil of the United States simply from being born there. That is dependent on the parents' domicil which may be of birth i.e the father taking the domicil of his father and not changing it by taking a 'domicil of choice' viz of moving to a country and intending to be to be settled there permanently. It would be odd indeed if the rules for citizenship were more free and easy in application than the law of domicil, which is the first and most basic status that the law considers. Most countries have strict rules that apply to the question of citizenship.
08-20-04, 06:59 PM honilov Oh, and I forgot to mention to Fuse that in his link, I found out what 'jus soli', and 'jus sanguinis' meant. Thanks. Smile
08-20-04, 08:11 PM Sarai Regardless of the original intention of the 14th amendment or any controversy that may be taking place around it, the fact is that children born in the US are automatically citizens. I personally know a couple who are both foreigners without proper documentation, residing in the US, who had a baby a little less than 2 years ago. The baby is an American citizen.
Doña Diana, your article was interesting - thanks. I haven't heard of any changes taking place, and if they were, I think it would be making major headlines. I doubt this will change any time soon.
08-20-04, 10:50 PM doñadiana Actually I believe that it is a big deal in California because of the large number of illegal aliens draining the system.
DD
08-29-04, 10:34 AM soaringhorse Very excellent question honiluv. I am not going to voice my opinion though, got accused of being a bigot before. Roll Eyes Then they wonder why people leave this site? Mad
08-29-04, 07:25 PM honilov Soaringhorse, I would very much like to hear your opinion. It's very important to hear what everyone has to say, regardless of who agrees.
Sorry that you were accused of being a bigot. Let's just wade through these deep waters and keep voicing our opinions. Smile
08-29-04, 09:35 PM soaringhorse Honiluv, I believe the term for the child is called "Anchor Baby" and if the 14th Amendment doesn't get changed, it looks CA has shelled out $215 million on them just in 1994. So can you imagine how much it is today? Here's an article about it:
This is what I was referring to in my post about foreignors.
08-30-04, 07:55 AM Sarai 1) Someone who makes $18,000 a year, whether or not they are here legally, does not contribute much in the way of taxes. A person who makes $18,000 a year legally would get a rebate check. In effect, s/he doesn't really pay income tax.
2) Many undocumented workers are taxed, but because they are undocumented, they do not get refunds. Thus, certain undocumented workers making $18,000 a year actually contribute more money to our economy than people here legally do.
3) Alan Greenspan said that immigrants, including illegal immigrants,
quote:
in essence donate $27 billion to state and local economies. This is the difference between what they pay in taxes ($70 billion) and what they use in services ($43 billion). In Illinois alone, he testified, "Illegal workers pay $547 million in taxes yearly, compared to $238 million in services used." This is a net "profit" for Illinois of $309 million. This phenomenon is the norm, not the exception, in states where undocumented workers pay taxes. Indeed, rather than take money from, undocumented workers donate money to the American economy and thus to Americans.
08-30-04, 10:49 AM Sarai I can't modify my post above, but by the way, I used $18,000 for my answer because of what Soaringhorse's article says.
08-31-04, 04:38 PM doñadiana Sarai: I was not able to pull up your site. I think it has expired. However, I don't see any way that a person paying taxes on a theoretical $18,000 per year could possibly pay for the services they use if they are using the public school system and public health services. The only answer I can think of is that many undocumented people are not using any public services at all out of fear of being caught and this accounts for the low figure. If they all used these services the results would be frightening. Many of these people end up in jail also and that is another drain on the tax payer. Undocumented workers avoid anyone that looks like "law" and whatever information anyone gets out of them is almost sure to be a lie. I can't imagine how it would be possible to get any kind of reliable figures about their wages or the taxes they pay, either from them or from their employers, since it is against the law to hire undocumented workers.
DD
09-07-04, 07:58 PM Sarai
quote:Originally posted by doñadiana: Sarai: I was not able to pull up your site. I think it has expired.
I'm still able to get it. Try again. If you still can't get it and want to read it, let me know - I could copy it and email it to you.
quote:If they all used these services the results would be frightening.
They aren't frightening. As it is, undocumented workers pay more in taxes than they take. That is a simple fact. It isn't draining the economy. Now, NIMN and Alan Moore will argue that this is an environmental problem (possible overpopulation) - that might be true. I'm undecided. But as for finances, they are not draining our economy. Quite the contrary.
quote:Many of these people end up in jail also and that is another drain on the tax payer.
Nope. Not a drain. The figures show they are a boon. If we want to end illegal immigration, it would have to be for reasons other than economic reasons.
quote:Undocumented workers avoid anyone that looks like "law" and whatever information anyone gets out of them is almost sure to be a lie.
No comment, except to ask the question, "What is the purpose of making a statement like this about an entire group of people?"
quote:I can't imagine how it would be possible to get any kind of reliable figures about their wages or the taxes they pay, either from them or from their employers, since it is against the law to hire undocumented workers.
Okay, well if we can't use facts and figures, then we would just rely on our stereotypes for this discussion. Your stereotype is of liars and criminals, mine is of poor people who just want decent work and to give their children a shot at a better future. Mine is based on people I know quite well, but that's beside the point - I can't change your mind based on people I know.
09-07-04, 08:04 PM Sarai
quote:Originally posted by FredPuli: An Irish born citizen of course has not only full rights as a citizen there but also as a citizen of the European Union, so such a lax rule did not endear the Irish Republic to the rest of us Big Grin
Fred, I remembered this thread today because of a discussion I had with a friend of mine. Her father is a dual Italian/Mexican citizen because he was born in Italy. He moved to Mexico as a child and applied for Mexican citizenship as an adult.
It made me think of this thread because my friend is currently applying for Italian citizenship. She expressly says that she's not applying for it out of any particular love of Italy, but because of the benefits of being a citizen of a country in the European Union.
Apparently, she can become an Italian citizen simply because her father is an Italian citizen by birth - despite the fact that she speaks very little Italian and that her father probably doesn't even remember living in Italy, he was so young when he moved to Mexico.
That sounds pretty lax to me! Don't you think that allowing someone to become a citizen because of blood is a less legitimate reason than allowing them to become a citizen because of birth? Someone born and raised in a country is certainly more a member of that country in heart and soul than someone born and raised outside of it, on another continent, speaking a different language, no matter what their blood line is. What do you think?
09-08-04, 02:33 AM FredPuli Sarai, your friend should check that out with the Italian Embassy Smile On the face of it, your friend has no claim.
If the father on whom the claim is based renounced his Italian citizenship before the child was born then the child does not have Italian citizenship. So if he became a Mexican citizen before the birth, renouncing his Italian citizenship in the process (which he would normally be expected to do; countries want allegiance to their country alone, without risk of conflict ) the child will not be an Italian citizen. Furthermore, even if the child had been born pre-renunciation , the child would not be regarded as an Italian citizen unless the birth was registered with the Italian authorities (consulate/ embassy ) at the time.
It is true, however, that Italian citizenship is based on lineage, not place of birth. So it can happen that a person has Italian citizenship derived through an ancestor who died over a hundred years ago. Once the chain is broken though the citizenship is lost.
On the economics point, the evidence in the UK is that immigrants, illegal or otherwise, do not, in practice, cause a drain on the economy once settled here. Illegals often pay their savings or that of family or friends to pay the agent who gets them into the country; they are not going to do that if they do not intend to work here. They are mostly young and of working age. If anything they are keen to earn enough to send money back for any family back home. We did worry about an influx from the old Soviet bloc countries which have recently joined tyhe EU. Our rules in the UK had not provided for restricting them, unlike those of other countries. However it seems that if they cannot find work they go straight back home, or seek work elsewhere in the EU before doing so. They do not remain.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
Posts: 7608 | Location: in the backwoods of North Carolina | Registered: 06-07-02
Fred, her father is a dual citizen. He didn't have to renounce his Italian citizenship when he became a Mexican. This surprised me, too. I knew that the US allowed dual citizenship, but I had understood that Mexico did not. Apparently I was wrong. Anyway, many countries allow dual citizenship. My parents, incidently, are also dual citizens.
She already has checked it out, and is currently filling out paperwork. If her application is accepted, maybe you can get her a job. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 09-08-04, 05:13 PM doñadiana
quote: Okay, well if we can't use facts and figures, then we would just rely on our stereotypes for this discussion. Your stereotype is of liars and criminals, mine is of poor people who just want decent work and to give their children a shot at a better future. Mine is based on people I know quite well, but that's beside the point - I can't change your mind based on people I know.
I guess I am jaded from living so many years in Latin America. The major part of the illegals that go to the U.S. from here are from the lowest levels of society. We are not talking about the cream of the crop. They are outside the law by virtue of being in the U.S. illegally. They are liars because they can't afford to tell anyone the truth about themselves...not even their real names. For the most part they have no qualms anyway about lying or stealing. It is part of their culture and they don't see anything wrong with it. It is a form of survival... their vocation, if you will and this is the culture that they bring to the U.S.
When I was young and naive, like you I wanted to believe the best about people. I often wish I could go back to that time of innocence but I have to live in the real world.
DD
09-08-04, 06:48 PM FredPuli Sarai , then if it is a problem for Italy it's a problem for us all in the EU but it can hardly amount to much of one Smile.There really can't be many people, born and raised outside the European Union, who have an unbroken lineage where no direct ancestor had ever lost their Italian citizenship.
By the way, I do wonder whether the Italians distinguish between nationality and citizenship.The writer of the link seems to think it is possible to have dual citizenship but that seems doubtful. Suppose the Italians and the Mexicans both had compulsory military service. A boy with dual citizenship, if it realy exists in law, would have to serve two lots; one in Mexico, one in Italy. If he refused he'd be guilty in either or both. He could be guilty of treason against both countries or either in a dispute between them too.
Britain had this question. Many thousands of people from former colonies or territories were entitled to a British passport but it was decided that did not give them a right of abode here.
09-08-04, 07:25 PM FredPuli [Now I find I can't rectify or edit the above]. The conscription problem is solved by the USA by a simple provision. Anyone declaring allegiance to another country is likely to be deemed to have forfeited their US citizenship Smile If to an enemy power then obviously it's treason. The terms citizenship and nationality are now evidently interchangeable. There was formerly a subtle distinction which could prove useful sometimes.
Get her a job, Sarai? Who me? Well it looks as though we could do with someone in this chair who can do Italian law and citizenship theory off the top of her head; the bloke here seems pretty useless to me !
09-08-04, 07:48 PM Sarai
quote:Originally posted by doñadiana: I guess I am jaded from living so many years in Latin America. The major part of the illegals that go to the U.S. from here are from the lowest levels of society.
Having lived for several years in Mexico, I'm also familiar with at least one part of Latin America - and the most important part in the US, as far as the immigration question is concerned.
I know well what you are expressing, and relate to it (although I disagree with it). But I hope that after you read this post, you'll agree that you can relate to what I'm saying, as well (although you may, of course, disagree! Smile ).
quote:They are outside the law by virtue of being in the U.S. illegally. They are liars because they can't afford to tell anyone the truth about themselves...not even their real names.
Yes, they are outside the law by virtue of their legal status. I don't dispute that. I do, however, dispute the idea that "they are liars." They have to lie to work. But that doesn't make a person a liar. That makes a person someone who is willing to lie if it means they can put food on the table. Additionally, in my experience, people are quite open about their legal status. I'm not a cop or part of the migra, so no one has any reason to lie to me. And in my experience, they don't.
By the way, if we offered things like accepting the matricula consular card as legitimate ID, it would make it easier and safer for people to tell the truth about who they are. Incidentally, police support this for this very reason. Most of these people aren't lying because "they're liars." They lie for work, not because they are by nature any more dishonest than an upperclass Latina or an American.
quote:For the most part they have no qualms anyway about lying or stealing. It is part of their culture and they don't see anything wrong with it.
Again, I'm not familiar with Guatemala, but I am familiar with Mexico. Certainly, every culture has its issues, and in Mexico, corruption is an issue. But to make a blanket statement like this is simply false. The majority of Mexicans I know are honest. No, I'm not speaking because I'm naive. I'm speaking because I have family who are Mexican. I don't think defending the people I love makes me naive.
Additionally, the harder we make it for them to tell the truth, the less likely they will tell the truth. If we recognized that immigration is good for our country and made it easier, there would be less dishonesty all around.
Additionally, I notice that you are focusing entirely on what those doing the work are doing. You aren't noticing the dishonesty and corruption on the part of those giving the work.
The thing I'd like to see more people focus on is not the stereotype of Latin dishonesty, but the dishonesty of American employers. Americans have our own form of dishonesty. How many employers pretend they "didn't know" that 3/4 of their workforce were here illegally. Please. If we want to be strict about immigration, let's get strict against the Americans who hire them, not the workers who are doing what you and I would do, too, if we were in their position.
quote:It is a form of survival... their vocation, if you will and this is the culture that they bring to the U.S.
How about a culture of deep connection with family? How about a culture of openness and humor and friendliness? How about a culture that understands poverty and suffering in a way that few Americans do? A culture of children who earnestly believe that helping the poor is important? A culture that talks about God like He really exists?
I'm not trying to romanticize Mexican culture. But there are a lot of good things that they have to offer.
As a slightly off topic aside, I would love to see the US become closer to Mexico. My dream world would have the US really thought of by Americans and the rest of the international community as geographically, politically and culturally part of "the Americas" ... rather than as some broken appendage of Europe.
09-08-04, 08:44 PM Sarai Fred, I had honestly never considered the difference between nationality and citizenship. Come to think of it, I don't even know if my parents are dual citizens are dual nationalities. They've always used the former term, but I have no idea how it is dealt with in the issues you bring up. I will have to ask.
quote: Get her a _job_, Sarai? Who me? Well it looks as though we could do with someone in this chair who can do Italian law and citizenship theory off the top of her head; the bloke here seems pretty useless to me !
In your chair, hmm? Well, she does dislike US foreign policy almost as much as you do. The change in gender would be iffy but probably okay, since by internet we can all pretend to some extent. But the French and the witty Briticisms are out of her linguistic field... no, I don't think she could take your place. Is there an opening for a FedericoPuli over there, by any chance? If so, I'll be sure to mention it! Big Grin Wink
09-09-04, 03:22 AM FredPuli Federico Puli, Sarai ? Wasn't that a film director ? Made that great masterpiece Il Dolce Vita ( =" It's a Dog's Life" (?); one of our favourites in this kennel Big Grin )
Don't think she need worry about nationality/citizenship. The distinction now seems only one for those of us who are so old that we (a) still think the typewriter is a pretty neat idea and (b) qualified by passing a law exam on the manumission [ freeing] of slaves and the creation and rights of Roman Citizens under Emperor Justinian, not Italian citizens under the lex Berlusconi ( Signor Berlusconi is a law unto himself, so I wouldn't be surprised to find him making his own).
By the way, slaves in Ancient Rome could become free men and even citizens eventually. You may find a similarity between that and granting citizenship to illegal immigrants who have worked like slaves, doing jobs no native will do, under some amnesty Wink
09-09-04, 04:30 AM FredPuli Or, Sarai, La Dolce Vita, even ! (You've heard of dog Latin; now we are getting 'dog Italian' off the Puli, who can't even get the gender right !)
09-21-04, 09:32 PM dodgecity A liar is a liar no matter how you try and cover it up if they lie once they will do it again and again. thats a FACT not fiction like you want to beleive. sorry i just cant resist i see this kinda crap every day i live in calif.USA and thats why this state is so screwed up.
quote:Originally posted by Sarai:
quote:Originally posted by doñadiana: I guess I am jaded from living so many years in Latin America. The major part of the illegals that go to the U.S. from here are from the lowest levels of society.
Having lived for several years in Mexico, I'm also familiar with at least one part of Latin America - and the most important part in the US, as far as the immigration question is concerned.
I know well what you are expressing, and relate to it (although I disagree with it). But I hope that after you read this post, you'll agree that you can relate to what I'm saying, as well (although you may, of course, disagree! Smile ).
quote:They are outside the law by virtue of being in the U.S. illegally. They are liars because they can't afford to tell anyone the truth about themselves...not even their real names.
Yes, they are outside the law by virtue of their legal status. I don't dispute that. I do, however, dispute the idea that "they are liars." They have to lie to work. But that doesn't make a person a liar. That makes a person someone who is willing to lie if it means they can put food on the table. Additionally, in my experience, people are quite open about their legal status. I'm not a cop or part of the migra, so no one has any reason to lie to me. And in my experience, they don't.
By the way, if we offered things like accepting the matricula consular card as legitimate ID, it would make it easier and safer for people to tell the truth about who they are. Incidentally, police support this for this very reason. Most of these people aren't lying because "they're liars." They lie for work, not because they are by nature any more dishonest than an upperclass Latina or an American.
quote:For the most part they have no qualms anyway about lying or stealing. It is part of their culture and they don't see anything wrong with it.
Again, I'm not familiar with Guatemala, but I am familiar with Mexico. Certainly, every culture has its issues, and in Mexico, corruption is an issue. But to make a blanket statement like this is simply false. The majority of Mexicans I know are honest. No, I'm not speaking because I'm naive. I'm speaking because I have family who are Mexican. I don't think defending the people I love makes me naive.
Additionally, the harder we make it for them to tell the truth, the less likely they will tell the truth. If we recognized that immigration is good for our country and made it easier, there would be less dishonesty all around.
Additionally, I notice that you are focusing entirely on what those doing the work are doing. You aren't noticing the dishonesty and corruption on the part of those giving the work.
The thing I'd like to see more people focus on is not the stereotype of Latin dishonesty, but the dishonesty of American employers. Americans have our own form of dishonesty. How many employers pretend they "didn't know" that 3/4 of their workforce were here illegally. Please. If we want to be strict about immigration, let's get strict against the Americans who hire them, not the workers who are doing what you and I would do, too, if we were in their position.
quote:It is a form of survival... their vocation, if you will and this is the culture that they bring to the U.S.
How about a culture of deep connection with family? How about a culture of openness and humor and friendliness? How about a culture that understands poverty and suffering in a way that few Americans do? A culture of children who earnestly believe that helping the poor is important? A culture that talks about God like He really exists?
I'm not trying to romanticize Mexican culture. But there are a lot of good things that they have to offer.
As a slightly off topic aside, I would love to see the US become closer to Mexico. My dream world would have the US really thought of by Americans and the rest of the international community as geographically, politically and culturally part of "the Americas" ... rather than as some broken appendage of Europe.
09-22-04, 02:26 AM FredPuli Dodge; you would like Mexico to be thought of by Americans as part of the Americas and much closer to the minds of Americans ?
Hmm. Well, if you have a problem with that ,if it's one of not being seen or accepted as like Americans, it's one that the rest us would like to have Frown. The day that all Americans start seeing that foreigners are different and not just failed Americans who are living in the wrong place, that they have a different outlook and different culture,that their thinking is not wrong simply because it is not American thinking, is a day devoutly to be wished Smile.
I wonder what Canadians wish in this regard.Not to be seen by Americans as failed Americans, I expect,as the colonists who never quite made it, with their traditional and irrelevant allegiance to a British monarch.
09-24-04, 06:42 PM doñadiana
quote: Dodge; you would like Mexico to be thought of by Americans as part of the Americas and much closer to the minds of Americans ?
You realize, of course, that statement was made by Sarai, not Dodge.
Fred: you might want to check on how Mexico and Guatemala treat their "illegal aliens."
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
Posts: 2241 | Location: In between | Registered: 06-03-02
quote:Originally posted by FredPuli: Dodge; you would like Mexico to be thought of by Americans as part of the Americas and much closer to the minds of Americans ?
Hmm. Well, if you have a problem with that ,if it's one of not being seen or accepted as like Americans, it's one that the rest us would like to have . The day that _all_ Americans start seeing that foreigners are different and not just failed Americans who are living in the wrong place, that they have a different outlook and different culture,that their thinking is not wrong simply because it is not American thinking, is a day devoutly to be wished .
Fred, honestly I'm not at all sure what you mean here. I think you meant to be addressing me, and that somehow you construe my post as meaning that I want Mexico to be like the US. If that is what you meant, you misunderstood me.
Britain is recognized by pretty much everyone as very different in many ways from countries like France, Germany and Spain. However, all of those countries are also recognized as having certain features that make them similar. They are European, and while their individual history, culture, language etc. are different, there is also a sense that they are all a part of a the same region: Europe. And that region shares certain cultural and historical ties that it doesn't share with, say, Asia.
As a result of those ties, Europe is becoming closer by the day. The European Union is one clear example of that fact.
I would simply like to see the world and Americans thinking of the US as part of "the Americans." Most Americans, incidentally, think of the US as being closer culturally to Britain than it is to Mexico. They would be much more upset at the thought that the British don't like our policies than that the Mexicans don't like them. I dislike that fact. I think we should care a heck of a lot more about what the Mexicans think than what the British (or the French, or the Spanish, etc. etc.) think. Not because Europe isn't important or good, but because I don't think it is healthy to care more about a continent across an ocean than our neighbros right next door.
I hope that with time we will become more American - in the continental sense- than we are European. You will say that we aren't European, but unless you wish to give Canada and the US their own category (which many do), I think defining Americans as Europe's child or brother or cousin or some other familial relationship is pretty much how most of the world sees us. Personally, I dislike this and would prefer to be seen as being part of the region we actually live in.
This does not in any way imply that I think the rest of the world is or should be like the US, and I'm a little miffed that you are implying that.
Posts: 2241 | Location: In between | Registered: 06-03-02
I haven't understood Sarai how anyone thought I was addressing you on that aspect.
I do not think that we , in Europe, in any country with the exception of France, see the United States or Americans as being even remotely like Britain and Britons . The French commonly have the habit of talking and thinking of Anglo-Saxons ( Les Anglo-Saxes) as though Britons and Americans are the same and, worse, united in some conspiracy, based on language and culture (and usually against them).
Any visiter from Britain to the United States is aware of superficial similarities but soon finds that the thinking and culture are as alien as any . The common language is deceptive. There is a strong impression, for example, that every American speaks and means to speak plainly and that we can take everything they say quite literally and as seriously meant and that we are intended to. You can have little idea just how much difficulty this can cause when Americans deal with the French. No Frenchman hears anything without asking himself what is meant, without seeking the unspoken message and thought behind the words, always taking it for granted that there is some.After all, when he speaks, he himself is not speaking absolutely plainly but, then, that causes few difficulties; the hearer is French too When this was pointed out to me once as an important French/American distinction I had to reflect that, if only the French commentator knew it, it is a British/American one too (made worse by the annoying British habit of injecting a litle humour or irony into almost any and every topic, as though nothing in life can be taken absolutely seriously). So, even in the simplest conversation, there is a fundamental and common feature, a bond of French and Briton, a mutual understanding, which is alien for Americans and vice versa . In that,for a start, we are closer to them than to you in America.
We are, in reality , far closer in other ways than conversation and far closer too to our other European near neighbours. Moreover we have been so for a long time. Right from the outset, it seems, Americans worked hard to achieve a national and cultural identity, marking the country out as independent, new, and uniquely different from Britain or those countries which later supplied the mass of her immigrants. She stood proudly free of Europe,proudly disconnected, and proudly different.She is sensitive to what that means. I stand to be corrected but I do not believe that the term 'un-American' has a precise equivalent anywhere in Europe. We do not talk, in our languages, of something being un-French or un-German or un-British (and we would never expect our schoolchildren to salute or acknowledge a flag either )
Our younger people think of themselves as Europeans and will say so Older generations fought wars within Europe as the various powers struggled for dominance or security. In the result a certain amount of chauvinism was generated. Underneath though, the thinking and the culture was really very close to being common.The differing languages suggest far more difference than did exist between countries whose very monarchs were interbred and related far and wide across borders, whose peoples had been part of great empires and whose faith had been, in the main, not in just one religion but in one sect of that religion.
Meanwhile, from her creation, the United States, thousands of miles, an ocean, and generations away, was on her own and a very big place too; something we Europeans never seem to quite grasp is just how easy it is to travel trans European distances there and still be in the United States. Couple that with her receiving grateful immigrants and her great wealth and power and it is easy to see how the beliefs of which we complain arise, that everyone else is a kind of wannabee American and that the 'American way' must be the only good way
Ah - well, then, Fred, it appears that we are agreed!
The difference you mention between British and American ways of speaking is very interesting. I notice, to a lesser extent, a similar difference between American and Canadian speech. Sometimes my Canadian relatives will make a statement, to which I'll respond in all sincerity and honesty... only to realize a few minutes later that they had not expected an answer and had, in fact, been teasing me. But maybe that's just my family.
Posts: 2241 | Location: In between | Registered: 06-03-02
. The day that _all_ Americans start seeing that foreigners are different and not just failed Americans who are living in the wrong place, that they have a different outlook and different culture,that their thinking is not wrong simply because it is not American thinking, is a day devoutly to be wished 
.
When this was pointed out to me once as an important French/American distinction I had to reflect that, if only the French commentator knew it, it is a British/American one too (made worse by the annoying British habit of injecting a litle humour or irony into almost any and every topic, as though nothing in life can be taken absolutely seriously). So, even in the simplest conversation, there is a fundamental and common feature, a bond of French and Briton, a mutual understanding, which is alien for Americans and vice versa . In that,for a start, we are closer to them than to you in America.
