One of the figures illustrates the the following numbers:
Cities that have Asian-American mayors and the percent of their population that is Asian.
Palo Alto 17.2%
Sunnyvale 32.3%
Cupertino 44.4%
Saratoga 29.1%
Milpitas 51.8%
A friend who is from Hong Kong once remarked that it's a sea of yellow faces. I know there one person of Celtic background who has complained on a certain paleoconservative site about the influx of immigrants from Asia into the Bay Area. I can understand why he would have a legitimate gripe about the Federal Government and its role in the loss of local identity. But to complain by focussing exclusively on the negative traits of a group and fostering stereotypes is something else. It is something else to point to the habits and customs of a group and show how those habits and customs are at odds with "American" mores, and there is a place for this in the discussion. However, the problem may be that given the moral and cultural decay of the major urban areas one can find many natives with habits and customs that are as bad or worse. This does not negate the observation, but it should make us aware that simply reducing legal immigration is not in itself a remedy for the "culture wars."
Of the five faces pictured in the first photo accompanying the article, four belong to East Asians, the other belongs to a Filipino. Of course, the grouping "Asians" also includes South Asians, Central Asians, Northern Asians, Western Asians... but it seems that most people do not use the term so broadly, even if it is applicable to inhabitants of the whole continent.
But my point is this: do we really need to turn ethnicity into a faction or an "interest group," as if ethnicity is something that needs to be represented in government? Factional politics of any form is a mark of sickness, not of health. Now it may be the case that for these 5 mayors, there is no pandering to "special interest" groups--they will look out for the interests of "all" like any good mayor should. But in that case they are no different from a non-Asian mayor, so what need is there for ethnicity to be represented?
So, really, does "representation" matter at that point? A politician who fails to aim at the common good is a bad politician, and if he leaves behind a tradition that has some notion of the common good in order to adopt American liberalism, should he not be blamed? Should we not be selecting those who are qualified to lead? Especially if East Asians play up "meritocracy" in the face of quotas that put them at a disadvantage.
Some may make the claim that "ethnic" representation, like "gender" representation, is a matter of justice. If we are going to talk about who is qualified to rule, ethnicity should be even less important than qualifications such as wealth, which are accidental but at least may involve some sort of ability related to that which is necessary for good leadership.
As for cultural differences, I think they are minor compared to the culture of self and sin that is dominant--individualism, greed, striving for worldly success--the "materalism" of the "American dream" taken to an extreme, when what is good when ordered properly to God by reason is elevated above Him--what we witness are the effects of certain dominant sins in our society.
In another post I will talk about E. Asian (specifically Chinese) culture and what sort of constitutions/polities it embraces and which ones are alien to it. Is it the case that Chinese culture may be opposed to a certain democratic model of political participation?
Then again, it might be the case that even Americans don't have what it takes to be citizens of a polity (setting aside the question of size for the moment). We see the opposition of both the Greek and early Roman political culture to the legacy of the Empire and of hereditary monarchies, and both strands have been inherited by both Americans of European descent and by East Asians.
Also in the same issue of the Mercury: Top-quality, universal broadband essential
The official position of the newspaper. Sigh. Not that I normally turn to the SJ Mercury for understanding of the world, so that they would take this position is not surprising. One reason why it is essential? Because we have a globalist economy. Another reason? Because it "opens the world -- and equializes it -- like no other tool ever invented. Children can tap into vast libraries of informationand great teachers, no matter how isolated their homes or how bad their schools."
This is really just the encyclopediasts' project updated (and dumbed down even more). And there are great teachers on the Net? Where? Not many who actually engage in a dialogue with students, which is so important to their intellectual formation.
"Consumers can find the latest goods for the lowest possible prices, no matter where they live"
Because this is really what matters, more than anything else, right?
"and download a variety of entertainment with the click of a button."
like pornography...
"Individuals can bond with friends, family and even strangers, thanks to the Internet's many communications channels: voice, e-mail, instant message, photo, video, Web page, blog."
Ever since the great communication cataclysm, we no longer have phones or paper and pens. Virtual community is overrated, since most people don't really have much to say to each other, not even when it comes to practical matters.
"Businesses, whatever their niche, can locate anywhere and connect with customers worldwide."
Thanks to cheap oil.
"Extending high-speed Internet service to everyone isn't a luxury--it's a vital to our economic competitiveness and our lives."
So what's the official position of the Mercury on global warming and fossil fuel use? Ridiculous. What sort of understanding of the public good is this stance assuming? Is economic competitiveness all there is to life? And can there be limitless expansion of the economy? I think not.
One last article:
San Francisco Chronicle, Tues 1/2 A New Language of Cooperation
Administrators hope Starr King's Mandarin model can be used to integrate other schools across the district through voluntary enrollment rather than forced desegregation efforts.
Most of the Mandarin students are white, Asian or of mixed races and generally not low-income. Most come from other parts of the city rather than the nearby homes or public housing complex across the street, where many of the other students live. While Starr King is more diverse this year than it was last year, the principal, parents and staff say it's also important to make sure that diversity isn't only on paper, but evident in the integration of students within the school's walls.
They don't want the Mandarin program to be something separate.
"I feel that all the groups are getting to know one another and trying to work together," Rosenberg said. "We have hammered out this idea that we're one school. I don't relent on that. I say it every time I can."
The school's PTA has grown this year to about 30 families, up from the half-dozen last year. A Mandarin program parent is president.
Parents from all the programs are trying to build bridges between the old families and "a set of families that normally wouldn't be here," said parent Mary Jue, who is the part-time nurse at the school and a parent of a Chinese learner.
"Building community was our top priority," she said of the parents.
Longtime Starr King parent and grandparent Loretta Lewis said the addition of new students can only help the school where her grandson attends second grade and is not eligible for the Mandarin program.
"To me, it's off the ground," Lewis said of the efforts -- including the Mandarin program -- to keep the school open and thriving. "We hope and pray it stays off the ground and grows and grows."
While all the kindergartners from the Mandarin, Spanish bilingual and general education classrooms sometimes play together at recess or eat together at lunch, you can't force children to be friends, said Rosenberg, the principal.
Bringing different communities and ethnicities together takes time, he said.
"We're not going to force playdates and require parents to sit every other person, Chinese, black, white, Chinese, black, white. We're not going to do that," Rosenberg added.
Building the Mandarin program through to fifth grade will take time, as will the creation of an integrated community within the school. But he said he doesn't sense any anxiety about either process.
"I don't mean to say we're a utopian community where we're holding hands and singing, 'We Are the World' in Mandarin," he said. "But I don't sense any strife."
I believe there are some Mandarin programs in the Cupertino Union School District, but I do not know if they are immersion programs.
KK's fiance told me recently that German is no longer offered at Cupertino High School.
Of course, even before globalization the benefits of learning the language of one's business and trad partners was emphasized. Perhaps there is a place to learn a language that has no links to one's forebears and culture, but should not Amercans become better familiar with their Western heritage? Or their classical languages, Latin especially? In the case of the San Francisco schools, the project is being advocated as a means of integrating students of diverse ethnicities. Apparently English is not sufficient, since it is "just" the language of one group (which may attain minority status in California soon). One can only guess what they would
say about Latin.
Is this how public money being spent? If there were enough money I wouldn't have a problem with students learning Mandarin or Spanish, but shouldn't the priority be English (and by extension Latin)? As it is, Americans' grasp of proper grammar is on the decline, along with their writing and speaking skills.
It's a small wonder that some non-Asian Americans complain. As far as I know, there's nothing individual states can do to limit immigration--it's a Federal issue. States are powerless to prevent immigrants from settling in a particular state, if they have similar backgrounds and are looking for the same economic opportunities. (Like in the Bay Area.) That they congregate and increase in number is a consequence of states not having enough (or losing) sovereignty, both political and economic. So long as Chinese are a minority, for example, it would be difficult to make a case that Chinese New Year should be a recognized public holiday, with all of the protection and benefits that law provides. In such a situation, I would not be "entitled" to take the holiday off. But what happens when those who observer the lunar new year become a majority?
Such language programs are probably another facet of multiculturalist project and the values that political correctness serves to protect. With such policies the United States is in danger of losing its Western culture and being turned into a mere "proposition" nation that certain people (such as the neoconservatives) would happy to have. Of course, for many, those propositions, especially the ones concerning freedom, serve to protect their licentious ways and their greed.
It seems to me that if American Catholics are to evangelize, they need to preserve among their own families and communities some form of Western culture (which is strongly rooted in Christianity), and to work to ensure the handing on of the Western intellectual tradition. Christianity is not a religion for individuals, but for societies, providing its own answer to the fundamental question, "How are we to live together?" As grace builds on nature, so too the inherited customs and practices which are ordered to God are kept and maintained.
(What is culture? In what does it consist? One's intellectual patrimony, mores, the practices and customs embodying those mores, plus the means by which the "values" and traditions of the culture are transmitted: the texts, institutions, and so on...)
No comments:
Post a Comment