US will ‘overhaul’ the citizenship test

[Tuur]

To be fair, I don't think that's an official practice test. I just thought it was funny that such a lousy one was linked as an example.

Then find it hilarious. It is what it is.

 

[BCP1928]

Why?

If a person's country is so bad that a person needs to emigrate, that's either evidence that the country's institutions and foundations were flawed, that it lacked the proper checks and balances, or that it hitched its wagon to a non-viable economic plan.

Or that the present administration of the country is making the place unliveable.

If I ever thought the US became so unstable (economically, politically, or otherwise) that I felt the need to move to Canada, my takeaway would be "welp, I guess I was wrong, the American experiment failed -- Canada is still stable, there must have been some things we overlooked that they had the foresight to plan for, clearly they're better than us", and you'd see a big maple leaf flag in my front yard.

Why? Why can't you just move because you need a better job than you can get here, or because the political situation has become intolerable. Why do you have to think that Canada is "better than us" to move there.

View attachment 370295

By "now" do you mean after 1970? (and I'm being generous by not including FDR in this conversation)


No, but the America's foundations and system of governance isn't purely defined by whoever the present administration is.

No, but they can be warped by it.

I'm happy to live in a system where executive branch administrations are temporary. If this were parliamentary system, a Trump-style person could be a Prime Minister almost indefinitely given that a PM's only impediment is "lack of party confidence"

Things could well get worse before they get better.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Why? Why can't you just move because you need a better job than you can get here, or because the political situation has become intolerable. Why do you have to think that Canada is "better than us" to move there.

Because the fact that there isn't a better job or that the political situation has become intolerable would be evidentiary outgrowths that the country isn't great, and that the country I was moving to was superior.

It would take a staggering amount of cognitive dissonance to say "I think the USA is better than Canada, but the economy and political stability is so bad here in the US that I feel the need to go to Canada for my own economic wellbeing and safety"

You can't separate the underpinnings of a country's institutions and founding philosophies, with the current state of affairs. The past always leads to the present.

People hate Trump, I get it, but Trump being in power is an outgrowth of the possibilities afforded by said institutions and founding philosophies. So if a person thinks that outcome is unacceptable, they're saying the institutions and philosophies that laid the groundwork for that outcome are unacceptable.

"I love this country, so long as I can continuously (and unilaterally) adjust the rules so it produces the election outcomes I approve of" isn't real patriotism. That's just simply saying "I would love this country if everyone agreed with me"

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Uh-uh. Remember division of powers? Legislative, executive, and judicial? Legislative legislates; executive makes it so; and judicial renders legal decisions. If you're young enough, remember the Schoolhouse Rock "I'm just a bill, sitting on a hill?" That was after my time, and was so long ago it was maybe long before many here, but the gist is that congress makes laws. Both chambers of Congress has to approve it to forward it to the president, and he has to sign it to pass it into law. The USSC ever since John Marshall has delegated to itself deciding whether laws passed by congress are constitutional, and presidents have, from time to time, refused to carry out the law. Where applicable by law, a president can issue executive orders, which are traditionally hailed as good by his own party and condemned as crossing the division of powers by the other.

This post is completely nonsensical. You linked a garbage "practice test" that's wrong (see the post you quoted), broken (two of the questions won't accept any answer as correct), and out-of-date (Nancy Pelosi hasn't been Speaker of the House in years). I was just having a bit of fun at the website's expense.

 

[BCP1928]

Because the fact that there isn't a better job or that the political situation has become intolerable would be evidentiary outgrowths that the country isn't great, and that the country I was moving to was superior.

In that respect, but not necessarily in all respects.

It would take a staggering amount of cognitive dissonance to say "I think the USA is better than Canada, but the economy and political stability is so bad here in the US that I feel the need to go to Canada for my own economic wellbeing and safety"

Sounds like a good reason to me. I don't have to tie all the facets of my patriotism all in one bundle

You can't separate the underpinnings of a country's institutions and founding philosophies, with the current state of affairs. The past always leads to the present.

People hate Trump, I get it, but Trump being in power is an outgrowth of the possibilities afforded by said institutions and founding philosophies. So if a person thinks that outcome is unacceptable, they're saying the institutions and philosophies that laid the groundwork for that outcome are unacceptable.

If you are talking about institutions and policies as described by American Exceptionlism, then yes they are unacceptable (as well as being largely imaginary) I think you must be channeling David Barton again.

"I love this country, so long as I can continuously (and unilaterally) adjust the rules so it produces the election outcomes I approve of" isn't real patriotism. That's just simply saying "I would love this country if everyone agreed with me"

I wonder how many actually leave the country for that reason.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It turns out that my ancestors were here before there was a US. There's even a chance some of them were complaining about all the ones crossing the Atlantic in those great big canoes.



That's not assimilation. Just before the Iranian Hostage Crises, I met Iranian students who came to the US and who dressed like they were in Happy Days because they thought that's what we wore. That didn't make them assimilated.

Assimilation means becoming a part of the culture. That doesn't mean imitating everything about it; that means being a part of it.

If that's all it was the assimilationists wouldn't have their knickers in such a twist.

I don't know how that is in the rest of the world, but being an American is like bringing a dish to a pot luck dinner: You have a little bit of everything. So it was that I've seen a naturalized Sikh who wore traditional clothing, though his son or in-law didn't (we discussed growing tomatoes). Maybe it was less of an adjustment for a former Lithuanian I knew, but we never got into that. I know a naturalized citizen from Portugal who has kept part of her culture, and that's typical. The assimilation part concerns views of government, of liberties, and yes, history, too, and a desire to be part of society and not apart from it.

Now, since you brought it up, there is a strange notion that's cropped up in the last few decades that treats culture as though it's genetic. Had heard of it, but didn't encounter it until the eldest offspring was required to write an essay "What is your culture?" I assume the expectation was that this would connect to where families had come from. Except culture changes. I don't make a living by hitching a mule to a plow like my grandfather and his father and the ones before him did. I don't wear the same clothes. At Christmas we put up a Christmas Tree, something that's surprisingly recent as such things go. My wife has some Indian ancestry, and I've been asked by several Indians if I belong to a particular Indian nation, so they may see something there, So our eldest wrote that we had been in the US so long we weren't sure where all our ancestors came from, and our culture what that of the region where we lived. And really, unless someone deliberately decides to live apart from the culture, that's the case for everyone. As it turns out, our ancestors were here before there was a US. But my culture is radically different from there's.

You wrote that the Yankees didn't adopt the culture of the Massachuset or the Wampanoac, but those who first settled did adopt part of it, They had to in order to survive. Not just agriculture. Buckskins were essential wear on the frontier because brush would shred the cloth of the time. Tanning was usually done like the Indians did it - brain tanning and smoking. Vegetable tanning was also done, but seems that it didn't yield the same results.

In that same vein, until the 20th Century my family grew a bean in corn, planted when the corn was "laid by," that would grow up the dying stalks after the corn had been harvested and served as fodder when cows were turned on it. That sounds suspiciously like a partial adaptation of the Three Sisters method. I also wish I talked to my father more about how they tanned their own leather, but it was a job he despised growing up, so don't know how much he would have told me. But the gist of it sounds for all the world like it was relying on the natural tannins in creek water, and I don't know if that's something they figured out or maybe if it was something indigenous.

 

[Tuur]

If that's all it was the assimilationists wouldn't have their knickers in such a twist.

It's also possible you haven't observed what some of us have observed.. Would your German ancestor who had to show he'd renounced allegiance to the Kaiser have flown a German flag? Did he make no effort to learn English? Did he consider himself an American or a German who was in America?

In the 1980s, I went through a Hispanic area with Mexican flags. We happen serve one such area that doesn't fly flags but was pretty much separate. Not a bad place, but almost insular. We also serve another area that isn't insular and where the residents have made an effort to assimilate, and it's a noticeable difference. Before my children were born, I happened to be in a bank when a bus with immigrants came up. As I waited, I noticed they were depositing their checks into accounts instead of cashing them and thought "That's the next middle class." And that turned out to be pretty much correct. Those I saw that day were making an effort to assimilate.

 

[BCP1928]

It's also possible you haven't observed what some of us have observed.. Would your German ancestor who had to show he'd renounced allegiance to the Kaiser have flown a German flag? Did he make no effort to learn English? Did he consider himself an American or a German who was in America?

In the 1980s, I went through a Hispanic area with Mexican flags.

I know lots of areas like that. Most of them are in those parts of the country which used to belong to Mexico. They fly Mexican flags for much the same reasons that residents of the South like to fly Confederate flags.

We happen serve one such area that doesn't fly flags but was pretty much separate. Not a bad place, but almost insular. We also serve another area that isn't insular and where the residents have made an effort to assimilate, and it's a noticeable difference. Before my children were born, I happened to be in a bank when a bus with immigrants came up. As I waited, I noticed they were depositing their checks into accounts instead of cashing them and thought "That's the next middle class." And that turned out to be pretty much correct. Those I saw that day were making an effort to assimilate.

In the latter part of the 19th century many Gemans immigrated to the Upper Midwest. They settled down with farms and businesses, started towns, all in German. They celebrated Germany holidays, published German language newspapers and generally lived their lives as Germans. Even the language of instruction in many of the public schools in the region was German. This went on for decades and they didn't "assimilate" until the US entered the war against Germany in 1917.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

In the latter part of the 19th century many Gemans immigrated to the Upper Midwest. They settled down with farms and businesses, started towns, all in German. They celebrated Germany holidays, published German language newspapers and generally lived their lives as Germans. Even the language of instruction in many of the public schools in the region was German. This went on for decades and they didn't "assimilate" until the US entered the war against Germany in 1917.

Yep - one of my grandparents was from that group (technically they were from Ukraine though - part of Catherine the Great's Black Sea Germans). My great grandparents barely spoke any English at all despite emigrating to the US as children in the late 1800s. There are similar groups from many parts of Eastern Europe - Poles, Slovaks, and Slovenians all had (and to some extent still have) distinct national identities within the US. See, for example, the SNPJ.

 

[durangodawood]

Reading some of the posts above it seems like assimilate! is a demand that falls heaviest on non-white people. Probably because just looking white already gets you halfway there.

 

[durangodawood]

....People hate Trump, I get it, but Trump being in power is an outgrowth of the possibilities afforded by said institutions and founding philosophies.

Thats pretty weak. Basically youre saying Trump is allowed for by our particular republican system. Theres nothing in our system that favors a Trump type*.

So if a person thinks that outcome is unacceptable, they're saying the institutions and philosophies that laid the groundwork for that outcome are unacceptable.....

No they arent, typically. They are saying American culture is unacceptable. They see a disturbing mindset taking hold among the people.

(*The exception being the electoral college system which boosts the voting power of Trump oriented types over others. That is a distinctly institutional issue that gets a lot of criticism. But I still think in the minds of potential escapees it pales next to their fear of where the culture generally is going.)

 

[essentialsaltes]

Reading some of the posts above it seems like assimilate! is a demand that falls heaviest on non-white people. Probably because just looking white already gets you halfway there.

Right, I haven't heard complaints (this century) about the Italian flags in many East Coast neighborhoods. I mean, this is a particular festival, but there are plenty of neighborhoods where year round flags are common.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It's also possible you haven't observed what some of us have observed.. Would your German ancestor who had to show he'd renounced allegiance to the Kaiser have flown a German flag?

I think you mised the point were he was asked to renounced allegience to a government he never lived under. Southern Germany was "Unified" into Prussia after he left, so I don't know why he would had allegence to the German Empire or its flag. (I supposed they had renounce something.)

Now my grandmother was known to fly the Swiss flag on a 30-foot pole in the rural midwest. I've seen it myself. Her parents were probably naturalized, but I never met them either.

Did he make no effort to learn English? Did he consider himself an American or a German who was in America?

I don't know. His regiment didn't give its commands in anything but English, so certainly he knew some English. The parish he helped found held services in German until after he died.

I don't know why any of this matters, or why people get so uptight about "assimilation" (or rather the "failures" to assimilate.)

In the 1980s, I went through a Hispanic area with Mexican flags. We happen serve one such area that doesn't fly flags but was pretty much separate. Not a bad place, but almost insular. We also serve another area that isn't insular and where the residents have made an effort to assimilate, and it's a noticeable difference. Before my children were born, I happened to be in a bank when a bus with immigrants came up. As I waited, I noticed they were depositing their checks into accounts instead of cashing them and thought "That's the next middle class." And that turned out to be pretty much correct. Those I saw that day were making an effort to assimilate.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Thats pretty weak. Basically youre saying Trump is allowed for by our particular republican system. Theres nothing in our system that favors a Trump type*.

But that's the point, it doesn't favor any *type. (with the exception of people 35 and older)

Our system allows for AOC to Trump and everything in between.

If people don't like that level of variable possibility, then they don't like our system.

Because a system that would restrict leadership to one person's "safe overton window" would omit people from someone else's overton window.

 

[Tuur]

I don't know why any of this matters, or why people get so uptight about "assimilation" (or rather the "failures" to assimilate.)

A failure to assimilate is different than never having a desire to assimilate. A naturalized citizen I know, who has been in the US for decades, said there were still things that reminded her that she was not born into US culture. Yet she's more patriotic than many who're born here.

As to renouncing allegiance to someone who wasn't the head of a country of origin, I think part of the oath of citizenship renounces allegiance to where you came from. That's pretty much standard.

I kept trying to think of instances of assimilation where it would be more clear. I hate to rely on "you know it when you see it."

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I don't know why any of this matters, or why people get so uptight about "assimilation" (or rather the "failures" to assimilate.)

Because it shows that one actually appreciates the culture, institutions, etc... and isn't just here for a paycheck.

Ultimately, that will determine how they'll end up interacting with other members of society.

Typically (and I think this is true of most civilized societies) people want neighbors and community members, not insular economic transients.

 

[iluvatar5150]

I doubt if Ilhan Omar could pass it.

Do you think you could?

 

[Hans Blaster]

A failure to assimilate is different than never having a desire to assimilate. A naturalized citizen I know, who has been in the US for decades, said there were still things that reminded her that she was not born into US culture. Yet she's more patriotic than many who're born here.

As to renouncing allegiance to someone who wasn't the head of a country of origin, I think part of the oath of citizenship renounces allegiance to where you came from. That's pretty much standard.

I don't think you quite get the idea. The country he was from didn't exist anymore.

I kept trying to think of instances of assimilation where it would be more clear. I hate to rely on "you know it when you see it."

 

[durangodawood]

But that's the point, it doesn't favor any *type. (with the exception of people 35 and older)

Our system allows for AOC to Trump and everything in between.

If people don't like that level of variable possibility, then they don't like our system.

Because a system that would restrict leadership to one person's "safe overton window" would omit people from someone else's overton window.

I laid it all out for you in the next section of my post you responded to. Its not the system that dismays them so much as its the emerging culture here in America.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Because it shows that one actually appreciates the culture, institutions, etc... and isn't just here for a paycheck.

Why should I assimilate to the culture I live in. I ain't sayin' "yall" no matter what.

Ultimately, that will determine how they'll end up interacting with other members of society.

Typically (and I think this is true of most civilized societies) people want neighbors and community members, not insular economic transients.

I am just here for the paycheck.