:: Iraq War ::

A Canadian perspective on the Iraq War and related matters.
:: welcome to Iraq War :: bloghome | contact ::
[::..Links and Blogs..::]
:: Pedantry Blog
:: davidjobson.com
:: Calpundit Blog
:: Seeing the Forest for the Trees Blog
:: Eschaton Blog
:: Tom Runnacles Blog
:: Language Hat Blog
:: Invisible Adjunct Blog
:: Thoughts Arguments and Rants Blog
:: Matthew Yglesias Blog
:: Daily Kos Blog
:: Media Whores Online Blog
:: Shadow of the Hegemon
:: A List of Some Forbidden Chinese Blogs
:: Japan Media Review from USC
:: Old China Hand
:: Anonymouse
:: Robert Livingstone Memorial

:: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 ::

Published on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 by the Toronto Star
Harvard Author Unveils Latest Alarmist Theory
by Gwynne Dyer

Dr. Samuel P. Huntington, chairman of the Harvard Academy for International and Area Studies and co-founder of Foreign Policy magazine, is like a dog that has only one trick: We've all seen it before, but he won't stop doing it. We're going to have to stop giving him biscuits.

Huntington's trick is to identify some alleged new threat to U.S. security, dress it up in academically respectable language, and inflate it to bursting point.

He did it in 1993 with his essay The Coming Clash Of Civilizations, which warned Americans that the Islamic hordes were coming from the east while the Chinese hordes were growing to the west.

It did very well in U.S. national security circles, where people whose jobs were endangered by the end of the Cold War were urgently looking for some new threat to justify their paychecks.

He recycled the article as a best-selling book in 1996, and the book enjoyed a whole second life after 9/11, but now it's time for a new threat. This time it's the Mexican hordes coming from the south.

In the most recent issue of Foreign Policy, he poses the question: "Will the U.S. remain a country with a single national language and a core anglo-Protestant culture? (Or will) Americans acquiesce to their eventual transformation into two peoples with two cultures (anglo and Hispanic) and two languages (English and Spanish)?"

Don't confuse Huntington with the foul-mouthed bigots who usually rant on about the Mexican Peril: His usual habitat is Harvard's dreaming spires, not some redneck drinking establishment on the wrong side of town.

But his article, The Hispanic Challenge, is a trailer for his new book Who Are We? The Challenges To America's National Identity, and one suspects that his definition of "we" does not include African-Americans, Muslim Americans, or Mexican-Americans. In fact, it doesn't really even include Catholic Americans.

Huntington is not exactly predicting that Mexican-Americans will grow into a permanent Spanish-speaking minority as important as French-Canadians in Canada, with a territorial base in the southwest, a culture that profoundly diverges from the traditional white, Protestant culture of the United States, and the political clout to impose bilingualism nationwide. He's just warning about it, that's all — and he's too cunning to court charges of extremism by suggesting specific policies to avert this dreadful fate.

It would be a waste of time to go through his arguments piecemeal, but a couple of examples will convey the style. He admits that the share of Mexican immigrants in current U.S. immigration is lower than that of Irish immigrants in the period 1820-1860 or of German immigrants in 1850-1870, but insists that the danger is greater now because Mexicans won't assimilate.

Then he quotes a study showing that more than 90 per cent of second-generation Mexican-Americans in Los Angeles speak fluent English and that more than 60 per cent of them speak either no Spanish or worse Spanish than English. But he promptly frets that "with the rapid expansion of the Mexican immigrant community, people of Mexican origin would have less incentive to become fluent in, and use English, in 2000 than in 1970."

Yes, they might, but where's the evidence? There is none; just false parallels, unsupported conclusions, and a lavish use of the conditional mood.

He really ought to get out more. He might start in a small way by visiting Canada, which takes in proportionately twice as many immigrants as the United States, picking them by rules that give every region of the world an equal chance.

As a result, about a quarter of its immigrants are Chinese, and Chinese is already the third most widely spoken language in Canada. Old-stock Canadians, whether English or French speaking, seem remarkably unalarmed by this, and most visible minority Canadians will tell you they live in a less racist society than the one next door.

If nothing else came out of his Canadian trip, Huntington would come home with two good ideas. One is how to solve the "Mexican problem": Open up America's doors to immigration from all over the world at the same per capita rate as Canada, and Mexican immigration would quickly shrink to relatively insignificant proportions.

Alternatively, when he needs a topic for his next scare book, he could write about the hordes of black, brown and yellow Canadians, some of them French-speaking, who are about to inundate the United States from the north.

Gwynne Dyer is a Canadian journalist based in London whose articles are published in 45 countries.

:: David 4:07 PM [+] ::
... Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?