Democracy in America ~ Alexis de Tocqueville: Part Export

What is America? What is an American? What is democracy?

Share your thoughts with us!

"No better study of a nation's institutions and culture than de Tocqueville's Democracy in America has ever been written by a foreign observer; none perhaps so good." (New York Times)

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA
by Alexis de Tocqueville
"I have sought to discover the evils and the advantages which democracy brings."
"In America, I saw more than America. I sought there the image of democracy itself, with its inclinations, its character, its prejudices, and its passions, in order to learn what we have to fear or to hope from its progress."
"My aim has been to show, by the example of America, that laws, and especially manners, may allow a democratic people to remain free."

Page numbers refer to Heffner's 1956 paperback edition

de Tocqueville on the topic of Origin of America:

"The emigrants which came at different periods to occupy the territory now covered by the American Union differed from each other in many respects. Their aim was not the same and they governed themselves on different principles." (P40, Origin of the Anglo-Americans.)

"If we go back to the elements of states and examine the oldest monuments of their history, we should discover in them the primal cause of the prejudices, the habits, the ruling passions, and all that constitutes what is called the national character." (P39, Origin of the Anglo-Americans.)

"I go back from age to age up to the remotest antiquity, but I find no parallel to what is occurring before my eyes." (P314, General Survey of the Subject.)

"If we carefully examine the social and political state of America, there is not an opinion, not a custom, not a law, not an event which the origin of that people will not explain." (P40, Origin of the Anglo-Americans.)

In this Discussion Group we are not examining de Tocqueville. We are examining America but in the process constantly referring to deTocqueville's appraisals. Although written 170 years ago, his astute statements are as relevant to democracy now as they were then.

If you think primarily in terms of Republican, Democrat, liberal, conservative, etc. there are many political forums in Senior Net where you can share those thoughts.

If you wish to discuss the specific issues of the current Presidential and Vice Presidential Debates,
please post in the Presidential and Vice Presidential Debates discussion.
Our spectrum and deTocqueville's was much broader. He spoke not only about politics but about art, poetry, the media, religion, men, women, orators, equality, liberty, associations, the law, physical well being, the family, wages, manners, business, science and many many other aspects of democracy.
Were you born in the U.S.? Are you a naturalized American citizen? Are you a foreign born visitor wanting to know more about us? Are you a Canadian who also lives under democratic principles?

Then this is about YOU. Join our group daily and listen to what de Tocqueville and the rest of us are saying. Better yet, share with us your opinions.

Your Discussion Leader: Robby Iadeluca

7% of your purchase returns to SeniorNet

Welcome to an exciting adventure! We are about to launch into mainstream America and as we flow along day by day observing the sights and sounds of this vital nation with all its strengths and weaknesses, we will at the same time be making comparisons between what we see and hear and deTocqueville's comments concerning the democracy he saw.

We are slipping into this mainstream at a moment when a truly American "invention" is getting underway -- the political convention. Let us look at the convention as a foreigner such as deTocqueville might, or even as an alien from another planet would see it and perhaps wonder. Why a convention in the first place? What is the purpose? Are we accomplishing this purpose or are we drifting off into something which has no meaning? Just what is going on here anyway, regardless of party?

As the days and weeks go by, America will unfold before our eyes -- another convention, further campaigning, opening of schools across the land, a pause to observe the working person's holiday, more campaigning, celebration of Columbus Day, a unique American holiday, then the election itself, followed by Thanksgiving, also unique -- and so America moves on. Very little happened in the United States of America of the early 19th Century that deTocqueville didn't see and comment upon. And so much of what he wrote is apparently relevant to the America of today.

But for now let's look at the convention itself. As you observe America and form your thoughts, may I suggest that you refer constantly to the quotes of deTocqueville above. They will be regularly updated so as to stay in line with what America is currently showing us. Is he relevant? Are his observations pertinent to our America? Come aboard and share your thoughts with us!

Robby

Good morning, Robby.

This sounds like a fascinating discussion. I have the book, but I moved yesterday, as you know, so will have to find it in one of those many, many unpacked boxes first!

I've lived in seven states and have observed many differences in each one that might prove interesting here later. I'll join you as soon as I can.

Mal

Good morning, Robby! I hope to find time to pop in from time to time. You're right, de Tocq. covers a broad spectrum and there will be something here for everyone! What fun!

Robby--

Good morning. I've just begun reading, and was looking up your citations. May I respectfully offer a suggestion? When your citation does not include the full text from the book, would you mind putting in an ellipsis (the series of 3 dots) to indicate missing text? Sorry to be such a nitpicker so early, but it might be helpful to others, too. Thanks.

Good Morning, Robby!

The Political Conventions here in America have been, in the past, so much fun. So much excitement generated. So much suspense and so many surprises. Also, they SEEMED to be a genuine effort in democratically nominating candidates from the political parties to run for the offices of President and Vice President of these United States. Were they? When all is said and done (and it was! Oh, it was!), in the long run, I think a lot of the outcomes were unexpected and a lot of the surprises were real.

I can remember laughing my head off at the Puerto Rican vote count during either the 1952 or 1956 Republican convention. The whole arena was rolling on the floor!

Remember all of the sit-on-the-edge-of-your-chair roll calls? I really miss those.

I guess it was the primary system, with guaranteed delegates being sent off to the conventions, that did us in. Now I am wondering if there should just be electronic conventions. Cyber-space conventions. Would save a LOT of time and money, and bring about the same inevitable result. What do you think?

But, sigh, this is ONE area where it Truly was Better in the "Old Days!" We had Fun!

MaryPage--

As usual, I totally agree with you that they seem almost superfluous now. In the good old days (I speak of the early televised conventions) I used to set up my couch for sleeping (in case I DID drop off), but I usually contrived--kids or no--to watch almost every significant moment of those conventions. It was exciting. You had the feeling that you were really participating in an important event. But as with other things, it appears that TV which brought those earlier events to us in their entirety has also been responsible for creating the current situation--or so I understand from things I have read. Now they are staged 'set pieces' and, this year, I understand the networks are only televising major speeches, etc. (altho CSPAN--which I don't get--will have complete coverage.)

I am inclined to believe that perhaps we should re-examine the primaries situation and see if we have lost more than we have gained.

Do you really believe that the 2 upcoming conventions will generate the excitement inherent in a last-minute frantically negotiated choice for vice-president?

I am looking forward to the Shadow Conventions established by public interest groups such as Common Cause to perhaps providing some 'breaking' news.

The conventions do seem dull now I agree -- I wonder what prompted the change -- certainly the Democratic Convention in the 60s horrified us as we watched the decenting youth outside being brutilized by those guarding the Convention members and then we have the journalists increasingly trying to scoop every thought and action as it happens so that there is no longer a concept of "Don't open till Christmas" with so much that was given ceremonial importance which is really what I believe a Convention did - mark or offer a right of passage for those that would represent the party.

One other thought that probably rings for me is that I am just worn out by the media making a circus over political faux pas and personal morals gone astray that I believe this convention and election has become more food for more media circus making and therefore I just want it all to go away. The example of all this unnecessary hipe was shown during the primaries and we even learned that the only candidate that was forthcoming and real with the press was McCain. Result I feel one more step removed from the reality of political power making.

I am here, briefly. First I must feed the body (grocery shopping)and then this afternoon I will feed the soul (reading and discussing DinA). Back later.

Phyll

ROBBY: As usual, your insightful comments and observations in the delightful introduction are top-notch. I am looking for my "thinking cap" in regards to these conventions and shall return anon.

Hello, Robby! Lovely heading with the flag waving! I've read the above hurriedly but will be back later -

The other day I read a history of the political parties - gosh, I wish I could remember where I read that. They didn't start right away with Good Old George - when, when, memory fails!

This quote - "Emotions in the midst of a sympathizing crowd are far greater than those which he would have felt in solitude." - reminded me of the 1960 convention in Chicago when Daley was Mayor - the riots there, remember? Truly got out of hand and I believe that Daley was blamed for a large part of it, wasn't he? But it is true that people do things in a group they wouldn't dream of doing alone - mob psychology, right?

I thought of that because there is a new biography out of Mayor Daley I would like to read - saw the author on C-Span last weekend.

Back later - it's going to be a wonderful discussion and am so glad you started it!

Have political conventions--one for each party every election year summer--been around since the country began in 1776? Bear with me, folks: I am a poor historian, an ignoramous mostly

I certainly agree they were much more interesting back when I was a young woman. How much did the 1960 Chicago fiasco have to do with turning the tide towards these cut-and-dried primaries? Exactly when did the primaries begin to "steal the show" so completely?

Welcome to all of you and a deep thank-you for participating! May I assure everyone who participates that he/she is most welcome so I will say in advance that I will not make individual welcomes. This forum belongs to us as a group.

A suggestion -- imagine that we are all sitting in a circle face-to-face. Someone makes a comment. The Discussion Leader reacts to it. Another person makes a comment and this time a second participant reacts to it. A third person makes a comment but this time there is no comment back from anyone. Everyone, however, has heard the comment and is thinking about it so there are no hard feelings when there is no reaction.

Not every comment here will cause a remark to come back but I am certain that everyone's thoughts will be absorbed. Your participation is valued.

Robby

Jeanlock: I will try my best to use the ellipsis (...) when possible but as you know from looking at the book, in those days (1830) authors used very long sentences.

De Tocqueville said (see quotations above) that he "sought to discover evils ... which democracy brings" and that "parties are a necessary evil." Do participants here see the conventions that are run by parties "necessary?" Were they possibly necessary before but not now? MaryPage preferred the conventions of the "old days." Barbara sees them now as a circus and "wants it all to go away."

Do you folks intend to watch the conventions" If so, why? If not, why not?

Robby

From Message #7 Barbara St Aubrey wrote:

The conventions do seem dull now I agree -- I wonder what prompted the change

The answer to this question lies in the recent changes in the way convention delegates are chosen. In the sixties and before, delegates were most often chosen at state conventions, whose delegates had been chosen at county conventions, whose delegates had been chosen at precinct conventions, etc. Though delegates were often pledged to support a particular candidate, the pledge usually applied only to the first ballot after which the delegate could vote as he choose (or as his Party Bosses told him). Under this system the choice was often wide open to be decided by the delegates. Often this resulted in bosses exerting the power. The system led to interesting floor fights and sometimes many ballots before there was a victor.

The reforms brought into effect a system of state primaries for the selection of delegates to the National Conventions. Under the new system the political infighting is during the primary campaign. It is waged in the spring after which the choice of the party's nominee is decided.

The result is that the convention today simply is a rubber stamp staged theatrical event in which the nominee of the party in introduced and the formal campaign begins. We know the candidates will be Al Gore and George Bush. Since nothing is really decided at the conventions and the proceeding can be counted on to be a one-sided propaganda event, its interest to the undecided and anyone other than the party faithful is greatly diminished. But I suppose that a week of continuous Republican propaganda followed 2 weeks later by a week of Democratic rhetoric is a small price to pay for the rights of the rank and file of each party to choose their candidate for the office at primary elections. Hopefully the issues will be decided later by meaningful debates of the candidates.

A final word to those who will point out that other things such as the party platform is written at the convention. True, but it is unlikely that either party will risk weakening their chances by including platform planks that their candidate could not accept or would find embarising.

Also the convention will choose a candidate for Vice President. But here it has long been the tradition to choose the choice of the nominee for president. Today this tradition is alive and well. In earlier days this was not of much importance, since the office of Vice President was a ticket to political oblivion. But today this is not the case as the occupant of this office has recently become well situtated to win his party" nomination for President when his chief's terms were over.

Harold: Thank you very much for that detailed well-explained description of a political convention now and how and why it changed.

Harold says that the convention of today is a "staged theatrical event." Consider the following:--

The political conventions give various companies a chance to showcase their latest technologies and ware, in real time and in real life, to lawmakers and journalists. In Philadelphia, for example there will be 30 governors, the Congressional leadership, local elected officials, fellow business leaders and 15,000 national and international journalists -- all chatting on phones, using computers and transmitting information.

And no single industry is better represented than telecommunications companies. It will be hard to tell whether this is a political convention or a telecommunications trade show. Communication companies are writing seven-figure checks to local civic host committees. They are spending millions more laying hundreds of miles of telephone, cable, fiber-optic and high-speed Internet lines at both conventions. They are handing out hundreds of telephones, pagers and walkie-talkies to important politiians. They are doing this to promote their products to a captive audience of power brokers -- along with their views on how Washington should decide a number of issues.

Anyone have a problem with this?

Robby

I see the conventions, too, as sort of a trial balloon for other political hopefuls for later national tickets. There is always much "to do" about Representative or Senator XXX's speech and whether it was good or a dud. I recall Barbara Jordan's speech making skills and how that and Watergate, of course, made her a nationally-known, and to my mind, a highly respected, articulate politician.

I think the lobbying by and the formulating of policy is done by all the major industries/businesses in this country, not just the telecommunications industry. I think it happens every hour of every day in Washington, D.C. It's just more visible at convention time.

š ...jane›

Robby the only thing I have a problem with ,is the constant repeat of forecast of convention outcome by our Senior Journalist. When we are all aware of the outcome of who is being elected. What we need is reliable informationas to the effect of how actions taken at this grand show is going to effect our lives in the near and far future, (meaning the lives of our grand children) Lets All unite and go for that which will benifit the lives of our children and grand children. In view of the above I think you could say I am in favour of more action and a lot less talk to get on with the job. Thats my view from behind the cracker Barrel. Ben

Harold gives an excellent overview of why we now have dull conventions. Like Jean, I used to Live in front of the telly for the duration of Both conventions.

And I totally agree with the happy and fair notion that Now, with our Primary system, We The People of this United States actually have a real, up front and counting, hand in choosing our national candidates.

Yes, we do. No doubt about it.

BUT, I throw on the table a real question as to whether this is or is not a good thing. For myself, I am not certain. Have you noticed the Money it takes to run a primary campaign? Have you noticed the good folks, and true, who decline to put their energies and reputations to the task of raising such funds? Have you considered the many great leaders with great minds, abilities, talents, ideas, and records who decline to enter this arena? The major reason for their distaste is this very question of fund raising. Right behind that is the matter of being worn out with campaigning by the time the Primary is over, and well before the real campaign begins. Another is the prolonged period of time being deluged by the media.

I assert that many truly qualified persons give their lives to serving this nation, and that such persons were, at one time, tapped by the workers in the political party of their choice to be the candidate for that party. Now this same person of high quality is loathe to step into the humiliating stream of slime that may, or may not, carry them to the White House.

Are we missing out on our present day Washingtons, Jeffersons, Lincolns and Roosevelts? I don't Know the answer, but I sure do feel the question is a valid one.

Before the institution of conventions in the 1830s (about the time de Tocqueville was here), parties decided on candidates and policies in informal caucuses. Conventions were introduced to eliminate the abuses of the caucus system. They were expected, by their open and public conduct of business, to be more democratic and less amenable to control by party bosses and machines.

However, most of the real business of conventions has been conducted in informal meetings of various delegates and leaders. Activity on the floor of the convention has usually been merely a reflection of behind-the-scenes decisions and compromises. In order to lessen this control by party oligarchies, candidates for most elective offices at the state and local levels are now nominated by direct primaries rather than conventions, although conventions still play an important role in endorsing party candidates.

Robby

Robby presents an excellent point regarding the telecommunications aspect of these conventions. In regards to freedom of the press, De Tocq tells us "what has been the opinion of only an isolated man becomes that of the country." Doesn't that pretty much sum up the reasons for the continuation of these conventions? The positions that the press adopts many times becomes the "thoughts" for the sluggish public. Years ago we didn't have all of these advertisers, did we? Yet, years ago, WE as a nation were more interested, weren't we?

ALF: And what we call the press - a single radio or TV station or newspaper, for example -- can tell the story that the one owner or publisher wants to give. What power!

Forgive the dash of color, people. Jane has been teaching me HTML and I'm caught up with my own sudden power!

Robby

De Touc also says " democratic peoples give a ready welcome to simple general ideas. They're put off by complicated systems and like to picture a great nation in which every citizen resembles one set type and is controlled by one power." Do we truly welcome these ideas? Is it possible that we, the citizens, DO desire this?

Alf's remark "becomes the "thoughts" for the sluggish public." reminds me of the early part of the book that speaks to the young of America furthering their education for the purpose of employment and also starting their quest for wealth just at the time deTocqueville says that there is enough interest and ability for further education therefore deTocqueville says that we are a nation that is not illiterate or uneducated but not a nation that is steeped with citizens acquiring higher education.

"primary education is within reach of all; higher education is hardly available to anybody...Almost all Americans enjoy easy circustances and can so easily acquire the basic elements of human knowledge.

There are few rich men in America; hence almost all Americans have to take up some profession. Now, every profession requires an apprenticeship. Therefore the Americans can devote only the first years of life to general education...so their education ends at the age when ours begins. If it is continued byond that point, it aims at some specialized and profitable objective; science is sstudied in the smae spirit as one takes up a trade; and only matters of immediate and recognized practical application receive attention."

That statement, except for the apprenticeship and starting to work just at the age when those in France start their education, basically still applies. We have many now attending collage but for the most part that attendance is to further their skill and knowledge for a greater income upon graduation and therefore rather than a "sluggish" public I think a public with little knowledge of politics, government, foreign affairs, national economics etc. etc. and not a lot of practice in seeing through the marketing carried out in the name of journelism.

ALF: An excellent question. Do we truly as democratic (with a small "d")welcome simple ideas as deT found in those days? Or is the philosopy of our recent generations very different from that existing 170 years ago?

Barbara speaks of "marketing" carried out in the name of "journalism." Are we indeed a slugglish public? Is the education that we give our young people (and older for that matter) insufficient to protect them against such marketing when it comes primary and convention time?

Robby

I am chilled by those words ALF quotes: ".... and is controlled by one power."

What do those words mean? They are specific in that they refer to the citizens of this country. Being controlled?

I do not favor a society in which the citizens are "out of control", so if these words refer to ONE government operating ONE official set of offices to see that the laws of the land are carried out (i.e., Justice Dept., FBI, Federal prison system, State police, state prison system, etc.), I am pacified.

But "controlled by one power" bothers me in that I refuse to be controlled in any other sense of the word. If the police stop me for speeding, that is okay. If government is attempting to control my thinking, that is NOT okay.

I think the political conventions are an advertising hoopla farce. Like the Miss America contest and many other things on TV, I do not watch them. Long, long ago I realized that my thinking and my opinions were being influenced by the political and other sales pitches I saw on TV and heard on the radio. I changed the radio station to one where there was little "news", and I stopped watching all but a very few programs on TV. I know what I want for this country, and I vote for the people whose past performance shows he or she will work toward that goal. I refuse to allow myself to be caught up in an emotional tide of rhetoric and political song and dance that loudly entices and signifies nothing.

Mal

pg.82: "Every one has had occasion to remark, that his emotions in the midst of a sympathizing crowd are far greater than those which he would have felt in solitude. In great republics, political passions become irresistible, not only because they aim at gigantic objects, but because they are felt and shared by millions at the same time."

I believe that this is one of the true values, from the association's point of view, of political conventions, or pep rallies, or church revivals, etc. It incites the sluggish or apathetic to join in the "passion". The persuasion of the many can be a very strong force and the association or party is well aware of this.

Even though the choice of candidates is settled well ahead of time the convention is still necessary to excite and unite the followers.

Phyll

Phyll: Where is the "passion" in today's conventions? Are "millions" listening and sharing?

"In great republics, political passions become irresistible, not only because they aim at gigantic objects, but because they are felt and shared by millions at the same time."

That's the trouble, in my opinion. I thought this was a country of individualists, not a flock of sheep to be led by some power or other. I could well be wrong. Unfortunately, there is every indication that I am.

Mal

I have to agree with those who remember when political conventions were exciting. I used to look forward to them and keep a "scorecard" on the voting, state by state. I know that a lot of the real deal-making took place off stage in smoke-filled rooms or elsewhere, but I felt a part of the excitement and flurry as I watched on black and white TV.

I stopped watching much of the convention coverage before the major networks cut down on their coverage. Hoopla and balloons falling from the ceiling just aint what it used to be.

Have heard recently more than one reference to these upcoming conventions as "INFOMERCIALS." That word perfectly describes my reaction to our current political process. It is prewrapped, ironed out, plotted moment by moment and there is no energy anymore. AND we know who the candidates will be WAY ahead of time. I am even tired of the words associated with the process, SPIN chief among them.

This most recent upcoming election is the worst yet in terms of starting early. I would be in favor of limiting the process, from primaries to convention to Three Months. So much time is being spent campaigning, not to mention money. To me, it seems to be madness.

Maryal

If, or rather it should be when, we become bored with the non-hoopla -ha of the political conventions, this year there is going to be something different. Arianna Huffington (author and pol) and associates from all walks of life are offering a "shadow convention" in which an assortment of activists, professional pols and how-biz celebrities with populist pretensions will gather for four days of speechifying, seminar giving and satirical merrymaking, all on the indisputable assumption that the national press corps and the public will be so starved for spectacle and spontaneity that it will lavish attention on them and their issues.

They have whittled their agenda down to three items: campaign-finance reform, the growing income gap between rich and poor and the "reforming" of the nation's drug laws. John McCain is scheduled to open the show with a call for campaign-finance reform. CNN and C-SPAN have expressed interest in broadcasting some sessions live.

Harold - does the new system give greater representation of the average parÝy affiliate or does it just remove the backroom deals from the scrutiny of public TV? Or maybe the better question is why was the system changed and what did the new system hope to achieve that the old system was not achieving?

Welcome to all of you who are sharing your passionate thoughts on the subject. May I remind everyone that this forum is part of Books and Literature and that we are examining the book by Alexis de Tocqueville. Let us try our best (difficult, I know!) to stay away from discussing public personalities of the current time but to remain objective as we look at primaries, conventions, issues, parties or whatever the sub-topic may be as de Tocqueville did. We are discussing America and what makes it the America we know. Please use the Introduction to this forum and Post #1 as guideposts.

Although nominations of candidates are the work of the convention as a whole, the growth of presidential primaries increasingly limits conventions to ratifying the candidate already selected by the voters. Candidates are nominated in eulogistic speeches. Noisy demonstratins are then staged, with bands and marchers hired for the occasion parading up and down the aisles and eventually the convention votes. Maryal sees the present-day convention as something "pre-arranged, ironed out, and plotted moment by moment."

Are there some of you here who think conventions should be abolished?

Robby

Thanks for the reminder Robby-- got rid of the part about a personality.

Maybe an intermediate step that would eventually end in no convention at all. Limit the convention to a weekend. Meetings could begin Friday night and run through Sunday night.

Actually I don't think we need conventions at all. The platform hardly exists anymore. We have been reduced to soundbites and photo ops. There is no Substance left. Conventions almost seem to me to be for the Party Faithful to gather and congratulate themselves on how wonderful they are.

Even though party conventions may have little practical purpose in selection of candidates nowadays, I see no reason for abolishing them. They provide a kind of pep rally to get the faithful warmed up. In addition, serving as a delegate is an ego trip for locals who are politically active, a kind of payment for yeoman services. As long as the party pays all expenses, let party go on.

I have served as a delegate to the state party convention and found it interesting and different, although my vote was already determined before I left home. Still, I kind of enjoyed the hype.

Mary Page: Those words are taken directly from a quote by deTouc on pg. 668. People are put off by complicated systems and ... perhaps he's correct? The paper said today that the interest in these conventions has dissipated. If that is so, will there be less interest in the news coverage and the press releases? Will it become less of a political extravaganza, this year? Mals right- it's been sanitized, ironed out and finalized. I must look to see what deTouc writes about activism and people demonstating. We are going to see a full blown (7000 Philidelphia policemen) attempting to control the flood gates of protesters. AHA! DeTouc says "In America the people appoint both those who make the laws and those who execute them... They are surrounded by the constant agitation of parties seeking to drag them in to enlist their support." I read that the AFL-CIO will be there, also the Pa. mineworkers unions. If the 20,000 protesters that are expected get out of hand the police are forced to "do their jobs (the jobs WE expect them to do) and then the melee , followed by the criticism begins.

Jerry: In the quote above, deT speaks of "emotions in the midst of a sympathizing crowd." In the convention you attended, did you find yourself "caught up in it?" Did you find yourself doing or saying things you wouldn't have done or said when you were relatively alone?

Robby

ALF: You are apparently quoting from the larger version of "Democracy in America." The Heffner paperback which many of us are using has only 317 pages. You'll notice that with the quotes above I give not only the Heffner page but the name of the sub-section. Giving the name of the sub-section may help some of us to find the words you quoted.

You wonder if there will be less news coverage and less press releases. Any reactions to this?

Robby

Sorry Robby. No wonder this damned book cost my 20 bucks. Maybe I have the wrong one. Oh no! My last quote is from the opening chapter of Parties in the United States. The 1st quote re. POWER is from Chapter 2 of Power Favored by Ideas about Government, subtitle Why the ideas of Democratic Peoples about government naturally favor the consentration of political power. Do I have the right book?

Actually today I'm a long way "from sunny San Diego" -- in Kansas City, to be precise. Thought I would be home by now, but it turns out I have to spend another week in the Chicago area. So I am here, visiting friends over the weekend, but my D in A is in San Diego. I'm flying blind <G>.

I think Tocqueville's attitude toward political parties was generally negative, based on the French experience (particularly as seen from the perspective of the hereditary aristocracy, of which Tocqueville was a member). I think it was a revelation to him that political parties COULD be legally organized and seek their goals peaceably rather than by manning the barricades.

Seems to me the party conventions today are nothing more than pep rallies. Tocqueville's observation that passions are felt more strongly in groups than separately certainly holds true. The conventions whip up enthusiasm among the party faithful, and the parties hope they have the same effect on the voters in general. Now that the nominee is chosen long before the convention starts, there really is nothing the party needs to do at the convention that couldn't be done at a less public meeting, other than sell the platform and the candidate to the voters. I think "INFOMERCIAL" is apt.

That doesn't necessarily mean the conventions should be abolished; as long as they work, by attracting and solidifying voter support, no doubt they are worth the effort. However, if the media don't pay much attention, the candidates may not get much of a "bump" in the polls. And if the polls don't move significantly, the parties may begin to question the conventions' usefulness. They certainly are expensive infomercials!

And there's something Tocqueville couldn't have foreseen - public opinion polls!

Yes, Robby, I think it is pretty well established that many Americans have little or no interest in the Conventions. That's why the major networks are carrying so few hours of them. There will be less coverage on air and obligatory coverage in newspapers, but there will be no banner headlines.

The whole process is WAY too long. The Convention is a huge anticlimax.

ALF:

If your book is titled "Democracy in America" and it is authored by Alexis de Tocqueville, then you have the right book. You probably have the complete one and we are working from the abridged one. This means simply that you will become much more enlightened about Democracy than the rest of us.

Robby

Watching the News Hour the other night I was in awe at the Philadelphia Police Depts training as depicted to handle the protestestors. What was/is being done to diffuse the situation?? Solution and at the same time make the convention more exciting(??). Give them represtation in the convention. Maybe risky, but winners take risk. Demonstrate leadership. Obviously you have the paid protest organizers to overcome to do this. The media/our technology has pre-empted what used to make the conventions have a purpose.

Katie: My impression as I read his book was that although he came from aristocracy, he became enamored of the democratic method. But we are only just beginning this voyage through America and democracy and there will be many opinions by many different participants. And "political conventions" is only one of many sub-topics we will be discussing. The first convention begins the day after tomorrow and as we watch what they are doing (or not doing) we will be able to compare that with deT's comments.

Robby

Yes, Robby, I did get somewhat caught up in the enthusiasm, but being a hardcore cynic I didn't get carried away and do anything foolish. I tried to listen to the speeches, but after a while, after about a dozen, one becomes anesthetized. That's when we began walking about and talking to each other. At the point the candidate entered, excitement grew and I admit to feeling some of it, too. Although, again, I was very controlled and, people watcher that I am got as big a kick out of watching others' excitement as from anything the principles said or did.

I suspect conventions still perform a useful function, although it is more expressive than instrumental. It's unlikely that I'll watch much of either convention on TV (assuming that either is broadcast), although I'll probably listen to the candidates speeches. They can be an indication of the direction of the campaign ahead, I believe.

Jerry: Maybe that will be the prime activity of both conventions -- everybody watching everybody.

Robby

We get to watch the "future" leaders of America here, too.

From an historical perspective,it may be interesting to note who this book was written for. It was not written for an American readership.but rather was written for the French ,who in 1831-32 were undergoing one of their many political turmoils.

DeT was an aristocrat,whose family was closely tied to the Bourbons,and he could hardly forget that he was living in an era of French revolutions,his great-grandfather was guillotined in 1794 and his family was given a peerage by Charles X in 1827,hence the de was added to his name.

Why did he come to America in the first place? When Louis Phillipe (The Citizen King)came to power in July 1830, Toc.'s family became suspect for their Bourbon loyalties. His family sent him to study the American penal system,but he was able to see France stumbling toward the social equality that he saw in America,especially since the rise of Andrew Jackson.

Also,on his way back from America he visited England for about a month in 1832,and as England was in the middle of its travails over the First Reform Act (passed in Dec 1832) he was able to observe another way of moving from aristocracy to democracy.

I think DeT provides us with two main purposes,and those are the same purposes that he wanted to awaken in his contemporaries.

(1) The "providential" currents of equality,which they could only vainly try to obstruct.

(2) The impending dangers to the beneficiaries of these new currents.

D in A is as much about the threat of the Tyranny of the Majority as about the Promise of Equality.

Toc himself,announces that democracy itself has created a new tyrant--Public Opinion.

It's my observation that this tyrant of Public Opinion is what drives the politial process today...especially the Conventions. The primaries has effectively dis-enfranchised millions of voters,especially in States that vote late in the process,because once the candidates are known,your vote is worthless...Is there any surprise that the numbers of votes keep dropping?

I'm in favor of a national primary day (for all parties-with no crossovers)and let the top popular vote getter be the nominee.

When the party machines selected their candidates in the smoke-filled rooms,at least the voters knew who made the decisions. In these days of unconscionable amounts of money being funneled into campaigns,it is difficult to follow the money trail,and that is what the conventions have become...a celebration of the individual raising the largest amount of funds.

I had the pleasure of being at three conventions in 1948 in Phila (which is my home area) and it was a very exciting time and the oratory was uplifting ( at least Truman's & Wallace's...Dewey..so..so)

Yesterday, I went to center city Phila to see to walk around and get the feel. Although.I'm cynical about the process,it's hard not to get a feeling of pride and patiotism,seeing all the Flags and buildings draped in red,white & blue bunting,and people walking around in Uncle Sam top hats and getting leaflets from some of the protestors... It's a great experience,because it can only happen in America.

Ed makes a lot of sense.

I find myself agreeing totally with Maryal.

Another point about NOT having the conventions: they have begun to be almost more of an ongoing news story on the OUTSIDE of the convention hall than on the inside. And this demonstrators versus the police is shown Around The World. We really don't need this.

As for large gatherings of people: these can be inspiring, cospiring, converting, convulsing, good and evil. Who was it back a number of posts who remembered the Hitler frenzy? I remember so well the huge arenas full of uniforms of every type, right down to the little tykes. Singing beautiful patriotic songs, roaring their approval of Hitler, saluting, goose-stepping, and listening to Adolf himself spitting out his venom of hatred.

Jerry has the right idea; we should all be cynics.

Yes, gigantic, expensive infomercials is just what the conventions have become.

On page 11 of the introduction, Heffner says: "..... this classic study thoroughly rejects Americans' now more than century-old, magical equation of equality with freedom, of democracy with liberty."

Robby--

I've been out all day, so will read and digest today's input and if I think I can contribute, will do so tomorrow. But, on the subject of being carried along with the passions of the 'mob'---

One of the reruns I was watching the other night had a very good brief discussion of this. I believe it was Third Watch (is that the one with the FD and PD interaction?) The one fellow summed up by saying that a determined mob scared him to death--or words to that effect. I hope that that kind of 'mob' psychology isn't what some folks are in favor of. Doesn't that sort of thing tend to carry one along on a wave of emotion rather than rational thought?

Thank you, Ed, for that brief bio of deT and for pointing out deT's announcement that democracy has a new tyrant -- Public Opinion. You then add that public opinion drives the political conventions. We "free" Americans tend to believe in the goodness of public opinion.

Is public opinion a "dangerous" thing?

Robby

Forgive me, but if I was Alexis de Tocqueville, I'd be rolling over in my grave at being called DeT.

It can be. Sometimes. On the whole, though, I think not. (referring to Robby's question )

I am Not going to get into any specifics, or get into "politics", but think carefully on what I say next here:

Public opinion does not ALWAYS sway the congress. There are Many, many instances of this right here and now, in our times. And in a good many of these instances, I, personally, have been affronted that public opinion HAS NOT influenced the legislators.

Sometimes the bad guys, read lobbyists-with-money, motivate the votes.

Is this democratic? Okay, this is a Republic, not a democracy. But IS this democratic? Are the law-makers representing their constituents?

No, Mary, I don't think they are...but I think we, as constituents, are at a distinct disadvantage in knowing how many of us share the same views. When I've written to my Representatives, the two (of three) who've responded have usually answered in such a way that I didn't know where they stood. The last thing I wrote about was the Elian Gonzales situation...and the responses indicated that my Representatives were in favor of (1) Family and (2) Freedom.

Boy, those are interesting revelations of their points, huh!

š ...jane›

Mal: I have patients who call me Dr. I and I haven't rolled over yet!

Robby

Jane, fortunately for them they never had to answer a roll call on that one!

Obviously the letters were written by staff members trying to have it Both Ways!

Like, duh, you're too stupid to notice?

Excuse me!

Barbara St Aubrey: Message #33 asked: Or maybe the better question is why was the system changed and what did the new system hope to achieve that the old system was not achieving?

I think the primary system, as it is now stands while far from perfect is a vast improvement over the old system. It does go along way to provide for the selection of the party’s candidates by rank and file party members. The role of the bosses in the selection of the presidential candidate is not eliminated but it is certainly reduced. Of course the role of the corporation and other money brokers with political interests to enhance has been increased.

Jerryj, Message #36; I agree with you the conventions should not be abolished. The party platform is important even though it does tend to end up being a masterpiece of creative writing incorporating the favorite planks of all the major factions and avoiding extremes that might turn away segments of the party. Also there is the question of the Vice President candidate. Unless this post too was made a part of the primary it would seem necessary even though it is a rubber stamp of the top dog’s choice. By the way, I never realized the party paid delegates expense.

Ed Zivitz in message #49 wrote:

I'm in favor of a national primary day (for all parties-with no crossovers )and let the top popular vote getter be the nominee.

I agree that a national primary day would eliminate the situation that occurred this spring where the winners were decided by the middle of the primary period making the votes of many superficial since the issue had already been decided. My state, Texas was in this category this year. At the same time other reforms might be made to shorten both the primary and final campaigns. I think six weeks for each would be more than enough but would settle for eight weeks for each. This should materially reduce the cost, as I doubt that the candidates could spend as much in four months as they are going to spend this year in ten.

I too thought that de T’s use of the term, “Public Opinion” to be quite significant and modern. I wondered if it was the first use of the term? Perhaps not but it was certainly an early appearance in print.

My favorite quote from what I've read of Tockie's [deT has SUCH connotations!] book so far is:

"At the present time the liberty of association is become a necessary guarantee against the tyranny of the majority." [Italics mine]

This is from the section called POLITICAL ASSOCIATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES. Hail! Hail! And forever delivery us from The Tyranny of the Majority!

My gosh, Jeryn, I never thought of that specific pronunciation of deT until you brought it up!! You have to get your lips wrapped around that French pronunciation -- dooh tee. deTockie? I don't know if his current family in France would go for that one.

You have brought up the phrase the tyranny of the majority which de Tocqueville mentions often in his book and which is a concept which most of us Americans never think of. As you brought it up, Jeryn, would you just briefly explain to the rest of us (in your own words if you wish) what deT meant when he used that phrase? How can following the will of the majority be tyrannical?

Robby

Given the planned demonstrations outside both conventions this year and the unusual U.S. military demonstrations of latest aircraft/weapons at the republican convention (and "offered" to the democratic convention), I wonder if the public's need for convention spontaneity has moved OUTSIDE. MaryPage, whether the pictures of the demonstrators are televised worldwide, I still relish the freedom of that sort of expression.

Betty, I am in total agreement with you about preserving this freedom of expression.

What I meant by "we don't need this" is this: when the demonstrations get Too large and there are Too many conflicting ones, the police sometimes are forced to step in to quell rioting between the differing opinions. When that happens, and we have people being hit with night sticks and tear gas, crowds running, much hullabaloo that is being TELEVISED all over the planet, well, then we are called a police state and worse. My feeling is if we did not have these conventions, we would not have SO MANY demonstrations in One Place at One Time; i.e., the conventions themselves draw unusual numbers of demonstrators.

Tomorrow the first convention begins. Some of you will watch the convention or at least follow it to some degree. Others of you will not deem it worth your time.

If you have the inclination, I am asking you to watch, at least part of the time, as a sociologist would or as deTocqueville would have. Not getting caught up in the partisan rhetoric but looking at the convention itself as an American "invention." Compare what you see and hear with what deT is saying (quotes above) regarding the American character.

Is what you are seeing peaceable in its intention? Is it legal? Is it trying to accomplish something only through lawful expedients? Do you see human passion being heightened or not? Is this necessarily bad? Are the emotions of those in the convention higher than they would ordinarily be when alone? Is it kept under control? If you happen not to like what you see or hear, would you agree with deT that parties are a necessary evil in free government?

Robby

For many people conventions have little to do with politics and a lot to do with business. Philip Morris, for example, plans to hand out macaroni to the delegates, the purpose being to tell the assembled opinion makers and power brokers that the company is not just a tobacco company. Dale Carnegie, calling this a "fabulous opportunity," is training thousands of corporate volunteers. Said an executive: "We are putting Dale Carnegie in front of every major corporation and showing them what we do."

Jeremy's MicroBatch Ice Cream which produced the first beer-flavored ice cream is donatng $10,000 worth of its product to the media center where 15,000 reporters will work. Motorola, McDonald's and Microsoft are donating both money and products. Philip Morris, in addition to distributing macaroni in animal shapes will be stocking hospitality suites and delegate "goody bags" with Altoids mints, Toblerone chocolates, Maxwell House coffee, Miller Beer and Philadelphia cream cheese.

Is this good? bad? Is this what one would expect in a republic? Would it have surprised our Founders? Would they have been pleased, displeased, or indifferent? How do you think deTocqueville would have reacted?

Robby

I don't know, Robby. Your researches here make me want to trip up to Philly and take in the goodies, if I can cadge a badge!

But hey, is this what conventions are For?

Not!

Or is this ALL they are for?

If it is, we should get rid of them. Rearrange the whole electing process.

Have the national primary suggested in someone else's posting here previously. Eight weeks Max (I would prefer 6) of campaigning, mostly in the form of debates, and Then Election Day.

Don't you all get Worn Out with the current system?

Robby, that is a pretty grave request you have made of me! You know how you are reading and some turn of phrase or idea HITS you and "The mirror crack'd from side to side"? That is the way I felt when I read Tockie's [forgive my Americanization] words, "The Tyranny of the Majority."

One of the greatest things about living in the U.S. is NOT having to be OF the majority in order to live in peace and prosperity. There is an aspect of life [no need to describe here] of which I was brought up and live as an absolute minority. Yet it has never troubled me, never been at issue, rarely even needed mentioning. Yet, I DO see most disturbing tendencies from time to time of people with certain convictions who seem quite determined that the whole country shall live by THEIR idea of what is right... what I jokingly call "The General Bullmoose"* attitude, but it's not really funny. Without mentioning actual issues, that is about the best I can do.

One can only hope that the majorities in this country will continue to allow its minorities [of all kinds]to live in peace and pursue happiness in their own ways!

General Bullmoose--a character from Al Capp's "Li'l Abner" who was fond of saying, "What's good for ME, is good for the country!" Capp was well known for his hilarious and biting satire! Nowadays, some periodicals would put him on the editorial pages!

Oh, I'm on a roll here; might as well go on and say what I think of political conventions. BIIIIIIIIIIG waste of time, money, talent, effort, EVERYTHING. I'll limit my attention to reading about them in the newspaper, thank you. All that product pushing smacks of capitalism and greed, not democracy. I agree with whomever said that the demonstrations OUTSIDE the conventions could be a symptom of a more general desire for conventions that MEAN something or accomplish something!

Stepping down off my unaccustomed soap box...

Jeryn: You have explained the "tyranny of the majority" very very well in language we can all understand -- that some majorites "do not allow certain minorities to live in peace and pursue happiness in their own ways." And deT saw this 170 years ago just a couple of generations after our nation had been founded.

I had forgotten all about Al Capp's General Bullmoose but I'm sure many here will remember him and his philosophy. But if, as you say, political conventions are a BIIIIG waste of time, etc. etc., then how should we go about electing our presidents?

Please don't get off your "soapbox." You done good!!

Robby

Oh shucks, thank you!

"How should we go about electing our presidents?" Weellll, Robby, I wouldn't change how THAT is done, I guess. Eliminating the conventions wouldn't actually CHANGE any part of THAT! Which is my point, precisely. It's just a show they put on, full of posturing, signifying nothing. If they insist on this primary system, they might as well drop the conventions. Back, oh what? Over 20 years ago, I imagine, when conventions ACCOMPLISHED something... that was OK. Quite interesting and even downright exciting at times, as I recall. I was pretty young... [heh heh]

What do YOU recall about the conventions where the candidates actually were VOTED on and selected on the spot, as it were???

Seems to me the length of time that candidates run had something to do with pre-TV when candidates had to travel this large nation in order for their presence to be felt by voters, who also wanted a first hand look at the candidates. Just as a symphony orchestra is more wonderful experienced live rather than just on TV so too individuals have a different magnatism that sometimes does not translate in canned spots or their edited TV appearences.

So I wonder if we aren't Bullmoosing ourselves denouncing the value of conventions, which even as a pep rally has value. Have you ever been to a real traditional pep rally-- example the A and M 'yell' where traditional yells are shouted that include certain linked body movements, applause for the team, traditional songs are sung and the school spirit soares to heights that often brings home the victory.

Our history has not been one of ethereal, thinking elections and voting but rather a rousing, energy filled hoorah.

Oh Barbara, I think I outgrew that sort of thing before I hit college even. That is just me. I certainly don't want to BE a General Bullmoose! The conventions just seem to be such a waste. Like pep rallies? Seems too serious to be viewed in that light, somehow...

I would definitely agree that seeing the candidates "perform" in the flesh would be much more meaningful. TV has made TOO much difference in ma-ny aspects of American life, not just politics.

Jeryn: To answer your question, I recall the conventions to be the type where I sat down with paper and pencil and kept track of progress. It was a "horse race."

Robby

A horse race?! Weeellll, OK. Yeh, I remember sitting with pencil and paper too, Robby. But in those dear dead days, I diagrammed football games too! Hahahahaha!!!

Does anyone here have a clue, please, as to where I may tune in that infamous "Shadow Convention" that is supposed to be taking place tonight? I am Dying to view it, but my tv guide does not Mention it!

MaryPage: I believe (not sure) that the first of 3-4 days began this morning at 11 a.m. at the Annenberg Center in Philadelphia and ended at 1:30 p.m. I believe that C-Span is carrying it.

Robby

"Conventions almost seem to me to be for the Party Faithful to gather and congratulate themselves on how wonderful they are."--Maryal. and

"They provide a kind of pep rally to get the faithful warmed up."--Jerryj. Isn't that exactly the point that Tocq. was making? And that it not only applied to a political convention but to any association or gathering of people with a common goal?

"That's when we began walking about and talking to each other."--Jerryj. I can only imagine the impressions that are formed in what are casual conversations between delegates that might lead to new ideas, new alliances, new political leaders many years down the road. Isn't that valuable to the association?

"Jerry has the right idea; we should all be cynics."--Mary Page. Judging from some of the posts here it would seem that we already are cynics. I just hope that a cynical populace does not become an apathetic one. To "turn off" of politics leaves a void that can be filled by frightening and powerful leaders with terrible doctrines. Does it sound as though I am being melo-dramatic? I think history proves that I am not.

"Is public opinion a "dangerous" thing?"---Robby. Yes, it can be, especially to those who do not have the best interests of the public in mind, thank goodness!

Phyll

I think that the last Convention that was "open" was when Adlai Stevenson did not hand pick his VP choice,but left it open to the delegates and JFK was almost selected as the convention's choice.

If that had happened,makes you wonder how history would have been changed.

Toc was haunted by the fear of the power of democracy to frighten and submerge the individual,and he was very concerned about the individual because the people (made up of individuals) are the source of power.

So who or what is the real source of power today? I wonder what Toc. would have thought of the effect of "globilization" on America today? How much does "globilization" affect the nominating process..

Ed:

Good old "Toc." We're becoming very close to him, aren't we?!

Theoretically the source of power in the U.S comes from the people, right? Do you believe that is no longer so? If democracy (along with the power of the majority) can submerge the individual -- And if deT came from a French aristocracy which also submerged the individual -- then just where is the source of power. In the French aristocracy we knew that the power lay with the nobles. Everyone knew that. If it doesn't lie with the people here, then where does power in America lie?

Robby

A definition of democracy from my Microsoft Reference Library. Where here does it say that democracy threatens the individual? Look to the Greeks. Demos, that's the base of the word democracy. It means people, as far as I know.

"democracy (dî-mòk´re-sê) noun "plural democracies 1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives. 2. A political or social unit that has such a government. 3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power. 4. Majority rule. 5. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

"[French démocratie, from Late Latin dêmocratia, from Greek dêmokratia : dêmos, people + -kratia, -cracy.]

"The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from INSO Corporation. All rights reserved."

Mal: That's the whole point of deTocqueville's theory -- that although dictionary definitions say that democracy helps the individual, deT believed from his observations that there was a tyranny of the majority as we discussed in the earlier postings. And, to be exact, we all realize that here in America we have a republic, not a democracy.

Robby

"Republic. A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who are entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them."

So what is the real difference, Robby? If the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who vote their representatives into office, does that still not connote individuality? Majority rule. That's where the catch is, I guess. How did the ancient Greeks work their way around this, or did they?

What do the rest of you think? Do you disagree with deT that the majority is (or can be) tyrannical?

Robby

Here's an interesting quote from the book.

""The electors see their representative not only as a legislator for the state but also as the natural protector of local interests in the legislature; indeed, they almost seem to think that he has a power of attorney to represent each constituent, and they trust him to be as eager in their private interests as in those of the country."

Was de Tocqueville's opinion correct in this assessment, I wonder?

On what page is that, Mal?

Robby

Ok what about that whole chapter on Townships, Municipal Administration State Government. deToc speaking mostly from his knowledge and experience with the New England area's township but he speaks about sovereignty first he says:

" 'The will of the nation' is one of the phaases most generally abused by intriguers and despots of every age. some have seen the expression of it in the bought votes of a few agents of authority, others in the votes of an interested or frightened minority, and some have even discovered it in a people's silence, thinking that the fact of obedience justified the right to command.

But in America the sovereignty of the people is neither hidden nor sterile as with some other nations; mores recognized it, and the laws proclaim it; it spreads with freedom and attains unimpeded its ultimate consequesces.

The dogma of the sovereignty of the people came out from the township abd took possession of the government; every class enlisted in its cause (the American Revolution) ...society acts by and for itself.

There are no authorities except within itself;... The people take part in the making of the laws by choosing the lawgivers, and they share in their application by electing the agents of the executive power, one might say that they govern themselves, so feeble and restricted is the part left to the administrations, so vivedly is that administration aware of its popular origin... the people reign over the American political world as God rules over the univers.

The township is the first in order, then the county, and last the state.

...communal freedom is not... the fruit of human effort. It is seldom created, but rather springs up of its own accord. It grows, almost in secret...the local institutions are to liberty what primary schools are to science; they put it within the people's reach; they teach people to appreciate its peaceful enjoyment and accustom them to make use of it.

...is attached to his township because it is strong and independent; he has an interest in it because he shares in its management; he loves it because he has no reason to complain of his lot; he invests his ambition and his future is in it; in the restricted sphere within his scope, he learns to rule society; he gets to know those formalities without which freedom can advance only through revolutions, and becoming imbued with their spirit, develops a taste for order, understands the harmony of powers, and in the end accumulates clear, practical ideas about the nature of his duties and the extent of his rights.

The American system, which distributes local power among so many citizens, is also not afraid to multiply municipal duties.

There are two ways in which the power of authority in a nation may be diminished.

The first way is to weaken the very basis of power by depriving society of the right or the capacity to defend itself in certain circumstances...

another way... depriving society of some of its rights and paralyzing tis efforts by dividing the use of its powers among several hands. Functions can be multplied and each man given enough authority to carry out his particular duty... By sharing authority in this way its power becomes both less irresistible and less dangerous...If one looks higher than the township, one finds scarcely finds the trace of an administrative hierarchy.

...people who make use of elections to fill the secondary grades in their govermnent are bound heavely to rely on judical punishments as a weapon of administration,...

My own thoughts--

we now have a crisis of trust with the 'law' especially, after the televised Simpson case and therefore, we do not feel as powerful that our causes could be judicated--

seldom are we involved any longer on school Boards or townships or local gavernment. Our involvment being less led us to our belief in our individual ability to influence power and the community toward meeting our needs is less and therefore, our interest in politics is less--

As much as the political process broadcast on TV may seem boring it is boring because we are not involved in the process and if we do not celebrate it being broadcasted to the land we risk a hidden agenda creeping into our government.--

We see money power as being the agenda that has creeped into our govenment through elected officials on the national level. The only way most see combating it is with chaos or demonstrations in mass or resignation.--

Finally our townships have changed and our mobile nation is less organized therefore, I do think issues that mobilize people and let their wishes be known through gatherings that turn into mobs is the outcome of the lack of civil power learned and enjoyed through activly participating in local politics.

Barbara: You bring up an important section of deT's book regarding Townships, Municipal administration, and State Governments which we will undoubtedly discuss in detail in the future. That is a whole sub-topic unto itself. You are of course correct that the "sovereignty of the people" relates to what will be going on in the political conventions. That concept is closely related, in perhaps an inverse manner, to deT's comment about the "tyranny of the majority." Your posting is extremely important and I hope everyone reads it in detail.

In the meantime, so as not to complicate our thinking too much, I would ask that while the political conventions are taking place that we concentrate on what they are doing. Is what about to happen helping America in any way? Is it hurting in any way? How can we explain these conventions to a foreigner? Are they, as deT says above, a "necessary evil in a free government?

As we flow along and watch what America is doing, what is America telling us?

Robby

Robby I think like a geomatry problem and without the basic truths my thoughts become scattered and useless and so I had to go back and look at what deToc said about Soverienty. Because in any group disission making if the individuals do not know what is within their power to change and how the system will address the change and they do not feel empowered to move the system along nothing happens.

I can not find the direct quote but deToc does say we as Americans are about our local government first and only lend our soverienty to the nationl government. I guess I am addressing this lack of interest that we all share just now and we keep giving our own version of why-- from the lack of a horse race to large corperations funding the event.

Barbara: Yes, I remember his saying that about local governments. It is, indeed, important. Later on when we get to election time (remember, we are following the flow of America day by day, week by week), we may get into that important subject.

Robby

Robby I learned a long time ago when I travel to another area if I have not studied a bit about the area and what is important then I miss noticing many things that I pass or could be observing and they go by without a bat of my eye. Well to me world wide broadcasting of our political process is only as good to the outside American observer as the observers knowledge of our process. And yes our system allows a vocal and sometimes messy process but the other side of the coin would be control in order to look a certain way to the world.

Our own appriciation for the convention is also hampered by our lack of managing our local townships and therefore, we have lost the apprieciation for those "formalities without which freedom can advance only through revolutions, and becoming imbued with their spirit, we develop a taste for order, understand the harmony of powers, and in the end accumulates clear, practical ideas about the nature of our duties and the extent of our rights."

In just a few hours the "show" begins. The Executive Director of the Center for Public Integrity describes the conventions as "gala events where the most garish examples of excess appear." He added: "The conventions have become Super Bowls of the influence of money on politics." The dazzling corporate sideshows put this year's gatherings in a class with the Olympics and the Super Bowl.

In addition to businesses, as enumerated earlier, local governments kick in cash as well. Philadelphia's effort is supported with $17 million from the states of New Jersey and Pennsylvania. For Philadelphia, it is an opportunity to show off a spiffed-up downtown and a new convention center and to promote itself as a place to vsit, do business and live. Said one official: "Getting this convention is like a seal of approval for Philadelphia."

Said a University of Illinois professor: "There is a lot of ego associated with these conventions. Lots of people enjoy the nonfinancial benefits of being close to power." Said one convention planner: "When reporters get bored with the conventions, as they do, they write stories about the city."

But it's more than a show, isn't it? Each convention begins by electing a convention chairman and a rules committee, adopting convention rules, and checking delegate credentials through a credentials committee. Thereafter, party platforms, prepared by a special committee, are debated and voted upon by the delegates.

We are watching America in action. deTocqueville tells us above: "I have sought to discover the evils and advantages which America brings."

Now -- 170 years later, as you watch the first convention start, what evils and/or advantages are you observing?

Robby

Personally, I think it is a wrong that one person chooses the Vice President and the Party then rubber stamps that choice.

Since this is true in both parties, I do not feel I am being political to bring it up, but am only discussing a part of this whole process.

We should either ALSO elect a candidate for Vice President through the primary process or have nominations from the floor of the convention, and campaigning there, and a healthy roll call vote for the selection.

The person chosen has, unfortunately, too often become President through the death of the President. (and once by resignation) S/He should be the choice of all of the voters of his/er party or, at least, of all of the delegates to that party's convention.

Robby do you or someone know the reason for the current parties? deToc talks about Federalists and Republicans. Is the current Republican party the party of deToc? When was the Democratic party started and what was it's original raison d'être?

Barbara: You ask if the current Republican Party is the party of deTocqueville? deT was French. When he was 26 years old he came to the United States to study the American penal system but during the nine months he was in the U.S, he observed much more than that and hence his book, "Democracy in America." While, upon returning home, he wrote jointly with his friend Gustave Beaumont a book about American prisons, later in DinA, he individually wrote about tne entire American culture.

Therefore, in this Discussion Group, we are doing the same -- examining the entire American culture. Currently we are examining the place of political conventions in this culture but as we move along watching what Americans do in August, September, October, etc., we will compare their actions to what deT saw and commented upon.

Robby

Barbara: You ask for the reason for parties. It is my understanding that it stems from the fact that our Constitution stands for a republican (small"r") government, as opposed to democratic (small "d") government and that it is the responsibility of the people to keep it such. For this reason parties were formed.

This ia an excellent question and may help us to understand how the parties came about and why conventions take place. I'm sure there are historians here who are more qualified than I to expand on this question. Let us hear from them.

Robby

The convention itself has not yet officially started yet several thousand dissenters, most of them orderly, are in the streets making their wishes known. One group is shouting: "Hey, hey! Ho, ho!, HMO has got to go!" Another group is shouting: "What do we want? Health care!" Other protesters are wearing large papier-mache heads of piggish plutocrats and Darth Vader caricatures of politicians. Some are denunciating the two-party system.

Peace is being maintained by peace monitors while causes such as opposition to the death penalty, to sweatshops, and to the antimissile defense movement are being espoused. Near the Liberty Bell hundreds of pairs of shoes are lined up as part of a Silent March demonstration, the empty shoes representing the thousands killed annually with handguns.

Is this what deTocqueville might have seen? Would the Founders of the United States have visualized this as the proper running of a republic? Is this what America is all about?

Robby

re: In discussion opener, DinA, by Toc 3rd para, "My aim has been to show, by example of America, that laws, and especially manners ...." I cannot help but wonder of the differences in communication and transportation today vs those at the time of his visit particularly our sound bite driven media whether his examples hold forth today?

Barbara, Regarding your second question:

When was the Democratic Party started and what was its original raison d'être?

It is generally said that the origin of the Democratic Party dates back almost to the origin of our country. Party distinction I think was apparent when Washington retired at the end of 1796. It was certainly apparent in the 1800 campaign. At that time the two parties who had emerged were the Federalists, the party of Hamilton, Washington and Adams and the party of Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson won.

The roots of the Democratic Party today go back to the political philosophy of Jefferson who is generally considered its founder. Its raison d'êtree was the populist political philosophy long preached by Jefferson. The Federalist party faded early in the 19th century and a successor group known as the Whigs became a major player until the time of the Civil War at which time the Republican Party who first ran a candidate in 1856 came to prominence. Its initial plank was the abolition of slavery. It was the Party of Lincoln, its first successful candidate for the Presidency.

Harold: Thank you for once again giving us a clear historical understanding of what helped to make America what it is today. Your contributions are much appreciated.

Robby

As I remember history, the reason for the two parties was a disagreement among the leaders of the day; some sought to limit the power of government and others sought to expand that power. Hence, they divided into the two groups and that, supposedly, is the basis of the Republican (limiting government) and Democrat (expanding)party today. Do you see that as their underlying principle?

Ella:

If I may relate a remark of deTocqueville to what you have just posted, he said (Pg 90): "...two great divisions which have always existed in free communities. The deeper we penetrate into the inmost thought of these parties, the more do we perceive that the object of the one is to limit, and that of the other to extend, the authority of the people."

I am building up a tremendous admiration for deT's ability to observe a society with calm and objective eye. It is my hope that we here, in the Year 2000, will try to observe the America we know in the same way.

Robby

Robby,

And then, doesn't each party break into additional factions? Liberals and conservatives--but still within the main party group.

Phyll

You are all asking me questions to which I don't necessarily have the answers. I am merely the poor little Discussion Leader here hoping that the "wisdom of the numerous Senior Netters" will come together here and find answers.

I would give a word of caution, however, speaking as DL, that if we get into terms like "conservative" and "liberal" (and I am not saying "don't do it"), that we can find ourselves in a hot political discussion which belongs more properly in one of many fine political forums in SN rather than here.

I'm sure you all understand what I mean and will locate that fine dividing line between examining America as deT would do and launching into a passionate conservative-liberal Republican-Democratic debate. Let us remind ourselves that this forum falls under the Books and Literature folder.

Robby

I agree with Robby. Several times already in this young discussion, I have started to give a response, only to realize it would be, or could lead to, matters too political.

Let us put Our Country, as it Is and as it Was, under our microscopes and Look at it. But let's not get into any type of debate over the issues of the day!

Ella, Robby gave you a great and valid answer to your question, but I find myself needing to give my own impression of the earlier days of our Republic, and it is this: The differences were that the Federalists believed in a Strong Central Government and the Jeffersonians believed in States Rights and a Confederation of States. The Party of Jefferson did go on to become "The Democrats" and the Federalists failed and the Whigs came along, and the Whigs failed and the Republicans came along.

But our history as a country has seen many, many flip-flops and many, many changes. We cannot trace our Party system in 2 straight lines, as issues have switched back and forth. Many famous names, and even more elected but not so famous, have switched parties, as well.

In our own lifetimes, we have had a Republican nominee, Wendall Wilkie, who wrote a book promoting One World. I doubt he would be a Republican today. Also, in our lifetimes, we have seen the "Dixiecrat" (was that the name?) revolt and strike at a Democrat Convention; and that was all about States' Rights! We have seen "The Solid South" go from a brick-wall majority Democrat vote to an often majority Republican vote! Lastly, we have seen the Party of Lincoln lose most of its certain-majority of Afro-American voters to the other party. I say lastly, but these examples actually just skim the surface.

My point being that there has been no direct-line descent in our political parties. On the contrary, a lot of Americans have gone for decades calling themselves died-in-the-wool Republicans or Democrats, only to wake up one fine morning and find they have to jump ship or change philosophies!

MaryPage: I like very much the way you described this forum -- putting this country as it Is and as it Was under a microscope. And thank you for reminding us how much and how often the various political parties have changed. There may be foreign born visitors or naturalized citizens lurking in this Discussion Group who are wondering just what America is anyway. Are we all over the lot? Do we know what we are doing?

Robby

Re: Camron's Post # 96

Back in those early days,communication WAS transportation.Today we get bombarded with so much much communication that it's mind boggling....I try to remember that communication is not necessarily knowledge.

Re:Harold's Post # 97

The Republican Party did grow out of the ruins of the Whig Party. The Whigs'policies were largely economic:strong support for central banking, a high tariff,and a commitment to internal improvements such as canals and railroads.

Republicans,then were the original "big government" party,in support of spending,taxation (they passed the first income tax in 1863)and intervention in free markets. Of course,it's ironic that today the GOP stands firmly on the other side.

As an historical aside, in 1860,the party of Lincoln had to run under a pseudonym in Philadelphia. That's because the word Republicanism was associated with anti-slavery and anti-Southern positions,neither of which were popular in Phila.....So in Philadelphia in 1860,the party ran under the name the People's Party and their core issue was protection to American industry.

I believe that Conventions are a necessary evil.At least they are sort of in the open and no one is being annointed as a monarch(although America has had its share of political dynasties)

Great and thanks all-- that was the gist of my question to learn about the straight line of the parties and now I know there is no straight line. This information about the parties is great, in that vaguely I remember learning some of this in School but my word, that was 40 years ago.

Although protesters are an unruly lot I really think that is what we as a nation are all about. No place, except possibly England to their parliment, is there the freedom to protest publicaly in mass. Any nation that does protest is usually on the razors edge of a revolution rather then expressing their will expecting to be heard in a spirit of change.

Throwing tea in the Atlantic ocean while dressed up like a bunch of wild Indians whooping and hollering seems tame now but then it was an 'in your face' activist protest.

Our history is full of bravado like actions and that bravado I think is the freedom expressed 'to be' that allows folks 'to be' involved. Involvment in any activity brings about a greater appriciation and belief in your ability and right to that activity. I see group activity toward any goal being the stuff that is within the American psyche and that prompts group action by citizens, organized or not, taking care of disasters and human rights here and abroad. We certainly gave an example of protesting the national administration that other nations have adapted. In particular I think of Tieniman (sp) square.

hi barbara...you have just said,

"No place, except possibly England to their parliment, is there the freedom to protest publicaly in mass."

the french LOVE to take to the streets. most recently, students, teachers, nurses, pig farmers, anti-mcdonalds people and this week the villagers of gonesse, where the concorde crashed. their demonstration will probably result in a third airport being built near le bourget and de gaulle. historically, there has been a wide range of interests shown by the demonstrators.

if they choose to hold placards, however, they don't seem as legible and attractive as those in philadelphia this summer. (i love all those shoes...very moving)

de Toqueville must have been quite a guy...with his broad curiosity concerning how america's democracy might affect the future.

aha and thanks fairwinds-- looks like the freedom to protest goes hand and glove with a domocratic society. Looks like deToc came from the correct background in a belief of individual freedom and soverienty to best understand what he observed her in America.

Good to have you with us, Fairwinds. Please help us as we go along by comparing what you see in France with what we are observing in America.

Robby

i have enjoyed all of your messages and consider this book something that fills in some of the gaps in my general education. incidentally, i signed up to vote this year through a website. easy as pie.

This post gives another comment about political Parties in the United States. Phyll in message #101 wrote the following:

And then, doesn't each party break into additional factions? Liberals and conservatives--but still within the main party group

While it is probably somewhat of an over simplification, I think the answer to the question is, yes. In the United States we have historically followed a two party system. New parties have found the task of establishing themselves very difficult. Of course this has happened by shear chance, as there is most certainly no legal impediment to the establishment of new parties.

The fact that it has turned out that way may have something to do with Americans ability to make compromise. After all, was not ‘pragmatism” as a philosophy invented in this country? This philosophy proclaims that “what works,” or what is practical or obtainable is good. Un-yielding insistence on fixed principals is bad and likely to lead to governmental failure and social disaster. The result has been as Phyll has pointed out a rather wide range of diverse views in both of the major parties. They seem able to disagree on major issues and yet come together in with compromise in the end.

On the Continent of Europe this has not been the case and some of the major continental democracies have seen the development of many splinter parties sometimes making effective government difficult. Curiously the United Kingdom too has until recently maintained a two party system. I think today there may be a significant change under way in the UK. Are there not in the present Parliament in addition to the Labor majority and the Tory (largest) minority a significant number of Social Democrats plus representatives of several other parties? Also in the US this year there will be five parties with candidates for President. While no one really believes any but one of the major two will win, I think both major parties are concern with the prospect of these splinter candidates attracting enough of their votes to cause their defeat.

The British and French attitudes toward democracy have been mentioned earlier. Michael Davies, the British-born producer of "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire," thinks American politics has boxed itself in. He says: "The art of performance has been lost in American politics. You can find C-Span debates in Parliament that are utterly absorbing. The pols are funny and liable to say stupid things when there aren't 100 people writing and producing for them."

He adds: "America should import the British system for one convention week. You have the two parties on opposite sides of a big convention center, like Parliament, jeering, pointing across the aisle, while the two candidates debate each other extemporaneously. You'd have to have somebody in the role of the speaker -- maybe Judge Judy."

Robby

Am I reading ahead too much? In the section called "Choice of the People, and Instinctive Preferences of the American Democracy", Tockie says

"It is a well-authenticated fact, that at the present day the most able men in the United States are very rarely placed at the head of affairs... The race of American statemen has evidently dwindled most remarkably in the course of the last fifty years."

I laughed right out loud when I read that! He should see 'em now!!! Hahahaha!

Jeryn, message #113

Curiously enough, that was exactly my reaction. By the way, does anyond know the chapter where the quotation, "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" can be found. I'm pertty sure it came from this de T book, but it has eluded me this reading.

And Robby, I've watched several recent P M's Questions Period. I'll say this that Tony Blare is one sharp fast thinker. And what a wit, he is. In the United States he would have been a first class plaintif's tort Trial Lawyer. He would have been a rich one too.

Would Bill Clinton have made a good British P.M. He probably has the IQ for it, but I don't think he has the wit that Blare has exhibited in his instant answers to a wide varity of question from the rank and file M.P. from all parties.

H.

Harold: Lord Acton was the originator of that phrase.

Jeryn: You have pulled out a most astute statement by deT pointing out that the ability of the heads of state seems to have dwindled over the years. And, as you imply, this dwindling has been continuing.

I'm wondering, however, if the fact is that in the latter part of the 18th century, by some stroke of "coincidence," a greater than usual number of geniuses found each other, formed our nation, and that no such combination of remarkable men have come into existence and found each other since. Where else since have we found the likes of Washington, the Adams, Jefferson, Monroe, Hamilton, Franklin, and others all in the same room at the same time? We have all been blessed!!

Robby

The Internal Revenue Service has issued an election-year warning that churches, charities and many other tax-exempt organizations should not engage in poltical activities encouraging support for or opposition to any candidates. The organizations involved are exempt from federal income taxes under section 501(c)(3) of the tax code.

The statement said: "These organizations cannot endorse any candidates, make donations to their campaigns, engage in fund-raising, distribute statments or become involved in any other activities that may be beneficial or detrimental to any candidate."

The IRS said that organizations could lose their tax-exempt status or be subjected to an excise tax on the political money spent.

Robby

hmmm I'm beginning to wonder if we haven't lionized our leaders of old. We are learning little by litte just how human they were as historians look with todays probing eye to scoop the imperfections of our leaders. For so long all we had was the glorious tales of the achievments of these leaders that in their wisdom blessed us as a nation. As they say "familiarity breeds contempt' and therefore, todays leaders we see warts and all and feel contempt for what we percieve as a lack of nobility. The greatness achieved by today's leaders may not be acknowledged or admired till history shows us what could have been had they not acted as they did.

Today we do not hear about the opposition to those active during the beginning years of this nation as we hear of current opposition with todays leadership. Also, regardless of our opinion of the behavior by those representing us in national positions of power we now hear, through the media, about all the warts. In fact we only started to hear about the warts of those in higher office after the civil war. Journalism was probably boosted into more prominence because of the war and certaily the production and readership of newspapers was greater then the eighteenth and early nineteenth century.

I have a hard time imagining our founding fathers were more able then many of todays leaders. The task for our founding fathers was different, requiring different skills. They were establishing and creating rather then maintaining, continuing to empower more varied citizens as well as, taking on a role in international affairs.

Along with Washington and Franklin we had Benedict Arnold and Aaron Burr, a nifty vice-president was he along with our illustrious Hamilton engaging in such a, ahah, 'code of honor.' Can you imagine the hue and cry today if we had death by dual happening in DC?

I guess bottom line I dislike lionizing past leaders at the expense of current leaders. I'm more comfortable hearing that folks were great without the comparison that only makes us feel less by catagorizing our current leaders as less.

Count me as agreeing with the assessment that our best candidates for leading the nation are choosing not to put themselves through the ordeal required of them today.

Our most brilliant and capable leaders of this age are choosing to contribute quietly and out of the limelight, but still make every effort to further the basic principles of this nation.

One of the biggest problems is their distaste for the rude and crude business of raising money. This is now the First requirement of anyone running for office. Think about it.

When any family group, township, state or country is in peril of some obvious and immediate sort, the very best leader or leaders will usually come forth. Bob to the top, as it were. This occurred during WWII, when we had Churchill in England, DeGaulle in France, Roosevelt in the U.S. The first two were later discarded as no-longer-required when their countries swung back into politics as usual. Roosevelt died just before the end of the war.

We did have giants at the onset of our revolution and during the setting up and beginnings of our nation. We needed them, and they were there. Check their biographies. The biggest and the best of these could barely wait to pass the reins to others and retire to their homes and their privacy.

Everyday politics is a dirty business. Persons of finer sensibilities rarely want to be part of that. We are most definitely not being availed of our best.

We can, however, be comforted in the knowledge that they are there. Persons of almost infinite knowledge and abilities are serving this nation in the Department of State, the United Nations, the Foreign Service, and many other places in which their efforts enchance our quality of life and further our aspirations as a nation of peoples.

Concerning raising of money -- was it not true that Washington, Jefferson, Monroe, and others were people of means with big estates and were similar, so to speak, with the millionaires of today? If they had not had that money, would they have been able to put some of their time to public service?

Robby

Washington was wealthy. Jefferson had huge debts. Monroe held more offices than any other public servant before or Since. He did not have great wealth, though he did manage to retire to a country estate. While Ambassador to France, Monroe earned 6k per year and his wife spent More than That on baubles! (visit the Monroe Museum in Fredericksburg, Virginia to see some of these and hear all about it!)

I agree completely with Barbara in that we have lionized our early leaders. Even they probably could not have stood up to the intrusiive, incessant probing into their private lives that today's leaders must go through. Jefferson was undoubtedly one of the greatest statesmen we have ever had but his private life was not without blemish. The same could be said of most of those who come to great power, don't you think?

Phyll

I found this, I think, very appropo quote from the new Poet Laureate, Stanley Kunitz. Thanks to Robby and Maryal it appeared on the Poetry board but I think it fits here as well: He (Kunitz) wrote a poem about being at the library (of Congress) during Watergate. In "The Lincoln Relics," he speaks to the 16th president:

Mr. President
In this Imperial City,
awash in gossip and power,
where marble eats marble
and your office has been defiled,
I saw the piranhas darting
between the rose-veined columns,
avid to strip the flesh
from the Republic's bones.
Has no one told you
how the slow blood leaks
from your secret wound?

Phyll

On July 28th, we entered the flow of the mainstream of America. Already time has passed. Already in the past is the opening of the first convention. The closing is two days ahead. Soon we will have passed that. Then comes the annual back-to-school movement which may not seem too relevant to those of us who have no children going to school. Yet that is what America will be showing us in August. The educational system is part of America and we will all have comments about that as did deTocqueville.

But in the meantime the first convention is still underway. As we float slowly by, what are we observing? Aside from specific political issues, what impressions are being left with us? As we compare those impressions with the remarks of deT, did we find the convention inside and the demonstrations outside to be peaceable? Were all actions legal? Was the intensity of human passions heightened?

As far as conventions are concerned, are you proud to be an American?

Robby

Ho boy! That's a good question, Robby. I'm proud to be an American, usually, but not really BECAUSE of political conventions! I am proud of the way the Philadelphia law enforcement agencies are conducting themselves, so far.

Hey, back a moment to Lord Acton. That guy had quite a way with words, didn't he! I found this in my Bartlett's:

"The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather of that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections." ...from The History of Freedom and Other Essays, Lord Acton, 1907

Hey! The tyranny of the majority raises it's head once again. In spite of Bartlett's, we can see that Tockie used the phrase FIRST?!

Our "great" leaders in the past were just human like those of today with their foibles and misbehaviors. We read and discussed AMERICAN SPHINX - the latest biography of Thomas Jefferson some two years ago here on Seniornet and it is archived below. Read the archived discussion and you will see that the great Thomas Jefferson, had he been president today, would probably not have survived the impeachment process.

We go back to the old question no one has ever answered successfully - does the office make the man great or does the man make the office great?

We have not done badly since Tockie's time in our presidents - we are still a free people and still and always will have problems with democracy, but as Colin Powell said last night -"we are the most trusted nation in the world" - although at times we have doubted that!

I was proud of "us" last night! Even got teary-eyed at times, it's great to be a part of this country and one thing Laura Bush said that struck me was she put the individual first, and then the family and then the federal government, which is the way it should be, I think. Was it Tockie who said that only in times of great stress does the American people put the government first?

Finally found the quote y'all have listed as on page 87 - In my book on the first page of chapter two page 174 the translation is altered just a bit.

Parties are an evil inherent in free governments, but they do not always have the same character and the same instincts.

There are further quotes in this chapter that caught my eye

Hence all the skill of politicians consists in forming parties; in the United States a politician first tries to see what his own interest is and who have analogous interests which can be grouped around his own;...

...Aristocratic or democratic passions can easily be found as the bottom of all parties and that though they may slip out of sight there, they are as it were, the nerve and soul of the matter.

The wealthy, therefore, prefer to leave the lists rather than to engage in an often unequal struggle against the poorest of their fellow citizens. Being unable to assume a rank in public life analogous to that which they occupy in private life, they abandon the former and concentrate upon the latter. They form, within the state, a private society with its own tastes and enjoyments.

This may be changing in that the computer industry has created many millionairs and the saying is that high tech has democratized wealth. An article a few years ago in the magazine Town and Country explained how a change in the inheritance tax was championed for decades by the California wine industry families especially, the Gallo family since the would be the main beneficiaries of the repeal of that tax. Onward to the quotes that I found facinating.

The wealthy man submits to this state of affairs as to an irremediable evil; he is even careful to avoid showing that he is hurt by it; thus one may hear him boasting in public of the blessings of republican government and the advatages of democratic forms. Far apart from hating one's enemies, what is more natural to man than flatering them?

For all this conventional enthusiasm and obsequious formality toward the dominant power, it is easy to see that the rich have a great distate for their country's democratic institutions. The people are a power whom they fear and scorn...The two main weapons used by the parties to assure success are newpapers and associations.

Four new quotations of deT have replaced the original four above. One of them (Pg 89 from the Heffner edition) is apparently a slightly different translation of the one passed along to us by Barbara.

It is apparent that a number of you are truly "using" your book as a tool. Wonderful!! The more one delves into Democracy in America, the more one realizes why the New York Times praised it as an excellent "study of a nation's institutions and culture." Here in this forum we are learning more about ourselves by simultaneously examining both the book and what America is presenting to us on a daily basis.

Robby

Today protesters clashed with police in Philadelphia, halted traffic and tried to block buses ferrying delegates to the convention. Protesters in some cases scrawled obscenities with red spray paint on police patrol cars or splashed them with orange paint. Fistfights between officers and demonstrators broke out. Windows on some 20 police cars were smashed.

Three police officers were injured when red liquid was thrown in their faces. Police tried to serve a warrant on people inside a two-story warehouse. The police believed that there was some sort of contraband at the location. The police said that the people were free to leave but they were refusing to come out. Said one activist outside: "In a real democracy, non-violent protesters are not arrested preemptively before they are able to do anything.

A group of 20 protesters lay down in the intersection, locked hands and blocked traffic. Protesters were removed from the intersection after they blocked traffic for two-and-a-half hours. Other protesters turned over Dumpsters to block traffic while another group egged them on with a rhythmic beat on plastic pails.Police were forced to move a mounted patrol against a group of 300 demonstrators outside City Hall.

The demonstrators are advocating a variety of causes, including opposition to corporate influence over politics, support for environmental protection, gay and lesbian rights and freedom for Mumis Abu-Jamal, who was sentenced to death in the killing of a Philadelphia police officer.

Do the above acts make you feel ashamed of America or are they in the spirit of democracy?

Robby

Robby in what chapter is the quote on your page 57. Since I have written in the border of my copy those page numbers that you're giving with the quotes you have listed, pages 82 to 97 are now easier to find in my book. I'm using a copy tranlated by George Lawrence, edited by JP Mayer, originally published by Harper & Row in 1966 then by Anchor Books, Doublday & Co. in 1969. The book has 778 pages, is paperback but a larger 5.25" X 8" size book. My book shows a chapter name followed by sub-chapters or topics. Example;

PARTIES IN THE UNITED STATES..................................................174
Remains of the Aristocratic Party in the United States..178

Well we wanted to know how the convention played abroad-- here are the bulletins on the front page from The Irish Times

Republicans wheel out war heroes stressing defence
US soldier jailed for Kosovo killing

On the page of The Irish Times World News first we have, with a photo, a brief protester article

A protester smeared with artificial blood lies in front of a cordon of police outside Philadelphia City Hall during the Republican National Convention. For three days police have accommodated activists and demonstrations have remained peaceful.

Republicans focus on defence strength
From Joe Carroll, in Philadelphia

THE US: Defence and foreign policy were the themes of the second day of the Republican Convention yesterday as distinguished war veterans warned that the armed forces would have to be updated and kept ready for overseas interventions.

Former Gulf War commander Gen Norman Schwarzkopf and former Vietnam War hero Senator John McCain addressed the delegates on defence needs. The general's speech was transmitted by video from the deck of the battleship New Jersey docked nearby.

Ms Condoleezza Rice, the chief foreign policy adviser to Gov George Bush, told delegates that he was well qualified to serve as president and that he had an inspiring vision for the future role of the US in the world.

Mr Bush, who is campaigning in key states as he makes his way to Philadelphia for his acceptance speech tomorrow night, has taken issue with President Clinton over his criticisms of the Republican goals.

And the sniping between the two sides reached a new level when delegates to the convention were delighted at a pointed reference by Mrs Laura Bush to Mr Clinton's behaviour in the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

Mrs Bush said parents and grandfathers were showing her husband pictures of their children and saying "I'm counting on you . . . I want my son and daughter to respect the President of the United States."

Mrs Bush said "when Americans vote this November, they will be looking for someone to uphold that high honour and trust."

Mr Bush, who was campaigning in West Virginia, said he found it "amazing that the President of the United States would spend time trying to be a political pundit".

Mr Bush was replying to criticism by Mr Clinton that the Republican proposals on healthcare are just "a pretty package". The President said "if they wrap it tight enough, no one will open it before Christmas."

Mr Bush accused the President of being "desperate to have his legacy intact by getting Al Gore elected". In recent elections, there has usually been an unspoken commitment that one party will not make high-level attacks on the other during its convention. But the Democrats have also chosen this week to launch a series of TV ads critical of Republican policies and comparing them unfavourably to those of Mr Gore.

President Clinton also expressed horror at the revelation that Mr Dick Cheney, the running mate of Mr Bush, had voted against a motion calling for the release from jail of Mr Nelson Mandela during the 1980s.

It was a good thing, Mr Clinton said, that "nobody listened to the vote that was cast by the Republican nominee for vice-president. He did get out of jail and he went on to do a great job for America."

Mr Cheney has tried to explain his vote by saying that the resolution also praised the African National Congress which was seen as dominated by communists.

Democrats have also attacked Mr Cheney for saying that he had "other priorities" during the Vietnam War when he secured three exemptions from the draft to continue his studies. But Republicans have retorted that Mr Clinton avoided the draft.

Mr Cheney will be closely watched tonight when he makes his acceptance speech to the convention. Republicans will hope he can defend his ultra-conservative voting record when he was in Congress so as to stifle Democratic criticism.

Other speakers at last night's session included Mrs Elizabeth Dole, who ran against Mr Bush in the primaries. Her theme was strength through compassion, echoing Mr Bush's slogan of "compassionate conservatism".

using bablefish. translater the French news has 3 articles. The following, in addition one featuring McCain and the third about the protesters.

Bush and the republicans revive their past

PHILADELPHIA (the United States), August 2 (AFP) - the republicans drew from their past the supposed inspiration to carry them to the White House, November next, and called to restore moral forces armed in closing Tuesday evening the second day with their national convention.

But while the republicans spoke national security and defense, the font of Philadelphia announced arrest of 282 people, after demonstrations in series in the centre town.

Face to face opposed throughout the day several hundreds of demonstrators against the death penalty and the police force, the first having tried to disturb the " large-mass " of the republicans.

Organizations representing a multitude of causes, whose abolition of the death penalty, called with acts not violent one during the four days of convention. Started Monday, this one is completed Thursday evening with the official nomination of the candidate George W Bush, opposed in the presidential election to the democratic vice-president Al Gore.

Arising all that account the party of former presidents, ex-serviceman and former heroes of the war of Vietnam and Gulf, the republicans hammered the topic of national defense.

Of the General to the retirement, controlling allied forces during the war of the Gulf, Norman Schwarzkopf, with the senator John McCain, a former hero of the war of Vietnam, the republicans glorifié the role of the soldiers, and denounced the attenuation of moral of the soldiers.

" As a commander as a head, I will rebuild our national defense and I will reinforce our alliances abroad ", declared Mr. Bush, while expressing myself in front of the delegates by interposed satellite.

If it is elected, the governor texan " will not let America fold up itself behind hollow threats, empty promises and a dubious diplomacy ", affirmed on its side, the senator John McCain, re-entered in the row and who publicly put himself at the service of the governor texan.

" I say to all the Americans, that they are republican, democratic or independent (...), vote for the Bush governor ", affirmed Mr. McCain, unhappy candidate vis-a-vis for Bush in the primary elections.

Among the other speakers appeared the adviser in foreign politics of the governor of Texas, Condoleeza Rice, black American, and Elizabeth Dole, wife of the former senator Bob Dole.

The republicans also paid a homage supported to the former republican presidents, Gerald Ford, George Bush, the father of the governor, and the god of always of the party, Ronald Reagan.

After having lengthily hesitated, Nancy Reagan had finally agreed to take part in republican convention, in spite of the fact that it had to leave in California her 89 year old husband, who suffers from the disease of Alzheimer.

" This country needs somebody who restores the military force of America ", had declared before Mr. Bush by stressing that " moral American army fell on a dangerously low level ".

The speakers were caught some with words covered with the Clinton administration, observing precise instructions, but stigmatized the abusive deployment, according to them, of the American soldiers of share the world.

The bulletins in The Scotsman

Powell challenges Republicans to turn
election slogans into substance
Popular hero tells convention to take real action on racial equality, a call in tune with George Bush
ALSO
Daddy Bush threatens he will fight for his boy

On the World News page we have:

THE former US president, George Bush, has threatened to make this yearÕs presidential election a bitter contest over character by delving into Bill Clinton's legacy of sexual scandal if he continues to attack Mr BushÕs son.

In the clearest indication yet of how much the Republican presidential campaign has become a family affair, Mr Bush, sen, has said he is considering declaring personal warfare on Mr Clinton by telling Americans "what I think about him as a human being and a person".

The extraordinary threat, in an interview with the US cable television channel, MSNBC, comes after Mr Clinton attacked George W Bush, the Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting, as a spoiled rich boy whose "daddy was president".

The Bush family has already come in for barbed comments from Democratic opponents who claim George W's run for president is motivated by a desire for revenge against Mr Clinton for defeating Mr Bush, sen, in the 1992 election.

But until now, the former president has tried to refrain from commenting on Mr Clinton's personal behaviour in office, particularly the sex scandal with the White House intern, Monica Lewinsky.

However, that restraint is now being put to the test by a desire to protect his son. Mr Bush, sen, said he was "tempted to go off the reservation".

He added: "IÕm going to wait a month. If he continues that, IÕm going to tell the nation what I think about him as a human being and person."

The comments which have caused the Bushes so much offence was made by Mr Clinton at a Democratic fund-raiser in Rhode Island last Friday.

In an attack which was more personal than any he has made before, Mr Clinton said: "Near as I can tell, the message of the Bush campaign is just that, ÔI mean how bad could I be? I've been governor of Texas, my daddy was president. I own a baseball team. They like me down thereÕ."

A personal public spat between a former and a sitting president would add a sour input to a campaign at a time when Mr Bush, jun, has been promising to put civility back into American politics.

Although the younger Mr Bush has been restrained in his comments on Mr Clinton, he has made the president's personal character an issue by repeatedly promising to restore "dignity and honour" to the White House.

On the candidateÕs instructions, this weekÕs Republican convention has been notably free of rancorous attacks on Mr Clinton and Vice President Al Gore, the Democratic nominee, in accordance with the event's theme of "a different kind of Republican party".

Although Mr Bush, sen, is not scheduled to speak at the convention, one of the biggest cheers of the opening night on Monday came when the former president and his wife, Barbara, were introduced to delegates from their prominent seats in the guest area of PhiladelphiaÕs First Union Centre.

The former president has tried to remain publicy detached from his sonÕs campaign. However, there are signs that he has played an influential role behind the scenes.

It is widely believed that he actively approved of George WÕs choice of Dick Cheney, Mr Bush, senÕs former defence secretary, as a running mate and even enlisted a surgeon friend to check on Mr CheneyÕs history of heart trouble.

Mr Bush, senÕs brief involvement in the New Hampshire Republican primary campaign last January was perceived to have damaged George W when he referred to his son as "this boy". Mr Bush, jun, lost the primary to John McCain.

By ROBERT TAIT

oh, boy, barbara...things are heating up. thanks for showing these articles...very interesting.

The BBC in London had the most comprehensive page of information on their World News page. The bulletin simply states:

Latest bulletin:
Anti-Republican demo: 100 arrested
US soldier jailed for Kosovo killing

There is also a great article explaining the convention

Barbara---wonderful, really enjoyed reading what they are saying "on the other side"...ha

BTW, sent you an e-mail.

Sun

Barbara: Page 57 in the Heffner edition comes under Chapter on Democratic Social Conditions and sub-Chapter The Sovereignty of the People in America. Sorry, I had started to do that in the quotations listed above and neglected to continue. I will resume that practice. Thank you for bringing that to my attention.

Any other reactions here to the demonstrations in the streets?

Robby

Well, I think the events outside convention hall and the resultant news headlines in the newspapers of other countries high light my concerns as posted here earlier.

Large political conventions attract demonstrations as honey attracts bees. We do not need that many demonstrations in one place at one time. No police force needs that many on their hands at one time. We should stop having one physical convention and start having organized, televised conventions from 50 (or more) places at once. It can be done.

Would just LOVE to comment on and call attention to something the French said, but THAT would be getting political, so I'll behave.

Thanks Robby - appreciate it - gotta run already late.

Robby - Bravo, I found the site. Well I must confess that I am not very interested in politics, even in Canada. I am nevertheless glad I was born and lived in a democratic North America. A de T. had not shed his aristocracy when he wrote about democracy as it took another 100 years after the French revolution for them to cope with democracy. I will read more of his books and try to understand why he is so revered here in N. America.

Must go now, bye for now, Eloïse

Eloise: Glad you found us! Just to clarify -- this not a political forum. At the moment we are discussing conventions in general because this is what America is showing us at the present time. After the convention is over America will present other faces to us and we will not only examine them and comment upon them but will also compare what we see to what deT observed and commented upon when he was there.

Please note in the Heading above that the thoughts of Canadians are welcome here. The key word is "democracy" and Canadians have much to offer us in sharing their democratic experiences.

Robby

Eloise made some interesting statements in her post. "A de T. had not shed his aristocracy when he wrote about democracy as it took another 100 years after the French revolution for them to cope with democracy. I will read more of his books and try to understand why he is so revered here in N. America."

Yes, why are de Tocqueville and this work so revered here in North America? I read on the web that it has become very trendy recently to turn to his Democracy in America when examining democracy in the United States. Why?

Alexis de Tocqueville and Gustave de Beaumont spent nine months in the United States, having come to this country to examine the prison system. Both were from French aristocratic families. De Tocqueville was 25. De Beaumont was 28, young by the standards of today. On the basis of nine months travelling the United States, de Tocqueville wrote Democracy in America. Together they wrote On the Penetentiary System in the United States, and de Beaumont wrote a novel about prejudice against blacks called Marie, or Slavery in the United States.

In my opinion these were two most unlikely people to write about these things with so little time in this country and such a different background from what was here in that day.

It came to my mind yesterday that what is posted in SeniorNet discussions is a far better example of democracy than what I find in de Tocqueville's book. We are representatives of this republic, and what we Americans post reflects democracy in the United States in a very great way. These posts in various discussions have been a most interesting study, for me anyway.

Robby, you asked where I found the quote. Two volumes of Democracy in America can be found on the World Wide Web. That's where I found it, and, unfortunately, there are no page numbers.

Mal

Excerpt from a news analysis:--

"The thought of 'do no harm' more than anything has drained all of the drama and much of the meaning from modern political conventions. No surprises are wanted these days. No sore losers. No floor fights. So long, eccentricity. Farewell, spontaneity. Hello, choreography. Partisans have been reading the polls and reflecting on the past. They are confronted with the uncomfortable finding that Americans, a few of whom may actually be watching on television, hate partisanship and discord.

"Perhaps it is because most people are happy with their lot, with the economy and with the course of the ship of state. Hard times pose hard questions, and those questions get thrashed out not only in campaigns but also in the conventions preceding them. This year, though, it is pablum for breakfast, lunch and dinner."

Any reactions?

Robby

Not all people in the United States are happy with their lot. For them, pablum is not enough food for their minds or bodies, thus protests. I predict there will be more.

Mal

Do the rest of you see continued protests? And if so, is that OK with you? Is that part of being a democracy?

Robby

de Touc tells us " It is important to realize that since there's no link binding the inhabitatnts of democracies to each other ,each man has to be convinced seperately whereas in aristocracies it's enough to influence the views of certain individuals and the rest will follow."

With this thought in mind, the protests will continue.

Well, I "see" continued protests only because, as I understand it, they've been planned for some time for both conventions.

Civil protest is, I'm sorry to say, sometimes the only way to capture the attention of the legislature and administration. An example---having been ignored for years, people in wheelchairs finally began to block buildings and transportation systems that they could not access. It was quite a sight some 12 (?) years ago to see the frustration of those "mobile" people who viewed the every-day activity of entering a building as their "right"---being blocked by people who ALSO wanted the same right to enter the building. What had been only an invisible issue of invisible people all of a sudden had immediate visual understanding. Rumor has it that Barbara Bush was deeply moved by the sight of invisible people being so visible in their requests. A few years later, President Bush signed Americans with Disibilities Act (ADA) into law, reportedly the most sweeping civil rights law ever passed.

Today's demonstrations on the inadequacies of health care (I'm not stating my views one way or the other) are timely, given the current discussions of medicare improvements.

One personal feeling about a specific demonstration---I just learned that all but one Medicare HMO will be leaving Texas at the end of December. The one left is a joke---awful coverage. This news is so unsettling to me (may have to move out of state to get adequate care--moving to me is worse than death)----anyway, you'll forgive a personal wish to be (at least in spirit) in the mad-at-HMOs demonstrations.

I know, I know.

If demonstrations are a legal way for citizens in a democracy to "speak," then where is the dividing line?

Robby

When I said I predict there will be more protests, I wasn't referring to the political conventions. There has been an era of complacency among the "haves". This inevitably leads to an era of unrest, protests and demonstration by the "have nots".

In a rather eerie way, I see a real similarity between this time and that before intense demonstrating began in the sixties, this time without a war to trigger it off. There is just too much inequity in this country of ours. Betty pointed out only one example in her post.

Mal

Robby---The line is somewhere to this side of injuring others, damaging property and inciting to riot.

There is a long history of protest and civil disobedience in America & the citizenry must be ever vigilant about our First Amendment rights.

The line is crossed when violence and vandalism happen. During the first day of protests in Phila the protestors were virtually ignored,because of the peaceful nature of their march. It seems,to me, that the only way the protestors can get any attention is by causing disruption,violence and vandalism. Of course,if the protestors had to go out & work & support a family,their protests might take a more positive vein.

Will there be more protests? Absolutely..but,for me, the best protest is to be found at the polls. The thing that Congress really cannot abide is an educated citizenry that knows how to vote.

DeToc focuses a lot on the individual and this individulaism served as an omen for De Toc in expressing the vitality of American Democracy.

In message #128, Robby wrote:

The demonstrators are advocating a variety of causes, including opposition to corporate influence over politics, support for environmental protection, gay and lesbian rights and freedom for Mumis Abu-Jamal, who was sentenced to death in the killing of a Philadelphia police officer.

Do the above acts make you feel ashamed of America or are they in the spirit of democracy?

I suppose that the demonstrators should be judged from the purpose and effect of their demonstration. So long as they are presenting their view on a subject they are exercising their rights under the constitution. In this capacity they deserve the full protection of the law. It is only when their demonstration is intended to deny the constitutional rights of others that the actions passes from the exercise of political rights to the commission of a criminal act.

In Philadelphia on Sunday and Monday as I read the news reports the demonstrations were orderly and did not deny Convention delegates access to their Convention Hall or otherwise deny the Convention Delegates the right to do the business they came to do.. Under such conditions, no arrests were made. On Tuesday, however, the protests took on a new character designed to block the streets and keep delegates from the hall. Under such conditions the police had no choice but to clear the streets and arrests were made. So far I think we have cause to be proud of the way our system is working. (Knock on wood!)

There have been many protests in the earlier history of our nation. One that is in my mind is the Whiskey Rebellion (I believe in Pennsylvania). And could that event with John Brown at Harper's Ferry be called a protest?

What other ones are in your mind? And did any of them ultimately benefit our country?

Robby

I would not characterize either the Whiskey Rebellion or the John Brown raid on the Federal arsenal at Harper's Ferry as a protest. I think both were at lest a stage beyond the protest level quite close to armed rebellion status. I think this was particularly true with the Harpers Ferry raid. It had all the earmarks of a military operation against the Federal Government (albeit for a good cause).

I also think the Whiskey Rebellion (was it 1796) too was close to rebellion. It caught most of the regular army away on an Indian campaign in Ohio. The settlers in the Northwestern Virginia (now West Virginia) and Southwestern Pennsylvania rebelled against the tax on their only income, i.e. corn whiskey. The old revolutionary slogans were again brought out. As for example "No taxation without representation" became "No Taxation.(period). Washington called out the reserves but at the last minute tempers cooled and a major revolution was avoided.

One of my ancestors owned a gristmill and distillery in Washington County PA at the time. His economic interests certainly lay with the rebels, and we note that he sold the mill and distillery about a year after the rebellion perhaps indicating his continued discust with the tax. Stephen Ambrose gives a good short historical sketch of the event in his recent biography of Lewis who as a young man saw his first active duty when a Virginia reserve unit was Federalized.

Malryn, it is such a tragedy that you weren't available then to persuade my English prof in college that de T wasn't worth the trouble to impose on us frosh the requirement of writing term paper based on D in A. Alas, however, I must come down on his side. Much the larger chunk of the Enlightenment was French, and you will note in ch.9 pt II that De T says he has included it throughout his work. The fact that he was an aristocrat explains his education, and no one any less equipped could have written it. That he was aware, and quite acutely so, that men who couldn't quote a word of Rousseau had put much of his plan into action in America--to me there is no doubt. He envies us our working democracy, and it seems impossible that he could have any other effect in France than to assuage the fears many still harbored of political control by the masses, still a frightening concept among many Europeans at that time.

Henry, chacun à son gout. There were a lot of things I was made to study in college that in retrospect I think were a colossal waste of time.

Mal

Henry another piece of information that I think adds to deTocqueville's work is that he met with many very influential people while visiting and had access to nearly all State and Federal papers. I do not know where I read that he met many times with Livingston, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independance. Not only did he have access to this wonderful written material but I understand he arranged access to research material and spent time in Britian as well.

The advantage to his book I think is that we could read many a history or political science book written during this era by an American that would be parochial in comparisson since this book gives us examples of the difference in democracy here versus England, first hand knowledge of France and compares it to European autocratic governments as well. Any errors were corrected over the years, the last set corrected in the late 1950s.

I think his 9 months here were spent with resources the average historian would have difficulty obtaining to this degree not having letters of introduction that his status allowed.

Yes maryal, I agree what we share here in this discussion is a valuable part of the democratic process but this system called democracy I do believe is like th preverbial elephant being cleaned by many blind men who can only discribe the elephant through their experience with that part of the elephant they are cleaning. deTocqueville simply gives us another observation that I believe is more researched with the added value of actually visiting with at least one founding father.

Barbara: If enough of the blind men cleaning the elephant get together and talk about their part of the elephant, they just might be able to get an idea of what the whole beast looks like. Assuming they are thinking individuals.

Henry: A powerful statement -- "Men who couldn't quote a word of Rousseau had put much of his plan into action in America." How could this be? What was there about these unlettered men that enabled (or caused) this to take place?

Robby

religious persecution might have sharpened their instincts.

Fairwinds: An interesting concept. Would you please expand on that?

Robby

In line with deT's first quote above, do you see the delegates at the current convention assimilated to all the rest and lost in the crowd?

Robby

well...many of the early settlers came from england in order to worship "according to the dictates of their own conscience." it therefore seems reasonable that they would organize their civil laws with that in mind. i believe de toqueville pointed out the inconsistency in these same people saying that everyone HAD to worship...and, the naughty ones were locked in the stocks in the middle of town to be publicly ridiculed.

does the convention theme "compassionate conservatism" sound like an oxymoron to anyone else?

bonne nuit.

(yes, but i can't say so here. we are trying to be apolitical)

woops. thanks for the reminder, mary page. i haven't been able to see the convention except short sound bytes on cnn. it's just as well since my house guests probably wouldn't appreciate my being glued to the television.

Robby, I agree the delegates and all of us are "lost in the crowd" - (how can it be otherwise when we have 250 million population - I wonder what the population was when Tockie came over) but we have one exceptional voice - each of us - one voice, one vote.

Fairwinds: It is so difficult, isn't it, to speak of a political event and not give vent to our personal political views? I'm sure all of you realize that if we did, in a split second (or less?) we'd be off and running. Yet let us give thanks that those of us in the "twilight of our years" (ha!) are so vital that we need to be courteously asked to "cool it" rather than having to be asked to get up and show some signs of life!!

We are each day flowing down this mainstream of America observing and commenting. In a couple of days America will present to us another face. August is usually called "back to school" month and deTocqueville had much to say about education. I would bet the gang here will have a lot to say about education in America!!

Robby

I must say Robby that becoming more and more adapt at performing on TV and using its value as an entertainment medium, along with the changes that the primaries brought about-- this convention reminded me of a long infermmercial or a large casting call. Few, except for Laura Bush, spoke as if they were spinning a dream and wanting us to hook our star to their dream. They all sounded like they were in combat and winning the election seemed more important than gaining the presidency.

I'm glad I read that sentence about flattery in DofA because that was how I viewed so much of the entertainment provided. Most of it just didn't fit the statistics of the party and appeared to by trying to flatter folks so they would join the party-party.

Well is it next week or the week after we will have the other dog and pony show to view.

For a clearer notion of Tocqueville's views on how democracy took root in America, check section 6 in Prt II "Idea of Rights in U. S." To paraphrase loosely, he does not know what the magic bullet is either. One reason it's hard to find out is that Americans don't compare or contrast their measure of democracy with any other people. Frankly they don't much care. The American "uncomplainingly obeys the lowest of his officials;" and he does not "attack political rights of others in order that his own may not be violated." Elsewhere (he must have predated Emerson, Thoreau, and certainly Whitman) he says we have no literature and not a single poet. We aren't long on high flown theory but we know how to exercise our rights, what they are, what officials apply to which ones--that's what Tocqueville saw here back then. I would say today that there are plenty of democracies where that simple basic element just isn't there, and nobody has any better idea how to bring it into existence than Tocqueville did then. We were lucky and we still are. In this same section, he goes on to say that, wherever he hears that tyranny is strong and the people turbulent, ever more urgent is the need there to democratize as soon as possible. I think this passage covers his motives rather well.

Oops, I fell over into no-persons land, but my toe is still touching the fence....

And while I'm here....just an observation. (Fits into "assimilation" question, stretch...stretch.) Less than 4 percent of this week's convention's delegates are other than Anglo/white. The last convention with this few Blacks (for example) was 90 years ago.

I'm sure the next convention will try to outdo this week's with a predominantly ethnic "entertainment." There's something unsettling about both conventions showcasing representatives of groups whose votes are needed.

If the democratic, Al Gore does not do better then Bush tonight I will be expecting a independed or some one to beat them both as he spoke of what he intended to do but has not told us how he will do it. I am very dissapointed tonight. I am a Christian but I vote for the person and how he will do what he state's he will do.

Ginger

Are you finding (as deT says above) that each political aspirant is beginning by discerning his own interests, contiving to find some doctrine which suits the purposes of his association, and then adopting it to bring forward his party?

Robby

Robby, Yes Bush is holding with his party and not the general public. He is saying nothing as to what will make the American dream continue as a prospersers country for all Americans.

Al Gore must do better or we need a better party my personal opion.

W.C. Fields said that Philadelphia, if nothing else, offers preferable shelter to the grave. Has the city shown a renaissance? 45,000 delegates, political attendants and news media from around the world came to see for themselves whether the city now gleamed. The First Union Center was transformed from a high-tech sports arena to a first-class political hall. Electrical workers snaked miles of fiber-optic cables into the sky boxes of the news media. Each delegate received a Barbie doll in red suit and red heels. Handsome new green bus kiosks were drilled into place for visitors. The buildings became aglow in added hues of red, white and blue. 4,500 new hotel rooms were furiously built in the last four years.

Do you see the convention as a theater production producing a command performance for the nation or is it much more serious than that? Is this what our Founders visualized?

Robby

Robby, no, this is not what our Founders visualized. It's the plastic, hard sell "American dream".

Mal

Robby. Barbie doll in red suit and red heels, I think is not what our Founders visualized, to me all of this is sick and showing a sick country, OURS, What to do about it, me thinks find a better person to lead our country who is honest and sincere about being a leader for our country and a spokesman for other nations.

UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FAlLall of this does not look good to me as I see to much divension, Have we come from being a divided nation. Then to being a Nation of coming together as the depresion and World War two brought us together to being a divided nation again, It does look like it?

Ginger

A bit of levity. I laughed so hard when this happened and have had a smile on my face since. Has to do with the Republican party trying to seem "cool," up to date, young.

The last live performer at the Republican convention tonight, just minutes after George W. spoke, was Chaka Kahn (pronounced all at once--like: shakacon). Her wonderful hits of the late 70s and 80s have not faded, but like Gladys Knight, Stevie Wonder, and others, have been discovered now by younger audiences. The invisible MC's big booming voice came on the sound system to announce the last performer: and NOW, we welcome the WONDERFUL (big dramatic pause) CHAKA (bigger dramatic pause) KAHN!!!

deTocqueville visited the United States and saw everywhere (see quote above) that the interests of the nation are an object of solicitude to the people of the whole Union.

A political convention has just come to an end. The media of our nation broadcast it to the far reaches of not only our nation but to the world. Do you believe that the majority of Americans, whether they followed the convention or not, care greatly about the interests of our nation? Or are most citizens apathetic?

Robby

Robby, it's probably a mixture of high, medium and low interest. Those who feel they are benefiting from the stable economics may feel less anxious about the elections, somewhat less interested. The fact that the two candidates are rather mild with criticisms of the other---that, too, may equal less interest (or less excitment). People who feel anxious about their financial status, health care status, or who feel there are high political risks that come with one of the candidates (environment, abortion, etc. with Bush; no tax cuts, increasing Medicare costs, not enough focus on military needs with Gore)---those people are probably very interested.

I can only speak to my waxing and waning interests (larger population interests would be hard to gage without some legitimate numbers). If there is an overall theme to my level of interest in any given year, it would have to be---what is the level of danger if the "other" candidate wins. Many years, both candidates looked so disappointing that I was terribly uneasy. This year, I'm truly worried about prescription drug coverage and the stability of Roe v Wade. But, unlike other years, the "danger" level of Bush isn't as alarming to me as Republican candidates of other years. I remember feeling somewhat the same about his father. So, maybe it's a wash. That puts my interest in a high-interest-but-not-frantic category.

I think most Americans worry first about their own little corner of the world... and as long as they have a job and things are going ok, and the country is not at war and/or not in a recession/depression, Americans as a whole don't worry about the "national" scene.

š ...jane›

From Wired News.

"A group of college students and recent graduates will board their own campaign bus on Monday to create an interactive documentary that they hope will cut through what they perceive as biased and superficial reporting of politics by the mainstream media.

"Beginning in Camden, Maine and finishing in Washington, they'll produce a 'non-linear Web documentary' that in its final form will function as a database of political perspectives in audio, video, and text formats. Everyone from prison inmates to residents of Indian reservations will be heard."

There will be 32 stops across the United States, and the group will use the bus's computer server to update the site as they go. They will explore why people hold the beliefs they do, as well as how demographic characteristics including race, class, and geography play out in their politics.

Some people are not apathetic about what's going on this country.

As we slowly float down this mainstream of America, the sights and sounds of the recent convention gradually fade into the distance. But America does not stop showing its face. As Jane says: "Most Americans worry first about their own little corner of the world." And in a very large segment of the populace, families have been talking about "going back to school" rather than discussing the convention.

But these are young parents, aren't they? Do we as Seniors care what is on their minds? As we continue to examine America, is the educational system in this nation of any importance to us? We've "been there; done that."

de Tocqueville (see quotes above) correlates "public education" with the "character of American civilization." Is our current educational system reflecting who and what we are? Is this a face we are pleased to show to the world?

Robby

I think the tone of the last 15 or so message reflects the disillusionment with politics of the American people generally. During the previous 3 days in contrast the messages showed a measure of enthusiasm probably indicating we were pretty well caught up in the hoopla and propaganda of the show. When the show ends we go home and our sense or reality returns as we realize that as in de T’s day political parties will say and promise what they think is necessary to win. When they have no solution to the pending problems, when there is in fact no practical or workable solution, they will simply say, they will provide the solutions. We will see the same show with many promises of un-specifeid solutions from a different perspective the week after next.

Re:Is our current educational system reflecting who and what we are? Is this a face we are pleased to show to the world? I think our educational system reflects exactly who and what we are...and that is a confused, perhaps divided, country.

[Examples:We want freedom of expression for all, but we want discipline and courtesy. We want our children to be "thinkers," but we're appalled when the basics of rote memorization...multiplication tables, names of the states, etc. are lacking. Should people be able to count back change if they're a cashier...or is it better they understand base 15 and base 20, or should they know both or do they know neither? We have the Creation vs Evolution vs Both "theories" controversies, etc.] It seems as if a community cannot reach consensus on what it expects the schools to do, and our educational system reflects that.

š ...jane›

Jane, what a thoughtful post to start us off discussing education. I'll add to your list of ambiguities.

Should we speak only English in U.S. classrooms or have bi-lingual education? Should we prepare students for college or for the work world? Should our schools provide sex education, condoms? Are our schools accessible to those who have physical or developmental limitations? Should our teachers be formally accountable? Should schools give up all expensive extracurricular programs?

Why, if we profess to value education, are teachers so underpaid? How do we provide violence-free and drug-free school environments?

And the big one, in my view---how do we equalize the resources among schools. There are many, many schools who do not have up-to-date history books--some 10 years old. In the same city might be a school with a multimillion dollar new auditorium, 3 marching bands with new uniforms and brand new history books for each grade.

My first career was teaching high school. That was some time ago, but I still follow the challenges/problems/triumphs in education with personal interest. I wish we would fund education at the same level we profess its importance.

Betty's words about underpaid teachers and old text books is true.

Have you seen the wonderful Staples commercial (I have No stock or ownership or relationship with that company) that shows the young couple struggling over their budget, and yet she is spending a lot on supplies for the students in her classroom?

Well, it is all true! That is the way it is! I have 2 daughters who teach. They do it for the love of it, and could not afford to do it if they had to earn a living. Their husbands consider their teaching wages small change!

MaryPage--I love that ad, but I think it is Office Depot, not Staples. I particularly like the last scene where the teacher looks across several registers and sees her husband ALSO buying supplies for her students.

Maryal

I TOLD you I had no ties to that commercial!

MaryPage-----hehehehehehehe. Guess you don't!

Ninety percent of the nation's school-aged children - more than 46 million students - attend public schools.

According to the National Education Association, public school enrollment has increased significantly, and per pupil education spending and teacher salaries have remained stagnant over the past decade. They say that spending on elementary and secondary education is simply not keeping up with the growing need for a well-educated work force.

How does this fit in with deT's comment that "the interests of the country are an object of solicitude to the people of the whole Union.?"

Robby

It seems as if a community cannot reach consensus on what it expects the schools to do, and our educational system reflects that.

š ...jane›

Since so many of you have family that teach and seem to know the educational system so well, I've got a question about the above statment. Just what imput does the community have in what is taught? Isn't it true that the government, either Federal or State mostly dictates what is taught in the government educational system? If so, then what the educational system shows about us is just how far government control has gone.

And as I was reading the past post, I noticed that the Founding Fathers were depicted as just normal politicians. But I disagree. Most of these men were wealthy men. They could have lived under bondage to England very well. They could have lived a life of ease, with none of the King's tyranny touching them all that much. But instead, they laid everything they had on the line for freedom, not knowing what the outcome would be. And many of these men, even though the colonies were fortunate enough to win the war, still lost their lives, and/or their fortunes.

While FDR, Chruchill, & DeGaule were indeed great men that showed up at a time when great men were needed and certainly are worthy to be compared to the Founding Fathers, they and ever other politician I know fall far short of the FF. No generation has suffered as much for freedom or sacrificed so much as them. And there's indication they knew their sacrifice was great.

"Posterity - you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it" (John Quincy Adams.)

DeT certainly was observant in the most part. However, I would have to wonder about his statments concerning education. The ideal he printed that seem to imply that higher education was not available. One has to wonder if he observed Harvard, which had been in place for 202 years at the time he was there. Yale had been there 129 years; Princton 84 years; Dartmouth 76 years; William and Mary, Columbia, Queens College(known today as Rutgers U.), Brown, U. of Penn.

At DeT time of observance and I think he rightly points this out, most all could read and write. And I would think a higher percentage could read and write at that time than can at present. Even on the frontier, parents believing education was important seen to it that their children could read and write. They knew the importance of education much more than we do today.

"All who have meidtated on the art of governing mankind are convinced that the fate of empires depends on the education of youth" (Aristotle)

I would only insert into Aristotles quote the word 'proper' in front of education. At DeT's time of visitation, he observed that parents took it upon themselves to see that their children were educated; while today, the parents take no active role, and leave it all up to others.

Don:

A well-thought out posting. Thank you! I am sure many others will react to your comments.

Robby

Don: No, in Iowa at least, I do not know of anything that is required by the federal government to be taught in the schools. There is really far less federal money spent for the schools than most people think. They are, I believe, mostly involved in things like the School Lunch Program and in Special Education and the laws dealing with children to be served and from what ages, etc. and that they have a free and appropriate education. There are also some laws about equal opportunity...Title IX for equal opportunities in sports for girls and boys, etc. Most of the tax dollars our schools get come from state funding and from local property taxes and possibly optional taxes...like an instructional levy that citizens can vote for. Other states do things differently...and even operating funds must be voted upon.

In Iowa the number of days of school, the number of hours classes must meet, etc. are set...and there are some other rules, but there is no State curriculum that must be followed in this state. That may not be true in other states. We do not have state competency testing as other states do because of the belief that how and what schools do is a local matter.

I think if you looked at the educational system carefully, you'd find that's a misnomer. It should be educational systems for there are as many different ones as there are school districts, it seems. What is done in one state may be totally different from how things are done elsewhere.

š ...jane›

Jane and all, Why do the county, state and especially local property taxes have to be so much for schools when we were told that the Lottery money would help support the schools. Just where is the peoples money who play the Lottery going?

Ginger

I think Jane is right about Federal money for schools. The Fed. Gov. has no role in curriculum that I know of. Monies are supplied for Title I aides in overcrowded classrooms, for example.

Here in Maryland, the schools are run by county, and there are some county-wide requirements. We have local school boards.

Maryal

I often wonder also where the lottery money goes - hmmm never thought to get an accounting.

Great post Don and from your prespective of the founding fathers putting their life on the line you do make a compelling argument for their contribution.

I think the national system that provides schools with a 'status' and visit to DC to obtain their 'blue ribbon' is some of the encouragement used to have more schools adhere to an excellance as outlined by the Federal Government. I do not know where balance in school enrollment as to race fits into the picture because I do remember the solutions were hammered out in the Federal Courts with Independent School Districts.

I remember reading that as late as 1939 only 5% of the population went on to higher education and I believe it was only in the 1930s that a law was passed requiring children stay in school till they were 16. I know in my father's generation more boys were working to help support their family after only 4 to 6 years of education then there were boys that even finished grade school.

Children missed a lot of school up through WWII between being ill for days with many illness that had no antibiotic treatment available and few preventive shots or vaccinations, there were the weeks that crops were brought-in, wash days that girls either helped or minded the little ones so the woman could get it done, canning season ment girls again missed school, round-up ment missed school and sometimes planting ment missed school.Child labor was a problem even when I was young and I had to get a permit to work summers, which I did to help earn my school tuition since I went to Catholic High.

And yet our nations children had free education available. I think it is just in recent years that British children attend school beyond the age of 14 or maybe it was 16. As I recall, unless they were able to attend collage or were tested bright enought to be accepted in collage their formal education ended at the younger age when they went into some trade often as an apprentice. I believe this is still true in Germany but I do not know about France.

Aha found this link that gives us some clue to what some London children were doing about their schooling in the mid to late ninteenth century.

In 1868 Thomas Barnardo started a ragged school at Hope Place, Limehouse. Ragged schools were free schools for poor children.

The pupils' plight prompted Barnardo to open his first home for homeless boys in 1870 at Stepney Causeway. This charity cared for children regardless of their age, faith, colour or disabilities which was very unusual at the time. Between 1880 and 1900 children from China, the West Indies, Africa, India and America were cared for.

By 1875, Hope Place and another ragged school he had opened were condemned due to overcrowding so he needed to rent larger buildings. This link goes to a page speaking to the programme in the ragged school.

Found this site of the history of the start of community schools in New Jersey in 1829. It goes on to say during the colonial period schools were mostly church supported.

Ok it looks like grammer schools in England were funded as early as 1551 according to this article I found. Early British Grammer Schools

Hehehe it seems the Rev. Andrew Burnaby, of the Church of England, traveled to the US in the mid eighteenth century especially looking at schools, literature and theater and differently then deTocqueville, compares all very dis-favorably to England. His slim book was published again in 1812 as a travel book.

Barbara:

Your link to the story of the Rev. Burnaby of England, who traveled the U.S. and had comments to make about American education, and how his reaction was different from that of deTocqueville, may help us to understand why we are not just "reviewing" deT's book but are also examining America as we see it - "the eye of the beholder." Plus the fact that there are many aspects of education (which part of the elephant) that can be examined.

For example -- The National Education Association notes that the percentage of men teaching in the nation's public schools continues a gradual decline that has been underway for the past decade. At the same time it notes that the states with the highest salries tend to have the highest proportion of male teachers.

Robby

Jane speaks of "many" educational systems due to the fact that schools are operated by local school districts.

Today's news tells us that national education groups and library advocates are claiming a federal proposal that would require the installation of filtering software on school and library computers connected to the Internet would be "members of Congress dictating local policy."

Librarians and educators claim the law undermines the efforts of local school boards and library groups. Says the National School Boards Association: "Many schools are ahead of the curve on developing acceptable use policies and using filtering."

In many nations, education is handled on a national basis. What is your opinion of the American way?

Robby

Our Federal Government does not choose or direct any of the subject matter taught in any of our schools.

For the most part, this is strictly Local. Local school boards. In some areas, the State chooses the textbooks and/or sets up standardized tests.

Local parents have Everything to do with what is taught. They elect the school boards. They appear before them in hearings to argue on one side or another as to what should be taught.

Actually, it is my point of view that a vocal minority has attempted to censor what our children are learning, even to the point of removing classics I and my parents were taught, and that this minority have been responsible for the "dumbing down" of our curriculum.

Ginger: In Iowa Lottery money does NOT go for schools...it's all for Economic Development. Other states may use their lottery funds differently.

MaryPage: You've summed up beautifully my feelings too. Some parents want the tough things taught....but only if their children "will be guaranteed to get A's...and without having to work too hard, please." Grade inflation and a poor work ethic go hand in hand, I think, to this "dumbing down" thing...and too many kids with jobs that are considered more important than their studying.

š ...jane›

Robby: I prefer the local authority way. It's bad enough this way; if it's decided in Washington...good grief! I think we must also remember that many nations are the size of our individual states, so they do not have the great distances and diversity of "neighborhoods" we have in the US.

š ...jane›

My 15 year old grandson will be going back to high school as a sophomore on the 14th. He's been studying European history for the past two weeks for an assignment given to him before school closed last June.

He's very bright and is in some special classes for people like him with other classes that are not accelerated. This is required so there will not be a segregation according to intelligence. Sometimes I think the demands put on the students in the special classes is extreme. There's not much time for "play".

There are many state requirements here in NC which students must fulfill, by the way. North Carolina education standards have improved tremendously since I lived here in the late fifties and my elder son started school. There's been a remarkable change in this area, perhaps because of the Research Triangle Park and the influx of people from all over the country who work and do research there. The RTP was not in existence when I lived here in the fifties.

It is my own personal opinion that parents have too many fingers in this education pie, here anyway. I feel extremely sorry for teachers who must contend with this.

Mal

Mal believes that "too many parents have their fingers in the education pie." DeT says (quote above) that in the "United States the interests of the country are everywhere kept in view. They are an object of solicitude to the people of the whole Union."

Should parents keep their fingers out of the education pie?

Robby

No, but it is an unfortunate truth that it is the ones who feel they have a grievance who speak up and demand things from the school boards.

In short, I feel it is a minority of parents who are guiding the way the schools are going. This is not right either. For just the few years their children are in the public school system, ALL parents should make the schools a main focus for their attention and concern. They do, as they should, have a Big Say; they just are not utilizing their power and are allowing a small handful of opinions to govern the system.

I think that unfortunately SO much is expected from the schools today. Are overworked teachers supposed to be the sole monitors of proper social behavior, decent clothing, moral values? What happened to the lessons learned in the home? It seems that some parents have abdicated their responsibilites as parents. I emphasize the word "some". I don't wish to use a sweeping generalization. Not all parents--just some--perhaps too many.

Phyll

"Object of solicitude." Robby, you've asked the question with these words several times. I'm not sure I understand the statement, therefore, I'm at a loss for an answer to your question.

Betty: To answer your question -- as you know, in this forum we continually relate what we see happening in our current America to deT's comments about what he saw. His terminology (or the translator's if you wish) as seen in the quotation above is the type of language deT uses. I interpret his sentence to be, in effect, that he found that the people of the United States pay attention to what is happening across the nation and care about these happenings. He is comparing the people of this democracy with the people of France, for example, where, in his time, the populace cared only about their little corner.

On the other hand, Jane suggested in a previous posting that even here the majority of people are concentrating more on their own little corner rather than what is going on in the nation as a whole.

This is, in my opinion, relevant to the topic of education. Do the majority of Americans care about education across the nation as a whole or do they "care" only about their own school district? And, if they are not young parents, do they even care about their own school district?

Robby

As a bit of side information on the local schools question, it's been noted that when people are surveyed about schools, they almost always rank their own higher than they rank others. Is it because they're better informed about their own? Is it because they're hearing all negatives about others, but don't believe it of their own? Or??

I think, too, in this day and age we're all obviously more aware of what is going on in other parts of the nation and the world than ever before. I think that some people believe everything they read or see/hear on TV, while others of us are a little more ...uh...sceptical/cynical...and wonder if we're hearing the "whole" story...which always seems to be something controversial or negative...which is why it's "news." By the time we've reached our "mature" status as Seniors, we're aware there are always at least two sides to every story...and sometimes many more, it seems.

š ...jane›

It is my belief that the more interested and involved the parents are, the better their understanding of the education system is. This keeps everyone on an even keel; the kids, the parents and the educators.

It's also interesting, Jane, that a similar survey showed that a significant number of people did not like the work Congress was doing but thought their own Congressperson was doing real fine!!

Robby

I admire the parents that are teaching there children at home as the children in our area are learning much more. The parents are buying computers and this helps. There children are protected from the violence that is going on in the schools today. Some of the children who are afraid of the violence are forced to go to public.

Ginger

Virginia, it is my belief that those parents that are teaching their children at home would not have done that if they lived in America at the time DeT made his visit. The entire Ivy League and other colleges that were present at the time were all started and supported by Churches, with the exception of the U. of Penn. Government would not get involved in education until decades latter. In fact, state schools did not become in total control of education until over 70 years after DeT made his visit.

Other social things were going on in America in 1830. The "Great Awakening" had occurred before the Revolutionary War, and the 'lightining rod' for that revival was George Whitfield, the boy preacher. Whitefield had raised money for orphanages that had now been constructed in Ga. and other places. Whitefield was now dead, but another minister, Charles G. Finney was active. In 1830 lawyer Charles G. Finney preached for 6 months at Rochester, and saw 100,000 souls make a profession of faith in Jesus Christ. It is estimated that the preaching of Finney, who founded Oberlin College in Ohio and served as its first president, influenced change in one half million lives.

So, it could be said that education was totally controlled by the churchs during his visit.

Today, we find an entirely different school system than existed in 1830. Most of the time parents teach their children at home, not so much because they feel they are in danger at the schools, but because the schools teach certain principles that are the polar opposite of what the parents and their church teach their children. So, believing that the parents are responsible for their children's education, and seeing that the school system is totally intolerant and even hostile toward any religious beliefs, the parents have no where to turn, but to themselves.

Our public/government education system is number 21 in the world. At one time it was number 1. With the methods in place, the systems are not keeping up. This has caused employers to look for two kinds of employees from other countries. They have to turn to immigration to find people who will do the 'down-and-dirty' jobs and they also look for people to do the 'high-tech' jobs. Our educational system is mediocre and puts out a product that is mediocre that fills the middle jobs. Too proud to do the down-and-dirty jobs and not smart enough to do the high-tech jobs. I wish it wasn't my view, but it is and I think I have ample reasons to make this statement. 'Our public/government educational system (K-12) compares favorably to the Titanic at the moment of it's demise, they are both sinking into oblivion and they both have bands playing'.

An Interesting social history of colonial times is Stephanie Wolf, “As Various As Their Land,” Harper Perennial, 1993. This book includes considerable discussion on education during the 17th and particularly the 18th century. It outlines education at a time when formal schooling was minimal, either home schooling by parents or a few years in a private school usually a home business of a particular professor. Typically this was available only for the rich. Stephen Ambrose in his 1996 biography of Lewis describes the year or so that Lewis spent in such a school in the late 1780’s.

The Wolf book notes that most Americans in the 18th century received as much home instructions as their parents were capable of giving and inclined to give. Very often children were apprenticed to learn a trade or profession. Even Law and Medicine credentials were obtained in this manner. Most of the students at the several colleges and Universities were there to study for the Ministry or perhaps for teaching careers. Only a few went for the natural and physical sciences.

I think as de T indicates by 1827 some sort of public schooling was becoming available to many American Children. Even so home instruction and the apprentice system was still the way most young Americans learned and acquired the skills and knowledge required to earn their living.

Two personal observations: I have a picture of my maternal grandfather and his elementary school class in Springfield Illinois about 1876. This I understand was a free public elementary school and the dress and appearance of many did not indicate a privileged social position. I do not know how longs he attended public school but there are indications he later took business courses (about 1890) at a business school in Kansas City. My Mother had the school catalog showing courses like accounting and general business like courses.

On my paternal side one of my grandfather’s brothers in the late 1880’s attended college and received a degree. He became a teacher and public school principal in San Antonio. I suppose of the next generation there were 25 first cousins with only 3 or 4 going to college. They became teachers even one who graduated from Texas A & M. with an engineering degree about 1920 became a teacher and later a principal and administrator. The idea of near universal college education did not really become vogue until the post WWII period.

Don: I appreciate your postings but I would suggest it would help if you gave some statistics to back up your comments. For example, you say that "most of the time parents teach their children at home." I question this statement but am open to your giving specific figures to back up your term "most of the time." You also say "the schools teach certain principles which are the polar opposite of what their parents and their church teach?" Which specific schools are you referring to? Which denominations are you referring to? To what specific principles are you referring?

As we examine the American educational system, any of us can find ourselves making general comments which have no statistical backing. We could, of course, add the phrase that this is merely our own opinion and, in that case, no figures are needed.

Robby

The decline in education is symptomatic of the general decline of American society.

I find nothing wrong in teaching social skills,manners,respect for property in addition to subject matter.

I guess that public education was supposed to provide for an educated citizenry,but I see a lot of functional illiterates,who have not a clue about their potential.

I think DeToc was trying to show that public education would empower America and thereby enhance our political system.

Accoding to the National Center for Education Statistics, this Fall approx 53 million students (both public and private) will be enrolled in grades K-12 and in six years this is expected to increase to 54.5 million. At that time it will start a slow descent. According to the U.S. Department of Education, the number of homeschoolers is approx one million.

Following comments in previous quotes, the federal government has no direct role in public education although it may exercise a great deal of influence through its ability to fund various activities. Further, the Constitution, as interpreted by the federal courts, is a powerful force in influencing -- even determining -- local school policy. This has most especially been the case in regards to racial desegregation and federal polcicies with regard to poverty, civil rights, and the exercise of religion in public schools.

Ed says that "public education was supposed to provide for an educated citizenry" but he sees "a lot of functional illiterates." de Tocqueville says "I know of no people who have established schools so numerous..."

What's going on here?

Robby

I have a problem with the quote that the public schools are teaching things that are a polar OPPOSITE of what the parents teach!

I cannot imagine such a scenario, unless the parents are part of a hate group. The public schools do insist on equality for all.

MaryPage: Would you give some examples, please, where "public schools insist on equality?"

Robby

It is the law of the land, Robby.

Everyone is to have equal access to the school rooms, teachers, textbooks, activities, etc. Equal everything, regardless of race, etc.

The hate groups, according to the news features on them, are for an all white portion of the U.S., relegating all others to a set aside portion for the "lesser" races!

I find it unbelievable, but apparently it is true that there are people who believe this.

In my part of North Carolina, there are Charter Schools along with public schools. I know kids who go to Charter Schools, and I also have met their parents. Parents have a great deal to say with what goes on in Charter Schools, it seems to me, and I also noticed that many of the students were kids who didn't do well in public high school. Some of the charter schools had no school house so the kids went to school in store in a plaza. Some have had serious financial problems.

There is a large population of African Americans in my area. After integration private church-run schools began to spring up. Because my ex-son-in-law has a business teaching computer to preschool and early grade children in church-run private schools, I heard a great deal about these schools. There is one where he taught in Raleigh that is an all-black school. There are all-white private schools. Others are fully integrated. Many of these schools emphasize study of religion.

I also know a few kids who have been schooled at home. The people I've met who do this are conscientious and follow guidelines provided by the state.

Mal

Continuing with the discussion of the state of education in the U.S today: my recent experience with local education stems from volunteer work with three local museums. At two of these institutions the subject is historical in nature. These are the National Historic Park and the Institute of Texan Cultures. At these institutions my work is generally interpretative to mixed audiences, i.e., mixed groups of adults and children. At the third, the San Antonio Museum of Art my work has been exclusively with children leading interpretative class groups through select exhibits. Here I have had the opportunity to observe and make a personal assessment of the success/failure of the system.

I do find a wide difference in the interest, preparedness, and apparent understanding among the different groups. Generally it is the exclusive private schools followed by the charter schools that score the very best. With these groups I conclude that the inclusion of the museum visit was very worth whiled.

In Texas the education system is fragmented into many independent school districts. In a typical metropolitan county there may be 10 or more of these districts. Formerly there was a wide difference in the funds available to finance these districts. Supposedly today there is a system in effect under which State funds and assessments from the rich districts equalize financing. Yet today it is my observation that it is still classes from the richer districts that show the most interest and knowledge. I am left with the impression that often the principal interest of the students lies in the trip which offers an escape for a few hours from the class room. There are exceptions. In particular I remember one class from a poor rural district that scored quite well and I am quite sure of the reason. It was the teacher who through the course of the tour demonstrated her working knowledge of art history and an interest and abilities beyond the norm.

Regarding home schooling by parents, my observations are favorable. I often run into family groups in interpretive work at the history museums. Often several families will combine for the particular tour. They score very well, right up there with the private and charter schools.

Harold: Re your comments on observing pupils from private schools:--

According to info released by the National Center for Education Statistics, 11 percent of the total national school enrollment (K-12) attend private schools. These come from 27,400 private schools in the U.S. serving nearly 6 million students. Just about one in four of the nation's schools is a private school.

Again according to the NCES, by a margin of NINE TO ONE, if American parents were given a choice of schools -- along with the financial wherewithal to exercise it -- a full 55 PERCENT of parents who currently send their children to public school would want to send them to private schools.

Robby

Robby,

My daughter-in-law is a very savvy young woman and is not the least bit shy about asking questions and doing research. When my grandsons reached school age she was not at all happy to send them to a public school and after doing a lot of checking she has sent them to a private school. It really, really stretches their budget but she feels it is worth it to have the security of knowing that they are getting what is apparently a quality education in an orderly and secure school.

I really feel that if the public school system had access to more money for quality teachers and decent facilities they could compete favorably with the private schools. But so often, those of us who complain so loudly about the public schools are the first ones to vote down increased school taxes.

Phyll

Phyll: Are we "older" citizens who no longer have children going to K-12 schools the ones who are voting the school budgets down?

Robby

Robby, my thought isn't budget it is one of 'largeness.' The concept of unifying so many small schools into one district may have help initially but I think it is the albatrose around the neck of schools today. The private school has one or maybe K-12 representing 3 schools at most to administer and finance. So much money and attention goes to administering these large school districts they have become top heavy with administraters and the budget reflects a large chunk toward salaries etc.

This is no different then a family with only one or two children sharing, not only the families economic where-with-all but, the time and energy of the parants as opposed to a large family, each child getting what they can and a few excelling because the are made of something that pushes them to aggressively go after meeting their needs with other adults or programs.

The more you can get your hands around something the more participation and unification of goals there can be among parants. The smaller system allows for individual pride and a feeling of associating with something that maybe, larger then an individual but, represents an identifiable community and the successes achievived remain as a standard for that community. That is what most private schools have going for them. I am not familar enough with charter schools but again I get the impression there is this insular identity that fosters building school pride that is then reflected as individual pride for each student.

During deTocqueville's trip there were small communities and therefore, community pride. If I remember my social history well enough, often, in rural areas, the teacher took turns living with the families. The teacher may not have experienced much private life but was definatly intimitly knowledgeable of the students home life. When I was a child twice a year the nuns or one of the priests visited every home in the parish and we children knew that the teacher knew personally our parants or at least our mothers.

Today those schools where there is a schedule and parants take turns with at least one child's parant in the classroom everyday helping the teacher and students-- there is a connection between home and school that seems to make for happier students and a supported teacher. Dads that cannot stay a full day come in at their convience, usually their lunch hour, to read to the students. In those schools with that kind of parant involvement there is less behavior problems and more achievment scholasticly for the students. Again personalizing the school and identifying them as part of a small community again.

According to Tocqueville, it was not for lack of schools or even their quality that few Americans went to college. It was the fact that most apprenticeships for livelihoods began at about age 15. As he says, " their education ends at the age when ours begins." Bk I, Ch 3. A study appeared in an issue of the Economist sometime in '97 which traced the problems of our schools (compared with those of other nations) not to class size, expenditure per pupil, or any of several other standard assumptions. The study identified teaching methods, which in the US are often more appropriate for the learning of a manual skill. If you've heard educators harp on behavioral objectives and the rest of their jargon, this comes as no great surprise. On the flip side, I have to confess that my daughter says that her public high school here prepared her well for college. Of my contemporaries, I can think of absolutely none who would make that statement. So I would claim that the quality of public education improved remarkably through the '60s and '70s, but just in isolated cases. As for why, far short of a theory, I haven't a clue. I'm glad to have caught the trend in time so that my daughter could benefit.

Henry: Some excellent points!! Any reactions?

Robby

From my own experiences as a public school secondary teacher in Ohio from 1963-1968 and in Iowa from 1973-1999, I found that students who applied themselves and were taking college preparatory courses...ie, foreign language, mathematics (algebra, geometry, trig, adv. algebra, calculus, etc.)sciences (biology, anatomy,physiology,physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy, etc.), English language and literature courses, etc. with an average or bit above level of success did not have problems with doing college work if they applied themselves to that work. I found those who were not successful in college were those who (1) partied away the first year or semester and were not "invited" back or (2) had not taken courses to prepare them for college level material.

I find the most promising sign for public education that the students who apply and prepare themselves in the high schools I'm familiar with do well in college. Our colleges and universities are considered excellent all over the world, and students come here for higher education from all those countries where the educational system is supposed to be superior to ours. Our students take the same university courses these foreign students do, and seem to compete with them on that level. Yes, a disturbing item seems to be that many of the highly technical sciences and math areas are filled with foreign students. I do not know how we interest more of our students in those areas, if that is desired.

š ...jane›

And as we float along in the mainstream of American life during this "back to school" month, let us not forget that almost 5,000,000 children will be entering kindergarten in 2-3 weeks. Most American children attend kindergarten and many participate in all-day kindergarten programs. Research suggests that how kindergartners spend their time may be more critical than the amount of time children spend in class. In other words, longer kindergarten days in unsuitable activities yield no educational advantages over the traditional half-day kindergarten progam.

Early childhood and kindergarten specialists have long emphasized the central role of play in young children's learning. Play provides a wide range and real depth of learning in all domains of development: physical, emotional, social, and intellectual.

Guided by deTocqueville's thought above, is the character of American civilization being demonstrated by the way we teach our youngest citizens?

Robby

The first grade teachers I know tell me that Kindergarten, itself, has been a flop. They tell me that most K-teachers teach the children how to play and how to take a nap - and that's about it. I refused to send my youngest daughter to kindergarten. I took her to her first day of school in the first grade. And one of the K-teachers was present. When she found out that my daughter had not went to Kindergaten, she said, "O my, what a shame, she will be so far behind the other students. I told her that I had heard that the only things taught in kindergarten was how to play and how to take a nap. She refuted with that in her class they taught them their numbers. I then asked her. Can any of your students do this - I proceeded by asking my daughter this question. "Deidra, if you had two dozen apples and you gave everyone in this room one, how many would you have remaining?" She looked around the room, counted that there was 7 present, and gave the correct answer of 17. The third grade teacher broke the silence by saying that very few of her students could do that, if any.

I am also told that high school drop outs who enter college by passing the GED test, do better on the average than the H.S. Graduates.

And I can tell you that more money is not the answer to educations problems. Statistics show that the more money they have received, the worst they get. Could it be that once they understand they can get more money if they do poorly, they are wise enough to do more poorly.

Creationism as taught to children by some parents and by some churchs is the polar opposite to evolution that is taught in schools.

God being involved in the affairs of man is taught by some parents and by some churchs is the polar opposite of the schools teaching that man is in total charge of his destiny.

Man is capable of helping people that are weaker and often do is taught to children by some parents and churchs is the total opposite of schools teaching its a jungle out there and only the fittest survive.

Don's going to have to offer me more proof of his assertions. Children in kindergarten here in Maryland learn the fundamentals of reading. They learn how to work in small groups. They learn how to sit and listen to stories. They start learning how to ask questions about stories. They learn how to raise their hands. They learn how to play together. They have simple music lessons.

I also do not believe that people who get their GED and then go to college do better than those who graduate from high school. Where does this fact come from?

Everything in Don's post seems to me to be general statements that could have easily been made up.

Is there, perhaps, an agenda here?

Maryal

Kindergarten depends on the school district... I teach computer to grades 1 through 6... and the 1st graders come to me knowing thier alphabet, letter sounds, colors, shapes, and numbers and can generally do simple addition and subtraction. They handle the mouse better than the teachers. They love to try anything new: whereas the teachers are afraid they might break something or fail with the computer. It has taken 6 years to convince the teachers that there are some excellent programs for teaching.

What on earth does "CREATIONISM", which is based on the first two chapters of Genesis, have to do with the curriculum in public schools? It is not scientific; it flies in the face of everything we know about the development of this planet. It is part of a very conservative, literalist belief system and it has no place in public schools. NONE.

Maryal

It is natural for young children to learn through spontaneous investigation (close observation, experimentation, and inquiry) as through spontaneous play. Many observers have noted that young children are natural scientists and anthropologists. They devote substantial portions of their seemingly endless energy to learning all aspects of the culture into which they are born.

They learn its language, stories, music, and literature. They investigate with all their senses and emerging skills what people mean, when things are appropriate and when they are not, where things come from, what they are for, how they are made, and how adults and peers respond to them.

They try to make sense of common objects by prying into them, taking them apart, and manipulating them in a variety of ways.

What, then, might be considered an appropriate curriculum and teaching method for kindergarteners? In line with deT's quotation above, do our current "mandates for public education (and in this case education for kindergartners) place the character of American civilization in the clearest light?"

Robby

One of my daughters taught 1st grade for years and years. (She is now a Remedial Reading teacher.)

She says she could tell all the difference in the world on the very first day between those children who had had kindergarten and those who had not.

She says all of the first grade teachers have a struggle with the ones who have not had the kindergarten experience. They have to give them a Lot more attention in a special group. Fortunately, there are usually not many of them, and towards the end of her years of teaching 1st grade she had none because so many parents of kindergarten students requested her for their little ones' first grade teacher.

Why have Remedial Reading? I have noticed that the method used in Remedial Reading is far better than the normal method used. Why shouldn't the same method used in Remedial Reading be used all the time and then all could learn to read because the best teaching method would be used on all.

Having placed several foreign exchange students in homes for a school year, I've noticed they usually know 3 languages. They are totally dumbfounded that in our school systems we teach English K-12, every year, and then take it at least 2 semesters in college. Normally, they took and mastered English in 3 years as a second language. So to improve our system, why not stop this. Teach English in such a way that the students have mastered it in 4-5 years and go on to other languages. And it makes no sense at all to teach computers early in the grades and then teach typing as a high school coarse. Typing or keyboarding should be taught before computers.

Maryal, you are right about creationism. It should not be taught in the public/government school system. However, many parents and the church still teach creationism and I used it in the context that the evolution taught in the school systems is the polar opposite of what the parents and church teach - and this is why a lot of parents have taken their children out of public/government schools. (It should be unconciousable for anyone to teach anything that they know up front is totally against the beliefs of the parents.) And I feel they have done the proper thing, believing that the parents are responsible for seeing their children get the education they want them to have. This is a major change in the U.S. since DeT. During DeT's time of observation, the school, church, and parents all had the same goals and what was taught in the schools was not contrary to what was taught in the church and what parents believed.

While modern day schools have much to offer, it is strange that illeteracy is probably higher today than it was when DeT made his observations. While the students at his time did not go on to higher education - because of the many schools he noted, illeteracy did not exist, and functionally illeterate had not been dreamed up, yet.

I would consider the subject of creationism vs evolution a relevant one in our sub-topic of education. It is being discussed in many areas of the nation, eg in Kansas. May I ask all participants, however, to refrain from any comments about specific denominations or theological beliefs as this properly falls in our many good Discussion Groups in the Religion folder. And I'm sure we will all continue to be courteous and considerate in our remarks as we would if we were sitting in a group face to face.

Robby

I'm sorry, Robby, that I did not get back to answer your question yesterday. Probably many of those who defeat increased school taxes ARE "older" citizens who live on relatively low, fixed incomes who see constant increases in taxes that they have a hard time paying. The ones, especially who have to decide between what medicine they can afford and whether they eat meat that week or cereal. But they are not the only ones, I think. There are many personal reasons why those who care enough to vote at all will vote against higher school taxes. I guess it goes back to that theory that we are only interested in our "little corner" and not in the whole community. What changes in American society from the time of DeTocqueville's writing brings this about? Too many of us to worry about anyone other than our selves? The so-called "me" generation who are too busy making money to think about anything else? Disillusionment with our political leaders who seem to care only for themselves and not for their people? Too many questions---not enough answers.

Phyll

Don McIntish, your post that proposed how well GED recipients did in college made me think of the different kinds of research validity. Each kind is a check or measurement on truthfulness or security of research studies. Does the study and its results do what it says it's going to do? Can we depend on it?

One interesting kind of validity is face validity---very simply, does it LOOK valid? If I said that I'd proved that eating 2 pounds of chocolate a day makes you lose weight, that doesn't have much face validity. It doesn't look right on the face of it. (The other kinds of validity are measurements; face validity on its own means nothing.)

Your statement that people who get their GED's do better in college than people with high school diplomas doesn't have much face validity. It doesn't look right. It sounds absurd. But it stayed with me; I thought about it and now I wonder if what you've heard about this IS, in fact, TRUE. There have been several interesting studies about what, in fact, does predict good performance in college. College entrance exams seem not to be correlated with good college performance at all. Doesn't predict well. High school grades, on the other hand, do a better job of predicting who will and won't do well in college.

I began to wonder about your idea. What I thought was this---I wondered how many people who complete their GED actually go on to college. I have a perception that few do. SO, those who, after not completing high school, go back to complete their GED for the express purpose of enrolling in college, might belong to an unusually motivated (if small) group of people. I don't know any of this to be true, nor have I read about it. Also, it's application may be limited. It certainly doesn't mean that we would advocate everyone dropping out of high school, going back later for a GED and then entering college. It WOULD be helpful to someone who hasn't completed high school and, for whatever reason, decides getting a college education is a wise idea.

This reminds me of the junior high school aged Vietnamese children who came to the United States at the end of the Vietnam war. They entered schools where only English was spoken. In California, I know that many high schools, for several years in a row, had Vietnamese valedictorians. The disadvantaged starting point may have worked as a motivator for several. (Since so many achieved this designation, it makes me think that other factors were at work, also. Work ethic. Family culture. Etc.)

Could you say where you heard or read of this idea about GEDs?

Intereresting that we have had so much to say about 'fixing' the educational system including budget, size, curriculum, bible views, student motivation, immigrant students etc.

I wonder if we were visiting, as deTocqueville did, only in fantasy with a magic carpet and we could fly over this nation, what is it we think we would see and what is it we would prefer to see. Not individual issues but what would be the picture of available education and what would we like to see education providing that effects the practice of Democracy in America.

What I think I would see is in those new housing areas there would be new school buildings with sports fields and trees planted. In the older areas of town I wouls see schools kept well and children playing after school hours in the areas where family incomes are above 80,000 a year and I would see deserted school yards with adequate buildings and less lush trees with no PTA supported gardens or landscaping other than what was provided when the school was built. And in the lower incomed areas I would see older kids using the playgrounds, older dated buildings and people of all ages outside their homes. No library nearby but churches.

I would see some private school typically next to a church building regardless, Catholic, Baptist, LUtheran, Jewish. I would see a scattering of Montesorri schools with maybe only one in a town that goes to fourth or sixth grade but many providing K and 1st grade. I would see day care centers in great numbers, some new and large others an old house and again some in churches. Some of the day care centers, especially the national chains provide after school care and some Kindergarten age instruction.

I won't venture the reason for a parant to home school, since there are several but as a Real Estate Broker I'm in many homes previewing when the family is at home and they know I do not have clients with me. I have found home schooling to be only in homes within a price range that takes a comfortable income to have purchased and maintained. I do not see any home schooling in homes where incomes are in the six figures. Those families seem to send their children to well run, parant involved public schools or the afford the private school. Some, very few, two family incomed families of essentially blue collar type employment will send their children to private Catholic schools but I do not see any families of incomes below about 55K either home schooling or in private schools.

I see lots of band and football practice in the late summer and fall in school yards and I see young children of all ages in age appropriate groups play soccor on Saturdays and Little League in the spring. I see children's museums springing up in most cities and I see more week long art classes available beyond the typical summer schedules that are offering home school youngsters a week of alternative education.

Now I know I have said magic carpet but, I am aware I can only use my view of what I see here in Central Texas to allow me to imagine what my magic carpet would see. Austin is a well educated town with so much high tech. We have the home of UT with over 70,000 students and in addition there is St. Edwards, Concordia Lutheran, Houstin Tilitson, the Austin Community Collage, the Episcopal Seminary, within a 45 minute drive is Southwest Texas in San Marcos and driving north 45 minutes is Southwestern in Georgetown. Flying over the nation I believe there are at least one or two cities in every state that have a grouping of collages and univerities.

I would like to see students graduate from High School with skills to critically think and from all material I read that is not a skill that is tought with few teachers gathering and using the tools and techniques to bring about critical thinkers. Therefore, that is the hope I would have for our children.

Critical thinking requires that questions be asked by students that include-- what is the point of this subject, class, lecture, chapter, discussion, what is it about. Followed by asking "So What" or why are we reading or discussing this in the first place, what is the significance or consequesces of of the material. And finally "So now what?" which is considering the application of what has been learned to a course of action or reflection, allowing you to become more critically aware of actual choices. Finally to intergrate thought and feeling and see the application and relevance of material in light of "everyman" and the students own everyday world.

This level of education takes studies of reading, math, science, history or literature beyond mere rote learning, the transfering of data into information that encourages fragmentation and superficiality. Students learning how to critically think are helped to realize that knowledge can deepen understanding which in time becomes wisdom.

I would prefer to see a weekly articles of 3 or 4 papers written each week by 3 or 4 different student representing schools in turn and a variety of classes, sharing their deep understanding of an issue studied and how they see that issue affecting themselves and our community rather than this annual review of test scores for each school. Yes, we would probably only read the best articles written by the best students, regardless, as a citizen I would have a better understanding of what the students are being tought then a list of test scores. And although one student can articulate better than the others many would be attempting to write well enough to be chosen.

As to the quality of teachers. I think by and large our teachers are fine folks that have a calling. No there is not the money in education as there is in working in the high tech industry but then schools are not run for financial profit and I do not foresee the inequity ever being addressed satisfactorily. As citizens we seldom review the school district's budget to have a clear understanding of where the money goes. I think our understanding of what it really takes to pull of financing the educating of a child is fragmentated and superficial since we depend on articles from our newspaper which cannot be the indepth report we need and we depend on others, elected others to take care of the nitty gritty.

Have we reached a point where we (as a society) have robbed our children of their childhood?

With so much emphasis on wall-to-wall programmed activities for children...after school sports,dancing lessons,extra tutoring...where is the opportunity to just be a child and ENJOY growing up and discovering the joys of your own imagination?

That's a good point, Ed, I've thought so for years. Where do the children use their own imagination, allow it to expand and grow, to be creative in their own play in today's society?

I cannot comment on the state of education today for I have no grandchildren; however, I volunteer one day a week in a reading program at an inner city school. Last year finally the school was wired for computers and they got a few, however the teachers don't know how to use them and the children have never seen the things before. Good start, huh?

I asked their teacher if we could go on a field trip to the Library and she said no and then I asked the children how many have library cards and none did! I was told that most of these young black students either live with a grandparent or in a foster home; however, this neighborhood is neat and clean with small houses. Actually, it was called at one time AMVET Village because it was built for returning veterans of WWII who purchased them with little or no down payment.

And then I compare that with my own library and it's summertime and all the children are there with reading programs geared toward their age groups and parents are always there with young children. It's sad that equality is not apparent in schools or in the lives of these young children.

Add me to the list of folks who'd like to see children be allowed to be children...and have cardboard boxes and blankets over card tables or over a clothesline for tent/teepee/igloo/cabin...whatever they want it to be.

I also think something's been lost in all the organized, parent-driver sports...where they pick the teams and make the rules...instead of letting the kids make up their own teams from the kids available on any given day and make the rules, etc. The one father who killed the other over a children's hockey game is an extreme, but I've seen parents go ballistic over what should be children's games for children. The local school in this little town had to have a mother of a participating student arrested for harassment of referees and coaches when she simply would not sit down and be civil. She had to pay a fine, etc., but I wonder if she learned anything.

š ...jane›

I keep using my 15 year old grandson, Hil, as an example, but I've lived very close to him since he was five years old. When he was little, he played very much the way Jane mentioned. He started computer learning at the age of five. His parents were his teachers at that time. Now he knows more than most of us combined about programming a computer, creating computer games, etc., etc..

He and his friends, whom I also know well, were very imaginative in their play. They created fantasy games which they played outside and in the house. These involved building castles with whatever was at hand, fighting imaginary dragons, and conquering all sorts of things.

Children here in my area of NC have a marvelous opportunity to learn the computer in public school or with a private teacher such as my ex-son-in-law who loads ten computers into a seatless 12 passenger van and takes them to private schools where he teaches children from pre-school age to the age of ten the basics of computer at $6.00 for a half hour lesson.

Though I imagine there are some kids around who did not grow up in the way my grandson and his friends have, I'll say that there's a large group of young people I know who have had a most marvelous childhood that hasn't been running from one parent-chosen activity to another.

Mal

I agree with y'all about children being free to play on their terms but as I speak with parants including my children, tha parants of my Grands they cite the fear they have and responsibility of assuring that the children are supervised in an enviornment with other adults and they could not allow their children to walk to any activity off the street where they live.

MY daughter on her way back to SC as of today spent two days visiting old friends in Wimberly which is about 1 hour drive from Austin, where she lived when she attended South West University in San Marcos and although the town has grown in the last 20 years it is still a very small town with the Blanco river running through the middle. There in Wimberly was the first place she found that children could and did spend the day on their own with parants using various call methods to call the children in for supper. They live in Greenville SC a much smaller town than Austin and my other grands live in Collage Station again, a town so much smaller than Austin and yet both families have this concern for their boys. My son had the bad experience of someone picking up one of his boys when he was only 6 when they lived in Portland Or. The screaming of the other children was what kept Cooper from disappearing and so we have legitimate fear. Their news spreads and other parants than follow the example of keeping danger at bay. It is a different world than when they grew up and very different than when I grew up.

Do you believe that kindergarten should have a curriculum? Should there be a certain amount of structure? ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education suggests the following as one possible curriculum which provides activities that include:--

1 - Integrated topic studies, rather than whole-group instruction in isolated skills
2 - Opportunities for children to learn by observing and experimenting with real objects
3 - A balance of child- and teacher-initiated activities
4 - Opportunities for spontaneous play and teacher-facilitated activities
5 - Group projects in which cooperation can occur naturally
6 - A range of actitvities requiring the use of large and small muscles
7 - Exposure to good literature and music of the children's own cultures and of other cultures repressented in the class
8 - Authentic assessment of each child's developmental progress
9 - Opportunities for children with diverse bckgrounds and developmental levels to paticipate in whole-group activities; and
10 - Time for individuals or small groups of children to meet with the teacher for specific help in acquring basic reading, writing, mathematical, and other skills as needed.

Is this what you see happening in kindergartens across America? Is that what you believe SHOULD be happening?

Robby

Having visited the day care centers that my grand boys attended, one where my daughter-in-law quit her teaching job and worked in the day care center to be near her three boys and still bring home a smaller pay check, I would say on the whole yes, they were most prepared for Kindergarten in the Lubbock Independent school system where they learned to read and simple math before entering the first grade.

My daughter has had her two boys in Montissori schools since they were each 2 years old. The boys learned the above and so much more. Cade enters first grade this year able to understand numbers and read them in the thousands, can add, subtract and do simple multiplication and division. He knows intimitly stories like the Narnia saga and more nursery rhymes then I knew existed. But than the tuition is high and classes small.

All three of my kids went to kindergarten in public schools where the curriculum was determined by the state. Two went in New York and one in Indiana. My grandson here not only had public school kindergarten, he went to preschool from the age of three. My Florida grandson also went to preschool and kindergarten. He attends private school. I rather think this state requires a very similar kindergarten curriculum to what you described, Robby.

Incidentally, I learned over the weekend that my ten month old New York granddaughter goes to a school three mornings a week with her mother where the children do all kinds of exercises, listen to music, and are read stories.

Mal

I forgot to say that I went to kindergarten all those many, many years ago. All I remember about it is that we tapped maple trees for sap and made maple syrup.

Mal

Betty G., there's other reasons why the people with GED's may do well in college and that is trying to earn a living in the 'real world' without an education. I would think this may awaken a lot of H.S. dropouts, and could very easily inspire them to greatnest, don't you think?

Children and grandchildren are so precious. Here's an article my daughter sent to me that sheds light on what they are worth.

The Greatest Investment

The government recently calculated the cost of raising a child from birth to 18 and came up with $160,140 for a middle-income family. Talk about sticker shock. That doesn't even touch college tuition. For those with kids, that figure leads to wild fantasies about all the things we could have bought, all the places we could have traveled, all the money we could have banked if not for HIM/HER!! (AIN'T THAT THE TRUTH!!

)

For others, that number might confirm the decision to remain childless. But $160,140 isn't so bad if you break it down. It translates into $8,896.66 a year, $741.38 a month or $171.08 a week. That's a mere $24.44 a day. Just over a dollar an hour.

Still, you might think the best financial advice says don't have children if you want to be rich. It's just the opposite.

There's no way to put a price tag on:

Feeling a new life move for the first time and seeing the bump of a knee rippling across your skin.

Having someone cry, "It's a boy!" or shout, "It's a girl!" then hearing the baby wail and knowing all that matters is it's healthy.

Counting all 10 fingers and toes for the first time.

Feeling the warmth of fat cheeks against your breast.

Cupping an entire head in the palm of your hand.

Making out da da or ma ma from all the cooing and gurgling.

What do you get for your $160,140?

Naming rights. First, middle and last.

Glimpses of God every day.

Giggles under the covers every night.

More love than your heart can hold.

Butterfly kisses and Velcro hugs.

Endless wonders over rocks, ants, clouds and warm cookies.

A hand to hold usually covered with jam.

A partner for blowing bubbles, flying kites, building sandcastles and skipping down the sidewalk in the pouring rain.

Someone to laugh yourself silly with no matter what the boss said or how your stocks performed that day.

For $160,140, You never have to grow up.

You get to finger-paint, carve pumpkins, play hide-and-seek, and catch lightning bugs.

You have an excuse to keep reading the adventures of Piglet and Pooh, watching Saturday morning cartoons, going to Disney movies and wishing on stars.

You get to frame rainbows, hearts and flowers under refrigerator magnets and collect spray-painted noodle wreaths for Christmas, hand prints set in clay for Mother's Day and cards with backward letters for Father's Day.

For $160,140... there's no greater bang for your buck.

You get to be a hero just for retrieving a Frisbee off the garage roof, taking the training wheels off the bike, removing a sliver, filling the wading pool, coaxing a wad of gum out of bangs and coaching a baseball team that never wins but always gets treated to ice cream regardless.

You get a front-row seat to history to witness the first step, first

word, first bra, first date, first time behind the wheel.

You get to be immortal.

You get another branch added to your family tree, and if you're lucky, a long list of limbs in your obituary called grandchildren.

You get an education in psychology, nursing, criminal justice, communications and human sexuality no college can match. In the eyes of a child, you rank right up there with God.

You have the power to heal a boo-boo, scare away monsters under the bed, patch a broken heart, police a slumber party, ground them forever and love them without limits, so one day they will, like you, love without counting the cost.

______________________________________

Remedial Reading is absolutely necessary to keep some of the children from falling between the cracks and thus falling behind their grade level and having to suffer the social consequences of being held back.

There are perfectly intelligent children who have never seen a book until they get to school. They have never been read to. Most of these Can be taught by their classroom teacher, but because teachers regularly have between 25 and 30 students, they cannot get to every student to spend the hours of one-on-one some need to even begin to read. Children not accustomed to books are sometimes utterly terrified by them in the sense of being terrified of something not of the world they know.

There are children who miss starting school at the beginning of the year because they have fallen ill. There are children who are slow to catch on. There are children who are ill at other times of the school year and thus fall behind.

The method of teaching reading is the same. The difference is the one on one, plus some additional tricks, testing, and monitoring that are impossible for the classroom teacher to implement due to the restraints on time per pupil.

Once the Remedial Reading teacher has brought a child up to the reading level they should be at for their grade level, another child with problems is given that time slot in order to address That child's progress.

Barbara spoke of small classes. MaryPage speaks of one-on-one teaching. Has anyone here ever seen a one-room schoolhouse, the type that existed when deTocqueville was here?

There are approximately 400 remaining public one-room schoolhouses in the nation. Spread throughout 28 states, one-room schools are concentrated in Nebraska, which has 128, and Montana, which has 81. California has seen a 22 percent growth in the number of one-room schools in the past five years, fueled in part by flexible work schedules and telecommuting policies that allow families to pursue frontier living again. Amish and Mennonite communities, among others, have been opening private one-room schools, which total nearly 1,200. About a third of them are in Pennsylvania. Among the public schools, average enrollment in 1996 was 9.4 students.

Even as the number of tiny rural schools has plunged in recent years, the fundamental aspects of teaching inside them -- from multi-age classrooms and peer tutoring to interdisciplinary projects and keeping students with the same teacher for more than one year -- are being copied in large school systems acrosss the nation. Small classes and, especially small schools, are increasingly seen as crucial to students' success in the early grades, leading many urban educators to create islands within large school buildings that attempt to foster the intimacy and individual attention.

Has any one here ever seen a one-room schoolhouse? Do you believe that the size of the class is one of the primary factors leading to the success of the student?

Robby

Robby--yes, I did see a one-room school house, and even visited, but that was many, many years ago. I had a cousin that lived in a small, rural community and they had the picture-book school house, and about 10 or 12 students, if I remember correctly, 1st grade to about 6th grade. I even remember the teacher's name, Mrs. Key. I was allowed to sit in all day with regular classes, I must have been about second or third grade level myself, and the cousin was one year ahead of me. What I remember most about classes, was the older students helping the younger ones, and I remember the younger students listening in on the olders students lessons. (Couldn't have hurt).

My cousin did NOT go on to college, she married right out of high school, but somehow, ended up working for a University later in life, anyway. Another student in that school room, that I know even now, went on to college and was very successful. The teacher I remembered so well, later taught me, in Jr. High School (called middle school, now?). She was an excellent teacher, and knew how to control a class of students like no other teacher, I ever knew.

So my answer would be, yes, I think the size of that class, and also, the availability of a large Book Closet and an excellent teacher lead to success of the two students I remember in that picture-book one room school.

Sun

As we slowly float down this mainstream of America watching what America is presenting to us and thinking of this as "back to school" month, we suddenly realize that this term does not make sense to a significant portion of our nation's students. I am speaking of those students who have been going to school all summer.

Summer school, which used to be an easy-going affair, has become serious business. It is especially so for those students who scored poorly on one of the five nationwide tests. The move toward mandatory summer school to help children meet higher academic standards is developing into a national trend.

In 1995, Chicago opted to end social promotion and required students who scored badly on standardized tests to attend summer school. Last year, Denver launched a mandatory summer program for at-risk readers in Grades 3, 5, and 8. Starting this summer, Long Beach, California, third-graders who were reading below grade levels had to attend a summer reading program. Georgia offers a remedial summer-school program and a course to help students who failed one or more of the five exams now required for graduation but it is not mandatory. In Minnesota, schools are offering summer-school courses to help students prep for the state's basic skills tests which determines whether students will be able to graduate from the eighth grade and high school.

According to the U.S. Department of Education such programs are especially important for at-risk children. What are your opinions regarding children attending school during the summer?

Robby

It's done in other countries; why not here? I feel the same way about long summer vacations for school kids as I did about the fact that my first piano teacher took the summer off. Because of this I lost something as a musician that I had gained during the school year; so do school kids, I think. Vacations for both students and teachers could be arranged between "semesters" of study, I believe, that would compensate for the lack of two months' time off in the summer.

Mal

I have been lurking lurking lurking and reading all these facts and opinions on education with great interest. My mother went to a one-room country school and probably had a better education than I did! She attended but never completed college because of economic factors [she had to work to make our ends meet!] but she read a lot all her life, was very politically savvy, and was a stickler for using good grammar and correct word usage. She would probably have made a terrific English teacher!

As for me, a routine product of public schools, I always have felt that so much time was wasted. What I learned in school could easily have been assimilated in 6 or 7 years instead of 11... or I could have learned so much more in the 11 years! [I skipped first grade having been taught to read by a clever Grandma] I graduated college but that, too, seemed much time wasted; however, I blame myself for not making better course choices. Perhaps if I had been better prepared, I could have made better selections?

My own children had similar experiences in school with quite different end results [between the two of them] which leads me to think SO MUCH depends on the individual and what he/she contributes to his/her own education. Part of that, of course, is the home background, as Ella has well illustrated with her experiences. But then, how explain the completely different approach to education of two children raised in the same home? It's still a mystery to me after all these years! No, not really--it was the difference in their PERSONALITIES.

Robby: I have watched my two grandchildren be offered ERIC's curriculum in their preschool program. My concern, then is: What will happen to these girls when they enter Kindergarten? Will they be bored ? Will they be ignored so the other children who have not been exposed to a curriculum such as this can be focused on?

I was raised in Kansas---I saw many one room schools but never attended one. I knew people who did in their early years of education and apparently, besides having a better teacher/student ratio, one of the benefits was that often the older childeren were called upon to help the little ones with their studies. I would think that other than the basic "book learning" that would have taught many different skills to both the younger and older students. How to help, to teach, to explain on the part of the older student and how to ask for help and to trust, on the part of the younger student.

I know that economically it is more efficient to have large centralized school districts but I can't help but feel something has been lost.

Phyll

We have an old one-room schoolhouse preserved on the grounds of the Institute of Texan Cultures in San Antonio. Such schools were common in rural Texas through the 1950's. I remember my first job assignment with City Public Service in 1950 took me regularly through the rural parts of Bexar County. There were many such institutions in operation then and this was in one of the larger metropolitan counties.

At my present National Park volunteer job I am in the visitors center at the Mission, San Francisco de la Espada. This Particular structure in the early 1930's was rebuilt as a school by the Archdiocese at a corner of the 18th century walls. It incorporated portions of the old walls and the old Indian housing units. It was used as small rural school until about 1965. There is a large mural size picture of a multi grade class taken in 1944. It is not uncommon today to receive visitors who actually went to school in the room when it was used as a school.

I forgot to mention earlier that many of the teachers who taught my classes in grade school never went to college. They went to "normal school". I really can't see that my early education was lacking in any way because of this fact. This makes me wonder why teachers are required to have so many degrees before they qualify for a raise in salary.

Mal

I think children having to go to summer school to 'make up' or to gain skills they should have been taught during the school year is a shame. It's a mark of failure toward the school. And just look at the added cost to education and look what the children lose. The children should have their summer to be children.

I also don't think smaller student to teacher ratios is the answer. Having been in excellent classes where excellent instructors were able to be superior in class sizes around 150. I think the answer is very simple. It will take better teachers and it will take a new system that will turn the teacher lose from all other mundane chores to allow them to spend time in the class room teaching. Plus, it will require that students are in the class room more than they are outside, in the gym, or being intertained somewhere.

Don, the kids are still children even when they're in school.

Mal

When I lived in Kentucky we went into the mountain communities with the older Girl Scouts and winterized many a one room school house during the 60s. We also brought nurses that administered Tetinus shots and several of us held adult education classes, mostly in history. Some of the girls lived for 2 to 4 weeks in the communities, learning mountain ways and teaching about modern life outside of the mountains. Although many homes had TV their impression of the country was based on TV and for instance most thought there were no more Indians since all the movies show the killing of Indians.

As I child for several grades it wasn't a one room situation but a four room situation where 2 classes shared the same room and nun. The attention was great and as another poster shared the older helped the younger. We were still learning to brush our teeth and wash with Lifeboy soap-- I think they must have had a special promotion for us all to recieve a bar of soap.

The larger grade school, with often 2 classes of children in the same grade, gave me a large in school library, big playground, auditorium where school plays were put-on annually by every grade, music lessons and a gym where after school the girls started a baskeball team. The boys of course had gym during school hours. I must say though I did get lost in the mix of students and never received the attention as I did in the smaller school. I became a better than average student but not the top student.

I am of two minds on whether school should go all year round with two weeks break between "quarters" or whatever we would call them. Looking back, I remember the feeling of having forgotten a good deal over the summer once I got back to school. But I also remember those hot summer days in Chicago, playing alley games, popsicles in my best friend's standing freezer, playing inside and outside with all the kids in the neighborhood, being allowed to go out after supper.

From a pedagogical point of view, it is better to have schools running without a long break in the summer. And maybe that is what is needed now. Many children do not have a parent at home which means a succession of camps, summer school, day care, activities to keep the kids busy during the day. My childhood is really not repeatable now.

Maryal

Since both the people who raised me worked, my summers were times alone. I got up in the morning, did laundry by hand if I was told to do it because we didn't have a washing machine. Then I cleaned the kitchen and went out and hung the clothes. When the clothes were hung on the line, I sat in the sun by the apple trees in a wooden lawn chair and read a book.

At noon I went inside and made myself a peanut butter sandwich for lunch and played the piano for an hour or two after that.

By then, it was too hot in the sun, so I went in the screened-in summer house attached to the one car garage and listened to a Red Sox or Boston Braves game if one was on the radio, or read more books.

At quarter of five I went in the house and peeled the potatoes and did whatever else was required of me to start supper.

Once in a while I had 15 cents in my pocket. When I did, I'd take the bus downtown for nickel and go to a movie for another nickel, come out afterwards and take the bus back home.

That's what summers were like for me, and although I did learn a lot, (one summer I read all of George Bernard Shaw's plays), throughout summer vacation I wanted to be back in school.

Mal

So many schools are now offering a week at a local camp to certain grades during the school year. The class has lessons in science and biology or the class in call enviornmental science. I could see that concept being stretched in summer to a month for older grades, two weeks for middle grades and a week starting third grade with a day outing to the campsite every other week for the little ones, who would then be helped and taught by the older students on site. But I still like having the Grands off for at least 6 to 8 weeks so that family summer vacations and family reunions can be arranged.

Again I think we have two economic levels to consider and those with the extra dollars will provide a camp experience as well as a family vacation that adds to the childs maturing experience. I know my daughter had the boys work through a math book during the trip. Each day they had to complete 10 pages and if they wanted not to have the work because of a special outing they had to double up on the pages before hand.

I notice that the YMCA had day care set up 9: to 5: at most of the schools this summer where they did art projects, played and usually there was a pool close by that they went swimming each day. I do not know if they did any school work though.

I wonder how teachers would feel about year round school? Some do get summer jobs but many are moms and enjoy the break often used to get caught up around the house as well as, being home with their children.

Aren't teachers paid a yearly salary?

No, Mal, not in Iowa. Teachers here are paid for the number of days they work. In my former district teachers had no paid holidays, even. We were contracted for 190 days and we worked 190 days. Our pay, however, was divided over 26 pay periods.

In other districts, teachers may have had some paid holidays...typically Labor Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year's Day, etc. So, their contracts might have been for 195 days...and they worked 190.

Some districts allow teachers to choose whether they receive their pay over the course of the contracted days...or over 365...as our district insisted. We could not get the pay for the school year at the end of the school year...we would continue to be paid for work completed over the summer. Many preferred this as the budgeting was easier; others objected and would have preferred to manage their own money and have it in their accounts gaining interest rather than in the district's accounts.

š ...jane›

According to a search I just did, the Fair Teacher Pay recommendation for the years 2000 and 2001 the National Average Salary Recommendation Based Upon All Models

Computed Recommendation for 2000-2001 Academic Year: National Average Master Teacher Salary = $67,990

In addition to this base salary, all teachers shall receive the computed recommended benefits package

When you consider that the figure quoted for a woman is augmented by her husband's salary if she is married, that amounts to quite a bit. In my opinion, alone, it is an amount that is not be sneezed at by any means.

In the past 25 years since I have been divorced and on my own, the largest income I've had in one year is $16,148.00, and I've managed to survive.

Just read your post, Jane. I am trying to find out what the system is here in my part of NC.

WOW that is high as compared to what my daughter-in-law and her two sisters earn, all teachers in various Independent School Districts in Texas. Top salary I'm hearing is 42K with most in the 30K range.

Am I hearing a consensus here of having year-round school with certain breaks throughout the year?

Am I also hearing a consensus of having smaller classes?

Robby

Here's a vote for year round school with three week's vacation at semester breaks. Yes, smaller classes if possible.

The best I could find out about teacher salaries in the US is this: "1998-1999 national average was $40,582."

I have a daughter with a Masters Degree who will just this year, after 15 years of teaching, earn 40k per year!

I have a daughter with nearly a Masters and 18 years experience who is earning in the 30k range.

Jane is correct about the system as far as every state system I know about. Virginia, Maryland, and Missouri are the same. You Contract to be paid for 190 days of teaching. You may be paid for 9 months or 12, as far as receiving checks is concerned, but you get paid for 190 days of teaching IF you teach for 190 days.

I have never heard of a public school that allows a teacher to teach 150 students at once.

Most summer school programs are for half days only and last for 6 weeks. The children involved still have a lot of summer left.

It is not the school or the teacher that puts these students in summer school. It can be illness during the school year putting them behind, family trauma in the school year turning the child off from learning for a period they need desperately to make up (divorce in family, death of family member, new sibling, alcoholism in family, drugs in family, violence in family, extreme poverty, HUNGER, etc.), a learning disability such at ADHD or ADD or low IQ. Families move a lot in this country, and sometimes the move results in their children missing too much of the school year. Also, the children encounter the differences in the curriculum in between the various school districts. Finally, according to my daughters, lack of parental involvement in their children's schooling, completing of homework, class attendance, honing of skills (reading at home and checking papers, homework, and material for testing) have EVERYTHING to do with children requiring extra help to get through school. My daughters say there are students coming to school SO TIRED they cannot learn. Are parents seeing that they get to bed?

The teachers are being blamed all over this country by parents who are not being involved. Involved parents, on the other hand, are usually full of praise for the system. And children are going off to college from every school system in this land.

Involved parents have successful kids. Uninvolved parents rarely do, and when they do it is the student and the teacher who should get the credit.

Oh, finally students with second language problems and children with speech delay problems need extra help that cannot be given during the regular school hours.

The American educational system has been described by Ralph Turner as a contest system, as opposed to a sponsorship system more characteristic of Europe. In a sponsorship system individuals attach themselves to other persons, masters, professors, employers or other guiding forces, and the person's future develops out of the relation to this sponsor. In a contest system individuals seek their fortune by pitting themselves against prevailing conditions. The person's future develops out of the interplay between his personal qualities of skill, intellect, etc. and the forces of fate and the market place.

To the extent that America is a contest system, it follows that dynamics of American schools must be understood in terms of the conditions of "the contest."

Robby

Robby---Yes, smaller classes. I would have no more than 15 in grades K,1,2,3. After that perhaps we could move up to twenty. I really believe that the more time a teacher has for individual students in those early years, the better the kids do. A teacher can really get to know all of them, their family situations and so forth. Quiet children get too easily lost in large groups as do those who are having trouble reading or doing math. With a small group, the teacher is far more likely to notice problems early.

Maryal

Every time I have ever entered a discussion about education in this country, I run into the same old road blocks to make any changes. The fact that the students are not doing all that great and that their education is mediocre at best is somebody's fault. And I find that roadblock no. 1 is always, it's not the schools fault. Roadblock 2 is it's not the teacher's fault. Roadblock No. 3 is that it's not the parent's fault. Roadblock No. 1 and No. 2 come from those that are in education. Roadblock No. 3 comes from the parents. And I got to tell you, somebody's roadblock is wrong unless we all want to agree that it's the childrens fault and agree that our children are just not as smart as children in other countries. My point - if we rank No. 21 among the nations in education, somethings wrong somewhere.

And then I find these cures for the problem are always present. More money will fix it. However, statistics show that education has gotten worst as more money is thrown at the problem. And then there's this myth about smaller classes. However, statistics show that classes have been getting smaller for years, and at the same time, education is getting worst.

And when you question whether or not the teachers may not be properly trained to teach and if this training was better, then the results would be better, people want to burn you at the stake. This assinine though is not even considered as a possibility.

Classes in college often approach 150 or more. And all of us seem to agree that we have the best higher education in the world.

Don gives us much grist for the mill today.

1 - We rank 21 among the nations in education.
2 - "Statistics" show that education has gotten worse as more money is thrown at the problem.
3 - "Statistics" show that classes have been getting smaller for years.
4 - Teachers are not properly trained.
5 - We have the best higher education in the world.

Your thoughts?

Robby

Where and what are the sources on which these statements are based? What statistics, and where are they? Where will I find out that the U.S. is #21 in world education? What authority says we have the best higher education in the world? Are these opinions, or are they based on fact?

Mal

Don...

Teaching 150 students age 18+ in a lecture hall at the college level is not the same as teaching 150 children age 5 to 14 years old. Do you really think a first grade taught in a lecture hall with 150 6 year olds or lecturing to 150 14 year olds would be more effective?

š ...jane›

What is the source for these "statistics"? It makes no sense to argue that children are best educated in groups of 150. It gives me quite a chuckle to imagine 150 eight-year-olds in a lecture hall at the University of Maryland. Way up front, we have one highly educated and "trained" teacher.

I was once a Title III aide in an elementary school here. I was hired to help a teacher with 25 children, fifth graders, who had been lumped together. Some had behavior problems, some had physical problems, some had problems with ADD and so forth. The teacher had fifteen years' experience in NY City inner city schools and, she needed an extra pair of hands to deal with this group.

If we are going to get anywhere with our problems with education in this country, all interested groups--parents, teachers, administrators, politicians--are going to have to seriously address the problem and think of possible solutions.

I especially doubt Don's information about class sizes getting smaller and smaller. I live in Montgomery County, Maryland, one of the richest counties in the country, and we have classes of more than 30 in elementary school, middle school, high school. I know personally three teachers who loved teaching who have retired because of class size. They were simply exhausted.

Maryal

Let us compare the Education of children in De T’s day with the requirements of the present day. In de T’s time the education of children was directed toward developing the moral norms thought to be essential for a person to live his/her adult life as a productive citizen. This end also required instruction in the basics of knowledge sometimes termed the three “R’s,” reading, writing, and arithmetic.” When the child could read and write reasonably well and do the basic math required to buy and sell at the market and perhaps for some make simple measurements regarding area of land, he could go on to learn a trade by the completion of several years of on-the-job-training or apprenticeship. The level of intelligence of individuals was not of much importance as one with an IQ in the 70’s with a little bit of effort could probably do as good as one with an IQ of 130.

To day in marked contrast much more is required. First because of differing opinions of moral norms, this element has for the most part been eliminated from public education. Secondly basic education today has expanded from de T’s time to include much more than the three “R’s.” Today it includes math up to or through calculus, physical and biological science, social science and more. These are difficult and often abstract subjects requiring significant intelligence and interest if a student is to master them. All students are not created equal, yet our system today requires all students to study the same curriculum at least through middle school and even into high school. This certainly is a factor contributing to the failure of many and leads to ineffectual remedies such as “social promotion.”

There is another big influence in the extra curricular/extra home influences effecting education today. In de T’s time child life was centered in the home. Besides school customary outside exposures were the church, the extended family (usually uncles, aunts, and cousins), and perhaps a few neighbors. Today church and home influences are often reduced to insignificance while even the most deprived child is exposed almost from birth to the influence of the commercial media from television to the Internet. While this exposure has a positive side in that the modern child has a much better concept of the outside world than even a half-century ago, it is also negative, at the least keeping the student from require home preparation and study or worst, leading to immature decisions having even more unfortunate consequences.

Under the existing conditions one can see the logic in policies designed to measure the ability of students at a very early age and customize the education program for each child based on his/her abilities as determined by professional examination. One can also understand why many parents would never approve such a policy applied to their offspring. Perhaps we should count ourselves lucky that the truly gifted students do seem to find a way to rise to the top despite the many shortcomings of the system.

Harold tells us that

1 - all students are not created equal yet our system today requires all students to study the same curriculum and that
2 - today church and home influences are often reduced to insignificance in comparison to the influence of the commercial media.

Do you therefore, like Harold, see the logic of measuring the ability of students at a very early age and customizing the education program? Do you agree that parents would never approve such a policy?

Robby

It is not completely true here, anyway, that all children are required to study the same curriculum. I have posted here before about the accelerated classes my grandson and other kids take and have taken since grade school. There also is an elective program which begins in middle school here. For example, my grandson elected to study German. He also elected to study culinary arts because he's thinking of going into the restaurant business as his father once did. He also elected to study theater arts, which involved the study and production of Shakespearean plays and others. Not only that, he had a course in investing funds in which the kids studied the stock market and "invested". These classes went along with the regular courses of science, math, social sciences, history, language and foreign language courses.

As far as distraction by television and the internet, my grandson and his friends have always made school work their first priority.

Last night I posted a looong message. It was not particularly earth-shaking but it said some things about education as i have seen it. The web must have eaten it or, perhaps I inadvertently hit the the wrong key as I am wont to do frequently since I dont know how to type. I do this with one finger. Robby: I am pleased to have made it to your new group. It's most interesting. I'll be back when I feel that I have something to contribute. My copy of "Democracy in America" should be delivered today. There is a copy here somewhere but ever since my elder son helped me to unpack the books and put them in bookshelves for me I haven't been able to find anything! Forgive this trivial interruption--- more later, Mary

MaryW: You have made some intriguing remarks in other Discussion Groups and I am sure you will do so here. Hurry back!

Robby

The size of schools and classes has been brought to the fore.

The Private School Universe Survey (PSS)shows some shifts in the landscape of private education. Accoding to PSS, 27,402 private elementary and secondary schools enrolled just over 5 million students in 1998. Private school studens tend to attend schools that are urban and small. For the first time this century, Catholic schools now account for less than a majority share of national private school enrollment.

Robby

MARY W. It is so good to see you Here. I am sure you have a lot to offer us here. My mother could not type so she made sure I took typing in school, very good for me as she was so smart in so many ways. Not all of us here are retired teacher's and this is a good place to learn so much. Please come back.

Ginger

No one has mentioned sex education. I always thought it came naturaly. Are they still taking up school time with sex education?

I have no idea when I can return as I will be serving other seniors tomorrow at the anualy picnic and am in a computer class on the net.

Oh while I am on the subject, Does any one here think that computer class will replace our school class rooms? Wow what a savings for the building etc. and no violence when there are no class room. I just can not get over the colorado killings and I am not sorry for not getting over the killings.

Ginger

More money for education will fix it. Myth #1.

From 1951 to 1965, the SAT verbal mean score was 476 to 478.

1965 Pres. LBJ signed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Title 1 had $1 Billion at start. This raised to $42 Billion by 1984.

Some intermediate SAT results during this time. 1966 the SAT verbal mean score was down 11 points to 467. In 1970 is was down another 7 ponts to 460. It plummeted to 429 by 1977.

From the Boston Globe of Aug. 29, 1976 described this decline:

"...a prolonged and broad-scale decline unequalled in U.S. history. The downward spiral, which affects many other subject areas as well began abruptly in the mid-1960s and shows no signs of bottoming out.

Only recently have facts become available that reveal the magnitude and disturbing nature of the achievment decline, its pervasiveness and consistency across all academic areas and all segments of American Education.

For the most part, educators and those connected with schools and colleges have tried to ignore or discount the significance of the achievement decline. At a national conference of school administrators earlier this year, for example, it was alluded to as the "big lie" being perpetrated against education.

At the same time as declining achievement engulfs the nation's schools and colleges, American education is beset with another problem: wholesale grade inflation. From high school through college, "A" and "B" have become the common currency for work which probably would have earned a "C" grade 10 years ago. "C" grades are now relatively few, and "D" and "F" grades are all but nonexistent. Grade inflation has partially blinded many to the reality of the achievment decline."

Page 179 in SCHOOL AND SOCIETY, BY James McKeen Cattell -1915 he tells about literacy: "Statistics compiled by the Bureau of Education for use at the Panama-Pacific Exposition, show that of children from 10-14 years of age there were in 1910 only 22 out of every 1000 who could neither read nor write. In 1900 there were of the same class 42 per 1000. The following states report only 1 child in 1,000 between the ages of 10 and 14 as illiterate: Conn., D.C., Mass., Minn., Montana, New Hamp., N.D., Oregon, Utah, and Washington. It is evident that the public schools will in a short time practically eliminate illeteracy."

The article goes on to state that most of the illeterates in 1910 was the result of the fact that some children had no schooling.

Looks like they knew how to teach reading in 1910. But today we have 24 million that have 8-12 years of compulsory public schooling that are functionally illeterate. And yet no one wants to even suggest that something is wrong with the method of teaching in the school sytems. Why is this?

Don, Now you have alot of information to tell us but you understand that you are going to be asked where you have got your information so for you and me state and give where you have recieved your information Please

I have read and enjoyed every post in this discussion, having to read over 150 posts but it was worth my time for sure.

Ginger

Let me ask you something, Don. Do you have any grandchildren? Are you close enough to them to know how and what they're being taught in school? Makes a difference, you know.

I find that a lot of seniors talk off the top of their heads from their seniority viewpoint without actually knowing what's going on with kids and what's going on in schools except for some article they pick up somewhere or what they see on TV. This is not a true view of education today.

Boy, I'm lucky. I have spent the last nine years out of ten here in NC living in the same house with a kid from the time he was five years old, namely my grandson, and talking to him and his friends, all of whom have been in school for that length of time. It gave me a chance to talk to parents, the kids' teachers, and the kids themselves, as well as going into the schools these young people attended. I sure learned a lot about education today that no quoted statistics, books, or TV show ever could have told me.

Mal

Malryn, I have no grandchildren as my daughter could not have any, so this is why I ask if sex education is taking up much time in the education system?

Ginger

Ginger, I don't know, but I doubt it. I'd have heard about it if it was, and I haven't heard a word. I'll ask my grandson and his mother about it in the morning.

Mal

Don has cited:--

1 - For information about education achievement, an article in a city newspaper, Boston Globe, published 25 years ago (8/76) and
2 - Information about literacy in the Year 1910 published in School and Society in 1915.

Any comments by anyone?

Robby

This is the year 2000, soon to be 2001. What relevance does that information have with education today?

Robby---If I comment on Don's sources, you will throw me out of here with my ears spinning.

Maryal

In a poll of randomly-selected adults commissioned by the National Association of Independent Schools, adults were asked to rate school characteristics in terms of their significance for quality education. The poll, published in January, 2000, found tht the 10 features the public thinks most important for successful schooling are as follows in rank order:--

1 - Employing high-quality teachers
2 - Preventing drug and alcohol use
3 - Keeping students motivated about learning
4 - Challenging students to do their best
5 - Encouraging parents to participate
6 - Maintaining discipline
7 - Meeting needs of the learning disabled
8 - Climate that says its OK to study and excel.
9 - Preparing students academically for college, and
10 - Providing adequate tools for learning.

Your thoughts, please?

Robby

Thought -- how many children are now in school and are attempting to learn that prior to the 1950s would not be in school at all? Are the spiriling scores because we are now educating a broader sector of children - keeping score on a broader sector of schools - and - are we compared to nations that have similar requirements for a basic 12 year curriculum - are the test scores of students going onto aprenticeship counted as well as those slated to go to collage, which is still the practice in Germany and I do not know where else but I thought Britian.

We keep talking about the poor quality of education in this country and yet I'm not sure what that really means. What are we saying we want to see different?

And yes, it does sound like those of us that are intimitly involved with Grands and whose children are teachers etc. etc. see the good things and are at a loss to pinpoint any glaring problem that would cause the lower rating. We can all come up with opinions but not a broad change that would "fix" the education of children, what ever that "fix" needs to be.

Is it just the concept of the rating number that is the problem? I know we hear the horror stories of mostly inner city schools which colors our opinion of all schools. The big problem that I wouldn't doubt makes a difference is the numbers of children on drugs. Attending many an ACOA meeting (Adult Children Of Ålcoholics) I have learned it isn't the substance alchohol or drugs it is the behavior and the crazy making behavior that becomes part of the addicts personality. I can't help but wonder how any teacher makes any sense out of the average class where binges are part of every weekend. Those that binge on what ever their substance of choice are still addicts. None of this was a problem in deTocquevilles day nor in the earlier part of the twentieth century.

Again, I would be most interested in learning what we would like to see different about the students experience or different about what they are learning that is not happening now.

Would fixing all of Robby's list bring us from 21 to 5 or 6th place?

According to what I am being told, numbers 5, 6 and 7 need the most improvement.

Also, I am told that sex education is not a subject in itself, but is a portion of the study of health and is brought up at the appropriate ages according to how much that age group needs to understand. Again, as we have brought out previously, these things vary by school district.

aaaha just had a thought - I work with so many, at least 20 families so far of Chinese from Indonesia, here because of their wanting a US collage education and because their math skills puts them in great demand for high tech industry. The last young couple I worked with were more open and forthright speaking about the difference in schooling here and in both Indonisia and Singapore where many Chinese families send their children to be educated.

Fransicus explained that what we are teaching children in this country in 5th grade math the schools in Singapore they teach to 1st graders BUT he was quick to say here in the states children are taught and are expected to be creative and to be independent. Chinese students are taught to obey, be single minded and only learn material and skills that the teacher prescribes. All great test taking skills but how do you measure the ability to be creative? He said that in the high tech world the Chinese and Indian are great assets but not the creative genuses needed to further the industry with new inventions or marketing. And believe me you would have to have met Fransicus to realize how quick, proud and easy he was to criticize anything that was a US practice that made his life less easy as compared to how things are done in Indonisia or Singapore.

You can now see "Can We Learn in Later Years?" by Dr. Robert Bancker Iadeluca in the Early Fall Issue of Sonata magazine for the arts. Click the link below to access Sonata. Scroll down to find Robby's essay.

Sonata magazine for the arts

As we examine the "back to school" month in America, let us not forget the "empty nest" syndrome that is happening in many nests around the nation. Education in America can not be thoroughly examined without looking at Higher Education.

Higher education has its own special history in this nation. American universities generally followed the models of Oxford and Cambridge and later the German universities. They differed from the European universities, however, in that their organizational strength lay not in the faculty, as was the case in Europe, but in their founding sects.

Initially, interests in higher education in the colonies, as in Europe, were dominated by clerical interests. But the important fact that there was no single dominant, unifying religion led to a proliferation of institutions along narrow sectarian lines. Lay boards of trustees governed the schools strictly along the ecclestiastical interests of their domination, and the faculty member who did not like it could look for work elsewhere.

Do you believe as deTocqueville says (quote above), that "education enables men to defend their independence?" If so, do you see the students of today's colleges and universities learning how to think independently?

Robby

Robby This refers to your request for comments in message #298 on the 10 features the public thinks most important for successful schooling:

It strikes me that #1 (Employing high-quality teachers) embraces most if not all the others 9 features that are cited. In other words most of the features 2 – 10 are the result of the first, high quality teachers. The question then becomes, "What makes teachers high quality? Is it a string of degrees, requiring salaries higher than poorer communities can afford, or are can individuals with lesser academic credentials also be high quality in elementary and middle grades?

Harold narrows it down. If "teacher quality" is not related to money or the degree the teacher obtained, to what is it related?

Robby

The love of the subject and the love of teaching is what makes a Master Teacher, a good teacher regardless of degrees. The Bible was so right when it asked, "Can all teach?" No, all cannot and we all have seen the evidence of that in our lives.

Some professors are researchers and scholars who don't want to teach at all, the vaunted 3 1/2 hours per week classrooom time. Some schools assign freshman classes to graduate students. A real "teacher" comes along once or twice, if you're lucky, in your lifetime, and I bet you can call his or her name out now?

ginny

Ginny: You are so right!! If I can write and/or speak correctly, be able to quote various snippets from Shakespeare, remember "Rime of the Ancient Mariner" (plug for another great discussion group), and spend much time reading good books -- it is thanks to Mary Jane Goodrich, my wonderful wonderful HS English teacher. Any similar experiences here - either on a elementary/secondary level or on a higher education level?

Robby

I can remember several good teachers. When I was a sophomore in high school, I broke my leg and missed time at school. When I returned, I found I'd been taken out of the College prep A class and put in College prep B. (The high school in my home town offered classes according to aptitude and capability and was one of the best in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts at that time.) I was upset about that, but if it hadn't happened, I never would have had Paul Harriman for a teacher. He introduced me to many writers and poets and how to analyze their work, and often walked down the hall with me talking about Mozart after class.

There were others in school, and there were some out of school. A memorable experience for me was studying piano with a Mr. Gibson at the New England Conservatory of Music. I was in high school then. There were two grand pianos in his studio, and when I played a sonata, for example, he sat down at the other piano and played along with me. He also talked about other things besides music; literature, art, science. Both of these teachers were well-rounded men.

There were two women teachers in high school who influenced me positively, too. Helene Picard made us speak French without knowing anything about it from the very first minute we walked in the door. Phyllis Croston not only was a marvelous English teacher, she guided me toward the college to which I won a scholarship.

Also because of a broken bone when I was a senior, I got behind in trigonometry and was tutored by a woman in her seventies. She was the one and only teacher I ever had who made mathematics fun for me.

Mal

And as we all list the various teachers that stand out in our minds, let us at the same time point out the attributes that we believe made them GREATteachers.

Miss Goodrich would stride back and forth as she poured out the Shapespeare. And she asked each of us to tell in our own language what we thought Shakespeare was saying. Then we spent some time digging deeper into what Shakespeare was trying to help us understand. And then (this was wonderful!) we looked for people in our time that were very similar to the people Shakespeare wrote about.

She made it live!!

And they were paid pennies in those days too. And she didn't have a Masters Degree either.

Robby

A short message about the trigonometry tutor I had. Each serious fall I had that caused me to miss school, or time out of school for surgery, made me think about my handicap and what I could not do, rather than focusing on what I could. Every time I told this tutor I couldn't do something, whether it was trig or something that had to do with my injury, she said, "You can! You can do anything!" By the time those sessions ended, I believed her. She taught me more than mathematics, and the other "great" teachers I had also taught me much more than just their particular field.

Mal

I must credit my high school English teacher, Miss Mullen, who was harder on us than we could believe at the time and to whom I owe my decision to major in English in college.

And Dr. Mark Benbow, an undergraduate English professor, who could be Iago or Satan (PL), Hamlet or Don Quixote. Every single person (16) in the class loved him. One day when he did not meet the class, we waited for half the period and finally left. On the blackboard we wrote "With thou away, the very birds are mute" just in case he came in.

And finally Dr. Lewis Lawson who taught me how to teach. I had him for several classes in grad school and had to choose between paying attention to the subject matter or paying attention to the way he taught.

Maryal

My tributes to two women and a man.

Mrs. Mary Jane Hotter, English 8, informed us at the end of the first or second week of 8th grade English, that we did not know our grammar as we should...but THAT would change. It did; we left with a complete knowledge of English grammar that carried me through junior college level structural linguistics when I comped out of the required English Grammar for Prospective Teachers of English.

Miss Pauline Shoemaker,English 12A, was exactly as Maryal described one of her teachers... she "was harder on us than we could believe at the time and to whom I owe my decision to major in English in college."

Mr. Hugh Howey, geometry, explained geometric things to me over and over...after school, before school...always patiently...always trying yet another way to make it sink into my "non-geometry" brain.

One of the most fascinating things about this remembering is that the same teachers were not the "best" ones for everyone. That's one of the reasons I believe in our high school arrangement....where students are in classes with a number of different teachers over their 3-4 years there.

š ...jane›

I probably wouldn't have majored in fine art IF the backward high school of East Tennessee had offered one, just one art course! I regret to this day I couldn't have learned at that lower level what I had to find out the hard way in college--that I should have majored in English or languages.

However, I learned more about composition and color from just ONE of my college art teachers than all the rest put together... dear Mr. Sherman, an eloquent teacher and successful artist during the 40s-60s at the Ohio State University.

One positive memory; one negative memory...

I never had a good English teacher and I'm sure it shows. However, I did have one I liked a lot. Mrs. Bess Rose was about 82 years old when she taugh me in college. I got the same comments and grades on each and every paper, went something like this; "Mr. McIntosh, if a complete thought ever went through your head it would probably do permanent damage, your spelling is atrocious, you have not been even introduced to punctuation - but I dearly love your hand writing." followed by a big red C-.

But by far the best instructor I ever had was Dr. VaLandingham or Dr. Val. Dr. Val taught Calculus and was the very best. And what respect all had for him. Everyone would show up at least 15 min. before his class and the classroom area would be alive with talk. But then the word would come, "Dr. Val has been spotted coming across campus, and things would get quieter". Then the message would come, "Dr. Val is within sight of room 243 and everyone would come in off the balcony and things would get even more quieter." Finally the last message, "Dr. Val has entered the building, then as if by magic, all were in their seats and all were quiet" Moments later Dr. Val entered the room, and he and all of us was ready for business. We celebrated with DR. Val his 50th year teaching at Cumberland College in Williamsburg, KY.

In recent years my daughter followed my footsteps to Cumberland College, first, and then later to the University of Kentucky. Dr. Val's grandson was teaching there at the time. He had become aware of what high esteem all of Dr. Val's students had for him and was curious how he done it. He asked me how he done it and I told him it was the fact that Dr. Val challenged us to do the impossible and he did this every day. And you know what, occassionaly we accomplished what we believed to be impossible very often. And this prepared us for life in such a remarkable way. For you see, all the rest of our lives, when we saw tasks that looked impossible, we remembered Dr. Val's impossible homework assignments that required the whole class to work 4-5 hours every night to try to get done and how on several occassions we did it, and since we were taught to do the impossible, it just might be that all other impossible tasks can be done too.

Does anyone see any relationship between the accolades being given here and DeTocqueville's remark (quote above) that "The Americans have not required to extract their philosophical method from books. They have found it in themselves.

Robby

All of us here continue to float along in the "mainstream of America" and have been comparing our thoughts in this "back to school" month with deT's comments about education. Some ideas have come to the forefront.

1 - The public school classroom is one of the last forums in which large, varied segments of society come together.
2 - The nation's future depends on how well it trains its students to foster and manage technical and knowledge-based industries.
3 - There is no clearer path to personal prosperity and well-being than through education.

As we read DeTocqueville's book, we increasingly realize that he was able to look at us objectively and see 170 years ago what we are seeing in ourselves today. How was he able to do this?

Robby

The wheel goes round and around? Or is it the platitude at work here of "History repeating itself."

ALF:

History may be repeating itself but it took someone like deT to show ourselves to ourselves back in the days when too many people were building this nation to take the time to examine it in an objective manner.

Robby

The other day in a post I metioned a picture taken in the mid 1870s od a class in Windsor Ill. ( I said Springfield, Ill in the oist, but I now find it was Windsor) Any one interested can view the picture by click the link below. I will offer the following comments and questions concerning this picture.

The class by my count comprised about 39 or 40 children. It was almost equally divided between boys and girls with the boys being in the majority by one or two. The sexes were separated with the boys in the first two rows and the girls in the 3rd and forth row. There appears to be six adults in the back row plus another looking through the window. Are all of these teachers? Probably not, but if so that would indeed be a favorable teacher ratio.

What does the picture tell us about these children? Are they clean? Are they well dressed? Are they healthy? Are they happy? How would this class picture compare to a today picture of a modern 3rd grade class?

Class Picture

Harold your picture emanates gravity. The children and the adults are somber and withdrawn into themselves. Perhaps they are showing respect for the camera. They appear clean and tidy, yet poor.

Black and white is hard to see the sparkle but I do see some sparkling pinafores especially, the young girl next to the top row on the end and a few boys in front posing for the camara either shyly or confidently or proud. Two of the teachers the young man and the woman appear to me to be older teenagers. All the boys have jackets and shoes and if they were really poor I wonder if they would even be in class. I bet all the clothes are homemade down to knitted sox and maybe shoes made in the area or maybe they are store 'boughten' from the Sears Cataloge

These kids all would have had a much harder life with a lot of physical work just to exist. The PBS special 1900 has been a real clue to what a city dweller would have experienced and much of the conviences or lack of them reminds me of my grandmother's house and how she continued to live regardless that a new gas stove was bought for her. She continued to come to my Aunt's house every Sunday (my Aunt lived on the next street from us) to take her bath and wash her hair. When ever I have been in rural areas, especially Mexico where the area is still without electricity and water is hauled the folks have this blank rather than animated look on their faces similar to what these children show in the picture.

Back to the picture the individuality of each child is only exhibited by the way they hold themselves rather than in distinctive clothing and it appears to be very much a teacher's class of children not a childrens class with varying teachers present during various times of the day. I would think this represented an entire school rather than one class with every age child and ability in one or maybe two classrooms. Looking closely at the children they do not seem to be all the same age. Also very few had the opportunity to go beyond 6th grade and I so I wonder if the few older ones especially the young man is showing the pride that would be natural to his knowing his family could afford his further educated to the tune of possibly going on to collage.

Harold, where is Windsor?

Barbara--you appear to see pretty much the same things that I see in the photograph. The children do seem to be dressed for the occasion, and remember, cameras were fairly new, and few, and it may be the first photo they had ever posed for....'must be still, don't move, hold your breath'....I can almost imagine those words.

The boys do have jackets, and shoes, and the girls have combed hair, with at least one bow, and maybe a "Sunday" dress. I wonder also, if some of the adults are parents, or older sisters, present, to help get the students ready for the camera.

Some of the older students could be the ones that 'stop and go', because of having to help with work at home, or maybe starting school later. The students are likely to be more accustomed to hardships, without out knowing it...they would not have been used to the convieniences that today's students would know and expect. They would have been perhaps wiser in some ways, and yet have less knowledge in others, simply because of the difference in time and place.

But back in their day....I suspect they were modern, model children.

Sun

As we move along this mainstream of America, the sights and sounds of the political convention have long since disappeared in the past. We have been examining America as it goes through a "back to school" month and comparing it to what deTocqueville has been telling us regarding education in this nation.

But what is that we hear ever so faintly in front of us? Could it be? Do we hear the sounds of another convention? But after all we"ve "been there; done that." A political convention is a political convention, right? Well, no, not exactly. People differ and therefore so do conventions. We'll have to examine this one to see the similarities and/or differences.

A reminder at this point to read carefully the Introduction above. This Discussion Group is part of the Books and Literature folder. We will not be having a political discussion, per se. There are many political discussion groups in Senior Net for that. We will be examining deTocqueville's book, "Democracy in America," looking at his comments which relate to politics and then placing them side by side with what this coming political convention shows us.

You still have time to pick up a cheap paper-back and even second-hand copy of deT's book. It should be fun!

Robby

What stays with me about the Republican convention were the many reports, references, jokes related to a request or maybe agreement that the well known and most conservative conservatives keep their mouths shut until the election is won. Rev. Jerry Falwel (and maybe some others?) admitted that, well, yes, that's why they were not at the convention and why they will have no comments, thank you, until the election is won. It's true that none of the hard line conservatives were heard from at the convention---not one of the well known faces of impeachment time, for example.

This feels like brand new territory to me. All conventions are part marketing, to be sure, but there is usually an upfront pride about what they believe. The "keep your mouths shut" request (what was reported it was called) is a little frightening to think about. I could never determine if the request came from party leaders or from Bush. Does anyone else see this as a true departure from the usual best foot forward at convention time?

I want to add my appreciation to those who participated in this discussion during the political convention held a couple of weeks ago. You all resisted that great temptation to get so close to the trees that the forest was not seen and rather than naming individuals or parties, you examined the American concept of political conventions through the eyes of someone like deTocqueville.

We are all so tempted but -- patience -- politics is just one small sub-topic on the long list (see Introduction above) of events that take place all year long in this wonderful nation of ours. In the meantime, please take a look at deT's quotations above and share with us your thoughts regarding political conventions in general.

Robby

My comments about convention-time marketing are about both conventions. I thought I made that clear. I want to know if the nature of conventions has changed in some ways.

Betty sees political conventions as "part marketing" and yet simultaneously showing an "upfront pride." Agree? Disagree? Is it still a method of "putting ones best foot forward?"

Robby

Oh, absolutely!

This old curmudgeoness admits to being an almost full-time cynic. Nevertheless, it is obvious to the planet that the conventions are a big sales promotion to woo voters with blatant propaganda. It is all a magic show with tricks and mirrors. What you see is NOT what you get!

Conventions, gossip, word-of-mouth and commercials are NOT the stuff to make informed decisions from. READ, READ, READ and check all interviews and debates. One final and very telling thing is to attempt to COMPARE a candidate's speeches made in the North, East, West and South of this country. This, if done conscientiously, can really raise the hairs more than a scary movie! Sometimes you can hear a candidate giving absolutely OPPOSITE promises!

For reading material, include the party platforms. Some newspapers supply these in their entirety. They can be provided by your local party headquarters as well. Avail yourself of one of each, and you become an informed voter.

"The majority is principally composed of peaceable citizens, who by either inclination or interest, sincerely wish the welfare of their nation. But they are surrounded by the incessant agitation of parties who attempt to gain their cooperation and support." P87,(Political Parties.)

And deTocqueville didn't even HAVE television with it's "incessant agitation" from political and politician's ads! He would have been just as irritated as I get, I think.

Phyll

The political convention came into existence the very year that deT was here. The first national nominatng convention in U.S. history was held by the Anti-Masonic Party in 1831, and the Democrats followed suit the next year. The Republicans' first convention as a national party was held in 1856, when they met in Philadelphia.

Delegates meet every four years to choose their nominee for president and vice president and to craft a platform outlining their stance on major issues. The purpose of the convention is to promote party unity, mobilize support and present candidates to voters.

Do you see them as fulfilling these goals?

Robby

Excerpt from a NY Times editorial:--

"Conventions this summer are photo opportunities built around balloon drops, confetti, storms, sound bites from acceptance speeches, and climactic tableaus of the nominees with their families, defeated opponents and Congressional allies. The role of national conventions has evolved -- some would say declined -- rapidly.

"The decline in audience is due at least in part to the fact that real political battles no longer occur at these meetings. We are far removed from the day when Walter Cronkite and other broadcast grandees were beamed into millions of living rooms in the role of convention hosts. Dwindling air time on the networks involves a cost-driven shift of political coverage toward cable and the Internet, leaving the broadcasters free to sell advertising around their entertainment programming.

"Perhaps viewers have made the choice that entertainment must sometimes rank about civic duty, especially during prime time. Recapturing the drama of the brokered convention would require taking power away from primary voters and giving it back to party-bosses, an unhealthy step for democracy.

"It is time for the national parties to find new ways to make them vital exercises in political communication, rather than ritualized performances of outdated ceremonies."

Has the convention become what deTocqueville (quote above) describes as the "incessant agitation of parties?" Should we go back to the party bosses?

Robby

No.

We should have a national primary day. Everyone same day. 3 months before Election Day. First Tuesday in August. No tiresome weeks in New Hampshire. Everyone same time. Each primary by Party Only. No voting by Independents or third parties in the Democrat or Republican vote. Come to think on it, they might need to do the Dems one day and the Reps another, but close together. Every State to have registration by party: Rep, Dem, or Independent or a third or more party designation.

That way the party, not the bosses, would pick their candidate. The conventions could be electronic only. We might not hear the same old news over and over and over.

MaryPage:

How would you go about having an electronic convention? What are some of your thoughts on that?

Robby

Actually, I haven't a clue.

Perhaps the nominees could hold a mini-convention in every state. Would be cheaper than todays campaigning system. Eliminate the tiresome and expensive primary system of today and eliminate the over done national conventions. Fifty mini-conventions could be ALL the electioneering done, other than tv interviews and debates. Let's outlaw advertising.

In my dreams!

MaryPage speaks of the:--

1 - Tiresome and expensive primary system, and
2 - The overdone national conventions.

She asks that:--

1 - Advertising be "outlawed" and
2 - That there be a mini-convention in every state.

How about it, those of you who are staunch advocates of democracy? Do you see this as the way to go?

Robby

I like MaryPage's idea...but I'd like to see the whole country promote "absentee voting" or whatever it's technically called for several weeks before the official day when the votes are counted. We have some counties doing this in Iowa. They set up booths at the mall, grocery stores, etc., and people can vote at their convenience. The votes are then all counted at the close of the polls on the designated Tuesday, etc. I've maintained our politicians really don't want all registered people to vote. IF they did, they'd make it more convenient...and not make working people have to be at the polls before work...or remember to go after work..if they can get there in time. Why not, then, actively promote early voting (absentee) and get a lot more people to vote? IS that what we really want? We say we want everyone to vote, but do we really?

š ...jane›

I wouldn't reject a National Primary Day where all 50 States hold their primary elections. I'd choose the second Saturday of August. Since the conventions/primaries are Party shows, national registration (in each State) should be limited to their own ilk. But, I would permit registration for primary elections through the second Friday of August, and I would permit registration for the National Elections through the second Saturday in October, with national election voting on the second Saturday of November. This may not eventually be necessary. I understand that Virginia (my State) will be permitting electronic voting in the future.

That simply provides the voter (the alleged beneficiary of campaigns, conventions, and primaries) the best chance to support whomever happens to be his(er) choice for the office in either election. (E.G. - McCain as a Republican, and failing that, (as an example) Nader as an Independent), not locking a voter into a failed Party bid that (s)he no longer wants to support based on nothing more than a Party Card. Properly done, the Party wouldn't need a convention - the single primary would have already solidified the Presidential/VEEP selections (by the people, not by the Party (nor the bosses, which I submit are the same entity in the final analysis)). We've seen recently that there is a huge difference between conventions which have the 'people' in attendance, and a convention which has 'representatives' in attendance.

Electronic campaigning/Party business would be easy. Just have the Parties provide cost-free stations throughout the nation that can be used by large groups of people to access the internet for such purposes (and of course, people's access via their home on demand).

Ads shouldn't be outlawed, they should be expanded and cost-free on our airwaves, and should follow specific FEC standards in order to be permitted on our airwaves. A major cost of campaigns is to prop up the bottom lines of the networks. I see the dimunition of network coverage as a direct result of bottom lines, free (news) airtime, certainly not as a result of any (every four year) survey of 'what the people want'.

BTW, a statement from decades past they are surrounded by the incessant agitation of parties who attempt to gain their cooperation and support that doesn't capitalize "parties", in my mind, doesn't point to political "Parties" attempting to gain support, but to individual "parties" (by today's standards, the media and the spin artists focusing on each camp) attempting to influence the outcomes. I have no idea who the "parties" might have been in T's day.

Absentee voting (as it now exists for the November election) enables voters to cast their ballots in an election without going to the polls. Most democratic countries permit absentee voting for persons who are unable to get to the polls because they are ill or away from their voting districts. Usually ballots are cast by mail. Sometimes voters are permitted to vote ahead of the election date if they are going on a journey.

Absentee ballots have been in use for several centuries. During the U.S. Civil War, soldiers in the field were encouraged to vote by absentee ballot. In some Asian and African countries where illiteracy is high, absentee voting is not permitted or is restricted to those who can read and write.

Do the rest of you agree with Jane that "our politicians don't want all registered people to vote?"

Robby

Gary suggests a National Primary Day saying that registration should be "limited to their own ilk" inasmuch as conventions/primaries are "Party shows." He would then have the Parties provide cost-free stations to access the Internet?

Your reactions?

Robby

In Los Angeles, protestors have made a pledge to "celebrate and renew our resistance to corporate globalization, militarism, poverty, starvation, campaign finance corruption, sexism, facism, homo/trans-phobia, criminalization of youth, environmental destruction, prison industrial complex, and genocide." They are in the process of building puppets to protest corporate greed, practicing passive resistance and media techniques, and sharing organizing tips over the Internet.

The Los Angeles police (in cooperation with other law enforcing agencies) say they are ready. They have chopped down trees that could be set on fire, uprooted newspaper racks that could be used as battering rams and fenced off a large patch of downtown Los Angeles with tall swaths of chain link.

Are we watching democracy in action? Does anyone have a problem with any of this?

Robby

It seems to me that unless we do something abot campaign financing, all these suggestions would mean nothing. Why can't we have elections like they do in England? Each candidate is given a certain amount of free TV exposure, the time allotted for the whole election procedure, from start to finish, is very brief, and there are no political paid "soundbytes!"

Or is this too simplistic a solution?

Lorrie

Although we are concentrating on democracy in "America," based upon deT's book, could it be that America has a lot to learn about democracy from other nations? Is that heresy? Weren't we, after all, the "originator" of democracy as we now know it?

Robby

I like MaryPage's suggestion although I would limit the whole process to two months. National primaries the beginning of September, election first Tuesday in November. No advertising on TV unless free time to both candidates (Lorrie's suggestion). I think we are now getting sound bites and photo ops and not real information. In order to find out where the candidates really stand, or try to, a voter must read. Do we have a problem in this country that not enough people want to read up on their candidates?

Maryal

I think Maryal hit the nail on the head. There is a lack of interest and the campaign promises /discussions are often ignored while browsing thru the comics section.

Everyone is in place. The rhetoric will be one sided (Democratic this time) and nonstop, lacking the drama of "yesteryears" conventions. The political positioning is already in place so I will concentrate on our up and coming leaders.

ALF comments upon the conventions of today lacking the "drama of yesteryear." Is it possible that there is merely a different kind of drama" - with Year 2000 communication now being its forte:--

Consider, for example, the following:

1 - Television viewers tuning into the convention coverage will see well-placed billboards for the convention's Web site.
2 - Streaming gavel-to-gavel video of speakers on the podium.
3 - Four "be-here" cameras that take a 360 degree shot and let users decide what angle they want to see.
4 - Speakers will spend about 15 minutes after they've addressed the convention, taking questions from Internet users.
5 - Students will roam the convention with digital video cameras and produce "raw, grity coverage" that will be posted on the site.
6 - Transcripts of speeches, after they are delivered, will be translated into several languages.

Is there anything dramatic about all this or is it merely "cotton candy?"

Robby

Robby,

I'm not sure if the scenario you outline is what is actually happening, or what COULD happen. The only way to get the streaming video is on the PC, and if I try to stay hooked up that long, they disconnect and I have to go thru the process of reconnecting.

Ever since I discovered the other day that I DO get CSPAN, I've been watching their coverage. And I have difficulty turning it off. I saw the president of Common Cause this morning which was very interesting. And, CSPAN says they will be covering the shadow convention in the daytime. The tenor of the calls that have been coming in is most reasonable--quite unlike what they get on CNN in the afternoons. I also saw parts of the only un-fixed convention this year--the Reform Party yesterday. Now there's some excitement for you! Made me remember why I liked to watch the conventions in the first place.

The Dems said that they are setting up a site where the reporters, etc. can get the text of speeches.

Your ideas are examples of what MIGHT be, but is not yet. Ghosts of Christmas yet to come?

I like what MaryPage and Maryal have suggested as to how the election should be conducted.

Jeanlock:

We'll know in a few hours, won't we?

Robby

Robby: It sounds mundane and boring to me. I long for the good old "fist-a-cuffs" days when the candidates got hot under the color and you were never certain what would come next.

ALF:

What do you suggest we Americans do about it?

Robby

ALF---You wrote "The political positioning is already in place. . ." but I read "political poisoning" and thought how wonderfully put. Oh my.

As to the uptothesecond gavel-to-gavel coverage, I watched a little of the Republican convention on the internet. Glurg. It looked even more scripted than it did when only parts of it were shown in the evening. I, too, long for the days when something going on at a convention could get my pulse going double-time. I think part of the reason "they" are so well-behaved and organized and pre-packaged these days may very well have something to do with the fact that they are being watched so minutely by all those cameras.

Seems to me though that not that many people are intrigued with the coverage.

Maryal

From time to time I take a few moments away from the computer keyboard to relax with a Video. Well, I just did and I made a terrible mistake. I admit to being an unabashedly patriotic American as is everyone here obviously in this forum. What was the old classic movie I watched? Ready? "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington."

Now I will be the first one to admit to its corniness but I challenge anyone to go out to BlockBusters or whatever, take out this movie, and after watching it not feeling that patriotic tingle up and down the spine. Yes, we are here chastising what we feel are ridiculous ways of nominating Presidents (as we have every Constitutional right to do) but as deT says (see quote above): "Both parties are agreed upon the most essential points" and how wonderful that we can come to a conclusion without a coup taking place.

I challenge anyone of you to watch this movie while taking part in this Discussion Group.

Robby

So many thoughtful post....and so much to agree with, and/or consider.

I was about to say to Maryal....I, too, am intrigued with the convention coverage. My one big disappointment is that I have never been able to attend. I watch them, knowning the original purpose is mostly lost, but I am always filled with patriotic feelings and ideas that have always been such a part of my life. Patriotism is something I have missed so often in recent year, always fearing that it will disappear with our generation.

Then in the next post...Robby admits to being unabashedly patriotic...

Thank heavens....I am not alone. I thought we would be able to pass it on to our children, and maybe we have...then again, maybe the circumstances of our lives and times were different, and that accounts for the depth of our feelings.

I also would like to say, I have difficulty seeing all the mobs that rant and rave, and fight, and protest outside the conventions, as defenders of freedom...any freedom (yes, yes, I know...) I can't help but wonder...how many of them are registered to vote?

Sun

Sun asks us to wonder how many protesters are registered to vote -- a question that makes us wonder if there is (or should be) any correlation. Is it necessary for a protester to be registered to vote? Can one "vote" with action of some sort without entering a voting booth? We have all heard the phrase "voting with our feet." Is it necessary for one to vote in order to be a "good" American? Is taking some sort of action to influence the vote of others as important (and patriotic) as one's own vote?

This leads us again to the question which is part of the title of this Discussion Group -- What is an American?

Robby

I think an American is anyone who lives in North or South America and that citizens of other countries in this hemisphere object to our calling ourselves Americans rather than "citizens of the U.S."

Given, however, that that IS what we call ourselves, why an American is any citizen of this United States. Most Americans feel very privileged to be just that! I know I do.

Gary, ending registration on the day before voting just will not do in most states of the union, including D.C., Virginia and Maryland. In fact, I do not know of any state it WOULD work in at this time, but I am not certain this is true.

The problem in this area is that our Registration Boards and State Boards of Election are not computerized to the extent that they are able to set up computers IN the polls. Therefore they MUST provide the polling places with large BOOKS of printouts of all of the registered voters in that precinct. This cannot be done in 24 hours. It is just a physical impossibility. They really, really need the month between the closing of the registration and election day itself to get all in readiness. Honestly, I have worked in this end of the business both in Montgomery County, Maryland and Fairfax County, Virginia and have discussed this problem with representatives of other counties in both states and with workers in D.C.

I think it depends, in this area at least, which party you belong to as far as wanting all registered voters to get out and vote is concerned. We have an expression here concerning which party loves rainy days and which does not. Will not go further, because I do not want to be political here. But I feel safe in guessing that the REST of the nation works pretty much the same way: i.e., if you belong to the party which has the MOST registered voters locally, you want sunny weather to get as many of ALL of the voters out as possible. The minority party (in registration) prefers rainy election days.

Lorrie, I do not feel it necessarily true that we have to have campaign finance reform PRIOR to making election changes such as I and others have suggested here. I favor reform AT ANY TIME, but we would be cutting down on the necessity for as much money being spent if we had 3 months (or 2, to give due to Maryal) between primary and election and did not have national conventions or advertising. What I'm trying to say is, it does not MATTER which we work on first.

Just hours until the convention begins and the law has seen to it that the First Amendment be followed --

Police can only set foot inside protesters' headquarters if they have a search warrant or during an emergency. This order comes from a U.S. District Judge who said that he would not allow civil rights to be trampled. The protester headquarters (Convergence Center) has been illuminated by helicopter spotlights up to 50 times nightly and city fire officials, accompanied by police, have continually inspected the building.

The injunction orders that that there be no more efforts to enter the Convergence Center without search warrants. The order also allows the popular political rap-rock band Rage Against The Machine to give a free protest concert Monday night across the street from the convention center without getting a spcial city permit.

Robby

Now, that last line bothers me, Robby.

My question is this: do they Normally require a city permit to give a free concert on the streets?

If they Do, I object. Then again, it is not MY city, so I object to my objecting.

Good question, MaryPage. We're really talking First Amendment interpretation, aren't we - in "normal" times as well as during a convention?

Robby

Thousands of protesters are expected to show up at the convention and the police say they (the police) "may" be armed with paintball guns that shoot balls filld with pepper spray rather than the colored liquid used in paintball war games. No final decision has been made about issuing them. By deploying high-powered air guns, the police say they will be able to focus on violent protesters far beyond the range of the pepper spray canisters ordinarily used.

Federal officials have asked the Los Angeles hospitals to prepare for possible chemical and biological terrorist attacks during the convention. There is no evidence that such attacks are being planned.

Organizers contend that both the pepper spray and terrorist attack preparations are extreme and send the wrong message to people coming to exercise their rights of free speech.

Robby

As we float down this mainstream of America, the speed of activities we are watching relating to the convention increases. While the delegates have not yet moved into the public eye, the first group of more than 2,000 protesters had their first demonstration today. They rallied at a downtown square against capital punishment. Two hours of music, poetry and speeches condemned the death penalty and "corporate greed."

A prominent banner said: "Don't choose between oppressors. Fight for justice."

Democracy in action?

Robby

Robby, regarding your question, "Do the rest of you agree with Jane that "our politicians don't want all registered people to vote?"" My observation is that the answer depends on how the party rates their chances of obtaining the majority of the registered voters when they vote. The demos seem the most active promoting voters registration drives surely the result of observations that their constituents are less likely to take the trouble.

On the absentee voting thread that was active today. I think this is related to above registration comment. Again traditionally I think Republicans were more likely to vote absentee. In Texas for much of the past decade, we have had an open 2-week voting period ending a few days before the actual Election Day. Anyone who wants to vote in this period can do so, and many do. There is no need to state a reason and a planned absence from the area on Election Day is not required and is not asked. I think both major parties are pretty satisfied with this arrangement. It gives people a wide window to go vote when they feel their mind is made up and at their convenience. At the end of the open period a voter who has not voted must wait the several days until Election Day. The disadvantage is that once the vote is cast, it cannot be changed. I guess this reduces the value of big media campaigns the last couple of days. This might work to the disadvantage of an underdog who is making rapid strides at the finish.

Regarding the 1876 class picture of the 1876 Windsor Illinois elementary class that I posted Friday. I certainly agree with the comments that were posted. I think I would also suggest that they somehow did not project our current image of carefree and happy kids. They seem unnaturally (by today’s standard) serious. I guess what I’m saying is the even it one of our "Photo Shop" artists put those faces in year 2000 clothing on the steps to a slick new school building, they still would not be mistaken for a 21st century class.

Thought - someplace I remember reading the concept that Democracy is a living system and each generation has to secure it's own place in that system. Looking at the years since deTocqueville wrote his book we have added many to the voice of the system and there has been a replacment of one group (poltical Bosses) that found the cracks and filled it with their vision for us to another group that does the same thing by donating money.

I also think that although electronic voting sounds so sensible it only sounds that way to those of us that are comfortable around a computer. Half this nation still does not even own a home computer and many more do not do the kind of work where they interface with a computer.

Democracy is work and each election is to me like birthing a baby. It takes time for all the issues to be addressed, for the support to have a chance to speak and look and listen. There are many events that once cut to the bare bone everyone wonders why bother at all. We like seeing and hearing by a flick of the TV switch rather than making a single effort to stand in an airport or auditorium or train station and hear what a candiate has to say with only the expense of a newspaper that would inform us by carrying the stories of the compaigne.

Somehow we believe that the TV stations can afford to donate free campaigne time. I think a more acurate account of the cost would be in order here. England has government run or maybe it is government subsidized TV. At any rate some of their TV is not financed soley by commercials and therefore they can give free time to candidates. Our TV would require someone financing the time - either rich sponsors or the TV stations themselves which again you have the staions looking to be compensated by who ever is elected.

It appears to me if we want an equal voice and would like the practice of soft money to stop then we may each need to think about supporting the convienence of seeing a campaigne on TV just as we would otherwise spend to visit a convention.

The early settlers may have given their life for Democracy and many since have secured our Democracy with their life and we may have to spend money to secure the opportunity for delegates to carry on a dialoge with the citizenry every four years.

Barbara reminds us that to have a democracy, there is a cost involved -- whether in lives or money or both. Holding on to the "rights" we have does not come free. As we watch democracy in action in the form of a political convention, perhaps briefly pausing to examine the basic tenets of this form of government might be in order.

Democracy is a form of government in which a substantial proportion of the citizenry directly or indirectly participates in ruling the state. It is thus distinct from governments controlled by a paticular social class or group or by a single person.

In a direct democracy citizens vote on laws in an assembly, as they did in ancient Greek city-states and do today in New England towns. In an indirect democracy citizens elect officials to represent them in government. Representation is typical of most modern democracies.

Today the essential features of democracy, as unerstood in the Western world, are that citizens be sufficiently free -- in speech and assembly, for example -- to form competing political parties and that voters be able to choose among the candidates of these parties in regularly held elections.

deTocqueville says (quote above) that "the majority is principally composed of peaceable citizens who sincerely wish the welfare of their nation." Are we Americans any different now from those in deT's time? Did he apprise us correctly?

Robby

Robby,

You CAN vote by protesting, but it only counts if there are enough protests to sway those who actually enter a voting booth. I think that what happened in the Viet era is a good example. The tide of the protests finally became overwhelming and those protesters succeeded in changing the minds of their parents, as well as the minds of many in government. Perhaps it takes a groundswell of protest to raise the consciousness of the voters to the point where they take action.

About non-interference by the police. Remember the recent IMF (at least I think it was that group) meeting in DC where there were so many protesters? The authorities were able to intervene because they had the fire dept. inspect the building the protesters were using as headquarters and declare it a fire hazard. Do you think that a similar thing could happen in LA to any really unruly protest group?

I think I will mention the Reform Party Convention that was held last week. Sort of a wild chapter out of the past. They ended up with a full party split complete with two conventions and two candidates to vie for the $6.5 million in federal funds. I suspect the Lawyers will end up with most of the cash regardless of which faction winds. I was sort of surprizd the event did not generate more discussion here?

Harold--I thought it was $12.5 million in funds they are fighting over.

Sun

Harold: I was also surprised that the Reform Party Convention was not mentioned by participants in this forum. As we all know (and knew), there were more than two conventions taking place.

any thoughts on events that took place in other conventions? Is America strictly a two-party nation?

Robby

Sunknow: Of Courrse, you are right! I had a real memory lapse on that one. The brethren of the bar will be real inspired by that figure.

And Robby regarding your question, "any thoughts on events that took place in other conventions? Is America strictly a two-party nation?" I think two other conventions should be mentioned. They are the Libertarian and the Ralph Nater group. Both received a fair amount of coverage on CNN and other cable news channels. In the past I have been attracted to the Libertarian ideal and in fact frequently voted for their candidate in the 70’s and 80’s, most often to avoid voting for either of the mainstream candidates. Of coarse in reality they have been much too much gold standard Republicans for me. Also I am attracted to Ralph Nater’s environmental position but completely turned off by his isolationist anti-free trade policy.

“Is America strictly a two-party nation? I would answer as a practical matter, no. But I do believe that an upstart like the Reform party with a hot candidate and an attractive issue could draw enough votes from one of the majors to affect the outcome. Do we have that situation this year? I suppose that that outcome is reduced, but not eliminated by the split.

Harold--double the money...schedule the trial. See you in court!

Robby--I know the Reform Convention is said to be a throw-back to the old 'fights' at the conventions. But I have so little respect for most of those people now, that it is hard for me to look at it from the stand point of being part of the democratic process. I know it is, but I feel they 'blew' it, and have pretty much squandered a chance for a functional, viable third party. I suppose I should reserve judgment at this time. Maybe a Party of Independents might have done better. A Two-party nation? I guess that's better than just a one-party nation. The current two parties are very defensive about new comers...but I doubt there is a limit. We have always had fringe parties about.

Sun

For those who are not too happy about the way our nation is operating via the party system, let us concentrate on Sun's comment: "A two party nation is better than a one-party nation."

Robby

The National Football League has agreed (as it did with the previous convention) to change the starting time of the preseason game, a decision that will allow the network to devote an hour of prime-time coverage to the opening night of the current convention.

1- ABC will be broadcasting live from the convention on all four nights.
2 - CBS News announced that it will broadcast on all four nights and devote an hour of prime time Wednesday and two hours on Thursday.
3 - NBC News has said it will televise all four nights of each convention on its cable channel and provide live coverage on the glagship NBC network on the final two nights.

The above gives an idea of how important the TV Networks consider the two conventions in comparison to the "other entertainment" on the screen.

Robby

It always seems to be that a strong 3d party takes votes away from one or the other of the main parties. In this election, I like Ralph Nader, but I know that most Nader votes will diminish the Gore total. When we lived on LI, I remember one Congressional election where that, as I recall, split the democratic vote, and the Republican won. The new parties seem to take an extreme view toward one end of the curve or the other, and thus only get the small % of the voters who hold that extreme position.

I don't see much hope for a multi-party system until you have more groups who can attract a larger percentage of the voters. But I could be wrong.

European countries have many more than two political parties from which people run and are elected to office. A few years ago a European friend of mine, who lived here for a few years, laughed about Republicans and Democrats and told me people in Europe really see very little difference between the two parties in this country. If there can be many political parties in Europe, why can't there be here? This is a question about this particular democracy that has bothered me for some time.

Mal

Mal: An excellent question. Perhaps someone with some expertise in this field can answer that.

Robby

There is one serious problem with more than 2 parties, and Especially in some European countries that have more than 3.

That is that the party that gets a plurality of the vote does not usually represent a majority of the citizens.

I guess you have to think about it to see the problem. But it is a real one and a serious one.

Robby, I'm following this discussion and reading all the posts, but have had no comments. Everybody is responding to deTockie and our system of government very well, don't you think?

In one of the quotes above, the phrase "surrounded by incessant agitation of parties" is very apt at the moment and will only increase in the days ahead. Getting nasty aren't they? Fortunately, this only happens once every 4 years except in the local elections.

Several years ago I spent 2 weeks at an Elderhostel in Rome and one of our lectures was on the Italian system of government. I think I have some notes somewhere, but it was interesting - they have 30 some political parties - can you imagine that confusion here? We'd never survive it! hahaha

Don McIntosh - I laughed when I read your post about the cost of raising children to 18 years. I would be worth almost 10 million dollars today if I had not had 6 children. Everything you listed is true. So its not the money, it gives me a sense of being alive I see them and my 10 grandchildren. I feel like a billionnaire every day .

In Canada also we tend to have only two parties. In France they have several political parties. Center, left of center, right of center, extreme left, and extreme right. They also have a Green Party. Am I forgetting one? Yet their prosperity seemed obvious to me last May when I was there. Oh! well.

I love this site anyway. Amitiés, Eloïse

Don McIntosh - I laughed when I read your post about the cost of raising children to 18 years. I would be worth almost 10 million dollars today if I had not had 6 children. Everything you listed is true. So its not the money, it gives me a sense of being alive I see them and my 10 grandchildren. I feel like a billionnaire every day .

In Canada also we tend to have only two parties. In France they have several political parties. Center, left of center, right of center, extreme left, and extreme right. They also have a Green Party. Am I forgetting one? Yet their prosperity seemed obvious to me last May when I was there.

Oh! well. I've had a bad day today, but I love this site just the same. Amitiés, Eloïse

Eloise:

It's good to have a voice from Canada. As I said in the Introduction, we welcome Canadians in this site as they bring with them the democratic experiences of our neighbor to the north.

Robby

Eloise, I can only imagine just how blessed you are. Ten grandchildren and each worth the whole world, I am sure.

I am sure, because I just have one and o, how I love that little girl who is 2 year old today. We had her birthday on Saturday so Grand Pa Pa (that's me) and Nan Na (my wife) could be there. Twenty five pounds of pure gold and pure love. Just can't explain to you just how I feel when she lets everyone know that she is Pa Pa's (thats me)girl. She's not Nan Na's girl even though my wife makes every effort to get her to say she is, she just says "no, no, I'm Pa Pa's girl". Not even Mommies girl or dadies girl, just 'Pa Pa's girl". Ah, how sweet it is!!

We actually have several parties within our two major parties. In each we have left, right, moderates, middle of the roaders, far left, far right, ultra conservative, fanatically liberal, and I am sure many more. I would really love to think that each of these factions in each party think in terms of what is best for our republic like they did in the days of DeT, but I'm afraid this is not the case. Many, only think of themselves. Others are against the private enterprise system that has made this country great, and many others are still for it, believing that some things have went wrong with it, but that it still is the best the world has to offer. Some believe that morals cannot be legislated, while others believe that most all laws represent someones morals, and the only thing in question is whose morals are going to be legislated.

People in DeT days in the U.S. would have answered the question of "Who owns your property?" by saying God does. People today would think the question a foolish one because they would presuppose that everyone knew that they owned their property.

Yes, there are balloons, funny hats and confetti but also on the floor in this convention are delegates with computers, Palm Pilots, digital cameras, wireless beepers, and "smart cards." This appears to be the most "plugged-in" national convention in history. Every delegate is connected to cyberspace.

Votes will be recorded by 56 Apple iMac computers scattered across the convention floor. And that smart card can be used in any of the more than 100 seven-foot high computer biosks, 12 of them scattered at the convention and the rest at Los Angeles hotels to get late-breaking information. The delegates will be able to ascertain issues ranging from the party's daily talking points to scheduling changes and restaurant reservations. The technological display is being offered free by many high-tech companies.

Said a research director from Harvard University: "All this technology is not so much to solicit opinions of delegates as it is to tell them what to do and what to say. It will help delegates get the message of the day -- or of the hour -- and provides an opportunity for the convention to speak with one voice to the media."

What is your thought regarding all this gadgetry? Is it strenghthening the individuality that is so important in democracy or is it "1984" come to life?

Robby

Robby, so the Harvard critic was charging that an interactive format was actually more one-directional than interactive, that some over-management of information was going on. Gee, she mused, a devilish twinkle in her eye, why does that charge sound vaguely familiar? Next time I'm in that complaint neighborhood again, as soon as I can catch that horse, I'll have to remember to quote Harvard and.....Orwell??

I have long believed that one reason you could never get a real political revolution going in this country is that almost everyone thinks he/she is above average--not average or one of an underclass. It seems to me that the reason for multiple parties is that you have a sizable group of people who feel left out and that their point of view is not considered within the existing parties.Then they get together to form a new party. As I see it, that's the reason for the Reform Party, and the Green Party. Each of these parties represents an extreme wing of one of the existing parties. And I don't believe there are enough extremists to garner the necessary votes.

With the exception of the depression years, which did see a move toward the Communist party in this country, or the conditions which sparked the rise of unionism, most people mostly have enough to eat, a fairly decent car, enough leisure time to go to the ball games, or whatever. They may not be wildly happy, but neither are they unHAPPY enough to want to rock the boat. Far from creating new parties, they don't even go out to vote.

Another example of the lure of Bread and Circuses?

Jeanlock mentions Bread and Circuses? Is that what most people want?

Robby

Robby, I was trying to make a funny, so no offense meant. At all.

Jeanlock, it still surprises me to hear people say that most people have enough to eat, etc. There are still plenty folks who really don't have enough to eat, who don't have a car and leisure time is the least of their worries. 30 percent of the children in Texas (other sources say higher) do not have health insurance. That speaks to the parents' economic condition. Some of those children are seen in emergency rooms for routine health care, but others simply never see a doctor. Most of these parents do work, but in jobs that either don't offer coverage or offer it at a price too high. I guess all this is part of what happens during economic upturns. Enough really is getting better, so we assume it's better for everyone.

Please note that the quotes above are periodically changed. Those participants who have not yet had a chance to get the book can find it easy to relate to some of deTocqueville's observations by looking at the quotes.

This discussion group has only just started so there is plenty of time to obtain the book. (Cheapie paperback recommended.)

Robby

What's behind the scenes at a convention? According to a recent article, a "convention is a lot like Hollywood, with nothing behind the scenery but plywood, sawdust and a snoozing gaffer." Everywhere people were promising to take you backstage past the security guards. The "crush" of journlaists was being promised that they would be taken into the "exclusive enclaves."

Journalists who finally ended up at the Playboy mansion found that some of the well-known names in attendance did not wish to e photographed in such a place. And "the Bunnies were off limits." Said a guard: "These girls are working. They're not here to be interviewed. They're here to mingle with the guests."

The article's conclusion? A convention is structured to deflect attention from a party's weak points so "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain."

So will someone here please tell us -- just what is a political convention anyway?

Robby

A convention is to make the country feel good about itself. Whichever party can succeed in that will win, I think. I'm watching and interested.

Most of the countries that have many political parties seem to be Parliamentary forms of gov't... I get the feeling that the Founders didn't seem to be interested in that,because a representative type of gov't would be more directly responsible to the citizens.

At least we get a chance to "throw the rascals out" every 2, 4, & 6 years .

Betty Gregory--

True, true. But that is not the majority. And, I wonder how many of them vote?

Lorrie--

Great poem! Did you find it on the 'net, or did you have it in a book, or had you memorized it.

Maybe I'm only jaded (about conventions) in theory only. Listening to the speeches last night---and especially anticipating the speakers tonight---I was reminded what convention time does for me. I'm put back in touch with the excitment of possibility. I feel again what's possible---and that my vote and others' votes actually add up to change the world. I know that sounds corny, but the founding fathers' dreams were just as corny, then.

Also, and this probably won't get translated well from my head to paper, I don't feel so alone in my concerns. A convention does that. It's one thing to talk over with close friends one's concerns, or to step gingerly when voicing them in public formats like these. It's something altogether different, and wonderful, to see several thousand people scream their approval when an issue is mentioned.

Also, in my lifetime, I've seen all male conventions change to conventions that not only include women but who celebrate their rise to (a few) powerful positions. Each one of the milestones passed felt wonderful in itself, but represented to me something being added to a foundation of change. It's particularly fun this year to see a competition, of sorts, of inclusion. Who cares about the charges of phony-ness---the images are instructive in ways beyond politics. Also beyond politics, it delights me to think what benefits are being born for Blacks who are being "fought over." Respect begins in strange places. I'm optimistic enough to imagine that some of this competition might lead to genuine inclusion. I'm sure some of my republican friends, in particular a Black woman friend, feel finally vindicated for sticking with the republican party---maybe just like I felt when the Democratic party began showcasing women at their conventions. All in all, and for many reasons, it's an exciting time to be alive.

Ditto that last sentiment, Betty!

I'm in a minority. My computer was a gift. The cable access I have is paid for by people other than myself. I drive a car that's over 15 years old, don't own a home, have no investments, no big bank account, no money for cruises, trips to Europe, the UK and Asia, out to lunch, movies, prescribed medications when I need them, or anything except necessities like food to eat and rent to keep a roof over my head, and I vote.

I know others in the same boat that I am who vote, too.

Betty, it is exciting to see women taking part in conventions and government after all these years of suppression. Do you suppose a woman president would allow the discrepancies I speak of above to occur in such numbers as they do today under a male president, or would that depend on party?

I've never been afraid to vote for a Socialist or anyone who might heed and do something about the inequities in this rich, one-sided country.

Mal

Mal---I'm not THAT optimistic.

Betty G.,

I know just what you mean. When I saw all those placards waving for Medicare RX coverage tonight, I felt like going to the streets with one of my own.

Today I see this as a loaded statement

"The deeper we penetrate into the innermost thought of these parties, the more we perceive that the object of the one is to limit and that of the other is to extend the authority of the people."

Where we think of cost and power-over or Federal beaurocracy becoming the center of power and authority, all the while extending the authority of the people so they receive a fair shake, especially the political and economically disadvantaged, it does seem to take the Federal Government to bring equity to the situation. I think of how the Civil Rights movement only became a reality when the government declaired schools, housing etc. to be available to all regardless of... So that while a limited government sounds good and is economical and there is less chance for the many fingers in the pie with the itch to cheat to take advantage of funds, I can see that the only ones that benefit from less government are those already included and prospering in the social, political and economic system.

In deTocqueville's day many were not included-- woman and blacks were not included where as landowners made up the greater percent of those participating, creating policy and benefiting from the Federal goverment.

Local government seemed to be stronger and even here in Austin I remember as recently as in the 1970s the cities 25 year Master Plan (required by the State of Texas for every city that is over 5,000 citizens and enjoys a Home Rule Charter) being put together. It was a huge effort to have citizens of every neighborhood trained in group development-- and the planning groups, with participants that counted in the thousands, were provided a comprehensive history and budget of every area of local government and a profile of every neighborhood with photoes of its current use and historical use and significance. Group meetings held in each area of town discussed and propossed the items for the Master Plan.

Out of that effort we have many strong Neighborhood associations that to this day continue to meet at least once a year. These Neighborhood groups affect traffic and zoning within their areas as well as other civic conserns. Problem newcomers to Austin seldom have experienced this kind of involvment and are often annoyed at how long it takes for anything to happen and they grunmble that the city fathers have not solved to their liking all the problems but do not participate or create their own Neighborhood Association.

Today Austin is three to four times the size it was in the 70s making this approach impractical and therefore requires volunteer citizen participation. The cost of training and gathering such an Armada of folks to provide imput would break the bank.

In the 70s when that Master Plan was being developed there were folks hired to visit ministers, hang out in playgrounds and schools to find and enlist the support of those citizens that usaully do not have a voice in government or do not volunteer. The result was that every area of this town was equally represented and often the needs of the different areas not only became known but at times clashed. This was a great call to equity in civic involvment and understanding.

I just wonder are there any New Englanders in our discussion that could share-- are the Town Meetings alive and well as deTocqueville expresses?

As we approach that magical moment when someone is to be nominated to be the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, let us examine this exalted office.

1 - THE PRESIDENT AS HEAD OF STATE.
a - The ceremonial head of the government -- receives representatives of other governments and is expected to travel within the country and abroad.

2 - THE PRESIDENT AS HEAD OF GOVERNMENT.
a - Appoints the heads of the government departments.
b - Provides leadership in legislation.
c - Is a constraining force on Congress.
d - Uses the Constitutional power to veto.
e - Is the nation's chief diplomat and deals directly with the heads of foreign governments.
f - Is chief of the armed forces.
g - Establishes and administers national policies.

3 - THE PRESIDENT AS POLITICAL LEADER.
a - The leader of his political party.
b - Campaigns for the party.
c - Manages patronage for the party rewarding supporters with jobs.
d - Exerts political leadership on Capitol Hill.
e - Excels at public leadership.

4 - ORGANIZATION OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE.
a - Guides a personal staff.
b - Commands a large institutional staff.
c - Listens to policy advisory organs.
d - Meets regularly with his Cabinet.
e - Meets occasionally with Vice President.

Hoopla notwithstanding -- would you say that the various political conventions have a most awesome responsibility?

Robby

Robby it would be nice to know the system that is within the party and what the political convention is to those in the system, how they got there, what they do in order to get there etc. Does a party have a charter, what are the rules that they govern themselves by and is a party responsible to an authority or rule or charter?

Barbara: An excellent question -- perhaps there is someone here who is qualified to answer it.

OK I found this teriffic site that answered most of my questions and many more - I'm linking the pages that are especially defining the conventions.

Barbara: Thank you for those links. They will help us even more to understand just how America works. Do you or anyone here see any comparison between what they say and what deTocqueville observed while he was in America?

Robby

Barbara, your # 397 is awesome.

It is so true that many wealthy citizens resent any regulations they bump their heads into which prevent them from charging ahead at full gallop towards their own goals of getter still richer, regardless of at whose expense.

Government is set up as a structure created by us, ourselves, to set the rules for us, ourselves, to protect the most of us who are attempting to lead decent lives against those few who want to injure or destroy peace and tranquility and order.

Without government we would have chaos.

The most obvious, to me at least, issue we have in these times which seriously impacts on every man, woman and child in our country today and into the rest of this century is the question of whether or not we are going to continue to allow our air, water and food to grow ever more poisonous to us. Our children are living longer than those of a century ago, but they have, by huge percentages, many, many more physical deformities and learning disabilities. I am not speaking of the unconquered diseases of the past, such as polio, which left children with handicaps. These chemicals which do not belong in our lungs and tissues are affecting, permanently and without recourse, our children from conception. It is easy for me to say it has not affected me and that I will be ashes in a few years time. Still, it is with a very heavy heart regarding the future of my species and, of course, of my own darling little great grandchildren.

This issue has literally become a battle between established wealth wanting to become wealthier without restrictions, and the unperceiving populace.

Some people say we have too much government. MaryPage reminds us that "without government we would have chaos." How do we reconcile these two?

MaryPage reminds us that government is "created by us, ourselves, to set the rules for us, ourselves, to protect the most of us..." Is this just theory or is this exactly what is happening?

In your opinion, did the two political conventions take this into consideration?

Robby

As we examine the action of protesters outside the convention, perhaps we are using the term, "protesters," too loosely. One journalist called the confontation a "standoff between police officers who want to go home and young people who don't want to go home."

These are a special kind of group. They don't have a formal organization,membership, posters or agenda. They are everywhere, causing all kinds of problem, chiefly because they want to be entertained.

One 23-year old Los Angeles resident said: "I came for a good time, and now I'm having one" as mounted police forced protesters and rock fans out of the parking lot. A 13-year old said: "I don't really have an opinion on the convention." One teenager in a black T-shirt who declined to give his name lighted a firecracker and threw it over the fence saying that he had nothing in particular that he was protesting.

The rock band appears to interest them but when the band wraps up early, the crowd's attention seems to turn to whatever sideshow remains: the police.

Any comments?

Robby

Carnivals and circuses attract many different kinds of people. Some pay for their tickets. Some climb over the fence. Others hoot and holler and create a sideshow of their own.

Mal

Robby--the teenager and the 13-yr old that had no good reason for protesting...just having a good, rip-roaring-destructive good time. One wonders, was the 13-yr old there alone, out on the town, or with parents? Parents proudly take tiny children to these things...it's their way of teaching Freedom, and Democracy!

Truth is, the biggest majority of the rabble-rouser that attend protest have no real reason for being there at all...except to rabble rouse. A Rock Concert? Oh, pleassseeee! The real meaning of most protest can be lost easily, because the ill-behaved overshadows the ones that really feel that they have a 'Cause' to protest.

Sun

It is just hours away from a person being nominated to be Vice-President of the United States -- a person, as the expression goes, only a heart beat away from being President. Exactly what is the responsibility of the Vice-President?

The vice-presidency of the United States is one of the two positiions in the government of the United States that is filled in an election open to all eligible voters in every state and the District of Columbia. The significance of the office relates almost entirely to the fact that the vice-president succeeds to the presidency if the president dies, resigns, or is removed from office. Altogether, eight presidents have died in office, and one has resigned.

1- PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE.
a - The vice-president is assigned only one responsibility by the Constitution, and that is in the legislative branch, not the executive branch. S/He is the presiding officer of the Senate and has the additional responsibility of casting a tie-breking vote whenever the votes of the senators are evenly divided on any roll call.

The Constitution as ratified in 1789 established a system for electing presidents and vice-presidents that remained in effect for only 15 years. In each presidential election the electors chosen by the states cast their ballots for president and vice-president. It was reasoned that the person who received the second greatest number of votes -- hence, the vice-presidency -- would also be some person of national reputation and the next best qualified person to serve as president.

The formation of political parties during the 1790s undermined the logic of this system. Each political party began to put up two-man teams and the electors chosen by the party would vote for both men.

American political parties traditionally have been composed of several factions. The party leaders usually sought to console the losing faction by givng one if its members the nomination for vice-president.

Since World War II most party leaders have sought to nominate tickets composed of candidates who generally see eye-to-eye on key issues. Balance is achieved by nominating a candidate who comes from a different part of the country, who represents a different ethnic background, or who has acquired different kinds of experience in public service.

In modern practice the presidential nominee consults with his advisors and with party leaders at the convention and then announces his choice for his vice-president, that is, running mate. The presidential nominee's choice is invariably nominated.

Robby

I am afraid it sounds as though most of the groups protesting at the conventions are made up of professional trouble makers.

Only the people who can see what is going on can know for certain.

To me a protest should be a healthy, licensed parade of persons wanting to push a cause, or protest an action taken by a company or an elected group of law-makers.

There should be feelings of togetherness and joy in the message, if possible, with placards and chants, music and songs, a beginning and an end.

No confrontations. No mischief. No destruction. Numbers count and can be impressive.

A protest may end at a speech giving place, but all should go home at the announced time for the end of the demonstration of protest.

Would it be fair to say that Democracy, by definition, is NOT an orderly place?

Robby

Oh, Robby, I sincerely hope not!

But we and the universe we live in are apparently in a spiral of increasing disorder which is built in.

Bu aren't dictatorships, again by definition, more orderly?

Robby

Probably. Fortunately, I cannot speak from experience!

In de Tocqueville's time, they lived at the most until they reached 50. Social problems were so different that they can't be compared. He could't make judgment on how American society of today solves problems. Runaway technology and the internet which webbed the whole world into one cocoon opened up vast information on how everyone on earth lived - and all the world wants to live like in America. Their homes were overcrowded because families were huge. Leisure activities were inexistant for the masses as they struggled for sheer survival. The education was reserved for the wealthy only. Women stayed home and toiled all day and every day without much reward.

How we live today is much better, but it also brings its share of problems. Too much freedom brings abuse of it. Criminals get away literally with murder and the people want to own guns to protect themselves. Its not safe anymore to walk on the street. There is the right of the unborn child, the right of the elderly, human rights in every shape or form, right of gays and lesbians, of, of, of,..... So it leads to a society where everybody and everything is right. There is too little control. Is that what democracy is?

I'm just pondering on where the future is taking us. I am not sure its going to be better in say 50 years from now. Bye for now, love Eloïse

A loud round of applause for your post, Eloise.

Mal

I think the Democratic convention is a picture of the controlled chaos that is democracy in action. Sometimes the speakers were boring and sometimes very perochial to their area of the country but, a mixed bag of individuals has been my impression rather than a program of group representation, doing things that entertain in sync. Like most 'soups' of biology that is forming as it goes, it's hard to find the pea as in the old shell game. This creative soup is reflected in the creation and the system called the internet. I think most of my creating, if only creating a clean home came out of trying to orgainize chaos. Once the chaos was orgainized I was off to find another mess. Sitting around in an orgainized enviornment is rather boring with little to do and little to stimulate.

Change can be scarry and the media has been focusing on more or the ugly but I wish I could blow the wind under your wings Eloise De Pelteau and Malryn. I really believe that so much is better than when I was young and even when my children were young.

There are groups still fighting for rights but I remember as a child the blacks had certain places they could go and if a Jewish person passed you on the street they had to walk in the gutter. When I was little there were no government programs to help and if it weren't for WW2 the effects of the depression would have been with me till I married. Some things have changed for the better and where we don't have equity for all we are still working in that direction.

Some of what I do wish is that we would start reading again in our newspapers about the local Scouts and what they are doing to help and support their communities. The good things about the youngsters that we used to read about and then the children would look forward to trying to accomplish what those in the paper had accomplished so that they could dream also of being honored by a story of their accomplishment-- rather than only reading about all the distruction that the young are inflicting on society.

I think we all need a little uplifting wind under our wings. That is what I found I respond to in a cadidate more than all the promises that may or may not happen.

I would think the people that DeT saw in the U.S. were self-governed. Our form of government was designed for a citizenry that would be self-governed. But at different times in our history, the self-governed citizenry has become a minority to those that have no self-governing tendencies. When these times come, a larger government is needed because when government does not come from the inside, it must come from the outside. We are living in a time perioud when the self-governed individual is in a small minority and the majority needs to be governed by force and threat.

The future looks much better than the past. We have become a chaotic people due to lack of morals and lack of national leadership. In the future, our children will have better national leadership than we had in our lifetime - even the law of averages is on their side.

Each generation learns from the mistakes of the previous one. And we have a lot of children today that will not be like their parents because they see where 'that way' leads. Sure you have a few like those around the demo convention. But you also have teenagers today that are more self-governed than ever before. They will be the leaders of tomorrow and they will show the masses how important that being governed from within is - and once this lesson is taught again, the outer form of government will not be needed as much and it will once again be like in the days of DeT - and then and only then will it be possible to have a smaller goverment.

Eloise is pessimistic about the future of democracy while Barbara looks for more "wind under the wings." Don sees a future better than the past -- the present, however, in his view is that of a "chaotic people" with a "lack of morals and lack of national leadership."

The future he sees is much like society as it was in the times of deTocqueville with less "outer government" and more "inner government." Don sees many of the teen-agers of today as being more "self-governed" and on the way toward being the leaders of our democracy tomorrow.

Robby

I do not believe that "smaller gov't" will ever happen,if indeed we ever had it. Nor do I believe that "big gov't" is necessarily an evil. Big gov't is needed for some protection against "big business"

I get amused with those commercials about Medicare that end with, Do we want big gov't in our medicine chest? I,for one,DO WANT big gov't in my medicine chest when ir relates to the FDA and the CDC and the NIH... Big gov't was responsible for eliminating the terrible abuses during the patent medicine hey day of the 20's & 30's,when many OTC products claimed they could cure cancer, TB & any other malady that afflicted man or beast.

Of course,the balance is delicate and it's up to us,to make sure that our elected representatives,do ,in fact,represent US and NOT the moneyed pooh-bahs.

Ed does not necessarily see "big" government as bad, providing the needs of each citizen is taken into consideration.

deTocqueville (quote above) points out that in his time the object of one party was to "limit the authority of the people" and the object of the other party was to "extend the authority of the people."

Is this what you see happening in our times?

Robby

I'm with you, Ed! I have precisely the same reaction to that commercial. No matter where I am in the house, I call out: "Yep, I sure do!"

Reference to Robbies excellent post #408 on the duties of the VP. I will add a comment on the changing attitude toward the status of the VP over the last 50 years. Over much of our history the VP was generally an older party workhorse who nearing the end of his career was “rewarded” (exiled might be a better word choice) by being selected as VP. Normally he served his term or terms as a Senate figurehead, attending diplomatic parties and an occasional state funeral, and then retired from public life.

I think the change began in the Trueman Administration. Remember in 1948 Trueman selected Alvin Barkley as VP. The change was not really significant, but he did begin to get some notice. To the press, he was referred to as “the Veep,” and did get perhaps a few foreign assignments and at least a bit of publicity. The status of the job was elevated even more under Eisenhower. Ike sent his VP, Richard Nixon on one occasion to South America on an important diplomatic mission. As it happened Nixon handled himself well when anti American riots occurred and received favorable press. I think this was a major reason for Nixon’s success in obtaining the 1960 Republican nomination for President.

Under John Kennedy the status was further elevated by Johnson’s surprise acceptance of the VP slot. It had been assumed that he would not be interested because of his senate leadership position. Of course in under 3 years fate made him President and he was successful in winning the office on his own in 1964. In 1968 Nixon again won the Republican nomination and and this time won the election, the first former VP who had not first inherited the office to be successful. Since then most VP’s have sought their parties nomination for the top office often successfully (Walter Mondale, George Bush (Sr.), and now Al Gore. Dan Quail also was a candidate but was not successful in obtaing the nomination. In any case the status of the office as a career step leading to the Presidency is today well established.

Harold: Do you (or others here) see the Vice-President in the next administration having various important responsibilities handed to him?

Robby

Yes, Ed, I totally agree. I sure do want Big Govt in my medicine chest, and the sooner the better, before I have to begin choosing whether to eat and be sick, or take meds, and eat the mac & cheese Gore spoke of. I do not exaggerate. It's a real possibility for me. And I HATE mac & cheese.

Well, the Circus is leaving town. As we continue to float down the mainstream of America and look backward, we hear the fading sounds of the brass band and the cheers, we see the big top coming down, we watch the crowds of people leaving the circus grounds and heading back home to a "normal" life. And our thoughts come back to normality after a heady two weeks when not one, but two, circuses presented themselves to us and the rest of America.

But America continues on. This great nation of ours never stops. Our thoughts return to what is going on at home. What is going on at home? In which one of the following categories do you see yourself?

1 - Still basking in the glow of the conventions.
2 - Caught up in the back-to-school activities of your grandchildren.
3 - Caught up in the back-to-college activities of other family members.
4 - Continuing to engage in vacation activities.
5 - Preparing for some sort of vacation.
6 - Lounging around for a well-earned rest.
7 - Other?

You are part of America!! What are you doing?

Robby

One of the things that sets the USA apart from other countries is that we move around a lot.

I am being very American this year by having my home up for sale and looking for one in another town in another state.

Guess that makes me typical.

As for the conventions, typically I thought they were a big waste of time. I did think one superior to the other. I do favor one candidate over the other and feel absolute fear that the rest of the voters will be too stupid to share my superior intelligence and vote for my candidate, therefore sending the nation right down the tubes. I expect we all feel the same, albeit for different parties and candidates!

MaryPage: How true!! Americans do move around a lot. If we visit the "Old World", we not only see the person we are visiting, but in that town are the parents, the grandparents, and the gravestones of their ancestors. Yes, we can find that in some areas of our nation, but it is not typical, is it, especially in recent years?

Robby

DeTocqueville on Pg 140 (Future Prospects):--

"One portion of the country always offers a sure retreat from the calamities which afflict another part; and however great may be the evil, the remedy which is at hand is greater still."

Robby

Speaking of the latter part of the summer, did you know that August is National Catfish Month, National Golf Month, National Eye Exam Month, National Water Quality Month, Romance Awareness Month, Peach Month, and Foot Health Month?? Did you know that, huh??

And to be more specific, did you know that today is Bad Poetry Day, tomorrow is Potato Day, and Sunday is National Radio Day?

This is America,folks!!

Robby

From Robby’s Message #423

Harold: Do you (or others here) see the Vice-President in the next administration having various important responsibilities handed to him?

I don’t think there is much doubt but that the trend for keeping the VP fully aware of and involved in Presidential governance will continue. I think the only thing that could disrupt the trend would be some form of personal disagreement between the two on major policy or personal issues. Such a possibility seems rather remote considering the degree to which the VP has hitched his political wagon to his chief’s star at least for the duration of their terms. There is also strong reason for an informed VP because of his position only a heart beat away. This point now seems well recognized since Truman suddenly succeeded FDR woefully informed in 1945. Since the early 1950’s, the VP has been a member of the National Security Council presumably an active one. Also the VP has been given a much more active role in developing governmental policy during recent years. I do think the trend will continue.

Here are two additional stories about VP's at home and abroad: First the 1960‘s Constitution for the 4th Republic of France apparently did not provide for a Vice President. I remember a press report in which de Gaulle was asked the reason for not making provisions for a successor. His answer: “so we put him up in a palace in Paris without a thing to do?” (He considered the question, a stupid one). Perhaps the framers of our Constitution faced the same dilemma finally coming up with the figurehead duty in the Senate. Of course the VP in the U.S. Senate does not have much power because he don’t vote unless there is a tie and the Constitution gave the Senate the power to make its own procedural rules. It has made these rules to minimize the power of the VP and maximize the power of its member leadership. The power of the VP in the Senate is much less than that of the Speaker in the House of Representatives.

Another VP story from about early 1960 (from my memory, it was probably a joke circulated by the opposition)

Reporter: “Mr President” (Eisenhower), “Can you tell us a specific contribution that Vice President, Richard Nixon has made as a member of the National Security Council.”

Ike (cupping his chin in deep thought), “Give me 6, months and I’ll think of something.”

Harold:

Interesting that the "power of the VP in the Senate is much less than that of the Speaker in the House of Representatives" and yet the VP is second in line for the presidency and the Speaker is third.

Pure speculation of course but if you were the President, what responsibilities would you hand the VP? Any others here want to enter that "if I were Pres" game?

Robby

Robby

Perhaps I should have added in my last post, that the reason why the VP's power in the Senate is so limited is that the VP has no power to schedule Senate consideration of proposed legislation. I think also the VP has no power to make member committee assignments or to send new bills to a specific Committee. These and probably other power that the Speaker of the house execises, are denied the VP in the Senate.

To answer your question, I think the present trend is a suitable one. It is really only intended to keep the VP fully informed. I don't really think the VP should have the status of a Co-president. The final ultimate power must remain in the elected chief, But I see nothing too wrong in the Vice President as the Nation's (here's a new title) "First Intern")

Concerning August being a leisure/vacation time for some of us in America, the concept of elderly leisure is a relatively recent development. Retirement became a social institution with passage of the Social Security Act of 1935, enabling the average American to enjoy his/her last years in relative freedom from employment pursuits. This resulted in the majority of individuals being able to experience their elderly years in a new stage of life characterized by leisure time. There still are unclear expectations and changing values regarding this significant life stage.

Robby

Well it may be end of summer but my inner clock is saying regardless that the temp. is 103 I'm ready for Autumn. I noticed a deeper shadow on my driveway when I pulled in my emptied trash cans last evening and the sun is a deeper red or orange. It will be soon time to plant my fall garden and I'm already looking for flights out of hear during the holidays to visit yes, the moble Americans, my daughter this time who now is in South Carolina.

I'm running over to Collage Station this afternoon to loan my oldest Grand my metronome. Chris started Junior High this year and has joined the school marching band as a to be drummer. High excitment. Along with that my sons birthday is the end of September and the Friday night of his birthday weekend the Black Watch will join The A&M marching band for a Texas version of a Tatoo. So I will get tickets for all of us as a birthday present.

We have had an incredible first half of the year in Real Estate and I still am working with more buyers than I can juggle in my schedule. I need to get some listing packages together and start thinking about those folks who will be needing to sell their houses since their new house will be completed around Thanksgiving. I really like my work in that it is working with real families and I do believe the design of rooms in a home can either promote ar seperate a family. Also, I like being there to help folks negotioate between themselves the many choices that often, I get the impression on their own dicisions would be made by quarreling till winner takes all.

As to the veep I guess it has a lot to do with the style of leadership the president chooses. If a pyramid of authority is established then the president would direct the veeps contribution where as, if they work as a team, than together they will look at what is appropriate for the vice-president to accomplish after they spread out on the table their game plan for accomplishing the goals they have established for themselves.

I am hoping it is the team approach because that would tell me the president is comfortable believing his job is one where his leadership role is creating a team like approach with all his repsonsibilities and that we the public are not the low man on the totem pole but rather a part of that team.

Along with that freedom came an additional social responsibility. I feel that we, as the older and "wiser populace" have an obligation to give back to our society. There are a variety of vehicles where this can be accomplished; schools, churches, private or federal avenues. We should be out there lending a helping hand to our society. This is my own personal credo and feel honored that at my young age, retired, I am able to perform these duties admirably and enjoy it every step of the way.

Social security is to offset financial burdens. Retirement is to "reap" what you have sown."

Robby Soc. Sec. is just one more grief promoted by the male dicision makers. Most woman of my generation were given a hard time if they wanted to work out of the home, as a Catholic it was even considered a sin would you believe. We were encouraged to feel pride and honor at creating a home and being there for our families. Fine...and thank God after they were grown I did find a job that I can maintain myself on the income. Because after Divorce the woman can either get her Soc. Sec. benefit, which because of all those years as a homemaker is nothing even having 10 years of decent income or, 1/2 of the Husbands who benefited by all the work taking care of their mutual responsiblities and often, much more that enabled him to be free to pursue his career. Free labor that actually added to the pool of economics of this country.

OK I say 1/2 seems reasonable although not enough to do anything but make a car payment, I am only 1/2 of the original 2 and it should only take 1/2 for me to subsidize my life But why is his life subsidized by the full entire amount and only after he dies would I get an equal amount. Obviously my work as a homemaker was desired by society but, not valued by society since I do not hear a clamering to equilize benefits to woman that take time from their career to be homemakers, my ex or, the legeslators in the Government that determined this form of...EQUITY!

Oh, Barbara! You are SO correct. Your information may surprise a lot of people, but it is the way it is.

Robby, regarding your "Days" post, I find I have goofed! Had my eye exam July 31. Wrong month!

But I AM eating peaches this month. Lots of them!

Me, Too, MaryPage.....I third the motion.

Barbara--Excellent discription of exactly how it goes. As it turned out, after I got my 'discharge' from him and the Air Force, I worked long enough supporting myself and children, so that my SS was more than half of his. The period of times that I did work during marriage, the check was tossed on the table, and put in to the bank account for 'someone' else to control. Hey, thats the way it was....

The crowning insult was when I tried to get half of the Retirement Pay, that WE both earned......do you rememember those big ole mushroom clouds that used to appear over the Abombs they dropped out on dry desert sands?....POW...you get the picture! Do Not Touch.

Aw, Equality...now there is a topic for you!

Sun

Yeah, the wife gets half her ex-husband's Social Security benefits unless, she happens to hit 65 before he does. This happened to me. I couldn't wait any longer for that income, so receive a percentage of the half.

Did I mention inequities in this country before??

Mal

As this back-to-school month moves along, the nation is sharpening its focus on education. Three factors explain the increased natonal attention to education:--

1 - With the military draft gone, the public school classroom is one of the last forums in which large, varied segments of society come together. How and what a nation chooses to teach its young is a reflection not only of what it is but also of what it hopes to be.
2 - With the cold war over and well-being often defined largely through economics, the nation's future depends specifically on how well it trains its students to foster and manage technical and knowledge-based industries.
3 - Most Americans are persuaded that there is no clearer path to personal prospertiy and well-being than through education.

Is education touching your family or yourself this month?

Robby

Education has become a crucial election issue. States have scrambled to attract teachers in the face of a shortage. Dozens of states are creating incentives for teachers to get national certification.

The National Board of Professional Teaching Standards, an independent panel tht sets standards for experienced teachers, makes available a way to gain recognition. Applicants must pass a rigorous and time-consuming assessment that includes videos of their teaching, samples of their students' work and essays analyzing their classroom techniques. It helps teachers with at least three years of experience measure their skills using benchmarks set by the panel.

Do you believe, to use the words above of deTocqueville, that the "multitude is taking an interest in the labors of the mind?" Just why is education a crucial election issue?

Robby

Robby, I just heard on the TV news tonight that some areas of the country are encouraging retired teachers to come back as substitutes because of the teacher shortage. Let's hope it works.

Mimi: I hadn't heard that. Now that is an idea which might really bear fruit! Any thoughts here from currently active or retired teachers?

Robby

No way...I would not have retired if I'd wanted to continue teaching. The administrations of school districts are going to face huge shortages of both teachers and substitutes.

š ...jane›

My next door neighbor at the house from which I recently moved is a high school French teacher. She retired and went back to work teaching in less than a year.

Mal

Back to school naturally includes college but the computer has made a considerable difference in college study compared to the way it was just a mere decade ago. Dormitory rooms, for example, are not the same.

The computer is the only item tht could deserve to be first on any list of dorm necessities. It not only displaces other technology in importance but also replaces the need for some other appliances. It serves as the the stereo for students who listen to MP3 files and radio Webcasts. It makes answering machines less necessary because so much communication occurs via email and instant messages. It can even substitute for televisions and alarm clocks.

The computer has also become the portal through which students do everything they need to do on campus. Using the Internet, they register for classes, turn in assignments, order books, browse the library catalog, listen to music, talk to friends, read the news, write papers, play games, pay bills, and watch movies.

One president of a software company said that this is "the most profound change that colleges have seen since the G.I. Bill."

Looking at America as we do here in this forum, we remember how the G.I. Bill gave millions of veterans the opportunity to become more enlightened (to use deT's term) and, in the process, better citizens. Does this newest change on the campus do the same thing? Will -- to use deTocqueville's words (see quote above) -- the present day college student, using the computer, use this "education to defend independence" and to advance the "public welfare?"

Robby

Robby,

This year at the University of North Carolina it is required for all freshman students to have a lap top computer. In an agreement with IBM laptops will be supplied at a discount and for those students who cannot afford to buy one certain compensations will be made---but they have to have one.

I wish that when I was in college I could have had such easy access to the vast resource of information that a computer allows.

Phyll

It is my understanding that every Ohio University undergraduate dorm room is equipped with at least one new $1,000 Gateway computer and printer. The cost of the equiment is covered in an annual student fee.

Students at Michigan State University, where most dormitories are wired, lined up seven hours in advance last spring to make sure that they were assigned to wired housing. To help those who missed out, the college installed voice mail. Everyone in those dorms uses the phone lines for dial-up access and students would be online so much they would never get phone calls.

Who else here can tell us what is going on in the various colleges in this back-to-school month in America?

Robby

Robby,

I am really impressed with your newly acquired HTML skills. You are dazzling us!

Phyll

You folks created a monster. Inside joke.

Robby

Univ. of Northern Colorado has a professor who's conducted fully online courses in Gerontology and those students have posed questions to SeniorNetters here. A number of you have participated so know how interesting that experience has been for both them and us. Dr. Wacker will be offering a different course this fall, and we're hoping to have a different discussion..it's in the works, but not yet finalized. I think there'll be more of this...extending the walls of the University beyond the campus area or just surfing the internet in general for information which may not be accurate to specific sites for specific purposes.

No monster...just proof we're all able to master new things/new technology IF we want to. Now, if we could only get all students in schools from K- through college to be so motivated,[ which I believe must come from within.]

š ...jane›

One of our local Catholic colleges was advertising early this summer that a certain Notebook computer was included in the tuition. It is quite difference today from when I begun college in 1946. Then the standard computing device was a K&E slide rule. It always hung from my belt as when I was going to class. I see mine is still in the bottom of one one my desk drawers. It has not been touched in years.

Jane: Yes, a most interesting online course!! Please keep your eyes open to this course which is not only a marveous Senior Net accomplishment but is just another example of what is going on in America today. Do the rest of you believe (to use deT's words above) that the "multitude is beginning to take an interest in the labors of the mind?"

Robby

Harold mentions what one of the Catholic colleges is doing. Much of what is on the World Wide Web today concentrates on business but the question arises -- Is there room in cyberspace for a discourse on ethics?

All but four of the nation's Jesuit colleges have decided there is. Last summer the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities began the Jesuit Distance Education Network to offer online classes teaching ethical principles.

Only in America?

Robby

NOT! The Jesuits are all over the world. I expect they are not going to allow their centuries-old tradition of being ahead of the curve in education fall to the wayside in this new race for instant access to all the knowledge of this global population.

The down-side of this new technology is that some students say they are carrying on fewer conversations with their dorm mates and more conversations with friends across the country. While they still hit the bars and coffee shops, they rarely go to the library. Fifty-six percent of the respondents of a survey, however, say they had spent less time watching television in the previous six months.

Some watch television while they chat. And, more often than not, are chatting on line with people in the dormitory even though they may be only a few paces away. Instead of picking up the phone or knocking on their neighbors' doors to see what they are up to, they send instant messages.

Do you see education in America moving forward on a positive note?

Robby

I have 2 granddaughters, a Junior and a Senior, at St. Mary's College of Maryland. They DO own computers, the Senior having both a Mac and a lap top. But both report they have to spend hours at the books and do not "get to their e-mail" as often as they would like. This shows me it is not ALL computers ALL the time.

Hey, Robby!

Now that you are such a smashing success at the fancy stuff, can you put up a Tea Party announcement at the VIRGINIA site?

signed, impressed

MaryPage: I'll talk about that over in the Virginia site.

Robby

Our students at the Naval Academy are issued computers when they arrive. This has been the case for about ten years. At first, there was great confusion because there were not enough printers available. Since papers are due pretty much at the same time, printers would be swamped. More than once I had a student bring me a disk and say, "Ma'am, really, the paper is on here." Fortunately in the English department, we have a printer in the Writing Center that students can use as well as a secretary who can help them with formatting. In the early years there was also much confusion as the "standard" word processing program kept changing. This was back in the days when word processing was not as user-friendly as it now is.

This year, for the first time, we are running four sections of Freshman English where the mids will be issued laptop computers. Our classrooms are completely wired. I have two of the four sections. As the beginning of the semester approaches, I am somewhat humbled to realize that only by working with the mids will I discover just how these laptops will be used. The textbook I will be using is also new. In order to make the course a richer experience for all of them, we will use the internet to further research some of the topics. On the list so far--the painting of Edward Hopper.

I intend to spend a bit of time the first day of class explaining laptops to my students, or rather the care and feeding of laptops. Since the "guts" of the computer are built into the area just underneath the keyboard, it is essential that these students are more careful than it is in the nature of most students to be. Having spilled a half glass of ice water on my keyboard when I first had a laptop, I find myself somewhat knowledgeable in this area. (Tip laptop quickly in the direction from which the spill came, grab paper towels in abundance, blot, blot, blot, drain and then employ hairdryer, keeping laptop on its side. Rest, allow to cool, apply hair dryer again. Allow laptop to dry on its side all night. Begin again with hair dryer. Yes, it worked.)

Anyway, I am looking forward to this new experience. I think if all goes well, laptops will be issued for all incoming mids.

Maryal

Maryal: Your recipe for the care of a wet laptop seemed to have everything except "allow to cool -- serves four."

It's great to know that the upcoming officers of our U.S. Navy are becoming such experts in this field. Of course, considering how technological our military is becoming, I don't see how they could be otherwise and handle their responsibilities properly. In this back-to-school month we have been talking about education but it goes without saying, doesn't it, that education is meaningless unless it is later applied.

I would like to ask, Maryal, are our Naval Grads coming out of Annapolis knowing how to speak simple understandable English as well as military and technological gobbledygook? This is a pet peeve of mine!!

Robby

Robby---Yes, I think the newly commissioned Lts. can mostly speak pretty well, adjusting for audience. Every time anyone uses an acronym, I ask for definition, even if I know it. They soon learn that civilians are different and that their friends at home will also need translation.

What many of them cannot do when they graduate is write well. We get lots of complaints from the fleet. Our English majors, of course, are not the ones complained about. If I were King, I would make all seniors take an additional writing course.

Maryal

I started graduate school just after the first baby Macs came out (word processors) and a few years before the internet became accessible to everyone. A statistics professor assigned us problems that had to be input and printed out at the college mainframe (one building where you had to make an appointment to use the computer). He also wanted us to understand in a hands-on way just what time savers computers were. He assigned a relatively simple statistics problem that we had to work out on paper by hand. He told us at the first of the semester to keep track of the hours spent---and had to so note on the partial computations turned in each week. It took us all semester long!! to work out this problem by hand. The last week of the semester, each of us had our appointment at the mainframe computer and got to gawk at the one second that it took the computer to reach the same answer it had taken us months to compute by hand. I'll never forget that.

Maryal speaks about some of the Annapolis grads not being able to write well. Are others here finding similar experiences with grads from other colleges?

Betty: What is our lesson there regarding the speed of the computer? More specifically, what conclusions are our young people coming to? Can anything override the importance of speed?

Robby

In addition to the progress in Catholic higher education mentioned above, Roman Catholic elementary and high schools in America are in the midst of an extraordinary revival. Enrollment is up across the nation. Hundreds of new schools have opened. More than 40 percent of all Catholic elementary and secondary schools have waiting lists for admission.

Catholic schools, once staffed primarily by nuns, priests and brothers from various religious orders, are now nearly devoid of clerics. Priests have become more urgently needed in the parishes. In the nation's Catholic schools, priests account for fewer than 1 percent of the 157,000 teachers. Ninety-three percent of the teachers are laity, while nuns make up 5.5 percent and brothers less than 1 percent.

A major change is occurring in this area even as pupils across the nation prepare to go back to school. Any comments?

Robby

On this date in 1830, deTocqueville travelled on Lake Ontario on a steamboat. As you look around the world, would you consider the Great Lakes, not necessarily relating to democracy, but definitely uniquely American? Do you live in that area?

Robby

Robby: Interesting that De Tocq. chose the Ontario, which is the smallest of the five fresh water Great Lakes. Perhaps it was because it is the most easterly and borders Canada's Ontario province and NYS. I am familiar with that area as we often visited Niagra Falls . Lake Ontario is fed by the Niagra River and flows into Lake Erie, where we used to vacation with family on Angola Beach. Did he travel by steamboat up into the St. Lawrence where Lake Ontario is discharged into? That waterway system was so important to commerce enhancing our industrial and agricultural economy. I understand that they are thinking of reestablishing some commercial shipping via the canal system.

deTocqueville had just visited Niagara Falls and was enroute to Montreal. It took him three days to get there.

Robby

I lived on Grand Island, an island in the Niagara River between Buffalo and Niagara Falls, NY from 1955 to 1958. Returned after a year's stay in NC, and lived in the Town of Tonawanda on the mainland for about six years. At that time, the area was very much American, full of industry, chemical companies, etc. with housing developments either going up or already built in the Lake Erie area. There was a big air pollution problem at that time.

That area was full of artists, musicians and writers, an exciting time for me in many ways. Not only did I go to the Albright-Knox gallery and many others, I went into laboratories of a corporation where my scientist husband worked. I also listened to hours and hours of talk about creating art intermixed with scientists' arguments about which was more important, research or development and scientific quotes from them to back up their arguments.

Mal

Your postings are helping us to see another side of America. As you know the title of this forum doesn't only ask "What is Democracy?" It also asks "What is America?"

Robby

Yesterday, I tuned in late to hear Mark Caldwell discuss his book A Short History of Rudeness-Manners, Morals and Misbehaviors in Modern America. At the point I tuned in he was explaining that rudeness on the Internet is often the result of another's rudeness - and the two slug it out in words. I'm not sure if he was speaking of chat rooms only, but this is one aspect of modern America. Here is one reviewer's words from the B&N site:

In his thought provoking new book, literary/social critic Mark Caldwell gives us a history of the demise of manners and charts the triumphant progress of rudeness in America. The perceived breakdown of civility has in recent years become a national obsession, and our modern climate of boorishness has cultivated a host of etiquette watchdogs, like Miss Manners and Martha Stewart, who defend us against an onslaught of nastiness. Meanwhile, New York mayor Rudolph Guiliani embarks on a personal crusade to improve the manners of the city's civil servants, pedestrians, motorists, taxi drivers, and delivery men, and Tipper Gore leads a nationwide campaign to label music albums that contain potentially brutish lyrics.

Caldwell demonstrates that the foundations of etiquette actually began to erode several centuries ago with the blurring of class lines and the emergence of a new middle-class. Touching on aspects of both our public and private lives, including work, family, and sex, he examines how the rules of behavior inevitably change and explains why, no matter how hard we try, we can never return to a golden era of civilized manners and mores.

Maybe it's my imagination (or perhaps my subconscious wish) but I see a definite difference in the use of courtesy and consideration between participants in Senior Net and posters in other online discussions. If you agree with this, then these are two separate faces of America. Why would there be such a difference? Is age the only reason? There are "older" people in other forums. We could say that the "powers-that-be" in Senior Net keep us in line but I don't believe that is so. They rarely find the need to give warnings in that direction. Just what is it about Senior Netters that they generally show the more pleasant side of America?

Robby

Ella--the subject of manners is thought provoking, too. When you talk about the "golden era of civilized manners and mores".

You're right, I doubt we could return to that. But I also wonder about the depth of sincerity, if you go back very far. What appears to be beautiful manners in some of the 'upper classes' now appears more snobbish than necessary. The poorer classes back then, though less educated, and less instructed in the mores of manners could be seen to express a kinder, more gentle (if clumsy) manner than the elite. Was it a matter of social class? I wonder. Yes, I feel that we all mourn the loss of civilized manners, and rejoice when we witness a flash of them now and then.

Sun

Edit: Robby---I do not surf the 'other' sites like some of our posters...maybe I should go look and form an opinion. But I doubt SeniorNet could be matched. There is truly a delightful cross section of posters here.

I've seen plenty of impolite and downright rude posts right here in SeniorNet. Fortunately, we have RoundTable hosts and discussion leaders to keep things in line. This is not like the Writers-Writing folder in SeniorNet on America On Line. I have been viciously attacked in that forum as the leader of the Writers Exchange WREX several different times by people who "come in off the street" to a discussion where there are not those safeguards. There were numerous times when I had to call for help from SeniorNet.

Some of our generation was taught manners and an acceptance of a certain kind of hypocrisy which caused us to say thank you and please even when we were annoyed enough to want to smack someone in the face. The younger generations are more casual and perhaps more honest than we are or were, so we do not get that kind of politeness, unless, of course, by our stance and words we make sure that others know we demand it.

Mal

What is wrong, though, with hypocrisy in the name of Kindness?

It seems to me it is not only more Civilized to be kind to one another, it is also more serene and peaceful and less stressful.

If we cannot arouse ourselves to be courteous to one another, we really have not earned our passport to commerce in a civilized society.

There are some hot-headed nasties on SeniorNet. Some of them have an agenda, and we get used to them and understand, as near as we are able to, what fuel it is that feeds the engines of their rhetoric. They are like relatives who come to visit and we do all we can for them and count the days until they depart.

Then again, ever so often come a few of the type whom Mal describes. I truly believe most, if not all, of these are crashing our discussions from other generations; but I cannot assert that this is the case. I do know they are sick and have a desperate urge to shower the slop pots of their purulent minds onto as many others persons as they can manage to reach. I truly do not know what is to be done about these, whom I pity deeply, but I also wonder if having them mingle freely all throughout our society encourages others to copy them, or if their behavior is more harmless than that. My mind picks up and puts down and picks up yet again the thought of very carefully supervised mental institutions as an optional solution to this problem.

Robby, so far I like the maroon with the green best. Have you considered blue and green? I think that would be Very you!

MaryPage: I love that expression: "a desperate urge to shower the slop pots of their purulent minds." My college English professor would have had lots of fun with that one!!

deToqueville says (P223, Why the Americans Show so Little Sensitiveness in their Own Country) that "The temper of the Americans is vindictive, like that of all serious and reflecting nations. They hardly ever forget an offense, but it is not easy to offend them, and their resentment is as slow to kindle as it is to abate."

What are your reactions to this comment by deT about us?

Robby

P.S. Blue and green at your request, MaryPage.

Just to clarify: Those people who attacked me in SeniorNet on America Online were not from another generation. They were senior citizens using a different screen name, as I discovered. That's very easy to do on America Online.

One of those disguised senior citizens, in fact, was a poet I had just published in Sonata. He downgraded WREX and me so badly that I removed his work from the ezine on the premise that insulting Sonata's publisher and the writers group she led was not acceptable.

Want to know something? I was criticized for doing that by some of the very people whom he insulted. Some of these days it seems impossible to please anyone. Today has been one of those days.

Goodnight, everyone. I'm soon going to bed and wait for what has to be a better day tomorrow.
Mal

Mal---did this all happen just recently? Have a good night and sweet dreams....tomorrow WILL be a better day...

Sun

Mal, it is just Incredible that human mentalities work in such really weird ways, but I am with You!

The work you do for poets and other writers here on the WWW is so lovely and so kind. You do it all at your own expense and with enormous stacks of hours. It is all a gift to those who write and those, such as myself, who appreciate.

So very discouraging for you, but hey, be of good heart. It is the ones who have to find fault who make all the noise. You ARE loved and appreciated and good things will come to you in the long run.

Mal, I think you sound like a neat person and I hate it that someone has tried to hurt you. Pity the poor soul who would do something like that and rejoice in knowing that lots and lots of people think you're terrific!

As we paint a picture of America in this forum, are we in agreement, then, that this nation is made up of all types of people -- that, in this sense, a democracy is no different from any other type of government?

Robby

Consider deTocqueville's remark (P249, Some Reflections on American Manners) wherein he says: "The men who live in democracies are too fluctuating for a certain number of them ever to succeed in laying down a code of good breeding, and in forcing people to follow it. Every man therefore behaves after his own fashion."

Consider also the comment about deTocqueville by the New York Times (above).

Robby

Someone was wondering why SeniorNet is a cut above, manners-wise. That's easy. Most of us have been practicing good manners all of our lives. We grew up with parents who beamed when we finally remembered to say thank you without being prompted. We've even lived through a long period when businesses were similar to large families, where loyalty and decency were part of the employment code---you gave your hard work and the business took care of you until retirement.

Also, I believe strongly that framework sets the tone, is the foundation. Mostly for good, people gather to them people who are similar. The foundation here is a positive tone with good manners, so those that come in and feel a kinship with that stick around. For most of the "trouble makers" who have nothing but agitation on their mind, it won't feel like home. Just as in all realms of life, those will come and go.

To the extent that practiced good manners interfere with open discussion, which has already been discussed ad nausem, that's probably a price that some would say it's worth. Heated discussion looks like bad manners to some. Good manners look like restricted thought to others. We probably err on the side of "if you don't have something nice to say......" That's not always good, but it's not a bad direction to lean. I think we could easily tolerate more, for lack of a better word, argument, but never argument for its own sake or that has any shred of meanness of spirit. Just good old "here's where I disagree with you." Served with heaps of good manners.

Betty says "people gather to them people who are similar." Are the participants in Senior Net "similar?" Is Senior Net representative of America or is it the exception?

deTocqueville says (P249, Some Reflections on American Manners) that "at first sight, a traveller would say that the manners of all Americans are exactly similar; it is only upon close examination that the pecularities in which they differ may be detected."

Is this what Democracy is?

<Robby

Malryn, From your message #478: I am not familiar wuth your Ezine. Tell us something about it and its address.

Robby, From your message 482, et al:

As we paint a picture of America in this forum, are we in agreement, then, that this nation is made up of all types of people -- that, in this sense, a democracy is no different from any other type of government?

No doubt about it, “America is made up of all types of people. I think the effect of this apparent division is magnified in democracies because there are no legal or social prohibitions to discourage or even inhibit minority groups however small from coming out in support of their positions. In America in particular we have many different types of people because we came from everywhere through out the world. No other nation has such diversity. Hence we hear all, from all.

This situation seems at first glance to be a classic example of Populism. However, in effect the result is ineffective Populism because no single group can command a majority. This results in the formulation of coalitions forming two major and maybe three additional now minor political parties. Politics does indeed tend to make strange bedfellows.

Another result of the formulation into political coalition groups has been the avoidance of the violent conflict that has plagued other Nations with diverse populations. Since views of minority groups can be heard and their influence exerted through participation in one or another of the several groups, the more extreme alternatives have been avoided.

Harold makes at least three points:--

1 - In democracies there are no legal or social prohibitions to discourage or even prohibit minority groups however small from coming out in support of their position. (We note that he uses the adjective legal.)
2 - No single group can command a majority.
3 - Views of minority groups can be heard.

Any comments? Disagreements? Agreements?

Robby

P.S. Malryn is an excellent publisher!! Good to see that you are contacting her, Harold.

Harold, I publish three electronic literary magazines. Below you'll find links for them. Dr. Robert Bancker Iadeluca is one of the writers in the current issue of Sonata. There are other writers in those pages who belong to SeniorNet, too. I hope you'll take the time to read Robby's fine essay Can We Learn in Later Years?. Scroll down on the index-cover of Sonata to find his positive essay. Here are the links:
Sonata magazine for the arts

m.e.stubbs poetry journal

The WREX Pages
Thanks, Robby. I appreciate what you said.
Mal

As we move along in the mainstream of America in this back-to-school month and thinking of entry or return to colleges, the topic of athletics comes to our minds.

Intercollegiate football -- the players are already in training for the new season -- demands absolute devotion. Not just from players, coaches and presidents, but from students, administrators, alumni and fans. That is why abuses in the system so often go unreported and uncorrected and why the game is allowed to spread a corrupting influence.

Standards of admission and academic performance are routinely cast to the winds for star football players. Athletics is now more a fixture of the national entertainment industry than higher education. But little is done about the problems because of the need for total devotion to the sport and because so many colleges and universities have allowed themselves to become dependent on athletics for money and a flood of choice students.

Admissions officers know that a star player can attract many more students than half a dozen Nobel Prize winners on the faculty.

deTocqueville says(see quote above): "When the people are enlightened, the collective strength of the citizens will always conduce more efficaciously to the public welfare."

Is this now true? Are Americans placing education above entertainment?

Robby

To answer that question one needs only to listen to the star "athletes" during an interview. The majority of them are incapable of forming a sentence.

Are you two speaking of the "professional" athletes or those who are college students. And if you are speaking also of the college students, then what is your attitude toward higher education in general in those colleges?

Robby

Both!

Higher education in general in colleges is okay, with the star athletes being the exception in too many instances. It makes me sick that most people really sweat it at the books and papers for 4 years or longer to get awarded their degrees, and some just sweat it on the game fields to get theirs!

I want to scream: "Hey, Guys! This is supposed to be about the acquisition of knowledge and learning to THINK, not stink!"

The observations of DeToc about manners and rudeness would have to be colored by his own nobility upbringing.

When he came to America,the "frontier mentality" and rugged individualism modus operandi was very much in play.We may still suffer from the vestiges of the frontier mentality so that some people feel they can say and act in any way.

Gov't cannot legislate manners and morality,and the pervasive rudeness in society will not go away unless somehow that kind of behavior becomes unacceptable to the majority...I do not have the answers,but I suspect that as long as disregard for courtesy and manners (as evinced in popular culture) continues to be economically profitable ,it will not go away.

Our First Amendment guarantees makes this a very thorny issue and I'm not certain that letting the censorship genie out of the bottle is the answer.

Comments Message 489 - 494 on the role of athletics in higher education:

Though I cannot cite my source, I do remember the comment of a 1960's skeptic who remarked that the success of an American University President has come to be measured by his success in providing research for the facility, winning football/basketball for the alumni, and sex for the students.

I sometimes count the number of times the phrase, "you know" gets inserted during a 3 minute press interview with star caliber college or professional athletes. Often the number can be astoundingly high. (When I hear the "you know," I want to shout out, "No dum-dum. That's what you are suppose to be telling us!")

Robby in message 489 quotes de T as saying, "When the people are enlightened, the collective strength of the citizens will always conduce more efficaciously to the public welfare." If knowledge and education are tantamount to enlightenment, I suppose Americans are today more enlightened than in de T's time. I'm not sure though that his predicted result has materialized.

Generally speaking, higher education in the United States in the early 19th Century was a dismal affair, characterized by a multiplicity of ill-staffed, ill-financed small colleges. Rigid adherence to the principle of absentee trustees meant that the governors were unable to govern the everyday affairs of the institutions over which they ruled. This weakness of the trustees made the position of president extremely powerful. He became its dynamic center or authority, its symbol, and its spokesman. He occupied and in a sense created an office which has no equivalent in academic systems outside the United Sttes. The prestige and pride that elsewhere were vested in the faculties came to center in him and there they have remained to this day.

Do you people see colleges and universities in America these days as being institutions of prestige?

Robby

Like, Harold, like, you know, appreciated your, um, comments on, like, verbal, um, tics. "You know," um, is, like, maybe replaced by, um, "like." You know?

Does Democracy have its disadvantages? Is schooling which is available to everyone (public schooling) perhaps sinking to its lowest common denominator?

In a poll commissioned by the National Association of Independent Schools (granted, this could be biased), the results are encouraging for private schools in general and for independent schools in particular. The public, in this study, believes that independent schools do a better job employing high quality teachers and preventing drug and alcohol use.

According to the project summary released by NAIS, the differences in how the public views the two sectors are "clear and many." For example, 66 percent of respondents think independent schools do a better job encouraging moral and spiritual development. Independent schools also are keeping class size smaller (69% say). The report stated that "the public regards independent schools as most different in offering a more personalized customized education, and an environment that is civil and cocntrolled."

The same report, however, gave the advantage (53%) to public schools in athletics and sports and (53%) in drawing students from a range of cultures, races and income groups.

Independent schools reach out to the entire community whereas public school population is often determined strictly by geographic boundaries.

Should America's education be appraised solely by its public schools and colleges?

Robby

Many students going back to school this month have obstacles to overcome. Charles Schwab cares about them. A billionaire businessman, he is dyslexic. But he insists that he is not disabled. He says: "I look at it as a difference."

The Learning Disabilities Association of America, the most powerful advocacy group for the learning disabled, is concerned about that definition. It believes that children with learning disabilities will not get the services they need if they are redefined as "different." It is worried that the federal financing for which it has fought for years will decline or even disappear if "learning differences" is the term that legislators begin to use.

The LDAA says that "a true learning disability is a handicapping condition." Mr. Schwab says: "My fundamental belief is that you want to emphasize the kids' strengths. What you're trying to do with all this definitional stuff is to make sure you don't beat the kids down and make them think they're fully defective."

The Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act of 1975 uses the term "learning disability" to classify children with "a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written." A learning disability may show up as an "imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations" according to the federal definition. Education officials say that 12 percent of all school-aged children are now classified as learning disabled.

Is the government of a Democracy responsible for the learning of ALL children? If so, just how should a Democracy go about this?

Robby

Robby, you open up topics that could take us a year just to get our mind around---and there are tons of books and journal articles debating just those same (general) issues. Schwab has a legitimate point about emphasizing strengths, but the real world of educational finances may not mesh well with the consequences of new definitions. What a mess.

Betty--you are right...Robby has opened up an almost dangerous topic. One can say the wrong thing, and incite ire in the wink of an eye. I will not expond on the definitions, or get too involved in the subject, because I am one of those people that believe, thousands of children are being hampered by this kind of dispute. If the children only have learning differences..then why are they included under the Disability Act? All children do not learn at the same rate of speed, or even in the same way. How does that make them disabled?

Sun

The most difficult heart rendering thing I had to do in order for my youngest to receive the help he needed in school as a dyslexic but very bright child was to declair him mentally handicapped. Only 30 years ago the language wasn't even that polite.

My only beam of light was that the then Secretary of State for the State of Texas lived in our neighborhood and his two boys had a similar version of the problem. Because of his influence the Junior High had these boys attend normal classes rather than the classes with all the other physical as well as mental handicapped children and at the end of each day their last class was with a specially hired teacher that helped these boys understand their studies for the day and helped them understand what they read and how to do their homework. Than I remember visiting all my son's teachers and explaining that as an adult he would not need to share his information my only writing therefore could he prove what he knew with other projects or with reporst spoken into a tape recorder. Most all agreed and than when he hit High School I helped him have the courage to speak to the teachers in behalf of his needs. OF course we made sure he always had something in his life that gave him acceptance with other students. For Paul it was photography. He became the school photographer and schhol newspaper reporter and photographer. He won State wide ribbons for his photos taken during football games and other photos.

One of my son's boys is also dyslexic and there have been special classes for him without the outrage of declairing him mentally handicapped.

Some of these issues are simply signs of progress. Not too long ago, students who didn't do well in school were just "lazy," "didn't apply themselves," and worse descriptions. Then, thank goodness, we began to understand better what was happening and a few children were diagnosed with various "learning disorders." Now, I gather, with more discoveries of brain process, etc., we know that there are lots and lots of kids who learn differently. So, some of these touchy problems are symptoms of our development in learning about learning.

Mel Levine, co-chairman with Mr. Schwab, says: "As of now, we're swimming upstream in many respects because people love to label kids, people love to medicate kids and people love to test kids." "We are determined to start a national movement," he adds. "Our model is one where we refuse to label anybody, so we have no "learning disabilities." The group has already traianed 5,000 teachers around the country to speak the language of learning differences.

Larry Silver, president of the disabilities association says: "We're stuck with the term partly because we need to because of advocacy and partly because it's true." Some of the strongest voices in the learning-disabled community -- including researchers, lawyers, and the advocacy group -- say the term disabled may have a negative connotation to some but is still the most accurate.

Question: Should this topic not be discussed? If not, why not? As America is showing us this back-to-school month, should this topic be avoided?

Robby

The stigma of having a "disability" is alive and well. That's an integral part of this issue.

Implications of that one issue include changing all "disabilities" to differences. There is truth in it and trouble. Hmmmm. Mobility differences. Vision differences. Maybe we need two years to discuss.

In the 1840s, the era in which deTocqueville was here, the growth of state funded public education was blossoming in states from Connecticut to Illnois. Southerners, however, believed that education was a private matter and not a concern for the state. They pointed out that the most important training a child receives is in the home. They felt a priority shold be placed upon creating a college-bred elite and this system helped to perpetuate the sharply defined social-class structue which eisted in the South.

Now in the Year 2000, as we examine education in America, do we see a class structure? Despite the claim that education is for all, do we see the opportunity to be educated more available to some than others, or are we a true Democracy with education available for ALL?

Robby

More like budding instead of blossoming.

Don:

Would you please expand on that? Are you disagreeing with deT's observation back in 1830 that "the utility of knowledge was conspicuous in the eyes of the multitude?"

Robby

Becoming more conspicuous every day are Charter schools. Charter schools, which get public funds but are run without regulation from the local school district are what many see as the most dynamic and important education reform movement in decades. While most political debate over education involves tweaking existing programs, charter schools present a chance for techers, parents, management companies and bright young idealists to sit around a blank blackboard and imagine a school from scratch.

There is, of course, the other side of the coin. Though more than two-thirds of the schools have waiting lists and some have posted remarkeable achievement gains, the freedom granted to charter schools has also created opportunities for corruption, with some schools shuttered after officials discovered dangerous facilities, the illegal teaching of religion or financial irregularies. Seventy-nine new charter school have been closed.

As the crescendo of this back-to-school month increases, is the Charter school the wave of the future? Is the freedom which a Democracy offers what is needed as we try to improve our educational methods?

Robby

I haven’t seen too much mention of vouchers to parents for private or parochial schools as a means of giving middle class and poor parents the option offered rich kids. Of course the obvious flaw in this proposal is it will dilute funds available for improving the public system. Any comment?

Also the modern situation requiring exceptional mental ability for students to learn modern mathematics, physical, biological, and social sciences seems to again make birth a principal determining factor in the achievement of high social position. Many, perhaps most just can't acquire the required knowledge no matter how much they might try. Though the resulting class structure is often justified as being based on individual ability, it still is a gift of birth that the ungifted can never overcome. Any comment?

An opinion from Texas: The Charter Schools are causing conflict, already...opposing opinions are plentiful. I am against them because I think all funds should be used to further Public Schools, Teachers, and Education for all. There is one (1) well know Charter School bragged about by certain politicians as the pattern for all. Others owned by the same people have failed miserably. Some of the Charters have closed, fraud, lack of everything, including education, one used up several hundred thousands of dollars, then never opened, just disappeared. Another just closed their doors one day, and never notified the parents or students, or anyone else. Another was opened in the middle of a shopping center, and caused many heartaches for the businesses in the Mall. Enough...

When there is no control over Schools, or anything else...you can expect things to get 'out-of-control'....personal opinion. Also, a lot of the Charters are for 'Special need' students, whose needs may or may not be met, drop outs, etc. They didn't do as well as they claimed they would do when it came to testing. I believe some of the Charters opened to cash in on the potential dropouts, rather than help them.

None of the Charters are required to maintain the same standards as public schools. And they can make any claims they choose to make, but who is to hold them responsible?

The Charter school everyone saw on 60-minutes recently....that was Kerr, I believe thats the name. It is the one that is raved about...the model for all. And may well be the only success story they have.

Funds should be poured into public schools, teachers paid better salary, buildings upgraded....why go on. I am against Charter Schools, as you may well have guessed by now.

No, I do not approve of Vouchers, either.....pretty much the same opinion. Help the schools that we have, there are some things that just should not be privitized, education is one of them. Parents may send their children to Private or Religious schools if they choose, or can afford it. If they can't afford it, let the Religious schools, or private individuals offer them scholarships.

Sun

I agree with everything Sunknow said in her previous post. The charter schools in the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill area of NC are failing dismally. Let people with money send their kids to private school, or get scholarships for them. The public school system in the United States needs all the assistance we can give it.

Mal

I'm also opposed to any school ...charter...voucher...whatever...which does not have to meet the same standards as the public schools.

I also think that the States need to do a much better job of monitoring the schools within the respective state...and as is the case with some large city schools...like Chicago, NY, LA, etc. those schools need to be monitored and...well...some "housecleaning" done...by the STATE. Many of those schools, are, in my view...much too large. They also are being drained of $$$ by "ghost" employees who are in labor unions that have strangled the control of the schools from the principals, etc. I would also, if I were Queen of Education, make a rule that any student who is not working towards a diploma would be escorted out the door and told to come back when he/she was there to work toward graduation. NO school or teacher(s) should have to put up with 19 year old 9th graders or those who fail every subject and refuse to be "students." I think every student (and I'm talking about 9-12th graders)...should be allowed ...maybe 2 "retakes" of courses. After that, the student or his parent pays for the cost of having to take the course yet again to pass it. If he/she has not accumulated 1/2 or 3/4 or the credits needed toward graduation by the end of a school year...that student has one more semester to show he's "making progress" toward that diploma. I don't think a student who has only 2 credits (of a possible 16 (eight courses a semester...two semesters) at the end of his 9th grade is serious about school...and needs to become familiar with the world of work in the outside world. He's to be welcomed back when his school "attitude" improves.

š ...jane›

Queen of Education----You got my Vote!!! I like your plan, enough is enough. Schools should not be able to cash in on dropout students, or students that do not, and will never cooporate. Help those that will let you help them.

Sun

The Dallas Independent School system has been plagued with many problems, some of which are discontent with the quality of education in some of the schools in some areas, displeasure with the School Board (which sometimes resembles the Keystone Cops), and seems incapable of hiring a competent Superindent. Our last super. has been fired, after a brief stint, but was able to get a program pushed through before he left. Seven schools will be operated by Edison Schools,Inc., a company which operates the school independenly, absorbing all of the costs of the operation. These are some of the changes being implemented at these seven schools 1---School days for most students will be extended by an hour. Starting next year, school years will be lenghted by about 20 days. 2---New math and reading curricula, heavily scripted for teachers. 3---All students will get foreign-language instruction beginning in kindergarten. All students will receive 90 minutesof uninterrupted reading instructions every day. 4---All students will eventually be given home computers.Each teacher will be given a laptop computer. 5---Music and art will become permanent parts of the curriculum. 6---Every classroom will be equipped with three computers. In addition, each classroom will vave a TV and videocassette player. 7---Telephones will be installed in each classroom to increase secutity and alow parents and teachers to communicate more effectively. 8---Students will remain grouped with the same teacher for three years to promote stronger relationships among teachers, students and parents. What do you think of this plan?, especially the teachers among you. This is reprinted from an article in the Dallas Morning News, August14,2000. Mary

Mary W....I am 100 miles S.E. so you are closer than I am. I have also kept up with the Dallas School Board problems (undescribable, almost). Do you trust the Edison Schools? There were glowing reports, then terrible things reported about others, some closed. If all these private school groups are so wonderful, why do they have only one or two great examples, and several others that have failed big time, and closed (also Edison schools). How do you feel about them? Have you formed an opinion yet? I have read dreadful things about some of them....but you are closer up there, than I am.

The Super that Dallas just fired was really BIG on Edison, and I think they are already commited on a certain number of schools. It will be interesting to see how it turns out.

Sun

One Charter school recently begun in New York City is the Bronx Preparatory Charter School. Bronx started with 102 fifth and sixth graders -- and seven teachers -- three weeks before almost every other New York City public school, part of its regimen of extra class time and rigorous discipline. With plans to add a grade each year until it stretches through high school, Bronx Prep is one of 380 charter schools opening across the country this fall, including 18 in New York State, 11 of them in New York City.

A movement that began with three schools in Minnesota and California in 1992 now stretches across 34 states and the District of Columbia, with nearly 520,000 students -- one percent of the nation's schoolchildren -- enrolled in 2,069 schools.

Bronx Prep lays out a lofty mission - to produce graduates who "think critically and creatively," with strong skills in core subjects, technology and the arts, and "are committed to a lifetime of learning and civic involvement." An achievement agreement must be signed by all students, parents and teachers. This concept was borrowed from Exeter, Catholic schools, other charter schools, and especially from KIPP, the Knowledge Is Power Program, which itself is converting this fall from a branch of the NYC Board of Education to a charter school.

Are we judging the Charter school concept by a "few failures" or is the whole idea doomed to failure?

Robby

Robby--I think the school I mentioned might be KIPP instead of Kerr, the one on 60 minutes program, in Houston. I don't know the answer to your question, but I don't understand so many failures, and only one or two highly talked about successes.

Sun

KIPP academy is a pair of public middle schools in poor sections of Houston and the Bronx. They require 70 percent more class time than their counterparts -- including Saturday and summer sessions. Its black and hispanic students consistently get top scores on standardized tests.

KIPP was founded five years ago by a pair of young Ivy Leaguers It grew out of a 12-hour conversation about the problems plaguing public education between Michael Feinberg and David Levin. Feinberg is a grad of the University of Pennsylvania and Levin of Yale. They were new recruits of Teach for America, the national program that places college graduates in impoverished schools.

Two years later, frustrated by the limitations of their classrooms, but inspired by a Los Angeles teacher, Rafe Esquith, the pair convinced the Houston district to let them stretch class from 7:30am to 5pm. They recruited 50 fifth graders, printed T-shirts, and taped Mr. Esquith's motto, "There are no shortcuts," over the door. The next year, the duo split -- Mr. Levin returned home to New York to start a branch of the program there. Mr. Feinberg expanded in Houston, recriting three teachers to help him with the new crop of 72 fifth graders.

Today KIPP-New York outperforms all other Bronx middle schools on New York's standardized tests, and 90 percent of the students at KIPP-Houston pass all sections of Texas' state exams.

Are these exceptions?

Robby

Yes, Robby--that is the same school...and yes, I think it is an exception, rather than the rule. If only there were more than ONE succes like that. That is the one being used for campaign purposes, as though it it is one of many. It is the only one placed in the spotlight. Period. I guess that's my problem with it.

Sun

Is everyone in agreement here or are there different opinions about Charter Schools? Please note deT's quote above about opinions.

Robby

If one could get people like those who started the KIPP school to work with every single charter school and have people to fend off parents who want to be vice presidents and run the show, they might be a success.

There are three cities I am talking about here in the Triangle of NC, my area, and not one of the charter schools in any of them has been successful.

It's obvious to me why I'd rather see money go into public schools like the ones I went to in Masachusetts which somehow prepared me to go to Smith College and graduate on the dean's list and my ex-husband to graduate with honors and go on to Brown University and later graduate school where he had a 4.0 average.

We were not alone in achieving such academic success based on the foundation of an education in a public school system run by people who cared in a state that paid attention to and put money into education.

All that I have heard of Charter Schools locally (mostly in D.C.) has been dismal indeed.

The school system is to have NO juristiction over them. No say in them. Okay, so there has been no agency or department or whathaveyou set up TO oversee them.

So anyone, literally, can start one up. Some of those in D.C. who have applied for and been given contracts to run Charter Schools have actually HAD CRIMINAL RECORDS! Go figure! Our Kids??!

You put in an application, complete with a prospectus of what you will offer the kids and a price per kid to do it all, and if you come in under the per head cost for the locality, you have a deal! Then you have to get the Enrollment before you can open. After the enrollment, some have taken off before opening their doors. Others have, as Sun pointed out about those in Texas, closed mid-term with no warning. Scam artists are figuring it for a bonanza, and are taking off with the funds, leaving parents and children in the lurch.

I see no excuse for Charter Schools. Parents need to get INVOLVED with their schools and yell for what they want within the system.

Vouchers are mixing private and public systems. Those who cannot afford private should get on the lists for scholarships. In many instances, these scholarships are not necessarily given for high marks, but for diversity.

Again, if arrangements cannot be made for private schools for all who want them, then those parents should work within and for the public system.

I agree with everything Mal and Sun have said about this. And I second making Jane the Queen of Education!

First off I would like to say that I told of this website by a user. As a thirty-something year old I find this specific discussion group highly stimulating. As an Educator in the Special Education field--that of Visual Impairment/ Blindness, I feel that there are many facets to your discussions which brings this powerful topic--Education for ALL in America--to the surface. In focusing primarily at the history of American Education, we are bombarded by a barrage of theories, strategies, and teacher techniques in its inception and throughout the process. Now, in the "Modern Age" of Education, we, educators find ourselves in what I like to call a "Technological Transistional Period". This is a time period when Education is being heavily viewed by the masses of our society. In short, everyone's opinions in how to educate our children are up for grabs--sometimes even the bad ones. Some of these "opinions" are being expunded upon those individuals who have had no prior educational experience or even ever worked with a student either "disabled" or not. Understandably, as educators, we should have an open-mind on such affairs and issues of this nature; however this unfortunately, in this writer's opinion has become Education's "achilles heel." True, we, as educators, should take into account the diverse and outside opinions in an effort to become balanced and cognisant of other points of view. Notswithstanding the notion of "taking a whole village to educate the child" theory; however education should be left to educators. Would we, lay people, tell a skilled archietct or doctor how to perform thier job??? Personally as well as professionally, I would not even dare to. So to all of you I state this: Do we continue to advise Educators not knowing the completed version of the problems at hand? Do we suppose a knowledge base even though we have not entered into a classroom with students? Do we feel securfe in our opinions regarding what "disablity" is or is not? And lastly, do we have a right to judge the "whole" educational field based one or more isolated incidences??? I thank you for your time and hope this is some food for thought!! Smiles and Rainbows to all of you!!! On behalf of the thirty-somethings of our country, Thanks for all you did/doing for us!!

LMI, I wholeheartedly agree with you that teaching in the schools should be left to the teachers, given qualified reachers. Agreat many teachers today are not well qualified for many and varied reasons. But parents should not interfere in the teaching process.That should be entirely the instructers domain. There must be, of course, communication between teacher and parent. We must not dismiss charter schools, Edison System or any other means of educating our children before they have been adequately tested. We should not,also, fall into the trap of comparing our public with that of today. This is a different world. there are diferent needs in curriculum, new subjects not even offered when we were in school and, arguably, the quality of education has declined. It is incumbent upon us to experiment with many cures before we discard them. Ila, I dont know of an Edison school being closed in TX. and this is the first year fir them in Dallas. With hope they will teach us something. Take care, Mary

"Would we, lay people, tell a skilled archietct or doctor how to perform their job???"

I love this question, and the answer is no. My question in return is, why do we mess around as lay people with what trained educators do?

As far as the education I had when I was in college is concerned, there would be little difference today, since I majored in music and minored in American, English and Italian literature. Some music studied would be different, as would some literature. Fortunately for me, I am filled with curiosity and have kept up with these disciplines, so am very aware of what changes there have been.

If I was in college today majoring in music, I'd be very involved in electronic music, which I am today at the age of 72, but the basics of the study of music have not changed. Believe me, it's true.

Our "public", if I understand the term correctly, is not so very different, either. Technology progresses at a far greater speed than does the evolution of human beings. How people behave today is not so very different from what it was fifty years ago when I graduated from Smith College, or thousands of years ago in a Classical Greek civilization.

Mal

Mal:

I might not tell a doctor HOW to do their job,but I would and I HAVE,most emphatically,reminded doctors,and teachers,and politicians about THEIR RESPONSIBILITY and THEIR OBLIGATION to their jobs,and I can tell you ,from personal experience,that when you speak out and speak up,they will listen to you.

If "lay"people, who are the ones who foot the bill for public education,then it is OUR OBLIGATION to make certain that our educators are doing their best job with our children,otherwise,we will get, and in some cases already have,the educational system that we deserve,which in many cases,is a failing system.

In the process of our examining this back-to-school month, we would be forgetting (or ignoring) a large segment of the American population if we did not discuss vocational schools, or what are often called trade schools. In the United States, a wide variety of institutions prepare people for technical and vocational occupations. Some schools train for a single job or industry -- others offer programs for many different occupations. Programs can last from a few weeks to several years. Courses tend to stress application rather than theory.

Vocational studies are intended to lead to immediate employment. Hands-on training is often a component of the study program and lead to certificates of completion rather than degrees.

A form of education during the period when deTocqueville visited America was apprenticeship. The need for skilled workers was great as a constant influx of new immigrants continued to arrive by ship. The "new world" had a wealth of raw materials which needed many hands to develop. Apprenticeship was a system of on-the-job training which was based on ancient and medieval pratices. Massachusetts and Virginia passed laws in favor of the formation of this educational endeavor.

When you examine life during the 18th Century and life today, how important do you see vocational training? With the current emphasis on "college" education, are we ignoring the importance of training which leads directly to work?

Robby

Education officials are saying that they are driven by a severe teacher shortage, the demands of higher standards, and concerns that traditional teacher education programs are failing.

Schools of education have often had a reputation (rightly or wrongly) as being the least rigorous branch of undergraduate education, with lower admissions standards and fewer graduation requirements than other professional schools. Critics say the courses spend too much time on pedagogy and not enough on content - that is, how to teach and not what to teach. In the higher grades, some say, teachers need to know more about the subjects they are teaching. Others say that people who go through teacher education learn how to look at kids, how to understand what's going to be appropriate for different kids at different ages, how people learn and how to instruct a curriculum that builds on the way people learn well and easily.

A growing number of states and school districts, as a result, are short-circuiting the usual route to teacher certification. Many of these new programs adopt the model creatd by Teach for America, a nonprofit organization that came into existence a decade ago and put fresh graduates of the nation's top colleges into classrooms after brief summer training. Nearly every state has established some alternative route to teacher ertification, allowing those who do not have an undergraduate education degree to enter the profession. One training school is the Massachusetts Institute for New Teachers (MINT). The Massachusetts deputy commissioner of education says that this will become a major source of classroom teachhers for Massachusetts school. In this school prospective teachers teach summer school in the morning and attend class in the evening.

The FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS: "What makes a good teacher and how much of that can be taught?"

Your thoughts?

Robby

In this state we have a number of "community colleges" which are two year institutions that offer a mix of technical/vocational training and core "college" courses. There are two in this NE quadrant of Iowa...another 45 miles west of me and another 40 miles south of me. They offer courses in auto mechanics, airconditioning/heating, non-destructive testing, electrician training, daycare/childcare training, masonary, computer technician, and other trades as well as courses that will transfer to the state universities but are much cheaper and available to students who choose to live at home or are working in the area, etc.

š ...jane›

There are vocational schools in this area available to any and all who want to learn a trade. I think they're great.

Offhand, and sticking my neck out, I would say that it is not the amount of education that makes a good teacher. Some of the best teachers I had in "grammar" school never went to college. Rather, they took courses at "Normal School".

There's a talent to teaching, just as there are talents for art and music. The ability to convey what you know to others comes hard to some people, but it is possible to learn means of communication which are a help. Enthusiasm is important, I think, though maintaining that in a tough classroom isn't always easy.

I remember when I first considered teaching music. I told myself I didn't know how to teach, since I'd never taken a course in music pedagogy. I knew how to teach, I discovered; don't ask me how. It was quite a thrill for me when I took a young girl who knew nothing about reading music, taught her, and in less than a year she won a gold award for playing Bach in a competition.

What makes a good teacher? I'm not exactly sure, though it's easy to say what doesn't. I think patience is a very important factor, though, in every area of teaching.

Mal

Most of my elementary and high school teachers attended Cortland Normal School in Cortland, NY, which is now Cortland College in the NY University system.

Robby

Schools in America are barometers of social change. Change has been the dominant characeristic of American society. But change is still the thing which Americans have trouble dealing with, especially change which thratens their sense of conrol over their destiny. American schools exist in a flux of conflicting external and internal pressures.

The anger felt throughout America which comes from many directions is a grass-roots anger and is mirrored in American schools. American schools are decentralized and they respond very quickly to stresses experienced by the people. Local control will continue to insure that the schools will reflect America's anger and fear.

Is it your belief that day-to-day life in American schools will continue to be difficult?

Robby

MaryPage focuses on the parental/teacher involvement in Charter Public Schools, which is one of its key foundations. Is there a distinction between commercial schools, that are profit-based, and Charter Public Schools? Are CPSes profit-based, or are they on fixed-price government contracts? Edison = CPS? CPS = Edison? Edison on fixed government contracts? Personally, I find the lack of standards in private, commercial, and CPSes disturbing.

Just wondering, for my own information.

Gary:

I don't pretend to be knowledgeable on this subject and I am sure there are others on this forum who can be more specific, but it is my understanding that Charter Schools are public schools that operate under a state charter, independent of local bureaucracy. Charter schools are being examined as being possible closer ties between lower and higher education.

About 20 Charter schools have recently opened on campuses in several states, including Arizona, Florida, Michigan and Massachusetts. The colleges are looking for an opportunity to influence education before students show up at their doors, especially in an era of rising standards in college. For the University of California, with affirmative action abolised in admissions decisions, it is also a way to lure minority students.

Robby

Most particicipants here are aware of the following but it might not hurt to remind ourselves of the relationship of education in the United States to the government.

The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Since education is not mentioned in the Constitution, it is one of those powers reserved to the states.

Of course, the U.S. Supreme Court can declare that something not mentioned in the Constitution is so closely related to something that is mentioned in the Constitution that the unmentioned power is a fundamental interest, which rises to constitutional protection. So far, states have plenary, or absolute, power in the area of education.

American public schools at the primary and secondary level are functions of local authority, in contrast to European schools which are functions of centralized national or regional authority. The basic legal unit public school authority is the school district, a geographical area established by law in response to the wishes of residents in the area. The Board of Education has the power to levy taxes on property, hire administrators, administrative staff and teaching fculty, create educational policy, and establish and operate facilites. States also provide some funds for the operation of schools from state-wide revenues. This last fact may have some relevance as we examine Charter schools.

Robby

As we float down the mainstream of America in these lazy days of August and look over the landscape, not everyone we see in this great nation of ours is concentrating on what is going on in school. Many of us are enjoying the last few weeks of the summer.

Just what are you doing? Are you lolling in a hammock? Are you visiting friends? Are you lying on a beach? Are you spending time in your garden? Are you sitting indoors all day at the computer terminal? Are you watching movies, either in a movie house or at home?

What you and millions of other people are doing is what makes America what it is. What is America in August in the Year 2000?

Robby

On this date in 1830, Alexis deTocqueville left Montreal on the steamboat John Molson enroute to Quebec.

Robby

Early education in America was unique, as it was founded upon private education in the home, churches, and schools with the Bible as the foundation stone for character development as well as intellectual insight. The Pilgrims and Puritans were greatly interested in education, but they saw it as a personal, family, and church responsibility. Sometimes formal education was offered on a township level, but always under parental control and Biblically-based. These early founders, knowing the importance of education, founded hundreds of private schools and colleges during the colonial period.

At the time of the Declaration of Independence the quality of education had enabled the colonies to achieve a degree of literacy from 70% to virtually 100%. This was not education restricted to the few. Modern scholarship reports'the prevalence of schooling and its accessibility to tall segments of the population.' Moses Coit Tyler, historian of American literature, indicates the colonists' 'familiarity with history, extensive legal learning, licid exposition of constituttional principles, showing, indeed, that somehow, out into the American wilderness had been carried the very accent of cosmopolitan though and speech.'

In tracing the greatness of our nation, no more important foundation can be found than the 150 years of tutelage in the Christian schools and the self governing, principled study and reasoning done in the homes by rich and poor alike.

In 1830, this is the school system that DeT would have observed. But things would begin to change.

In 1838, Horace Mann, who is known as the father of the public/government school movement, became the Sec. of the Mass. Board of Education. So since public/government education would have just come to life, I would call this time, the budding (when new life begins) of the public/government school system. Mann promoted a philosophy of education that diametrically opposed that of the Founding Father generation. His system was:

1. He supported forced taxation for state schools which undermined parental control and was detrimental to the private schools.

2. He de-emphasized the Biblical doctrine of salvation as the basis of character development, replacing it with the optimistic, humanistic view of the perfectibility of man through education and environment.

3. He encouraged group thinking and study rather than individual initiative and creativity.

4. He standardized teacher training, textbooks, and accredidation beginning the transition away from the principles of the Christian philosophy of education taught by the great founder of America's educational system, Noah Webster. So education marched toward government secularism.

The public school bureaucracy, which is now the largest in the history of the world, has been "vaccinating" the vast majority of America's youth for several generations against what it considers to be "the infectious disease of absolute morals", our Christian heritage, and our Christian republic, which was built upon these truths.

Today, as progressive, public/government education collapes before our eyes, damaging millions of young lives in the process, we are witnessing an inevitable consequences of 150 years which cannot be corrected by simply putting voluntary (pluralistic) prayers back in the schools. A complete change of philosophy and leadership is needed.

That is why it is important that one new private school per hour is being started in the U.S. That is why it is important that parents take the full responsibility of teaching their children by 'home schooling' them. When I see a high school graduate looking for a job, asking if he can take the application home with him because he needs to get his parents to fill it out for him - this breaks my heart. He/she deserves better and when schools are failing that badly, I'm for trying anything. And then I see college grads that have great problems reading and writing, I know drastic changes need to take place.

Don, that is inaccurate history from beginning to end. I am afraid you have accepted whole hog some revisionists writings. Try a few other sources.

MaryPage---clap clap clap clappety clap! The history is inaccurate, misleading, terribly general, and a few other things.

Maryal

MaryPage and Maryal---May I join you? In agreement....

Sun

Quote your sources, Don.
As far as I'm concerned, what you've said is a bunch of balderdash.

Gotta quote those old sources, Don. Then we can take aim at THEM.

______________________________________

If anything is true at all, it's that recently, everyone has an opinion on education, teaching and teachers. In the long run, that's probably good. I don't ever remember this much ENERGY focused on how education ought to "be fixed."

I taught high school eons ago and feel lucky it was then, not more recently. My annual salary was $7,300. Over the years, I've added and added to my thoughts on "good" teaching. Those who love it, truly love it, probably have a leg up on all others. The technicians who tolerate the kids but who are particularly good in their fields probably also deserve a place among the "good." Those who have a gift for leading groups of teachers, squeezing necessities out of tight budgets and representing their schools to the district---well, those are amazing people and they have all my respect.

I also worked for a private high school for a short while. A British headmaster, several artists in residence, kids that lived away from home 12 months of the year. Night and day from public school. Even after years of thinking of the two separate experiences, though, I can't really say that one place was a better educational environment than the other. I can report, however, that Ted Turner's daughter was a terrible student and a trouble maker. AND, on Parents' Day, twice a year, Ms. Turner's parents were noticably absent, which always made several of us sad for her and increased our sympathy when she acted out. Can you imagine---living away from home and looking forward to seeing your parents---and they don't show up!! I can still remember how upset that made me.

As many participants here indicate, we try in this forum to quote our sources. Each of us is certainly entitled, and in fact encouraged, to give our opinion so long as we label it as such. Unless, however, we give the sources of the statements we make, they are open to disbelief.

In the meantime, as suggested in an earlier posting, let us share with each other what a large segment of America is doing these days -- i.e. enjoying the "lazy, hazy" days of August. What is America (meaning you) doing as a form of vacation or leisure to gather energy for the more active Fall season?

Robby

Don, Message 539: Mary Page, Message #540, and all. The Stephanie Grauman Wolf Book, "As Various As Their Land" discusses education in Colonial America in the 17th and particularly the 18th century in several chapters but particularly in the chapter 4, "The Invention Of Childhood." I found this well documented Social History a convenient source for a view of the lifestyles of our colonial ancestors. I recommend it to all.

It has been pointed out... on this side of the ditch that the latest rash of protests at the conventions were organized by organizers at a national level. A protest that makes things change starts at the grass roots level. At least according to the professor i listened to on CBC.

A protest that starts at the top usually is more violent because it has no roots or really dedicated people throughout the nation. It must make its point quickly and violence is a good way to get media attention.

Two years ago Californians voted to end bilingual education and force a million Spanish-speaking students to immerse themselves in English. Those students are improving in reading and other subjects at often striking rates, according to standardized test scores.

In second grade, the average score in reading English increased nine percentage points. In mathematics the score increased 14 points.

Kenneth Noonan, who founded the California Association of Bilingal Educators 30 years ago and who is now the school superintendent at Oceanside, California, had warned in 1998 that children newly arrived from Mexico and Central America would stop coming to school if they were not gradually weaned off Spanish in traditional bilingual classes. He now says he was wrong. The exact reverse occurred. Children, within nine months in the first year, have literally learned to read.

Superintendent Noonan now says he will teach Spanish-speaking students exclusively in English.

Any comments related to the importance of speaking English in America?

Robby

My question is this: Why are we so afraid of other languages in this country?

Mal

My question is: why are current immigrants who apparently come willingly to this country unwilling to learn English which appeared to be important to earlier immigrants?

š ...jane›

I truly wonder if immigrants to this country are any more reluctant to learn English now than they always were before.

We are a multi-ethnic society; why not multi-lingual?

Mal

I see nothing wrong with being multi-lingual....but I certainly expect everyone that comes to this country to work or live, or become a citizen...should be expected to learn English.

Sun

Absolutely, Sun Know. I believe this as much as I believe it's only a courtesy that we learn some of their native tongue, too.

Mal

A charter school which is not only different from public schools in general but is different from most other charter schools is the Young Women's Leadership Charter School in Chicago. It is Chicago's first all-girls public school and one of the few public all-girl schools in the nation. It is a sister school to the Young Women's Leadership Academy in Harlem which opened in 1996 and states as its purpose freeing the girls from what many find to be an intimidating presence of boys in classes.

A 1998 study by the American Association of University Women showed no proof that a single-sex educational environment is more beneficial to girls than a coed environment. The report found that while many girls prefer a single-sex atmosphere, they may not excel academically when they are separated from boys.

Currently there are 74-sixth graders and 75 ninth-graders with the expectation of including grades 6 through 12 in the coming years. With 73 percent of students African-American, it has a college prep curriculum including seven rigorous years of math, science and computer scourses. The curriculum is light on physical education and the humanities. English and social studies are lumped into one course. Students are spending Wednesday afternoons volunteering in nursing homes and eventually, as they get older will intern with Chicago companies.

What are your views about charter schools and on this type of charter school in particular?

Robby

On this date in 1830, Alexis deTocqueville visited the village of Lorette, near Quebec.

Robby

The AAUW study is important, but doesn't stand by itself. It has to be considered in the context of a wealth of studies that continue to show different treatment of girls and boys in school. As I've written elsewhere, the most compelling studies are those of teachers who self-identify as "feminists" or "aware" of a need to, in layman's terms, pay as much attention to girls as to boys in the classroom. Even those teachers are shocked to see themselves on tape giving more attention, encouragement to boys. So, when girls enter a coed environment, they enter a place that reflects the world, where even subtle nuances of entitlement favor boys.

In general, we respond to men with more respect than we do women. It happens in the family, in the workplace. It happens here. It's not anything that jumps out at you most of the time, but it's such an established part of our world, that it's often the absence of it that will catch one's attention.

And, yes, things are better now, so much better, I can hardly believe it sometimes. Then something will slap me in the face and I will think, boy, we still have work to do.

My personal way of thinking about girls-only schools is to think of them as a remedial option. And I wish they weren't needed. I wish we could put our efforts into searching for ways to make the coed environment a place equally welcome to girls and boys. But I wish the same for the workplace when I hear of women leaving the corporate world in frustration to start businesses of their own.

If anyone doubts our varying levels of respect, just look at income comparisons (same job, same experience) or at emergency room admissions or sheer numbers of rapes in urban, suburban and rural communities. These are good measurements of respect and of male entitlement. End of lecture, I promise.

Betty:

No, it wasn't a lecture. As we examine America critically, it's important that we see both the positive and negative sides of this great nation. Notice in the quote above how deT speaks of both the "evils and advantages which Democracy brings." The more we look at this nation today, the more we realize how astute deTocqueville was 170 years ago!!

Robby

Don't you all think the sad apartness of Quebec from mainstream Canada and its many repercussions on that great nation constitutes the main reason most of the U.S. fears becoming a bilingual society?

Jeryn: An interesting thought. Would you please expand on that a bit?

Robby

Expanding is not my forte, dear, hahaha! However, it just seems Canada would be a happier, healthier nation if all those Frenchmen had, early on, bit the bullet and learned English. Now it appears we may one day have TWO Canadas, two nations, and the great divider is LANGUAGE.

Jeryn: Do you suggest that all those immigrating to this country "bite the bullet" and immerse themselves immediately in the English language? Do you suggest any additional bi-lingual help for them or would you leave the rest up to them?

robby

Jeryn, it is not the language that divides us it is the fact that we won the Battle of the Plains of Abraham. This has been exploited by the Church and politicians ever since. Most folks in Montreal and Quebec City speak english. It is only in places like the Eastern Townships that they do not speak english.

The ability to speak english allows for easier emigration to a larger market. I certainly would not like it if french disappeared from Quebec. This heritage is an important part of Canada's history. Canada is not a melting pot it is a multi-cultural nation. The ability to speak english simply means you are able to move up in society as this is the language of commerce.

Idris: Thank you for sharing your thoughts and for giving us the Canadian point of view. As indicated in the Introduction above, we are talking about Democracy in Canada as well as in the United States. You bring up a couple of very important points:--

1 - Canada is not a melting pot; it is a multi-cultural nation.
2 - English is the language of commerce.
3 - Other heritages, along with their language, should be allowed to flourish.

Is this similar to what we see in the United States? What are your opinions, folks?

Robby

Well, Idris, I admit I do not feel comfortable discussing this at length--I'm not Canadian and all I really know about their emotions and situations is what I read in the newspapers! [smile]

I do know you can't drive down a highway in ANY PART of Canada without seeing road signs in two languages--no matter how alike or obvious the words are. How much did that cost that nation in actual $$$? And how many other things that tourists such as I don't see have had the same laws govern their appearance... and cost? I do not really see how clinging to a language WITHOUT adopting the language of your country [else why the need for all those bilingual signs?] furthers anyone's personal best interest or that of the culture, be it French or Hispanic or Hindu or Vietnamese or or or...

Jeryn, there are Canadians who would agree with you about the signs, i don't. What price the honour of showing the world our pride in being a nation with two modern founding nations? The third of course are the First Nation's Peoples.

We are a biligual country by law and through our Constitution. Do we deny what is our heritage? Would it make me better to take what is essential to another founding people their heritage? I think not.

I may disagree most strenuously with their separatist politicians but i would never suggest that the people of Quebec be unable to educate themselves in french. That would be asking them to deny their heritage and the essence of self.

I remind you .....most of the people of Quebec speak english.

Again Jeryn brings up a most salient point. Here in the United States, we are dealing with a tremendous influx of people from all over the world (is this true in Canada, Idris?). As Jeryn implies -- what about Hindu, Vietnamese, Hispanic, Portuguese, Chinese, Japanese, the various African languages, etc. etc.? Should we have bi-lingual signs and lessons in those languages as well?

Idris mentions something that I didn't know -- that Canada is bi-lingual by law and by the Constitution. How does that relate to our approach in the United States?

Robby

Percentage wise....more, Robby. It is easier to get into Canada than into the U.S. I am not happy about this believe me.

Mal & Robby:

What do you think about Ebonics?

Mal; Do we (as a nation) show courtesy to a significant group of Americans if we converse in Ebonics?

Our native language is English (American).If we want or need to learn another language ,for whatever the reason,that's fine, but to HAVE to learn another language,either because it's mandated by gov't or because we feel "guilty" about something...then that's another consideration altogether.

I have some experience in the retail aspect of the economy and I can assure you,that regardless of what language people speak...they all know how to count money in the English Language.

I admit to abysmal ignorance of Canadian law and their constitution. I love Canada and the Canadians, every one I've ever met on either side of the border, but basically have been just a tourist there. As a tourist, the signs struck me as wasteful and redundant--especially if most of Canada does speak and understand English anyway. As a matter of showing pride in bilingualism, are there other ways... that I don't know about?

What do you mean, Idris, that you are not happy about it being easier to get into Canada? I don't quite know how to interpret that...
It could mean you or someone you know wants to get into the U.S. and can't? Or it could mean Canada is having an influx of, to you, too many foreigners?

Ed: Your last phrase is most powerful! We need to remind ourselves of that. When some HAS to do something, he DOES it!!

Robby

Canada needs people. We are a very large land mass, much of it unpopulated, Jeryn. We welcome immigration but we seem to find ourselves stuck with those who come in illegaly. Much like your position re Cuba. Once those who jump the que arrive by whatever means it costs mega bucks as we afford all newcomers all of the rights Canadians have. Once out in the general population they do not come back for immigration meetings...they disappear into the country.

I have not problem with anyone coming to this country legally. It means they have met certain standards. However, i fear the que jumpers and their disappearance into my nation. Rarely are they every caught and thrown out.

Excuse me, Idris. I don't know what a "que" is.

Robby

I think she means "queue", Robby; people who jump out of the line to enter the country and just disappear.

Apparently, Canada makes this easier to do than the U.S.--am I understanding you, Idris? I think I see what you mean now. Folks entering illegally might be--well, just ANYONE! Crooks. Mafia. Disease carriers. ICK--who knows!!!

Sorry, Idris. I hadn't thought of a "line" of people waiting to get into the country. And, as you say, Canada is such a gigantic nation (I think many of us forget this) that one could be lost for a lifetime!

Robby

Exactly, Jeryn.

Sorry about the error in spelling, Robby. Nothing like making one's point clear as mud.

)

That is unfortunate indeed, Idris. Are there any moves underway to tighten up the security a bit? Surely there are others who feel as you do?

Anyone else here with thoughts about the importance of language in a nation?

Robby

You bet your buttons, Jeryn. It is a national disgrace!

I'll give you one, Robby. If you have folks within your nation that speak another language and understand the heritage of it, you are a better trader. Canada is an exporting nation. We now have people here from every nation in the world. They speak the language and understand the folks in those countries we trade with. We can trade more effectively with these folks. In other words they are invaluable to our making of money. They expand our markets and enrich our country with their heritage.

I have to say, it has been so interesting "hearing" your views, Idris, and I am a richer person for it. Truly! I think I can safely say, not just I--but all U.S. citizens, wish Canada well!!

Nonetheless, for the U.S., I am among those who advocate One Official Language--English. Naturally, I am delighted with the confirming results of the California experience recently touted in the newspapers. It makes sense to me. Teach them English and teach them IN English: they will soon KNOW English, and everything else too! This is essential for living and making a living in an English-speaking society! We do hope and assume immigrants come here to JOIN us, not to sponge or live lives of crime!!

Idris: What many of us might infer from that (although you didn't say it) is that so many - if not majority - of citizens in the United States are saying, in effect, this is our language, this is the way we do business, and if you don't like it, you know what you can do.

Robby

I would say so Robby. You are an elephant and we are a mouse. You catch cold and get pneumonia. We are however a very different nation from the U.S. in many ways. We are also similar in others.

There are many Canadians, especially out West who would dearly love to become an english only nation. Now remember we are official bi-lingual, you are not.

You could make yourself officially unilingual english and still accept the differences of people...including language. I disagree with heritage language schooling because too often it is a way to keep a minority down and poor. Sadly it is often their own who do it to them.

I want our newcomers to prosper. In their prosperity they will make us a very rich country.

You (Canada) are not a mouse!! I see Canada doing humanitarian things around the world where the U.S. is taking no action at all. But we see what you are doing and elephants are sometimes afraid of mice.

Robby

A few thoughts about the language barriers--

Wasn't it Franklin who said, "United we stand; divided we fall."

There are many things dividing our society these days, and language is just another one. My grandparents came here from Czechoslovakia and never learned English. They lived in a coalmining town in Penna., and I suppose most of their neighbors were like them--new immigrants. However, my father not only learned both English and Slovak, but Spanish, and Polish. He worked in the bank and wanted to be able to talk to his customers in their own languages.

But I think that citizenship should be a striven-for privilege; not just a handout to anyone who takes a notion. And one of the preliminaries should be an ability to pass some sort of basic spoken English test. I understand that these days our newcomers are not so interested in assimilating as they were in the days when I was growing up. But if we keep creating smaller units who can't converse with each other how long do we stay "united"?

Remember the Tower of Babel? And its purpose?

Idris, I think we are actually in some agreement here. Your statement,

"I disagree with heritage language schooling because too often it is a way to keep a minority down and poor. Sadly it is often their own who do it to them."

Yes, if that is all the language schooling they are getting. You are so right.

I don't think of Canada as a MOUSE! Hardly!! A partner. A smaller but equal partner. A cousin. A friend, for sure.

You were posting with me, jeanlock! You make an excellent illustration there. Oooooh, no we don't want "the tower of babel"!!!

I can hardly say the Canada is united. We are often yapping at each other through Federal, Provincial conferances. In our diversity there is unity. If part of my nation is from everywhere, i am more understanding of the needs beyond my borders. To see a Somali on the street is to know faintly that someone like this is still living in a horrible nation full of terrors and no true government. It elicits understanding i think. I am a citizen of the world, not just Canada.

Jeryn i truly believe that a lack of english language skills will keep children in their getto and unable to take their place in the greater society. I think it is a case of the abuse of a minority.

Yes, Idris. We ARE in agreement on that.

I agree---This is a nation of many groups. However, English is the language of the country. We are doing our Hispanic neighbors no service by providing education in two languages. The program in California to switch to all English has had a great deal of success according to a friend of mine who lives there. Many prophets of doom said that English Only would not work, but students are happy and scores are significantly higher.

It is hard enough to teach. We don't need to be focusing on things that divide, like language. Jeanlock's example of the Tower of Babel is well taken.

Young children are little language-learning sponges. Thus the earlier we provide total immersion in English the better. The child will not lose, let's take Spanish as an example, her "mother tongue" because it will be spoken at home and most likely in the neighborhood. These children in California will be bilingual.

However, I do wish that more Americans knew more than one language. If we lived in Europe, we surely would know at least two and most likely three.

Maryal

Ed, please show me how Ebonics is a language. To my mind, this is a dialect and idiomatic speech. Dialects and idiomatic speech are found in every section of this country.

I agree with practically everything Idris has said. In my opinion, the world has become very, very small, and the United States, like Canada, is a multi-cultural nation, so why not accept and acknowledge that fact? The 19th century is long, long gone. The 20th is, too.

It is to our advantage in the United States not only to require immigrants to learn English, but to afford citizens here to have at least a nodding acquaintance with Spanish, French, Italian and German, Russian, Norwegian, Swedish and some Arabic and Farsi, Japanese and Chinese. The list goes on and on.

If we are to live peacefully in one world, as this one is and always has been, a better understanding of the culture of other people and how they think must be achieved, if only through reading literature other than that which is in English.

So, the language of business is English. So be it. There's more to life than business. Simply by going on web sites written in languages other than English one sees that the American "majority" in our minds is small in relation to the entire world. One will also find numerous possibilities to study and read other languages and find out something about people and places and the history of those people and places that are not part and parcel of the US of A. I do it all the time.

Mal

Call me weird, but I often see seeds of growth in dissension. The current wave of clamor against a few so-called "liberal" ideas is a measure, in my weird way of looking at things, of those ideas making progress. A backlash is in response to something, sometimes an effective something.

As the world grows smaller and as we each inch toward Idris' view of being a citizen of the world, there will be people kicking and dragging their heels. (Did I just mix those metaphors?) Anyway, I see this decade-old clamor for "English Only!!" as one of those (backlash) responses. I really don't know how I feel about teaching in just English and I'm really glad to hear of those early California results. It is only to our benefit, though, and as others have pointed out, to get to know our neighbors of the world. Lots of pictures come to mine---saving old growth forests, etc., etc.---so many challenges we have. Knowing each other better can only assist us. Tower of Babel analogies don't ring any bells for me. I feel a kinship and a curiosity about people everywhere. Their differences, especially of language or color, are nothing to fear.

The way we explain it in Canada is...There is unity in diversity. Sure it is difficult and requires stretching and accepting that which is new but it pays off in the end. If we hang together that is and sometimes it is a real question as it was just a few years ago. Quebec had its Referendum and we almost lost them.

The UN has named Canada as the best county in the world to live for seven years now and i totally agree.

Ebonics---a term that we didn't really need since it has provided so much nasty joke material--is a vernacular, non-standard form of English. Formerly called Black English, it has a slightly different grammar, most likely influenced by African languages and pidgeon English.

One brief example--In Black English "He working" means He is working at the moment. "He be working" means He has a job.

Jesse Jackson daringly used Black English when he employed the sentence--"Stay out ' the Bushes." "Of" has here been omitted as it would be in the neighborhood in such admonitions as "Stay out ' the street now."

Maryal

Just curious, Idris, does Canada have affordable housing for seniors?

Yes, but not really enough. It is a local responcibility for the most part. For folks who have alzheimers etc. there are Provincial facilities. Senior's and those who are chronically ill have their meds taken care of through a special plan. All seniors can write off their meds through their income tax. We also have Federal/Provincial medicare in every Province and is taken care of through our income taxes. What is covered is slightly different Province to Province. For example if you want a mole removed cause you just don't like it, the surgery is not covered. If the same mole is possibly pre-cancerous it is covered.

LOL, Betty. I was just going to ask the same thing. Thanks, Idris, for answering Betty's question.

You are right, Maryal. I have lived in the Southeast for over twenty years and come in contact with not only black African Americans who speak in this way, but whites who speak like this, too. Once in a while I have to tune into the accent and dialect because my mind is back in Massachusetts where we never said an R, said ayuh for yes; said he wa'n't goin' to the stoah and told people to turn off the tap in the kitchen 'fore everything got floodid. The Ebonics dialect is rich. What about Gullah? That's English, too, but a completely different dialect.

Mal

We are on "soft" ground here as we speak about Ebonics and I have every confidence that all participants will speak in a courteous manner. When we examine America naturally we can not exclude any portion of it.

Robby

It would appear that all around the world people are speaking english. The problem is it often doesn't sound like the Queen's english. However, you understand each other and that's the main thing. Their children usually speak english better than someone born here as their parents want them to succeed so badly.

Robby I finally made it......I have just finished reading all the previous posts which has taken several days and a few late meals for the husband.....Fascinating discussion....I read this book many years ago so will mostly just continue to follow along without comment...I gather there are many teachers here, retired and active....Please tell me who writes the content of the present day text books used in the public schools? Of course I know there are more than one or two texts...Particularly the history texts......I don't mean a particular person.......

Nancy: So glad you found us! Hope your husband didn't suffer too much from malnutrition!! We have just begun this discussion group and we have a long way to go so you have time to get the book if you wish. If you click onto the Barnes and Noble box above, you can order the Heffner paperback for approx $7 and Senior Net receives 7% of what you paid B&N. In the meantime you will find that the deTocqueville quotes above change periodically depending upon what sub-topic we are discussing. I don't know who writes the content of the present-day textbooks but I'm sure someone more qualified here will give you an idea. Welcome again and please continue to participate.

Robby

Ah Robby that was much to easy ordering that book!!!!!! I am looking forward to reading and following along with the group...Thank you so much.

Nancy: Great!! We aim to make life pleasurable. That's what America is all about!! No??

Robby

In message #592 Idris O'Neill Wrote

The way we explain it in Canada is...There is unity in diversity.

We use the same words at the Institute of Texan Cultures where I do volunteer work. We too consider our State a multi cultural society and the role of the Institute is to promote that end. At the same time we do not want to forget that for diversity to promote unity there must be an absense of hatred. There was no appearence of unity among the several cultural groups making up the former Yugoslavia.

My paternal Ancestors were Germans who immigrated to the U.S. in the 1850's, settling in Texas soon thereafter, During the last half of the 19th century there was a large German influx into Central Texas. The German language was as much used as English. Yet they were in the melting pot and by the 2nd native born generation the German language was forgotten. I am the 3rd native Generation. The men of the 2nd and 3rd generation wore the u.S. uniform in two wars against the country of family orgin without a second thought. For a view of this family early in the 19th see the following: Pictures From Our Past

Yea!! Hip-Hip-Hooray!! Today is the one-month Anniversary of this Discussion Group. Thanks to the active participation of everyone here, this forum has become a most successful one.

We have been floating along in the mainstream of the nation observing the various faces America has presented to us, starting with the first political convention, then examining the back-to-school month, then the second political convention, again examining the American educational system, and are now looking at the diverse ethnic make-up of the Democracies of both the United States and Canada.

A sincere thank-you to all those who have helped to make this discussion group such a scintillating one. Please invite all your friends to come join us.

Robby

If it is advantageous to politicians to cause a lack of harmony they do it. Their job is to get re-elected no matter what. Then there will be no unity in diversity. Only that which is different will be stressed not the things that are similar.

Candidates in presidential elecions seem to divide ethnic groups and classes of people more than unite them. I think their rhetoric concerning classes of people does the nation harm and fosters a lot of hate. It seems it takes nearly 4 years to repair the damage they do, and then its time for another election and they do their dividing again.

Don, it is done here too so it isn't just an American thing. What is worse the media plays along and makes matters worse. Everything is seen as taking from one to give to another. Sometimes as with the bill that is in front of some political group in your country the ability of a physician to give a script for drugs to be purchased in Canada rather than the U.S. Given the amount of money the drug companies put into each campaign you can imagine what is going to happen.

Folks in your country will be forced to continue to pay high prices for much needed meds. I find the whole thing disgusting.

Our Iowan friend, Jane (among others here), might be interested in the following:--

Twice in the last three years the Iowa state legislature was embroiled in debates over proposals, not passed, that English be made Iowa's official language. At the same time, according to Tom Vilsack, the governor, the state needs more people. Following the 1980s farm crisis, the state has fewer residents than it did 20 years ago. With an unemployment rate of 2 percent, there are not enough workers to allow many new businesses to open, or existing ones to expand or even replace retirees. Iowa ranks third in the nation in percentage of elderly. The average farmer is 58 years old; the average assembly-line worker is 57.

Now a governor's commission has come up with a proposal called an "immigration enterprise zone," seeking an exemption from federal immigration quotas. The governor realizes that some Iowans, and immigrants, might have trouble adjusting. In Marshalltown, a community of 30,000, the influx of several thousand Mexican immigrants at work at a meatpacking plant has not been univesally embraced. This month, a petition was submitted to the county board of supervisors calling for county business to be printed in English only.

Where does diversity fit in with Democracy? What has our history shown?

Robby

If the new immigrants come in gradually so the older residents are not overwhelmed and they can get to know the newcomers there is far less trouble. Slow integration seem fairly easy. An influx that is fast and swift involves too many changes and a rush to please the newcomers. Then the changes are so overwhelming for the older residents there is trouble and an us and them mentality is set in motion. Not good!

Oh, Robby, I'm much aware of the "immigration" proposal here. There were petitions circulated widely here to stop a meat packing plant from building a facility that would have employed thousands...of mostly immigrants from Bosnia and Mexico. It was felt the impact of thousands moving to our small community would reek havoc with the school system in finding speakers of Serbo-Croatian, etc. for the children coming into the system, housing for thousands in a town of 5,400, waste water from the plant, etc. The plant was not built here...but in Waterloo 40 miles west which had already lost thousands of people when packing plants there closed and had the waste water treatment facility, etc., to handle the plant.

Bringing in waves of immigrants is indeed a very touch subject in this state.

š ...jane›

You are very lucky Jane, that your petitions work. Ours do not generally. The Parliamentary system that we have is winner take all, not the system you have of Congress and Executive Office of the President.

Thank you, Jane, for helping us to see the picture through the eyes of someone who lives in Iowa. It is my understanding that what has been called "making Iowa an Ellis Island of sorts" came from a bipartisan committee appointed by Governor Vilsac, which created a plan to help the state thrive by 2010. The committee of 37 prominent Iowans set goals like "making Iowa technologically eompetitive" and "developng nonagricultural industries." The mayor of Indianola, who heads the 2010 Committee's group, has described the population problem in Iowa as a "disaster."

What does a Democracy do when there are jobs to be done and no one to do them? How was this solved 100 or more years ago?

Robby

In Iowa years ago people had large families. It's not unusual to find older Iowans with 12-14 siblings. When I first started teaching in Iowa in 1973, families of 8-10 childen was very common...and 14-15 not uncommon. It was commented on when a family had, as one did, 14 girls and 1 boy. It was combinations like that that caused comment. Children were needed to help with the farm chores, etc. Now, it's not so much the children or the "hired hand" as it is the bigger and bigger "John Deere." The one exception is on dairy farms...where it's human work to get those cows washed every morning and every evening before milking. I had many students from dairy farms who were bone tired at the end of a week, after getting up at 4:00 or 4:30 am to get the cattle washed and into the milking parlors and milked before showering and catching the school bus. Back home after school to do some homework, repeat the dairy process, grind feed, do other chores and to bed.

š...jane›

In Canada it was massive immigration from Poland etc. plus Russia, Germany. They were all farmers and that was what we needed. The Prairie Provinces still have this as their base population. You must have done the same.

Alberta was an exception as it was populated through natural migration of folks from Texas who were panning for gold during the time of the Gold Rush. They started to come south again and just settled in Alberta. It is the most conservative of all of our Provinces.

Robby,

I believe that a hundred years ago many, if not most, of the immigrants into the eastern United States were Irish. And they went through the same discrimination that the immigrants of today endure----such as the Mexicans or Spanish speaking newcomers. The "wheel" constantly turns and eventually all ethnic groups meld into American society keeping our country vital and alive with ever changing viewpoints. As to an "official" language, I still feel that it should be English because it truly is the language of world commerce. That doesn't prohibit the speaking of a "native tongue" by new citizens nor does it mean that we who came before should not attempt to learn languages other than English-American.

Someone (forgive me that I can't remember who) spoke of the influx of Russian immigrants and that reminded me that my older son took several years of Russian in jr. and sr. high school and became pretty proficient. However, when the Russian class took a two week trip to Russia they found, much to their dismay, that they couldn't understand the "street" Russian at all. But, kids being more adaptable than we older folks, they managed to find a way to communicate with each other, anyway. I think, no matter what are first language may be, we will find a way to communicate with each other if we only try.

Phyll

Phyll, our East coast was settled mainly by the Irish, Scots and Welsh. You can still hear it in their speach patterns. There were also a lot of Home Children who came and were adopted (some not very nicely) by folks in Quebec and the Eastern Provinces. Seems we have a lot in common here.

Gaelic, French and a wonderful form of English is still spoken there.

Idris,

A lot of Scots settled here in NC after the Clearances in mid 1800's including the famous Flora McDonald who helped Bonny Prince Charlie escape "over the sea to Skye" after his, and the Highlander's, defeat in 1845. She later went back to Skye where she is buried.

I am of Irish and Welsh heritage and I believe while immigration brings many, many problems for both the old and new citizens of both U.S. and Canada it also adds such a richness to the fabric of our countries. It takes many different colored yarns to make a beautiful tapestry.

Phyll

Phyll, i am of Welsh and English heritage and married a third generation Irish heritage fellow.

) My mother only spoke Gaelic when she came to Canada, just before the depression hit.

I raised the issue of Ebonics merely to show how far the political corectness pendulum has swung.

We are an English speaking country and you are certainly free to converse ,at home,in any language that you desire,but if you want to advance anywhere in American society,you had better learn English.

Regardless of what the historical revisionists may claim,we ARE a British,European based culture that has been leavened by the foresight of the Founders and enriched by all kinds of immigration.

Robby, I hope this doesn't make the ground softer,because I am finding the wide range of exchanges quite stimulating.

A suggestion to everyone -- that as you enter this discussion each time, that you not scroll down quickly to the postings but instead pause to read the quotes of deTocqueville's remarks. The quotes are changed periodically. Do not assume that they constantly remain the same. They usually relate to what we are currently discussing.

Note, for example, deT's comment above that "the tie of language is, perhaps, the strongest and the most durable that can unite mankind." This is a powerful statement. Despite the numerous heritages that we all bear, is it language that has kept us together? Was this wise Frenchman who visited us 170 years ago able to discern what makes America, with all its various backgrounds, different from all other nations on earth?

Robby

History does show that language is a great uniter AND a great divider.

MaryPage:

Does having one language unite? Does having different languages divide?

Robby

Robby--

Language unite or divide?

It's a matter of perspective. Just because official and corporate America conduct their business in English does in no way prevent a person from using any language he/she wants. Even that thing that GBS tried to promote. BUT if you want to participate in those activities you'd better learn the language they respect. I think it's amazing to realize that whereas French used to be the language everyone was supposed to learn to be 'international', today it's English. I think we make a great mistake in this country by not insisting that students become fluent in at least one other language. (Not much use for my Latin, however).

What started as a discussion about American Democracy has slipped into another thread...and a valuable one,I think. We can't understand where we're going until we know from whence we've come. Re:the Democracy discussion...I haven't read the book,but would like to comment.As a Canadian, I post on many American message boards...and most of the "political"posts express a disenchantment with the "system",mostly related to how distant the voters feel from their representatives.They display a real cynicism(sp?),and many are choosing to not vote at all. There is,I think,the same sense of disenchantment here in Canada. The "youth" wings of our political parties are not attracting the same numbers....and those are the very people we need to get involved,and to understand the process. I particularly liked the observation that it takes many different coloured threads to weave a tapestry...well said!!!

Kesann: Good to have you with us. We are not a "political" forum but discuss Democracy as we see it day by day and compare it with deTocqueville's appraisal. You are urged to buy the book (paperback version) and to follow along with us.

Robby

I come from an Italian heritage through my father's side and a Swedish-Dutch heritage on my mother's side. None of my ancestors came over on the Mayflower. None of my ancestors were part of the colonial expansion. There is nothing in my ancestral makeup that is related to England in any way. Prior to their coming to this nation, none of my grandparents spoke English.

A similar situation existed in the United States in 1830-31, the period when deTocqueville was here. By that time the population of America was made up not only of British but German, French, Dutch, Spanish, Russian, Portuguese, and other citizens of various foreign origins. Despite that, deT spoke of all of them as Anglo-Americans. He described them as such because they all lived under laws, language, and manners which originated in England. Democracy as we know it here and now originated in Britain. "The sovereignty of the people," said deTocqueville, "was the fundamental principle of most of the British colonies in America." (P56, The Sovereignty of the People in America.)

As we look at the multitude of hyphenated Americans in this nation today (Croatian-Americans, Chinese-Americans, Turkish-Americans), and realize that we all live under the same laws, language, and societal manners brought here by the British, are we stretching the point too much in calling ourselves Anglo-Americans as deTocqueville did?

Robby

We sure are. De Tocaqueville was wrong.

Mal

Mal: But if, regardless of our families of origin, the majority of us in the United States speak in English, write in English, use English in our official documents, follow English customs handed down to us from the English colonies, live under principles of English law, use English mannerisms, and run our lives under a Constitution which was strongly influenced by the English Magna Carta -- then aren't we, for all intents and purposes, Anglo-Americans?

Robby

How about Anglo-influenced? We in the United States are no more like the English than they are like us. Ask any Brit.

It would be an interesting study to find out exactly how many of us in this country are of true English origin, I think. I am primarily of English heritage, but when a genealogical search was done of my family, it was discovered some French got mixed in there sometime or other.

Do I call myself Anglo-American? No, I don't, any more than I say this country is that. This leads me to another thought. Why call any citizen here anything but American?

Mal

I do not agree that de Tocqueville was wrong. He was correct at the time. The United States is much more of a melting pot now than it was then.

The Founders of the United States were aware of the importance of language on nation-building. A nation's language was thought to be the essence of national culture. Hobbes wrote in 1651 that language was the major organizing principle of states and without it "there had been amongst men, neither Commonwealth, nor Society, nor Contract, nor Peace." Language was seen from the start as a potential element in constituing a political and cultural unity among the citizens of the new republic.

Robby

I think that it was Teddy Roosevelt that made the statment, "There's no such thing as a hyphenated American". I agree with Teddy and would go even farther - we accept completly and therefore there's no need for hythens, they are Americans, complete and wholly. Hythens, like language, often can separate instead of unite.

Don: What is your answer to the question in the title - What is an American?

Robby

As I understane the situation, the British Isles too since the 1950's have not escaped becoming something of a melting pot also. Is it not true that there was a significant non-anglo immigration to those islands particularly from colonies and former colonies? Has this not also significantly altered the UK ethnic make-up today?

I agree with the previous comment that the term Anglo-American was a proper-one in de T's time. I would prefer today to drop the "Anglo" as well as other hyphenated divisions leaving simply "American," applicable to all.

Robby asks, "Anglo-American?" Mal suggests "Anglo-influenced." Sometimes, I think I hear Anglo-obsessed. Again, this clamor for English-only is a contemporary phenomenon. It feels to me like a reaction to an increasingly diverse society. I'm speaking less about the valid concerns of education than I am of, for example, two events that just took place. I think both these English-only stories took place in Texas, but don't hold me to it.

The first story is of the workplace management memo that mandated English only among coworkers---if you're in the building, English is the only language you are permitted. Within 24 hours, a court-ordered retraction memo said, in essence, never mind. Also, just last week, a judge ordered 2 parents to speak only English to their children at home. (I didn't hear the circumstances. Juvenile problems? Custody problems? Don't know.) A higher court overturned the order quickly and had critical things to say about the judgment of the lower court judge. Everyone interviewed, even those who disagreed on educational issues, agreed that no judge had a right to say what language was spoken at home.

I want to say here that nothing surprises me anymore about discrimination and racism---about who practices it and how insidious its nature. Long ago, it was with some shame that I first realized that I was as racist as I thought others to be. Over time, I have come to believe that racism resides in all of us, that we live what we've learned in our families and the larger society and that becoming aware of internal racism is very difficult. (An example of my discovered racism was realizing, years ago, that I spoke of people I'd just hired in separate ways. I said, "the new Black guy," but I never said, "...the new Anglo guy.")

This English-only thing, I'm convinced, is tied to racism (though not exclusively) and how we feel about certain groups. For example, my guess is that the lower court judge would never have considered ordering French parents to forego speaking French at home. Also, none of us have mentioned the often reported statistical predictions of how soon Anglo-Americans will lose majority status in the U.S., that people from many countries of Hispanic heritage will, in fact, be the majority population. I'm convinced some of the English-only demands are tied to the changing numbers.

And (a big and), I think this is another piece of my own racism. I'm crazy about this young woman who works one day a week in my house. She's an interesting person who has navigated incredible hardships in ways I'm not sure I could have, especially at such a young age. She's also creative and quirky in the coolest ways. I will think she's in the kitchen making egg salad, which I've asked for. Well, she is, but she's also making a "surprise," which she hands to me on a plate and says, "Taste this." She's a wonderful cook and since I've lived alone for several years, there's nothing better than a person coming out of my kitchen, saying, "Taste this."

The racism, I'm convinced, is behind my endless frustration that this woman is in the middle of learning English. Since some of her responsibilities affect my safety---how slick are the cleaned surfaces and other things---these instructions must be understood. She will tell me, "ok," even when she doesn't quite understand. I don't discover what was misunderstood until the next day, then I'm furious.

Also, there is the (much studied) differences in how we view time. If she worked by the hour, she would earn more, but she will only work by the job. Sometimes, I say, "No surprises today, because the to-do list is too long." This doesn't make any sense to her---she'll just stay longer, she says. Then I should pay you extra, I say. This hurts her feelings.

I know I haven't explained how this is tied to racism, but you'll have to take my word for those moments of something that feels like nasty superiority. I sometimes feel inches away from the classic ugliness of---can't get good help these days. Also, my thoughts written elsewhere on worries of TB in immigrant grocery store workers is tinted with racism. In summary, my arrogant deductive reasoning goes something like this---if I could feel this way (about the English-only issues), then others could, too.

Betty, we patiently teach. At the same time, we painfully learn.

Mal

More than 300 languages are spoken in the United States. English is one of the few common bonds between Americans of all backgrounds. Although 14 percent of Americans speak a language other than English at home, 98% of americans speak English "very well" or "well" according to the national journal, Demographics.

Robby

Harold, the novel White Teeth, by Zadie Smith, addresses the multi-ethnic culture of England and, I've read, has some things to say about losing one's ethnic identity. The book poses the question of who is more or less likely to retain a strong ethnic identity, the person immigrating to England or the relative back home---with surprising answers. In an interview of the author, England's Z. Smith said that the "culture" of England today is wholely multi-ethnic, that being "British" means something very different than being "American," that there is not the assumption that an immigrant to England will slowly be integrated into a homogeneous British society, as is the assumption in the U.S. Wish, wish I could remember something else she said---something about why it seemed easier to the British, maybe something to do with the closing of Britain's colonial period and promised citizenship. Does this ring any bells with anyone?

Betty speaks about "immigrants being slowly integrated into a homogenious society." Do you folks here believe that this is what is happening in America?

Robby

Betty--The two cases you mentioned: the first happened before I retired from working for the state, I was still in Amarillo. Yes, they had frequent problems along with the lack of English speaking employees, and that employer did, indeed, back down quickly after the newspapers, and the legal system got involved.

The second case that happened recently is (I believe) a strange one....a child not doing well in school even after a long period of time, because mother and other relatives,(and step-father?), continued to speak only Spanish to the child and to each other at home. There was some sort of effort to get the famly to speak English to the child, which I understand they agreed to do, but then did not cooporate. The child's father is the one that filed charges against the mother and family, to make them speak English to the child to improve grades and level of understanding. I believe school councelors, etal, were involved in the case. The real father seem to think they were deliberatly setting the child up to fail, and he wanted a brighter future for the child. So the story goes.

I confess, as I said before...I believe everyone that lives here for any length of time, and makes their home in this country, should learn English. But I fail to see how anyone can contol what language is used in the privacy of a home, and obviously, as in this case, it would not be possible without their cooporation.

I doubt if democracy could succeed in a land where language inside a private home is controled. It would be like telling someone to think in English only.

Sun

So what's new? As far as I can see immigrants have always been "slowly integrated into a homogenious society" in this country. Are we making a mountain out of a molehill now about a situation that has proven over and over before in our history that it solves itself?

Mal

Very early in our history there were signs outside of many bars, stores etc. The sign always said the same thing...No Indians, dogs or Irish may enter.

Yep, it goes way back...in Canada as well.

My Italian grandparents came over here at the end of the 19th Century. They could not speak any English. The settled in an Italian neighborhood and spoke Italian both to their friends and to my father and his five brothers. Italian was spoken at home. My father and uncles learned English on the street -- from struggling through school and from older kids who could speak English.

My father and uncles learned to speak perfect English and while they were not proficient in speaking Italian, they could understand it. I am confused. Please help me. What is the problem in the areas of the United States where the families are in exactly the same situation except that the home language is not Italian but Spanish or some Oriental language?

Robby

Robby, my definition of an American is very simple. First, I must confess that when I think of the word 'American', I think of citizens of the U.S., while I know it could mean other countries. But when I think of what a citizen of the U.S is, I just think of one that is a legal citizen of our country.

I come from a small town in Eastern Kentucky that has been used as a model for race relations in the past. Prejudice based on races just does not exist there. Each person is judged on what kind of person he/she is, not on what color or ethnic background they are.

Attention came to our small town about 3 years ago when some news media types found out that the High School had postponed their homecoming parade because it was on the same day that a funeral was scheduled for Antony Sharpey. Antony had been out of high school for several years and had died from a tragic fall off a bridge. Antony was very well liked by all in the community and no one felt like having a parade or homecoming on this day. The news media noted this because Antony was black and our town is predominantly white. They never did completely understand, but they knew we were different and when they went to interview Antony's closest friends, they found themselves interviewing white folk.

I still remember parts of the interview as the newsman tried to make sense out of this, but from his background he would never be able to understand, but here are some of the words I remember from the interview.

The newspaper man asked, "Mr. Clutts, would you say that people in Hazard are color blind?" Mr. Clutts, laughts a little and said, "No we are not color blind, and neither was Antony or me color blind, Antony knew I was white and I knew Antony was black, but we loved each other anyway." Antony was like a family member in the Clutts family and was treated as such. The entire town loved Antony in the same way. The newspaper man continued on to try to find out what the secret was in this little town. Why was it that prejudice didn't exist now and probably never had. Had they not tried that ideal of being color blind? The closest he came was this. One man from our town told him this - "Sir, no relationship can develope unless it is based on truth. Sir, it is the best thing for race relations if each party recognizes that there are differences in races and once this is agreed on as a fact, then you can start to build relations. Sir, we are different, but we are all Americans, and as such, we should all treat each other like we know this is true."

About that time, he met the homecoming queen and it nearly blowed his mind when he realized that she was black. In a school that is 90% white, how could this be? This this is another story. The newspaper wrote for about 2 weeks about our town, using them as a model for race relations.

Yup, Idris, and it continues on. However, the names change on the signs, and that indicates to me that some melding is, and has been, taking place for a long, long time. Too bad we don't learn, though, isn't it?

Mal

1.9 billion people worldwide, one-third of humanity, speak English. English is the official language of many countries, including India and several populous countries, in Africa. People in those countries speak many languages, but use English to conduct common and official business.

Robby

Good heavens to control a child by punishing a family who loves the child but is not speaking English seems so beyond my concept of Democracy, America-- God save us one and all.

Growing up in a German speaking household the big change happened in 1939 when we attempted to spend an evening in the local Beer Garten. An outdoor pavillian where my uncle often joined the band with his violin, my parants, aunt and uncle and my grandmother danced and we children played and sometimes even sneaked a sip of beer from the dripping spout.

The infamous night we stopped dead in our tracks about 100 yards from the Beer Garten. Swastikas were painted all over and the windows were smashed in. My father put my sister age 3 on his shoulders and we all silently walked back home. Half way in English my mother said sternly to my grandmother,"no more German mama no more."

The three families across the street spoke only Italian and it was up to the children to interpret the labels on the cans in the grocery store and handle all other matters. We spoke English in school and we had a pride in doing well, as well as feeling so privilaged to attend school since our parants did not graduate from High School. My father only went to the 6th grade and was needed to work to support his family.

With that background I just cringe when I hear folks wanting laws and rules to control how we speak. I would prefer that children be tought to have pride in their parants and if we are wanting a better English speaking child then lovingly speak to children in English and help those that struggle with their English and privide a feeling of pride when children do learn their English.

Yes, I agree children are like sponges when it comes to language and many a US Child was educated abroad because of the families transfer and they quickly learn the language. But they learn not out of fear or feeling less than but a joy of wanting to keep up and be included. This is harder to accomplish where there are large communities of a similar culture, as if the nation of origin has grown like a seed in new soil. And so with the new comer's not wanted by most communities they than live close together assuring themselves a feeling of acceptance. The result is a community of folks that retain their own language and ways.

I guess I didn't think of America as a club or fraternaty or sorority where the entrance membership is to prove you can speak English.

And so, considering not our families of origin or the color of our skin but the language we speak, the laws (including the Constitution) we obey, and our societal customs, are we, in general, Anglo-Americans or not?

Robby

All Law can be traced to history. We are not a monarchy as is Britian. Lousiana State law is based on Nepolionic Law. We are an evolving nation with new laws building our unique style of Democracy. I believe Anglo is simply a way to describe a Western or European link that some of us share.

Good answer, Barbara.

Sun

Malryn--

Bravo! Bravissimo!

Barbara: Appreciated your post. One wonders why a child cannot be instructed (in English) without a dependency that all people within the child's environment speak English. I agree that children are sponges, and I'm personally convinced that the child would have learned English, in her environment, without any help from legal pursuits.

I think a child with normal intelligence can indeed manage one language at home and one at school. The first few weeks of school may be difficult for the child, but in today's schools, he/she should have no problems. I've known many bilingual people and they could speak both languages fluently and without cross-over accents. If the child had hearing problems, and/or a very low IQ and/or a severe learning disability, it may be that the language changes confused him/her, but I'd guess the not doing well in school because of "language" was not the real reason for the child not doing well in school.

š ...jane›

when i was ten i was placed in a school in french-speaking lausanne, switzerland. i'll never forget my first friend, pilar, from south america. she asked me to go ice skating with her and some friends. it didn't take two seconds to learn what patiner meant. that whole period changed my life.

i believe it is for the best that u. s. federal and state education funds support english in the schools. i love the idea of lots of racial diversity complemented with one common language.

Thanks, fairwinds. I was thinking it would be nice to hear from someone who grew up in a bilingual way.

I know a man through Sonata, the literary electronic magazine I publish, who teaches English in a college in New York. He also sends me notes in Italian about his submittals to Sonata. He knows that language because his family spoke it at home. I had to learn it in school.

When I was in high school I studied Latin, French and Italian and was very annoyed because they stopped teaching Greek. Knowing something about these languages and a little German and Russian, too, has helped me in my lifetime more than you'd ever know. Not in travelling, either, but right here in the U.S.A..

Mal

Fairwinds wraps up the concept in one small phrase -- "racial diversity complemented with one common language."

According to an article in Time Magazine entitled "Hispanics Say Call Us Americans" and in a San Francisco Chronicle article headlined "Poll Contradicts Stereotypes" -- Immigrants believe overwhelmingly both in learning English and in English as the official language.

Robby

An experience in a college course on ethnic diversity, late 80s. To get acquainted during the first class, we were asked to each spend a few minutes talking about our "ethnic identity." All but two of us, myself and another, were "of color," I think we called it. Hispanic, Asian, Black. Then we 2 "Anglos." Maybe 10 or 12 total in the class. People tended to speak at length, so at least half of the 3-hour class was spent doing this. What a shocker for the other Anglo and myself. Neither of us had an ethnic identity. Helplessly, I said things like----white, English, Irish and I don't have an ethnic identity. And---why don't I have an ethnic identity?

So, to answer your question, Robby, are we "Anglo-Americans," I would guess that people who don't have family stories such as yours and Barbara's don't know what they are. Back in that class, I don't know who was more dumbfounded, the 2 of us without ethnic identities or those others who, some for the first time, felt they had something important that "white" people didn't. I know the racial makeup of the class was random, but it turned out to be a life altering moment for most of us.

Are we all beginning to get just a bit of the answer to the question in the heading -- "What is an American?"

Robby

Come on, Betty. You have an ethnic identity just as I do. Where did your great grandparents come from, for example?

Mal

I'll bite. An American is somebody whose ancestors came here from some other place besides America and lives in this country with people from many, many different kinds of backgrounds. So, incidentally is a Canadian, as Idris has pointed out.

Mal

Mal: Where do Native Americans (Indians) fit into that?

Robby

Malryn---from Virginia and Georgia. And, uh, uh, the cherokee nation thrown in before that. blank face. End of story.

Idris, My Grandparent's lived on the Canadian border in Minnesota so I understand the Irish, Indian etc. type thing. We had a swedish person married into the family so when my Mother Married a Canadian Indian from across the border of Michigan they did not know how to handle the sisuation but got to know him and all was alright, Mom's was married to Albert Lake and I like him very Much for many reason's, Whit, Humor etc.. Mom was Irish and French.

We all got along very well.

Ginger

And before that, Betty?

Robby, it has been said that those who first became "native" to America crossed over the Bering Sea and immigrated to this country, so you figure it out.

Mal

Are we labeling a person who lived here before the area was named America as American?

Robby

Naming places does not an ethnic identity make. The word ethnic didn't even ring a bell with me until someone suggested I might have an ethnicity. A what?

Not too long ago did most of think we knew what it meant to be an American?

Robby

I quit. I stuck my neck out too far.

but I like your neck....sticking way out there, Mal.

Robby: Our "Native Americans" fit well in Mal's definition, "an American is somebody whose ancestors came here from some other place besides America." True, they came earler than the rest of us, but they did come from some other place, across the Artic ice/land bridge from Siberia.

Using other words, "an American is a resident of our country, the United States.

Another comment on our taking the word American to refer to people in the U.S., to the people of Mexico we are "Norte Americanos," North Americans.

How about something along the lines of "All persons born or naturalized in the United States shall be. . . ."

In Canada we refer to them as First Nations Peoples. They certainly had many Nations and still do. If you know the Nation they belonged to is it is a good idea to call their heritage whatever that tribe was.

In which state do you live? The following states have made English their "official language:"--

Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wyoming.

In Alabama it received 90% of the vote in referendum but a Federal Judge overtuned the law. There is a ruling on appeal pending.
In Alaska it received 69% of the vote in referendum but was blocked by a federal judge. A full trial is pending.
In Arizona it received 51% of the vote in referendum but was overturned in district court. The Supreme Court refused to reinstate the law.

Hawaii has declared both English and Hawaiian as its two official languages.

Robby

According to Linda Chavez, the columnist (who speaks perfect English), her son was put into a bilingual education classroom even though he spoke ONLY English. She wrote: "Failed policies such as bilingual education and multicultural curricula are not being demanded by Mexican laborers or Chinese waiters. Instead they are being rammed down immigrants' throats by federal, state and local governments."

There are some who say that official English is intended to stop the costly and unworkable trend toward having government operate in many languages. In addition, government would no longer be able to "force" private individuals to use languges other than English in their privata activities, Government documents would have to be written in English, and Government would hve to respond to an English-speaking person in English.

Any additional comments about the importance (or lack of importance) of the English language in helping us to be American and whether that language should be official or not?

Robby

Just curiosity. Do other countries besides the U.S. declare the principal language that is spoken the "official language"?

Mal

I guess I am confused (as usual). To me the term "official language" does not necesarily mean the spoken language. One official language, known and understood world wide, is the language of commerce, of diplomacy, of negotiation, etc. English is in the case of most of us of Anglo heritage the first language and in the case of other ethnic groups the second. Knowing English can put us all on the same plane when dealing with each other. That certainly does not "prohibit", as someone said, the speaking of other languages in the home or with others who understand us. I don't think anyone is suggesting that declaring an "official language" should preclude all other languages spoken in social groups of whatever kind.

To have everyone of whatever background speak a common "official" language in "official" situations would seem to me to at least reduce the chance of misunderstanding.

Phyll

I believe France does. However they still have signs that say...Le Hot Dog.

Yes, France does. There is a French Academy of Language that purports to "control" what words are acceptable and what words are not. However, as Idris points out, the French people appear to not be paying attention with Le Hot Dog. Writers in English have long been proud that England did not set up such an academy. English shamelessly borrows from all sorts of languages, always has, and most likely always will. Language is constantly changing.

English is also continually providing newly coined words; some we need, some we don't.

Maryal

Our Province of Quebec also has "language police" to guard their language. No kidding folks! The measure the size of the letters to make sure that french is at least twice as large as english on a sign...etc.

When France decided to have its air pilots speak english for safety reasons a Mpp from Quebec went to France and demanded that the law be changed and they maintain french only as it is in Quebec. She won. Sooooooooo language it seems is more important than the safety of humans.

Please remember that Canada is officially bi-lingual and Quebec is officially french only.

you mean, in québec all the pilots embarking and debarking speak french? i was under the impression the pilots from all international airlines spoke english at paris' charles de gaulle and orly airports.

channel 16 marine communications on large and small vessels are supposed to be in english throughout the world.

i feel sorry for the french. here they had this beautiful language which was used for peace treaties and scientific papers for so many years. then everything changed quite suddenly into english. then the berlin wall came down and germany became bigger. some of my friends whispered about germany's two invasions into france and wondered what was next...with more people speaking german. and l'academie francaise just can't fight things like le hot dog...(but i'll bet they see it as better than le weiner)...and all the new software and internet language is driving them key-RAzy.

ain't life grand.

I'm not surprised no one answered Robby's question of 'what is an American' with an answer of what all it means to be American (or Anglo American or citizen of the U.S.). Everyone gave definition and geographic answers.

When I sat in that class with those people giving talks on their ethnic identity, each would begin with something like, "Well, what it means to be Mexican American is complicated. But it mostly means family and our history. My grandmother's six sisters lived in the same neighborhood all their lives, first in Mexico, then in Texas. My Dad's father told his wife that he was moving the whole family to San Antonio because 'every son of mine will finish college.' When we all meet together at Christmas, we have to hear that story again and again. We all know how he wouldn't speak to my father when he left college to join the Air Force and on and on. There are traditions in our family that go back many years."

I'm not making up those details. A good friend of mine rented two bedrooms in my house when we were both going to college. I remember being a little irritated that her extended Hispanic family had such a central place in her life---but I can't really articulate how it irritated me. I do remember how she would drop everything to drive far out of town with her mother and 2 sisters to go visit a new baby of a distant cousin. Her stories of family were different than mine. My family stories often included some element of independence. Her stories all had an interwoven quality, something I'm still unable to describe. I do remember that when I made major decisions, she was amazed how uninvolved my family was. When she made major decisions, I was amazed how involved her family became. For example---where, nationally, she would apply to do a doctoral residency. We handled that same decision so differently!!

So, when I say I don't have an ethnic identity, I mean several things. First, it means that I was in my mid 40s before knowing any details about what European countries my ancestors were from. Then, after hearing the details, they had little meaning for me. What does it mean that I have an Irish ancestor? I don't know. This is more than a generational issue. All ages were represented in that class; it was our ethnic heritage that distinguished us, not our ages. (Although you could apply generational influences to all of us, across the board.)

I think Zadie Smith's book White Teeth proposes that ethnic identity is strengthened when one moves to a new country (at least the question is raised). I don't know if that's true or true for all countries equally. It is very interesting to think about. It's one possible answer to the missing ethnic identity for that other guy and me in that class. Or, maybe my great-great grandparents had a strong ethnic identity and that central importance faded away over time. I don't know.

My sister-in-law who is in her late 30s has a pretty strong Italian identification. Her large, extended Italian family still lives in one general area of Pennsylvania. Her Italian Catholic wedding was a day long experience of Italian traditions. Specific Italian wedding cookies, very symbolic dances while gifts of money were being collected in an apron, etc., etc.

It occurs to me that in this country, it was roughly in the 60s that some groups began to want to know about and celebrate their ethnic heritage----remember the first wave of "Black is Beautiful"? My mother reached her 60s wanting to know more about where she came from. Her search for details about a grandfather who died when she was 3 led to an extended research project that has brought her much satisfaction. My brother has joked several times that sure, he wants to see what she's uncovered---maybe when he's in his 60s. He calls it the genealogical gene---kicks in when you turn 60.

Perhaps it's different for me. I am from primarily English heritage, and I grew up in New England, northern Massachusetts, to be precise. Native Anglo New Englanders were, and perhaps still are, very strong in their cultural identity and heritage. After all, the Mayflower did land not too far from where I grew up, and that meant a lot to us from the time we were children.

Our "Americanism" was based on our New England background: John Alden, Miles Standish, Paul Revere, Lexington and Concord, the Boston tea party, Hannah Dustin in my hometown, John Greenleaf Whittier, who was also born there, Henry David Thoreau, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Margaret Fuller and all the Transcendentalists, Anne Bradstreet (an ancestor), various Presidents from the 1700's to the 20th century, Harvard College, the Boston Atheneum, Bunker Hill, the old North Church; all those things. My hometown celebrated its three hundredth anniversary in 1940, for example.

Boston at one time was considered the center of culture in the U.S. if not the world, and this is the environment in which I grew up and in which I was raised. It is part and parcel of me even now, despite having lived long periods in 6 other states, and having done travelling in this and other countries.

A cousin of mine did a genealogical search of my paternal family, and I learned something about the ancestors of my mother. The knowledge of my roots here in this country and in England brought an even greater awareness of who I am and where I came from.

My heritage is as colorful and involved as those people you mention, Betty. I understand very well what it is to drop everything to go and help a relative or part of my extended family. I also know how major decisions were made by the entire family, not just one person alone.

It did not take a move outside the borders of the United States to strengthen my ethnic identity. All it took was a move outside New England.

I've lived outside New England longer than I ever lived there, but my roots and my identity are still very much there. There are plenty of times I've wished very fervently that I could go "home" where my brother and two sisters now live and also where the harsh Winters are more than I, who have been handicapped since childhood, can manage today.

Mal

Canadians ask themselves all the time...What is a Canadian? It is like some stupid passion of ours that raises its miserable head everytime the Separatists start beating their drum and hold a Referendum to leave Canada.

Most folks here believe Americans know who and what they are and are not hyphenated. It is nice to know you have identity problems too. In most cases Canadians just fall on the old saw...We are not Americans. What a negative way to define being Canadian.

(

I wonder how much economics and the U.S. becoming a mobile society have impacted ethnic identities and, in general, what we feel "being American" is. One constant in our posts, Mal, is the family being in roughly the same geographical area.

The urge to go west, to extend the frontier---that took people away from gathered families. Maybe one thing that I identify with in my earlier family that immigrated to Texas before it was a state---that of leaving behind safety and pushing off for the unknown. When living in Oregon, I used to joke, "Alaska next." So, hmmmm, maybe that's an identification of "American" that fits me.

Sounds like there is the micro and macro view of what is an American. I also think our micro view is based on what generation American we are. My grands are essentially 5th generation and becuase of the marriages of my children they are own a very mixed gene pool from various Europian nations.

Where as I am mostly German with my mother's father's parants being Irish. The father of my children was also mostly German, with his Father's Mother's people coming here in the early 1700s. I was familiar with German ways, language, foods. About the only think I see my Grands sharing is some German ways at Christmas time. Certainly the whole hiararchy of a German family choosing who got educated, who got the family property, and who went out to work while living with another family is no longer even a consideration.

So for me I see America as opportunity. Opportunity for each generation to better themselves, become more educated, raise their level of life work, own property etc. etc.

I also see that the macro American culture is replaced with how TV celebrates holidays and what is learned in school as being important, the Disney interpretation of history and life and sports. The vocabulary of Sports seems to play a large part of how we even talk to each other and how we explain life in America.

I also see that the drug culture is killing our ability to feel safe, is filling our jails and wrecking havoc on our nation.

It's interesting for me to note what my kids call their Americanism. My first son was born in Rhode Island. My second son and my daughter were born in Niagara Falls, New York and Buffalo, New York, respectively. My sons lived with our family in Western New York, North Carolina a year, back to New York, to Indiana, and then to Eastern New York. My elder son also lived for three years in Maryland with me and his father before the other two were born. As a child, my daughter lived in New York and Indiana.

Later they all lived in Florida; followed me down. One son is still in Florida. One son is near New York City. My daughter lives in North Carolina. All three think of their America as the country house we had in Westchester County in Eastern New York where they lived only a few years of their lives.

What I'm saying, I guess, is that we all have a regional identity which influences how we feel about this country as a whole.

To be an American is to live in a country which is woven of many different threads and colors. We choose the threads that suit us best and make our determination about the United States from them, I feel.

My grandchildren are different, too, and it will be interesting to see what they think is their Americanism. The first is of English, Austrian and Italian heritage. The second is of English and Welsh heritage. The third is of German and English heritage. The fourth is of German and English heritage. The fifth is of Italian and English heritage. Three are Protestants, one is Catholic and the other is Jewish. To me these kids represent Americans and America.

Mal

When "Canadians" didn't exist as a label, perhaps during De T's lifetime, "Americans" in North Americans might have been appropos, but no longer.

Naming places does not an ethnic identity make. I agree, Mal. And, Harold's already identified the right language, given that "American" is now a misnomer - "US Citizen".

her son was put into a bilingual education classroom even though he spoke ONLY English. That can't be the whole story, can it?.

Was he put in a bilingual classroom because he spoke English and looked Spanish?

From Message #673 by Robby

In which state do you live? The following states have made English their "official language:"--

Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wyoming.

Of the 11 states of the late Confedercy, only Texas has not adopted English only legislation. Somehow it just has never been an issue here. Other states with such laws are principally in the West and mid-west with only New Hampshire in the Northeast. I am somewhat surprised about New Hampshire and considering its French beginning, I'm also surprised about Louisiana.

Everyone here has been struggling to define America, or American, or Americanism. And perhaps the multiple answer (or lack of answer) has itself become the answer. Consider deTocqueville's remark (in quotes above) that "it is difficult to detect the link which connected the emigrants with the land of their forefathers."

Was it Jesse Jackson who originally coined the phrase that we are not a "melting pot" but a "salad?" The lettuce and the tomatoes and the celery and the olives and the carrots and the onions all stay together and form a delectable dish and yet each vegetable retains its own identity. They do not become a melange or a soup yet they stay together. What keeps them together? Is it the common language whether defined as "official" or not?

Historically, American government has operated in English. On January 13, 1795, the U.S. House of Representatives defeated a bill to print 3,000 sets of the federal laws in German "for the accommodation of such German citizens of the United States, as do not understand the English language." Ironically, the decisive vote against bilingual publication was cast by the first Speaker of the House, Frederick Augustus Muhlenberg, a German-American from Pennsylvania, then the state with the largest German population.

Again referring to deT (quote above) "the tie of language is perhaps the strongest and the most durable that can unite mankind." Going back to an earlier posting about the state of Iowa which is proposing an all-out immigrant recruitment drive, Sandra Burke, a demographer at Iowa State University who lives in Marshalltown and heads a town diversity committee, says: "We have people who resent hearing anything but English on Main Street." Said Roger Harrison, a lawyer organizing the English-only petition: "The non-English-speaking people continue to have their own groups and it fosters ethnic problems and educational problems." Is that the commonality of America despite the citizens' families of origin? The fact that, despite regional dialects, we can understand each other? Is lingual communication the bond that holds America together and, in one way at least, makes it what it is?

Robby

Idris, I just saw some fascinating footage of Canadian authorities running down and capsizing lobster fishermen. Apparently no one was hurt, but there is a clash between the laws and the fishermen. Those little boats bobbing around in those cold grey waters and dashing at one another like so many dodgem cars were riveting!

Robby---This is one really large country. Compare it to all of Europe, for example. It needs something to hold it together. I'll take the language.

Wonderful comments on generational influences, Barbara, and on regional influences, Mal. Most compelling, though, were comments on both sets of grandchildren, all of which are grand mixtures of many countries. It also led me to think, what does it mean TODAY to say that someone is, for instance, British. Britain is so multi-cultural, as are so many countries, that it means something altogether different than, say, 300 years ago.

Harold, the call for English to be the official language was an issue in Texas, but I'm hard pressed to name the year(s). It had to be before I moved from Austin to California in 1991. Because naming one official language was primarily about saving money, the issue's introduction must have been connected to the deep recession in Texas at the end of the 80s (numbers that I've never forgotten---600 plus building contractors in Austin down to 80 something).

Also, Ann Richards had just been elected as governor (she was liberal, liberals hated the English-official-language idea). And, don't you suppose, there were just too many central and southern cities whose majority populations were Hispanic. San Antonio, 60 percent Hispanic at the time. May be higher now.

Finally, even though I was not here during most of George W.'s time as governor (though I am now), his popular connection to Hispanic citizens (who have historically voted Democratic) would have finished killing off the idea. I agree with your puzzlement over Louisiana. Strange.

MaryPage, the clan of First Nations People and all other Fishers on the East coast have been told not to fish more than a certain quota as the stocks are depleated and need time to renew themselves. This particular clan feels that they can fish as much lobster as they want due to treaties. The Federal Government says they must obey the rules like everyone else. They say they don't. I can see nothing but trouble coming.

This fits into the general discussion here as you also have certain clans living on the East and West coasts. Who is a Canadian or an American and do some folks have the right to break the law because they come from a protected group?

Canadians are going to look really rotten...again.

(

Harold and Betty---yes, indeed, English-only has been known to be a popular idea in Texas...more than once. Truth is, is doesn't matter which party is in power, they are always running for office, and don't dare offend anyone with a vote. I would start a campaign right now, myself (big laugh) but it would be a waste of energy...especially, with George W. in power at the moment.

But I do confess, I believe English should be the official language in all 50 states.

Sun

We've been having a busy time recently, examining ourselves to see who and what we are and if we haven't it narrowed it down completely, we certainly have built up in our minds the concept of language and its importance in keeping our multi-cultured nation together.

But while we have been doing this, time has not stopped and we have been continuing to float down the mainstream of America. The sights and sounds of the two political conventions have long since disappeared into the past. In this back-to-school month most American students, whether at a lower or higher level of education, are busy (we hope!) at their desks and in some area of the nation the leaves are beginning to turn.

Now as we look up ahead, we see America preparing to show us another face. A truly American holiday is coming into view. Much of America is preparing to celebrate the Labor Day week-end - a week-end which is tied to a unique holiday -- Labor Day.

Labor Day! Just what is Labor Day anyway to you and those you know? Is it a day that marks the end of the summer? Do your summer activities stop at that point? Is it the time when you take your summer clothes out of the closet and replace them with winter clothes? Is it a day when you scan the ads for special sales? Is it a national holiday to you at which time you put out the Flag? Is it a day for picnics or family and/or friend re-unions? And - oh, yes - that word "labor." Just what does Labor Day have to do with labor (work) anyway - either to you or to the rest of America as you scan the passing scene?

Please share with us the importance (if any) of the coming Labor Day weekend.

Robby

Just heard on the news this morning that California's "non-Hispanic white" population is 49.8 percent, so is no longer considered the majority. It's Hispanic and Asian populations have been gradually growing for years.

There was a time when Labor Day was an extra day off for people who worked. It still is that, but there are so many others that its significance has paled.

For me a holiday is just like any other day in the week. I work and do pretty much what I always do. The only holidays that have much meaning to me are Thanksgiving and Christmas.

That reminds me. I'll be alone for four or five days at Thanksgiving time, so if you want to drop by, please let me know, and I'll see what I can do about roasting a turkey and baking some pies. Is that American or what?

Mal

Labor Day is a very important and very mixed day for me. I force myself to watch portions of the Jerry Lewis Muscular Dystrophy telethon. My neuromuscular disease is one of the 40 diseases for which MDA funds research. Without those research dollars, the gene markers of my disease, Charcot Marie Tooth, would not have been found---or not as early.

The mixed part, of course, is the damage done to the images of people with disabilities. The telethon has improved but not enough. These poor victims, these my-god-what-if-it-happened-to-my-baby pleas have brought in millions of dollars and have perpetuated the pitiful images. Most entertainers and hollywood actors have turned away from any association with the telethon, so the same, tired old standbys appear each year.

And, don't even ask how I feel about the martyred, artificially sincere Jerry Lewis. He's an arrogant _____ and he's also directly responsible for hope for treatment for my grandchildren, if they happen to have this familial disease. The whole experience has taught me how to live with ambivalence.

Betty: Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. Many of us would not have related Labor Day to the Muscular Dystrophy telethon. I can see from your remarks why you have mixed feelings. You say you "force" yourself to watch part of this telethon. In addition to doing that on Labor Day, how else will you occupy yourself this coming Labor Day weekend?

Mal: You will do pretty much what you do any other day and the only holidays that have any meaning to you, if I understand correctly, are Thanksgiving and Christmas. Are you saying that you won't take any time off at all that day for relaxation of some sort?

Robby

Ha ha, Robby! That's a good question. Maybe that's what's wrong with me!

Well, let's see. If I remember how to turn the TV on, maybe I'll watch a little of the Macy's Thanksgiving parade. I keep forgetting I've moved and have easy access to my television set now, which is no longer used by the rest of my family, who have another in the main house.

Maybe I'll do a little cooking. I've been craving chopped liver, paté to some. Perhaps I'll make some of that, an unlikely dish for someone with my background, but like everything else in this country, even food and tastes for food have become eclectic now. I never heard of a quesadilla until a few years ago. The diet I had growing up was a roast every Sunday, which we ate through Thursday, fish on Friday and Boston baked beans on Saturday night.

Mal

Mal: Actually, I was referring to Labor Day. Are you going to rest a bit from your labors that day?

Robby

In Canada for the most part it is celebrated in towns where the labour unions and NDP are strong. For most folks it is a day to go somewhere or have a BBQ.

Woops! I've been working on the Holiday Issue of Sonata. Guess my mind is on November and December holidays.

Labor Day, Labor Day. Well, it might be a good idea to go somewhere besides the supermarket and take a walk. Can't walk around here because of gravel on the driveway hill and other hilly terrain. Perhaps I'll go to the little park in Chapel Hill which has paved sidewalks, walk around and sit on a bench for a little while. That sounds like relaxation to me!

Mal

Idris:

Is Labor Day celebrated in Canada on the same day and for the same reason as it is in the United States?

Robby

Sounds good, Mal. As I understand it, Labor Day is supposed to be a day of rest for those who work hard the rest of the year and you are certainly one of those!!

Robby

That's for sure, though I forget it sometimes because I'm so busy working!

Mal

Robby, it is held on the same day and for the same reasons. The speaches by the NDP = New Democratic Party are usually scarey. They also are used to organize labour support behind the NDP. I suppose that is why they are so scarey.

There are other issus raised and speaches given after the parades for many groups that would probably vote NDP. The NDP is socialist. Hey, in Canada we even have a comunist party that is legal. The NDP is also seen in the House of Commons as the concience of the House.

If you have ever been in the position to cross a picket line you would know they have some members that are really scarey.

(

Holidays sometimes come and go without our ever stopping to contemplate their true meanings. For many, Labor Day is just another holiday, a time of rest and relaxation. In the United States, Labor Day, the first Monday in September, was initiated by the U.S. labor movement and is dedicated to the social and economic advancement of American workers who contribute to the strength, prosperity and well-being of the country.

Robby

I think ours is partly about that now. Living in a union town we are probably more aware of it than those who live north of Toronto.

Labor Day me thinks has various meanings for different areas. I am remebering here in Austin some years when the children didn't get off from school for Labor Day. For the most part except for Banks that celebrate National Holidays most business went on as usual. It is only in the past few years since we have more high tech companies that originate from other states along with many employees that also come from other areas of the country that Labor Day is a day we have to check to see what is opened.

Sometimes families use the three day holiday to have a last go at the coast - but school has been in session since August 14 and there is usually the extra assignment to finish over the three days.

The weather is always very hot. This year we are still in the 100s where as typically we are still in the high 90s. Therefore, the lakes, although very low, will be full with the usual weekend boater. Many of the pools are closed now and so neighborhood parks will be quiet. The shops will be opened but it is just too hot to shop for fall clothes. (When will the clothing industry realize we don't wear wool until at least late November and maybe not till December) All the UT students came back to town so the movie theaters will be full again and 6th street (where all the live music and eating and drinking holes are located) will be crowded.

Ranchers are still working under a burn ban but continue to cut down the dead trees and clear dead brush, labor day or not and the cotton farmers continue to harvest. The crop doesn't look as good as last years. Most home construction will continue except the AC, electric, plumbing and slab pouring sub-contractors will probably have the day off. The carpenters, brick layers and roofers will do their thing.

For me it is another work day but than, I usually work when others are off.

No parades, speaches or general flag waving - nor does it feel like the end of summer. The summer's end came when school started. Our big looked forward to holiday seems to be Memorial Day. That is when school is out and the bands parade and there are services in cemetaries and there is a stirring in the air that we are a blest nation.

Am I inferring something that doesn't exist or is it the consensus that Labor Day is a "nothing" day?

Robby

Labor Day has come to mean only 2 things to me:

Whew! Summer is over!

Shoot! Have to put away the white clothing and purse and take out the other stuff.

I know the several posts that called my attention to the fact that official language legislation for English has come up in Texas are correct. The issue has been raised but always with out much serious intent even in the legislature. One reason why the issue has never been prominent in my area is that Hispanics are the majority in San Antonio (the city) and command a 40+ percent minority in Bexar County. South of San Antonio they are typically majority. As was pointed out in a previous post, no politician the least bit interested in state wide office would even whisper such a thing. George Bush in particular has steered clear of that issue and has benefited by that policy. Of course he had the example of Pete Wilson in California whose political hari kari resulted from his stance on the issue.

Regarding the Labor Day holiday, I think it has been taken more seriously in San Antonio than Barbara described in Austin. We always loved it as a holiday even though San Antonio is certainly no “Labor” town. I always relished it as the last of the three great holidays of summer by taking a trip to the coast or maybe Houston. Since I retired it has lost much of its significance since I can always take such trips at times when the roads and facilities are not so crowed. Also even as early as 1909, I note my grand parents seized it as the opportunity to have a camping holiday. Labor Day, 1909

Great pictures, Harold. It looks as if everyone was having a great deal of fun.

Mal

Thanks for sharing the photos, Harold. They knew how to enjoy themselves in those days!!

Robby

Recently a group of local malls ran an advertisement in the Boston Globe, telling the readers they would be celebrating Labor Day in the most fitting way possible -- they would be working.

This notice blatantly mocks the meaning of Labor Day. Labor Day is not meant to be a day to labor, which unfortuantately is how much of corporate America feels. Rather, it is supposed to be a day to honor the contributions working men and women make to our society and give them a chance for leisure and relaxation

Today fewer and fewer workers can enjoy rest on Labor Day and nowhere is that trend more apparent than it is in the retail industry. It was not all that long ago that stores wold close on holidays such as Labor Day and Veterans' Day. Those breaks were needed by the industry's burdened, stressed workers. Upper management now is unresponsive to the needs of these laborers for a day's rest. For many of our nation's retail employees, Labor Day is just like any other -- a day to labor.

Your reaction?

Robby

I wish Labor Day meant end of summer, but as others have noted, it's still hot in Texas. How hot? 108 in Houston today. My brain has melted.

Gotta work to pay those electric bills!

Remember the Blue Laws? Society once enforced blue laws, preventing shops from opening on holidays. Most of these laws, however, have been purged from the statutes of most states. The repeal of the blue laws has meant a repeal of time for working families to spend together. It has meant a repeal of vacation time for workers.

Employment in the retail sector is not as rewarding as that in manufacturing. Pay is generally lower in the retail industry. Benefits packages are less impresive. Workers must put in longer hours.

Do you folks see Labor Day holding on to its original meaning or is that gone? Do deTocqueville's remarks (see quotes above) regarding work have any relevancy to the working person today?

Robby

Robby--I saw a report last night on I think it was CBS evening news about companies that are forcing their workers to work overtime. The unemployment rate is so low that new employees are difficult to get. The recent Verizon strike was about overtime. Workers there are now only required to work half the overtime they were before. This seems to be one of the down aspects of a boom economy.

Maryal: As you say, we have a "boom" economy. And yet - and yet --

The American worker is still anxious. Economists say few people fret over whether they can find jobs in the 10th year of the nation's longest stretch of uninterrrupted economic growth. But many employees say they are concerned about whether they can keep up with technological change and take advantage of opportunities in "new-economy" companies.

In the Rust Belt in the 1980s, waves of blue-collar workers lost jobs as one American industry after another retooled to face heightened foreign competition. In the early 1990s many white-collar employees faced "downsizing".

There are lingering uncertainties within America's 140-million-strong work force. According to Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Federal Reserve, the evident insecurity felt by workers is a fear of job skill obsolescence.

What do you participants here see as the mood of the American or Canadian worker as we approach Labor Day week-end?

Robby

Robby, there is no doubt workers are terrified of losing their jobs and therefore work longer hours...often unpaid hours.

I have a theory about this. When you can form a consuming society and high taxation, the mother and father must work. This leaves children confused, pier oriented and needful of things. It matters not what political party is in power on either side of the boarder. The very idea that folks are judged on what they have, rather than the closeness of the family is destructive to the family.

Some have suggested 24/7 daycare is the answer. Ahhhhh yes, unionized, paid care is the answer for these folks. The children are seen as a commodity to provide jobs. The parents must both work to provide the income they require to live in a two car, expensive accomodation, fear of getting laid off, frightened parents.

The whole family lives in fear and is under constant stress. The child feels unloved by their parents. Who is responsible for this. I blame government with its high taxation and a society that puts things before the young.

Who wins? The politicians, big corporations and small business. Consume, consume, consume. No wonder some of the children, wear almost clothing and listen to music that is rooted in horror and dispair.

CONSUME -- CONSUME -- CONSUME. Do you agree with Idris that this is one of the major factors leading toward the "terror" of job loss?

Robby

That and worry about survival. The dollar doesn't buy much any more, and wages are limited for some. People bunch up, live together in apartments to share an exorbitant rent, or have extended family live in their homes so they can pay the mortgage. A fine example of that latter is my daughter's situation. Her friend who lives here, my son Rob's daughter who lives here, and I all contribute "rent" toward the payment of the mortgage and taxes of my daughter's house. We are not the only people I know who do this.

Mal

Mal, this is an answer for many extended families. I think it is a good idea as the child will have someone to listen to them and make them feel secure. What do children require? I believe it is love, security (of the person) and a sense of belonging. How many children have this in our two countries?

Many are alone for the most part and don't even eat proper meals. What could be more soul destroying than to know you come last? Possibly that you don't really count at all.

The current nationwide average of unemployment is only 4 percent yet there is a current tension betweeen prosperity and insecurity. While Americans acknowledge an abundance of jobs, a surprisng number still report that they fear being laid off in the near future. This, despite the fact that a record percentage of Americans now say they think that jobs are plentiful and the number of people with the confidence to quit voluntarily has steadily grown since 1996.

What is causing this paradox?

Robby

And, another version of Mal's description, is the young couple who buy a brand new, $250,000+ home in our rural area and so need every last cent of at least their two paychecks to make the huge mortgage payments. They literally live from paycheck to paycheck, making minimum payments to keep the credit cards afloat, etc. I see that as a downward spiral into a whirlpool and down the drain, but apparently it's not a view shared by many others. I've not got the temperment to "live on the financial edge" like that.

š...jane›

Robby,

The increasing lack of loyalty to the worker by the corporations, perhaps? So easy to dump people to save on the profit line---you can always hire more later. I read a statistic, and I'm sorry but I can't cite a source, that said middle management is the most vulnerable sector for lay-off. Experience no longer seems to be a determining factor. And yet, I have also heard and read that some corporations are actively recruiting older workers mainly BECAUSE of their experience and dedicated work ethic. Another paradox?

Phyll

Jane: Is your comment perhaps representative of those of us in the "older" age bracket. Many of us grew up with "make do" (what is that four phrase slogan?) with what we have and not to go into debt. On the other hand, many young entrepreneurs are doing quite well on borrowed money. They don't know about "tomorrow" but "today" for them is very good, thank you!! We tend to think about today. Are we seeing a generation gap? In the business world of today, which way is the best way (whatever "best" may mean)?

Robby

Robby: I think it's just true of all generations...that the younger are always more willing to take chances and that's probably good. As we get older...and have lived through the sleepless nights of worrying about losing a job...being laid off..being "downsized"..of the company moving away/folding...I think we "learn from our past" and so are more conservative with money and less eager to go out on a limb, financially. We also know we don't have the ability to get another job easily, to have time to rebuild the nest egg, etc. So, I think it's natural that we at 60+ view things differently than a 25 yr old, etc.

š...jane›

jane,

And the huge lawn that goes with the big, expensive house--and the long commute to the jobs that pay enough to maintain the house and the lawn equipment or yard workers to cut the grass on the huge lawn and then the several cars and associated maintenance of those cars, that are necessary to make the long commute.......and on and on. I see it in my own family and must bite my tongue when I hear, "I wish I could spend more time at home with my children."

Phyll

Younger employees, particularly those with a strong educational background, often view today's job market as a giant bazaar where their skills are handsomely rewarded. When this woman's grandmother asked if she was thinking about her pension, the answer was: "Who cares. It's 401(k)'s, grandma."

Robby

The children's book i am now writing, is about this very subject. As my story takes place in reality with the addition of my Wee One and fae tales it often doesn't appear totally real. I really felt it was a topic worth exploring.

The expensive house and long commute are not just a reflection of the younger generations of this time.

With every job transfer for the corporation where my ex-husband worked, he bought a bigger and "better" house. Distance between home and work became farther and farther. At the end, he commuted by train, a monthly cost that was a a great deal.

He did not want me to work, so my kids and I had to "sacrifice" to live where and how we did in the manner my ex-husband thought suited his profession and status as a corporate executive. This ended twenty-five years ago in divorce, a relief to me after I got used to being alone because I was very tired of the sacrifice.

The competitive status symbol complex is not new by any means.

Mal

I see that as a downward spiral into a whirlpool and down the drain, but apparently it's not a view shared by many others.

You're not the only one, Jane. The impetus now, unlike the past, is to frown on bankruptcies where the home remains intact. This new concept could have a telling effect the youngsters.

I have noted that more and more folks are tele-commuting. My daughter-in-law now lives in British Columbia and tele-commutes to her office in Pittsburg. She must attend at the University in Vancouver, BC once in awhile to do tele-conferencing with the staff in Pittsburg. I am using this idea as an answer for the family in the story.

If one is insecure they surround themselves with trappings of importance.

You just said a mouthful, Idris! All I can say is that there must be a lot of insecure people around because everyone in the rich neighborhood where I lived at the end of my marriage lived exactly the same way we did.

Mal

The bonds between companies and employees have loosened over the last decade. Younger employees have a hard time imaging spending 20 years with one employer. For most older workers, many of them watching their companies merge, the changes are more unsettling.

And, as indicated in postings above, the low unemployment rate does not capture a number of trends. People are working harder -- per family, three more hours a week than a decade ago, according to the Economic Policy Institute. And household debt is up while health insurance coverage is down, raising the stakes for people who do leave their jobs.

In reference to living above one's means, how do you relate that to deTocqueville's remark made 170 years ago (see quote above) about "envy of the enjoyments of the rich?"

Robby

For many of us the answer is to move to a smaller community. There wa every reason to believe that if hubby and i stayed in Toronto we would never have a home and hubby would not see the children much. There would be a higher rate of pay but we would lose too much.

We moved to a smaller community and he could come home for lunch. He was able to come home at a reasonable time. When the children were older...the youngest being twelve, i went to work with him. I was able to be home before the children arrived. Now we had to instal an Executive line at home but we made it work. The children came first and always have.

That's the way I always felt, Idris, until I realized that if I didn't put myself first I couldn't take care of or help my children or anyone else.

Mal

In doing what we did, we really were putting ourselves first. We just didn't know we were, Mal.

)

Oj it is so easy to use todays concepts to explain away yesterdays deeds. Seems to me that 25 years ago in fact untill the 80s woman were tought to make hubbies goals the prioriety and so many men in corperate America had an upward moble culture that they would feel a failure if they were not climbing the ladder. With that culture went the concept of laying out the trappings of success as almost a one-up-menship game at work that added to the competition for the next step up.

Today I am not seeing that mentality the source of bigger and better. I do think that part of it is the natural desire and belief that you must outdo the preceeding generation but also, collage is now all about preperation for a better paying position. I think the concept of class envy is a given that if you have the tools similar to those of money and this is such the land of opportunity than the only reason you do not achieve recongnizable success is because you are lacking. No one wants to acknowledge they are lacking and so they live beyond their means to prove to themselves and the community they are successful.

Unless I am missing something here, I am not seeing any references to what is ordinarily described as the "working man or woman." Of course we all work or worked but if I understand the meaning of it correctly, Labor Day was established to honor people who rarely had a chance all year to rest -- those who worked primarily with their hands. Is this what Labor Day means to you?

Robby

Wow Robby since when is Labor only that which you do with your hands?? If that is so then farmers would have rode the band wagon of Labor Day and Labor Day would only be important to the industrial age. Is Labor Day really a relic of the industrial age? I thought it had more to do with Labor Unions celebrating not only the contribution to the nation through their labor but also celebrating the Laborer and if so than we have teachers and telephone operators etc etc.

What does Labor Day mean to the rest of you?

Robby

Well it used to mean Halelujah the kids are back in school. Now it means, soon the snow-birds return.

Shallow, n'est ce pas?

It was not uncommon in the 1800s for workers too work 80 hours a week and to bring piece work home with them. There was no minimum or guaranteed wage, little concern for work-place safety, no grievance procedures, no health insurance, and no paid vacation or sick days. Employers cold easily replace any worker who threatened to quit or complained about conditions. The competition for jobs forced poor unskilled people many of them recent immigrants, to work under almost any conditions.

Up until the mid-1800s there were virtually no unions. According to the Dept of Labor, the idea for a working-person's holiday first caught on in large, urban, industrial centers. Labor Day was started by the U.S. labor movement. The first state bill was introduced in the New York legislature. (I can remember my father telling me about the infamous shirt-waist fire in which so many women died in Manhattan. Their working conditions were horrendous.) Oregon, however, was the first state to recognize the holiday with legislation approved in 1887. By 1894, 23 other states had adopted the holiday, and in that same year, the U.S. Congress passed, and President Grover Cleveland signed, legislation making the first Monday in September a federal holiday.

It is obvious that Labor Day had great meaning in the latter part of the 19th Century and through a significant part of the 20th Century. Is that all dead now? May I return to my original question: "What does Labor Day mean to you, your family, and friends?"

Robby

o.k., if you insist.

labor day means nothing to me.

Through some of the Free Trade Agreements signed but not totally understood...we may be back there again. Certainly the folks we trade with could use Labour Unions to protect them.

Most of us hesitate to admit it....but these days, Fairwind's answer may be pretty accurate. It is for me. I do remember a day when it was celebrated more in honor of those that truly labored for their livelihood, but sadly, I know of no one, personally, that labors like that anymore.

Sun

By golly, I do. They may not use picks and shovels, but my New York son, who is known to work much more than 60 hours a week at his job, and my North Carolina daughter who works long into the night with hers, "truly labor" for their livelihood. So do I, come to think of it.

Mal

And it is indeed conceivable that Labor Day means nothing to almost everyone here or even across America. What we are doing in this forum is examining America. Quite possibly the world of work has so changed in America over this past century that what was so important to society that it became a Federal holiday is now nothing more than an artificial marker indicating that Fall activities are now to begin.

Prior to the Civil War forty percent of the labor force in New England's textile factories were children between the ages of 7 and 16 who worked full time. Has this now become irrelevant? In 1916 (not much before our lifetime) the first Federal child labor law was passed. Is this fact meaningless in current society? The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1939 (certainly within our lifetime) finally brought about regulation of child labor. The 40-hour work week also went into effect under that act. What were then called sweat-shops were common throughout my boyhood. Does all that have no meaning to our life today?

Fringe benefits in contracts between labor and management came about during World War II. The Federal government discouraged an increase in wages during the war years and saw fringe benefits as an alternative way of attracting employees. As a result of that, employees began to receive pension plans, medical insurance coverage, dental care, company stock purchase plans and other non-taxable benefits.

The purpose of Labor Day (and I am open to be corrected) was and is to remind us of the life that primarily blue-collar workers used to have and how the sacrifices they endured led us to the more "easy" life we have today -- much as Memorial Day reminding us of the sacrifices of war veterans.

Has the meaning of Labor Day to America died on the vine?

Robby

No offense meant, Mal....the hard workers I know, work in offices, in hospitals, ect. I am not saying they do not work long hours, or do hard work...it was just that it was not what I considered HARD Labor. It can be argued, ofcourse, that any work is labor...

Sun

Maybe we should rename it Workers Day???

I worked in nursing all my life and retired to part time last year....I probably worked as many holidays as I had off as do a great number of working Americans....Labor Day being one of them..My dad who was an electrician and belonged to a union never worked a holiday in his life!!!!! What it really means to me now is the end of summer, college students returning to town, geese flocking to my lake, football Saturdays, and the lovely fall weather returning......

Tigerliley:

Your career of nursing was obviously not the same kind of occupation as your father's of electrician but you point out that while most of those who "labored" throughout the year were given a day "officially" to rest -- that there were and are those who must remain on duty to take care of the rest of us.

Robby

Labor Day for me was traditionally the beginning of the school year, the end of summer and the beginning of fall and no next "holiday" until Thanksgiving. That was until a year ago when I retired and now it's a day I can enjoy without the thought of getting papers graded on it so I'm ready for the next day of school.

š...jane›

Given that in the U.S. and Canada there is child labour once again maybe we should think about Labour Day more.

My father was a union man from the time he came to Ontario from Manitoba. He was afraid of his union bosses but needed the support of his union. He worked very hard as a Lather. It was indeed very hard labour.

My father never went beyond the eighth grade. He worked in construction and did plumbing and any other handyman job that came up. The uncle who raised me was an electrician and serviced oil burners.

My father was a firm believer in unions. My uncle would have none of them.

My daughter's friend is a carpenter, who has taught himself more about the computer than most technicians know. His first job in NC a little over a year ago was as a maintenance man. He now is a step higher and works on the procurement of computers for the Kodak subsidiary that hired him. He will have nothing to do with unions.

Oh, yes. In my brief career as a professional musician, I belonged to the musicians union.

Mal

LABOR DAY In 1898, Samuel Gompers, head of the American Federation of Labor, called it

"the day for which the toilers in past centuries looked forward, when their rights and their wrongs would be discussed...that the workers of our day may not only lay down their tools of labor for a holiday, but upon which they may touch shoulders in marching phalanx and feel the stronger for it."

In September 1892, Twenty thousand workers union workers (the Knights of Labor) in New York City took an unpaid day off and marched in a parade. They carried banners that read "LABOR CREATES ALL WEALTH," and "EIGHT HOURS FOR WORK, EIGHT HOURS FOR REST, EIGHT HOURS FOR RECREATION!" After the parade there were picnics all around the city. Workers and celebrants ate Irish stew, homemade bread and apple pie. At night, fireworks were set off.

Labor Day: a goodbye to summer

Almost a century since Gompers spoke those words, though, Labor Day is seen as the last long weekend of summer rather than a day for political organizing. In 1995, less than 15 percent of American workers belonged to unions, down from a high in the 1950's of nearly 50 percent, though nearly all have benefited from the victories of the Labor movement.

And everyone who can takes a vacation on the first Monday of September. Friends and familes gather, and clog the highways, and the picnic grounds, and their own backyards -- and bid farewll to summer.

My dad was a strong union man also.....When I was a young nurse and for many years I thought belonging to a union would make nursing seem less "professional".....Boy were we sold a bill of goods......I would certainly rethink that now and think nurses would be very wise to get their act togather and build a STRONG union...Many reasons for this which I won't go into here.....

All Canadian nurses are unionized. A lot of professional government workers are. I think because of the number of strikes many of us think critical sectors should not be unionized. At the moment the VON..Victoria Order of Nurses who look after the older folks and housebound are on strike. Two months ago those who take care of the Mentally Challenged went on strike. We have had police, firemen etc go on strike in the last year.

Why did they go on strike, Idris?

Well Idris I understand what you mean.....HOWERVER....nurses working 12 hour shifts....understaffing....substituting unlicensed personell to do some nursing duties professional nurses should do and on and on makes me think that for the safty of all nurses would be better off with a union....Management does as they pretty much please and you do it or you know where the front door is....... There was a time when one could not be forced to do overtime....That is no longer true.... Very difficult time.....

They have always had the right to bargain for higher wages etc. but had to settle through an arbitration system. We elected an NDP government for one term (boy were we surprised) The then Premier Ray gave them the right to strike. He also tripled our Provincial Debt.

The Premier that we elected next was a Conservative (which in Canada is more like your Democrats. In any event he is attemping to reign in the debt and put us in the black. He has chipped away at the deficit and we are now very healthy. He did this by lowering taxes and tightening the purse strings. This did not sit with the unions well. All of organized labour in the Province has gone on strike over the last two terms he has been in office.

The nurses have been cut and hospitals closed. Part of this is because many operations can be done as day surgery, new mom's and their babies only stay in hospital for three or four days. There is a move afoot to have more older folks who need meds, visits etc. be visited sometimes three times a day. Meals on wheels is used more often. Still they feel they are not well paid and over worked. This could be.

The teachers are threatening strikes as soon as school starts. They are refusing to do extra-curricular activities with the children, want more money...yadda, yadda, yadda. They are certainly paid one heck of a lot more than your teachers.

The fact is they hate our Premier. They wanted the NDP to stay in power as they received so much from them. They also almost bankrupted the Province. One sector or another of the union movement has been down at our Provincial Legislature. In some cases throwing rocks, bottles you name it at the building and police. To keep taxing folks more and more to back labour is just not on anymore.

Part of the problem is also that the Federal Government cut transfer payments to the "rich" Provinces. They cut money for hospitals, education and a few other things. It has been a not too happy five years but we have managed to beat the deficit down fairly quickly.

Tigerlily, i think we are all aware of the problems the nurses have. However, through the arbitration system they usually got what they wanted without going on strike.

Liked your post Idris....Interesting.....Your gov. sounds more like our Republican friends....Cut taxes, tighten the purse strings. I see our two pary's as kind of balancing each others excesses out..... Our hospitals have changed drastically here also.....Shorter stays for patients...cutting back on professional staff and hiring auxiallary help, etc.....Much more out-pt. surg.... We do sound like cousins.....

From the talk here about unions and strikes and similar labor situations, it would seem that many of the labor problems remain and yet there does not appear to be any connection with Labor Day. Labor Day was first celebrated with give and take between labor and management. Sometimes violent clashes erupted betweeen the two. State militias, the National Guard, and even the U.S. Army were called in to restore order.

One continuing labor problem was mentioned earlier -- the result of the repeal of Blue Laws. Working in the retail industry can be incredibly stressful. Poor benefits, low job satisfaction, cranky customers, odd hours, nights, and weekends compound the stress.

Shopping malls have substantially increased their hours of operation. Most large stores operate until 10 at night; some now are open 24 hours a day. Both weekend days are major shopping days, with many stores holding extended hours on Saturday. Malls and shopping centers have also expanded their Sunday hours as well.

Everybody deserves to enjoy an occasional holiday of rest and relaxation. Do these workers not deserve an occasional holiday to rest and relax?

Robby

Tigerlily, the NDP is the party that messed us up. It is socialist.

I agree Robby. The race to the bottom is nuts!

What is everyone's reaction to deTocqueville's comment (above) about "rapid progress in trade?"

Robby

Under the heading of "rapid progress" in trade, consider some of the fastest growing occupations for the future:--

1 - Computer engineers
2 - Computer support specialists
3 - Database administrators
4 - Dental hygienists
5 - Medical assistants
6 - Paralegals
7 - Personal care and health aides
8 - Physician assistants
9 - Residential counselors
10 - Securities analysts

deTocqueville was well aware that life in the 21st Century in America would be different than life in the 19th Century yet he observed us and described us in broad terms which are still applicable to our times. Please read the quotes of his remarks (above), compare what he said and what is happening today, and give us your reactions.

Robby

It would be difficult not to see the above as the wave of the future jobs. Most of the not so well- educated folks have pretty well lost their jobs due to trade deals. Service jobs can pay well or not depending what end of the educational spectrum you come from. All i can say is make sure the educations system is in good shape or your economy will suffer as much as the poor folks who can't enter the new economy.

Amazing how soon various occupations are made obsolescent due to changes in technology. When I started with the NY State Dept of Education public relations department in 1972 (seems like yesterday), typewriters around were both manual and electric. I chose to use a manual. I liked the pressure of the keys on my fingers and the sound of the clackety-clack indicating to me that something was being accomplished. Not too long after that I changed to an electric one.

In the early 1970s when I became a university student, I used an IBM Selectric in which one placed plastic cards which recorded what I was typing. In the late 1970s, I wrote a thesis on a computer in one building and the data went to another building where IBM cards were punched for us to feed into a machine that printed it out.

In the early 1980s (also seems like yesterday) I was with the federal government and the agency had a main frame computer that took an entire air-conditioned room. I sat in my office and printed out the data and then went downstairs where the printout was handed to me. In the mid-1980s, that room was designated for another purpose and all of us in the agency now had PC's on our desks. We communicated by email with fellow employees but by the time the late 1980s was here, so was Arpanet and we communicated with various universities across the land.

My point is that as technology changed, jobs were both lost and created. deTocqueville, even 170 years ago, was amazed at the incredible speed with which Americans progress.

Robby

One would never wish to left behind. The key to staying ahead is a good educational system. The more ways we can find to give children a good grounding, the better chances our children have to thrive.

We as just plain folks have to move with the times to. Education just doesn't end at a certain time of life. We have to try to keep learning even if it is just on the puter.

Couldn't agree more, Idris, with your thoughts on education. Now, if we could just scoot beyond seeing education as one of those "women's issues" (progress, yes, but not very much), then with those blinders off, we might be able to see that education is connected to every other worthy goal we have.

Some of the changes that my son is involved in with Cognative Sciences, he teaches are not looked on favourably by some teachers. It would help a lot but change is never easy to accept, Betty.

Well, as one of those who urged Robby to undertake this discussion in the first place, I must apologize for being a dropout! I spent the last half of July and most of August working 10 and 12 hours a day developing and conducting a new education program for my firm's new staff. I went to Illinois in mid-July expecting to be away from home for about 10 days, but as it turned out I was there almost all the time for six weeks. So for me, Labor Day is a time to catch up a little bit here at home!

I have read through some, though not all, of the discussion. I thought the discussion of ethnicity, especially with reference to those of us from an English or northern European background, was very interesting. I had an English ancestor, the son of an Anglican vicar, who emigrated to Westerly, R.I. in 1669 and joined a Seventh-Day Baptist community there. I don't know if he was SDB before he came to America, and that's why he went to Westerly, or if he ended up in Westerly and figured if he couldn't beat 'em, he'd better join 'em. Subsequent generations moved towards the Brethren denominations, Quakerism, and finally Methodism. My great-grandfather and his two sons (one of whom was my grandfather) were all Methodist ministers. My grandfather served small-town churches all over Minnesota, North Dakota, and Kansas. My mother was born in Fairmont, Minn., and graduated from high school in Humboldt, Kansas. She grew up in small midwestern towns that served the surrounding farmers.

On the other side, my great-grandfather migrated from Germany (Bavaria) in the 1860's and settled in Iowa. The original farm was just recently sold out of the family, but fortunately to someone who is extremely interested in its history and actually plans to restore the existing farmhouse to its 1920's original condition. My grandfather thought he could do better in southeastern Kansas, so he went there, and that's how I got to be part of the POOR branch of the family <G>. My father grew up on the farm.

So what is my ethnicity? I do believe we all have one, whether we are aware of it or not, because we all have roots that influence our worldview. In my case, I think it is the midwestern farm culture that grew up in the 19th century and flourished until the middle of the 20th century and, of course, still survives in some places. That culture had its roots in northern Europe, but it developed on American soil. The ethnic heritage I have to pass on to my grandchildren and great-grandchildren is that middle-western, hardworking, don't-mortgage-the-farm, can-do mentality that I got from my parents and grandparents.

My late husband grew up on a farm in northern Minnesota, near Aitkin. I don't believe we have traced back to a specific immigrant ancestor on his father's side, but they had been here many generations and were tradesmen and farmers. His mother's parents emigrated from Norway in the 1880's; she was born here, but she had older siblings who were born in Norway. My husband and I had no common background. I grew up in the exurbs of Kansas City, the daughter of a college professor and a social worker, graduated from Oberlin College, and did a year of graduate work in sociology before our marriage. My husband graduated from high school and had some technical training as an aircraft mechanic before he joined the U.S. Border Patrol; he never went to college. However, we soon found that we shared almost exactly the same values. In 38 years of marriage I remember ONE argument about money. One. With that exception (which involved the immense sum of $

, we always agreed about what we could afford and what we couldn't afford to do. I think it is because we both came from those middlewestern farm roots.

I certainly don't feel ethnically German or English, nor do my daughters feel ethnically Norwegian (although they are 25%). Those of us who don't feel we have any ethnicity are just ethnically American, and that ethnicity certainly has regional variations.

Katie, we both live in very big countries. By the very nature of the size of our nations there are very real differences because of where we live. Those who settled the place are regionally different. Their needs are different and so are their problems.

I am first generation Canadian and i sure don't feel any attachment to Wales or England. Canada is my country.

Well, yes, Katie. I wondered what ever happened to you but am glad you are now part of us. Your family and your ancestors are and were certainly a mixture of nationalities and religions so I guess that makes you a sure-enough American. At the present time because America and Canada are presenting the face of Labor Day to us we are discussing labor, occupations, and the world of work in general in America. Please share your views on this topic with us and relate them, if you can, to deTocqueville's comments (see quotes above) on this subject.

Robby

Robby: It may be that because working people today have many opportunities for a "day of rest" (other National holidays), that Labor Day is no longer considered a day of rest for working people. Without belaboring the question of how did it happen, I believe that the generations that have followed us have, with some exceptions, taken for granted the rights and benefits that previous generations had to struggle for. The conditions you referred to in your post #752, 40 hr. work week, child labor laws, the right to organize, the place of women in the workplace, all came as a result of much sacrifice, and at times bloodshed, by working men and women. At that time the work force mostly affected by hard working conditions were factory workers, miners, i.e. blue collar workers. Workers in white collar jobs in present day America have these "pioneers" to thank for their living conditions. And if their present living conditions do not provide them with a decent way of life, they have much to learn from the early union organizers.

How many of us - not to mention our sons and daughters and their offspring - remember The Pinkertons, the Haymarket Square conspiracy to blame workers for a bombing, Sacco and Vanzetti, sit-ins, lockouts, workers' marches in the streets of San Francisco, Emma Goldman....the flight of the "Okies" for a better life and what they found when they got there. There is just too much history to go into here, but this is what Labor Day "should" commemmorate. Not just another workers' day of rest, but a celebration of and a memorial to those who gave us the way of life so many of us enjoy today.

Beautifully said, Gail, and I am so glad to see you again.

Mal

Gail: So nice to see you again, Gail. You have brought up so many items which are relevant to Labor Day. As you say, those in today's working world have what they have due to the sacrifices of the mostly blue-collar workers of earlier generations.

I am curious to know how many participants here recognized the names and events that you listed in the final paragraph.

Robby

My only understanding of the U.S. union movement is through, "The Grapes of Wrath." Then again i'm sure most of you know little of the Winnipeg riots. I know some of this because my father...almost blind in one eye and never having held a gun never mind firing one was behind a great bale of hay at Portage and Main on that day. He was handed a gun and told to shoot whoever broke through the barricade...even if it was his mother. That was in 1928.

I suppose in Canada it is different than across the border as we still have the NDP Party federally and provincially. It is represents labour and when union leaders refer to the NDP the say...Our Party. They however are really not on course anymore. Instead of representing the weak and poor they represent more money and better working conditions for themselves.

Idris: Just what were the Winnepeg Riots?

Robby

A few decades ago, employers in America were in search of typists, switchboard operators, mimeograph repair technicians, keypunchers and elevator operators. Today's want ads are seeking Webmasters, LAN opeators, desktop publishers. Just a few decades ago, business magazines celebrated the latest office tecnology - cutting edge equipment such as electric typewriters and dictaphones. Today, it is more like digital phones and personal digital assistants.

We are living in a world few could have imagined 50 years ago. As you look at your children and grand-children -- who are, after all, the face of America -- how are they fitting into this world of work?

Robby

My daughter teaches computer to senior citizens. She also teaches them how to use scanners and fax machines; does technical repairs on their computers and tech support over the phone. My New York son's business as head of sales for a business is conducted primarily through the computer, fax machines, scanners, copiers and cellular phones.

My "business" is, and has been for several years, in desktop publishing and web page building for three electronic magazines. I'd say we are certainly keeping up with the times.

Mal

No doubt about it, Mal!!

Robby

The folks who wanted unions were of course opposed by the government and employers. It was in essence class warfare. In 1918 (sorry type O above)

) the whole thing came to a boil. The union folks were painted as supporters of Karl Marx and only wanting to oust the federal government of the day. The working class across Canada, picked one day to demonstrate. There was much goings on behind the scenes. Churches were divided as to whom they would support. The West, but mostly Winnipeg, in the Province of Manitoba knew they would not become the "Chicago of the North." An enormous riot broke out in Winnipeg and the Milita was called out. It was a time of change, hot tempers, political manipulation and all of the horrors that go with anti-union feelings. Be you child, man or woman you worked if you were poor and most folks were poor.

The aftermath of the riot was not good. By 1925 the unions were in a state of confusion and the numbers were falling. The railway men who were the workers most effected by the change of where the trains would go. Industrail unrest was still going great guns. The Shipping Federation crushed the International Longshoremen's Association in the West Coast Ports in 1923 at the cost of cripplingt strikes fought between th edocers and the armies of professional strike-breakers. The near destruction of the Lumber Workers'Union. This was done by blacklists, brass knuckles and worse. And so it went all union members across Canada, became targets.

The fact that the Unions lost, during the time of the Winnipeg riots made the workers targets for brutality and destruction of their paycheck, and the few rights they had in the beginning. Sort of reminds you of what is going on now with the FTA and NAFTA. Many of the unions were taken over by U.S. Unions in the end. Dues were syphoned off and sent across the border to help US unions but not our own. A huge bone of contention. They were in effect being governed by a foreign country, which of course led to more rioting across Canada. The Unionist were opposed by the Federal Government, Provincial Government, Churches, large and small business. This caused a loss of membership but what was left became very militant. All of this started with the Winnipeg riots.

Thank you very much, Idris, for that detailed recounting of what the workers of those days went through. It emphasizes what Gail said earlier about the need to remind ourselves that Labor Day should celebrate or memorialize the actions of workers years ago which brought us to the more comfortable days of our times.

If I understand previous postings correctly, Labor Day will be considered by most people (including us) merely a day to picnic or a day which marks the end of summer. "Labor" will not even be in most people's thoughts. Why is this so?

Robby

The computer evolution, or revolution, while more bloodless than many other changes in our society, was not without a great deal of controversy and distrust. My husband was hired in 1956 by the then major corporation building computers. He jokingly says now that the computer he worked on in those first days is now in a museum. But I can recall that when he first began our families and friends had never heard of the computer or the corporation that he went to work for. Then in a few years computer people were accused of taking away jobs---that all clerks, secretaries, etc. would be out of work because computers would be doing it all. It was something to be feared. Also, as a minor side issue, we were to have a paperless society....everything was to be in computer memory for instant access therefore why would we need paper any more? Couldn't have been more wrong, could we? Computers didn't take away jobs but did perhaps change their focus and created many more.

As for the paperless society-----why am I drowning in computer generated paper that arrives daily in my mail box?

Phyll

The Economic Policy Institute today released the year 2000 version of its biennial “Report On State Of Working America.” A press release describing this paper is available now from the EPI web page below. The EPI is a well-respected labor supported think tank. The report gives labor's partisan view of the progress and lack of progress relative to the status of working America during the past years.

EPI Home Page

I note that today is Sept 3, the 61st anniversary of the beginning of WW II.

For those people who do not intend to go to college for at least a Bachelor's degree but might need some sort of post-secondary education or training, the following are the fastest growing occupations (in order of their weekly wages), according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics:--

1 - Registered nurses
2 - Police officers
3 - Sports instructors
4 - Non-vocational instructors
5 - Vocational education teachers
6 - Air-conditioning/heating mechanics
7 - Correctional officers
8 - License Practical Nurses.

College is not in everyone's future. The above occupations are important. How does this ranking compare to the world of work as you remember it?

Robby

I think most registered nurses now end up with college educations, Robby...many places want those with RNs to have advance work and be RN-Certified (which is different than just an RN) and/or have a BSN. That's the push in this area, anyway, and the word from my niece who is an RN in a large hospital in Columbus, OH

š ...jane›

I agree with Jane. All of the RNs I know have B.S. degrees.

My daughter, Alice, U.of Denver Hospital has her MS and working on a doctorate and she is still "just" a nurse working in the ICU with heart transplants.

Local small towns around hire onlt Law Enforcement grads of WIU at Macomb, IL

If it is now required that a person have a bachelor's degree to be an RN, that's terrific!

Following are the fastest growing occupations, again listed in order of weekly wages, according to the BLS, for those occupations requiring a bachelor's degree or more:--

1 - Lawyers
2 - Physicians
3 - Systems analysts
4 - Computer engineers
5 - Management analysts
6 - Residential counselors
7 - Secondary teachers
8 - Special education teachers
9 - Writers and editors
10 - Personnel specialists
11 - Designers
12 - Artists
13 -Social workers

What change do you in these cases of occupational requirements as they were in earlier years?

Robby

Pat, a young nurse living upstairs from me has her M.S. as well. She works in the OR for open heart surgery at Fairfax Hospital. She sometimes travels to other places with hearts to put in patients. Is on call 24 hours a day and has beeper, cell phone, etc.

Robby, artists surprises me. I thought that just required talent.

The working world in America is made up heavily these days with temporary workers. There are now 1.2 million people employed by temporary agencies -- one of the fastest growing segments of the work force.

Last week the National Labor Relations Board issued a decision that authorized temporary workers at a business to join the same union as the company's permanent workers without first obtaining permission from the employment agency that assigned the temps to the business. Previously temporary workers sent by an employment agency to a company could vote to join a union at the company of only if the employment agency agreed. Temporary help agencies rarely gave the workers they sent to a company the go-ahead to join a union at the company.

The Labor Board ruled that in many cases temporary workers are in effect the employees of the user company and not of the agency and should be treated as part of the same bargainng unit. We have been speaking here of the importance of unions in our past as they helped to improve the lot of the workers. Now the union movement is straning to add workers. The number of people working for temporary help agencies soared more than sixfold from 1982 to 1998, while jobs over all grew by only 41 percent.

Do any of your family members or friends hold jobs sent by "temporary" agencies?

Robby

It appears to be a very important thing to be treated as a fulltime employee as without it as many of your folks would have no health coverage. In Canada everyone is covered. I should think also many other things would be covered.

When i was recovering from an operation we had to employ a part-timer in our business for six weeks.

I am a Union Member and Proud to be. I love America and Canada as many of my relation are Canadians, But for today enjoy this. http://www.send4fun.com/laborday.htm

Ginger

Thanks, Ginger! That page is a lot of fun.

Mal

Interesting that deTocqueville noticed we go into industry so easily. I couple that with a statement I've shared earlier in this conversation. One of the gentleman I recently worked with from Indonesia shared how far ahead their schools were in teaching especailly math but also how ridged their schools were and how Americans are tought to be creative and inventive.

Think about it, we had been a nation of tinkerers. Most homes had the garage or basement or barn filled with all kinds of projects and tools not necessary to the work that earned the family money. Farming does not provide a lot of possibilities for tinkering or creativity. It is hard work with change in equipment and science making differences.

Tinkering could be done in manufacturing. Now the assembly line gave little to no room for tinkering although, those suggestion boxes were always full. But now the computer industry is nothing but tinkering and using creativity.

It was the creative use of manpower and weapons that fought WW2 and the exploration into space. We are still a nation of "do it yourself-ers" keeping Home Depot very busy with all the Sunday tinkerers.

Creativity stems from the ability and support to ask "So what?" What is the point, what is the intended purpose of what ever is at issue. What would happen if it didn't happen that way or if it happened this way? What would be the consequence and so what anyway. And now what?

And than we start all over again questioning anything and everything. That concept of questioning is what I think we do with our laws and politics and why our Democracy is a live creation so that many of the trappings of government and what we honor look different as the creative Americans tinker with Democracy.

Ginger: A very inspiring link. Thank you! Especially the remark that here one is "able to work for pay." Not every nation can say that!

Barbara: On this Labor Day you have given us much food for thought. "We are a nation of tinkerers and questioners" and that "our Democracy is a live one because we tinker with it." You remind us by using the word "live" that there are many different kinds of democracies. Labor Day is indeed a "memorial" type of day as it reminds us of the strong relation between Democracy and work.

Robby

The first Monday in September was celebrated as Labor Day in the United States in the 1880s during the campaign to establish an eight-hour work day. The Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions, a predecessor to the American Federation of Labor first passed a resolution calling for an eight-hour day in 1884.

This was just one step along a sometimes tortuous road that gradually brought the American worker one of the highest living standards in the world. That achievement has been credited to the rise of this country's labor movement and the establishment of unions. Trade unions grew out of medieval craft guilds where practitioners set rules of operation and established standards for craftsmanship. The influence of the modern union grew with the realization that individual workers joining together gained bargaining power over employers.

In your past working experience, have you seen any of this take place?

Robby

On this Labor Day of the Year 2000, after a long period of job growth, a steady slowing in job growth is now taking place. There is a slowdown in construction, manufacturing and mortgage finance. In manufacxturing 79,000 jobs disappeared and the National Association of Purchasing Management said that its index of manufacturing activity had turned negative in August for the first time in 20 months. Employment in retaling fell 34,000 in August. Department store hiring has been particularly weak.

HOWEVER! - there has been a growth in job training, management, engineering and temporary workers (probably in the electronics field).

According to deTocqueville (quote above) Democracy leads men to prefer one kind of labor to another. In his time it diverted men from agriculture to commerce and manufacturing. Any ideas why America is so far ahead of most other nations in the electronic communication field?

Robby

My two cents worth would be that each of our countries have folks who are allowed to let their imaginations go. I think our school systems really help with this. In the U.S. you spend a lot on R and D, we do it less so...much less so.

(

It has been suggested that as you have a very strong military and R & D portion many of your advances have been taken into business concerns. Just think of all of the products that are now your everyday products.

Idris believes that the cltizens of both Canada and America "let their imaginations go." Do the rest of you believe that this is typical of a Democracy?

Robby

I don't think this has anything to do with whether a country is a democracy or not. Look at Japan.

Mal

Isn't Japan a democracy now?

Robby

I don't know, ha ha! I thought of that after I posted that message. Maybe I'm still living in the Dark Ages before there ever was a Labor Day!

Mal

The meaning of Labor Day and the world of work in America can not be properly discussed without pointing out what our earlier workers did on behalf of children. Child labor is a social problem associated with the rise of industrial production. It appeared in earlier ages in agricultural societies, but during the Industrial Revolution of the 18th Century in Great Britain, it was especially conspicuous and began to be opposed. Many of us here are familiar with the works of Charles Dickens who, himself, worked at a factory at age twelve. One of the most effective attacks came from Dickens' novel "Oliver Twist," which was widely read both in Britain and the United States.

Child labor first became an issue in America in the 1850s in large Northern cities like New York, worsening with increased industrialization. The problem also worsened with the increasing immigration at the turn of the century, and with the South's late and slow industrial development.

deTocqueville spoke of America's move toward manufacturing. As you examine America these days, do you see the problem of child labor as having been solved, not only in manufacturing but in other occupations, or is there still a need for action in this area?

Robby

There is a definite need to revisit Child Labour again. Just about everyone knows it is going on here and in the U.S. I hope we don't have to hit over the head with this before we start complianing to our government members LOUDLY. I have called my M.P. and was told there isn't (what a lie) and no one has complained.

I first received the same sort of lie when i called three years ago about Female Genital Mutilation. I managed to find a Senator who would listen and she had heard of this happening here. We got a law finally by using talk-shows and passing the word along that way. A local group was set up of folks who didn't want this to happen to their children and they worked through the Senator.

I received some pretty scary phone calls in answer to a Letter to the Editor i had written. The local talk show had the M.P.'s phone ringing. We can do the same thing with child labour.

Idris, today's WASHINGTON POST is full of reporting on the Americanization of Fair Canada and the concerns of many that your country is becoming, in effect, just a 51st state. Me, I adore Canada just the way it is now, sans the Quebec separatists, but would welcome TEN more states. Or is it 14? I think I can rattle off ten!

MaryPage we have a 67 cent dollar. We are being sold to mainly Americans at firesale prices. We will lose most of our sports teams because they are paid in U.S. funds and we can't afford it. Many of our industries are now U.S. owned.

Many cottages in prime locations are being purchased by U.S. citizens. Many of our farmers are selling their farms to Cargill a giant U.S. agrabusiness. We are in big trouble. Add to that we listen to U.S. TV which is far more brutal than our home grown stuff. Then again ours has more sex in it.

We are hollywood north it seems. Movies can be made more cheaply here with our low dollar. The U.S. government insists our culture is not culture but business. Fat chance we will be left with our culture intact.

It sure isn't funny being a mouse living next to an elephant sometimes. It was our politicians that promised not to sign the deal without fixing it ....guess what! They lied.

Gosh Idris Wha Happen' I remember in about 1988 visiting Canada and the exchange was $1.27 of American for $1 Canadian!

In times of change and tumult the money flows to the U.S. Bummer, huh?

without giving us a 15 year blow by blow history what turmult and change did Canada experience?

We have separatists that rattle their sabers every once in a while. We have a province..British Columbia that the First Nations Peoples lay claim to 110% of it. Yes, 110% of it due to overlapping treaties. We did not have "Indian wars." We signed treaties with them. Less bloody, but a heck of a lot more expensive now.

The world is unstable and that means folks around the world flock to the U.S. dollar.

We are an exporting people and we sell in Canadian dollars and purchase in U.S. dollars. It is a whole bunch of things.

Oh my had not idea - Idris is there a link you could provide tø a Canadian daily newspaper online? You have peeked my interest and I would like to be better informed.

Idris what part of Canada do you live? Are you born Canadian or a transplanted Englishmen? Are you close enough to the border that you shop USA?

I know I plan to get a big prescription from my Doctor for these wonderful migraine headache pills I take now at $16.81 per pill and run down to Lorado and get the perscription filled there. The trip is about 5 hours down and if I only stay a bit I can do it round trip in one day. Of course with our heat I will wait till just before or after Christmas.

From the few times I visited Canada both the Quebec area and Vancouver and Victoria area there isn't that much difference in the socio-economics of the average folks but visiting Mexico is definitely going into a different world.

Our temp. was official at 112 today and 110 yesterday and 108 for the 4 days preceding that. We have had 39 days over 105 this summer and the trees are so dry they are snapping off large branches or half the tree and causing all kind of traffic delays all over town. The heat build up in the afternoon and evening creating a wind so fiece it feels like the roof is going to come off. I understand we are finally getting a cool front tomorrow and we will be only 100. Yes only 100 but any relief - we are usually in the low 90s this time of year.

I live in Niagara, Canada and we are about 40 minutes from the border. I never shop anywhere but Canada even if our buck is riding high. I was born out West. Many American Doctors will write a script to be filled in Canada and returned to them so you can pick them up at the Dr.'s office. Don't know how many do now. It is far cheaper i know.

Here are links to two Canadian Sites.

The Vancouver Post (a newspaper out on the Wet Coast)

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (our national radio station)

It is good to have this United States-Canada exchange such as we have here. Both nations are Democracies and it is extremely rare to have two such nations in the world on such friendly terms with each other. If I understand it correctly, we have the longest undefended border on this planet.

In line with our earlier comments about child labor, in the United States, numerous organizations worked to eliminate child labor, including the National Child Labor Committee, launched in 1904 by social workers. In 1916, President Wilson passed the Keating-Owen Act through Congress. This banned articles produced by child labor from interstate commerce. A 1918 Supreme Court ruling, however, declared it unconstitutional. It was not until 1938 (within the lifetime of most of us here) with the far-reaching Fair Labor Standards Act, did any attempt at child labor legislation succeed. This requires the employers to pay child laborers the minimum wage. It also limits the age of child laborers to 16 and over, 18 if the occupation is hazardous. Children 14 and 15 are permitted to work in certain occupations after school hours.

Have most of the problems regarding the exploitation of children in the work-a-day world been eliminated? What are your opinions?

Robby

Good thing it is undefended cause we don't have a lot of police to do border duty, Robbie.

)

Due to the high rate of illegales in your country and mine there is a lot of underground child labour. I understand it is mainly sharecroppers in your southern states, New York and a couple of other places in the South, i can't remember.

In Canada it is Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.

You still have to tackle Female Genital Mutilaltion there. I sure wish you would try to stop it. I truly get frantic at holiday time.

Okay one more complaint. Almost all of the stuffedtoys folks won at fairs, get for Christmas or other holidays like Easter come from factories where little children work 10 hours a day to produce these toys for our children and grandchildren. Think about it. This is the year 2,000 and we allow our toystores to buy this stuff and sell it to us so our little ones can hug the toy to feel comforted at night.

I don't understand why we aren't up in arms about this.

Maybe after we have left the period of Labor Day and the world of work, we can approach Female Genital Mutilation. de Tocqueville didn't speak of that topic specifically but he did have comments about women. What do you say we save that for a later date?

Idris: Just where are these factories where children work 10 hours a day?

Robby

robby...since you mention the women...i just want to say that the de t.'s references to women and lawyers were the ones i found most interesting in his book.

Fairwinds: We most certainly will get to those topics. What we have been doing in this forum is letting America choose the topics for us as we float along in the mainstream observing this life in our democracy. America has been showing us the holiday of Labor Day which just naturally brought us to the subject of work.

We are living in a new economy -- powered by technology, fueled by information, and driven by knowledge. And we are entering the new century with opportunity on our side. But within this prosperity comes concern. Families are working harder. Parents are stretched for time. Workers young and old wonder whether they have the skills to stay ahead in the workplace of the future.

There are three pillars providing stability in workers' lives:--

1 - A rising economic security over a lifetime so a worker can have food on the table, a roof over one's head, health care when needed, and a secure income for retirement.
2 - The resources and the time to enjoy family life and meet the needs of children and aging parents.
3 - Safe and fair workplaces free from health hazards and from discrimination and other unfair employment practices.

There is an integral relationship between work and family. deTocqueville's comments above indicate the important relationship - even in his time - between work and family.

How has your work affected your family in the past? How is your work or the work of others affecting your family now? What about salary? What about pension? What about firings or "downsizing?" What about promotions or salary increases?

Robby

As i understand it Robby, New York is a favourite spot for folks from China. There are chicken factories in whatever State President Clinton comes from. Look at the places along the U.S./Mexican border. Many of the children are sold under contract to people in the sex trade. That is in North America.

In China for example their parents are in prison or in debt and are sold to pay the debt. Indian and Pakistan the same. In these two places they are made to produce rolled cigarettes for sale in the U.S. can't remember the product name....Beebs or something.

Idris.....We have several chicken processing plants in Missouri....I know of no problems with child labor in them...Many of the workers are Hispanic....I see adds in the paper from Columbia telling these folks where they can come for social services if needed.... The plant I am thinking of is a starting point for some of these families...They often go from there to better paying jobs etc....I am seeing some of these familys now where I live......

Tigerlily, i'm thinking of the ones that are under contract because someone in the family needed an operation or for some other purpose. They are often sold into this form of bondage in other countries for $25.00.

The ones from China will pay just about anything to get out. These are the ones that pay over $40,000.00 to be hidden in boats etc. There are literally thousands that come this way. They have no money and are therefore bound by a contract to work until the debt is paid off. That can be 20 years or more. The girls are sold to people as sex slaves in Canada and the U.S. Honest!

Idris I guess I just don't want to believe that little girls would be sex slaves in the U.S. in the year 2000...Is it really true then that some things never change??

There are some things that never change, Tigerlily. Just think of the numbers of folks from both of our countries that go to certain countries where this is legal. As the young boys and girls there and probably here are seen as being more likely to be AIDS free....... Think too that on CBC's "As it Happens" they are forced to do this 50 times a day...i don't think so.

There are somethings that don't get press and this is one of them. Some things are also so gross to print they are not reported. As long as we have illegals we will have this sort of thing going on and people to feed the market.

What are we in the democracies doing (if anything) to counteract this?

Robby

Pretending it doesn't exist. These things are put in motion by Tongs on this side of the border in BC and Toronto. Tongs are hated and feared by the Chineese who came here when our railroad was built and are very good, hard working, citizens of Canada. They really hate this as it puts more money in the hands of the Tongs and hurts their image as Canadians.

I'm sure you see the same thing in New York City. I know the Tongs are there too.

From Idris O’Neil, Message #828

There are chicken factories in whatever State President Clinton comes from. Look at the places along the U.S./Mexican border. Many of the children are sold under contract to people in the sex trade. That is in North America.

President Clintons home State is Arkansas the home office of one of the largest U.S. chicken packing companies. There are also many chicken packing operations in my State, Texas and in Seguin, where I live. These operations are in inter-state commerce and as such are subject to the labor and health laws and regulations of the United States. They are considered very favorably by the local people because they provide good regular employment for many people that are a significant improvement over what was available before.

The deplorable border sex trade that you cite is the product of the old corrupt politics south of the border. Improvements in the north Mexican States have followed during the past years since the passage of the North American Trade Treaty. This includes the outcome of the recent presidential election in Mexico that saw for the first time in 80 years the election of a President that really is serious about reform.

I attended a professional meeting 10 years ago at St Andrews in New Brunswick. I was certainly impressed by your country and its people. Also at a World Future Society congress in Washington, DC in the mid-1990 I centered on seminars on governmental health care policy. Several were critical regarding the operation of the Canadian system. This included Canadians who were in attendance. The impression was that the service dangerously limited high tech, expensive procedures and often delayed necessary treatments in a manner amounting to the rationing of medical service. I was left with the impression that Canadians who could were coming to the States when faced with a potentially serious health problems. You might comment on the adequacy of the present Canadian system.

There is a definite relationship between occupation and the health system. The traditional work arrangement -- a full-time, year-round job where an emplyer usually provides a worker with benefits, training, and/or a pension upon retirement -- is often giving way to something fundamentally different.

Today's nontraditional workers receive fewer benefits. Only seven percent of agency temp workers receive employer-provided healthcare benefits.

Robby

When Americans come here they are delighted with it, Harold. I have never had trouble with our healthcare. I have had four operations recently and had no trouble at all. I also live in a small community.

At a particular time we had some Doctors leave for the States. Ninety percent of them have returned to Canada. So the stats tell us. There was a strong move by some politicians to move to the HMO system. Now they see it is a bad idea. We are a different people, Harold and do things differently. It is single payer although i believe many in your country call it Socialism. It isn't. However, you are happy with your system and we are happy with ours.

To each his own. We prefer to have everyone covered.

)

More than 8 million working Americans are living in poverty and one-quarter of them work full time year round. Nearly 60 percent of the working poor are women and minority women are more than twice as likely to be poor as white women. Almost 3 million poor workers are in families with children under age 6. Ten percent of people with significant disabilities working full time fall below the poverty rate.

This is in America. Does this possibly relate to deTocqueville's comment above about "poor citizens?"

Robby

deTocqueville says (see quote above) that in America the greatest undertakings are executed without difficulty. I submit that America at this time does not face a worker shortage but a skills shortage. Our fundamental challenge is equipping all Americans with the tools to succeed in this new economy. We need to make sure no worker becomes "jobsolete."

Why do you folks believe we have so many people out of work despite a soaring economy? What would you do to correct it?

Robby

I wonder if it is that those in power decided we should ship offshore the jobs for those with low skill levels. You certainly have trouble as we do with not enough people with high skill levels. That's easy to fix you import the labour you need. The powers that be just wrote the low level skills people off and figured they could get McJobs. I think our minimum wage is $7.69. You can't live on that. This group also pays too much in taxes.

My income is thirty dollars a week more than a weekly income based on $7.69 per hour. My granddaughter makes slightly more than that. You're right. It's hard to live on this kind of income, and the taxes are far too much on it, here in this country, anyway.

Mal

I just don't get it, Mal. We keep the wages low at the low end and then pretend we are helping them with programs. I think it would make more sense to let them keep their tax dollars. Then again all of the politicians couldn't buy their votes with program promises.

America's workforce of the future will include more people of color, older americans, women, and people with disabilities. The availability of larger pools of workers creates the opportunity to maintain economic growth by tapping new human capital resources.

Wage gaps between the sexes and across racial groups, for example, have narrowed. As more women enter the labor market and spend longer hours there, the pay gap betwen men and women has lessened -- shrinking by more than one-third in the past twenty years. African-Americans have also made progress, although over a longer time period. In 1940, the average African-American man earned only 40 cents for every $1 earned by a white man. Today. it's 76cents.

Is America progressing or is this only an illusion?

Robby

We cannot speak about the workforce without speaking about the nation's population. We ask above "What is America?" Are we still looking at ourselves as a nation of Anglo-Americans? This country, as we all know, began on the East coast and moved toward the West. What is now known as New York City became known as the "Gateway City." What is happening in that city where the Statue of Liberty raises her torch?

In just the last ten years a human tidal wave has added one million immigrants to New York City to the point of making foreign-born residents 40 percent of the city's population. Even Senator Daniel Patrick Monynihan, co-author of "Beyond the Melting Pot," a 1963 treatise on race and ethnicity in the city, reacted with: "Boy, that is some number -- wow, wow!"

Just think of that, folks. If you walk down a New York City street now, pause to think that 4 out of every 10 people that pass you were born in another nation. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, that level of immigration has not been equaled for nearly a century. As recently as 1990, the figure for foreign-born residents was only 28 percent.

The tendency to flow westward and southward still continues in this nation. Again the question -- "What is America?" Your thoughts, please?

Robby

What is everyone's reaction to deTocqueville's remark above about population beginning: "The time will come ...?"

Robby

Well, I guess we expected perfection from such an astute person, didn't we? After all, he did say this 170 years ago.

Robby

Ouch, Robby. Well, he was right about a vastly increased population, for sure. The kind of homogeneity he mentioned just has not seemed to happen here.

Mal

It hasn't happened on this side of the ditch and we only have 30 million folks here.

Idris: What is your reaction to deTocqueville's comment beginning "The English in Canada ...?"

Robby

We certainly are no longer dependant on a King or Queen as they are simply a figure head. WW11 made us feel like our own country. We made the mistake of patriating the Constitution in 1982. It was a mistake because Quebec would no sign onto the new one but together by Prime Minister Trudeau. There have been serious separatists, ever since. I doubt we will ever be able to change the Constitution again. That is too bad because the West wants its proper proportion in the Senate. The place would fall apart to open the Constitution again. One often wonders if the West won't leave instead of Quebec.

We of course can't move North. It is just too inhospitable but boy, Vancouver and Toronto are getting too big. We have this huge land mass and can only use a little. Then again we have some of the most beautiful wildplaces you have ever seen with no people at all.

Idris: Perhaps most Canadians don't want to move North but what about that vast space between the two coasts?

Robby

British Columbia is truly a place that makes you think of God. It brings tears to your eyes to stand on the top of a mountain and look down. Vancouver Island is where the fae live for sure. Vancouver has trees, trees and more trees. In the north it has cold.

Alberta has mountains, prairie, freezing cold, trees and oil.

The whole Province of Saskatchewan only has a million people. Mainly it has cold winters and grain.

Manitoba is a prairie province like Saskatchewan and mosquitoes as big as buzzards. It has -40 almost all winter and grain in the summer. It has a couple of million people.

Ontario has a lot of things and over 10 million people.

Quebec is lovely and freezing cold in the winter too. They have a little less than 1/4 of the population of Canada.

The whole of the East Coast is gorgeous and being rather isolated people with wonderful accents. It is rough in terms of winters.

We have 1 million First Nations Peoples. The two Northern Territories have their own tribal governments. These folks are Inuit. One of the territories has 20 thousand folks living there. It is huge too.

Let's face it you can die in Canada in the winter just about anywhere. This is a rugged country. We look after each other or perish.

Idris: That was a great description of each province! I had never understood each area that detailed before.

Robby

Swoon, swoon. I'm in sweltering Texas, missing Oregon, and have loved my trips to Vancouver, British Columbia. Reading your post, Idris, felt like a blast of cool air.

Yes, and it is the warmest of our Provinces in the Winter. Vancouver Island is for the most part, a rainforest. They get in a real bad mood when it snows at most twice a year. It is NEWS.

Idris: Are there any significant population changes in any of those provinces, either in terms of numbers or in terms of type of people - either from various parts of the U.S. or from other nations?

Robby

While the rural population has declined, creating pockets of hardship, the shift in the economy from agriculture to manufacturing and the service industries has promoted the regrowth of Missouri. However,I live in a suburb of Kansas City, Missouri's largest city in population; it had 435,000 people in 1990 and today has 441, 574. What with all the new houses going up around here, you'd think it would have increased more than that. Roads, businesses and new homes are going up everywhere around here.

The fastest growning provinces are the southern part of Ontario. Primarily the Toronto area. There are folks from everywhere there.

Vancouver in British Columbia is growing quickly too. The original folks were English. The fastest growing groups are from China, India and Pakistan, Robby.

Quebec has language laws so most of their new inhabitants are from Haiti.

I am in Niagara where the winters are relatively mild. Most of our new population are from Toronto because of the milder winters and cheaper housing. We are now about 130,000. It was at 120,000 for some twenty years. In the winter our population grows due to the students at the local university. They are from everywhere on the globe.

The prairie provinces are loosing population as it is mostly farming.

Peppy:

Thank you for joining in our discussion. That's interesting that you have so many new houses and yet the population has only a slight increase. And what do you mean by the "regrowth" of Missouri? Was it "dying" due to the drop of agriculture?

Robby

Idris: This is fascinating. People from China, India, and Pakistan are changing the population ratio in Vancouver. As you say, the original folks were English -- the Anglo-Americans (Anglo-Canadians?) that deTocqueville talks about.

And language laws? What kind of language laws? What does the law say?

Robby

Robby -- Thanks for inviting us Texans over to join in this discussion. Texas definitely has a changing population, at least in some parts. For example, Austin (which is on the edge of The Hill Country) is often called "Silicon Hills," and it is becoming more and more like Silicon Valley every day. This is especially true in terms of the high-tech nature of the town, the techies who are moving here, and the high cost of housing. Those changes, at least in Austin, then impact Austin in other ways. For example, teachers and many state government people can't afford to live in Austin. So like Silicon Valley and the San Francisco area, they live further and further out from Austin and commute longer and longer to get into town and their jobs, which adds to traffic congestion, air pollution, etc. And that's just one aspect.

Of course, we Texans never were (or almost never were) what people elsewhere in the country imagine us to be -- either cowboys or rich oilmen!

Robby, i would be more comfortable if someone from Quebec told you about the language laws in Quebec. Suffice it to say the politicians feel that french must come first. Everything must have french dominant. If you have a sign it must have french twice as big as any other language on the sign. If you yourself were not schooled in english, in an english school in Quebec, your children must attend french schools. It just goes on and on.

Quebec is unilingual french. They are governed provincially under the Napoleonic code. Most Quebecers who come from Montreal and Quebec City speak english as well as french.

Where is Eloise? Her views of Quebec would be most interesting here.

California population is changing rapidly. Non Hispanic white population is now less than 50% of our population. Many do not have English as their first language, some not even as their second language. This makes the practice of Democracy very different, and the educational system is just beginning to change. Look for a very different California in 10 years, than you see now.

I think you are right, Mal. I have never lived in Quebec and feel totally incapable of handling this subject. Quebecers are really a special and lovely people.

One more thing. Pierre Elliot Trudeau was our Prime Mister for over 12 years. They have just announced on the radio that he is at home surrounded by family, dying at this very moment. He is 81. I feel so very badly.

Oh, no, Idris! That is very sad news. I always admired Trudeau.

As my daugter would say...he lived large. Boy, did he live large!

He has Parkinsons they have reported today. That's the first time i heard that. Very, very sad.

Songbird: Thank you for joining us. I wasn't aware of the Silicon Valley "types" now increasing the size of Austin. Can you tell us if these are "Anglo-Americans" or whether they are first or second generations from other nations? What is the percentage of Hispanics in Texas now?

Texas is so large I imagine your answer would depend upon the section of Texas you are speaking about.

Robby

Good to have you with us, Old Chemist!! An amazing comment that the majority of the population in California is no longer white and that some of them not only do not have English as their first language -- they do not even have English as their second language!! As you say, this "makes the practice of Democracy very difficult."

What are the languages of some these folks who have English as their third language?

Robby

Hi, Peppy! I have a granddaughter who is an announcer for KCUR in Kansas City, Missouri. She lives there as well, with her husband, who works for Cerner, and 1 and 1/3 great grands of mine!

28% Mexican-American and raising daily - Blacks slipping from 11% to 9% - 1 in every 40 people are millionaires according to some statistics taken last January. Highest number of books per person sold in Austin than any other city. 42% own a home computer. And the city is 52% female. There are more first time Moms in their 40s with more Doctors in Austin specializing in the older first time Mom than any other US city.

The average home price is $142,000. The close-in area of Austin, homes are $212 a sqare foot, the mid- area of closeness to the Capitol and UT the homes are about $140 a square foot and the area that takes about 45 minutes to get into town the homes are $109 a square foot. For homes less in price you need to be in the surrounding communities of Cedar Park, Leander, Pflugerville or parts of Round Rock.

A series of five lakes run right through the middle of this area and the oldest collage west of the Mississippi is located north of Austin but in what we consider the Austin area in a town called Georgetown. We have many centers of Higher Education; the home campus of the University of Texas, Concordia Lutherian, St. Edwards, Houstin Tilitson, Southwestern, Southwest Texas, the local Community collage and the Episcopal Semenary in the Austin area called Central Texas.

Sixth Street has more live music than Nashville, a large movie industry and most of the big High tech companies are here starting with Tracor and IBM locating her back in the 1960s. We still have an annual Rodeo very well attended in the Spring and acres of hill country preserving some endangered speices of birds, salamanders, beetles. The largest population of mexican bats roost under the Congress Ave. Bridge in summer and the Bald Eagles winter on one of the lakes in winter.

The home of Lady Bird, Liz Carpenter and the current hero Lance Armstrong.

I don't know the current ratio of Hispanics to Anglos, and you're right, Robby, it definitely does depend on where you live. (EDIT: Oh, thanks, Barbara. Those are great statistics. By the way, when I said "it depends on where you live," I meant that both in what part of Austin you live in and what part of Texas you live in.)

I'm not sure I've read a breakdown on the ethnicity of "Silicon" types moving into Austin. They're generally highly educated, very wired, and mostly making big bucks. My guess is that they're predominantly Caucasian, with some being Asian. There surely are some African-Americans and Hispanics, but my guess is that the percentage would be fairly small. (This is not purely stereotypical -- I'm basing it on articles in the newspaper about the newcomers, observations, etc.)

You know Austin is the home of the original University of Texas campus, and one of the things that I have done as a volunteer is work with a Christian organization that works with international students on the campus, helping them with English and just being friends, etc. UT has a huge international population (I think it's about 10% -- they are from all over the world, but based on the ones who come to our programs, a large percentage are Asian. Most of these have come to Austin for their education and plan to go back home. Their families are still there. Sometimes women come here and leave a husband -- and even children -- at home while they get their educations. I know several women in this situation.)

There is also a fairly large Asian population outside of the campus, but I don't know what the percentage is. These would be first and second generation, primarily.

One more edit, after Barbara's fine post. She was talking about the average price of buying a home. The average price for renting a one-bedroom apartment is $800/month, they say. I have seen that figure quoted dozens of times. Obviously there are some cheaper places (although they're usually not taken care of and in terrible neighborhoods, or else they're efficiencies), but there are ones waaaaay more expensive. Really nice apartments start way over $1,000 a month, and you can get to $2,000 a month pretty quick. You can see that rents like this make it difficult for middle-incomers and downright impossible for minimum-wagers.

Songbird lots of Asian and Indian. In the last 3 years 70% of my business has bee with Asians. Mostly Chinese from Indonesian, Hong Cong, Tiwan and China.

Barbara and I have been posting at the same time. I'm sure her numbers are much better than mine -- I'm mostly guessing.

I know it sounds like I am trying to be a smarty pants -- it is just that as a Real Estate Broker you have to know those numbers. Those considering making the move want all those states and we can gage where our business will be and how we must market based on the kind of market we are working in.

In this Discussion Group we are examining America. To do so we need to examine the states which make up America and there is no way we could do so without examining the great state of Texas. It is obviously great in sense of size but reading the terrific posts of both Barbara and Songbird (thanks to both of you!) demonstrates that it is also great in many other ways.

We will undoubtedly have many comments and questions referring to their detailed statistics given but at this moment I would appreciate a reaction from both of you (and others) to deTocqueville's remark quoted above beginning: "The province of Texas . . ."

Robby

Robby I am here at your request to tell how the Virginia I love has changed.

We moved here in 1972 when my husband was assigned to Langley AFB. At that time we were in the country. It wasn't easy to find us. The enclave of homes was small(60) and since we were isolated to some extent we bonded as neighbors. Most of us belonged to the pool association and worked for the betterment of our neighborhood. In summers all of the children gathered at the pool. We had a swim team, adult socials and family gatherings. I was in charge of the 4th of July picnic one year and instituted a parade. A neighbor with a motorcycly led it and the children participated. Parents dressed their children in Patriotic costumes...One small child was pulled in a decorated wagon and was dressed as the Statue of Liberty..we had Geo Washingtons..Marthas as well and all who rode bycycles had bedecked them with ribbons etc. We had Easter Egg hunts for the children,,a group at Xmas went from door to door singing Xmas Carols, we had Halloween parties and other social events. At Xmas some one in the group would host an open house to which all were invited,children and house guests as well.

In winter we held monthly socials in homes and had a weekly bridge group. I had to hire someone to go shopping since the closest stores were in town which was about 25 min away.I couldnt return before school was over hence the housekeeper. The school bus stopped at the front of each house to pick up the children and the same when school was over.

It was hard to find us since only a small two lane road led to the area. No street lights at night. We passed a huge dairy farm ( family owned for generations) with assorted livestock. Some people who lived on the road leading to our area had small gardens, chickens and goats. Whenever our windows were open the crowing of roosters greeted us each dawn.

Today...we are in the middle of one of the busiest areas of Hampton Roads. We have the unhappy distinction of living within five minutes of the worst intersection in VIrginia for accidents. The woods that surrounded us have been decimated and newer housing areas have sprung up..as well as strip malls and Patrick Henry Mall a typical large mall. The dairy farm was sold first to other developers and the remainder was delveloped by the original family. We have Lowes and Home depot located almost next to each other, Best Buy, Costco, Sam's Club .Wal-mart , super K every kind of business A huge Barnes and Noble..and new businesses starting daily it seems to me.

Gas stations, 7/11's are every where ..restaurants too...good ones and fast food places. Within 10 minutes are located two hospitals, the airport which at last is truly thriving with the accompanying sound of flights. Our trash is picked up by the city for ever increasing cost.

Large homes are the norm ...the ones in this area when we bought were about 2000 =2400 sq foot..Most who stayed added to our homes. A four lane highway was added on one side and the traffic is horrendous. In 72 this was a family area now we are mostly seniors. When the first black family moved in ( a doctor and his family) some sold their homes and moved out. Today we have about 15% black families. Some belong to the association and the rest I never see. We have at least one home owned by two men who are gay. We have had several Asian families move in but after about two years move out. My next door neighbors just moved here from CT ...they are seniors..she is Vietnamese. .In fact this area has many Northeners. People who dont like Florida but desire milder winters.

This summer we had a reunion of neighbors It was surprising how many returned ..and from far distances. 130+ it was interesting to see my old Brownie and Junior Scout troop grown, married and with children.

I dont know the stats but I do know we have many small businesses owned by hard working Asians.Restaurants, stores selling asian products, doctors and dentists. My hairdresser is Korean. The homes have more than tripled in value since 72. When my husband died everyone assumed I would sell this home ( we added a lot of extra rooms ie sunroom, sitting room, screened in porch ,deck , greenhouse) but if I sold for top dollar the best I could find in this area in new homes would be either cluster homes, town houses, condos etc. WHERE would I put a lifetime accumulation of STUFF? I couldnt swear but I have had friends who have built in some nearby housing developements and single family homes are going for 200,000 up to 500,000...those areas offer many amenities ..golf course, club house, restaurant , maintained walk ways and bycycle paths..planted grounds with fountains etc.They are not gated communities but they are restricted ie to parking motorcycles, vans etc ...lots of covenents.

I know we have a large black population and a large group of professional blacks who live about three miles from my home in a beautiful subdivision. The businesses near by are frequented by people of all nationalities. The churches are becoming intergrated. The small church I attend is the most diversified I have seen. We have blacks, biracial families, asian and a gay couple. You name it and I think we have it...we serve the community through many service activities. Study buddies an afterschool group from the nearby elementary school. Through the generosity of members we have a computer center where we teach the children how to use them. BY the way this is a small church..mostly middle income..lots of elderly as well as young A wonderful mix.

In the newspaper the other day there is a plan to build a minor league baseball stadium within minutes of where I live. The local University (which I attend as a member of the LIfe LONg Learning Society) has built three dorms and in the process of finishing a athletic center and football field. A 5000 seat art and entertainment center is on the book and parking garage. I believe construction on that starts this year. Medical centers and the Jefferson Lab for proton accelerator is one of the many places all within ten minutes of my former home in the country.

Everywhere I go it would seem the America of my childhood has changed .....I dont find that bad ...it makes life far more interesting...anna who calls Virginia her hearts Eden

Anna: Thank you so much for that very detailed description of the Virginia you knew and the one that exists now. I don't know the reactions of others who are reading that but mine, at least at the start, moved from being happy to being sad as the changes occurred. Yet you end your comments by saying: "The America of my childhood has changed" but "I don't find that bad." You are apparently still active in the America you see around you now.

My question to you (and to others participating here): "Do you believe that your description is a description of America in general today?" For those of you who travel a bit, is this what you see everywhere?

Robby

The earlier generations of immigrants who passed through Ellis Island were largely from Europe. The fastest-growing groups these days are from South Asia, the Dominican Republic, Mexico and the nations born of the breakup of the Soviet Union. In just the borough of Queens alone in New York City there are 167 nationalities and 116 languages coexisting.

Such changes cause many challenges in our nation. The inability to speak English keeps immigrants in very low-paying jobs. Long lines of people are turned away from the too-few English classes sponsored by nonprofit organizations and community colleges. A shortage of affordably priced housing has led to overcrowding in poor areas. It is not uncommon in some neighborhoods for four or more people to live in a single room. Schools are also inadequate in these neighborhoods.

What is happening to our America? In the long run is it possibly a good thing? Just what created the growth of our democracy in the first place? How can we best handle the growth which is taking place now?

Robby

"The province of Texas will soon contain no Mexicans. The same thing has occurred wherever the Anglo-Americans have come in contact with a people of a different origin." (P139, Future Prospects of the United States.)

Well, he obviously was wrong. Of course, there is a lot of assimilation. And one could argue that once a person leaves Mexico and comes to the US, he or she is no longer a Mexican citizen but is an American. But I know here in Texas and I'm sure it's true elsewhere, and not just with Mexicans, that people coming to this country do not leave everything behind. They bring with them their customs, their religions, their foods, their language. And some never do assimilate. That is, there are people of all nationalities in the US who never learn English, or who learn only enough to get by and who continue to speak their native tongue as their primary language.

de Tocqueville was writing about a different time and a different people. I think in many ways America is much more the "melting pot" than it was -- at least in tolerance for people from different nationalities or for people who are different.

On the other hand, there is no question that the American culture permeates. One has only to go to foreign lands and see McDonald's or Coca-Cola or any of dozens of other American "institutions" to recognize that fact of life. So to that extent, "they" do become "us."

Here in Cary, NC, it has changed in much the same way as Austin and Virginia and Kansas City and many places in all of America, I think. We are a part of the Research Triangle and it is sometimes called "Silicon East". When we moved here in 1984 the population was approx. 35,000 and has just passed the 100,000 mark. Average new home price is around $212,000.00+ and houses were being thrown up rapidly until a new governing Town Board instituted what they call "slow growth" and passed more rigid requirements for developers. Mal can tell you more about Chaple Hill where she lives (another city in the Research Triangle) and where the average new home price is even higher!

I think in one small way the changing of our cities and neighborhoods proves DeT. right----America has become homogenized in many ways. Most large towns have large malls, all with the same stores. It is difficult to remember just where you are in the country when you are inside a mall. But in the specific things that he thought we would achieve "sameness"---opinions, habits, language, etc.---he would be amazed, I think, at how wrong he was.

Phyll

Phyll:

Thank you so much for adding the North Carolina segment to the picture of America. Interesting that you see deTocqueville correct in viewing America as becoming "homogenized." I relate to your comment about being inside a mall and temporarily forgetting about which part of the country you are in. And yet - yet - as you say, we do not have the same opinions, habits, and language.

Is America a melting pot? Is America a salad? What do the rest of you see as we float gently down the mainstream of our society and look at the various faces America presents to us?

Robby

Phyll, I truly had no idea that Cary had that many people.

What a change since I moved to Durham from near Buffalo, New York in 1958 to 1959. There was no Research Triangle Park, the reason why the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill area is called the Research Triangle. The main industry in Durham was tobacco, and you could tell because the smell of roasting tobacco was prevalent for miles around.

My husband, two little sons and I rented a small house near Duke University where he was doing post-doctoral work for the corporation that employed him. This whole area was very much Southern in its culture and ways. Though "damyankees" in the eyes of our neighbors, we were accepted because my husband was at Duke. The cleaning woman and yard man one of my Southern neighbors politely insisted I have worked for $5.00 a day. They were African Americans. Today I see African American bank presidents here.

When I returned thirty years after that first stay on a trip south with one of my sons, I was amazed at what happened. Chapel Hill was no longer the sleepy little university town it had been, though the area around the campus had not changed at all. Raleigh and Durham had become large, cosmopolitan cities because of the influx of people from all over the world, thanks to the Research Triangle Park where large corporations have facilities, as well as other things. Is it the National Humanities group one that is there, Phyll?

Ten years after that trip south, I moved to Chapel Hill to live. I've been here a little over ten years. The area of Chapel Hill proper is small, but portions of the county where I now live have a Chapel Hill address. There's been an enormous increase in population, people moving South from the North, and people who came here to work. I believe the population of Chapel Hill has increased from 33,000 to 55,000 in those ten years, and there's not much room for anyone else. Orange County has had an enormous increase in population, large homes on small lots, apartment complexes. It's hard to believe.

The area is no longer what I'd call Southern. It is cosmopolitan with people here from all over the world. Chapel Hill has the largest number of Ph.D.'s in residence than any other place in the country and numerous languages spoken. There's enormous competition for jobs because of all these highly educated people. I know a woman who has a master's degree. She cleans houses because it pays more than the teaching jobs she could find.

I really don't know the average cost of a new home, but it's very, very high, as are rents. This house my daughter and other relatives and I are in is a little over 2500 square feet. $300,000.00.

If Chapel Hill is any indication, America is a salad, held together by a common government, national culture and primary language.

Mal

Taking a risk of being mis-understood I would like to say this...I think we should slow up on immigration a bit until social services, infrastructure etc. have time to catch up.... Not enough housing, schools, English classes, health care, senior services, all tell me something..... I am NOT against immigration......

I grew up in a town about 60 miles north of Austin. In the 50s and 60s, Austin was primarily a view of green rolling hills, only a few tall buildings showing above the trees, a spread out medium sized city that looked different than other flat, less green Texas cities. Many who lived within driving distance of the city would drive in to go swimming at Barton Springs, a natural swimming "hole" fed with chilly springs---welcome on Texas summer days. The University of Texas at the very center of Austin, long one of the largest employers (maybe still is, with state employees and different computer companies all edging up) was such a grand place to visit as a young girl. The ultimate was to attend a UT football game in the towering stadium and hear the Texas Longhorn band come into the stadium.

My fate was sealed, though, when (as an early teen) I visited my mother's cousin's sorority house on campus. The cousin was a freshman and lived in a closet-sized room in the house. Two twin beds pushed head to head along one wall were the only 2 pieces of furniture. Everything else was on shelves nailed to the wall above the beds. The door hit a bed as you opened it. You had to inch in sideways and close the door to get into the room. I was so impressed with this "college" scene that I thought about it for months. That room and that cousin were my only models for what "going to college" meant and I wanted it.

Funny the way things in life turn out, I ended up attending another college in Texas (University of North TX in Denton) and didn't attend University of Texas until the mid 80s. My feelings about the Austin campus had not changed and even though the school had continued to grow, what I had first fallen in love with was still there---winding streets, old trees everywhere, old architecture, a thousand little shops, cafes, book shops, street vendors, street musicians, everyone carrying books, everyone in jeans. In the mid 80s, I gave away every suit, silk blouse, lapel pin, leather bag I owned. I bought jeans, cheap silver earrings and joined the complaining poor. Heaven.

When I left Austin in the early 90s, it had already lured the research and development chip people with tax breaks, connections to the university, hill country vistas. When I lived in the San Francisco area for 2 years, the Chronicle there wrote articles about how Austin was luring away their best companies with open-arm business friendliness and complained about California red tape, how difficult it was to start a business there. They may have relaxed their start-up procedures since, I don't know.

Living in Portland, Oregon (and vicinity) from '94 through last December, I was there to witness Portland's being tagged "Silicon Forest," the center of which is the main site for Intel's research and development. Portland has long lived within a very detailed and strict growth plan, successfully restricting urban sprawl, letting the light rail system stay up with anti-traffic goals. In THEIR newspaper, articles appeared about Austin's late 90s out-of-control growth from being so attractive to computer companies. Austin was suggested as a cautionary example of what could happen to Portland if they were tempted to loosen its restricted growth plan.

Two months ago, my brother and sister-in-law spent a week in Austin---they hadn't been there since the mid 80s. They came back to Houston mourning the missing "old Austin." Development was their main complaint. Deep canyons now are filled with houses instead of green views, they said. It takes too long to get anywhere, they said. Too much traffic everywhere. "They've ruined it." It reminded me of the same thing said about Austin when I first moved there in 1981---people then complained that the old Austin was gone. It also reminded me of the constant complaints in the San Francisco area, people wishing for the old San Francisco, wishing away the traffic.

There's an old joke heard in the northwest about the rain. Oh, yeah, say the Portlanders and Seattlites, the rain here is awful. You don't want to live here. Any article in a Portland newspaper about its urban growth policies always mentioned that myths about rainy summers (it's dry all summer) are still an important part of keeping growth in check.

I don't know where all of this was going. I just had thoughts on Austin from living there and from living elsewhere.

P.S. I'm thinking of moving back there. Houston is the pits, all six million. Austin might look tiny.

Well, the traffic in Austin is awful. Here's an interesting side note, although it fits (maybe) into the discussion about democracy. After all, democracy has to do with "the people" -- the question is, WHICH people?

There is so much construction work going on in downtown Austin that entire sections of streets are closed down (not just lanes of traffic but the entire street for several blocks), making it easier for the contractors but harder for the poor shmucks who have to drive in to work. (And find a parking space? Good luck!)

But the corollary story to that was in today's paper. The state is building a major overpass system at IH-35 and U.S. 290. They've been shutting down sections of the road for several weekends now, forcing motorists to use alternate routes or at least stay on the IH-35 frontage roads. This would be from late Friday night until early (like 3 or 4 in the morning) Monday.

Well, the University of Texas' first football game is Saturday. THURSDAY, UT asked TXDOT to change the schedule so all the poor football fans wouldn't be inconvenienced. It was announced today that the state won't shut down the highway until AFTER the football game Saturday but then will keep it shut down until Monday afternoon. Yes, commuters, this means that all half million of you cannot commute into Austin during rush-hour traffic Monday morning to accommodate about 85,000 football fans. Is THAT democracy in action? Isn't this a great country or what?

only in football Texas

Though it is a relief in my mind to see the lessening in prejudice against blacks that has occurred since I first lived in this part of North Carolina, it saddens me a little to see that the true Southern feeling of this area seems to have gone, at least in this area.

It's possible to travel to places where the South maintains true Southern culture, but I foresee a future disappearance of that which was special to the Southeast and made America part of what it is.

The same is true of my beloved Northern New England where I grew up. The last time I was there, I could see that the essence of "my" New England was leaving, too, except in rural small towns. It saddened me very much.

Homogenity is not always good. If the so-called American influence is permeating the world, then what do we have left? Not a salad any more, but a pudding where not all of the flavors will mix, more like an indigestible stew.

In a way, this makes me understand why immigrants who come to the U.S. hold onto some aspects of the culture of their origin. Those cultures are important. There's no question in my mind about that, as I relate old tales of the New England my ancesters and I knew to my grandchildren.

Mal

I feel exactly the same, Mal, about places losing their individuality. I'm spoiled rotten in this respect, having lived in an Oregon coastal village of only 1200 people for 5 years. Unlike other small towns north and south of Cannon Beach, this little town absolutely refused to admit any recognizable named business. No McDonalds, no Safeway, no K-Mart, not one business that could be found in a thousand other towns. We shopped for groceries at 2 locally owned stores, could get hamburgers or resort-level cuisine at locally owned restaurants, but not at a Hilton. City council meetings were as good as attending a good movie or play---every permit request was sized up a hundred ways and usually turned down. A service station permit was turned down because more than one gas station in the town (on the ocean drive) might have spoiled the ambience.

Since you're a good deal younger than I am, Betty, I can't say the opinion I have about imposed homogeneity is just old age conservatism and memories speaking. One of the distinctive parts of this country was the fact that each section did have its individuality, customs, dialects and accents brought about because of that area's history. When that's gone, what is left? Sour Grapes Blanc Mange?

I don't really know why I feel this way, but I think areas of this country should fix the prejudicial things that are wrong and keep their individual cultures strong. If that means a fight against corporate homogeneity influences and intrusions, then so be it. Let's fight.

Mal

I think the big box stores are really stupid when you think of the ageing of our two countries. Do you really think a lot of folks over 50 are going to want to go to a huge store as big as a football field and walk about for hours. I don't think so. Even my son and his wife at 30 think it is a waste of time.

We will have lost our downtowns and then there will not be the small places to shop at comfortably. Developers are some nuts i think.

There have been some wonderful posts in here suggesting the sameness of malls and large stores all over the country as well as remarks about the South losing some of its southerness. This has been going on for some time, it seems to me.

People moving to the sunbelt had something to do with it as did prosperity and the standardization of the accent. The first thing I noticed slipping was the deep North Carolina drawl that my mother's sisters had all their long lives. I used to love to listen to them, to be in what for me, as a small child, was another country.

I blame TV and the nightly news for some of this. Announcers all over the country began to sound like they came from broadcasters' school and slowly the local accents began to fade. Same thing happened in Maine. When I was in college, you could hear all manner of Maine accents, including coastal. There is some of this left, but it is diminishing.

My students come from all over the country. Those who are from the South or Texas get teased about their accents, what little they have. They lose them rapidly. They tell me when they go home, they resume speaking the way they used to.

Maryal

For the immigrants who came through New York harbor in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Statue of Liberty dazzled their senses, but Ellis Island determined their fate. Opened on Jan. 1, 1892 (the year my father was born in New York City), Ellis Island's vast inspection center served as the entry point for more than 10 million men, women and children, mostly European Catholics and Jews. The conditions in 19th Century Europe -- industrialization, political upheaval, religious persecution -- led millions to flee the continent. In the busiest years, betwen 1898 and 1915, the overburdened staff processed 5,000 people a day.

In the 1890s, Americans grew uneasy about the enormous flow of immigrants from places like Greece, Italy, Russia, Poland and Hungary. They believed that these immigrants would "pollute" the nation with a stream of alien blood and Ellis Island was a logical response. Congress, worried by a flood of immigrants from central and southern Europe, gave the federal government complete jurisdiction.

Why did these people choose America? What did they hope to find? Why did some immigrant groups see the United States as their final destination while others traveled back and forth between the continents, often dozens of times? Why did millions of immigrants bypass our shores entirely to settle in countries like Australia, Canada, Argentina and Brazil?

Any thoughts on this?

Robby

Rural population shrunk because small farms no longer could provide a living, with produce being shipped in from commercial growers. The advent of Technology lured high school graduates to make a living in the city. More students are going on to college than their parents did, so they move to the city. Today most people move to the city when they get older, because life is easier, and especially after a woman becomes a widow, she doesn't want to live alone in the country. There are still some farms, but they rarely provide 100% of the living. The small farmer commutes to his job in the city.

Peppy:

What is the make-up of the people in Missouri these days? Are they people who grew up in Missouri or are they people from other states? Or are Missouri folks moving to other states? Those people who moved from the rural areas to the cities -- what kind of work are they doing?

I appreciate your helping us to see what is happening in the heartland of our nation.

Robby

All the things Peppy mentioned are true. But there are other factors, sometimes the "unintended consequences" kind and others just unexpected or not thought of. For example, one thing I'm thinking of is refrigeration, and particularly refrigerated trucks and railcars. That was a MAJOR factor in all this. Before refrigerated trucks, you got vegetables, meats, dairy products, etc., from nearby sources. Once vehicles could be refrigerated, those items could go anywhere. Just one tiny piece of the puzzle, but it was one of several pieces that made a difference in the way we grow, transport, distribute, sell, and ultimately buy food. And when one part of the whole puzzle changes, it affects all the other parts.

You could very well be spot on with that one Texas Songbird. It gets very cold here by the end of October. You have two choices. Buy what is available locally, being root crops or go to the supermarket and purchase things that really don't taste very good anymore. I try to stay with the root veggies and cook them as comfort foods. You can't have fresh summer things in the winter.

When I say something it just comes from my heart I dont always think about WHY I feel a certain way..so your question about the end of my Virginia expierence post made me stop and evaluate why I felt that way.

When the bucolic nature of where we lived started changing and new housing developements and apartment building began to proliferate we asked where are the people coming from to live in them? I am reminded of the movie "Field of Dreams" where Kevin Costner hears "If you build it they will come" and he builds his baseball field and the diamond heros did come...well the people to rent and buy did come..there was the promise of jobs, opportunities for small businesses to serve the newcomers..empty buildings were torn down and new businesses filled the space. Instead of a rural area I now live in a cosmopolitan area..with all that means. Shopping, restaurants,medical centers,industrial parks etc.and a diversified population.

I miss the quiet of the old way, I miss the camaraderie with the old neighbors ( we do have a computer link up with everyone who lived here and who now have a computer)but what can I say to the newcomers?

Would I tell them I wish they had never come? Can I deny them their opportunity for employment, for owning a business, for good medical facilities, for recreational areas, for opportunities for thier children ?

I regret that the "old way" is disappearing but one day the changes will be the "old way" and others will miss what they knew and long for the OLD WAY.

If I have learned one thing in my life I have learned you cant go back...your only choice is to go forward. As my ancestors came and found their place the new people,the immigrants from wherever (here in a port city we see many Vietnamnese,Koreans,Japanese ( we do have a very large Canon factory near) will find their place ..and as they marry with the americans that are here we will become more blended...and hopefully that will be a good thing.

I know my mother was concerned when my youngest brother married a Japanese lady. Who would her mixed grandchildren marry? How would they fit in? I am glad she lived long enough to see they fit in well and had no problem in marrying.

When I first moved here I was an outsider. I was warned by others who had come here that I would NEVER be accepted since I was an outsider.I wasnt a Virginian born and bred. Now what I see there are so many outsiders we dont need to be accepted ...but we are. I knew I had it made when an ardent southerner and Virginia gentleman at church addressed me as Miss Anna ....

To turn back the clock would be giving up all the benefits progress has made. Not only can I not do that I dont want to ..so I say the changes arent all bad...I have everything I used to have to drive 25 min to get right at my back door so to speak.. the trees here are still standing and providing shade for the summer and a bounty of leaves for the fall. The schools that were segregated when I arrived are a real melting pot...as I said my church is as well...and I personally would love to see the day when you can be proud of your heritage but say with pride that you are first and foremost AN AMERICAN...just thinking here after midnight ..anna who has become a Virginian by choice....

During WW II when I was a child a lot of people came to SE Michigan to work in the auto factories which were making tanks, bombers etc for the military. A lot of these people came up from the southern states, like Tenessee, W Virginia, Kentucky, S. Ohio, Missouri--and people laughed at them and called them hillbillies because their English was atrocious and many of them weren't used to wearing shoes in warm weather and I guess protested vigorously when ordered to wear steel-toed shoes on the job. And from what my mother told me when I got older, they weren't very fond of bathes and clean clothes, either. I'm not a racist--these were mostly white people. I think back in the 70's a lot of people went to settle in Texas and thought things would be better there--this I think was when it was tough to get gas because of OPEC's shenanigans. And in 1967 there was a race riot in Detroit--43 people were killed, and many buldings were burned to the ground--the National Guard was called out, and thre was a curfew from 6 pm to 6 am for a week, The city of Detroit really deteriorated in many ways--a lot of white people moved to the suburbs and many downtown stores that had been in business for years went out of business--the downtown area was almost deserted.

Hello Robby and all the lovely contributors here. All these serious discussions led me to want to tell you about the population in our small county here in N/E Pennsylvania (I'm from Kentucky, BTW). Our area's population has grown such a numerical gain since 1996: Three! That's counting all the people who have bought or built cottages to retire and move here to live. That's counting all the old people who grew old and ill and passed on. That's counting all the new babies. That's counting all the young people who have left to find monetary gain where income is higher. We only gained three people in four years! But what a delightful, friendly place this is to live. I would find it difficult to return to New York, where I once lived, or Kentucky, though most of the family is still there. Anyone who's interested in reading about our area can visit <questpublish.com>, <www.jvbrown.edu> or <www.state.pa.us>. What a marvelous place to live! Someone once said of such rural places, "It's a good place to live because if you don't know what you're doing, your neighbors do."

A BIG THANK YOU TO SO MANY OF YOU WHO ARE GIVING US A TASTE OF THE AREAS WITH WHICH YOU ARE FAMILIAR AND, IN THE PROCESS, HELPING US TO UNDERSTAND OUR AMERICA MORE!!

Old Chemist who reminds us that the non-Hispanic population of California is now less than 50% and that many many of them do not speak English at all.

Barbara in Texas, a real estate dealer, calling our attention to the strong influx of Chinese from various Far East areas moving to her state.

Phyll in North Carolina who comes up with the amazing figure that in her area the population has tripled in just the last 16 years.

Tigerliley from Missouri who suggests that we slow up immigration from other nations until we improve our infrastructure.

Mal from North Carolina who sees a disappearance of the "Southern feeling" and believes we should keep our individual cultures strong, including the culture of immigrants. She describes what we have now as an "indigestible stew."

Idris, our Canadian friend, sees developers as "nuts" and laments that we have "lost our downtowns."

Maryal also sees our Southern accents "slipping" and blames TV.

Betty Gregory grew up in Texas but is in love with that Oregon coastal village where they refuse to allow in "any recognizably named business."

Songbird from Texas says there is something stronger than the construction business and that is Football!

Peppy from Missouri believes that many of the changes in her state are the result of the advent of technology and the young folks going off to college, making it hard for the small farmer. She believes it is hard for the widow "living alone in the country."

Scooterlady reminds us of the migration during World War II from many Southern states to Michigan, thereby making another major change in America.

Annafair in Virginia sees the influence of Japanese, Vietnamese, and Korean in her area, sees it as a positive influence, and reminds us that we "cannot turn back the clock."

And, with all this talk about construction and population influx, Sara Helen of Pennsylvania, originally from New York, lives in a county which has had a population increase of THREE (repeat: 3)! America is, indeed, diverse.

Please continue to share your thoughts, folks. WE are America!!

Robby

I'm going to give you a link from our national newspaper, The Globe and Mail. It is a special pull out section and is eight pages long. However you might find some of this of interest. Again and again we ask ourselves who and what we are. It is such a pain in the neck!

Focus

Great article, Idris. Thanks!

Mal

Thank you, Idris, for that Link to the article in the Globe and Mail. I read it and recommend it to the rest of us "Americans" who want to know more about our democratic neighbor. It talks about a nation that is deeply divided and has distinct communities.

I found of interest the author's comment that "Canadians have more humility than Americans." -- Any thoughts from the rest of you on that? Could there be a connection with the comment (above) by deTocqueville beginnng "No people in the world ..."

Robby

Canada too had a place where new immigrants, mainly Irish, were held before being allowed into Canada. This is a link that will give you the flavour of this gruesome time in our past.

Grosse Isle

I thought I'd give everyone an update -- the people do reign, and I mean the common people. There was such an uproar yesterday after the article in the paper about how the Texas Department of Transportation was going to leave IH-35 shut down during rush hour traffic Monday morning (because of leaving it open longer Saturday to accommodate UT football) that they have rescinded the order! TXDot was flooded with phonecalls (the paper said from the kind of people who never call and complain about things), so they're going to open it BEFORE rush hour traffic Monday. (They're still closing it early, though. This means, of course, they can't do as much as they had planned.)

The percentage of immigrant workers in America's labor force has climbed to its highest level in 70 years. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the number of immigrant workers jumped to 15.7 million last year, up 17 percent from three years earlier. Nearly 5 million of these workers are illegal immigrants.

Immigrants now represent 12 percent of the nation's workers, helping to hold down wages in unskilled jobs and giving many companies the employees needed to expand. Immigrants dominate such jobs as poultry plant workers, meatpackers, gardeners, hotel maids, seamstresses, restaurant workers, building demolition workers and fruit and vegetable pickers.

America is a nation created by immigrants, some of whom arrived in the 17th and 18th century (which was really not that long ago) and some as recently as my grandfather who arrived from Italy a little over a hundred years ago and became first a worker in a peanut factory and later a lamplighter (made famous in the popular song). If he had not come here, I would not be existing today as an American citizen (or in any form for that matter).

Should I be against the flow of immigration? Should I buy that stereotype that Italian and Hispanic peoples are lazy? Because I speak English and do not speak Italian, because I live under the laws set down primarily by British settlers, because I follow customs which are closer to those followed in England than in, for instance, Central America, Africa, or the Orient, am I, in effect, an Anglo-American and therefore threatened by "those foreigners?" Even if I wanted to stop the constant flow, how could I and the rest of us Americans do it? What is your reaction to deTocqueville's remark (above) which begins "No power on earth . . ."

Do any of you find yourself in this "dilemma" in regard to immigration laws?

Robby

Side Item:

On this date in 1830, Alexis deTocqueville arrived in Boston for a three-week stay. He stayed at the Marlboro Hotel on Washington Street before moving to the luxury Tremont Hotel.

Robby

Referring to DeT.`s statement above "The time will come when l50,000,000 people in North America, etc." I can`t envision a body of millions of people having the same ideals, the same religion, etc. as long as there are other foreign countries with people coming to this country, speaking different languages, different ideals, religions. Am I understanding what he meant by that paragraph?

Armella:

Welcome to our forum. Glad you have joined us. Let us ask other participants here their understanding of what deTocqueville meant by that quote above.

Robby

I expect it is not just here in America, but all over the world that persons who have attained our age have to wistfully observe the changes and poignantly see again in their memories what was once there.

My home town in Virginia may have as much as 100 times as many people as lived there when I was a child. (Total population then was 435; said so on our old sign!)

My grandmother's farm was called Sunny Side and was right on the Valley Pike. All sub-divisions today. There was a long circular drive, and 2 square greystone posts on each side of each end. These posts had square concrete tops, that finished, kind of sparkly concrete. I used to climb up on them, sometimes with my friend from across the street (now a retired PhD in anthropology), and sit and watch the rare traffic go by. Mind, this was a major highway! We would play license plates.

Today I go back and drive by and note that there, amongst the brick ramblers, there is one cookie cutter house that has an old square greystone pillar at the highway edge of their front lawn. I know what it is, and suspect they do not. Something in me weeps, not because there have been changes, but because a beloved time and all the much loved faces are quite, quite gone.

And Texas football prevails! I love it-- for those that do not understand this inside joke-- Football is "Church" in Texas!

Your feelings are so understandable. Just thinking of what used to be, my family, the relatives who lived on farms and introduced this city girl to home made quilts, feather comfortors, mattresses made from corn shucks, strings of apples drying in a musty attic, privies, cows and horses,chickens and pigs too....oil lamps with wonderful painted globes that shed the softest light. Truly fresh food in summer and home canned in winter. I would live my life over in a heartbeat (as the young often say)

I have always thought newcomers to our shore were the most industrious. Most came here because times were poor where they lived. Thier hope was to be allowed to work and Live better than they could possibly do in thier home lands...Some came because of persecution and the Irish came because they were starving to death..When you read about the famine in Ireland it is a wonder any were left to imigrate.. And some of the lack of help was due to a fear once you helped them you would always have to help them.

Those who would halt immigration are of the Close the barn door AFTER ME>>. Sort of a case of I've got mine ...but I dont want you to have the same opportunity. When I observe the hard working foriegners in their stores and business how can I say they shouldnt have their chance. I think I am harping on that subject ...I just feel strongly about it..

I believe perhaps hope the America of the future will be a true melting pot. I hope that also means more tolerance. I have a number of on line friends and from the parents and grandparents I feel and hear of thier concerns. Especially when family members marry outside the family background. I am proudest of those who say and mean if this person can make my child or granchild happy than I will be happy too.

One think I see computers and technology offer is the opportunity to be more connected to people. We reach out to those from different lands as well as those who live near.. The world is changing ...and America is too...anna who thinks she will have a grilled cheese sandwich and a coca cola ...

Any responses to Annafair"s comment that "newcomers to our shore are the most industrious?"

Robby

I think anyone that sees opportunity regardless of time in the Americas, is the most industrious.

America has benefited immeasurabley from immigration..It keeps our country strong and vibrant... New ideas, new ways of doing things, new culture....all to our benefit... My concern is with illegal immigration....These folks are aften not treated well and they are to frightned to ask for assistance..Some suffer horribly trying to get here.....Would anyone from Texas please tell us what problems if any you feel you have in Texas as a result of illegal immigration....Maybe this should not be discussed here but only legal immigration.....

Tigerliley:

We are discussing America and at the moment we are discussing anything related to population which is happening -- illegal immigration is one of those items.

Robby

Americans encouraged relatively free and open immigration during the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Certain states passed immigration laws following the civil War but the Supreme Court in 1875 declared that regulation of immigration is a Federal responsibility. The number of immigrants rose in the 1880s and Congress began to issue immigration legislation. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and Alien Contract Labor Laws of 1885 and 1887 prohibited certain laborers from immigrating to the United States. The Immigration Act of 1882 levied a head tax of fifty cents on each immigrant and blocked (or excluded) the entry of idiots, lunatics, convicts, and persons likely to become a public charge.

Congress soon expanded the list of exclusable classes. The Immigration Act of 1891 barred polygamists, persons convicted of crimes of moral turpitude, and those suffering "loathsome" or contagious diseases. Located within the Treasury Department, the Superintendent oversaw a new corps of U.S. Immigrant Inspectors stationed at the United States' principal ports of entry.

As we can see, entry into the U.S. became more and more difficult. What are your reactions to this?

Robby

It's a difficult question, Tigerliley. I am convinced that certain kinds of operations in Austin (and other parts of Texas) would come to a virtual halt if there were no illegal immigrants. The two that come to mind the most are landscaping and construction, but I'm sure there are more. There are laws about hiring, but some how these companies are able to circumvent the law. And the fact is, they couldn't, in many cases, get their jobs done otherwise, because people who are not illegal immigrants are not willing to do the kind of back-breaking, sweltering work I'm talking about. I don't think, in these cases, the illegal immigrants are taking bread out of anybody's mouths.

It IS tragic the kinds of risks these people take to get here and to stay here, and they ARE used, misused, and abused -- by their own people, by employers, by the legal system. I don't know what the answer is.

You ask what kind of problems there are. They seem to be victims of a lot of crime, more so than perpertrators. They live in crowded, substandard housing. I don't know if they try to send their children to school or if they are too afraid to. I know there are a lot of Hispanic children in the Austin schools, but of course have no way of knowing who is legal and who is not. But I spoke to a literacy counselor the other day, and she said they have many students who were in the mountains of Mexico a year or so ago and who are in her school now, speaking very little English and performing at an abysmal rate. (My company tutors second graders at her school, and most kids are at a 27-29 reading level, whatever that means. These children she's talking about are at the 6-7 level.)

I'm probably naive, and I'm certainly ill-informed on this subject, but I think the ones who have the most problems are the illegal immigrants, not we who are a part of the mainstream society.

Yes Songbird I agree there is a huge adjustment for those coming from the mountains. I did some hiking in Mexico just a few years ago with a small group of eight. The organizer came from Lubbuck and learned of the area because of flying some Doctors in missionary work. These were communities with no running water, except the nearby creek and no electricity. It was like going back in time, much like the mid-nineteenth century.

I learned that the Mexican always went out of his community at some time during his lifetime and for some, on an annual basis to earn cash since these mountainous communities only need cash infrequently. For generations they went either to Mexico City or north to the agricultural fields of northern Mexico. Gradually they learned, especially after the revolution, that they could earn more money faster in the US. Most Mexicans still have a hard time understanding borders and remember that much of the Southwest was Mexican territory during the 1800s.

What is amazing is to see these woman left behind. They keep the children safe from bandits, plant, grow the corn crop which is the only source of food so that if a crop fails there is no food. They hual the water from the streams, thatch the roof if there is a storm, sweep the dirt floor, keep the fire burning in the corner because if it goes out there are no matches to start another and they have no idea if the man is alive or where he is since there is no mail service.

The children literely walk those perverbial 10 miles, on bulldozed dirt trails the best the government can provide, to a one room school house with a teacher that must give one year of service to these rural areas in order to graduate from Collage with a teaching degree. The young teacher lives with one or more family that lives closest to the school building. These schools have no supplies! Not even a chalk board. Sums are learned by scratching in the dirt. Families leave messages for one another on the side of the trails by piling rocks and stones in certain patterns.

When the men take off they just simply walk out the front door and live off the land. Many hitch hike now but the closer they get then they need to get off the main roads. I too like the migrant ate the pears of Prickly Pear cactus and learned a few herbs that give nurishment or make a tea.

When I am on a construction site I can now ID the newest wetback. They all have this dazed look in their eyes. I must say I had eye opener just a few years ago. I helped someone sell their home in an area of Austin that was probably 60% Mexican-Amcerican. As usual when the house is first listed I walk the neighborhood with flyers and an invite to a special neighborhood Open House. Here were these small but very well kept and landscaped homes whose owner didn't speak a word of English. I was amazed that they could earn enough money to own a home and keep it so well without any English. I could not imagine myself being in a different country where another language was spoken and doing as well.

A special addition to our community. The other night on our local PBS there was a talk show in preperation for the Bill Moyers show coming up about Death and Dying. The AIDS hospice now annually celebrates the Day of the Dead with the alter and Mexican paper cutouts and bread in the shape of the skelaton etc. etc. It seems those in the hospice now look forward to that day of remembering mostly the clients that still pass away in such numbers that they cannot take time to grieve at the time of their death. Also, this greiving and mocking of death typical of the Mexican Day of the Dead is a time to grieve all the small personal loses that happen during the year. The addition of the Mexican culture has certainly enriched this part of the country.

As I read the comments of Songbird and Barbara about the Mexicans, once again a feeling of gratitude comes over me. We are asking, as in the Heading here, what is an American? An American, as I see it, no matter how down-trodden, is someone who can give thanks for having been given the gift of citizenship. No wonder so many people are knocking on our door, legally or illegally.

We take so much for granted!!

Robby

Thank you ladies for your report on illegal immigrants from Mexico.. I am very touched and upset by the plight of these people.....Living in Mid-Missouri as I do I do not see any of this first hand... As I mentioned earlier, we do have some Hispanic immigrants coming in to work in the poultry plants.....I have no idea what their status is.. What steps are being taken to help this situation...Is their any help? I guess the best hope is for the new Government in Mexico to make Mexico a better place for it's citizens to live.....

According to the 1999 Statistical Abstract, an annual update of the census, Hispanics, at 30.35 million, make up more than 11 percent of the total U.S. population. The nation's Hispanic population increased by more than 35 percent in the past ten years, making them the fastest growing minority group.

Hispanics are a unique group. Undefinable by race or nationality, they are united simply by a language. Language is the dominant force behind Hispanic culture.

64 percent of the Hispanics living in the United States were born here. The Hispanic population is young -- more than half are in their 20s or younger -- which means their influence is likely to last. As many begin to settle, marry and have families, the Spanish languge and Hispanic culture will become more pervasive.

Compare this statistic with deTocqueville's comment (above) starting: "The time will come . . ."

Robby

Robby, You asked about any changes in Minnesota. Well, the capitol is St. Paul which is predominately German heritage. I am German and Polish but usually don't talk about ethnic values. Now in St.Paul and thru out the state, during the past 25 years we have developed a very large Vietnamese and Hmong community. They are a wonderful addition to our mix. They are industrious people who needed some state help when they arrived here but the majority have learned English as a second language and are now independent. They never say ENGLISH but they say Anerican and that is a nice way for them to feel about the speaking they do. Our state was mostly farm land but now the big towns and industries have industrialised much of the most fertile farms. Farmers who didn't want to sell their land were almost forced into it by the encroaching business and land developers who build very expensive homes which causes people to drive a long way to their place of employment.It is sad for them but their children don't want to go thru all the years of hard work that their parents had to do. Several generations had owned these farms and many of the farmers hope their own children may someday go and buy farms in the outlying districts with the money the farmers made from selling their land.

I have been reading the posts in this discussion for several days and find it interesting. I cannot imagine an America that would fit de Tocqueville's vision of one language, culture, opinion and so on. Don't many Americans pride themselves on their individuality?

I thought I might tell you a little about the small city I grew up in. I left in 1956 and returned about 30 years ago. Robby is familiar with Geneva as he once lived here.

I was born here in 1934. During the war the population grew to about 20,000. Sampson Naval Base and the Seneca Army Depot were two of the reasons. Sampson was a training station. Many young sailors took their basic training there. Some officers and their families lived in the city. We had an officer rooming at our house.

Now we are a city of about 14,000. Lots of us have seen Geneva as a place where many did not welcome change. We have seen the big industries, like Shuron Optical and the American Can leave our city. There seemed to be some influential citizens who wished the city to stay small. They did not welcome new people or encourage new industry. That is changing now. Guardian Glass has recently built a plant here and the city government is actively involved in seeking others to do likewise.

The largest employers here have been the Colleges, the NYS Agricultural Experiment Station and the Hospital. Though they have provided employment, the fact that they are all tax free institutions has made for some hard feelings.

Change is definitely coming to this small town. I don't know how it will affect the population but it will be interesting to watch and see.

Welcome, Marjames. Thank you for sharing about your state of Minnesota. It seems that the farms in your area are also being approached by the developers and in many cases cannot turn it down. Please tell us more about the Hmong in your state which, if I remember correctly, were mountain people in Vietnam who had much to do with aiding our soldiers.

Please click onto "subscribe" below and come back again to share your thoughts with us.

Robby

Good to hear from you again, Alice, and, as you say, I once lived in Geneva, New York, in the beautiful Finger Lakes Region by Lake Seneca - from 1950 to 1952 while I was a Scout Executive there. The experience in Geneva, as you described it, seems to indicate that the non-developers won out over the developers, at least for a period of time.

Were the residents pleased with that? Did the small town atmosphere which remained, despite the lack of taxes which big businesses bring, make Genevans happy?

Please click onto "subscribe" below and come back again to visit.

Robby

I've had little time to spend on the computer this summer, but, found Robby's request in the California folder today. I can't speak for California as a whole, but the changes in the area in which I live are much like those stated by others from different states.

Personally I have mixed feelings, sadness being one of them. I live in a valley that is surrounded by beautiful low mountain ranges on the south end of Silicon Valley. When we moved here in 1947, I remember the stretch of road from San Jose to here was a tree lined canopy and beyond the road were acres of orchards. I think the population was around 6 thousand. We have more students in the local, (impacted and unprepared schools) now than that.

On the west side of the valley the hills are verdant and cooler because of the ocean proximity. The east side of the valley is warmer and the hills tend more to brown in summer. We settled on a small prune and apricot ranch on the east side of town. The neighbors also had fruit "ranches" as they are called here. My parents sold it in 1953 for about $15,000. A friend recently sold less acreage than my parents for over $400,000.

The "country" where I grew up is now one ranchette after the other. Fenced parcels with a horse or more, few trees, and no orchards. The hills where I used to hike and explore are filling with homes. More like estates as the years go by. The roads became freeways and are choked with traffic that moves at a snails pace into Silicon Valley during commute time. Well, just about any time now. The overflow from Silicon valley is spreading even further south and east of us. Farmlands have become Wal-mart parking lots, shopping outlets and strip malls. The beautiful hills to the west, where I used to horseback ride, are also being graded and built upon. Huge homes look down on this town now.

On Labor Day weekend my son and family came down from the northern part of the state (an area which is like going back in time compared to this area) for a visit. We all went up to the winery where we lived when my children were born. Where there was once lush vineyards on rolling hills as far as the eye could see, there are now small vineyards blotted with more ranchettes, hodgepodges of homes and makeshift barns of every conceivable size, shape and color. The dirt trails where the kids excitedly discovered deer and other animal tracks are now marked with the tracks of four wheel drive vehicles.

One of my sisters lives 5 miles from town along the base of the same western hills. One could see fox, deer and other interesting critters along the road to her house in years past. Housing developments in just the past couple of years have reached her and are beginning to cover those same hills. The other day when I was there the noise of graders and trucks attacking those once beautiful hills was painful to hear.

This summer I was anxious for my favorite vegetable/fruit farm to open. Wonderful fresh fruits and vegetables in bins in a huge barn at this farm. This year I was in shock as I drove up. It is almost completely surrounded by housing developments.

Median price homes in this area are, (according to today's paper) $439,000. The closer to San Jose and San Francisco one gets the higher that goes. Rentals are hard to come by and also astronomical. The beach and valley communities are also being impacted. People are having to move further and further from SV to find affordable housing and then face horrific commutes. Road rage is an oft discussed condition of late.

While the technical marvels that are products and by-products of SV are wonderful, in my mind I liken it to the plant in Little Shop of Horrors. The more it's fed the hungrier it becomes. Guess though, If not for that hungry plant I wouldn't capable of writing this to you.

In communities south of here, Monterey County, Salinas Valley, etc., where there is much agriculture, there is the same kind of issues that abound here. Growth vs. environmental impact. I just wonder when we pave it all over, what we are going to eat? Housing is of particular concern to those that labor in the fields. And I do mean labor.

California is such a beautiful state. Ethnically speaking, in this area, Hispanics have a large population. The Asian population is growing by leaps and bounds. My family is an example of the American melting pot. My heritage is Scottish/Irish/? my husband was Italian. One of my BIL's is Hispanic. Three of my grandchildren are Portuguese/Italian/Scottish, etc. My latest granddaughter is Italian/Irish/Peruvian/Chinese. She loves Sushi along with her pasta.

The Mexican/Spanish/Indian influence is all around us. A few miles to the east there is a wonderful California Mission town.

Sorry this got out of hand and as I posted this, I see you have moved on and so this may be of no relevance to your topic.

Judy S

By one of those amazing coincidences, I finished writing above about the Hispanics in America, shut off my computer, went downstairs to the TV just in time to see the first Hispanic Heritage Awards program. It made me think a lot about what we have been discussing and I just had to come back to the computer again.

One of those who received an award was Anthony Quinn who spoke briefly but passionately. He said he disliked "hyphenated" terms like Chinese-Americans, Mexican-Americans, etc. "We are all Americans," he said. He received a big round of applause for this.

Robby

Decaf:

Thank you for accepting the invitation to join us and share info about your state of California. Medium-priced homes almost a half million dollars!!!

When we pave it all over, what are we going to eat? What a powerful and thought-provoking statement!

And your family is composed of Scottish, Irish, Italian, Hispanic, Portuguese, Scottish, Peruvian, and Chinese. Now there's a truly American family!!

Please click onto "subscribe" below and continue to share your thoughts with us. And, may I add, that everything you said was most relevant.

Robby

Oops, forgot my Italian/German grandchildren and my other BIL who is Russian/Jewish. One of our common grounds is the family love of food/celebrations and parties. Sometimes it's Chinese food, other times Mexican, lots of times Italian, and so on. It's fun to see the Chinese/Peruvian extended family enjoy a totally Italian meal of Bagna Cauda.

Judy S

In fifty years the U.S. population is expected to increase by 50 percent (putting us well over 300 million) and minority groups will make up approxmiately half the population. (This is true now in California.) Immigration will account for almost two-thirds of the nation's population growth. One-quarter of all Americans will be of Hispanic origin. One in ten Americans will be of Asian or Pacific Islander descent.

Consider deTocqueville's comment (above) which starts with "It cannot be denied . . ."

Robby

Ellis Island opened in January, 1892. It housed inspection facilities, hearing and detention rooms, hospitals, cafeterias, administrative offices, railroad ticket offices, and representatives of many immigrant aid societies. It employed 119 of the immigration Service's staff of 180 in 1893.

Detention Guards and Matrons cared for those people detained. Often, aliens were excluded because they lacked funds or had no friends or relatives nearby. The Board of Special Inquiry usually admitted the person if someone could post bond or one of the immigrant aid societies would take responsibility.

In that era there was an unprecedented rise in immigration to the United States. A Presidential Commission investigated the causes of massive emigration out of Southern and Eastern Europe. The Immigration Act of 1917 then required that immigrants be able to read and write in their native language and the Immigration Service began administering literacy tests.

Do participants here believe that literacy tests should be required today?

Robby

No all it did was make little Nepoleons out of immigration officers. Most coming to this nation are not only literate, they are well educated and their education has no approved value here. The only ones that in large numbers that aren't are those from Mexico and the Island nations.

Creating Literary tests would really be adding more reason for the many folks that have a problem with the Mexican National coming her to have a field day with their reason to keep the barbed wire between the two countries. And those from Haiti do not have a chance at all. Cuba may end up being acknowledged yet, especailly after Castro is no longer fit to be a threat.

I'd rather thay come here and become literate just in order to survive so that we are benefitting from their labor, than be sending foreign aid to Mexico hoping it really does provide education and we as individual citizens never see any benefit from our aid. We are now sending aid to Haiti to help their legal services and it has become a glory hole for the officials handling the aid.

I think we would have to define what we mean when we say literate. The most uneducated that crosses that border must learn about money, how to get work, follow instructions, learn the laws that will keep him from being picked up becuase that means deportation, how to live without spending much of his low wage earned income so that he has the money to bring back, that alone means learning the value of available goods and being a better stewart with money than most of us.

Barbara would rather that Mexicans come here, even if they are illiterate in their own language, and receive an education here rather than sending money to Mexico and their not receiving "proper" education there. Any thoughts on that?

America is a unique nation. We have roots in every corner of the globe -- and every existing and potential market throughout the world. We speak every language. We know every culture. America is many faces and many races and soon will have no one majority group in the workforce. In this new century, nearly one out of two Americans will be a member of what today is considered a minority group.

Robby

I wonder what other countries think about North Americans from the United States who have emigrated there? I had a small taste of this when I moved to each of the seven states where I've lived for five years or longer in this country. North Carolina and Florida were not the only states which were of the opinion that Yankees should go home.

Mal

Mal: Are you referring to ex-patriates - those Americans who now live in other nations? Do you believe this is a significant number and why do you believe they have done so?

Robby

This morning the San Francisco Examiner featured an article, "A quest for identity, Japanese Americans confront a changing future." It relates that" cultural rituals are among the few things binding an ethnic grooup that 76 years ago was called an "unassimilable race" by V.S. McClatchy, once publisher of the Sacramento Bee." It goes on to say that Japanese Americans have assimilated, are upwardly mobile, marry outside their ethnic group in high rates and are dispersed throughout suburban American. That there are more children born to couples in which only one parent is of Japanese descent than to couples where both parents are of Japanese decent. These statistics are from the 1990 cencus.

It mentions that "except for Hawaii, where Japanese Americans make up nearly a fifth of the population, most of the nation's 925,00 Japanese Americans are now so geographically scattered and assimilated that they are culturally indistinguishable."

I thought this was an interesting article considering this discussions current topic.

I've forgotten how to make the clickable but the SF Examiner and the SF Chronicle can be reached by the link www.sfgate.com

Judy S

Judy:

That is intriguing! In our lifetime Japanese-Americans were interned and now they are "culturally indistinguishable" and "assimilated." I wonder why more children are born to couples where only one parent is of Japanese heritage than of couples where both are of Japanese descent.

America is truly a unique nation. Thank you for sharing that with us.

Robby

Info for those who have recently joined us. This is a brand new Discussion Group and you still have time, if you wish, to buy deTocqueville's book, "Democracy in America." Buy the paper back which is approximately $7 and is often much less than that -- or borrow the book.

For those who haven't yet received their book or do not intend to obtain one, the quotations above change periodically and you can keep up with the rest of us easily.

WELCOME to all you newcomers!!

Robby

Robby - The article is written in-depth and todays is only part 1. It further states that, " the sense that the community (Japanese-American) is at a crossroads has been made more urgent by the steady stream of obituaries of nisei, or second-generation Japanese Americans, in the pages of the Pacific Citizen, the weekly newspaper of the SF based Japanese American Citizens League.

The passing of the nisei - children of issei, or the pioneer generation that emigrated from Japan - is epochal for a community largely defined by its immigrant roots and unique wartime experience."

Further on, " The camps had a profound influence on Japanese American experience, and the passing of the nisei - the last direct links to that era, who have been the pillars of the community since the war - is a turning point What that means for their highly assimilated children, the sansei or the third generation, and their children, the yonsei and gosei - fourth and fifth generations - remains to be seen."

It does state that, " not all Japanese Americans who marry outside their own group choose Caucasian partners. Indeed, substantial numbers of Japanese Americans are marrying other Asians, giving rise to a generation of multiethnic youths whose pan-Asian roots truly fit the label "Asian American."

"Japanese Americans don't fit the general profile of other Asian Groups," said Omi. "For many Asians, English is a second language. That's not true for JA's. They're older. They're highly educated. They marry out."

There are many opinons and quotes from Japanese Americans, in the article, so what I am sharing here is only a small portion. I tried to find the article in the online Examiner but perhaps it is too lengthy.

It is a fascinating article in view of this current discussion.

Judy S

Issei (born in Japan) - Nisei (born in America and interned) - Sansei (children of Nisei who were interned) - Yonsei (grandchildren) - Gosei (great grandchildren). I'll try to remember all that.

Judy, we have a Discussion Group here in the Senior Net titled "Japan." I would imagine that those participating would be interested in this. There are at least two participants who live in Japan and the rest over here.

Robby

There is a Japanese woman living in Japan who comes into the North Carolina discussion because she has a son living in this state.

I don't know if there's a significant number of expatriates from the United States, though I can think of any number of reasons why people might want to leave this country, and I'm sure there are many who do leave and have left in the past. I simply was curious to know how these Americans were treated in other countries by people who grew up there and wondered if it is any different from the way we treat immigrants here who don't speak English at first.

For some reason, there seems to be a tendency to treat newcomers from other places as if they are black sheep in a way. I wondered if our sometimes negative attitude toward immigrants is a kind of universal behavior.

It is too bad that Fairwinds is away. She could give us some answers about her treatment in Antibes in France and other countries where she's lived. I suspect that she is still an American citizen who lives in France, though I have no way of knowing.

Surely, there must be others in SeniorNet who have chosen to live in places that are not the USA. The thought crossed my mind that if we have English, Japanese and other war brides living here, there could be American war brides living in other countries, too.

Mal

Geneva - Robby, I think many of the people who opposed change here were either independently wealthy or were making a good living. Perhaps they were not eager to see new companies locate here as they were afraid it would spoil the "South Main Street" ambiance. There are many old, beautiful houses there that overlook the lake. I think they may also have worried about who might move here to take the jobs.

When I went overseas to teach in the late 50's, there were not many minority groups here. When I returned 3 years later, the black population had grown. Migrant workers had decided to stay. When I came back here to teach in 1969, I had Hispanic students in my classroom. They were the newest group to come.

Some of these "newcomers" have found good jobs and are educating their children to become productive citizens. Unfortunately a neighboring small city, which is the county seat, has had an illegal real estate method of keeping minorities out. As a result, Geneva has become the "welfare capital" of the county.

As with most towns now, we have a drug problem, with dealers coming here from larger cities. I have had students with a lot of potential who ended up in prison or a mental institution because of drugs. Selling was an easy way to make money and using was an easy way to forget your poverty and problems.

My son lives in Pittsburgh now. There wasn't much to attract him to stay here. I think that is true of many educated young people.

So we have a nice small town with things that make it a good place to live and we also have some of the big city problems. It will be interesting to see what develops.

An excellent question, Mal. Are Americans caught up in the belief that their way is the best and possibly "only" way? Are immigrants "black sheep?" Are we blind to the many wonderful characteristics of their culture? Do we export our ways to the world but refuse to "import" other cultures into our way of living?

Alice talks about small towns with "big city" problems. Is this a common occurrence across America. Does this ambivalence exist in your area?

Robby

My son and his family came back a year ago from three years in Scotland. (He works for Motorola, and they have a facility there.) Some of his stories are hilarious about the differences in the way things are done.

But he said the most common thing he heard when he was there was, "You're not in America any more, SIR." This was told to him when he wanted more choices in products and the biggest time was when they bought a new dryer and were told it would be delivered Monday, Wednesday, or Friday. He said, "Well, Wednesday would probably be best for us."

"You don't understand, Sir," the clerk said. "We will deliver it Monday, or maybe Wednesday, or maybe Friday."

"We can't stay home all day every day for three days," my son said.

"You're not in America any more, SIR."

The Immigration and Naturalization Service grew rapidly in the last 20 years or so due to the changes in world migration patterns, the modern ease of international travel for business or pleasure, and a growing emphasis on controllng illegal immigration. The INS workforce today includes more than 30,000 employees in thirty-six INS districts at home and abroad. It now has a corps of officers specializing in inspection, examination, adjudication, legalization, investigation, patrol, and refugee and asylum issues. It continues to enforce laws providing for selective immigration, and controlled entry of tourists, business travelers, and other temporary visitors.

Where does all this fit in with the Statue of Liberty?

Robby

Do you mean the Statue of Liberty or the Emma Lazarus poem?

The New ColossusEmma Lazarus

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door."

Yes, how does this fit in with what Robby just posted about immigration laws?

Mal

What was available in the 19th and 20th century are no longer now....farmland is being gobbled up by urban sprawl and imported fruits and vegetables have taken profit away from farmers. Tomatoes were grown abundantly in SE Florida up until the 70's when Mexican produce flooded the markets. Now we seem to import hispanic peoples from not only Cuba but all of South America and the Islands. On Ellis Island in NY harbor the health department turned immigrants away for health reasons when their ships landed, but Islanders land on Florida coasts bringing TB and veneral diseases and slip through INS guards during the night. We need our new immigration laws to protect what we have built to be a free and healthy society. Some day when the World Health Organization manages to educate the third world nations perhaps we will all enjoy the benefits of democracy. rvl

Let us pause and examine America and its attitude toward foreigners keeping in mind Redvanlady's comment that we want to protect the "free and healthy society" that we have built. Now, if you will, please read de Tocqueville's remark (above) which begins "It cannot be denied . . ."

Any relationship?

Robby

Following are a couple of the requirements for naturalization::--

1 - Demonstrate literacy in English
2 - Deemed not to have good character if he or she was at any time during the past five years --
a - habitual drunkard
b - polygamist, associated with prostitutes, narcotics.
c - convicted of a crime of moral turpitude
d - a gambler
e - at any time convicted of an aggravated felony

INS inquiry may also cover homosexuality, adultery and non-support of dependents.

Does anyone here know any citizens born here whose behavior is described above?

Robby

Yup, and they're all native born Americans.

Mal

Songbird! Loved the Scottish story.

You recently posted in the Oklahoma folder asking for info on population changes. These stats were in the Oklahoma City "Daily Oklahoman" this morning.

Oklahoma's Demographics Change from 1990 census to 1999 estimate Total Minority (American Indian,Asian,Hispanic,Black) +15% (greatest change is Hispanic at +58.6%; second greatest: Asian at +31%) Total Oklahoma +8.1% (Includes aforementioned Minorities and White)

apropos of almost nothing

Speaking of disappearance of family truck farms and our collective loss of regional charms---I just remembered traveling to central Florida from Texas each summer as a child to visit relatives (unairconditioned car, 7 people). Not long after leaving the panhandle of Florida, the air became fragrant with citrus as we drove through miles and miles of orange groves. The handful of small orange truck farms still remaining are far from the the main highways now and the air is anything but fragrant with citrus. The experience of stopping the car to let 5 city kids pick an orange or grapefruit from a real tree---because for miles we'd been calling out "there's a good tree!!"---is not even possible now. It's the smell and one other thing that stays with me in memory---our handpicked oranges were sunshine warmed. Holding a warm orange (even more fragrant) is such a different experience from standing in the cold produce grocery section picking out perfectly formed, stamped, cold oranges. Hmmm, makes me wish I had a glass of orange juice.

CallieK: Thank you for coming to visit us and for giving us the Oklahoma picture as we examine population changes in America. Again we see the Hispanic increase (58% in Oklahoma) which is becoming increasingly evident across America. However, you have called to our attention another minority which has not meen mentioned up to this point -- American Indian.

Here we are talking about Americans and no comments yet about those people who were here before this part of the world was even named America. We would appreciate it, Callie, if you would tell us a bit more about American Indians in Oklahoma (population size, activity within society, relationship with other Oklahomans, etc.).

How about the rest of you folks here across America? Do you have a significant (or even small) American Indian population where you live? Do you have Native American heritage in your family?

Robby

Stamped, cold oranges vs sunshine warmed oranges just off the tree.Betty reminds us of one of these so-called small changes which, multiplied with others, is changing America before our very eyes.

Robby

The world's busiest border in the the one at San Diego between the United States and Mexico. Each weekday, an average of 42,000 cars and 30,000 pedestrians cross from Tijuana to San Diego through the San Ysidro Port of Entry. The number of cars swells to 65,000 on weekends, and holidays can bring twice as many, according to the U.S. Customs Service.

Now, a new automated commuter lane is cutting to just two or three minutes the time it takes prescreened drivers to cross. This is a bi-national effort to east traffic congestion at the border without sacrificing efforts to prevent illegal immigrants and contraband from entering the country. Commuters pay an annual fee of $129 and pass an FBI background check. The other lanes are still free. A photo of everyone authorized to cross in that vehicle appears on a screen, and the Inspector can choose to stop the motorist for questioning or send them to a secondary inspection area. Drivers must swipe a card through a scanner as a final step to entry. Cars will be randomly searched for contraband.

Already 3,300 have signed up to use the commuter lane, 70 percent of whom are American citizens. The others are Mexicans with visas to enter the country. After 6,000 enroll, U.S. authorities plan to open a second lane. INs officials expect about 12,000 will use the program.

What is the belief of those here on easing the crossing of the Mexican border. As we all know, crossing between Canada and the United States is already relatively easy. Should the same situation exist between the United States and Mexico?

Robby

My mother's family settled in the upper Champlain Valley and the Au Sable Valley and the Keene Valley areas of New York pre Revolution. In fact, the spelling of their name (they came from Ireland) changed because of the way the paymaster misspelled it during the Revolutionary War. They intermarried with many other Irish families through the subsequent generations; also some English and Scottish. On my mother's mother's side, a great, great, great grandmother who was half French and half Mohawk (father French, mother Mohawk) married into this Irish clan.

The Mohawk name is a very respected one in the New York State area. It is impossible to read any reputable history of that state without the term "Mohawk" being seen.

Robby

Idris, that great-great-great-great grandfather of mine was French Canadian. He married the Mohawk squaw.

Anyone else here who has any family history regarding Native Americans that they would like to share?

Robby

Mary Page if i could spell them i would tell you who is here...Mohawk is one. There are also Ojibwa...I can't spell that at all. Oh well.

I thought the busiest crossing was here in Niagara at Fort Erie. We have two others at least...being the Whirlpool bridge and the Rainbow bridge.

Anyone else here who has any family history regarding Native Americans that they would like to share?

Robby

Robbie I have no Native American history ..but one gentleman I met on line who came to Virginia to research his family history was 1/2 Cherokee...we spent lots of time in Richmond at the State Archives and Isle of Wight,the library at William and Mary plus etc,, he had already completed a great deal of the work but wanted to check it out here,...We found out he was a direct descendent of Arthur Allen ..whose daughter when she married moved to NC and eventually west to Tennessee and Oklahoma ...His father's people were Cherokees who were resettled in the Trail of Tears..his mother married his father ..and records show they had to have permission of both parents for the marriage. His mother died at 25 after his birth and his father left the children with their maternal grandmother to raise. He did return often to check on them ,,but and to me this was interesting..when I was sharing the results of our research...I cant tell you how many people I have known for years and years told me they were part Cherokee or some other Indian tribe..I just found that interesting.....another interesting thing about this ...he and his brother and sister were very poor growing up in Seneca...and no one ever thought he would grow up to be on the board of one of the large oil drilling companies and spend years in Boliva etc and China..after his wife died he moved back to his old home town...and spends his mornings at a local coffee shop where everyone now claims they were best friends when he lived there as a child

anna in Virginia just thinking about people ....

Sorry. I am most emphatically not qualified to comment on any social issues concerning American Indians in Oklahoma, or anywhere else. The best I can do is refer you to these web sites: The Oklahoma Indian Times newspaper site. The Opinions link might be of interest to your discussion.

Another which is connected to the American Indian Institute at the University of Oklahoma

(I tried to make these clickables, but- no luck. Maybe someone can help.)

Callie:

Both of your clickables worked very well. Thank you. Obviously American Indians play an important part in the state of Oklahoma in order for there to be a newspaper entitled the American Indian Times and for the university to have an American Indian Institute.

Annafair:

You mentioned the Trail of Tears. I have heard of it but do not know the details. Can you (or someone here) help us on this?

Whether we have American Indian blood in our veins or not or whether we are connected to American Indians or not in some way, the fact remains that it would be impossible to talk fairly and sensibly about population in America without discussing the place of Native Americans. According to the Census figures, there are just under two million American Indians currently in the nation. Some of the largest tribes are the Cherokee, Navajo, Chippewa, Sioux, Choctaw, Pueblo, Apache, Iroquois, Lumbee, and Creek.

A number of the Native American languages that were spoken at the time of the European arrival in the New World in the late 15th Century have become extinct but many of them are still in use today. Some scholars estimate that the Western Hempisphere at the time of the first European contact was inhabited by 40 million people who spoke 1,800 different tongues. Another estimate suggests that at the time of Columbus more than 15 million speakers throughout the Western Hemisphere used more than 2,000 languages, with 300 separate tongues native to some 1.5 million Native Americans north of Mexico.

By the middle of the 20th Century, two thirds of the many indigenous American languages had already died out or were dying.

Are these facts of any importance? Does it make any difference whatsover to those of us who are "American" citizens whether American Indians exist or not or whether their culture continues or not? What are your reactions?

Robby

Robby, the Iroquois were not a tribe. They were a Nation made up of the "six civilized tribes." They had a written language. I do not own a book about Indians, and doubt my feeble brain can remember all six tribes, but will try: Mohawk, Oneida, Mohican, Seneca. Shoot! Blanked out!

Went on a search and found one source that left off Mohican and put the other 3 as Onandaga, Cayuga and Tuscarora.

MaryPage: Thanks for the correction. We need to be exacting if we are going to discuss that culture about which we know so little. I come from New York State and should have remembered that. As I remember it, they were a most civilized nation. It probably wouldn't hurt as we continue to discuss "population" in America to try to understand just what the term "civilized" means.

Robby

In one of the former chapters of my life, I spent a summer being a school bus driver and each day drove through the Onondaga Reservation just outside of Syracuse, New York. The evidences of poverty there were unbelievable.

Robby

Here's site where you can read about the Cherokee Trail of Tears which tells the story of how the Cherokee were driven across N.C. to Oklahoma. Not a nice story!

Granpa was an Indian Chief

There were many places called "holding forts" in Georgia where they placed the Cherokees before the walk to Oklahoma started.

Here's another Trail of Tears

We were going through the Cowboy Hall of Fame when we first heard the history of the Trail of Tears. In the Hall of Fame there is a huge monument or sculpture by Charles Frazer of an Indian on his horse titled "End of the Trail". The plaque that is up by it, describes part of the history of sad story. Here is the statue with some of the history at the Cowboy Hall of Fame.

End of the Trail

We are on cable and have a First Nations' channel. I must admit i don't usually listen to it.

(

As i understand it the Iroquis Nation's constitution is one that your founding fathers used as a guideline to yours. That was stated on the First Nations' channel.

Idris: Any further info from you (or others here) regarding a Constitution of the Iroquois Nation? And can you tell us about the population of First Nation in Canada or other relevant information?

Ann: I am in the process of readng your Links. I am sure, as you say, that it will not be a nice story.

Robby

Robby we have one million, First Nations People (status Indians) in Canada. I have no idea how many Metis we have but i'll try a search and see what i can find.

Idris: I admit my ignorance. What is a Meti?

Robby

A Meti as i understand it in someone with mixed heritage being Indian and something else. They are non-status Indians.

Here is a link for The Iroquis Confederacy Constitution

Iroquis Confederacy

Metis, plural MÉTIS, in Canadian history, a person of mixed Indian and European ancestry. The first Métis were the offspring of local Indian women and European fur traders in the Red River area of what is now the province of Manitoba. They resisted the Canadian takeover of the Northwest in 1869. In the course of half a century they had developed a distinctive way of life and thought of themselves as a nation with rights in the Northwest. Fearing the oncoming wave of settlers from Ontario, they established a provisional government under the leadership of Louis Riel (1844-85). In 1870 their government negotiated a union with Canada that resulted in the establishment of the province of Manitoba.

The more we talk here, the more it is becoming obvious to me (and perhaps to others here) that it would be out of the question to discuss "population" in the United States and Canada without also talking about those people who lived here before we did.

Robby

I am in the process of reading the Links that Ann Alden gave us and heartily recommend them. Two quotes from "Grandpa was an Indian Chief":--

Jack Bushyhead: "I think of myself as being strictly American, which I am, literally...My grandmother, the Chief's wife, used to want me to sit at her knees for hours while she tried to tell me stories about our people. I wish that I had listened."

James Bushyhead: "In those earlier days the Indians should have had stricter immigration laws. That would have taken care of the whole problem."

Robby

Thank you, Ann, for the link to the Fraser sculpture "End of the Trail".

I was raised in Kansas and every year the Haskell Institute, a school for American Indians in Lawrence, had their big Pow Wow. It was open to the public and my family went a couple of times. At the end of the ceremonies all of the field lights were turned off. In those days there weren't many street lights anywhere near the school so it was, of course, absolute darkness. After several moments a bright spotlight came on centered only on an Indian brave on his horse in the pose of the End of the Trail statue. No sounds at all----just that poignant and very effective image. It was a sobering moment, even for those of us who were non-Indian and couldn't possibly empathize with the story behind the scene.

Phyll

Thank you, Phyll, for your description of that poignant moment. Any thoughts you care to share with us regarding American Indians and Kansas including the Haskell Institute?

Robby

I find of interest the following remark in "History of the Cherokee":--

Although allied with the English the Cherokee began to favor the French...The French showed greater respect for the Indians than the British who considered them an inferor race. It should be noted that the English also considered non-English whites as inferior." Do you see any relationship between that remark and the quote (above) by deTocqueville which begins "It cannot be denied..."

Robby

I suggest that you read some of the works of Ed McGaa, Eagle Man. Eagle Man is an Oglala Sioux, a lawyer who has written several books about Native Americans from his American Indian background and point of view. I have published several chapters of his books in the past in my electronic magazine, Sonata magazine for the arts. A veteran of the Vietnam War, Marine Corps fighter pilot Captain Ed McGaa, Eagle Man, is an American much to be admired. Click the link below to go to his home page. Click Site Map on Eagle Man's home page to read portions of his books. I just noticed that Eagle Man has a link to Sonata on his Link page. Thank you, Eagle Man, for that honor.

Ed McGaa, Eagle Man

Mal:

In reference to your Link to Ed McGaa (Eagle Man), it must be a terrible strain on a person's inner psyche and need for identity to be simultaneously born on the Pine Ridge reservation, be a registered tribal member of the Oglala Sioux, to be honored by the Sioux for having participated six times in the Sun Dance eeremony and also a fighter pilot in the Marine Corps in Vietnam, flying 110 combat missions, receiving 8 air medals and 2 Crosses of Gallantry, and finally recommended for a Distinguished flying Cross.

The question in the Heading above remains -- "What is an American?"

Robby

As I know Eagle Man from correspondence when I was publishing some chapters of his books, he is a dedicated man who has none of the vainglory that is visible in others who have accomplished less in their lives than he has.

From his emails to me, I would say he is a quiet, thoughtful person, who strives always to better the lives of American Indians. It was interesting to me to find that his sister suffered polio just as I did.

Many of Eagle Man's books are full of a kind of Native American Mother Earth philosophy which could benefit most of us. His most recent published book, Eagle Vision, is a novel based on his experiences growing up on a reservation. One look at this work will open the eyes of those of us who cannot possibly imagine what it is and was like.

I think Eagle Man is very strong in his identity. His identity is Oglala Sioux, an important part of what is our American heritage.

Mal

Where I taught high school eons ago was in Oklahoma, rural northeast Oklahoma, in a small bump in the road named Bluejacket, after Chief Bluejacket. This was before much of the current consciousness raising began on the American Indian (can't get used to the change from Native American back to American Indian). So, I don't know nation, tribe or history. I do know that many of the rural kids who were bused in from an entire county were "full blooded" American Indian. All were living within the Americanized socialization forced on their ancestors (but not on reservations)---none had reembraced their history. I've often wondered if some became interested in their own history as it became more acceptable/popular to do so.

I've also thought of them during different controversial discussions on names of sports teams. The "Bluejacket Chiefs" is the only name I know (may be others) whose reference is NOT derogatory.

Oh, I miss those years of limitless energy. Small high school, so we all had to pitch in. I was Senior Advisor, cheerleader coach, Annual Advisor, Newspaper Advisor, and in a motivation I now find laughable, I started a high school girls' choir---though we did win a "first" in a state competition, much to my then husband's consternation. (He taught choral and instrumental music composition to college graduate students and had sung with the Met twice. Since I was not "trained" to sing, how could I possibly teach others, etc., etc. My ten years of playing french horn didn't count for music sophistication. In that rural high school, though, there was no budget for choral directors and other extracurricular personnel, so we all pitched in where needed.)

Betty: I notice in some of my reading that "Indian Territory" later became Oklahoma. As there were Indians and reservations all over the map, why is Oklahoma former "Indian Territory?"

Robby

On the subject of leaving behind the label "native American" and getting used to "American Indian," I caught sight of a heading in The NY Times using "American Indian." I guess that finished off the rest of my doubts.

Robby, I don't know.

It's also the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), not the Bureau of Native American Affairs.

Robby

Since so many of you seem to be unfamiliar with Oklahoma, I offer a bit of state history that may help you be more informed. Angie Debo was a sometimes controversial writer/historian in Oklahoma; this information is taken from her book "Oklahoma, Footloose and Fancy Free" - plus a few asides by me.

At the time of the first known exploration of what became Oklahoma (1541), the ancestors of the Cherokees, Choctaws, Chickasaws, Creeks and Seminoles were living in the Gulf and southern Appalachian regions. "They were then a prosperous agricultural people with highly developed political and social institutions...... During 1817-1837 all these tribes were persuaded or forced (by the US Government) to exchange their lands in the East for..tracts beyond the frontier (obtained in the Louisana Purchase) where-so said the treaties-they might govern themselves and no state or territory would ever be erected over them without their consent." (p. 17) These tribes were "removed" to what is now eastern Oklahoma (basically east of I-35), which had been a regular hunting area from their original homes. To distinguish them from the tribes native to the region, they were usually called the "Five Civilized Tribes" and their land known as the "Indian Territory". "As soon as they...recovered from the Removal, the Indians began to....[lay] out farms, [plant] orchards and [accumulate] cattle, horses and hogs. ...Here and there were traders' stores owned by mixed bloods or white men licensed by the federal government". (p.18) (Callie's note: I've been told that permission had to be granted by tribal governments for white men to establish businesses in the Nations.)

Oklahoma "firsts" from this era: First church organization by the Creeks in 1830; first public-school law by the Cherokees in 1832; first constitution, probably the one adopted by the Choctaws in 1834; first capitol building, by the Choctaws in 1838; first newspapers, bilingual Cherokee-English publications beginning in 1844; first incorporated town, the Cherokee capital, incorporated under tribal law in 1852.

All this promising Indian development was interrupted by the Civil War. There were many conflicts between tribal factions regarding which side to support. By the end of the war, guerrilla bands from both sides and organized efforts by white men to drive out the Indians' cattle for sale to army contractors had completely stripped the country. And then it was decided (by the USA government) to colonize other Indians in the unsettled half of the Indian country. At least 25 tribes were assigned to reservations on the prairies of what is now western Oklahoma, excluding the panhandle which was known as No Man's Land and is another story.

Railroads and cattle drives brought white men into the Territory in increasing numbers and by 1880 these forces were able to prevent the settlement of any more Indian tribes in the territory. In spite of arguments before Congress by citizens of the Civilized Tribes, plans were made to open the area to homesteaders.In May, 1890, Congress passed the Organic Act, organizing a "Territory of Oklahoma" (basically west of I-35) and adding the panhandle. Land Runs, lotteries, title purchases of Indian lands by the Government and division of Indian lands by allotments eventually stripped the tribal governments of their powers and made Indians citizens of the United States. In 1907, the "Twin Territories" became the state of Oklahoma.

Callie's Comments: I grew up in rural southeastern Oklahoma with no concept of "them and us" regarding American Indians. Both of my grandfathers came to Indian Territory just prior to statehood and were, I suppose, part of the white "intrusion". I do not apologize for them. They were products of their times - decent, honorable men who treated all with whom they dealt fairly and compassionately. After twenty years out of state, I now live in what was known as Oklahoma Territory and still don't think of "them and us"! .....And that's all I care to say about attitudes and consciousness raising, although I'll be glad to try and help with factual information if I can.

Thank you, Callie. How young this nation is!! My father was born in 1892 and here you are talking about organizing the "Territory of Oklahoma" only two years before he was born. And Oklahoma becoming a state only 13 years before I was born. Absolutely incredible!!

Robby

In 1914 my father a young unmarried man working on the Panama Canal construction, and his roomate from Oklahoma, made a bid on some land in Oklahoma sight unseen. I still have the deed

It reads;

CHOCTAW - CHICKASAW NATIONS
STATE OF OKLAHOMA
(Formerly Indian Territory)

Whereas, The land hereinafter described is a portion of the unallotted lands of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes of Indians and the same has been sold to........In Witness Whereof, We the Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation and the Governor of the Chikasaw Nation, have hereunto set our hands and caused the Great Seal of our respective Nations to be affixed at the dates herein shown

For some reason this deed is dated Oct 1917, some 3 yrs after the sale. Maybe Oklahoma became a state in the interim?? I can't read the signatures, but the price shows as $881.84 for 78.88 acres, more or less.

My father first saw the land in the 1950s and felt it worthless, "tobacco road country." Nope, no oil anywhere near. All those years a local farmer ran cattle on it and paid the property taxs for the privilege--$6 or so a year. His heirs sold it in two parcels for around $14,000 in 1996.

Thank you, Seldom, for sharing that info with us. Obviously, various Indian entities were being recognized as soverign nations. And this was as recent aw World War I.

As a Scout Executive with the Boy Scouts of America, one of my responsibilities was to make sure that those applying to be Scoutmasters were American citizens. In 1951 we had a problem in New Jersey when an American Indian applied. He was not (according to the records) an American citizen. He was a ward of the government. It was obvious we could not turn him down and after a certain amount of paper shuffling, he was accepted.

How ironic that those boys in his troop studying to be Second Class and First Class Scouts were doing so by learning how to build a fire without a match, cook over a campfire, tell directions without a compass, recognize various trees, know trail signals, make moccasins, follow animals footprints, and do all those wonderful things that the ancestors of their Scoutmaster had done centuries before.

Robby

Seldom958,

Can you read the legal description on the deed? Is there anything that says _____County, Section___, Township___, Range___E or W? If so, I can possibly tell you where the land is. By 1914, these identifying descriptions would have been in place.

Callie

Glad someone gave the link re Trail of Tears ....It has been sometime since I read it. I did some research on Indians and the Civil War and found there were troops fighting on both sides. Although the Cherokees had a General Stand WAite who led a troop of Cherokees ..It seems they fought on the side of the southern states ..the memories of being displaced by Federal Troops apparantly the reason for their choice. They fought on the Western front and if I remember correctly General Waite was the last southern general to surrender.

When reading our history it seems Americans of many eras had things that were less than noble ...I know every nation has a similiar past but sometimes I think we need to remind ourselves of our own....

anna who is just thinking in Virginia

CallieK

You are correct. The deed says "Lots six (6) and seven (7) of Section (6), Township Four (4) South and Range Twenty-one East of the Indian Base and Meridian, in Oklahoma, containing Seventy-eight and 88/100 (78.88) acres, more or less, as the case may be, according to the United States survey thereof."

It's near Idabell. I saw it in 1966 and 1973 and totally agreed with my father's impression. No paved roads within 10 miles

It did have spindly pine trees which no one one would bother with on the west coast. But Weyerhauser built a paper mill in Valient, 20 or so miles away,which used such trees. We discovered someone had been cutting the trees. A local informed us that he knew who was doing it- an adjacent property owner. Word got around and lo and behold out of the blue we got an offer for nearly twice what we had been trying to sell it with no takers for over two years ($11,00 vs $6,000) from the adjacent owner.

Absentee ownership is hazardous!

Not the least of the effect of the American Indian on our everyday life is our language. Native American languages have contributed to numerous place-names in the United States.

English has been enriched by such words as moccasion, moose, mukluk, raccoon, skunk, terrapin, tomahawk, totem and wampum from North American languages -- by chocolate, coyote, and tomato from indigenous Mexican tongues -- by barbecue, cannibal, hurricane, maize, and potato from aboriginal languages of the West Indies, and by coca, condor, guano, jaguar, llama, maraca, pampa, puma, quinine, tapioca, and vicuna from indigenous South American languages.

Can you think of other examples?

Robby

Robby,

Here's a link to a book of words that the American Indians introduced into our language.

American Indian Loan Words

Here's a list of loan words and where they came from, it includes both the Indian and European words. Very interesting and quite extensive!

Thank you for that link, Ann. Even where I live in Virginia -- I live in Rappahannock County near the Rappahannock and Shenadoah Rivers, not too far from Manassas, etc. etc.

Not widely known, and a fact I just learned, is that many American Indians owned African slaves, and fathered children with African slave women. As a result, thousands of Americans have black and Indian ancestry. Genealogists have found thousands of records documenting the history of African people living within the Indian nations.

Perhaps this part of history was widely known in the 19th Century but this unusual fact seems to be left out of the history books now used.

Robby

How tight should our borders be? de Tocqueville says above that he "sought the image of democracy with all its prejudices." Are our prejudices determining how strict America should be in allowing foreigners to enter? Are our borders too tight and are we forgetting the meaning of Emma Lazarus' poem on the Statue of Liberty?

Or does prejudice have nothing to do with it? Are our borders too loose? Are we allowing a steady stream of foreigners which are causing no end of problems, whether it be in terms of numbers or in terms of the "wrong" people?

The threat of war in Europe and a growing perception of immigration as a national security rather than an economic issue affected the Immigration and Naturalization Service in 1940. The INS grew rapidly during World War II. War-related duties included recording and fingerprinting every alien in the United States, organization and operation of internment camps and detention facilities for enemy aliens, guarding of national borders, record checks related to immigrant defense workers, and administration of a program to import agricultural laborers.

In the mid-1950s, there was public alarm over illegal aliens resident and working in the United States causing the Service to launch "Operation Wetback." The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was charged with enforcing sanctions against U.S. employers who hired undocumented aliens. Duties included investigating, prosecuting, and levying fines against corporate and individual employers, as well as deportation of those found to be working illegally.

Has America become paranoid? What happened to freedom and democracy? What happened to seeing America as a nation of immigrants?

Robby

Not having read de T., I must keep my comments brief.

It seems apparent that most of the second- and third-world, and a good portion of the first-world, too, would move to America if given the chance. Our freedoms and our opportunities are unimaginable to most of them.

I don't see how we can open our gates wide and retain the qualities that make this country what it is. Free speech, a free press, freedom of religion and assembly, etc., are freedoms that folks coming here from other cultures may want for themselves but not necessarily want to share with others. Try (if you have a death wish), visiting Calle Ocho in Miami and saying something--anything--favorable about Castro.

Rambler brings up the subject of freedom and the problem that arises when folks come here from other cultures wanting freedom for themselves but not wanting to share such freedom with others.

What do the rest of you see as the answer? Tightening the borders? Educating the foreigners in one way or another? Law enforcement moving in quickly and strongly?

How did foreigners in earlier years adjust to the American way of life?

Robby

In my observation only a small portion of populations of first world countries wish to immigrate to the US of A. Second or third, yes.

One reason might be what appeared today in the Sacramento Bee newspaper in the state capital of the richest state in the richest nation in the world.

One in three children in Sacramento County live in poverty
One of 20 starting kindergarten speak more Spanish than English.
One in 20 speak Hmong with little or no English.
140,000 children of working families in the county need child care. There are 38,000 slots with licensed child care providers.
24% of babies born had no prenatal care during the first trimester of mother's pregnancy. Statistics go on and on! Lack of health care is insane.

Our grandaughter dates a fellow student at UC Davis from France. He shakes his head. His country does not allow this.

Whoa, yes the first world has problems. But in 5 trips to 1st world Europe, plus Canada, I've never met anyone who wished to trade places with us. They seem to have a good lifestyle.

Seems to me our base has always been immegrants that are hungry in more ways than just food. The rich, settled, comfortable or aristocratic do little to further the energy and creativity this country is known for. To this day when an employer is looking for new blood he always looks for the one that has the hungry eyes.

I wonder how many of us had ancesters that came to this nation speaking English and economically comfortable.

According to Seldom and Barbara, those immigrants who come to us from First World countries are not "tired, poor, yearning to breathe free, wretched refuse, homeless, or tempest tossed" - their countries are not "teeming shores." In other words, if I understand their posts correctly, the Europe of today is not the Europe of the 18th Century filled with people whose freedom had been taken away from them and some (but not all) poverty stricken. As Barbara indicates, most of them spoke English and many fairly well off economically.

But this, if again I understand corectly, is indeed true in Second and Third World countries and this is why they are fleeing to our shores. So here we are now, most of us Anglo-Americans in the sense that we speak English and follow the customs and laws many of which originated in Great Britain. And here we are, facing an onslaught of people, most of them speaking Spanish and following customs considerably different from ours.

What a decision for America to make!! Do we examine not only the law but also the ethics and morality which influenced our Founders and extend the hand of liberty and friendship to these new immigrants? Or do we say: "OK, that was true then but not now! We have less room in America now and those of us already here have first privileges. Go find your own location and create your own nation!!"

Is our "good crowned with Brotherhood" or is that just a phrase in a poem and in a song? As asked in the title above -- "What is America?" "What is democracy?"

Robby

It has been so long ago---I hope I remember it correctly. Wasn't there a sociological/psychological study done in which a group of rats were in a confined, small cage? As long as there were only a few all the "laws" of co-existence in their community remained intact but, when many more rats were introduced into the same confined space the society began to break down and chaos resulted. Our country is no longer the big limitless land that it was two or three hundred years ago. With unrestricted immigration isn't it possible that chaos will exist here and we will have a complete breakdown of the American society?

I guess what I feel is that we should not close immigration because that leads to stagnation, but that we should impose stonger restrictions----at least until the infrastructure can catch up enough to care for all of the people---the already here and the newly arrived.

Phyll

As we continue to observe America and examine the American population, are we sure we know what our population actually is? Are we living in an illusion as to what these days constitutes the population of America?

According to the University of Texas in El Paso, the nearly 1000 mile Texas border with Mexico is NOT a boundary line of separation. Rather than being a political function defining where the U.S. ends and where Mexico begins, the Borderlands is a different place from either nation. It constitutes what the anthropologists of UTEP call a "region of tumultuous encounter" between the so-called First and Third Worlds. Low income settlements (colonias), defined officially as substandrd, unincorporated subdivisions lacking basic services, appear in close proximity to the border with Mexico, stretching from the Gulf of Mexico to El Paso, and continuing in smaller numbers off into the Southwest and West.

The authors contend that those of us in the "interior" -- those of us in the Northeast, the South, the Northwest, the Midwest -- are currently blind to what is about to happen to us. Historians described the frontier as "the future." Now anthropoligists are describing the Mexican-United States border as a "social laboratory" foreshadowing a disintegration of the former Anglo influence that will take place throughout America.

If this is so, are all of us here prepared to rub elbows with people whose faces look different from ours, people who speak another language and perhaps do not speak ours, people who do not completely understand or perhaps agree with our laws? Many of them are here legally and the term "go back where you came from" may not be relevant.

How does all this fit in with de Tocqueville's comment (above) which begins "No power on earth...?"

Robby

Of course you have crime that accompanies sub-sub-sub-standard living enviornments in close proximity to El Paso. Juarez is a city with double and maybe by now triple the population of El Paso, all there because of the US maquiladoras. The pay may be better than the little to none available in other areas of Mexico but not enough to allow for city living even with the low value of the Paso.

These maquiladoras are right on the Rio Grande spewing out such polution that you can see this greenish haze in the sky 25 miles out of El Paso. The population in Juarez that have flocked there since the mquiladoras were opened are living in shacks of found material with a ditch down the center of areas for an open sewer, every half mile or so a tap for water and for most no electricity.

I understand setting up a business that will bring more profit because there are many that need work and there is little paying work in the area but I also think keeping the people in those conditions while making a profit is criminal. And no the people of Mexico that are hungery for these jobs are not very educated nor do they understand a democratic system that spawned the Labor Unions. So the fact that the US companies are keeping the labor unions out is only a small issue, the people would need to be schooled in how to politic for their needs. In the meantime the fenses along the Rio Grande in El Paso get higher and higher.

PS Robby my point in an earlier post was not that earlier immigrants could speak English and were financially comfortable - just The opposite I was questioning how many of our immigrant ancestors were in the same non-English speaking and hungry for opportunity as the immigrants of today. It is easy for us a generation or more later to want to limit immegrations as we see our world change and areas of the country loose their farming communities but our grandparants also saw changes that made them long for the old days. As children most of us didn't want to listen we were full of the idea that opporunity would be ours.

Phyll, I have often thought about that very thing!

My memory is flaky as all get out, but this is what it tells me (mind, please, subject to LOTS of error!): NIH, the National Institutes of Health, set up a Rat community. I think it was in a fairly sizable space: like a very large sand box. Within a room they could look into through glass windows. They each had x amount of space and were fed x amount of food. All was well. (There was a least one book written about this, and it later appeared in many, many reference books and textbooks.) Then, as the population increased, they got more aggressive with one another. Then, with more population, they got downright violent. Then some became very depressed and anti-social, going off in corners alone. The rest killed one another off .... and I cannot remember how it all ended. But yes, it followed Perfectly what human beings have done with their civilization As Population Has Increased!

When the aggressive driving horrors started showing up, that Rat City was the first thing I thought of!

Woodlands, Tx... I STARTED OUT WITH NOTHING AND I STILL HAVE MOST OF IT.

I has long been my contention that democratic institutions are slowly eroding in the United States. It would appear that we are already into a discussion of one of those institutions, namely immigration.

Up until the mid 1960's immigration was strictly controlled. Then along came Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" farce and the bars were let down. It is my belief that Johnson had in mind flooding this country with hordes of Hispanics from south of the border, and that these hordes would naturally become converts to his Party, giving them the everlasting control of our government.

Frankly, this is exactly what is happening. I see it every day that I am out and about Houston and its environs. It will not be too far in the future when English will not be the major language spoken in Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. Right now, Spanish is the official language of many border towns in Texas.

The problems that this is causing are many and serious. The educational system is in chaos, because the immigrants cannot speak English and have no desire to have their children learn the language. The only jobs available to them are low paying menial labor jobs, which means the welfare system is growing by leaps and bounds. Requirements for naturaliztion have been for the most part eliminated.

This is a far cry from when my ancestors immigrated to this country 160 years ago. Immigrants have always learned the English language as quickly as possible so that they could be integrated into society and seek out better jobs and an improved standard of living.

We need a copmlete overhaul of the Immigtartion and Naturalization Administration, and a reestablishment of proper rules and regulations to control immigration. And in addition there must be a reversal of the governments acceptance of illegal aliens, and totally unacceptable amnesty.

Uncontrolled immigration in time will have a debilitating effect on many of our institutions, such as education, health, politics.

I have no problem with rubbing elbows with people with brown or black faces. As long as they respect the institutions of this nation which was founded over 200 years ago. As long as they all have the opportunity to improve their lot, as my ancestors did. And are willing to put forth the effort to achieve a better place in society, I say more power to them. Just don't try to destroy what we have had for two centuries.

"Them" "brown and black faces" as opposed to white-- how about yellow? whoooow Bye Folks

Many thoughts today regarding effects on America. MaryPage sees increasing population leading to violence. Barbara points out that our immigrant ancestors were often non-English speaking. Willewoody states, however, that immigrants have always learned to speak English as quickly as possible, sees our democratic institutions slowly eroding, sees in the near future Spanish as the major languge spoken in Texas, New Mexco, and Arizona, and suggests that there needs to be a complete overhaul of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

In what specific way would you change the INS, Williewoody?

Robby

A sizeable number of the colonias' residents are Mexican-Americans who were in the region before the border was even drawn, ex-urban out-migrants possessing historically prior rights. "We did not cross the border, the border crossed our ancestors." In contrast to many public representations of colonia residents as recent and undocumented, there are high numbers of legal colonia residents. Colonias house the earliest and most recent residents of the Texas Borderlands.

One trend is the movement out of U.S. cities, especially Latino barrios, into the colonias by people tired of renting when they can own their own piece of land and control their living space, and with more hopes for bettering their family.

Isn't this the American dream?

Robby

We have laws on top of laws regarding immigration and our boarders but it has become evident that the current administration has failed to enforce them. We have to be fair but firm with our neighbors on our boarders. If we fail on our land-boarders, why do we have seaport entry inspections. Why not open all the doors? Just as much trouble in many forms can come over land as by sea or air. Mexico states publicly that they will take back California, Az. Tx. New Mx. and change the boarder forever to include these states and more into Mexico. What Santa Anna could not do, the immigrants will.

Willewoody, I'm not sure that it is true that "immigrants have always learned to speak English as quickly as possible." I've heard stories in the past of older immigrants from European nations who never learned English or learned only a minimum of English. It's true that their children learned English quickly, at least once they got into school.

swabby, re "our neighbors on our borders," the states you mention are all southern states. Do we have these same kinds of feelings about our neighbors on our northern border? And yes, it's true that many -- maybe most -- of these immigrants are coming from deep within Mexico, but look at what Robby said just above your post about the colonias: "A sizeable number of the colonias' residents are Mexican-Americans who were in the region before the border was even drawn, ex-urban out-migrants possessing historically prior rights. 'We did not cross the border, the border crossed our ancestors.' In contrast to many public representations of colonia residents as recent and undocumented, there are high numbers of legal colonia residents." The conditions these people are living in are appalling. Don't we have some kind of responsibility to them/for them?

When I taught, I had several Mexican-American students over the years from central Washington. One student stands out in my memory because of his California-Mexico background. His great-great-grandfather owned a large ranch in California when it was Mexico but was driven off of his land by white-American "settlers" at gun point. My student, a Mexician citizen, had to have the proper papers to even drive across the border to what had been his own family's ranch, now California, USA.

We Americans have such a short memory, or distored memory or no memory at all of the thousands upon thousands of American Indians from hundreds of tribes across the country that were run off the land that they had occupied for thousands of years, land that was originally seized from native peoples, one way or another, usually at gun point. I think that its great that the natives are taking back the land again. Isn't that what the native Mexican is doing on the border now? We always sound so darn superior when we talk about "them" and "us", our culture and their culture.

I have lived on an indian reservation, in an Indian village in Alaska, and taught Indian children and teenagers through the BIA. First, I have never heard American Indians refer to themselves as a "Native American". It may be politically correct but it sure isn't used by Indians. Its always "what tribe are you from?"

Personally, I like the way the Quinault tribe up the road from me handles white America, IN A WAY THAT WE UNDERSTAND. "Keep off our land, beaches, hunting -clamming, and fishing sites --PRIVATE property-PERIOD. THE QUINAULT TRIBE! With big signs posted. Other signs read "You are on reservation land, get off and KEEP off. NO TRESPASSING" Boy, that's one

We have rebuilt Japan.

Why can we not build Mexico our neibor and then not to worry about them coming to to United States. We can do it and it would be good for them and us also.

Maybe they may say (English, Irish, etc. GO HOME)

deTocqueville spoke (quotes above) of observing America with its inclinations, its prejudices, its character, and its passions. He saw both sides of America and both sides of what we call democracy. Are we, indeed, being democratic (with a small "d")? Are we, indeed, demonstrating the meaning of liberty and freedom? Are we, as Swabby, says being "fair but firm?" Swabby asks (although I realize he was saying this with irony): "Why not open all doors?" Why not? Would that be a worse situation that what we have now?

I must admit that I have never heard or read of the government of Mexico's public statement that "they will take back California, Arizona, Texas, and New Mexico." Can you give us some documentation on this, Swabby?

Songbird calls our attention to the "conditions of the colonias' residents being appalling." Whose fault is that? She asks: "Do we have any responsibility for that?" What can we do and what should we do for those people in that area who are in that twilight zone between being Mexican and American?

All of us Americans must certainly know from reading our history books that which Ellen reminds us, i.e. "white settlers took property at gun point." We "Anglo-Americans" were conquerors who, as she reminds us, "always sound so darn superior" and who, in addition, have "short memories or distorted memories."

Ginger, your question is a thought-provoking one. I am not sure if you were serious or not in asking "Can we not rebuild Mexico as we did Japan?" Just how would we go about doing that? Could we? Should we?

Thanks to everyone here in this forum for bringing up strong points which help us to understand ourselves. The questions in the title remain.

What is America?

What is an American?

What is democracy?

Robby

A common term is "diaspora" meaning people who are forced uut of their homelands or choose to leave due to their difficult life but who keep their culture alive in exile. Are earlier immigration patterns into this country from Europe and Asia distinct from what we are now seeing regarding immigration from Latin America? Close to one half of our foreign born are Latin American (10 million) of which four out of five of them are Mexican (8 million.)

Due to the close proximity of the United States with Mexico, they are able to keep in contact with their nation of origin. This differentiates them from other immigrants. There are many enclaves formed within the United States where the assimilation process can be arrested, where people do not learn English well enough to "melt." An additional factor is that the economic landscape is different now from what it was earlier in the century.

Should we look at the "Mexican situation" in the same way as we looked at immigration procedures decades ago?

Robby

Wow leave it to Ginger to be one to bring us one of the most enlighting concepts in a few words. Yes, just as most of us would not have known how to tackle the rebuilding of a much hated nation as Japan was after WW2 it was accomplished with strong, enlighted minds of wisdom. I wouldn't know how to tackle Mexico but with finally a change in government with Fox the door is opened to help rather than exploit.

Interesting that most folks do not have a negative reaction to those communities that continue to speak German or Czech. They were still teaching children in the public schools with German in Fredricksburg as late as 1969 and many of the older citizens of Coldwell and Shulenburg still speak Czech.

As you say this country seems to be big enough for all kinds of thought and words. It is when the thoughts and words become actions that concern me.

I had this thought not long ago that it struck me that most of us are from families that immigrated here since the 1840s and pride oursleves as being so American because of the time our family has been living in the Continent and yet the Blacks have a heritage in America that goes back so much longer than most white folk. And come to think of it most Brown faces have the same historical time connections as compared to us Anglos. Hmmmm

Robby, The first thing to help Mexico is for our factories etc. who have moved there to pay them a living wage and to see to it that they have running water and in side plumbing. Clean things up there.

What I see is cheap wages to make things to sell other places and make a huge profit. Greed is the problem so the people suffer and we look the other way.

Hi Barbara.

Ginger

Barbara talks about helping Mexico rather than "exploiting" it. In the case of Japan, the door was open to our restructuring it because we had just conquered it. How do we go about restructuring another sovereign nation? Is this our responsibility? Is this what Mexico would like us to do? How would such an action (assuming we had the right and abiliy to do it) strengthen the population now existing in our own nation?

Robby

In response to an increasingly affluent Hispanic audience, a third Spanish languge television network will launch in the United States next year. The Dallas-based network will be called Azteca America and will begin programming sometime next summer.

It will broadcast 18 hours a day of original programming and will reach about 45 percent of the country's Spanish speakers. By 2002, the network will reach 70 percent of the U.S. Hispanic population.

According to a stock analyst who follows these trends: "The Hispanic population is growing at five times the rate of the non-Hispanic population and the buying power is growing at twice the rate of the non-Hispanic population." Many of the programs will be created in Mexico at one-fifth to one-eighth of the cost of producing them in the United States.

Are we still seeing America as composed primarily of "Anglo-Americans?"

Robby

Robby: Before this discussion gets so far ahead let me reply to your inquiry as to what needs to be done with the INS. I guessI was not too clear. What I mean is that we need to bring immigration back under control. Reinstate those requirements for citizenship such as being able to communicate in English, know about our history and customs, etc.

deToqueville was absolutely right..."the tie of language is the strongest and most durable that can unite mankind."

I am not against immigration, I only want it to be controlled and legal. I don't see another nation on earth that has thrown open its borders to allow uncontrolled mass illegal immigration.

Of course, since the very beginning times of this nation there have been immigrants who have chosen not to learn English. Most if not all of such instances were elderly persons who followed along with their younger siblings to the new world. Because of the tendancy of most immigrants to gravitate to settle in close proximity to others from their same country of origin, these elderly were able to carry on their lives without learning a new language.

The reverse of this situation is in Guadalahara, Mexico where there is a large enclave of English speaking people from the States who have moved there in retirement.

Williewoody: Your comments about the Immigration and Naturalization Service are still most relevant for we have been talking about the American population and how it makes America what it is. You see deTocqueville's remark made 170 years ago about the power of language in uniting people as continuing to make as much sense in our time.

How would you go about enforcing newly arrived immigrants to learn a bit about our language, our history, and our customs. As you well know, making a law is one thing - enforcing it is another. And what if they choose not to become American citizens but to remain among us as Mexicans - speaking their own language and following their own customs?

Robby

The INS does not make the immigration laws, if my understanding is correct. The INS is just a federal agency, I believe an arm of the Department of Justice, but perhaps of State, that carries out the Laws of the United States as passed by the Congress of the United States.

I believe it is the Congress that sets the quotas from each country and instructs the INS as to the job they are to do.

And WHO influences Congress?

Robby

Two quickie comments:--

1 - To new comers to this discussion. Please refer regularly to de Tocqueville's quotes above as we are comparing the America we see today with the America he saw. This is a new discussion so you still have time to get a paperback of his book ($7 or much less).
2 - To the many of you who I know are lurking. Please share your thoughts with us. Everyone of us has some views about America.

Robby

Robby: Your coments re Mexicans not wanting to become citizens and living here, not learnig our language and customs, etc. sounds like you would favor what really is happening now. ILLEGAL immigration. It is understandable why you have these feelings. May I suggest you come down here to Texas and live on the border for a while to see if your ideas will change. I doubt if you see many Mexicans in your part of the country.

What is exasperating to me is to have to resort to sign language so often when trying to communicate with these people. At my age I don't feel I should have to learn their language in order to commuicate with them in my own country. If you were a German and your country was overrun with Italian immigrants, would you feel obligated to learn Italian in order to communicate with them in Germany? Makes no sense.

Robby: In answer to your #1033 "Who influences Congress." I know you would like me to think it is the people in this "democracy." But you know as well as I do it's the lobbyists and PAC.s that have that honor. The Big Business lobby among many others has a hugh influence on our immigration policies. They moved their industries to Mexico to feast on the cheap labor. So now when the Mexicans are fleeing starvation wage jobs . there are no industries here to absorb them. What's the answer to that?

In an earlier post I said that I feel that immigration should be slowed down until such time as social services and infrastructure can accomodate those all ready here and that includes U.S. Citizens......

Tigerlily has an excellent point in mentioning our infrastructure. This is turning inexorably from being a problem to becoming a nightmare. Bridges and roads all over this country are crumbling and falling apart. Gas and oil pipelines are in need of replacement. Many water and sewer systems are ancient. Dams need expensive repairs. It is not going to be Our problem, but later generations are not only not going to see projected budget surpluses materialize, they are going to see their taxes soar to fix the plague of problems they are going to find themselves saddled with because not enough attention is being put to required repairs now.

Williewoody: I don't recall making any comments indicating that I favored illegal immigration or "what is happening now." Please give me the number of the posting where I indicated that.

Robby

Williewoody:

You stated: "I know you would like me to think it is the people in this "democracy." No where in any postings have I ever "wanted" you or anyone else to think anything. Everyone in this discussion group is entitled to give his/her views regardless of whatever anyone else believes.

Robby

Tigerliley: Regarding your suggestion that "immigration be slowed down," until social services and infrastructure can catch up. Would you do that across the board? Would you say, for example, 25% less immigration for the next five years for all immigrants, no matter from where they emigrated? Would you set quotas - 10% less for this nation and 50% for that nation? Would you consider stopping all immigration for a specific length of time? If you were the INS Chief, how would you do that?

Robby

Swabby is not racist. I claim several nationalities in my blood and my wife has Cherokee blood in her veins. I am well read on the plight of the American Indian all the way from Lewis and Clark to the tradgedy of Wounded Knee. I respect all peoples, but my point on Mexico is the lack of cooperation with our country to stem the flow of their people over the boarder. It appears the Mexican Gov. thinks thats to bad,you Americans handle it. Now is that a neighbor. Did you ever have a neighbor that had a dog that used your yard for a restroom everytime he had to relieve himself. It iritated you and you asked him to please watch his dog and he absolutely refused to do his part and keep him out of your yard. Eventually you get so put out that you start taking it out on the dog and it's really his masters fault.(which is not fair to the dog). This being very simplistic and the Mexican immigrants are not dogs of course. I amtrying to illustrate what a good neighbor and a bad neighbor is. The early Mexican settlers in the South and South West are as much American as I am. The Mexcan people must remember that the Americans marched all the way to Mexico City and as much as conquered Mexico at one time in History. The neighbors to the North in Canada enjoy a stable Government and living conditions are comparable to ours. The pressures on this boarder is balanced out and the cultures are similar. I am for friendship, not adversaries. I am for order, not chaos. I intend to elect a President this time that understands Texas and the Mexican people. George Bush. Adios

As we continue to float down the mainstream of life observing the face of America just as we have been doing since July 28th, a very strange thing is suddenly happening. As we look about us, we don't see any faces!! We suddenly realize that almost all the faces across America are pointed toward their television sets. Senior Net has suddenly gone almost silent. Six billion people around the world and millions upon millions of Americans are watching the Olympics.

This is what America is showing us at the moment. Therefore, although there are still segments of America's population that we haven't examined and to which we will return, it is perhaps apropos that we spend a couple of days examining a term very similar to democracy -- Brotherhood.

How many here observed the opening ceremony of the Olympics? How many of you were affected emotionally by what you saw? What specifically did you see which brought tears to your eyes? Why? What thoughts were in your mind? Were you proud of the American team? Were you proud of the Canadian team? Were you proud of all the teams present?

What do the Olympics mean to you and do you see any connection between that and what we have been discussing here?

Robby

Robby I can't help it - I am rolling on the floor - BROTHERHOOD - talk about a dichotomy of interests being projected just now - I just can't help laughing and I can't stop.

Barbara: Expand a bit more, if you will, on what you are thinking. I am exhausted and headed for bed but will pick up in the morning on your thoughts and the thoughts of others.

Robby

Oh Robby I am afraid my brother's dog may be poohing in my yard that is really the yard that our parants own. I have a brother that should keep his dog in his yard because it is not the color I like and therefore I don't want it messin around in my and my parants yard even if it can fetch the paper for us. Heck I put that fence up 'bout hun'ard and sixty years ago. You'd than'k that brother o' mine would honor that fence after all these years and just keep his dog outa my yard.

Maybe I should call the Governer to make sure my brother's dog doesn't get into my yard.

Swabby, don't know if you are racist or not but your example of the dog is as racist as it gets. I'm going to assume that it was as inadvertant as most racism is. The racism in me is just as hard to hear or know. What's coming into your yard isn't an overgrown rose bush, but dog do.

When I think of people with Mexican heritage, I think of one of my best professors at UT Austin, also of a friend who shared rent with me as we trudged through graduate school, also of a colleague at UC Berkeley, or of an artist of whose work I have several prints. In fact, they are part of the "we" of Americans, not of the "them" who you picture as invading our space.

The mechanics of immigration may need work, but so do our perceptions of what divides us or what joins us as a human family.

We need all of us to work hard on writing what we mean. So often when I post it doesn't sound like what I meant. I am afraid Swabbies little antecdote re dogs and yards was in very poor taste and if he meant it as racist that is what it appears, but if he was trying to make an economic or political point he missed. I smiled at the posts following his too. Robbie is that why Seniornet has gone silent? Olympics. Wow, I watched some and yes the opening ceremony always gets to me. I like the swim competion best and it has been going on several days in advance. Saw how they keep sharks away from the triathalon swimmers in the waters off Sidney. I don't know if Brotherhood is synonomous with Competition but I don't think so. And the origins of such games usually had a pretty war like reason for existing. Barb. What do you say about that. Brotherhood :An affiliation of men for the purpose of attaining a common goal. A trade Union. A lodge. A mens club. Faith

Wow great statement Betty “The mechanics of immigration may need work, but so do our perceptions of what divides us or what joins us as a human family.”

Faith YES! “Brotherhood :An affiliation of men for the purpose of attaining a common goal. A trade Union. A lodge. A mens club.”

Ok here is my Litany - if you have the interest they are great sites that say a lot about our history of accepting the poor, tired, huddled masses yearning to be free--“...send these to me, your tempest tossed, I lift my lamp before the golden door.”

Without Sanctuary brings home how we discard those with other than white skin.

Moon of Popping Trees A reminder of how the white man in power values human life when they do not value the culture.

America for Americans. “Anything that disrupts that by having masses of immigration disrupts the whole idea of the nation.” Great article ahum to hand to current immigrating Indonesians and Hatians.

legal aliens and citizens with the wrong look.

“...would be nice if all of America's ethnic groups and all its children were, as in Lake Wobegon, above average.”

colored or white African Americans have been exasperated by the idea that their ethnic backgrounds—as Irish, Mexican, German, etc.—are obliterated by the necessity to maintain “blackness” as the unalloyed touchstone for determining who is white and who is not. According to the racial formula by which mixed-raced persons of African descent are denied any identity other than black, it would be impossible for a black woman to give birth to a white baby.

Although she was the last member of a family who had held the original Mexican land grant for Bolinas, Rose Briones left little behind in the Dogtown schoolhouse to suggest her family once owned much of West Marin.

...You bet !!! With 3 million ILLEGAL Mexicans in this country

FAIR is FAIR and here is the INS view of Illegal aliens in Texas.

Too many immigrant children in the United States are staring into "a toxic mirror" that seriously compromises the self-image of children who will grow up to be part of American society.

DISLIKING OTHERS A judgment--a positive or a negative attitude towards a person or group of people which is not based on objective facts. These prejudgments are usually based on stereotypes which are oversimplified and overgeneralized views of groups or types of people. Or, a prejudgment may be based on an emotional experience we have had with a similar person, sort of our own personal stereotype. Stereotypes also provide us with role expectations, i.e. how we expect the other person (or group, like all Japanese) to relate to us and to other people.

Our culture has hundreds of ready-made stereotypes: leaders are dominant, arrogant men; housewives are nice but empty headed; teenagers are music crazed car-fanatics; very smart people are weird, and on and on. Of course, sometimes a leader or housewife or teenager is somewhat like the stereotype but it is a gross injustice to automatically assume they all are.

Barbara: Your list of Links is a treasure-house of information about "man's inhumanity to man." I read your links and they are all so informative and thought-provoking that I will not comment on them. My comments would be weak compared to what they say. If one doesn't know where to begin, my suggestion would be to start by reading the last link, "Disliking Others," and then moving to one's own preferences. I heartily recommend participants here reading some or all of those Links.

Considering what we (Americans and others) are doing -- Pogo: "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- does the apparent reason for the Olympics existing have a hollow ring? Is Brotherhood, as Faith says, merely a "trade union"? - a "men's club"? Do the Olympics have primarily a "war like" reason for existing, i.e. competition?

Why are 6 billion people watching the Olympics? Why are millions of Americans watching the Olympics? Why are you watching? Or are you not?

Robby

Watched the opener and wished I were there. My eyes welled up at the singing of the Australian national anthem. The LOOK on the faces of the Australians the camera scanned! They were all feeling EXACTLY the way I feel about our country. Enormous pride, joy and love.

I felt awe at the opening program. Loved the little girl who was "having a dream".

My favorite part was watching the nations enter the stadium. Resented the commercials interrupting this. My heart welled up at seeing Korea parade in. The Aussies gave them a special roar of approval, as well. Kept looking for the female of the species in the arab delegations, and most often not seeing them. Stood up and saluted my own flag and did a half dance, half march in front of the telly the whole (long) time we were on. It seemed we had the largest number, along with the Australians themselves.

I am a women's soccer fan, big time.

Why are 6 billion people watching the Olympics? Why are millions of Americans watching the Olympics? Why are you watching? Or are you not?

Robby

Today in the Columbia Missouri Tribune and interesting article....Columbia Mo. is the home of Missouri University, population approx. 100,000...The article is titled "Honoring Hispanics". Some tidbits from this article...Sept. 15 to Oct. 15 has been Hispanic Heritage Month in the United States since 1974 , but this was the first year it has been made official for the city of Columbia. Pacheco, speaking in English and Spanish, said that the Hispanic population in the United States has risen 39 percent in the past nine years...( Mr. Pacheco is Hispanic)..He said that some states have seen "efforts to reduce the impact of a rapidly growing Hispanic community" and called such treds "dangerous." He said people who come to this country want to work and should be accepted as contributors to America's culture. "It shouldn't have taken 500 years for there to be a Hispanic president of a major university." Pacheco said. Missouri "has never marketed to Hispanics," has seen its Hispanic population rise in many cities. The state's Hispanic population has grown by 50 percent in the past 10 years, and some counties have seen a more than 100 increase...Mr Pacheco said he wants Hispanics who are already part of Missouri communities to "take responsibility for building an infrastructure" of social support for recent Hispanic immigrants........Columbia saw its first Sapnish-language radio program debut in February....A Spanish-language television station will debut this coming Wed. The Hispanic presence on the Mu campus has risen 25 percent in the last semester and said "that rate of growth, if maintained, will mean tremendous things for the future of MU". ....... I found this article most interesting as of course it relates so much to what we have discussing......I cannot believe how much I am learning from these discussions!!!!!! We are proud of Mr. Pacheco and the job he is doing in Mid-Missouri.

Robby to be quite honest I have no idea what I would do to slow immigration a bit.....Guess I will have to leave that to the "experts" and I will just try to continue to my work as an "expert"...

I all ways cry at parades, the "Star Spangled Banner" Ball games, and of course the opening of the Olympics..... Watching all the young people from different countries looking so pround and happy just sends me over the edge..... Doesn't it make one proud that the U.S.A. is made up of a little of all those people?

Forgive the long post.....

Barbara---Thank you for those incredible links. I have been to about two thirds of them and will go back and check out the others. The transcript of the PBS program was something else. Again, many thanks.

Maryal

Excerpt from a NY Times column:--

"Olympic athletes have been role models since the days of the ancient Greeks. But there's a wrinkle in the scheme now, and it ges bigger every time the Olympic Games roll around. We used to pluck athletes out of the fields of Arcadia, just as dewy and fresh as natural apples, but this is an era when our apples may be genetically modified.

"We're achieveing levels of performance far beyond those of the ancient Greeks and rather beyond the merely human. Growth hormones and blood-doping scandals have broken out repeatedly, but this is just the thin edge of the biomedical wedge.

"Knowledge is power. If knowledge of the body explodes, then banning drugs is a mere finger in the dike. A rival in Kenya trains the traditional way. Our cyber-paragon can tailor a program to his exact needs for more-than-peak performance -- while obeying the letter of the Olympic law. The champ knows hmself on a cellular level, while others still work by pre-industrial intuition.

"This is the catwalk to the posthuman future. Olympic athletes are just fighting our battles first. If they try to slow down, an eager society will just take a route around them."

How does all this, if true, relate to the spirit of the original Olympics?

Robby

I believe I read that one country, in THIS 2000 game, BOUGHT 3 athletes from another country?

This seems to undermine the principles of the events.

Bought as in Purchased to Compete under The Flag of the Purchasing Country!

Does anyone have any facts on that?

Robby

I just threw today's WASHINGTON POST, where I read it, away a couple of hours ago. I mean, out in the huge newspaper recycling dumpster. Irretrievable. I think it was not in the Sports section. I think it was in the gossip box (EYE?) on page 3 of the Style section, but I am not certain.

Names and Faces is now the name of the column that used to be called :Eye", I think.

Anyway, I went on line, and it is not there. Will let you know when I find the item again.

TEAM U.S.A. BEAT CHINA in Women's Soccer! We are BOUND to win the gold medal now!

Millions of South Koreans watched on television as 180 athletes from both sides of the Korean Demilitarized Zone, the world's most heavily guarded border, marched together at the opening of the Sydney Olympics. North Korea's state controlled media has not reported it, or any other Olympic news. According to the South Korean daily newspaper: "For the brief five minutes the athletes walked together, Korea was a one and single nation."

The joint march was a staged event, heavy with symbolism. Korean athletes had never marched together in the Olympics. Contact between North and South Koreans is still outlawed.

Does anyone here believe that the Olympics, either this year or any other year, can have an effect on world events?

Robby

Based on the aftermath of previous Olympic games which are forgotten not long after they are over, I would say no.

Mal

Elimination of restrictions on amateur standing had some effect on my viewership.

Written by Journalist William Oscar Johnson shortly before the Atlanta games:--

"The Olympics are very different from what its founders envisaged. Never the cult of purity that they extolled, the Games have become the focus of a new kind of cult tht worships the ultimate in unlimited sporting achievement...The radiance has become that of professional superstardom. Olympic heroes have multimillion-dollar contracts and cast elecronic shadows around the globe.

"Pure competition, as the Games' crusty founders enfisaged it, does not yet exist and isn't likely to. Training methods and chemical abuse still cause quarrels and suspicion. The tom-toms of nationalism are throbbing as loudly as ever...But imperfect as it is, the enduring Olympics may still give humanity a glimpse of evolving perfection."

Robby

The games are certainly not perfect. I was upset about the money paid under the table to woo the committee to award the games to a particular city. I was upset by the change of rules to allow professional athletes. I feel queasy about the amount of money spent on the opening show, because some perfectly wonderful sites for the games might feel they could not possibly compete with this.

BUT, I felt, and my children and grandchildren said that they felt, SUCH a wonderful sense of what the worldwide community of man COULD be! Could be! Maybe this does plant a small seed in all those who participate and in all those who watch.

Every little bit helps.

I think like all events and all books and all that is written we look at it through our own eyes having no clue to the reality. Think of the many families you have enjoyed thinking they were so right for the community till some truths leak out. The concept of a pure and innocent giving their all for glory is lovely to imagine but just look at the visiable reality the last few years as we see famous professional sports figures playing and winning olympic medals, never mind the many that are funded to their reach for a gold by nations.

Like all groups in society there is politics and a struggle for power that is more often about the money than the glory. Personally I think when we realize what is involved with group interaction and see that reality, only than, will we begin to see how the acceptance ond mixture of ethnicity, peace and friendship could become a goal that is achievable.

This week's issue has an article "The Wealth Revolution" which says the ranks of new rich are exploding. Number of millionaires rose to 7.2 million last year from 3.4 five years earlier. Houses don't count. It must be in investable assets.

And those with over $5 million are growing even faster. Estimate is there are 590,000 of them now compared to just 90,000 in 1994.

The aricle has several quotes from deToc about democracies "...passion for...the love of riches..."

It ends with his "Amongst aristocratic nations, money reaches only to a few points on the vast circle of man's desires; in democracies it seems to lead to all."

As suspected, the riches are primarily from the stock market and stock options.

Hey gang, how do we fit in here?

Instead of the much touted Olympics that mesmerize so many of us, I prefer to watch, when they are available, the Special Olympics. These show us children and young adults who compete against themselves, who strive to attain pride and well being based on their individual achievements and who show us that no one is "disabled". Handicapped, yes, but able to strive for and achieve the best that is possible for them.

Whether the Olympics is more symbolism than evidence of world connection, I wouldn't sell the benefits of symbolism short. I personally think it does us good to SEE all these countries' young peoples gathered in one place. I personally was very moved to see the Korean teams march together. I don't know the lasting value of the sight of them together, but sometimes I think of the direction of momentum---that both momentum and the direction have some value. Who knows what hard work this sight might instill in some South Korean watchers. I can imagine a "unified" Korean saying years from now, "Remember those Olympics? That's what inspired me to keep working."

Thanks, Barbara, for the good links. Goodness, the play (script) written about the U.S. non responses to information about Jewish death camps, etc., and the personal story of the missing parents---what a wrenching story, so well written. I was imagining watching it in finished form as I read.

Prejudice is painful from every direction. I particularly liked the last article's emphasis on how many prejudices are within all of us, born of society, family, even our innocent everyday experiences. It's an undercurrent of most of life, not relegated to just "awful" people, but within most of us nice people, too.

Barbara: I have just gotten around to reading your post and list of links and cannot find the words to thank you for your digging and bringing out the information contained in those links. I was particularly horrified to read the narrative of Kurt Klein and the role of our State and Treasury departments and our beloved president in underplaying (to be generous) the systematic annihilation of the Jewish people. You have done a magnificent service in reminding us of our own foibles and acts o dishonor. The very fact that you have brought all this to our attention, and the responses here on SN give much hope that we have learned well from this shameful period in our history.Wouldn't it be wonderful if the spirit of the Olympics in bringing young people from all over the world together could be translated to our own country in bringing all of our diverse population together as one people. Thanks again, Barbara.

Gail

Betty reminds us that prejudices are "within all of us." Gail calls attention to "our own foibles." As we continue to examine the population of America, we need, therefore, to keep in mind that the population is "us" and that if any inhumanities are being shown, some of it might be coming from our very selves.

We are a nation of immigrants - made up of people who migrated from other parts of the world. We look at Chinese, for example, and if they do not look like us, see them as strangers. Chinese migration, however, began before the Civil War. That period of immigration lasted from 1850 until the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. This Act prohibited direct Chinese immigration. Chinese men who migrated to the United Sttes came to work at a low pay and were generally assigned to do the "dirty work" such as railroad, laundry, and restaurant work that whites had no desire to complete. The few women who did migrate to the U.S. were forced to work as prostitues.

These Chinese came without knowing anyone else migrating at the time. In 1870 about 61% of the Chinese women were prostitues in California. Congress finally passed a law in 1875 that forbade Chinese women to immigrate for prostitution, and most Chinese women were not allowed to come until the 1940s. (I repeat -- the 1940s -- how long ago was that?)

The U.S. economy was in a depression in the beginning of the 1870s, which resultd in job opportunities for the Chinese immigrants. Many Americans hated them because they were taking away numerous jobs and becoming successful. This hatred led to the aforementioned Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. As soon as this Act took effect, Chinese migration dropped drastically. The Act was extended for ten years in 1892 and indefinitely in 1904.

But in 1943 a small migration here was allowed because China was a wartime ally of the United Staes when the U.S. declard war on Japan in 1941. How ironic that it took a war for freedom-loving people to be able to go to the land of their dreams.

What are your experiences with incoming Chinese or with Chinese-Americans? Are there any in your area? Do you know any personally? Do you see any prejudice in the governmental Acts mentioned here or was that necessary for the benefit of the United States?

Robby

I find it interesting that those Chinese who have managed to immigrate to this country have for the most part followed the same pattern as our forefathers and quickly learn the English language and assimilate into the general population.

Like it or not English is the common language of the United States and the bulk of our heritage can be traced to England.

Hispanics on the other hand do not seem to want to follow this pattern. Once again I repeat that d'Tocqueville's premise that.."The tie of language is the strongest and most durable that can unite mankind." is exactly right.

One of the arguments heard about why the Hispanics don't want to learn English is that they are afraid they will lose their Heritage. Nothing can be further from the truth. Wisconsin has a large German-American population who still retain much of their old country heritage, but certainly speak English fluently. The same is true of Swedes in Mnnesota, Italians in New York City and elsewhere. Czechs populate many areas of the Dakotas. and Texas has many pockets of Germans and Czechs.

As a matter of fact Hispanic traditions and customs are well established in many areas of the Southwest with no particular objection by the non-Spanish speaking population. So "where's the beef" as the saying goes.

For Naturalization, an applicant must demonstrate literacy in English. The INS takes into consideration an applicant's education and background. Until recently, only applicants who were over 50 years old and had been legal permanent resident of 20 years or more were not subject to the English literacy requirement Now, however, an applicant over 55 who has been a legal permanent resient for at least 15 years is also not subject to the literacy requirement ("55/15"). Persons eligible for the 50/20 or 55/15 waivers are required to pass the U.S. government and history exam, but may be questiond through an interpreter.

We have asked this before but might we not ask again: "Can the majority of Americans, regardless of their family origin, call themselves Anglo-Americans" because, as Williwoody puts it, "the bulk of our heritage can be traced to England?"

Robby

I really have never once thought of myself as Anglo-American. I believe that all of the legal citizens of America, whether by birth or naturalization, are AMERICANS. I have heard of many black people who do not like the hyphenated Afro-American and I suspect there are many others with ancestral roots in other lands who never think of themselves as hyphenated Americans.

As to the Olympics---I don't like the commercialization of the Games either. But whatever I may feel, it seems to mean a lot to those athletes who dedicate years and years to very hard work in their chosen sport. It has to be because it means more than the dollar! You only need look at their faces as they stand on the podium and hear their national anthemn played. The pride, and sometimes tears, are pretty evident. Even though I don't like some of changes that have come about I can always admire the men and women who compete.

Phyll

Phyll....I never thought about it before but I also have never thought of myself as "Anglo" but simply "American".....I don't know many Chinese but those I do know from work I like very much....Very courteous, smart, and hardworking.....Also are quick to laugh and seem to enjoy life..........Some don't speak the best English but they are trying and I can certainly understand them......Sometimes I don't speak the best English either........(grin)....

What is everyone's reaction to the latter part of deTocqueville's remark (above) which begins "They commonly seek?"

Robby

"This would be enough to prove that, at such periods, no new religion could be established ......"

I find Tocqueville to be possessed of incredible intellect, but so firmly opinionated as to be hopelessly wrong more often than not.

In his thoughts here, he begins by stating firmly that no one of us can put our single intellect to the task of solving all of the philosophical questions that come up in life. He believes we do not have the time for that, and must, therefore, choose to follow a belief pattern of one type or another. He is quite certain that our democratic tendencies will preclude our coming up with a new creed or new prophets.

Ha! This was in, what, 1835? The Mormons, a totally American-born belief, led by a prophet, started in this country in, what, 1857? We have had beaucoup American-born and bred prophets since that time. And quite a number of new (Christian) sects that are distinctly American, plus New Age dogmas that have little or nothing to do with the old religions.

deT arrived in 1830 and returned home in 1831.

Robby

See page 9 introduction: First published in 1835. Arrived here 1831, departed 1832. Wrote up his journal, incorporating his lofty thoughts, and published in 1835.

Barbara -- I was out of town over the weekend, and just came back to about 100 posts in this forum, which I have just waded through. Thank you so much for those awesome links. Like someone else said, I'll go back and read them more thoroughly later.

But I wonder, and maybe this is awful of me to ask -- and shows my liberal leanings -- but I wonder how many people actually LOOKED at those links? My guess is that people who are prejudiced about certain people DIDN'T look at links that addressed those particular issues. Whatever our beliefs or our prejudices, we're comfortable in them, and it takes more guts to step outside of our comfort zones than most of us have. Being WILLING to look at the facts and being WILLING to change are the first steps to change.

Growing up on the far west coast gives a person a different perspective on life and its cross-section of human backgrounds.

Portland, Oregon, during the depression years, had a large Chinese American population. I had many childhood Chinese American friendships that continued over into adulthood as well. I even lived with a Chinese family, taking care of the children (the wife, my close friend, was in the hospital) while the husband tried to get two of his sons out of China at the time of the revolution. He never did find the boys and was lucky to get out alive himself. I have many interesting memories of my high school Chinese American experiences. I remember the families going through so much that is so common for immigrants. The old-world ways colliding with the next younger "American" generation.

Robby: I would like to know what you interpret "truth" to mean in de Trocqueville's statement. I am not qualified, obviously, as a deep thinker. Philosophy, has never been my strong point. But I do believe I can follow what is being said if someone will interpret what a philosopher is thinking in terms my small mind can follow. Thank You

Williewoody:

I'm not quite sure why you describe yourself as "not qualified as a deep thinker" or having a "small mind" but there are no connections between the size of a person's mind and his ability to think deeply and his right to have an opinion on Senior Net. This is not a group discussing philophy. We are members of democracies sharing our thoughts.

As to "truth" in deT's quote, I believe he was referring to each person looking for "truth" as he sought it or recognized it as such when he found it.

Robby

The first Chinese people here as workers were referred to as "coolies," "heathens," "mice-eaters," and "Chinks." In the 1860s and 1870s, feelings of hatred toward them were felt in union policies, and political platorms. Chinese are often mistaken for Korean Americans, while the Japanese are mistaken to be Chinese. Chinese are often thought of as "foreigners" and are seen on television as faceless and not valuing life.

In general, they were underrepresented in the political system. It was not until 1920 when they became involved in political activities and labor organizations were formed.

Most of them worked as unskilled laborers, while some became merchants and crafts workers. More than 12,000 of them worked on the construction of the transcontinental railorad up until 1869 when it was complete. There were at least 135,000 Chinese Americans by 1880, most of whom lived in California. They turned swampland into farmland, planted, cultivated, and harvested at ranches, orchards, and vinyards. Some of them farmed as sharecroppers.

They were also factory workers in woolen mills, cigar makers, shoemakers and garment workers. Some developed shrimp fisheries, while others were domestic servants. They had to work for hours and hours and not only were there poor working conditions, they barely made any money.

Didn't someone say years ago that the American Dream is obtained through vision and hard work?

Robby

American or American/? Funny I grew up in an intregrated neighborhood which I may have stated before..but I never thought of any of my neighbors as anything but American.. Yes I knew Mr Guenther was of German ancestory, that my family and several others were of Irish backgrounds, the corner tavern on end of the street was an Irish pub and on the other was run by a Polish lady named Julie. We also had Armenians, Jewish, English,Spanish,Mexicans and Negroes. In fact I always thought of the Negroes as being more American than my family since they could trace thier americanized ancestors further back than I could.

We also had Catholics, Methodists, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses,Baptists, Unitarians..etc I think I investigated them all at some time in my life...and whether I stayed awhile or left after a few visits depended on how I viewed their tolerance...

I do believe language is a strong bond...and have always felt we should encourage a common one...it is easier to understand thus love someone who you can communicate with although my new neighbors are He..Irish and She ..Vietnamese..he is American born and she escaped from Vietnam at the end...and they come from the North ie as Connecticut..when I greeted them on their arrival here...Na (her name) and I had some difficulty in communicating..hampered by the fact I am hearing impaired ..but when we parted she and I embraced as I welcomed her to the neighborhood and she thanked me for that by returning my hug enthusiastically ...so caring transcends all.

I think of all the words whose meanings have changed dramatically since I was young...it is easy to misinterpret a sentence, a word when you dont have the same definition ...

Just thinking ...anna in Virginia

Annafair:

I relate to all you said. I look back at my high school classmates with whom I grew up in a small town. To this day I have no idea of the heritage of any of them. I can guess by looking at their names in a different way from which I looked at them 60 years ago but that is only a guess. All I know is that they were Americans.

Robby

I grew up on the south side of Chicago, and like Anna, had all sorts of neighbors, some kids with parents who didn't speak English. My best friend in the early grades was Janie Hirsch. I knew that she was Jewish, but that didn't make her any different to me. There was a lady who lived upstairs from my friend Beth who was from some Scandinavian country. She had an accent and wore her long hair in a braid wrapped around her head. There was even a single father--never did find out why he was raising his two daughters alone. His name was George and the daughters were Barbara and Virginia. He used to dress them alike and their dresses always seemed a little odd, as if a man had picked them out. I had another friend who was Greek. She and her brother spoke unaccented English, but they had to speak Greek at home, even when Jeanie phoned home, she had to speak Greek. I used to listen to her talking to her mother on the phone and be SO impressed that she could talk fast in another language. I even had a black friend in school. Her name was Berlina and I think she came from Africa. I guess all sorts of people just seems like normal to me.

Maryal

Robby and Maryal...here you are telling me how similiar our backgrounds were ..when did it change? Sometimes I feel we are more isolationists now than before...I hope I am not ...and I certainly try not to be...We stayed when the first black family moved into the housing area where we lived although at least six families I know moved out...I am glad there were a number who stayed as well..some have moved but their children have bought the parents home and they are now living here...and we now have 15% black neighbors. A spinkling of oriental ...and it is odd to me that I know those better than my next door neighbor on the other side who have stayed isolated for at least 25 years..they know no one in the neighborhood, their sons attended private schools and NEVER had any friends over in all the time they lived there. The boys are married and I see them back every other year ...strange...anna in Virginia who still asks when did it change?

Annafair:

When did "what" change? Exactly what did you see change? What is different now from 10 years ago? 25 years ago? 50 yers ago?

Robby

Chinese-American children were usually placed in separate schools. In 1927, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that it was legal to segregate chldren of the "Mongolian race" in Mississippi. De facto school segregation took place in numrous cities. Although they didn't know the English languge as well as those who previously lived in the United States, they were thought of as high achievers. It was also a culture shock migrating from China, especially when attending public school.

According to an account by a Chinese-American: "American students always picked on us, frightened us, made fun of us, and laughed at our English. They broke our lockers, threw food on us in cafeteria, said dirty words to us and pushed us on the campus."

Those who learned the English languge at an early age had an easier time adjusting to public education. As students, they were integrated into good public schools with a white majority student population.

Robby

Robby perhaps I was naive when I was young...It just seemed to me and from your post and Maryal's that we expierenced an acceptance of diversity...I know my parents did..and if anyone in my neighborhood felt threatened by living near a mix of ethnic backgrounds or beliefs I never saw it. When a neighbor died someone would go around and collect money (often a quarter or less and I know because I was a nosy child and read over my mother's shoulder as she added her name to the list and the amount) for flowers for the funeral. If there was a serious illness in a family neighbors would take food ..and it never mattered who the person was...my mother always prepared something for hoboes ( I guess these were homeless men for whatever reason ) and they gratefully accepted whatever she could spare..always coffee ..peanut butter sandwiches, or bacon and eggs and I know because my brothers and I would sit on the porch steps and watch them eat and talk to them.

The biggest shock in my life came when I was nineteen and took a trip to Peoria Ill and found that blacks had to sit in a special section and later when I was married and living in Texas ( now we are in the 50's here) to find separate water fountains and bathrooms for whites and Mexicans and blacks...

There are so many other memories of what seemed to me an acceptance of diversity of people...

Just thinking of a pleasent and wonderful childhood ...anna in Virginia

It seems as though every wave of immigrants faced the same persecution and prejudice at the hands of those who preced them. Newly arrived Irish immigrants were looked down upon and considered to be drunks and irresponsible. Italians were herded into tenements, as we the Jews and Irish, and looked upon as potential gangsters. We all are aware by this time of the relegation of Jewish newcomers to the sweat shops and crowded living conditions and how they were made the scapegoats for every social problem. I'm not familiar with the situation immigrants from other countries faced; I am most familiar with the history of immigrants into New York City. While we may have "grown up" and our attitudes more accepting, we know that there is still a vestige of these prejudices lurking deep inside the best of us. And, notwithstanding the assimilation into the American culture, to this day people whose families have been here for generations still identify themselves as Italian, Irish, German, Irish, etc. Not even hyphenated.

I think a difference making itself felt here in Fairfax County, Virginia is that we are so crowded. Housing is so expensive and so hard to find, and then you have to commute to work on highways that are almost like parking lots in the morning and evening "rush" hours. Too many people, too many cars, not enough roads. The schools are crowded as well. To find more space, folks started moving as far as the Shenandoah Valley and West Virginia years ago, suffering commutes as long as 2 or more hours each way. There is a lot of anger and frustration out there on the roads, and now the price of filling the tank is making it hard to manage the monthly budget. What is more, the places moved to for space are now full of sub divisions.

I hear a lot of anger over finding the banks and other places offering both Spanish and English instructions orally and in writing. This new trend makes people feel threatened that their descendants will live in an America where Spanish is dominent. It is not my purpose to make a complaint here, merely to observe what is going on with a large number of people.

Is what being described above a human trait? -- "liking" those who are similar to us and "disliking" those who are different? How are some of the other nations reacting to their immigrants? We are "democratic." Do we, therefore, act differently from other nations in this respect? Do "we the people" form a more perfect union? Is everyone equal in our eyes? And if we do not see everyone as equal, are their opportunities, at least, equal?

Robby

I am reading that there are some particularly ugly things going on in Germany with Indian immigrants.

While watching the Olympics, I am learning of the past treatment of the Aborigines in Austrailia and the present trend toward apology and atonement. It seems to be a human problem and not just an American problem.

Unlike Anna and Maryal, I was raised in small town mid-America. Our ethnic make-up was not as diverse as in the cities. I knew of only one Jewish family in the town and a small community of blacks. Unfortunatly, in keeping with the times, the blacks were segregated, not overtly, but definitly defacto. Perhaps if I had had the opportunity to live in close proximity with all heritages I would have learned to understand those "different" from me a little better. It is said that "familiarity breeds contempt" but I think the unknown breeds fear and suspicion.

Phyll

Hello everyone: It's been two weeks since I have been a part of this group and I have missed you. Although you are miles ahead of me now I'll strive to catch up. I've read the previous posts and even though I can no longer contribute to those I can add a footnote to this current subject.

My experience has been somewhat different from most of yours.I, too, grew up in a completely segregated community. The only black people I ever knew were domestic help. They were a necessity because my mother was an invalid, confined to bed, and we had to have help. These wonderful women were my surrogate mothers and I loved them very much. My sister and I were given large doses of the "Fatherhood of God" and the "brotherhood of Man" and Iknew that out there in that vast somewhere there were thousands---millions-- of all kinds of people who were my brothers and sisters They never materialized. I have never had a Black or Asian and only one Hispanic friend. I consider this a great tragedy. It was also inescapable---we always lived in the south and integration did not begin until our younger son was in High School.I was never in my life really exposed to groups of others.

There were, of course, always poor or homeless people who were never turned away from our door. They were always fed and helped in whatever way we could But always these unfortunate people were caucasion.We never felt they were a threat. We believed it was a privilege to be able to help.

I do believe that we are a democratic country but as a whole we are equal to the sum of our parts. We ARE striving---albeit spradically---to form a more perfect union. We haven't achieved our really goal but perhaps one day we shall.Contrary to Father Jefferson we are NOT all created equal nor do we all achieve equality. Everyone is not equal in our eyes and,remember, every person has a different yardstick for "equal".

Phyll: You are quite right that the unknown does engender fear and, unfortunately, until we are all better informed there will always be "unknowns".

Take care all, Mary

Actually, Mary, I think America is MORE than the sum of its parts.

Mary I know this is frivolous but I have always said I knew we were not created equal because if we were I would be able to sing like Rise` Stevens ( does that date me?) and look like Elizabeth Taylor. Now I have never learned to sing like Rise` or anyone else but finally Elizabeth and I do resemble each other WE ARE BOTH FAT!!!

I also think being with my husband in the military for thirty years continued my early encounters with people from many backgrounds. We had black officers who were close friends as well as associates etc

We had household help when I was growing up too Aunt Annie was Irish and a delight ...her husband was called Uncle Floyd and long after she was no longer in my parents employ my mother and she would visit. Uncle Floyd made wonderful home made root beer ..wish I could find some manufactured that was as tasty.

I do believe we have to give ourselves E for EFFORT ..as Americans we are trying to treat each other as equals...I know there are some that will never do that and it is not just an American thing ..it is world wide AS all the Civil wars and unrest in all parts of the globe attest.

We can take some small measure of pride that there is a real effort to elect the best a community has to offer regardless of nationality and this in communities where the victor's background was not the majority.

We have a long way to go before we can break our arms patting ourselves on the back but perhaps we can delicately give ourselves a gentle tap...

anna in Virginia

Mary W:

Good to have you back! If you see something in one of the previous posts to which you want to respond, go right ahead and do so. Thouhts do not become outdated.

I am still curious to hear reactions to deT's remark (above) that we "seek for the source of truth in those who are like ourselves." Do we doubt those who are unlike us?

Robby

I think we have a tendency to think they couldn't possibly have as much of the truth as we have. Some people fight those tendencies because they have learned through experience that other people can and do have the truth, as well.

People who consistently believe in and live in stereotypes don't permit themselves to consider that possibility. And I think we ALL find ourselves in that position from time to time.

I grew up next door to the world's largest military base (geographically, the size of a large county and 2 different times, qualified in number of military personnel), Fort Hood, TX. The civilian town was tiny up next to the monster sized base. Our high school was large, though, and well funded from government grants and it educated children from every imaginable ethnic background.

Not all of this was a positive, in that my parents were in constant fear that something bad might happen to me at the hands of the thousands of military men who walked or drove into our small town. So, I grew up making friends from all over the world and hearing bigoted fears. My wonderful grandparents added to the confusion. They had built tiny (one room) apartments on their property to house military young marrieds during WWII, but spoke of each couple in very stereotyped ways (always emphasizing the cleanliness of the "Czech wife") and made a big production of doing the "Christian thing" to rent to the "Negro folks." For years, my grandmother would always add with surprise that they were hard workers and not dirty. Not too many years ago, my mother (trying not to smile) said to my grandmother, "Are you still surprised they weren't dirty?"

I've always been secretly pleased that the one Black family that moved into my parents' nice neighborhood (1980s?) have put the others to shame on landscaping and beautiful front gardens. My grandmother (lives on the same block), a lifelong gardener, was duly impressed and eventually was able to "talk gardening" with the woman. My mother and I looked at each other when, for the first time, my grandmother referred to the woman using only her first name as identification and not "that nice Negro lady."

One of Barbara's articles emphasized the need for not just forced proximity (as in school busing), but meaningful interaction between people of different races. So, living in close proximity would not achieve what working in the same office on the same team would. Or working together on a political campaign. Or giving children in school cooperative projects that depended on all to succeed---which always makes me wonder if teachers in newly integrated schools were reluctant to gently interrupt natural groupings born of unfamiliarity. Surely, someone somewhere has done a study on just this topic.

Their web site www.splcenter.org will be of interest to many on this board.

They fight hate, intolerance and discrimination through education and litigation.

They just won a big court case in Idaho which should bankrupt the local clan.

Check their site and consider donating whatever you can and get their mailings. It's spookie how many hate groups there are. SPLC lists them by state and county. You might be shocked by those listed in your own state.

YOU CAN do something about it!

The Southern Poverty Law Center is absolutely the best. Thanks so much for that URL, Seldom. Here's a link to the site.

Southern Poverty Law Center
Mal

Many people in this forum first became really aware of the Japanese at the time of their attack on Pearl Harbor but the Japanese are one of the oldest immigrant groups from Asia. Their initial contact with the United States involved gunpoint diplomacy in 1853, when U.S. Commodore Mathew Perry sailed warships into Tokyo Bay, and with a show of force won a treaty granting the United States trading rights with them.

Many of the first Japanese immigrants traveled to labor in the fields of Hawaii in the late 1800s and over 230,000 more arrived before 1929. European-American planters sought low wageworkers and they arrived under labor contract. Once the labor agreements expired most of them simply stayed. This helps to explain their place in the cultural make-up of Hawaii to this day.

Between the 1880s and 1908 more than 150,000 of them came to the United States in hopes of a bright future. The vast majority of them arrived on the West Coast of California and took farming and mining jobs. Many of their Japanese ancestors helped construct railing through the rough terrain of the West.

Were you aware of the place of the Japanese in America prior to Pearl Harbor?

Robby

I attended Kerns in Portland, Oregon, a depression-strapped grade school complete with wood stoves in each classroom. Kerns was a most unusual school in its racially and ethnically mixed classes. It was a small melting pot long before such issues were even thought of. I went to school with African American children whose fathers worked for tips-only as porters on the railroads who brought their families to Portland, the end of the railroad line, where the racial pressures were not quite as bad as in such places as Chicago. One of my best girlfriends was Ellen Wood, African American and the daughter of a railroad porter. Ellen was seated at the same desk with me in the first grade and we went on through high school and art school together— always calling ourselves “the gold dust twins”. Her mother died when she was in grade school.

Chinese boys (and only the boys) who could not speak a word of English were brought overseas third-class on steamships by their fathers, usually about the age of 12. Their mothers were many times left in China with the father’s family. (I often wondered what happened to them in the war and revolution that came a short time later.) The fathers worked in the restaurants and businesses of Portland for the lowest menial wages. I especially remember Clifford Lee, an older student in my class, just over from China who was taunted by being called a “Jap” on the school grounds every day during recess. Clifford picked up his tormentor one day and twirled him around and around over his head shouting “me no Jap, me Chinese” and then threw the name caller onto the woodpile that was stacked like a fortress on the playground. Clifford had spoken his first English sentence and nobody ever called Clifford names again!

He and I had the most homework to catch up on of anybody in class. We knew because the list of names and late homework were all written out on the blackboard for what seemed like forever. But we struggled over our lessons after school-with me helping Clifford with his English and reading and Clifford helping me with my arithmetic.

In later years many of my close friends were from Chinese families. I thought that they had very interesting homes and homelife and thought they were really no different from my Italian and Lebonese friends. Everybody had their own ways but we were all in the same neighborhood, running around together. And eating at their homes were so interesting. I was fed real Chinese, Italian, and Lebonese dishes. I can still remember having my arms pinched by adults saying "Ellen, you got to eat-you too skinny". Then I would go home and my adopted German parents would say the very same thing. I would be stuffed enough to pop. The depression saw some very good ethnic food served in our neighborhood.

Robby, in depression Portland everybody was sent to the same schools. The town was so broke that it couldn't even afford segragated schooling. So we were all bundled up and sent to school together. And if you couldn't speak English, you just got more homework. There were no teacher aids, no cafeteria, no anything. Just a grim teacher with a stick of kindling to whack you with if you didn't pay attention. Even Clifford Lee learned to sing Miss Donovan's favorite song on Friday afternoon. He finally could belt out "London Darry Air" with the best of them. If it could only be as simple as Kerns school today.

Portland, Seattle and Spokane areas of the Pacific Northwest had large truck farms in the outlaying areas manned and owned by Chinese, Japanese and Italian families. The Oregon Historical Society ran a series of articles on just this topic in their journals. So has the Washington State Historical Society. Almost all of those farms are now gone, but I remember the owners working on their hands and knees pulling weeds and harvesting in fields that were just immaculate. There was a population of Japanese and Chinese in every town that I have ever lived in out here in the far west.

Its interesting to me to see a Chinese family straight from the old-country come into Long Beach and start a restaurant. (I eat there almost every night.) They speak very little English but run a fantastically organized operation. Even the cook comes out to greet me when I go in. The whole family makes me feel welcome.

How Chinese families function in a new environment has always interested me as I known so many Chinese families during my life and have even lived with them.

I have attended workshops on at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, BC and the most popular food dispensory is a local take-out Chinese restaurant, manned by a mother and father, with a grandmother or two and a bevy of children going to college next door when not working at the resturant. Long hours at the restaurant. I was at a workshop at the University of Pittsburg and saw the very same thing! There were the usual grandmothers working in the kitchen with the grandchildren in tow, the husband cooking, the wife running the cash register and serving, plus three or more nieces that are just barely learning English-serving the food. Like all of the Chinese that I have ever known, they WORK and all work together long hours in a day. I am interested in watching the new Chinese family that has settled in Long Beach. They are the only orientals in the area. There were Japanese Americans here that raised oyters and cranberries, both back breaking work that is now done soley by Chicanos. But like so many immigrant families, they grew up and beyond their original start. Those Japanese Americans lost everything here during WWII.

Robby, please remember that Washington State has a Chinese American governor and his Chinese American wife is one of his greatest assests.They work hard long hours and value educaton beyond all else.

Thanks so much for your interesting posts...Like you I have always found the Chinese and Japanese hard working. I think you were all lucky to get to know each other. My dearest friend until her death at 25 on an operating table ( appendectomy) was Jewish. It was in Helen's home I dined on new and interesting foods. I know my interest in different ethnic food comes from that contact years ago.

Robby asked whether we knew about Japanese Americans before WWII ..I know in mid america I didnt. I am not sure I knew about the internment of the Japanese at the time it happened but I do know when I read about it later I was sick to the pit of my stomach. HOW COULD OUR GOVERNMENT DO THAT TO AMERICANS? Even though I respect the background of all in the final analysis I think of them as Americans regardless of that background.

I am happy to have found a church that is diversified. I know it works well because the pastor is a retired Navy Chaplain. He is used to serving all and newcomers of all backgrounds know he means it when he welcomes them.

Thank you again Ellen for sharing those memories ..I find them encouraging.

anna in Virginia

Ellen:

What a wonderful informative posting!! Just to pull out a few items that started my thinking juices going. Your "small melting pot" where you learned to know and love your neighors came about because unknowingly you and others were "forced" to be in close proximity. You got to know them as individuals. You sat at the same desk with an Afro-American girl. You often stayed after school with a Chinese boy. The community was "forced" to have a mixed group of students because it was too poor to have a segregated school. (Ironic that!!) This moved you onto going to the homes of people who were already your friends.

Many of us realize, as you say, that the Chinese tend to be family-oriented and yet we "Americans" don't seem to catch on to the value of that. We spread out and individuals and generations separate. They are also hard-working but we don't seem to catch on to that, either. We look for the "soft" life, calling that progress or civilization. I also knew that your governor was Chinese-American but the thought keeps going out of mind, not realizing the importance of being guided by someone who is hard working and whose First Lady is also a hard-working Chinese-American. It certainly says something (you find the adjective) for a state's population that puts a Chinese-American in the Governor's seat.

I would like to repeat a phrase of yours for others here to possibly comment upon ---- "IMMIGRANT FAMILIES THAT GREW UP AND BEYOND THEIR ORIGINAL START."

Robby

Additional thought regarding the difference between first and third generations --- Instant gratification vs long-term gratification.

Robby

In 1900 the mayor of San Francisco described the Japanese as "completely inassimilable." The Issei, who were the first generation of immigrants that came to America, had the hardest time fitting into society but began the basis of community that made things easier for each successive generation. When the Japanese tried to enter their children into the schools, the people of San Francisco feared that they would flood the public schools with "ignorant foreigners." In 1905, California newspapers campaigned against their potential threat to public schools calling them the "yellow peril." Both houses of the California legislature passed resolutions calling for the exclusion of their peoples on the grounds that they were unable to assimilate.

Furthermore, in 1908 President Theodore Roosevelt met with Japanese officals to form the "Gentlemen's Agreement." This doctrine called for no new passports to be given to any more of their people outside of those who had already arrive there. This was an attempt to reduce the number of Japanese allowed to immigrate.

Does anyone here relate that action to deTocqueville's comment (above) which begins "No power on earth . . ."

Robby

In the last week, I had the pleasure of discussing the immigrant problems with a lady from Germany who came here in the '50's. She trained to be a nurse and worked hard in the hospitals here in Columbus. She said when she was a nurse she bacame aware of the Chicanos who worked at any job that came along. They did anything that could help them make money. She found them to be the hardest working people around.

What I learned while living in California was that the Mexican families chose the strongest among them and sent them to the states to work and send money home. Many of them work three jobs to do so and didn't turn down anything that would help them along. We also became mildly acquainted with the man who owned the nursery where we bought landscaping plants. He was Japanese-American and talked about living in California during WWII and being sent to the camps. His father, a first generation American, had started the nursery business long before the war and his children certainly considered themselves Americans. One of the things that warmed my heart in California was the diversity of people who lived there. It was exciting, hearing all the different languages and accents. Knowing that everyone deserves a chance to prove themselves. Maybe that's what is so different about younger countries like America. We offer everyone a chance to succeed. As does Canada and Australia and New Zealand.

When I was growing up, the most diversity we had were different religions in a neighborhood. And that's another story! It was quite a shock to me to move to the South early in my marriage and see segregation, which I didn't know existed. We returned to the North for a long time and then moved back in the '80's. And, guess what? It was still segregated in many ways. In one of the suburbs which had grown from a very small railroad town, there was a shop named "The Civil War Antique and Herb Shop". In it were old guns and swords plus other Civil War memoribillia plus newspapers from around the south that still supported White Supremacy. My brother-in-law said that he thought he was in Nazi Germany when he took his son to look for a Civil War antique. The owner had long,long chestnut hair and wore all black leather clothing plus heavy chain jewelry and two holstered guns (57 Magnums?). Scary! But, that's what we are all about! Anyone can succeed and sometimes doing strange things.

There is a very good book about the treatment of the Japanese in Canada written by a first generation lady who I think is the Poet Laureate of Canada or Ontario. The title is "Obisan" and tells of the camps in Canada. Very good reading! I will try to get the author's name.

Perhaps Idris or our other Canadian friends here can give us a picture of the experience of the Japanese and other immigrants in Canada.

Robby

Robby, the Canadian Railway was built through the Rockies on our West Coast. Much of the labour was from China. They were very badly treated. There was also a head tax. Most didn't make enough money to go home or bring their families here.

The Japanese that settled, mainly on the West Coast were put in camps at the time of Pearl Harbour. All of their property and goods were taken and they never got them back. They have been recently been given a small money compensation and an i'm sorry.

Canada has its things to be ashamed of too.

Idris:

I wasn't aware that Canada had Japanese internment camps, too, during WWII nor was I aware that the Chinese also played a large part in constructing the Canadian railroad. I wonder if Australia and New Zeland also had Japanese internment camps.

Robby

What has confused me all along is that de Tocqueville did visit the US and spoke with so many movers and shakers that were connected to the US government and yet he uses the word America in his title. My concept of America is not limited to the US and I notice in this conversation we are at times focused on especially US experiences and than we open up and include references to what is going on in Canada with little about what is happening in Mexico or the Islands never mind Central America which we have not discussed or added to this discussion at all.

I realize we do not have a poster that is more intimatly knowledgable about these areas of America but yet what is America... To me South America is a different culture and mind set and although Central America is also much less modernized with a different culture and language our interests and involvment in Central America have been heavy as they have been in Cuba and Porta Rico.

We have so many English speaking folks making good money in places like Balize (sp) and we know the majarity if not all the drug companies have their headquarters in Porto Rico which for them has been a huge tax advantage. The US population in areas of Mexico are so large now that we have several well known and successful US Real Estate agents moving there setting up shop and coming back to give seminars on how to make the move easier for those moving from Texas in particular that I know about Austin to Mexic. One of our top well known Brokers is now exclusivly working the Mexican market.

Mexico and Canada are have democratic governments and so does Belize I beleive. Porto Rico is almost a State of the US but I do not know the types of govrnmnt in the other Central American nations. Panama is another nation that we have reall affected ever since our involvment with the canal. And so I ask what is America? Do we only consider the English speaking part of America as the bona fide Democratic America of de Tocqueville?

Barbara:

This forum concentrates around deTocqueville's book so when we use the term "America," we use it to mean the United States because that was what deT meant. You are right, of course, that the term "America" is much broader and relates, in fact, to the entire Western Hemisphere. In addition, we constantly refer to the term "democracy" which was one of the words in deT's title. Therefore, while our Canadian friends are part of our discussion because their democracy is, in many ways, similar to ours, democracy as it exists in Mexico and Central America and South America is not. deT mentioned Mexico briefly and Central and South America not at all. As an aside - I suspect that Canadians do not call themselves "American." Many of our words become common usage. While this is an open discussion and no courteous and considerate comments are ever "banned," we try our best to relate to what was discussed in "Democracy in America."

If you have some thoughts regarding democracy as it is practiced in, eg Puerto Rico (which is part of the United States) or Mexico or Belize, I would consider them most relevant -- especially if you can relate them to any of deT's remarks, whether they are mentioned above or whether you pull them out of his book.

Robby

Robby, most of the Japanese Canadians were moved inland from the Coast for reasons of security. However, the large German Canadian communities were not interred.

The Japanese Canadians held Canadian Citizenship. They were literally dumped in the Northern inland portion of British Columbia with nothing and i mean nothing. There were not even shelters for these folks.

We also under McKenzie King turned back a couple of boatloads of Jewish Children during WW11. They had no place to go and ended up in the death camps of the Nazis. He was a anti-semite of the enth degree. I believe he publically stated..."One Jew is too many." You don't have to look far in our history to see racism and the horrors that this brought to folks who came here for shelter in a horrible world.

Idris:

You mentioned that the "German Canadian communites" were not interned. Neither were the "German American communities." What does that say to all of us?

Robby

Robby, we see those who do not look like us as the enemy. Just who the heck did we think were killing our boys in Europe?????

Here's a timeline of the Japanese living in Canada. They were no better treated than the Japanese Americans. Japanese Canadians

THE ENEMY----I find it fascinating to think about those we perceive to be the Other, the Enemy, the Threat, the Opponent. Those who look unlike us are easiest to see as Other. Thus, during the Second WW and afterward, the Japanese were more demonized than the Germans, or so it seemed to me.

But later, during the Cold War, the Soviet Union was our enemy. And this period is the most interesting to me. If you look at tapes of Russian people, or of a Russian leader delivering a speech, and turn the sound off, you discover the unthinkable---they look like US, like many Americans. They especially look like the "old us," the everyday whites (Anglos, Europeans, Mediteraneans) in this country before we became such a decidedly multicultural nation. I don't have the language at the moment to set this up. Perhaps I will try again later.

Maryal

Great link, Ann. Short, sweet and to the point.

Ann:

Thank you for that Link. I read it and hope others do so also. Interesting that an apology was given by the Canadian government only 12 years ago. I believe the American apology was also recently given.

So when wartime arrives and fear sets in, what happens to "DEMOCRACY?"

Robby

I looked up that title and I was mispelling it. Its "Obasan" by Joy Kogawa. Story of the Japanese Canadians being moved to internment camps by the government. This is a first person story as she was moved with her brother and grandparents inland while her father was sent to a camp where only males were held. Her mother and other grandmother had just left to visit Japan. They would never return to Canada. Book is available on Bibliofind.

Regarding the question of why the German American Communities were not interned is an interesting one. I surely do not know the answer, but I can speculate with the following.

1. Maybe because Germans had been immigrating to America for much longer period of time, and had proven their qualities as good citizens..???

2.Maybe they were considered a more civilized people. Although there is the inigma of the Holocost, which of course, was not known until much later in the war.

3. Germany never directly attacked us as the Japanese did.

4. The Japanese were barbaric in their treatment of American prisoners. Only approximately 50% of American prisoners in Japanese Prison camps returned alive. Only 1% of American prisoners were killed by the Germans.

Incidentaly, German-Americans were subjected to greater hatred in WWI than during WWII.

As I said I can only speculate, but the above seem like possible reasons for our distrust of the Japanese- Americans. Incidentally, many young Japanese fought for our country in Europe, which helped to dispell that feeling of distrust.

Williewoody brings up some interesting possibilities.

What do you think?

Robby

The Japanese had been on our shores for a very long time. Canada had been in the war for a very long time before the US came into it. Had the US not been bombed at Pearl Harbour one wonders if they ever would have come in to help.

I still think it was because they "looked" different. Had the Jewish children been Christian the boat would have been unloaded too. We seem to think we live in safe democracies......NOT! In this time of peace we had better think on this cause both countries have trouble with otherness.

At what point do we finally understand that equality within a democracy is fragile and must be re-won generation by generation? Democracy is often not the same for all different peoples of our nations.

Robby asks, So when wartime arrives and fear sets in, what happens to "DEMOCRACY?"

Unfortunately, I think it too often goes by the wayside, Robby. National security issues and other kinds of issues often mean that the Bill of Rights and other civil rights, etc., are dispensed with "temporarily." I mean, look at what happened with McCarthyism, and we weren't even shooting at people at the time!

Fear may be the most destructive emotion of all. When people become fearful, they do all sorts of bizarre things. And freedom gets lost in the shuffle.

QUOTES:

Idris: "Equality within a democracy is fragile and must be re-won generation by generation."

Songbird: "National security issues and other kinds of issues often mean that the Bill of Rights and other civil rights are dispensed with 'temporarily.'"

Maryal: "When people become fearful...freedom gets lost in the shuffle."

QUESTION:During wartime, what is the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship?

Robby

Almost none. I think the biggest difference is that people who have lived in a democracy know that ultimately they will get it back, once the crisis is over -- or at least they HOPE they will. People who have lived under a dictatorship sometimes have lived that way so long that they don't know anything else and don't even dream of something better. But even if they do, they may not get the chance for it.

So in America during WW2, people knew they were giving up some freedoms so they could win the war, but they also believed that life would get back to normal once the war was over. Many people in Europe had no "normal" to get back to.

Precious little, i think Robby. We know the first casualty of war is truth. Sometimes we should look around us in times of peace and ask ourselves if the fourth estate is delivering truth. Once we loose this, even in times of peace, we are in great danger of losing our democracy.

Idris:

deTocqueville says a great deal about the media and at a later date we will most certainly discuss this subject.

Robby

Great Robby, it is fundamental to how we govern ourselves and see the truth about ourselves.

Talking about the media, Idris said "it is fundamental to how we govern ourselves and see the truth about ourselves." I'm sure we'll get into that later, as Robby said. But I want to make one comment about what Idris said in relation to the media. Just as we do in many discussions, and as has already been discussed in this one, we tend to think of "America" as people like ourselves. But as we have been discussing, the majority is becoming the minority.

Think about how "those other people" have been portrayed in the media. If we draw conclusions about ourselves by the way we see ourselves portrayed on television, in the movies, and in print, how must they be seeing themselves? Look at television -- almost no normal Hispanic or African-American families portrayed; certainly they're not represented percentage-wise on television as they are in real life. They're often portrayed as the villains and perpertrators, not the victims. Or else they're portrayed as illegal immigrants or lazy Welfare bums.

I don't know what the answer is, but I think this has long-term effects for the future and for democracy.

I'm looking forward to discussing the media portion too, Texas Songbird. There are so many things that are wrong with the media and yet we have no control over them at all. I truly believe many of our current problems occur because they interpret the world about us.

Just so i can say i mentioned this...There was a conference in Winnipeg, Canada this past week. The working title was "Children of War." It was about how to stop children being warriors. I would have thought both the US and Canada would have voted against this practise but for one reason and another they did not. I would like to know why in detail. Will the media really do an indepth of this? Doubt it. We will get superficial yadda, yadda on this or total ignoring of the problem.

Okay, after that rant i feel better.

I read the posts but there are so many that I usually feel I cannot post as I am behind. These are some things that have come to me over the weeks. I am posting them now for whatever they are worth.

The Geneva I grew up in was a small city with a few black families. Most of them were descendants of slaves brought here by Virginia planters. They were some of the oldest families in town. I have one dear friend who went through school with the son of a man who started a grocery store chain here. They were best of friends, but after graduating from high school, my black friend was turned away when he went to that grocery chain asking for a job. He had to go to a neighboring city (larger) to get a good job.

The Episcopal church I attended had a "negro" mission. The priest held separate services for them in the chapel on Sunday evening. I can remember when the mission was closed (I was probably about 10 or so) and they became a part of the church. Not many of the families stayed with the church. I was too young to think about it then but now I wonder if they suffered from prejudice on the part of the white members. The man I talked about in the previous paragraph is still a staunch member of that church. I sang in choir with him for many years. He was also on the Board of Education for a time. I know that he was called an oreo by blacks who had come here in the later groups.

When Sampson Naval Base was built here more black workers came and later migrant workers stayed to live here year round. There was a very definite divide between these three groups. They did not associate socially with each other. I don't know whether that division still exists. I am sure that if it does, it is not as strong as it once was.

During WW II a Japanese girl lived in our home while she attended college here. My father was a professor. Her parents and siblings were interned, in Washington, I believe. I don't know how she was allowed to come to college but she did. She kept in touch with my mom till mom died.

When I was in high school here (class of '52) one of the girls in my "crowd" dated an Italian boy. That was very daring and just not done at the time. Her dad was a doctor. Seems so silly now. But even much later, in the 70's, I remember when the first Italians joined our Yacht Club. It wasn't a big, fancy one. Just a building with a living room, locker rooms and a small kitchen. No food or drink for sale. We all brought our own picnics. Many families were there every Sunday. I have not belonged since 1981 but at that time, there were no black members.

I have a friend in his 40's who lives in NYC. He is of mixed race, African American, American Indian and Irish. To look at him, most people would assume he was a light African American. He is a college graduate and works at a state university. He talks about racial slights even now. Some people in the North don't like to admit that it happens here, and now. When I went to the SPL site, I found some hate groups not too far from where I live. It is a scary thing to contemplate.

The last large group to move here is from Puerto Rico. I know that they suffer from prejudice. Many feel they come for the welfare system in NY and that they don't work hard or do well in school. In truth, they are like all other groups, some hardworking and studious and some not. I had all kinds of kids in my classes when I taught here and not all Asians are math wizards and not all "white kids" are well behaved, model students, and not all black and hispanic kids are lazy and poorly behaved. Just the fact that I can list those preconceived notions proves that these prejudices exist.

I feel many who have prejudices like to look at the best of their own group and measure them against the worst of the group they are talking about. I also agree with earlier posters who have said that most of us have some prejudices even though we try not to. I am sure I do though I try not to exhibit them.

Alice, i suppose until the morning we wake up and find ourselves perfect we all have to struggle with the things that we don't like about ourselves. Possibly self-examination and truthfullness about what we see about ourselves is the best we can do. We strive.

Alice:

Please feel free to enter the discussion wherever you wish. We all have many things to do in addition to Senior Net. At the same time America keeps moving along and to properly examine it, we must move along with it. What a wonderful concept you present to us to think about -- "we measure the best of our group against the worst of the other group." Makes one to ponder.

To properly examine America's population, as we have been doing, we ought not to leave out some significant segments of the population. With your permission, let us discuss a few more items about the Japanese and then move on to a couple of minority groups we haven't yet mentioned.

Most of the Japanese who first arrived in America were men that came under labor contracts. Between 1908 and 1920, thousands of Japanese "picture brides" were allowed to enter the United States following wedding ceremonies conducted in Japan to husbands they had never met. The Japanese-American family was starting to develop.

By the early 1920s, much of the nation didn't look upon the Japanese kindly. Powerful organizations like the California Farm Bureau Association and the American Legion pushed legislature for anti-Japanese laws especially in labor. In 1921, angry white farmers in California drove Japanese farmers out of their farm areas. The 1913 California Alien Land Law proclaimed that aliens couldn't buy or lease land for more than 4 years. The 1922 Cable Act stated that any woman citizen who married an alien that was ineligible for citizenship (Asian) would in turn lose her citizenship. This malicious act was supported by the Supreme Court case Ozawa vs. United States of America (1922). Moreover, Supreme Court Judge and later Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Earl Warren described the Japanese as "dangerous and threatening." He later affirmed that "children of English, French, German, Italian, Scandinavian, and other European descent, quickly merge into the mass of our population and lose the distinctive hallmarks of their European origin." The 1924 Immigration AAct established racial quotas giving preference to those of Nordic descent and excluding the Japanese. This last act prohibited the Japanese from bringing their wives that they had left behind in an attempt to prevent the development of Japanese-American families.

Robby

Even Earl Warren!!!???

Betty:

Scary, isn't it when we see the thinking that goes on in the court that interprets the Supreme Law of the Land?

One more posting, if you will, about the Japanese-Americans. They had a strong commitment to education. The Issei enrolled children into schools more often than any other immigrant group. In 1906, San Francisco secured a resolution from the Board of Education setting up segregated public schools for Asian children. The Federal Government, however, forced the board to give the Japanese Children equal rights which had been promised to them by a previous treaty. After months of being out of school, Japanese-American children were allowed to return.

They developed their own language schools that focused on education in the Japanese language and traditional values such as respect for elders. The reason these schools were established was to strengthen community bonds. The white racists attacked the language schools as centers of emperor worship and claimed that they were aimed at making Japanese children disloyal to the United States. California legislation unsuccessfully tried to abolish these special schools.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident . . ." -- How does that go?

Robby

Robbie, I saw your invitation on the Australia thread for Australians to enter into this discussion. Maybe I should start by explaining my by-line. A Pom or Pommie, is what you used to call, and perhaps still do, a "Limey". Poms are English people who have migrated to Australia.

I did not read the article in the New York Times, that you referred to, but I did read an article in our daily paper today, which referred to an uncomplimentary article about Australia, which appeared in the Washington Post under Sally Jenkins' by-line. The Olympics have put Australia into the public eye.

It did seem to be a case of the "pot calling the kettle, black" but if we are all honest, most countries like the United States or Australia, which came about as the result of migration, have an indigenous population that has suffered as a result of that migration.

I think that it is part of the "human condition" to find some members of our community to "persecute". When I was a child in England, there was still a "hangover" from the anti-papist days, which I, as a Roman Catholic experienced. In my youth, my mother disliked my first girl friend because she was of Italian parentage. In later years, it was the West Indians and the Pakistanis who were persecuted because they were obviously different, because of their colour. Then at almost 40 years of age, I became a migrant by coming to Australia. I now number amongst my friends, Germans,Indians and Italians of my own age. A young Chinese couple as well as Australians and other English migrants. There is nothing like being a migrant, to make one understand what racial equality means.

I noticed a question about internment of Japanese, in Australia during WW2. I believe they were and there was a significant population of Japanese pearl fishers in Broome, Western Australia.

I think that is enough for me to say in my first post.

Peter:

Thank you so much for joining us!! In this forum we are not only discussing America, we are also discussing democracy, per se. Your input will be valuable. You may find it helpful to buy a copy of deTocqueville's book, "Democracy in America," the paperback version of which costs approx 7 American dollars. Whether you do or not, you will find above a list of quotes from this book which periodically changes depending upon the sub-topic of the moment. In addition to reading the Introduction, you may find it helpful to read Post #1.

I was struck by your comment: "There is nothing like being a migrant to make one understand what racial equality means." I hadn't thought of that prior to your remark. What do other participants here think of Peter's comment?

Robby

Peter brings forth that issue from his viewpoint as a migrant to Australia. Also some of us are finding to our surprise and discomfort that having long been in the majority in some places in America we are increasingly in the minority. It is unsettling to realize that we no longer outnumber and over rule all others but perhaps we will finally begin to understand the feelings of those whom we think of as "other". In more and more places in America we are the "other" now.

Idris said, "We strive." And perhaps that is the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship. Being human, we are not perfect but most of us strive to be better, I think. If that weren't so, why would so many of us be here trying to understand our American form of democracy, understand others and ultimately, understand ourselves?

Phyll

Phyll:

You have put your finger on it. In trying to understand Democracy, we are, in the process, trying to understand others and ultimately understand ourselves.

Robby

One of the oldest groups of Asian immigrants are the Filipinos. At the end of the Spanish-American War, the islands that make up the Philippines were handed over by Spain to the United States for a mere 20 million dollars according to the Treaty of Paris. The Filipinos came to the United States in waves. They arrived in California and although all they desired was independence in their new home, they were denied any sort of independence when they got there. They were known to many Americans at the time as social problems, economic threats and disease carriers.

They were excited when the idea of education came into their lives but it was extremely limited to them. Within federal governmental regulations, Filipino children would be educated but teachers would teach them American cultural values. Many Americans made up various plans for their Americanization. One plan was to send all of the Filipino young men to American colleges. In this way, when the men were educated, they could become teachers and go back to the Philippines to teach. This plan was made up by William Howard Taft who was the first governor of the homeland in the Philippines. He later became President of the United States.

Robby

Koreans are relatively recent immigrants, but they too have been hit hard by anti-Asian violence. The immigration of Koreans to the United States began in the early 1900s. By 1905 approximately 1000 Koreans lived in California. Most of them came here in a journey to seek better living and working conditions. Like other Asians, they were confronted with discrimination in all aspects of life in America. Language barriers and racial discrimination kept them from obtaining employment. They faced harsh working conditions and extremely low wages. Some of their areas of profession included agricultural laborers, dishwashers, kitchen helpers, houseboys and janitors. They were segregated along with Mexican and African Americans, were refused housing in all areas except for the poorest, and denied services in restaurants and public plces.

Of special interest is the fact that most of their hostility and discrimination was with African-Americans. They were both exploiters and the exploited. They discriminated and formed stereotypes against the African-Americans just as much as the African-Americans did to them.

Japan, which occupied Korea, learned of the condition which the Koreans were undergoing in America and restricted the entry of Koreans into America for many years. After the restriction, only a small number of Koreans still entered the United States. They were either students or "picture brides" and this situation continued until after World War II.

What is it about Asians -- Chinese, Japanese, Filipinos, Koreans -- that causes European-Americans to be hostile to them? And what do you suppose caused (or causes) the hostility between Koreans and African-Americans?

Robby

We are continuing to examine America's population diversity but, as we do so, America (in the form of nature) is about to present another face to us. At 1:27 p.m., EDT, tomorrow (Sept. 22), it will be the time of the Autumnal Equinox -- the first day of Autumn. Let us take a brief break from looking at America's population and share with each other what Autumn means to us. Is it a pleasant time of the year to you or is it a dire warning to you that cold weather is on the way? If it is pleasant, why so? What memories do you have about Autumn?

We here in the Senior Net live in all areas of the continent? Please share with us what Autumn is like in the Northeast, the Northwest, the West, the Southwest, the Southeast, the Canadian East, the Canadian West? Has it arrived there yet? Is it on the way?

And Peter in Australia -- for you it is the Vernal Equinox - the first day of Spring. What does that mean in your life? What memories do you have?

Robby

Fall has not really arrived in Niagara, Canada yet. The leaves are still for the most part green. Gold touches here and there can be seen on the escarpement, but fall is still a few weeks off. The tiny fruit and veggies stands are heavily laden with nature's harvest. The grapes are almost ready for picking and the Grape and Wine Festival will take place soon.

Fall is the fulfillment of spring. It is the welcoming of the beautiful lady of fall. The smells of leaves and produce are heady. The sound of Canada Geese overhead tells us fall will soon be here and then winter, the time of true renewal.

A poem for you about fall

~The Wind in the Leaves~

The wind crept slowly, softly

And then pounced.

He caught the red, yellow cracklings

And tossed them playfully.

Up they flew swirling, dancing,

Beckoning youthful spirits to play.

~*~

To see a picture of my Little Woods please click

Fall in the Little Woods

Idris:

Thank you for that beautiful beautiful description of Fall in Niagara, Canada. (Not to ignore what an excellent writer you are helping us to see, hear, and smell the sights, sounds, and odors of Autumn!) Thank you also for that lovely photo of your "Little Woods."

Robby

Fall? in Texas? What's that?

Actually, the weatherman is predicting that the temperatures will go below 90 today -- for the first time since this long, hot summer began. (But that's because it's raining -- or at least drizzling -- today.) It is expected to go back up tomorrow. Traditionally September is almost always almost as hot as August and October is usually only a tad cooler. Although there are a few little "cold snaps" now and then to bring hope.

November is often pretty much like October, and so is December some years. Fall officially ends in December and winter begins, but you can't always tell that. Some winters we have no winter -- that is, no really cold weather, or maybe only one time when it gets really cold. The flowers start their budding, etc., and then, just as spring is about to officially start there will be one more "cold spell" to kill off all the newly blooming things.

So, the upshot is, everything you ever heard about Texas is true (at least here in Central Texas) -- there are only two seasons: HOT and COLD, and sometimes we don't even get the second season. The other thing they say about Texas weather is also true: If you don't like the weather, just wait a little while and it will change. (Except that's not exactly true in the summer, and particularly not THIS summer.)

Hope that helps, Robby.

Thank you, Songbird. Reading just the two previous posts serves to remind us of the immensity of this continent. Some of us may have had the experience of looking at a map of the world and measuring the size of Europe and realizing it covers just a small part of the United States, never mind North America.

I lived for most of my life in New York State and now in Virginia. I just cannot relate to two "seasons" - HOT and COLD. I remember being in San Francisco one Thanksgiving when the Christmas trees were just going up. I absolutely could NOT relate to my looking at them while I was wearing a short-sleeved shirt. Autumn for me means a "brief pleasant chill in the air."

Robby

Fall weather. Texas songbird describes Texas weather perfectly. I thought I'd share with you the oddity of west coast September. In the San Francisco bay area, September is often the hottest month of summer. That was also true of Oregon. On the northern Oregon coast, the 60-70 degree days of summer all of a sudden turned to a week or two of 80 degrees. As everyone suffered and complained, I would always think to myself, wow, this is nothing compared to Texas heat.

The rain here today in Houston is so welcome. A sign that summer is finally over is that the days of 100 plus degrees are finished and that it is raining.

I love the light here in the Fall, golden and buttery.....The days are warm and the nights are lovely and cool...Wonderful sleeping with the windows open and hearing the night sounds as one drifts off....The geese are back on my lake. They fly over my house and I can hear their wings moving the air.......They are so low I can even see their feet curled up...Smoke will waft over my way as leaf raking and burning will start soon.....Then of course there will be the stews, soups, and apple desserts !!!!!!! Also football and baseball is big in this part of the country....

All of you are such writers! -- "gold and buttery" -- "hearing the night sounds" -- "wings moving the air" -- "stews, soups, and apple desserts".

Yes, America and Canada are such wonderful countries - more than the political side of it - being democracies. They cover such a vast terrain that Autumn means many different things to those of us Senior Netters who are scattered from East to West, from North to South.

Robby

Hi everyone. Before I start anything I should like for you, Betty, to describe "rain" for me. I've nearly forgoten. This is the 84th day (except for one when it rained around here) without any rain for Dallas. Count your blessings, Houston.

Robby, what a great idea to introduce the approach of fall. It's a glorious time of the year. One of the adjustments I made many years ago, when we first moved to Texas was the fact that there was no autumn. Songbird hit it right on the button---No real fall in Tx.---only two real seasons. However I have wonderful memories of autumn growing up in Missouri. I remember bright red cardigan sweaters (brand new for the just started school year) and tart-sweet Jonathan apples, then only available in the fall I can still remember vividly the sound and the feel of walking in Forest Prrk, shuffling my feet through enormous piles of huge leaves from the tall hardwood trees. The beauty of the Ozarks---the hills covered with every conceivaable color---shimmering in the breeze is impossible to forget. Horseback riding along the bluffs above the Mississippi River , the suddenly cooler wind in my face, the excitement of the horses at the changing weather and the indescribable of the river and the land. I am SO lucky to have had those days.

Another unforgetable taste of autumn has been in Colorado in The Rockies. The great golden slashes of the Aspen trees against the deep,dark green of the evergreens was spellbinding for me.

Idris, thank you for your beautiful post. It brightened my day.

Take care, all, Mary

When we lived in Leadville Colorado (altitude 10,200 feet above sea level) the saying about the weather was "We have eleven months of winter and one month of very late fall"! Not quite true - but Mary W's comment about the aspen is correct. Our kids always had to wear a parka over Halloween costumes because the first snow of the season usually came about the end of October. And I remember tulips blooming in June through the snow.

Fall in Oklahoma means a certain smell in the air - crisp, not heavily humid as summer is - outdoor colors becoming softer as the angle of the sun changes - the clear sharp sound of the h.s. band practicing their marching drills - butterflies migrating through - American finches arriving as Hummingbirds are leaving - a kind of "settling in" feeling....and holes in the lawn as squirrels store acorns and seed pods for the winter (except they never seem to remember where they are!).

It's not fall yet in Maryland this year. Often by this time in September, leaves on many trees are turning. The dogwood in front of my house is the first to turn and is turning a lovely orangy-red, but the other trees are all holding on to green leaves. If I look only up, it could be high summer, tall trees, blue sky, green leaves. On the ground, however, are the first to fall. Just a few brown ones so far. I attribute our late fall to all the rain we have had this spring and summer. Last summer we had a drought as Texas does this year. How much change there is even if you stay in one place.

The dearest memory of fall from my childhood--in Chicago and in Maine--was catching a sniff of smoke from leaves burning in the gutters. I still miss it.

Maryal

I live in the central coast area of California. This week and last has been uncomfortably hot. Late yesterday layers of fog spilled over the western hills and today is cool, overcast and breezy. Such is the temperament of fall in this area. As summer spends itself out, fall takes the upper hand.

The breezes blow fallen leaves along with the dust. The oaks in my sister's yard are dropping acorns in abundance. The great profusion of summer vegetables and fruit slowly dwindles. Years ago, when I lived at a winery, this time of year meant the harvesting of grapes. The noise of the crushers, the great piles of discarded skins (pumice?) and the sweet, sour scent of fermentation.

Personally I always feel an overwhelming sense of nostalgia this time of year. I'm not certain why. This became very marked after my husband died 15 years ago. Providing nourishment, care, and shelter from the elements, for our families and those we love, seems an inherent part of our humanness. I get far stronger urges to cook large pots of soups and similar foods, to foist off on family, in the winter than in spring and summer. I tend to buy the grandchildren a surplus of pajamas although there is no evidence that any of them are in danger of freezing. The wild cats that I feed (four and they are neutered) were supplied with a duplex several winters ago to keep them sheltered from the elements.

By the middle of October I've usually "adjusted" and enjoy the fields piled with orange lumps of pumpkins, baking bread, and the busyness of the approaching holiday season.

I lived in both Iowa and Minnesota when I was young and am familiar with the greater distinction in seasons than we have here. I remember playing in the great piles of leaves before they were burned and of course the severe winters. Here I look forward to the end of winter and the emergence of my favorite season, spring.

Judy S

Mary W: Thank you for giving me the credit for "introducing the approach of Fall" but as you know from the Introduction to this forum and from my very first posting, I don't introduce subjects -- America does. We started this forum on July 28. At that point America introduced to us the first political convention, then a back-to-school month, then another political convention, etc. etc. Now America introduces to us the advent of Fall.

Callie: I love your phrase -- "American finches arriving as Hummingbirds are leaving."

Maryal: "a sniff of smoke from burning leaves." - terrific!

Judy: "Summer spends itself out, Fall takes the upper hand."

Is this what Autumn does to all of you? You are all poets!!

America will have many other things to show us as the weeks and months pass but for now it is Autumn as of 1:27 pm (EDT) tomorrow, September 22. What can you tell us about Autumn where you are now and where you were earlier in your life?

Robby

Robbie

I've managed to tear myself away from the TV to post.Good day today for the american swimmers. Got two gold medals for the price of one in the 50m freestyle. I do find the commentators are a bit over "the top". I am a great believer in the old adage that taking part is the thing.

I was asked what the vernal equinox means to me. Well it means I'm another year older, as my birthday is September 21. When I lived in England that was the first day of Autumn but in Australia that keep things simple. September 1 is the first day of spring, December 1, the first day of summer , and so on. Spring is a lovely time of year in Perth. The winter rains are almost over, everything is green and the daytime temperatures are bearable in the low 20s celsius. By the middle of January everything is burned brown, except for the gardens, which people have poured gallons of water through. Getting back to the discussion. I can sympathise will Phyll's post, which referred to lifestyles being changed by an influx of different cultures. I have seen that happen in the 28 years I have lived in Australia and I know that it has happened in England, where I used to live. It does seem that since the end of WW2, there have been mass migrations all over the "western world". I have a german friend, who went back to Germany for a holiday last year. He told me that there are parts of Berlin where Turkish is the spoken language. I wonder what Adolf would have made of that? If democracy is Government of the people, by the people, for the people, who decides who the people should be? One is described as being "racist" if you wish to uphold your own culture. I think that if you move to an established country(culture) then you should learn the language of that country and gradually assimilate into its culture. This had happened in Australia up until the mid 1970s. No doubt in time the people who have arrived since then will gradually change, or at least their children will, but the country of pre 1970s will never come back. I suspect the same has happened and will happen in the US and the UK. In the meantime, those of us who remember what it was like, will hanker for those days. Hope all this rambling makes sense. Must get a copy of the book that prompted this discussion

Here in Quebec, we have an example of how allowing a nation to keep its own language after it has been conquered by another nation. There are tremendous problems because in rural Quebec there is a vast area where people don't speak English, thus they want to separate because they want to continue to speak only French. We all know that this Eutopic to believe that about 5 million Quebecers can survive in a continent of somewhat 300 million people who speak English daily in business and at home. To learn another language is almost impossible for people who are over 60. Should we keep immigrants out if they don't speak the language of their new country? I don't think so because their children will adapt to the current lifestyle in order to make a living which is the first goal of anyone.

One language of communication in a continent as vast as North America is scary to me. Nationalities loose their original identity to fall into the huge couldron of the masses, thus becoming a colourless hybrid culture. Quebecers are different from the rest of Canada. We have very different views in several areas of personality. We are very latin in our behaviour. I believe its because we speak French and language brings it own set of values.

I want to stress is that the US is now dictating every aspect of our lives. Culturally, in our language, in our economy, thus in our behaviour. Our children are becoming little Americans. It might be wonderful for Americans to see the world falling into their nest, but I don't believe its for its own good. Diversity in culture is good for the creation of ideas. You can feel its impact in the contribution of talents coming out of this province.

I am always surprised to hear a visibly japanese person speaking American English without a trace of an accent. Is that person now living and behaving like an American or like a Japanese? If he/she looses the original identity, they also loose their individuality.

On the other hand, America became what it is BECAUSE of its one language policy. All great civilizations fell at the hands of less civilized nations in the past when it had become too complacent.

Peter Brown, happy birthday to you for yesterday. Mine is today, so fall has always meant school, birthday and cooler weather and has long been my favorite time of year. I also associate fall with the smell of school supplies---new paper, notebooks, pencils, erasers---remember smell of erasers? And colored pencils, a distinctive smell. Mmmmmm.

Peter:

Good to hear from "down under" again and HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

I never realized that in some areas of the world, the seasons changed according to specific dates, eg September 1st, December 1st, etc. I thought everyone did it according to the equinox.

You ask some thought-provoking questions: "Is upholding ones own culture being 'racist'"? "Who decides who the people should be?" I'm sure our participants here will have some thoughts on that matter.

Yes, please get deTocqueville's book. You can order it right here on Senior Net through Barnes & Noble and SN gets a percentage of the profit. Most of us get the inexpensive paperback Heffner edition and the pages noted above in the quotations refer to that edition.

Eloise:

You also give us some thought-provoking comments. You say: "With just one language in such a vast continent (which you find 'scary'), nationalties lose their original identities and become colorless hybrid cultures." Those whose primary language is English often forget that Quebecers are latin in behavior and have their "own set of values." How easy for many of us to forget -- that a specific language is usually associated with a specific set of values. Is that, perhaps, what is bothering many of us concerning various immigrants? -- not that they speak a different language but that their values are different from those of "anglo" heritage?

Eloise also raises a warning flag -- "Canadian children are becoming little Americans." Eloise, would you expand a bit on that? Just what is happening to them? What do the rest of us here see as the advantages and disadvantages of that?

Betty Gregory:

Also a HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU! Memories of various Autumn smells have been mentioned here -- burning leaves, etc. etc. but it took Betty to remind us of the smell of erasers and colored pencils?

Robby

My favorite time of the year!

I have been so lucky to have lived at some time in my life in most of the places in the U.S. that you all talk about. Started out in Kansas where the feel of fall brought out sweaters and the rustle of leaves as the huge elm trees (all gone now) shed their summer clothes and weiner roasts on chilly evenings out by the river. Moved to Mississippi where there was no fall at all--just a few degrees lower on the themometer and a moist, cool breeze off of the Gulf. Then came central Texas where, as it has been said, there are only two seasons. But the unceasing wind made it feel as cold as winters in Canada must feel! "Blue Northers" are a real experience on the Texas plains! And then to Colorado where the aspen gleam so golden in light of the low sun that it hurts somewhere inside when you come upon a mountainside covered with them. Next was Los Angeles---no spring, no summer, no winter and no autumn. And pink and lavender and turquoise Christmas trees, for heavens sake!!!! But New York/New England made up for California. Autumn in New England is the champion if you love scarlet, gold, and russet trees spreading over little villages with white houses and tall-spired churches clustered around the village green. They are the most beautiful of all but they don't last long enough----all over in a couple of weeks.

And finally, North Carolina, where fall starts in the Appalachian Mountains and sweeps slowly across the Piedmont on its way to the Outer Banks. More subdued, less flamboyant than New England, but beautiful in its own way and it lasts and lasts and lasts.

Forgive me if I have gone on too long but I have had a good life and you all make me remember the things that made it good.

Phyll

Phyll: Kansas, Mississippi, central Texas, Colorado, Los Angeles, New York, New England, and North Carolina -- you are truly an American! You most certainly have stored in your mind a realization of the immensity of our nation. I never thought of Los Angeles (where I have never been) as a place with no seasons at all!

And like previous posters here, the thought of Autumn brought out the poet in you -- "scarlet, gold, and russet spreading over little villages" and "Fall starting in the Appalachian Mountains and sweeping slowly across the Piedmont on its way to the Outer Banks."

As we share out Autumn experiences here, does the song "America the Beautiful" become more meaningful?

Robby

Happy Happy Birthday, Betty!!! and many more, we are so glad you are with us!

Happy Happy Birthday, Peter! and many more to you, too, Welcome to our Books,!!!

ginny

Fall has always been my favorite season and became even more so when my husband and I courted and married in fall. He was 35 and I was 28. One day we went to a nearby park and rolled down hill in the leaves. We had a wonderful time though his mom thought we were nuts!!

We had a fairly cool summer but the days heated up for the beginning of school. That often happens and I remember when the kids would come on the first day, wearing their new clothes, in spite of the fact that sweaters and corduroy did not fit the weather. The next day they would be back to shorts and tee shirts till winter really moved in.

Most of the trees here are still green but the maple in front of the house has started its change to scarlet, orange and yellow. This tree is one of the most beautiful ones around, and no, it isn't my imagination. Others have said so too. My sister and I took a series of pictures of it a few years ago and made a collage for a neighbor who had loved to watch that tree before she moved away.

We have Canada geese here year round now. I have been told it is because the farmers don't glean their fields so the geese find food easily. At this time of year, there are more geese here as some do migrate through this area. In the late afternoon the lake is alive with them and your ears are assaulted with their cries. They sit on the lake in the hundreds. It seems as though they are discussing lodging for the night, as gradually one group after another takes off and flies to a night time abode.

Ah, yes -- Fall in the Finger Lakes region of central New York State!! Having lived in Geneva for a couple of years I remember it well. Alice also becomes a poet when she speaks of Autumn, her favorite season -- "the Maple starting its change to scarlet, orange, and yellow" -- "Canada geese discussing lodging for the night." Also remembering children the first day of school wearing "sweaters and corduroy." I had forgotten all about corduroy. I had a corduroy jacket.

Any other Autumn comments and memories here?

Robby

I've lived in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maryland, Indiana, North Carolina and Florida. Fall in Northern Massachusetts is the best. The colors of the trees on the hillsides are indescribable. There is no shade of blue as blue as that Northern New England sky in the Fall. The air is crisp and clean with the smell of burning leaves and the crackle of leaves under your feet.

There is an invigoration that comes in late September and October where I grew up, and the taste of the apples I picked from the tree in the backyard was the best taste of any food I ever ate. Standing on wet, gray granite rocks by Nubble Light in York, Maine and watching the cold, cold ocean is wonderful. Turn around and you're surrounded by color that isn't the color of the breakers and gray-white foam or blue.

Fall in any other state where I've lived is not the same, and I wish I was "home" to see it and feel it right now.

Mal

Mal is also a poet (but we knew that already!) -- in addition to the colors of the trees, she reminds us of the "blue of the Northern New England sky" and "taste of apples" in the Autumn. Mal has also moved around -- Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maryland, Indiana, Florida, and North Carolina (where she lives now).

And I'm sure, Mal, that we all feel that pang of nostalgia as we hear you saying: "I wish I was home right now."

Robby

I forgot New York. I lived near Buffalo, and I lived in the Eastern part in Westchester County. Westchester County is beautiful in the Fall, no question about that. This is my second "tour of duty" in North Carolina. I lived in Durham about twenty miles from where I now am in the late fifties, too.

No poet I! I'm a writer of prose, through and through!

Happy Birthday, Betty! Hope you have a wonderful, productive year.

Mal

It is my hope for the future that we continue to become a multi-cultural world. I hope we will continue to mix the races as well. If we wind up with one race, perhaps, in color, a tan to die for, so much the better for not having race cause fear, discrimination and wars. Our one culture, which will by pure mathematics and human nature still show at least small differences, just as countries that speak one language speak with many accents, will actually contain all of the best of every previous culture of this planet.

We cannot "lose" anything. We can only gain mutual understanding and affection. We can forge bonds of world-wide community that will serve us well if, at some far future date, we do meet up with someone from a "galaxy far, far away!"

"Countries that speak one language speak with many accents. One culture can show small differences. We cannot lose anything."

Comments, anyone?

Robby

MARY PAGE. Your ideas of racial harmony are mine also. But I cannot see it happening anytime soon. It seems to me that perhaps 20% of a population accepts and celebrates the differences between individuals, but about 80% fear them, mostly in a small way, but in some, the fear is very intense. In the small, supposedly harmonious population mix of these Islands, it surprises me to find much antagonism between Maori and European and Asian. And I regret to say it, even between Maori and Maori, European and European. Yours and my dream is seductive, but only a dream, I fear.-- Trevor.

Ah, Trevor! I do not expect this to come about in my great grandchildrens' grandchildrens' time. But come it will, unless we lose 90% of our population to the next virus pandemic before that and THAT either hastens or slows down the progress, depending on the inclinations of the survivors. Lovely to think of having a friend with a like mind-set down there under the Southern Cross.

Trevor:

Thank you so much for coming from New Zealand to visit us!! Would you tell us a bit more about the Maoris? We hear quite a bit about the Aboriginies in Australia but most of us know little about the Maoris, their origin, and their relationship with the "Europeans."

And, as you know, we are discussing Democracy in this forum. How is the New Zealand form of government similar to or different from our governmental system in the United States?

Robby

Robby - I see children becoming Americanized in their behaviour around my house. Even those who don't speak English. Its true that American values are spread around the planet via television and its a tidal wave that is just impossible to stem. Here in Quebec children behave the same way as the kids you see on American TV. Dress in the same fashion as kids across the border and dance the same way as US children. In the future, I fear that the French language will slowly disappear except at home. My own grand'children are being assimilated. French Canadians have very few children. l.5 per family if not less by now. We are seeing a huge imigration inflow here in Montreal. On our commercial streets we have store signs in Arab. Arabs tend to assimmilate at a slower rate than other nationalities and still speak their own language and wear their own traditional costumes.

I believe that North America will become one huge nation speaking English when Canada and Mexico will be a part of the United States. Too bad though. Even if those two might become more prosperous, they will be less interesting.

There is so much to talk about as we roll along into autumn! First, I just got home from work at the Lewis & Clark Interpretive Center on one of those absolutely perfect days that happens in the early fall on the Pacific Northwest coast of the USA. (We are known here as the "end of the world".) Not one cloud in the sky, the surf rolling lazily in. You could even see the Olympic Mountains from the bay beach.

The center had as usual, a day filled with visitors from all over the world. I stopped on the way home and ate dinner at Chen's Chinese restaurant and here I am communicating with people across the globe. As Wilke said so long ago, its one world.

Being adopted can give a person, as they grow older, an excellent view of life, although its slightly different than most people's. Sometimes that view is hilarious!

My former husband was first-generation Norwegian whose mother highly disapproved of me because a friend of her son told her that I was a Chehalis Indian. She stormed and wept and refused to come to our wedding, etc. The reason that the friend said that I was American Indian was that my birth father lived on the Chehalis Indian Reservation. Hjalmar (known to the world as "Barney") looked pure Indian with coal black hair, black eyes and tan dark skin and I looked like him. BUT-unknown to her, he was Swedish and Norwegian, born in Minnesota, never learned to speak English until he was eight years old, and spoke English with an accent very much like older American Indian speech. He had lived so long on the Chehalis Indian reservation that even the Indians thought of him as one of their own.

Maybe its a good thing that Inga is long gone to her Lutheran heaven as my son-in-law is Black African American and my grandsons (her great-grandsons) are the "golden men" of tomorrow with Norwegian green eyes and beautiful Afro hairdos. Now their African American grandmother was one-fourth Cherokee so what does that make my grandsons? Americans, men of the NEXT generation, who by the way, have roots in America that go back to the late 1600's and even further with the Cherokee blood, not just immigrants who came to the USA a generation ago. I hope that they live out their lives in a democracy.

I like living on this planet because it is round.

And Joan, did you see the moon last night, an elegant sliver in a black, star-studded sky?

Eloise and Ellen: I am struck by the juxtaposition of your postings and the comments by each. The comments by both of you may, more than we realize, give us a picture of the future. For example:--

Eloise:

1 - American values are spread around the planet.
2 - A tidal wave impossible to stem.
3 - Quebec children behave the same way as American kids.
4 - Dress in the same way as kids across the border.
5 - Dance the same way as U.S. children.
6 - The French language will slowly disappear.
7 - My grandchildren are being assimilated.
8 - There is a huge immigration flow in Montreal.
9 - North America will become one huge nation.
10 - Canada and Mexico will become part of the United States.

Ellen:

1 - The center had visitors from all over the world.
2 - I am communicating with people across the globe.
3 - It's one world.
4 - My birth father was Swedish and Norwegian but lived on the Chehalis Indian Reservation.
5 - The Indians thought of him as one of their own.
6 - My son-in-law in Black African American.
7 - My grandsons have Norwegian green eyes and beautiful Afro hair-dos.
8 - Their African-American grandmother was one-fourth Cherokee.

The comments above speak for themselves without my reaction.

What is America? What is an American?

Robby

Please compare the appraisals of Eloise and Ellen with the two quotes of deTocqueville above -- one beginning "The territory" and the other beginning "The French inhabitants." Please keep in mind that deT wrote this 170 years ago.

Robby

As Autumn moves in and we experience the sights, sounds, and fragrances listed above by many participants here, and as we float down the mainstream of daily life, America suddenly presents another familiar and friendly face to us -- the State Fair. Here in Virginia the State Fair began yesterday in Richmond and will continue until October 1st. As a native New Yorker, the very first State Fair I ever saw was in Syracuse. I am pleased to note that the very first State Fair in America was held in 1841 in Syracuse. Very quickly, other states followed suit and some of the oldest ones are those held in Michigan since 1849, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin (1851), Indiana (1852), Illinois (1853), and Iowa (1854). Among the largest state fairs, with annual attendance exceeding one million each, are Texas, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Los Angeles County, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, and California. In Canada the Pacific National Exhibition at Vancouver, B.C., and the Canadian National Exhibition at Toronto both attract well over a million visitors every year.

What are your memories? We, of course, all remember the musical "State Fair, by Rodgers and Hammerstein but what about your direct contact with State Fairs. Country music? Races? Pie-eating contests? Side shows? Game booths? Cotton candy? Rides on the ferris wheel? 4-H Club exhibits? Quilts and quilt-making? Sheep shearing? Cow milking? Hog contests? Tractor-pulling? Horse racing? There's lots and lots more!!

What thoughts come to your mind as you see the term, State Fair?

Robby

I think Pat Boone comes to mind when I hear the words "State Fair". And that huge Texan.

Get thee to Fredericksburg, Robby!

I'm leaving shortly, MaryPage. For the rest of you who don't know what we are talking about, MaryPage and I and four other Virginians are meeting at 1:30 p.m. today in Fredericksburg for an informal Tea Party. Most of us have never met each other personally. Isn't Senior Net wonderful?!

Robby

Have a great time, Robby.

)

I have met a few cyber friends this summer as well as last. It was fun and they were really nice. Everyone wants to come here to see the Little Woods. My Secret Garden has little momentos they leave. Very odd that my tales have that effect but if it makes folks happy that's good.

Robby and MaryPage and the others - how nice that you are going to meet and spend some "real" time together. Here in So. California Claire, Maril and I are going to have a Chinese brunch together next month. And isn't it exciting about our old friend Ben (from many other discussions) andd WindDancer planning a future together!

Although I have not been a regular poster in this forum, I am a faithful reader of all your messages and comments and I must say that this is one of the most intelligent, compassionate, free-thinking, and liberal (in the moral and ethical sense, not the political) bunch of SNetters on the Web.

We've had the Great Virginia Tea Party, and you can drop into Geographic Communities and then into the VIRGINIA file and read all about it.

Later, there will be pictures.

From now on, you can call Robby "Speedy" or "See My Dust!"

I don't suppose you saw the Mad Hatter at the tea party did you? I've been looking for him all day. Okay the wind is up and i've got my balloons with really long strings to help Winnie the Pooh with his Windy Day. I just bet the Mad Hatter is hiding cause he is jealous.

)

Gail:

What a wonderful compliment of this forum!! We do have a terrific group of participants. Have you noticed how their comments seem to weave in and out with each other? Please add your thoughts to the sub-topics here!

Robby

Can't match your weaving in and out of traffic!

(whoops, sorry!)

I had no idea Dr. Robby was a weaver. Then again i didn't know he was a Mad Hatter who went to tea parties. Funny what you learn about people in a forum.

)

Robby - The trend is accellerating rapidly. Europe is trying to unite into one large economic entity. Since man went in space, we now see that our planet is but a tiny dot on the vast universe. Technology has shown us how fragile we are and that constant warring cannot be tolerated unless we want to fragment ourselves into smithereens. While the West is getting more powerful and more wealthy, the Third World is dying from hunger and disease. The accumulation of wealth is superseding compassion for the needy of this world and we sweep the dirt under the carpet and try to ignore it. Television slams it back in front of our eyes on News Channels around the clock. If we are born in wonderful America its just pure luck. I saw on TV yesterday that the world's population of one billion out of the 6 lives like us.

De T. must have written somewhere about America's choice geographic location between two huge oceans which gives it unique protection, (until distence becomes irrelevant). Oceans and one language made America great along with immigration policies and as long as the language policy remains as it is now, America will remain strong. "America is great because it is good and if it ceases to be good, it will cease to be great"

I am greatly concerned about the future of my grand'children as they enter the 21st century. Will they abuse their immense luck at being born here? Will they help deepen the abyss between the rich and poor countries by buying goods manufactured in poor countries using child labour in unsanitary conditions?

Democracy evolved into what we see here in America. The good and the bad. I have come to a stage in my life where I just observe and pray and leave it be. I only have another 25 years to live anyway God willing.

Please read deTocqueville's comment (above) beginning "The territory occupied..." and then read Eloise's remarks. What thoughts do the rest of you have?

Robby

Wonderful thoughts, Eloise. Such writers we have here!

I agree with you and your post about people NOT agreeing. When I worked with the children of different American Indian tribes, I found that the strangest contradictions exist among most all people. American Indians never, that I ever heard of, called themselves First Americans or Native Americans, but always called themselves Indians and by tribe. He's a Yakima, she is a Makah, they are Warm Springs and so on. And what struck me was the animosity among members within a tribe. The traditionalists against the Christians, the Catholics against the Protestants, the Red Eagle clan against the White Eagle clan and so on.

It was the Blackfoot tribe that brought down Chief Joseph's band of Nez Perce just 30 miles from the Canadian Border, not the federal troops that were waging war against the Nez Perce to drive them from their Wallowa Valley, Oregon homes.

American Indians did not achieve citizenship until 1924.

State Fairs??? Iowa, by far the best that I have ever attended! That's where the tall corn grows!!!!

Eloise

I can sympathise with French Canadians, who find that the English language is becoming a "must". Only 50 years ago,French was always the second language taught in english grammar schools. I find it hard to accept, when I see english negroes being interviewed on TV who have stronger "cockney" accents than I. You also commented on US influence, but that is not restricted to Canada. With the instant media coverage of things like the Olympic Games, or Royal Weddings in the UK etc. etc. the world really is becoming a global village. At present that media is dominated by the US and therefore english is obligatory. In 100 years time, the Chinese or the Indians, may have superceded the US. Then maybe Cantonese or Mandararin, or even Hindi, may become the global language. Whatever does happen, I believe a global language eventually is bound to come about. Robbie. State Fairs to me mean Jeanne Crane and her bouncing hair

Thank you all for your birthday greetings

Pete

ROBERT. You asked about New Zealand. This is the youngest piece of land in the world to be inhabited. The Maori arrived here about 1000 years ago, by canoe from Tahiti.It seems they found NZ by accident, whilst exploring the Pacific. The first voyagers returned to Tahiti with news of their discovery, and came back here with a fleet of about 6 canoes, and as far as is known, never returned to Tahiti. It must be 3000 miles or more, and to travel that far in a canoe across an ocean, says much for their seafaring ability. Their's was the same race that voyaged from Tahiti to colonise the Hawaian Islands in 300 AD.

The Maori were the first mammals to reach these shores. They found these islands populated by birds, and one ancient descendant of the dinosaurs. Because the birds did not have to cope with mammals, such as cats, dogs, etc. many lost the ability to fly. and became ground dwellers. The biggest bird ever to live, the Moa, stood over 8 feet tall. The Maori sought them for food, and the last remaining were hunted to extinction just before Europeans came, in numbers, about 1800 AD.

The first Europeans to arrive, whalers and sealers, were from San Francisco and Seattle. There presence, and also that of the French, motivated the British, who were in Australia, to annex these islands. At that time, the British were almost in a state of war with Americans and Frenchmen. Remember the wars of 1776, and 1812? So they grabbed NZ. before Washington or Paris could claim ownership, and forced the Americans out.

Well that's enough burbling for now. I tell you something of government, and relations with the Maori, next time.-- Trevor.

Ellen: You are a great story teller! Please share with us your memories of the Iowa State Fair!!

Is the world indeed becoming a "global village", as Pete says, and is much of that due to the influence of American TV? Is English becoming "obligatory?" Was deTocqueville correct in his remark (above) starting with "The early English immigrants..."? Jeanne Crane and her "bouncing hair?" Now that must be a memory!

Trevor: Your story of the Maoris is fascinating!! Amazing, as you say, that they could have traveled in canoes across 3000 miles of ocean. Would you say that they must have had navigational abilities greater than we would suppose? And birds becoming "walkers" because they did not have to fly to escape mammals -- what a concept. I'm not so sure I want to meet an eight-foot bird. OK - I'll give in to the temptation to mention Sesame Street. We are looking forward to your comparing democracy in New Zealand to Democracy in America.

Robby

Peter - China and India have the most populated countries on earth. India I heard has 22 official? languages. China several also. That is not good if they want to dominate as competently as the US does. They don't have oceans to protect them from warring neighbors. Those two countries are progressing fast towards better technology. Within 100 years, if they use a common language, move towards a market economy they might make more progress. But they will always lack what America has. A multiethnic population all aiming towards the same goal using the same language and understanding freedom as we do. Their cultures have been ingrained into their every fiber and their history is too old to change rapidly like the Americans did only a few short centuries ago. Freedom in every shape or form is what makes new Americans shed their old culture to adhere passionately to democracy.

In Eloise's last sentence she places freedom and democracy side by side. And she adds the phrase "understanding freedom as we do." In what way do you interpret freedom, Eloise? How do the rest of you here describe freedom whether you live in the United States, Canada, Australia, or New Zealand? This is a word that many of us throw around loosely. Just what do we mean when we use it? Are "freedom" and "liberty" the same thing?

Robby

Robby - For early immigrants to the American continent freedom meant perhaps something different than how we understand it today. When America was discovered, freedom to own territory came first. I am not saying that the land was empty of humans, no, but the immigrants did not consider Indians as owners of land and they litterally took whatever land they fancied and felt it was their own. That was a great attraction for overpopulated Europeans. They left behind monarchies and wanted to have a part in the discovies of the Americas. Here they had freedom of religion and freedom of speech which they did not have in the old country. Enyone could attain the highest office in the land. The vastness of the new country was a dream, they could own vast lands and rule over it.

Today freedom in America remains almost the same. Own land, have freedom of religion and of speech. Not very many countries can boast of such freedom.

Freedom of speech can destroy as well as build. The Monica L. affair. Freedom of religion can kill, Waco. Freedom to own land remains the best freedom there is in a democracy.

I see Liberty in a political context. In French "liberté" is freedom.

1 - "Freedom can destroy as well as build."
2 - "Freedom to own land is the best freedom in a democracy.

Any reactions?

Robby

Robert, Freedom. As the country song has it--

Freedom’s just another word for nothin’ left to lose,
Nothin’ ain’t worth nothin‘-- but it’s free!

I guess there are times when many can relate to those sentiments. Every society must restrict the freedoms of it’s members, to some extent, or social cohesion will not be achieved. This means that those in powerful positions, Cabinet Ministers, Employers, Judges,. even our marriage partners and children, restrict our freedom of action in many ways. All individuals must give up freedoms, in order to enjoy the benefits of social living.

Perhaps freedom is best defined as the participation in privileges of citizenship. Though the restrictions imposed upon citizens are many, there is one freedom that is vital, not only for individuals, but for society itself. I refer to freedom of speech, for without it Democracy can be subverted to Dictatorship.

It is in the contention of ideas, inherent in free speech for all persons, which guarantees the continuation of Democracy. Remember the Senator McCarthy days? America then faced being shackled with the evil that so many young men had died to destroy, just a few years before. The citizens of your fair land survived the onslaught then, but you will be assaulted again, perhps in the efforts to promote Globalisation.-- Trevor.

HAPPY 80TH BIRTHDAY, ROBBY!

HAVE A DELIGHTFUL ONE !

Yes, MaryPage. Blessed to have been born 80 years ago today in the Land of the Free. Thank you!!

Robby

I see some kind person has corrected my heading on post No.1206. Whoever it was, many thanks.

ROBERT. I did not know it was your birthday. Many happy returns after your eightieth cicumnavigation of the sun.-- Trevor.

Yes, MaryPage. Blessed to have been born 80 years ago today in the Land of the Free. Thank you!!

Robby

Trevor:

I don't know which correction you are referring to in Post 1206 but I can assure you and everyone here that I NEVER change anyone's postings.

And thank you for complimenting me on 80 circumnavigations!!

Robby

Happy Happy Birthday,
our Robby!
The Big 80~!!

ginny

Thank you, Ginny. Only 20 more years to the BIG DOUBLE O!!

Robby

Happy birthday, Robbie!
Celebrate in style!
Here's some grog!

Maryal

Thank you, Maryal! To those of you who didn't understand the "inside joke," Maryal and I are part of another discussion group examining the "Rime of the Ancient Mariner."

Robby

And we keep alive by drinking GROG

I suppose we could relate GROG to the development of America.

Robby

Happy 80th Birthday, Robby!!!
There's a greeting for you in the WREX discussion, too!

Thank you, Mal! It would appear that America is on hold for my birthday.

Robby

Robby,

Well, at least OUR part of America is on hold for your birthday!

Many warm wishes on your 80th and many more to come.....at least 20.....and even more. After all, we have a lot more books to discuss.

Phyll

HAPPY 80th BIRTHDAY GREETINGS ROBBY!

Somehow i think with your attitude you will make it well past 100 years.

)

I looked up our Charter of Rights and Freedoms last night and it is just too long to post, as it is pages long.

What is freedom? What is equality? Are they the same? Do they necessarily go together? What are your reactions to the four quotations above by deTocqueville?

Robby

Robby: Guess I am slow in getting off the blocks this morning. (A play on the Olympics) But add me to the list of those wishing you a HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

I am just a year behind you.

Willie

Thank you, Williewoody. You have never sounded slow to me!!

Robby

Happy Birthday Robby - Only 80 are you saying? my but you have a long way to go yet. By the looks of your posts, you are too young to think about being old.

Freedom and equality are totally different words to me. Freedom is what you can choose to do, say, buy, worship. Equality is not a choice, it is a state of things. Equal pay is given by the employer. Equal color of skin you were born with as well as equal intelligence. Equal size of fortune you either enherit or earn. Only in the eyes of God are we all equal. He decided that.

Equality and justice is just as different come to think of it.

Robby a few posts back somewhere I shared the information gleaned at a Conference on Aging ...the fastest growing segment of population are the centenarians ..I hope you are around for at least 20 years as I expect to be likewise ..I shall bake you a cake for your 100th and YOU ARE ALL INVITED TO HAVE A PIECE and I AM ONE GREAT CAKE BAKER ..no package mixes ..fresh eggs, real butter, real vanilla etc only the best ...so lets plan to meet some place in 20 years to celebrate!

I am off to discover Iowa ...my youngest brother who lives in California and is on line said when told ...This is a farm state ..there are nothing but farms there You will most likely get lost on all those country roads...

I will have my carrier pigeon laptop with me and if I can find an electrical outlet and a phone line I will check here and give you a report from IOWA ...

Best wishes again to you Robby ...anna from Virginia

Ok Robby this is Democracy in the 1920s and the world as it affected our excersize in governing ourselves. A special Happy Birthday !

In 1920 "the Jazz Age" there were 106,521,537 people in the US.
Male life expectancy was 53.6 years and female 54.6 years.
The average annual income was $1236 with Teachers salaries $970. that is 78% of the average annual income. US Census Bureau Median Family income in 1997 $ 46,737-- 78% = $36,678.71 How many teachers today make that salary?
Illiteracy rate reached a new low of 6%.
It took 13 days to reach California from New York by car.
In 1920, the 19th Amendment was passed in the United States, granting suffrage to women. The flapper, a sign of the 1920's, characterized the changes that were occurring in the decade.
William "Big Bill" Tatem Tilden II became the first American to win a Wimbledon title in 1920. He would recapture this title in 1921
In 1920, Suzanne Lenglen of France captured the women's singles title at Wimbledon. Over a span of eight years (from 1919 - 1926), she would win a total of six Wimbledon titles.
Greek national Peter Trivoulidas, a New York bus boy, won the 1920 Boston Marathon.
Francis Scott Key Fitzgerald, an American writer and screenwriter, his first novel, This Side of Paradisehad been made available to the public in 1920.
Babe Ruth, joined the Yankees in 1920 and hit 54 home runs that year. The next year, he increased to 59. He finally broke the old record in 1927 with 60.
American writer Sinclair Lewis, or Harry Sinclair Lewis, publishes Main Street. (1920)
The public is able to hear radio broadcasting for the first time. (1920)
1920 The U.S. gross national product (GNP) rose to $71.6 billion. In 1910, it had been $30.4 billion.
April 15, 1920, a guard named Alessandro Berardelli and paymaster Frederick A. Parmenter were robbed and killed by gunmen. Despite Celestine Madeiros, a criminal on death row, admitting to being a part of the crime, the trial ended on July 14, 1921, and Sacco and Vanzetti were sentenced to death. They were electrocuted on August 23, 1927. The world felt that the two Italian immigrants had not received a fair trial. What the two did receive, in their opinions, was prejudice.
Silver Lake, Colorado receives 76 inches of snow in one day! (1921)
1921, two researchers from Canada, Frederick Grant Banting and Charles Herbert Best, made an incredible discovery - insulin.
Aldous Leonard Huxley publishes Crome Yellow, his first novel. (1921)
July 2, 1921, American boxer Jack "the Manassa Mauler" Dempsey , fought challenger Georges Carpentier, a Frenchman, in New Jersey. Dempsey was declared winner in the fourth round.
In 1921, the first Miss America Pageant took place with a total of eight contestants in Atlantic City, New Jersey.
Albert Einstein published his theory of relativity, "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies." He earned a Nobel Prize in Physics, 1921.
James Augustine Aloysius Joyce introduces his novel, Ulysses. (1922)
In 1922, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, better known to his followers as Mahatma, or "great soul," was sent to jail. His non-violent methods were used successfully to change the history of Black people in this country.
Arab Republic of Egypt, gained its freedom in 1922.
1922, two American scientists, Dr. Herbert McLean Evans and K.S. Bishop discovered vitamin E
Up until 1922, no swimmer, had been able to swim the 100 meters in under a minute's time. American Johnny Weissmuller (1904-1984), broke the record with 58.6 seconds swimming freestyle on July 9. He went on to win three gold medals at the 1924 Olympics in Paris, France, and two gold medals at the 1928 Olympics in Amsterdam. In his career, he claimed 52 U.S. titles and 28 world distance records.
King Vittorio Emanuele III (or King Victor Emmanuel III) summoned Mussolini to Rome and asked him to become Prime Minister in 1922. In October 1922, Benito Mussolini and his 22,000 supporters, or Black Shirts, marched into Rome. In 1925, he became Il Duce or the leader;Italy was now under a dictatorship. The former journalist/teacher's rise to power gave Great Britain and France new hopes for European peace.
T.S. Eliot, or Thomas Stearns Eliot, publishes The Waste Land, a free verse poem. (1922)
Ralph Samuelson of Minnesota invented waterskiing in 1922
The Communist and Bolshevik formed the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in 1922.
October of 1922, the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) was created for the public.
1922, Birdseye Seafoods, Inc. Working near the Arctic for the American government, Birdseye found that immediately freezing meat kept its flavor, maintaining its nutritional benefits.
November 4, 1922, an English archaeologist and Egyptologist, Howard Carter and Egyptologist George Herbert (Lord Carnarvon) found the long-sought grave of Tutankhamen or Tutankhamun (1343 - 1325 B.C.) The body of the 18-year old king and his treasure were uncovered after more than 3000 years. The contents of grave have been on display many times in the US and after several deaths associated with the find, a movie was produced in the U S developing the idea of a curse.
Igor Fyodorovich Stravinsky writes music for Les Noces, a ballet. (1923)
The 'Charleston,' became popular after being shown in Runnin' Wild, a 1923 musical. One man, John Giola, from New York managed to do the Charleston for 22 hours and 30 minutes!
November of 1923, Adolf Hitler and his Storm Troopers barge in on a beer hall meeting.
Lenin died on January 21, 1924, and a total of 900,000 people viewed the leader's lifeless body in Moscow.
In New York, George Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue is performed. (1924)
Harold Ross founds the New Yorker. (1925)
1925, a Tennessee biology teacher named John Thomas Scopes was put on trial for teaching evolution.
Ernest Miller Hemingway publishes his book, The Sun Also Rises. (1925) A Farewell to Arms. (1929)
Gerorge Bernard Shaw wins the Nobel Prize for Literature. (1925) His novel Pygmalion delights us many years later in a musical version called My Fair Lady
The very first motor hotel or motel, Motel Inn, is opened in the state of California. (1925)
July, 1925, Adolf Hitler issued his autobiography. The book, entitled Mein Kampf or My Struggle, had a second volume in 1926.
May 1926, a constitution was established in Paris for the republic of Lebanon.
Queen Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsorwas born on April 21, 1926, to King George VI and the Duchess of York (later Queen Consort).
Valentino died at the age of 31 in his sleep on August 23, 1926.
John Baird Introduces His Television (1926)
October of 1926, British writer Alan Alexander Milne , published Winnie the Pooh.
Gertrude Ederle from New York, swam the English Channel, 21 miles on August 6, 1926. Ederle, only nineteen. Her time: 14 hrs and 31 min.
Houdini did not die in an escape but from peritonitis, a type of internal gangrene in which the lining of the abdominal cavity becomes inflamed. Never knowing that he might have been suffering from appendicitis, he passed away on October 31, 1926 (Halloween).
The first film featuring spoken words was The Jazz Singer. Warner Brothers produced the talkie in 1927.
Henry Ford makes the Model A, a new car, available on the market. (1927)
Maurice Joseph Ravel, a French composer, writes Bolero, an orchestral piece. (1927) The movie score for the perfect "10" girl!
In 1927, Chiang Kai-shek and his nationalist army, the Kuomintang, took control of Nanjing and Shanghai.
Isadora Duncan was accidentally suffocated to death in Nice, France. (1927)
May 20, 1927, twenty-five-year old airmail pilot Charles Augustus Lindbergh achieved a feat that had previously claimed the lives of two French pilots. He left Roosevelt Field, Long Island, New York, on May 20,1927, at 7:52 a.m. and landed in Paris, France, 33 1/2 hours later.
December of 1926, the English writer Dame Agatha Mary Clarissa Christie (1891 - 1976) was discovered to be missing. Despite the fact that she was later located at a hotel, the reason for the mystery-writer's disappearance was never determined.
Walt Disney presents Mickey Mouse in Steamboat Willie, a cartoon complete with sound. Disney provided the voice of the soon-to-be famous mouse. (1928)
1928, Alexander Fleming, a British scientist, discovered green and yellow mold on a culture plate of Staphylococcus bacterium. He isolated Penicillin notatum and cultivated it. In 1929, Fleming published a report on penicillin and its antibacterial characteristics. This discovery would earn Fleming and scientists, chemist Ernst Boris Chain and pathologist Howard Walter Florey, a Nobel prize
Charlie Chaplain stars in The Kid, his first full-length film. Other notable actors at the time included Douglas Fairbanks (1883 - 1939) and Mary Pickford (1893 - 1979).
The Valentine's Day Massacre, took place on February 14, 1929, was one of the many outcomes of organized crime during the 1920's.
Kodak introduces 16mm color film. (1929)
Sergei Diaghilev, the founding father of the Ballets Russes and helped get ballet noticed, Dies (1929)
During the 1920's, many American people saw "the good times." These times of prosperity would not last forever, however. The stock market crash of 1929 would end "The Roaring Twenties" and the Jazz Age.

Robby Do you remember any of these incidents from your boyhood?

HAPPY BIRTHDAY ROBBY!

All best wishes!

Judy S

Happy Birthday Robbie.

We have some friends in our Seniors group who told me that they had got the OBE. I assumed they ment they had got the Order of the British Empire. Oh no, they said "OBE means over bloody eighty". Pardon my language. Just hope I live long enough to get mine!

Regarding your two questions.

1 Freedom can destroy if one does not accept the responsibilities that freedom gives. The claim that freedom gives rights also means that we must use those rights for the benefit of all.

2 Whether the freedom to own land is the best freedom is very debateable. Isn't it the desire to own land that has been the cause of many a war. Hitler spoke of Liebensraum(apologies if I've spelt that incorrectly). Sometimes I think our indigenous peoples in both the US and Australia have got a better perspective. They ask "how can you own the land when it will still be there after you have died'?

Peter

OLDER THAN Mickey Mouse ???

No wonder you seem so wise!!!!! Happy birthday, Robby. Your youthful level of energy is contagious and is a marvelous example to all!! I appreciate you!

Betty

Yep and the Queen of England! Robby may just be older 'n dirt!

If I have not been respsonding, it's because I just got home after a very long 11-hour work day. But here I am and I thank every one of you for your wonderful Birthday Wishes. Inside me is a 40-year old spirit (if not younger) so we won't bother about the body that surrounds it!!

Barbara: It will take some time for me to examine that list but some of the items I remember did pop out at me. I had no idea so many events happened during my life!

Peter questions whether the freedom to own land is the best freedom seeing that as a possible prelude to war. And does freedom give responsibilites, as Peter says?

Do we have these various terms defined in our own minds? Is freedom the same as liberty? Is freedom the same as equality? Is equality the same as freedom? Do they all go together? Can they be separate? Do we people who live in a democracy throw these words about loosely without bothering to examine what they mean? Can freedom hurt us? Can liberty hurt us? Can equality hurt us? Can we be hurt if we have one without the other? Can we lose one and hold onto the other? Is it important that we know the distinction?

Robby

Just this minute watched Australian Cathy Freeman run the race of her life---for her country women and men, a "symbol for freedom," her country Australia and the aboriginal people call her. (She has tatooed on her arm "cos I'm free.") This gold medal race a healing symbol for the indigenous people with such a painful past. Our countries have much in common.

Additions to your list-

Memories from the Pacific Northwest

Grand Coulee Dam, built on the Columbia River, was dedicated by President Roosevelt, August 4, 1934. Built at the depths of the Great Depression for $60 million, it was finally finished after a hard-won battle between the private power companies and the public authorities and it brought abundant, inexpensive electicity to the Pacific Northwest.

Next came Bonneville Dam, finished in 1938. It was also dedicated by President Roosevelt. I saw that dam go up stage by stage and I will never forget it. I also saw the rattlesnake filled desert of eastern Washington turn into a vast farmland.

I love my hot-water tank heated by electricity-good abundant, power. And I have my own water system, a well run by electricity up in the east corner of my property. I love my wood stove too, especially when the power goes out in our winter storms, but for everyday living, god-bless electricity! I can remember my parents buying their first electric cook stove. Wood was the traditional way for cooking and heating in the Pacific Northwest until the dams on the Columbia River were built and people could afford cheap electricity from the Bonneville Power Administration. It freed so many women from drudgery. (Ever try to cook on a wood stove in the summer? All of the glamour goes out the window.). Thank you C.C. Dill, a man who spent his whole life fighting for the Grand Coulee Dam.

I don't know how electifying the Pacific Northwest comes under freedom, but maybe it could be called being freed from drudgery for women as well as many other things! And C.C. Dill was a lone Democrat from Spokane, Washington, a VERY Republican stronghold at that time that fought his every move to get electrical power to the public. All of it has happened under a democracy.

In that list of what happened during Robby's lifetime:

The American Indian received citizenship and the right to vote in 1924. They were no longer governed under the US War Dept.

What is citizenship? To vote, when we are simply awash in advertising campaign electorial commercials? What's the difference between advertising a toothpaste with all of its carefully studied hype by a team of so-called experts to the barrage of television ads telling us why we should vote for so-and-so politician and how awful his advisary is?

Are there real isues being debated? How many of you had DEBATE in high school? As ex-college faculty, I can assure everyone that it was a most important class that got dumped somewhere along the way in time and history. Just listen to young people speak today-"like cool an stuff, ". I'm beginning to cringe at the stuff as well as the cool. What stuff???? Like you know. Know what? Cool!!!! How repetitious those three phrases become! Could a union meeting, or negotiation team be held by the young today???? I know, call Bernie my attorney, he'll will take care of everything.

Best wishes for your brithday Robby

Ellen, I agree that debating is an important discipline.

Any answers to the questions in Post #1232? Liberty -- freedom -- equality? Do they all mean the same?

Robby

According to the dictionary, Liberty is "1. a. The condition of being free from restriction or control. b. The right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one's own choosing. c. The condition of being physically and legally free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor."

Freedom is "1. The condition of being free of restraints. 2. Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression. 3. a. Political independence. b. Possession of civil rights; immunity from the arbitrary exercise of authority. 4. Exemption from an unpleasant or onerous condition: freedom from want. 5. The capacity to exercise choice; free will."

Equality is: 1. The state or quality of being equal. 2. Mathematics. A statement, usually an equation, that one thing equals another."

I have no argument with these definitions. Liberty, freedom and equality do not mean the same thing. Perhaps one difference to note is how we use liberty and freedom to create equality.

Mal

Mal:

How do you see us using liberty and freedom to create equality?

Robby

Freedom gives us the "liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression". Those of us who have never been enslaved or had ancestors enslaved, detained or oppressed for whatever reason must exercise our choices and free will to ensure that no one anywhere, whatever race, religion, creed or gender will be thus enslaved, detained or oppressed, if only to guarantee that we will continue never be so degraded and made inequal as human beings.

Mal

It may sound at the moment as if we are playing around with dictionary definitions but I submit that how we look at these attributes in a democracy not only affects our nation as a whole but our personal lives. Words have definitions but they also have connotations. They have "exact" meanings and they have meanings which are kind of "slippery" if you understand what I mean. Furthermore, a term might mean one thing to one person and an entirely differently thing to another. This was what concerned deTocqueville (see his quotes above).

Mal, you say in your opening phrase that "freedom gives us liberty..." This would imply that, to you, freedom and liberty are not the same. Am I correct? And how do the rest of feel about this?

Robby

Freedom and liberty are not the same in my estimation. As I see it, freedom gives us the liberty to have free choice and free will. Without freedom, there is no liberty to have anything, including beliefs.

Mal

Yes, Mal, as I understand, you do not see freedom as the same as liberty. You see freedom as giving us liberty. But -- to press the matter a bit -- just what IS freedom to you. Help us to separate the two in our minds.

Robby

Did the old Jim Crow dictum of "separate but equal" indicate freedom?

I do not believe that you can ever achieve equality in anything,except,perhaps,mathematics.To me,equality presumes that we are all the same...but we're only human and human nature will never go down the road to Utopia, and if you cannot get to Utopia,you can never get true equality ( whatever that means)

To Ed, equality means that we are all the same and therefore definitely not so in his eyes. At the same time he wondered if freedom came from being "separate but equal."

Any reactions?

Robby

Are we not just equal before the law? Folks are not equal in that they are all different. If we are different then we are not equal except possibly equally human.

The problem with "separate but equal" as it was applied when that term was used was that it was NEVER equal. I agree with Idris that, at least legally, it means equal under the law. Ed is right, we can never be equal -- one person is better in this than that, worse in something else. We're all on a continuum when it comes to skills and abilities. But before the law, we're supposed to be equal -- treated equally, judged by a jury of our peers.

However, I believe that ideal goal still doesn't happen. I think a person's skin color, education level, and economic level, as well as some others, probably, all have a bearing on how that person is treated in court --and of those, economic level is probably the most important. People with money can hire attorneys and hire the best. People without money can't. If they get represented at all, they're generally represented by the dregs of the bar, men who sleep through trials, men who either don't know how to put on a defense or can't be bothered.

And as for "separate but equal," I don't believe THAT concept has gone away -- it's just gone underground.

I'm still thinking about the definitions of freedom, liberty, etc. I'll get back to you on that.

We are beginning to notice here the problem deTocquevill anticipated. In his first quote (above) he was concerned that freedom and equality would be "confounded."

Robby

"The advantages which freedom brings are only shown by the lapse of time. The advantages of equality are immediate." (P191, Why Democratic Nations Show an Ardent and Enduring Love of Equality than of Liberty.) So said de Tocqueville.

To me, after living almost three quarters of a century, the advantages of freedom are very, very real. It took a major world war and other wars and witnessing countries and states in this country close and far, plus a great deal of living in situations where I did not have freedom and subsequent liberty, and hours and hours of reading and study to bring me to this reality.

Yes, the advantages of equality are immediate. I won't relate them here, but I could tell of many discriminations by others against people like me who are not considered equal. I base a great many of my opinions on life experience rather than "book l'arnin'" though, believe me, I could quote you published chapter and verse which corroborate my assessment of freedom and equality.

Take it from one who knows and who has friends and acquaintances who have experienced the same thing in real life, separate but equal is not equal.

Mal

I have read at least some of this discussion, but not all. I would guess that I struggle with equality. It seems to mean so many different things to so many different people. I would love to believe that equality is an achievable goal, but I truly dont think so. The variables are just too many. Separate but equal in practice has been a failure, but that is because the equal never worked. However if there could be a way to make it work, it has possibilities. I have read studies of same sex high schools, which function much much better than coed schools. I have seen women who truly believe that they must be 100% better than a man to get to be a type of doctor or special type of attorney. It may even be true. There are days when I am not even sure I want to be equal... I suspect that this discussion will never come to any firm comclusion, although it certainly is an interesting discussion

I think in many cases one must do something extra to help others be the best they can be. Sometimes it is small a thing as making slop cuts at street corners so those in wheelchairs can get around the neighbourhood. There are so many little things one can do to help even the playing field. Taking account of differences means trying to make things equal.

Right, Idris, and that is exactly what was not done for most of my life and the lives of other people like me by people who would not stop to consider that we have much more to offer than just the handicapped bodies they see.

What I say here applies not only to physically and mentally handicapped people but to other minorities whose color, or whatever difference it is, makes people think they are different and behave toward them in a condescending or dismissive way.

Mal

Mal, it is pretty normal even now not to look beyond what we see. We judge folks by what we see all the time, even down to mod of dress or skin colour. It is as if we the think the eye judges the person. That is a pretty shallow way to look at people and we miss out on a lot of wonderful folks if we do that but our society does this judging all the time. When you look at TV how often are you struck by the "pretty" that may contain the "smart" or "wise" or "kind." It is the way of our media led society to judge on what one sees as having or not having value.

I have often wondered why we don't build strip-malls with apartments for Seniors, handicapped or others who can't get around much. There was a fellow who was going to do that in our town. He assembled the land and had everything all set and then city counsel said no. Why? Not enough parking. How many of these people would really drive? I mean that was why they wanted to live in an apartment building with all the services near at hand. So, it is still vacant land and we don't have enough housing for the handicapped and seniors.

Stephanie:

As you say, we may not come to any "firm conclusion," but sometimes the process (the discussion) is more beneficial than the result (conclusion.) I submit, however, that this is more than an academic "debate." deTocqueville was extremely concerned about America's future. He said very simply (above) that "equality threatens us." What do you suppose he meant by that? How can we be hurt by equality? Any thoughts?

Robby

Come on Robby, that is a duhhhhhhhh.

Idris:

Apparently deT thought so. You disagree?

Robby

"Equality threatens us"

If all are equal then "the in group" is threatened by "otherness." They no longer control, get special priveleges, feel superior, determine the lot of the "others" etc, etc.

So equality threatens the "ins" because they must share everything (including rights) equally with the "others."

Eloise:

Now that you bought the book, "Democracy in America," published en francais, our interpretations of what he said should prove most enlightening considering the fact that you are reading it in the language in which he wrote it. Now we are not dependent on the nuances of the translator. Each of the quotations above indicate the subtitles in the English version from which they are taken and should easily take you to the same subtitle in French.

And how do you feel about "egalite" threatening us?

Robby

Égalité is a threat because it disproves the premise that the old idea that the survival of the fittest hypothesis (which, incidentally, Darwin did not state) is true and valid. Stephen Hawking is one example. Itzhak Perlman is another. Helen Keller in the past is another good example. So, in fact, is Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

If the weak one, through physical disability or race or whatever cause, appears to have the power of a brilliant mind and the ability to use that mind, it is a serious threat to those of less ability who profess to know what is best for others and propound those opinions by running for and winning public office or directing the lives of others in academia, the various arms of the media, and in the business arena.

Mal

We can discuss equality forever. but the simple fact is that we are not equal.Malryn mentioned Stephen Hawkins. I do not have his physical disabilities, but then I have not one tenth of his mental ability. Even if we are all of equal physical ability, we are mostly not of equal mental ability. The same applies to financial equality. Marx and Lenin tried to create a philosophy of equality and look where that finished up. Utopia, where all live in a land flowing with milk and honey, is but a dream. Freedom is the opportunity to use the talents we are given and hopefully Democracy will give us that

Mal and Peter point out the dangers that equality holds. deTocqueville (on Page 26) says:--

"Among the novel objects that attracted by attention during my stay in the United States, nothing struck me more forcibly than the general equality of condition among the people. I readily discovered the prodigious influence which this primary fact exercises on the whole course of society; it gives a peculiar direction to public opinion; and a peculiar tenor to the laws. It imparts new maxims to the governing authorities and peculiar habits to the governed.

"I soon perceived that the influence of this fact extends far beyond the political character and the laws of the country and that it has no less empire over civil society than over the government. It creates opinions, gives birth to new sentiments, founds novel customs, and modifies whatever it does not produce.

"The more I advanced in the study of American society, the more I perceived that this equality of condition is the fundamental fact from which all others seem to be derived..."

Reactions please?

Robby

Freedom interests me, because the concept means so many different things to so many different types of people. You even imagine freedom quite differently depending on age. Equality sometimes equates to strange concepts. I read in the paper this morning that the state of Alabama is being sued by someone because they only give their drivers license test in English.. This is considered unfair to the disabled... This concept bothers me.. Road signs and all other street information is all in english.. The idea that you should get a license and not read enough english to pass the test makes me cringe. Now at least I begin to understand the strange behavior or many drivers.. I know I will get flack for this sort of opinion.. I am not saying that you should not retain your native tongue.. I am saying that is you plan on living here, it would be wise to learn english. The US uses this basic tongue for all sorts of everyday living and all business.

Bothers me, too, Stephanie. No flack from me!

Government language "assistance" programs often have unintended consequences. Sometimes government's intentions in providing language "assistance" are benign, as in teaching English to immigrants and children, and protecting public safety or health by providng translators or services in languages other than English. Other times government promotes a particular special interest, like multiculturalism or the preservation of other languages.

However intentioned, government actions are often either ill-informed or counter-productive. These failures hurt both those they are intended to help, and government's own legitimacy. In light of these costs and difficulties, 22 states have declared English their official language. Those states still use other languages when necessary, but their official language -- the language in which their governments function -- is English.

Robby

Robby - Equality does not exist for me. Nothing is truly equal. It is a sort of symetry, I think. Picasso once said nothing is symetric in nature. You cannot see a great painting that has symetry. It would be terrible to have equality in people. It would kill the incentive to improve. Communism, which aimed at equality, tumbled because the theory is utopic as Peter said. Humans are born different in every way and that's good. We are unique. Is it desireable to strive for equality? what is commendable is the struggle for equality, it makes people concerned for others that are needy. After the start of Democracy, it was possible to try to achieve high levels of society and that was what made Democracy work, because everyone could dream of attaining a better social level than they had previously. After the French revolution, the new republic aimed at equality, but the people still thought in terms of monarchy and it took a century to achieve a republic that was viable. The same with the fall of communism. Russians still think like communists, but they are trying desperately to achieve a market economy and pretend to have a real Democracy. If you watch who is in power there, they are the same old staunch communists. In the meantime, corruption has a ball reaping in rubles that falls through the cracks of the government.

Robby - I have to really dig into de T.'s book. I will perhaps take notes because he is so exhaustive.

Eloise: I agree completely that deTocqueville is "exhaustive" (not exhausting!). This is one of the main reasons why this discussion group (as is stated in the Introduction) is not examining deT but is examining America and other democracies and then turning to the pages of his book. In no way do we ever want this forum to be like a class or to look at his book, "Democracy in America," and go at it page by page as if it were a text book. We are here to have FUN (and I use that term purposely) as we look about us and observe what is going on in our lives and then compare it to what deTocqueville had to say on that subject.

Robby

About the only equality that I can see is possible and I hope we continue to broaden and assure is an equity of opportunity. I do not believe it would be possible to eliminate competition and the politics of competition but for us as a nation to continue to strive toward equailty in providing education with eguality of pay for similar work.

What does amaze me is how unequal the court room. If the TV small claim and divorce courtroom programs are any real measure of decissions, gender bias is rampant based on the gender of the Judge. Those cases where there is a lawyer present we do not see as a live case but we do have enough knowledge to know money makes the difference. This is especially dishaeartening since we think Justice is so basic to Democracy and the center of our Justice system appears more unfair than the work place in many Corperate offices.

I agree with Eloise that there is no true equality and I also believe that there is no true freedom. We are told that "all men are created equal" but we know that in reality, they are not. Whether it is physically or mentally or intellectually---we simply are not created equal. And we are not totally free. It seems to me that total freedom would only foster total chaos. We, as a democratic society may be privileged to have greater freedom than is allowed in a monarchy or dictatorship but still we are, and must be, governed by restrictions on our freedom. What, to one person, may be freedom to conduct his life in the manner that he chooses, may be a threat to the freedom of another. We must abide by certain laws politically, legally and socially. It is not a perfect example but what if one person feels it is his right of freedom of speech to say anything, anywhere, anytime even though it may be harmful, inciteful and threatening to another person's freedom. That is why we have laws against libel and slander, isn't it?

I wish I could state what I mean more clearly but I guess it comes down to the personal belief that in order to dwell in a so-called "free society" we must give up certain freedoms. Thus there is no true freedom.

Phyll

In examining equality, Barbara brings up two important items:--

1 - Equality of opportunity.
2 - Equality within the courtroom.

What are your thoughts, folks?

Robby

I don't believe either are true at the moment. It is one of those striving things.

Phyll now brings up the topic of freedom which takes us back to deT's concern that "freedom and equality meet and are confounded together." Phill believes that in order to dwell in a "free society," one must "give up certain freedoms." Would "total freedom" lead to "total chaos?" Is greater freedom gained, therefore, by having less freedom?

Robby

I agree with that Robby.

If we gain greater freedom by restricting some, who determines the restrictions?

Robby

Hmmmmmm Elected officials, good manners and common sense.

It seems to me that there is never an equality of being An equality of condition however can exist.D' T. thought it did exist in the days he traveled here in USA. I think it exists in the equality of expectations. Everyone expects to "be equal". I wish for a definition, that would help understand the semantics of the word equal. They say equal justice before the law. We strive for it but it is not a fact. I guess only measurable things can really be equal.

Barbara -- Well said, about equity of opportunity. Education, job opportunities, equal pay for equal work, justice should be available to each of us -- no matter our gender, race, creed, national origin, whatever.

As for freedom, I was trying to explain to my almost-11-year-old grandson the other day why we couldn't run the red light (he was in a hurry to go, and was frustrated that we were having to wait at the light.) I think that's a perfect example of freedom being limited. Yes, I can drive my car whenever and wherever I want to, EXCEPT... I give up certain rights for the good of all -- for safety reasons and for logistics and so that we can all eventually get to wherever it is we're going, I abide by the traffic signals. And that's where what Phyll said is true: "It seems to me that total freedom would only foster total chaos."

We have been discussing both "freedom" and "equality." Please share your reaction to deT's quote (above) which begins: "The advantages..."

Robby

I agree with TEXAS SONGBIRD who points out that by curtailing freedom we can achieve some measure of equality. This restriction of freedom or liberty, ( they are the same ) is a necessity if social living is to endure. Further, these restrictions must be equally distributed over all individuals.

In the matter of equal pay for equal work, I would take the concept further, and call for what the feared and hated Communists stated as " from each according to his ability, to each according to his need " I know Americans look upon that idea with scorn! (BG)-- Trevor.

An interesting concept by Songbird and Trevor! -- curtailing freedom leads to some measure of equality. This implies (and perhaps states) that freedom and equality are not the same and, to oversimplify, if we want to be more equal, our freedom should be curtailed. Yes? No? Was deTocqueville onto something which most of us in democracies don't pause to think about?

Robby

The attainment of equality, even the concept of equality can get bogged down in talk of measurements or different mental abilities, etc. I think most of what is meant today with terms like "equal rights" or "equal opportunity" is the necessity of a level playing field, the necessity of equal choices to ATTEMPT equal achievement. For too long, different groups have had unequal playing fields (to use a sports metaphor), with barriers to achievement present in some fields. Women were not able to vote, own property, enter law school, etc., until these barriers were removed. The science community was still measuring brain size of a Black person in the 40s (??) to prove why he was "dumb." So, those barriers of ignorance had to come down.

Perception remains a persistent barrier to equality---for example, perception that someone's gain in power means a reduction of one's own. Or odd perceptions about why certain people don't "make it." There are some interesting findings about attribution---how we attribute success and failure. Basically, when "I" fail, "I" attribute it to external factors (unfair test, boss doesn't like me, etc.). When "you" fail, "I" attribute it to internal factors---"You" aren't smart, "you" didn't try your best. Conversely, when "I" succeed, I attribute the success to myself--I'm smart, I studied hard. When "you" succeed, I attribute it to outside factors---the test wasn't very difficult or the boss must like you. (All are percentages leaning in that direction, not 100 percent.) So, even the way we see each others' attempts at achievement can be barriers.

According to deT (above), democratic communities want equality so badly, they will take equality in slavery rather than no equality at all. Do you believe that to be true" Just what is "equality in slavery" anyway. How can one be a slave and equal simultaneously?

Robby

Well, around tax time you kind of feel like a slave to the elected politicians.

)

A reminder that deTocqueville saw that "equality threatens us." As I read the postings here, it seems that everyone sees equality as a good thing. That this is what makes the United States, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia. Hooray -- we are all equal!! deT adds, however, that "the passion that democratic nations entertain for equality swells to the height of fury." "Men pounce upon equality as their booty." "They cling to it as some precious treasure which they fear to lose." And then he says that "equality threatens us."

How can this be?

Robby

Interestingly enough anarchists believe they have total freedom by having no rules.. I have always had problems with this, but I guess if you follow the thought far enough, there is truth in it. Since I have a grandchild in kindergarten, I have been paying attention to the educational system.. When you truly peep into it, you discover that inequality starts quite early. As a girl,eager to learn,pretty and charming, my granddaughter does not work out to be equal to the little boy next to her, who is never quite clean, very noisy and not quite ready to sit. Thus equality is not achieved from day one..

Are we saying that NO RULES = EQUALITY = TOTAL FREEDOM?

Robby

In accepting the equality of others who come to our shores, it upsets the established order for a bit, until we manage to accept them. In the acceptance we also become somewhat different and for the most part better. It is not an easy transition as it threatens what was. That is why we seem to be in a constant state of change.

A constant state of change.-----From our vantage point of being in the "older" generation, has freedom in our particular nation changed over our lifetime? Has equality changed? If so, for the better? For the worse?

Robby

We went from a Bill of Rights to a Charter of Rights and Freedoms and more folks were brought into the equality tent. Our justice system is more fair in many ways and too lienient on our young under the Young Offenders Act. We no longer put people to death but have a life sentence of 25 years unless the person is designated a "dangerous offender" we have more communal rights which are sometimes confusing.

Equality has changed in many ways, under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Also people now go to the courts to clarify their equality rights in terms of work, access, group rights etc.

We now have acknowledged in law the rights of First Nations or Aboriginal Peoples and the Supreme Court has dealt with some land claims and will be dealing with many more in the future.

We are in a state of confusion and yet the country is better for all of this. It is as if in the granting of equality and the getting of equality we are in a muddle.

Idris: In what way was the former Canadian Bill of Rights different from the current Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I think if anyone in the United States tried to change our Bill of Rights, there would be a cry from here to the moon.

Robby

MARCEL PROUST: "Things don't change, but by and by our wishes change."

It was not in our own Constitution because we didn't have our own until 1982 (i recall that was the year) We were governed under the B & A Act that came from Britain of 1800 and something or other (i think). I don't have time to look it up as it's late.

Quebec did not sign our new Constitution, so that is one of the reasons we are in a muddle although they are governed Federally by our Constitution.

It is a very good idea to leave well enough alone, Robby. You would never be able to re-write your Constitution today ....believe me.

I think equality has to do with equal opportunities and equal treatment, not with sameness. There is no way that individual human beings will ever be the same. Some are more talented in athletics, some in reading, some in playing a musical instrument, some in physical endurance. We are certainly not attempting to achieve the unachievable. And yet we strive for equality under the law, equality of opportunity for all. At least I think we do.

Maryal

Maryal:

The question is ridiculous, of course, but needs to be asked.

Is everyone in our democracy receiving equal opportunity and equal treatment?

deT says (above) that "democratic nations have an ardent and enduring love of equality." Perhaps we are not democratic (small "d"), after all?

Robby

There have been repeated calls and movements for a "new" constitutional convention for the purpose of rewriting our constitution. I think it would be a most dreadful mistake to Ever allow this to happen. I shudder to think what the few who want so ardently to do this could do to this near perfect document and to our freedoms.

"We hold these Truths to be self evident, that all Men are created equal..."

Robby

So, Robby, are you suggesting we DO need a rewrite?

Betty:

Not at all. I'm suggesting that we all examine more critically what we mean when we say that. In this Democracy which so many of us (not all, fortunately) take for granted, we throw words around indiscriminately and don't pause to examine what we are saying. In many ways we are truly examining here in this forum with deTocqueville, a marvelous sociologist, helping us to do so.

Robby

The question is: When it was written who were the men? Who were in the equality tent and who were not? It was a dream and not a reality.

Sort of in line with what Idris is questioning, I have to stop in the middle of my reading and thinking to remind myself that DeToqueville, though a genius at observing America and analyzing our society, never the less wrote from the standpoint of having been born and raised a French aristocrat. He was a member, by birth, of the privileged and ruling class in a (at that time in history) strong and powerful nation. I think the circumstances of his birth and the times had to bias his conclusions to some extent.

Having said that, I am still amazed at what he thought and wrote so long ago that still has relevance today.

Phyll

Idris:

An excellent phrase - "equality tent" - indicating that there were those "inside" and those "outside." And that, by definition, would mean "inequality" - right?

Was it, as Idris asks, merely a dream and not a reality?

Robby

Phyll:

I am amazed, as well, at deTocqueville's perspicacity. (Isn't that a wonderful word? Sorry, folks, I just couldn't resist it!)

Yes, he was an aristocrat. Weren't some of our Founders also aristocrats to some degree or another. Wasn't Layfayette, who had so much to do with helping us get on our knees, also an aristocrat?

But, following Phyll's comment about deT, I urge all participants here to buy, borrow, (steal?)a paperback copy of "Democracy in America." This discussion group has only just begun and everyone has time to get a copy and browse through it as we continue our remarks. The quotes above change periodically based upon what we are discussing at the moment but looking through the book will call to your attention comments by deTocqueville that are not quoted above.

Robby

To begin with a dream is not all that bad. As time passes we see the inequality and expand the tent. Because our Constitution is just barely 20 years old we had many equality seekers showing up to get into the tent. It was bedlam and very confusing. It is better to add to the tent, than to build a new one today.

Robby,

From an old lover of the English language comes the sound of clapping hands.

And deT. would have enjoyed your perspicacity, as well.

Phyll

Robbie---It's a fine word, yes. And Phyll is right; you surely have perspicacity.

Unfortunately equality under the law is not the circumstance as one discovers by examining the makeup of death row in any state with a death penalty. Those who are of non-majority races as well as the poor cannot afford the same legal treatment that the wealthy can.

And other kinds of equality are also lacking although I have seen progress in my lifetime. More minority students are attending college.

Maryal

Phyl : "the circumstances of his birth and times had to bias his conclusions to some extent." You are certianly correct. Aren't we all biased by the circumstances and times of our birth. I readily admit that I have bias because of when and where I was born and grew up. The Greatest Generation collectively have biases different than those born later in the last century. It shall always be thus. But with respect to our Constitution, a remarkable document, over 200 years old, written by men with decidedly different bias than all subsequent generations, still is acceptable with relatively few changes (amendments).

I do not believe it needs to be rewritten, however, I do believe the 1st amendment needs to be clarified so that it is not being used to protect all obscure actions, whether spoken or not. Calling the burning of the flag of our country, and portrayal of religious entities and symbols in a degrading manner likewise as protected as free speech is wrong.

Burning of the American flag is an event that (in this country) almost never occurs. Do we want to amend our Constitution to correct a problem that doesn't exist?

"The First Amendment exists to insure that freedom of speech and expression applies not just to that with which we agree or disagree, but also that which we find outrageous. I would not amend that great shield of democracy to hammer a few miscreants."--Gen. Colin Powell, in a letter to the U.S. Senate.

(Those) "who died following that banner did not give up their lives for a red, white and blue piece of cloth. It would be a hollow victory indeed if we preserved the symbol of our freedoms by chipping away at those fundamental freedoms themselves."--Sen. John Glenn.

The Right Honourable Pierre Elliott Trudeau died this afternoon at 3:00. Pierre Elliott Trudeau 1919 - 2000.

He was the Prime Minister who brought back our Constitution and made us proud of ourselves. He gave us our bilingual and multicultural and Just Society. He was a very great man.

I agree he was a great man, Idris. He was certainly admired by me and by my family. Condoling here, Marypage

The Right Honourable Pierre Elliott Trudeau died today at 3:00 pm. He was the Prime Minister who brought us our Constitution and with it A Charter of Rights and Freedoms, bilingualism, mulitculturalism and A Just Society. He was a great man and a greater Prime Minister.

Please click the link for more

Pierre Elliott Trudeau 1919 - 2000

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Another View of

Charter of Rights and Freedoms

I have included two different ways of looking at the Charter Robby. Sorry i couldn't look it up last night, i was tuckered.

)

Idris: Thank you for those links. I am ashamed to say that I know very little (almost nothing) about the Supreme Law of Canada. I have printed out your links and am in the process of studying them.

Robby

Robby, you are ahead of me. Your post in big red "...are created equal...". I would if I new how make it, "All men are CREATED equal...." with red for created and maybe blue for the rest, and of course on a white background. And of course the critics will state the obvious and say that isn't even true since we know all about genes and are differences

) What a humdrum world if sameness for all is ever achieved. Maryal, right on again.

Idris, you and your country have lost a great man. On scanning the links I must take the time to go back and study more.

Camron would like to say::--

"All men are CREATED equal..."

Robby

Idris, and all of our Canadian friends,

Sad news about Pierre Trudeau. He made Canada come alive for all of us Stateside people as well. Too few like him around these days.

Phyll

Williewoody,

I totally agree with you and the others who feel that we should not re-write the Constitution to counteract the few. It is still one of the greatest documents ever written anywhere in the world and does not need to be nibbled at or bent and twisted in an attempt to solve a single problem. Rather than rewriting it we need to work on the conditions that bring about the abuse of the flag and the mis-use of the First Amendment.

Rambler is mostly correct, I think, in that the burning of the flag is a fairly rare occurence now but I do remember vividly the 60's and the Chicago 7 and the Viet Nam protests when there were many abuses of the flag. If I can rely on my faulty memory I think there were loud calls then for rewriting the Constitution to protect the flag. But the quote of John Glenn that Rambler posted here says it very well. As much as we revere the flag, it is only a piece of cloth. What it stands for is what needs to be carefully preserved.

Phyll

The reason i posted the links about Pierre Trudeau's passing was to help you understand that we are a very young country. We lived through the making of our own Constitution. It was a lively time with TV watching the proceedings in the House of Commons, everyday. There were travelling commities that listened to all of us from sea to sea to sea. We helped shape it. We watched the meetings of our Provincial Premiers argue about how things would effect their Provinces and people. We watched as Quebec walked out and thought all was lost and wondered what Trudeau would do. We watched the signing of our Constitution by the Queen and Trudeau outside in front of our parliament buildings. It was an awesome time. We knew we would never be the same again. We knew we would be a stronger, more just society. The new tent was built and we helped in the building.

We have in more recent years seen another Prime Minister try to destroy us through The Meech Lake Accord and The Charlottetown Accord. These documents were to weaken our federal government and would have made the FTA and NAFTA sell us to the U.S. piece by piece. When Mulroney held our Constitution over his head and ripped it in half as a symbol of what would happen if we did not vote for Meech Lake in a referendum we became unbelievably angry. We have destroyed his Tory part and we hate him.

I am sure that each of you would re-act the same way if a President of yours attempted to do the same thing. Our Consitution and Charter of Rights and Freedoms is important to us and woe to any politician who thinks they can threaten us in this manner again to please a US President or Corporations. It is not on!

We are a country with many problems because we are so vast and each Province has its problems. We need a strong central government to speak for all and maintain our Just Society. As Trudeau said...If Canada is to die, let us go with a bang and not a whimper. "I'm sure he borrowed this from Elliott but it fits."

He came out of retirement to tell us not to vote for the Constitutional changes, Mulroney demanded. We listened to him because we trusted him to put Canada and her people first. Trudeau will be remembered for many things but especially because he was in effect the father of our new Canada.

by James H. Warner, Marine flyer who was prisoner of the North Vietnamese from 1967 to 1973. Appeared in THE WASHINGTON POST

****************************************************************** "In March of 1973, when we were released from a prisoner of war camp in North Vietnam, we were flown to Clark Air Force base in the Philippines. As I stepped out of the aircraft I looked up and saw the flag. I caught my breath, then, as tears filled my eyes, I saluted it. I never loved my country more than at that moment. Although I have received the Silver Star Medal and two Purple Hearts, they were nothing compared with the gratitude I felt then for having been allowed to serve the cause of freedom.

Because the mere sight of the flag meant so much to me when I saw it for the first time after five and a half years, it hurts me to see other Americans willfully desecrate it. But I have been in a Communist prison where I looked into the pit of hell. I cannot compromise on freedom. It hurts to see the flag burned, but I part company with those who want to punish the flag burners. Let me explain myself.

Early in the imprisonment the Communists told us that we did not have to stay there. If we would only admit we were wrong, if we would only apologize, we could be released early. If we did not, we would be punished. A handful accepted, most did not. In our minds, early release under those conditions would amount to a betrayal, of our comrades, of our country, and of our flag.

Because we would not say the words they wanted us to say, they made our lives wretched. Most of us were tortured, and some of my comrades died. I was tortured for most of the summer of 1969. I developed beriberi from malnutrition. I had long bouts of dysentery. I was infested with intestinal parasites. I spent 13 months in solitary confinement. Was our cause worth all of this? Yes, it was worth all this and more.

Rose Wilder Lane in her magnificent book "THE DISCOVERY OF FREEDOM", said there are two fundamental truths that men must know in order to be free. They must know that all men are brothers, and they must know that all men are born free. Once men accept these two ideas, they will never have to accept bondage. The power of these ideas explains why it was illegal to teach slaves to read.

One can teach these ideas even in a Communist prison camp. Marxists believe ideas are merely the product of material conditions; change those material conditions, and one will change the ideas they produce. They tried to "re-educate" us. If we could show them that we would not abandon our belief in fundamental principles, then we could prove the falseness of their doctrine. We could subvert them by teaching them about freedom through our example. We could show them THE POWER OF IDEAS.

I did not appreciate this power before I was a prisoner of war. I remember one interrogation where I was shown a photograph of some Americans protesting the war by burning a flag. "There," the officer said, "People in your country protest against your cause. That proves that you are wrong."

"No," I said. "That proves that I am right. In my country we are not afraid of freedom, even if it means that people disagree with us." The officer was on his feet in an instant, his face purple with rage. He smashed his fist onto the table and screamed at me to shut up. While he was ranting I was astonished to see pain, compounded by fear, in his eyes. I have never forgotten that look, nor have I forgotten the satisfaction I felt at using his tool, the picture of the burning flag, against him.

(to be continued following posting)

Idris: Would it be exaggerating too much to compare Trudeau with Lincoln who kept the United States together? When there were those in Quebec who wanted to secede, was there the threat of civil war?

Robby

"Aneurin Bevan, former official of the British Labor Party, was once asked by Nikita Khrushchev how the British definition of democracy differed from the Soviet view. Bevan responded forcefully that if Khrushchev really wanted to know the difference, he should read the funeral oration of Pericles.

In that speech, recorded in the Second Book of Thucydides' "History of the Peloponnesian War," Pericles contrasted democratic Athens with totalitarian Sparta. Unlike the Spartans, he said, the Athenians did not fear freedom. Rather, they viewed freedom as the very source of their strength. As it was for Athens, so it is for America _______ our freedom is NOT TO BE FEARED, for our freedom is our strength.

We don't need to amend the Constitution in order to punish those who burn our flag. They burn the flag because they hate America and they are afraid of freedom. What better way to hurt them than with the subversive idea of freedom? Spread freedom. The flag in Dallas was burned to protest the nomination of Ronald Reagan, and he told us how to spread the idea of freedom when he said that we should turn America into "a city shining on a hill, a light to all nations." Don't be AFRAID OF FREEDOM, it is the best weapon we have.

I would say yes, Robby.

At the time of the FLQ we had bombs going off. We had a Quebec politician murdered (James Cross) and kidnappings going on. Mailboxes were bombed in English neighbourhoods. Finally Trudeau evolked the War Measures Act. In effect all of our civil rights were stopped (it really only effected Montreal much) People were collected up and it was anything but nice. Trudeau felt he had to do this. I personally don't. Canada is not used to violence.

In any event troups with guns were in the streets of Montreal and heavy military protections around our Parliament buildings. A reporter asked him how far he was going to go (to protect Canada) He looked at the reporter and said, "Just watch me."

He was on a balconey once during this time at a celebration for St. Jean Baptist Day. Rocks and bottles were raining down and everyone got up and left. Not Trudeau. He sat on that balconey and dared them to kill him. We saw it on TV so it became very real to us. The Separatists hated him and still do according to their speach in the House of Commons today. He stood for everything they hate...a strong united Canada.

He was may i add, not a politician and was surprised to find himself our PM. He was a professor of philosophy, a very, very intelligent man. A lawyer, poet, great reader in french, english and italian. He was a man who loved the wild and travelled over 3,000 miles in a canoe in his 50's. He did not understand our West much.

Idris - I did't know that PET died yesterday as I wasn't listening to the news. Its so strange for me to hear it on Seniornet but it shows how close our two countries are. Pierre Trudeau reflected what our country is because he was born from an English mother and a French father and thus was a bicultural Canadian, very much like this family of mine. He was the most influential Prime Minister we ever had in my opinion. His writings will remain though to keep his spirit alive.

Robby - this site just explodes my mind. I try to keep up with all the ideas you throw at us but sometimes I don't have the time to come online (one hour a day) or my primary school education has trouble expressing itself in English. I am reading De T. now and then and his writing is true in almost everything he says that I have read so far, except the one where he mentions that the poor people of France of his time were "happy" in their low state and "loved" the aristocracy that dominated them. I believe that the masses feared reprisals and provoked apparent love and respect. (sorry for the lack of vocabulary). De T. did'nt have a clue of how the lower classes lived in his country it seems and the aristocrats visited their subjects from their high positions and were secretely glad they were born into aristocracy. Don't forget that aristocracy, I believe formed only around 10% of the population, if not lower percentage. Suddenly when he came to America, he admired how both high and low birth people were EQUAL. Something he had never seen before in Europe. If you wanted equality then, you had to cross a vast ocean.

The Pilgrims de T. said were only 150 in number and they were Christians. He said that democracy stemmed from them in New England. Pilgrams rejected monarchy, and invented a the true democracy America enjoys that gives them freedom to own land, of religion, and of speech.

I have to go, but my this is interesting. Bravo Robby.

MaryPage quotes Rose Wilder Lane, author of "The Discovery of Freedom," in saying: "There are two fundamental truths. All men are brothers. All men are born free."

Taking into consideration that the term "men" is used here generically, do you agree with those statements?

Robby

Quote from deTocqueville on Pages 137-138:--

"There was a time when we also might have created a great French nation in the American wilds, to counterbalance the influence of the English upon the destinies of the New World. France formerly possessed a territory in North America scarecely less extensive than the whole of Europe...But a course of circumstances have deprived us of the this magnificent inheritance. Wherever the French settlers were numerically weak and partially established, they have disappeared. Those who remain are collected on a small extent of country, and are now subject to other laws. The 400,000 French inhabitants of Lower Canada constitute at the present time the remnant of an old nation lost in the midst of a new people."

Robby

L'shanah tovah!
Happy New Year to my Jewish friends all over the world.

Free of What? Free from or for What? Free a noun? Free a verb?

The Constitution seems to be a promise of certain freedoms but are not automatic and every generation seems to be required to aggressively reassure those written freedoms without achieving freedom for all.

Equal-- under the law...no. Equal-- opportunity...no. Equal-- education...no. Equal that we are all born and die...yes. Equal that we all reqire food, shelter and clothing to stay alive...yes. Equal that we are all social individual and therefore political...for most yes. Equal that we all aspire happiness...OK but than how do we define happiness?

If out of 9 Supreme Court judges we have in each a different interpretation of law, equality, freedom than we must be aware a court with one judge is going to bring his bias and background into the courtroom. We do not like the wrangling that goes on between different parities and yet that wrangling may be what allows different views an airing. I'm beginning to see a courtroom run as a monarchy and we as citizens have more connection to the county and state courtrooms than even our state Supreme Courts. What I am really saying is that within our very system we have created inequality. How do you successfully educate connecting the mind and feelings of a Judge and maybe even a jury to truly understand the experience and therefore choices avauilable to those trying to sort out equality or in some cases blame in a court room.

Even the practice of incarceration is not Just. Not only does money buy more freedom but the requirements for punishing certain crimes are not in keeping with other crimes that does damage our population to a greater degree. Yes I am talking about jail time as a result of breaking drug laws as the big example. Do we say justice is the dream in all of life unless proven wrong by an incompetent lawyer and a bias judge and than all the rules go out the window so that you are at the mercy of a mini monarch?

At times with all our heart stirring words I feel as though we are living in Kafka's castle.

The folks you can Cajuns were French Canadians (Acadians) that we booted out of Canada.

(

We shall leave it to Eloise to describe what goes on in Quebec where french is still spoken and services given. They are provincially ruled by french law, the Napoleonic code.

Canada is federally officially bilingual since the time of our new constitution. All bills in Hansard be it provincially or federally must be available in french even if the numbers in a province are below 1%.

A powerful statement by Barbara:--

"Within our very system we have created inequality."

Any reactions?

Robby

In addition to the fact that, as Barbara and others (including me) have stated, there is different "justice" for those with money than for those without, there is another factor. Sometimes this has to do with money, sometimes race, and sometimes who knows what?

But how it can it be that two people who are both involved in a murder do not get equal punishment? If one "rats" on the other and turns state's evidence, chances are that he (usually a he) won't get the death penalty but the other might. This happens sometimes when the guy who gets the death penalty is not the guy who pulled the trigger -- the state's evidence guy actually commits the crime, turns state's evidence, and gets off with a lighter sentence than the guy who was driving the getaway car or who just happened to be hanging around with the murderer. I'm philosophically against the death penalty, but if it's going to be administered, then it ought to be administered in a fair way in these kinds of cases. And how can you believe the state's evidence guy, anyway? Doesn't he have a lot of reason to lie?

Idris - Aren't we lucky to have not one but two official languages in Canada? Especially that one of them is French? I travel to Europe almost every year. France is the country I love. My son lives in Switzerland and I have stayed in England. I am sorry to say again that I find our language problems here in Canada very minor compared to problems I saw elsewhere. We get angry at peanuts and make a mountain out of a molehill. I have gone past that and really worry about how the third world countries are suffering because of globalization and that's what we, the West, are doing to them.

Did you all know that when Free Trade Agreement NAFTA was signed, it was agreed that the Canada was not allowed to refuse any sale of crude oil to the United States and that Canada was not allowed to stock their oil for future use? I didn't know that until two days ago. Now tell me that Canada is not slowly becoming an American state?

I agree Eloise. If you only look in your own backyard you have no idea how lucky or unlucky you are. We will keep striving and growing and we will be more beautiful than we are now.

)

Eloise, i read both the FTA AND NAFTA cover to cover. I know only too well what can happen to our resources. I rue the day Canadians voted for Mulroney and sold our country down the drain. Never mind, we will survive and thrive anyway in spite of it all. If we love Canada we will stand for her.

"WE, therefore, the representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in GENERAL CONGRESS, Assembled . . . solemnly Publish and Declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES..."

What is the difference between "freedom" and "independence," if any?

Robby

I had an interesting thought driving home a few minutes ago. Remember the other day, when I mentioned how we give up a certain measure of "freedom" when we obey traffic signals, etc.? Well, I thought of another aspect of that. I'm not sure you can carry this analogy too far in this discussion of freedom, but...

What happened tonight is that I saw a car driving down the road with its lights off. And what I was thinking about was trust. We as motorists, especially at night, trust that people are driving with their lights on. When we get to a point where traffic is to merge, we trust that if there is no car lights there, there is no car there.

Don't we, in a democracy, trust that other people are going to do the right thing? That they're not going to abuse their freedoms, just as we don't abuse our freedom? And when democracy breaks down, isn't it usually because someone betrays that trust?

I think so Texas Songbird.

)

Texas Songbird - Absolutely.

Robby - Free and independent? I hope that people are free, but are they independent? I don't know. What are states independent of?

An interesting concept, Songbird.----Democracy "works" on a basis of trust. It works because the majority of us want it to work. What if no one followed the Constitution?

Eloise: The original meaning, I believe, was that the Colonies, and therefore the States, had become independent of England. Are they now independent of something? Are they now sovereign entities independent of all other states? The United States, I believe, is a Federation (hence the term Federal Government). Is each state independent of the Federation?

Robby

I would say that in Canada the fights between the Federal Government and the Provincial Governments is always about the feds encroaching on the rights of the Provinces to govern themselves without Federal interferance.

When the Great Depression came the Provinces gave up certain rights to the Federal Government, as they had little money. The Federal Government has been very loath to give the rights back and it has been a real pain in the butt, at every Federal-Provincial Conference since.

Idris:

Are we saying that MONEY = INDEPENDENCE?

Robby

Well, actually in Canada we call it "powers". It is true that when our Provinces and the Federal government get fighting about "powers" they are talking about money.

We have what is called "transfer payments." The Provinces pay certain amounts to the Federal Government according to their so called ability to pay. The funds are they "shared" in an equitable manner so that the poorer Provinces can provide adequate services to their people. When the Fed won't give up "Powers" and want to manage or hang on to money for their own purposes (read here elections and promises) we always have trouble.

The Federal Government is a creature of the Provinces, not the other way around. The Feds use the money to keep control over programs and decide how the program will work across the country. The Provinces are all very different and one size does not fit all. Hence the fight over the "Powers" and the money.

When we were in the midst of Meech Lake Accord and the Charlottetown Accord this was what the whole thing was about ...Powers and Independance of the Provinces.

Both Accords were instruments to decentralize the powers of the Federal Goverment. Under Charlottetown we would have had a Federal Government that controlled not much more than the Post Office and Armed Forces (and we have a very small armed forces).

The fight was about returning original Powers to the Provinces, giving a great deal of control over money, programs and turning us into such a loose Federation we would not really be the Nation we are now.

Mulroney did this because he thought it would keep Quebec in Canada as they want Sovereignty Association or a sort of total independance but still get money from the Feds and keep their Old Age Security, Health Care etc. It was not all Quebec wanted but it was coming closer.

Independance in a way, is always about money.

Been away for a few days... When reading the older messages, I saw something I thought I might disagree about.. The Pilgrims did not number 150.... and they most certainly did not approve of democracy. They came here to enforce their own religion and to have control or it. When more people arrived, they tried very hard to keep everyone else in line and only permitted their own form of religion. The Puritans who truly founded Boston were even worse on religion. Just ask the early Jews, Catholics and Quakers. We developed into a democracy, but the early settlers wanted freedom of religion only for their form of religion.

Stephanie is absolutely right. And not just about the Pilgrims but many of the groups of people who have fled to America in order to avoid persecution of one kind or another and then, have in turn persecuted those who come after them who worship differently, or speak differently or have a different skin color. Unfortunately it seems to be a human condition and not just a political one.

Not to make the slightest suggestion that one country is better, or worse, than another but I am thinking of Australia. It, I believe, was largely a penal colony for so-called "undesirable" from Britain and judging from what I am seeing on the t.v. and reading now, Australians are trying very hard to atone for their persecution of the Aboriginal people. Just as we are trying to atone to American Indians, black people, interned Japanese, etc.

How to overcome being human---I have no idea---except to keep trying and teaching the next generation to keep trying, also.

Phyll

When our Canadian friends talk about the argument between their Provinces and their Federal Government as being about "Powers", isn't that the same as we have here in the states. It would seem the Democratic party favors more power for the Federal Government, whereas the Republicans want less power in the Federal's hands and more left to the states and local governments. Actually this has been a point of argument since the founding of our nation. In part, a Civil war was fought over this point over 100 years ago. Actually only Switzerland is a true democracy, where the "Power" remains with and is exercised by the people direct.

From what i can tell Williewoodie, it is exactly the same arguement. The Feds always like to encroach on the Provincial Powers or States Powers. Unfortunately ours was made somewhat worse by the troubles of the 30's when our Provinces willingly gave some powers to the Feds because they simply did not have the money to do anything else.

When new programs come along there is usually a 50/50 split. Meaning the Feds put in 50% and the Provinces put in 50%. When the Feds get in a financial bind they then withdraw their funding but the program must continue so the Provinces attempt to continue the funding at a lower level. Guess who gets the flack for the program being underfunded...the Provinces.

Our most recent Fed/Prov Conference was about funding for Health Care. A few years back it was 50/50. The feds cut back to 20% and we have had serious trouble lately. The feds are now flush with money and we are close to an election so the feds will put most of the money back for the next 5 years. That doesn't help the problems we are going through right now.

Unemployment Insurance was short funded too...on the eve of an election again the Feds are promising to put the funding back. Oh how i hate politics.

Some public speakers use the term "The (singular) United States" and some use the term "These (plural) United States." We have been speaking about the equality of individuals. Are States equal? deTocqueville (quote above) spoke of the terms "freedom and equality being confounded." When the States became free and independent, did they also become equal?

Robby

Sorry about the 150 Pilgrims and Democracy. I gleaned that from the de Tocqueville's book. I could have misunderstood. Might I ask how and who started democracy in America? Did it happen before the Pilgrims? Since the Pilgrims were Christians and they all came from Britain they were still pretty mean to anyone who did'nt think like them. Well said that discrimination is a human condition. We defend ourselves of not having an ounce of it.

Robby - Are states independent and equal? As independent as they can be under the law I guess. But in reality they are not.

Only in Switzerland did I see three nationalities happy about their lot, not wanting to change anything within their borders. Yet they have three official languages, French, Italian and German. The "Cantons" a sort of province are almost totally independent. Their Federal government is very small. They select their president every year from 7 elected "Conseillers d'État. They have several referandums every year of many issues and less than half of the people bother to vote on them. It is the best Democracy I know and the Swiss people want it to remain as it is.

Eloise:

Of course, if I understand correctly (there are others here who are more knowledgeable than I on this subject), the United States is not actually a Democracy but is a Republic. This means (again as I understand it), that we do not vote directly for certain actions - with referendums as you described it for Switzerland -- but we elect representatives who do this for us. This has advantages and disadvantages. Some of the New England "town meetings" still have procedures which are truly democratic, but that is now rare in the United States. I don't believe that deTocqueville said that America was a Democracy, per se, but he described Democracy in action in America. There is a difference.

Robby

Our parliament is made up of a house elected under MMP. This tends to be more democratic than a first past the post system as it is more representative of the diversity of opinion amongst the populace.

However I do not believe we have true freedom of speech. Everyone is entitled to demonstrate in a public place. In latter years we have been denied this freedom.

If you will not move to where the authorities consider you should demonstrate you will be forcibly removed. The police will use batons. It horrifies me and sends shivers down my spine when I see this on TV. It has shades of the book 1984 I think was the title or another novel written and set here called 'Let sleeping dogs lie"

We have also presented our government with petitions which clearly show the majority of the voting public are against some particular law they are wishing to make legislation and our opinions are ignored. This even though we have put these politicians in power to represent us, the people!

So do we truly have democratic rights or are we being manipulated like puppets by small groups who have their own agendas.

I am truly disillusioned by the way the term democratic rights is put into practice by many governments.

Carolyn

Carolyn:

So good to have you in our discussion group visiting from New Zealand!! Your comments about "freedom" take me completely by surprise. I was under the impression that you had "true freedom of speech" and were "entitled to demonstrate in a public place." If I understand you correctly, your representatives are not truly "representing" the citizens of New Zealand.

Would you describe your government as a Democratic one?

Robby

We have the first past the post in Canada.

We are allowed to demonstrate as long as it is peaceful. It's also a good idea to pick a place that won't get you into trouble....like not in the middle of a street but in front of the Legislature. That is pretty normal around here. You know...demonstration of the week for this cause or that. Just don't pick up rocks and hurl them or you will be encouraged rather strenuously to leave.

Perhaps I am the only one here not understanding the term or perhaps I am missing something but I don't understand the term "pass the post" used by both Carolyn and Idris.

Robby

The election is held. The party that wins the most number of seats (ridings) becomes the ruling party. The leader of that party is the Prime Minister. The party that comes second is the Official Opposition and their leader becomes the leader of the opposition.

They sit in the House of Commons facing each other. This is where the debates takes place and the truly fun bit...question period. The Prime Minister is expected to take questions just like his Ministers.

There is an old story that goes something like this:

Benjamin Franklin was leaving the Constitutional Congress. A lady was outside as he came down the steps, and she said: "Oh, Mr. Franklin! And what kind of government have you given us?"

Old Ben replied: " A REPUBLIC, Madame! If you can keep it!"

I believe not all of the party that came to Plymouth on the Mayflower were Pilgrims; nor were they all of the religion that group was fleeing England (and Holland) to be free to observe. I believe, for instance, that the ship's carpenter, John Alden, was a member of the Church of England. I believe Miles Standish, a soldier as I recall, was not religious. I could be mistaken. My memory tells me there was a distinct difference between the group brought over for religious freedom and the group that brought them. Some of the latter group did stay in Plymouth, for various reasons.

Please forgive my ignorance. What is the "post?"

Robby

Just in case you were wondering. Pierre Elliott Trudeau was taken to the Hall of Honour in our Parliament Building today were he is lying in State. The crowds are enormous. The folks are filing by and have come from one end of the country to the other to pay respect to Mr. Trudeau. He will stay there until tomorrow and then go to Montreal where he will be at a basilica and more lying in State. The State funeral will take place Tuesday.

I don't think they expected the crowds they have so will probably have to stay open a lot longer than 11 p.m. A sad day and my old eyes sure are swollen.

Lots of stuff from the FLQ days on TV. Rememberances and Election tapes too for most of the day.

The post? LOL Winning the darn election, Robby.

I listened last night to "As It Happens" where the entire hour was devoted to the memory of Trudeau. I learned much about him I didn't know and can see why he was (and is) loved by so many Canadians.

Robby

I'm just a poor simple country boy, Idris. I'm not up on these sophisticated expressions.

Robby

We really don't have as complicated a system as you do Robby. There are no primaries or taking this State or that. The Prime Minister walks over to the Governor General's Office and drops the writ. The date is announced and everyone drives you crazy trying to get your vote. You know the old TV lies and propaganda thingy. The people running in your "riding" send lots of mail saying vote for me because blah, blah, blah. They come to the door and generally speaking do their campaign thing.

The election is held on the day appointed and specified in the writ (not one date always as you have) we vote. In the space of a few hours after the polls close we find out who won and therefore who our new Prime Minister is. It is a very short space of time some 60 days i think. We couldn't stand a whole year of all this junk.

Idris:

No wonder I didn't understand. It was much too simple. And it gets my mind back to the original question expressed in the Title of this Discussion Group:--

What is a Democracy?

Robby

Perhaps Democracy has nothing whatsoever to do with Freedom. Any reaction here to deTocqueville's remark (above) beginning with the phrase "Freedom has appeared in the world . . .?"

Robby

It is supposedly a form of government in which the people hold supreme power. I suppose we do have supreme power because we can kick them out when election time comes round if we can't stand them anymore. If we destroy their party by not voting for them and reducing them to a mear shadow of themselves they have to re-organize themselves between elections. We can so wound the leader by withdrawal of our votes that the party dumps them.

We have supreme power for but a second...when we mark our ballet. We turn out in fairly large numbers to vote so we can wound a party or leader we hate...by looking at the total votes cast and for whom.

We have more than two parties so we can cast anger votes and still vote thereby with holding our vote from what were the two mainline parties. We hated Mulroney so much we destroyed his party and gave him 2 seats in the House of Commons. Ohhhhhhh it was soooooooo delightful.

)

Now we have a new to the right party called Alliance. Who know how they will do. Our Prime Minister Chretien is about to call an election any day now...or so it is said. We shall see what happens. The Liberals should replace Chretien he is getting just too moldy oldy in the job. We need a new leader there too. That is up to the party so who knows what will happen.

Anywhooooo that's what i think a democracy is.

According to Idris:--

"Democracy is a form of government in which the people hold Supreme Power."

Agreed?

Robby

The Supreme Power Robby is just our vote. Just about the most important thing you can have in a democracy. I just don't know why some countries can't get more folks to vote? The numbers say something and you can wound a party terribly if you want to. We are not one with our vote, we are the people with a mighty weapon. It just doesn't look like much when one little person does it.

I have not read de T., and I am not as fascinated with definitions as some of you seem to be, and I will not be brief because what follows is not my own. (And Robby, you're about as much a poor simple country boy as Sam Ervin was a simple country lawyer!)

In the critical World War II year of 1944 a vast "I Am an American Day" ceremony was held in Central Park....(Judge) Learned Hand's brief address was so eloquent and so moving that the text immediately became the object of wide demand...

We have gathered here to affirm a faith, a faith in a common purpose, a common conviction, a common devotion. Some of us have chosen America as the land of our adoption; the rest have come from those who did the same. For this reason we have some right to consider ourselves a picked group, a group of those who had the courage to break from the past and brave the dangers and the loneliness of a strange land. What was the object that nerved us, or those who went before us, to this choice?

We sought liberty; freedom from oppression, freedom from want, freedom to be ourselves. This we then sought; this we now believe that we are by way of winning. What do we mean when we say that first of all we seek liberty? I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitutions, upon laws and upon courts. These are false hopes; believe me, these are false hopes.

Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it. ...

The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right; the spirit of liberty is the spirit which seeks to understand the minds of other men and women; the spirit of liberty is the spirit which weighs their interests alongside its own without bias; the spirit of liberty remembers that not even a sparrow falls to earth unheeded; the spirit of liberty is the spirit of him who, near two thousand years ago, taught mankind that lesson it has never learned, but has never quite forgotten; that there may be a kingdom where the least shall be heard and considered side by side with the greatest. ...

I shall take my red swollen eyes to bed now. The folks in the line to see Trudeau are still long and will probably be that way most of the night and tomorrow. They are very quiet.

The Parliament buildings are lite in white lights. The Canadian flag flies at half mast. The eternal flame in front of the Peace Tower glows as people leave flowers there. Mainly red roses of course, as that is what he always wore in his lapel.

Inside the Hall of Honour a maple leaf flag drapes his coffin. There are no flowers in there. At each end of the coffin a soldier from each of the armed forces stands, head bowed. There is a book on a pedastal off to one side, so folks can say a remembrance. It is quiet there, except for weeping. Young and old come, and so they will through the night and tomorrow. This is the people's time.

Rambler:

Thank you very much for that excerpt from the mouth of a renowned respected judge. He understood the underlying spirit behind liberty and freedom.

And, yes, I remember Sam Ervin very well and his constant comment about himself!

Robby

Idris:

Your description of the Lying-in-State of Trudeau reminds me (and probably many others here) of Kennedy's coffin in the Capitol.

Robby

I was thinking the same thing, Robby. I remember that I basically cried for four days, and so did most of the people I knew.

ELOISE De PELTEAU.speaks of the Swiss referendums, and says that often less than half the elegible voters bother to vote.What happens if some measure attracts less than 50% of the posible vote? Does it still become Law? If so it would hardly seem democratic.

Oh, and Robbie, in NZ we have two votes for selecting our parliamentarians. One vote is a "first past the post one" for the individual who will represent your electorate. The second vote is for the party you wish to govern the country. This system is called MMP ( Mixed Member Proportional) and is based on the German system of voting. I hasten to add that Parliament is run on the same lines as Westminster, (the English house of Commons,) with the English Sovereign as our official Head of State.-- Trevor.

Yes, it reminded me of the same thing, Robby. Except of course it is smaller and quieter.

The percentage of voters to vote in our last Federal Election was 63%. Not a very good turnout last time.

In the excerpt from Judge Learned Hand's comments which Rambler shared with us. Judge Hand said:

1 - "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it."
2 - "We affirm a faith in a common purpose, a common conviction, a common devotion."

As we examine these comments, the bond that holds us all together and which holds us to liberty and freedom seems so frail!. Why isn't that bond breaking as it is in so many other parts of the world? What is that "certain something" in democracy (as we know it) that keeps that spirit in our heart - which links us together in a commonality?

Robby

I made a mistake in an earlier post. The length of time between the call of a Canadian election and election day is 36 days. I guess it just feels like 60.

)

wish we could do it that way

color me worn down

During the 10 year term of the last government they brought in an act it was called the Employment Contracts Act. It effectively put all power in the hands of the employer. Unions were not allowed in the workplace unless by permission of the employer and Strikes were illegal!

This act has been repealed by the new government and the new act is in force as from today.

This legislation relys on good faith bargaining between employers and employees. You can strike but must have entered into negotiations for at least 40 days with no agreement before strike action can be taken.

We will wait and see how this works but I really am terribly disillusioned. Our elder Statesmen of bygone eras both liberal and Conservative would never believe how powerless the worker at the bottom has become in this country!

I think this crushing of the spirit here for so many years has resulted in a defeatist attitude of many of the people, also I believe has contributed to our poor showing at the Olympics.

Don't get me wrong I love my country. Its the greatest little place in the World and I believe we have some the most innovative and adaptive people in the world living here. I am just so sad that the great economic experiment started in 1985 of freeing all our trade wide open has resulted in our dropping to almost the bottom of the list in the OECD developed list and also many of our democratic rights of free speech were quashed.

To achieve these ends the Employment Contracts Act was part of the experiment.

Carolyn

Carolyn:

I have always heard such wonderful things about New Zealand and have wanted to visit your great nation but am so sad to hear that you are "terribly disillusioned" and the "defeatist attitude of your people."

I am correct, am I not, that New Zealand is a democracy? Where is that spirit that others spoke of in earlier postings and the remarks by Judge Learned Hand that Rambler quoted?

Robby

This is the whole point of this discussion. You may have a democratic charter but in practice the charter is not fully implemented. It is only democracy in action if the politicians listen to the people and act on the polls.

Some goverments have their ear more to the voice of the people than others. You may live in a democracy but still feel powerless as the government of the day bows to pressure from strong but small lobby groups or to a very wealthy section of industry.

Because one see flaws in the way democracy is implemented in your country does not mean one gives up on trying to change things. I am constantly emailing the media and govt if I feel strongly about an issue. One does not have to agree with all of the policies that the party one elects it is our democratic right to make our views known .

You did sound a bit like a therapist in your last mail! I am not sitting here wringing my hands!

CAROLYN (tongue in cheek!)

Congratulations, Australia, for being such a marvelous host for such a wonderful Olympics!!

Rambler, that quote I loved it!

CAROLYN

In this forum, as explained in the Introduction above, the sub-topics are chosen by America itself. On July 28th, this forum entered the mainstream of America and began to observe the face that America presented each day. At that time America was preparing to have a political convention and participants here discussed the pros and cons of a political convention. Then came back-to-school month and a discussion on education - then came another political convention - then came Labor Day at which time participants here discussed the life of the working person - this led to the examination of America's varied population and the related immigration and naturalization - this topic led of course to the reasons why people come to democracies, eg freedom and liberty.

Now as we float slowly down this mainstream, we see ahead of us preparations for an event common in democracies but almost never seen in totalitarian regimes -- a debate between two presidential candidates. This Discussion Group is not the forum for giving opinions regarding the current candidates and current issues. We have some excellent political forums for that purpose including the new one dedicated specifically to the current debate. You are invited to visit them and participate. Here in this Discussion Group we will examine debates, per se, without mentioning the names of current candidates or mentioning the issues and will compare our thoughts with those of deTocqueville whose remarks on related subjects are quoted above.

Do you see such a debate as important to the outcome of an election? Do you see the term "debate" as defining what is actually about to happen? Do you think that debating changes the minds of citizens as they prepare to vote? What are your reactions to what some would call a true democratic process?

Robby

One of the first models for debates were the Lincoln-Douglas debates held five times in 1858 -- August 21, August 27, September 15, September 18, October 7, October 13, and October 15. Each debate lasted three hours. The first candidate spoke for one hour - the second for one and a half hours - the first replying for a half hour. Candidates alternated going first. The topics were primarily slavery and the Union.

Is what we are about to have a true debate?

Robby

Lincoln-Douglas had substance and originality.

Will we see this in Bush-Gore?

In our dreams!

We are all overstimulated these days. I cannot imagine people standing outside to hear a THREE hour debate. Soon the crowd would be calling for the fireworks, the sizzle, the hot dogs!

I have my doubts as to how many Americans will watch the debates on TV. I don't think I would if I didn't feel that it was somehow my responsibility to do so.

Maryal

3Kings - My son works for the government of the Canton de Vaud, where Lausanne is located. They wanted to raise the people's contribution to their health care system explaining why it was necessary. They had a referandum and the people approved of the increase. I asked him if there were demonstration when the government wanted to dig more into the pockets of constituants, he said no, they just adjust to the new law. There must be times when the votes are less than 50% on a referandum, the majority wins. It has nothing to do with democracy. You can't force people to vote. It seems to me that that means the Swiss will go along with whatever to government decides. Look, they like their government and usually don't want to change anything major no matter what. Ask any Swiss, they prefer their country to any other one.

I know it will be very difficult for all of us here but I would request please that we try to refrain from mentioning specific names. This causes an emotional reaction in all of us and we tend to narrow down on the man rather than on debates, themselves, and their place in America.

Robby

Do people really listen to the arguments in a debate or do they look at body language and who is prettier? The one cutting or smart remark is usually played on TV over and over. Frankly i think people come to the debate with biases and don't change their minds.

Possibly only 10 to 20% of the voting public is the swing vote and i wonder if they listen to the debates at all.

Do you agree with Idris that people come to a debate with biases and don't change their minds?

Robby

I watched the ceremonies surrounding Pierre E. Trudeau's passing. He was such a visionary man and did such good things for Canadians. He wrote in "Cité Libre 1962"

"In Ottawa and in the other provinces,(English-Canadian) nationalism was able to wear the pious mask of democracy. For as English-speaking Canadians became more numerous, they begant to veil their intolerence under the cover of majority rule; thanks to this rule, they were able 'democratically' to suppress bilingualism in the Manitoba legislative assembly, violate acquired rights in the separate schools of several provinces, ferociously impose conscription in 1917, and in 1942 break their solemn plege" (not to impose conscription a second time).

"The die is cast in Canada. There ARE two ethnic and linguistic groups; each is too strong, too well-rooted in the past and too well-based on a mother culture to crush the other. If the two collaborate within a truly pluralist state, Canada can become a priviledged place where the federalist form of government, which is the government of tomorrow's world will be perfected. If Quebec became an examplary provinvce, if men lived there under the banner of freedom and progress, if culture occupied a favoured place, if the universities were brilliant and if the public administration were the most progressive in the country - and none of all that presupposes a decleration of independence - French Canadians would no longer have to struggle to impose bilingualism: the knowledge of French would become a status symbol for anglophones, it would even become an asset in business and administration. Ottawa itself would be transformed by the competence of our policies and our civil servants".

My personal views are that English Canada wants desperately to hold on to their place in the Commonwealth and that alone is enough to feed seperatism. Its time we shed that obsolete so-called form of democracy don't you think?

Yes there is a certain proportion of the voting public who have tunnel vision. It would not matter what any candidate said, did or offered they would vote the same way their parents and their grandparents did.

I come from a family who have had a long history of being closely aligned with a particular political party. One of my earliest recollections is sitting on the Knee of a newly elected member of Parliament at a celebration held at the home of my grandparents. However I grew up and as I got older decided I would vote with my head and not from family loyalties.

I have even voted for a very conservative party in one election because I felt they had the best policies to encourage the stabiltiy of families. My grandfather who leaned towards the left would have been very upset with me if he had been alive at the time.

When I have listened to the rally speeches so far (yes we do know what goes on in American Politics way down here) one of the candidates does seem to me as an outsider as not being up with the play. I actually thought I was listening to someone who had barely finished high school. If I was voting I would be wondering if that person would be able to show authority on the world stage. In other words would he be a Statesman.

I do think that being articulate and having researched ones topics thoroughly may influence a sector of the voting public. A poor TV presence unfortunately in todays world does count against a politician even though his party may have a very worthwhile agenda.

Carolyn

I had to think for a moment what you meant by the term "Anglophone" Eloise. We don't use that term in the other provinces as we are now just too multicultural for it to make much sense. Toronto is more than 50% folks of colour now, not English, Vancouver predominantly Chineese and Indian.

I suppose Canada will survive with good will or just die, Eloise. That would solve all of the old problems still held by the two founding nations. Time will tell, for they are just not that important anymore.

A debate is, basically, an argument. That is not to say that it is an undisciplined shouting match between parties that passionately believe in a particular point of view. In fact, the opposite is true. Debating has strict rules of conduct and quite sophisticated arguing techniques and in a true debate one often has to be in a position of having to argue the opposite of what is believed.

If a debate is a form of argument then it logically follows that there must be something to argue about. This is called the TOPIC. The topic changes from debate to debate. They are sometimes about current issues of public importance and sometimes about general philosophies or ideas.

Do you believe that the "debate" we are about to see will follow such rules?

Robby

The Presidential Debates are run by the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). while they sound like an official government agency, they're actually a private organization run by the former chairmen of the two major parties. The CPD's candidate selection criteria state that only candidates that are getting an average of at least 15% support in 5 national polls by the end of September will be allowed in these debates.

The John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and the University of Massachusetts Boston have been chosen as co-hosts of the first presidential debate of the 2000 general election. This October 3rd debate will be broadcast from UMass Boston's Clark Athletic Center. This is the only debate site in the northeastern United States. It will also be the first presidential debate ever held in Boston.

Robby

Idris - Anglophones was a term used by Trudeau in "Cité Libre" of 1962. His words still ring true to me in the above quote, but I agree that there is such a diversity of nations now living in Canada. that's good. Still English is one of the official languages and it is used most of the time in 9 provinces out of 10.

Do you remember the debate that Gorbachev and Yeltsin had on TV live when Communism was crushed? It is still fresh in my mind when Yeltsin made Gorbachev look weak and vulnarable. Yeltsin won, unfortunately. Television debates can make or break a candidate because it reveals clearly all the faults a person tries desperately to hide.

Robby can you sum up for us what are the rules of a debate and what is typically looked for when a debate is being analysed-- not neceasseraly a presidential debate but any debate. I understand there are debate teams in schools where these rules are understood and practiced. If during a debate you argue what you do not believe, how will we know what the presidential candidates belive or not and therefore what we can look forward to as their prioraties if elected?

Charlie Rose on PBS honored the memory of Trudeau last night by repeating an interview they shared in 1996. What came across was a thoughtful and caring man that wanted people to have information rather than just being whipped into national pride following a leader based on emotion. He named several obscure leaders around the world that he praised as being good leaders of their people and these leaders did not lead by emotion.

These thoughts shared by Trudeau made me more aware how important a free press is to democracy even if at times they act like a bunch of washer women gossips.

One of the most important actions to decide in setting up a Debate is to determine the TOPIC(S). Would the participants here please list (no more than five)the topics that, if you had your way, you would like to see discussed in tomorrow night's Debate?

Robby

Ok Robby why are the Topics chosen the most important part of setting a debate?

I'm very interested in seeing/hearing the debate tomorrow night. I have already made up my mind as to which candidate will get my vote so perhaps I will be listening with bias.

In this area, as I'm sure is happening elsewhere in the country, reporters are polling people on the streets regarding their political stance. If any of the interviews I've seen are representative of the country as a whole, there would appear to be a number of people on the fence who say they are waiting to make their decisions after tomorrow's debate.

This debate then is a powerful elective tool. I think of it in terms of "showcasing." Television has added a whole new dimension to political debating. The candidates appearance, gestures, and facial expressions will be heavily scrutinized and analyzed at least by various media. Perhaps the untimely rolling of an eyeball will change the course of history. Hmmm.

Judy S

I would want to know 'Why' each candidate really wants to be president, what does he think has prepared him to do this job of leading this country as well as how he believes he is prepared to interface with the world. What he thinks are the U.S. responsiblities to the world economy and how do our enviornmental practices affect the world. I would also want to know how he approaches team work so that I have a picture of how he would interface with his cabinet and congress.

What characteristics does he feel are important in choosing someone for a post on his cabinet and how he measures someone that he would recommend as a Supreme Court judge.

What are the gender and race make-up of the candidates current teams that he has not only helping him get elected but his staff that is helping him with his current job.

Barbara:

You are, of course, correct in that the Presidential Debates do not follow the exact rules as followed by debating societies. In high schools and colleges, the goal is to "win". Rules are very exacting, eg It must be agreed in advance what the debate is going to be about. Thus it must be agreed what the topic means. The job of defining begins with the Affirmative. Debates often use teams and the first speaker of the Affirmative must explain in clear terms what they believe the topic means. The Negative team may agree with or choose to challenge the definition presented. This is important as it is difficult to continue the debate with two definitions.

The goal in a Presidential "debate" is to win the hearts and minds of those listening. I would suggest that the most important factor is "The Manner of Presenting."

1 - CUE CARDS - Do not write out your speech on cue cards. Debating is an exercise in lively interaction between two individuals and between the individuals and the audience, not in reading a speech.
2 - EYE CONTACT - If you look at the audience you will hold their attention. When you've "got them by the eyeballs," their hearts and minds will follow.
3 - VOICE - You must project so that you can be heard but constant shouting will become very annoying very quickly. Use volume, pitch and speed to emphasize important points in the speech. A period of quiet speaking can draw your audience in and make them listen carefully.
4 - BODY - Your body is a tool. Move your head and upper body to maintan eye contact with members of the audience. If you want to walk up and down, do so but move with effect and deliberately. Stand with confidence.
5 - NERVOUS HABITS - Playing with your cue cards, pulling on a stray strand of hair, fiddling with your watch, bouncing up and down on the balls of your feet. Don't let any one thing detract from your ability to persuade the audience.
6 - ELOCUTION - Debating is not an exercise in grammar or elocution. Avoid being too informal but don't go overboard the other way. There are no marks to be gained from trying to use big words.

Let me share at this point that I have been a member of Toastmasters International for years and have given many many public speeches and I say the above from experience. I would also suggest that everyone here read deTocqueville's remarks above about Debating and Public Speaking. He apparently knew what he was talking about.

Robby

Unfortunately today and even over here, debates tend to end up with a great deal of mud slinging. I hope that this is not the case in the one you are speaking about in this discussion.

I too will be watching it, as whoever wins the Presidency will have a world wide influence and input not just in the USA.

Carolyn

Carolyn:

I wonder how many Americans think of the next American President as having, as you say, "worldwide influence" and not just "USA input."

Robby

Hmmmm those rules of debate may be what is the very issues at hand. I do think at times the repesentatives of these parties are talking past each other as they often share differing interpretations of similar words and theories.

All the other rules you mentioned Robby sound like something we intstinctively know to look for when someone is publically requesting our support and so the rules for a High School Debate team may not really be all that different. It is just that they know enough to agree on the meaning of the topic.

As I remember the Swiss has just left women vote..They were one of the last countries to extend the vote. They also have essentially no immigration. It is very very difficult to become a citizen.. This essentially changes how the country behaves.. A very stable homogenous population acts differently than our glorious mixture of old and new.. Yes, The original pilgrims encompassed both believer and unbeliever. They all had to sign the charter however.

May I suggest that we absorb deTocqueville's comments above about Debating and Public Speaking and then keep these in mind as we watch the debate tomorrow. It lead to some interesting comments here after having watched the debate.

Robby

Well if we do not realize we are the worlds greatest polluters, consumers, war mashine than we are looking at our navels. Wish we could say we were also a nation that was the greatest readers and most educated with the least infant mortality and health care for all.

Stephanie:

Do you believe that one or both of the candidates (without mentioning names) tomorrow will make it a point to appeal to women?

Robby

I too shall be watching the debate with great interest. Being the mouse that sleeps next to the elephant, one must be aware of every movement.

) Whoever you choose will effect us greatly, as it always has.

Idris:

Presidential candidates always think about (and sometimes speak about) China, the Mid-East, the Balkans, Africa, etc. Do you think Canada (their close friendly neighbor) ever enters their mind?

Robby

I actually feel that both will try quite hard to appeal to women. Not sure why since women do not vote in overwhelming numbers.. Voters.... well they are primarily.. senior citizens ( Like us) Urban jewish population ( have no idea why), the cuban voters( issue voters) and of course ordinary citizens who feel they have an issue to address. I think many many more people vote against than for.. Will watch the debates, but feel that it would be much fairer if all four of the candidates were allowed to debate.

It may but during a TV opportunity we have the rules of journalism in play that sees no excitment in what is safe and sure. That I think is how most Americans view Canada.

Nope! We are that big piece of natural resourses up there somewhere. You know, where the cruise missles etc. get tested. We are simply here and too small in numbers to worry about. Besides we are almost always in agreement with you...and shiver if and when we disagree.

It doesn't really matter whether they think of us or not...we think of you.

)

What do you think about electronic voting over the internet?? It would be simple and no time off from a job and probably more votes. It seems un-American in that the concept of visiting the poll booth has been with us since the flag.

I do not plan to watch the "debates" as I think they will be strictly show-biz and sound bites and rehearsed quips, just like the conventions and the campaigns themselves. I vote on issues. My vote will go to one major or one minor party candidate. The other "major" is not on my radar screen at all.

Barbara:

Voting is a big subject (you always think big anyway) and I have some thoughts in mind for our discussion in the period just prior to election.

Robby

Compare Rambler's term "show-biz" with deTocqueville's remark above beginning "Debating Clubs . . ."

Robby

Many of the United States Government policies indirectly affect those of little countries like ours.

When your interest rates go up ours go up too! Ours are higher than yours. Next time you have a rate rise think of us too!

If we do something the USA Government don't like they can indirectly punish us because they wield so much power on the world stage. So it matters a lot to us who is in power in the USA. I quote our nuclear free stance. We were sent to Coventry by the USA. It was very hurtful at the time but now we have kissed and made up. Thank Goodness!

CAROLYN

This discussion group on DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA by Alexis de Tocqueville got me to thinking of a rare book that I remembered that I have in my possession. It's a small, moldering, but beautifully printed book that my pioneer ancestors owned, titled "KEY-NOTES of AMERICAN LIBERTY" Due to the de Tocqueville topic, I dug it out and got to reading it. Oh my- I am amazed that the family somehow had this gem. To have owned such a book on the farthest-western frontier amazes me! These people had a covered wagon, a team of oxen, tools, guns, a dutch oven, 160 acres of homestead, a bible and very little else. But out here in the wilderness, they purchased a book on Key-Notes of American Liberty!!!!

My great-great-grandparents had been a part of what was called "the Brazen Overlanders" a wagon train that come west in 1845 from Illinois to the Willamette Valley, Oregon Country and were survivors of the infamous Whitman massacre in the Walla Walla area in 1847. (How they survived is a saga in itself.) The book is dated 1866 and I do not have any information on how my g-g-grandfather came to own the book. It really gives me a feel for what those early frontier Americans felt. To have purchased a book on American Liberty at that time in their lives with their meager resources must have been from the deepest of feelings.

The full title is: Key Notes of American Liberty, Comprising the Most Important Speeches, Proclamations, and Acts of Congress, from the Foundation of the Government to the Present Time with a History of the Flag, no author, just the publishing company and date, an illustration of President Washington and the US Flag. It is SIMPLE, ELEGANT, and speaks volumes about American Liberty. It was read by the light of a campfire or candle in the farthest reaches of America of that time, and it makes shivers run up and down my spine. No advertising TV hype, no campaign slogans, no balloons, no nothing but the howl of coyotes and the light of a fireplace (that you had built yourself) with some hostile Indians and/or British lurking out in the woods in the black of the night. (The British were out west too trying to run the show.)

Its simply about Liberty!

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trail, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of trial without jury:

For transporting us beyond seas, to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free system of English law in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws and altering fundamentally the forms of our government:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever:

Those were the concerns of liberty for my ancestors.

Carolyn

You made a very valid point when you spoke of the concern of other nations about who shall become the U.S. President. The power that the position wields is immense. You pointed out how New Zealand was treated when they banned nuclear arms carrying warships. Australia did not have the intestinal fortitude to go along with New Zealand. Yet all you were doing was asserting your national rights. At that time there was a counter balance to U.S. power in the U.S.S.R. Now there is not even that, but I am not complaining. Regarding the "Debates", which are now copied in many other countries, it seems to me that all that does, is help get the most charismatic candidate elected. Voters say "he/she seemes nice, I'll vote for them". I think we are kidding ourselves if we believe that many voters are really aware of the issues. Then again, what percentage of the people will bother to vote? In Australia we have compulsory voting. If you do not vote and have not got a good reason for not voting, you are fined. Some think this is wrong. Ask those who have lived in "one party" states if they think it wrong. Our ancestors had to fight long and hard to get enfranchised, yet some of us treat voting as a "chore"

This discussion is on Democracy. Democracy is a system that once obtained has to be kept. The keeping of it gives us a responsibility and one of its responsibilities is to cast our vote after due deliberation. You would not buy a new car without studying it's pros and cons. I'll now jump off of the soapbox

Ellen:

It is a compliment to the active participants in this forum that they should cause you to do some deep thinking to the point of digging out a rare book in your possession you had forgotten about.

Your description of the book itself and the probable surroundings in which it was read makes any one of us pause and think deeply and come to realize with awe the stature of those pioneers who gave us the nation we have today. Stature is not reserved for those wealthy and more highly educated residents of the original 13 colonies who spent much of their time holding meetings and making far-reaching decisions, as important as they might have been. Stature also belongs to those simple folks, much like your g-g-grandparents who understood "Liberty" by living it. Sitting around a fire discussing Liberty!! As you say, it "makes shivers run up and down the spine." As we discuss the book, "Democracy in America," we must not forget American Democracy, itself, which exists as a result of what your ancestors and their cohorts did.

Thank you for this glimpse into living history.

Robby

I am convinced that appeal to women (or sex appeal) whatever you call it is important in a debate. When you have that, you have a human dimention that is indispensible if you are in the public eye. Great men of history all had that because it is needed to project a correct image of humankind. By sex appeal I don't mean performance in the bedroom. I mean this 'Je ne sais quoi' which appeals to everybody regardless of gender. Pierre Trudeau had it, but not our present Prime Minister. It cannot be faked or brought out for a specific event.

Issues would certainly be important to me. Violence, gun control, health care, abuse towards women, education. I admit that one candidate appeals to me more than the other perhaps because of what I've said earlier. But as a Canadian I can only watch with deep interest.

Peter says that "democracy is a system that once obtained has to be kept." Can democracy be kept in a compulsory way, eg fining people for not voting? In Australia, there seems to be divided opinion on that subject.

Eloise lists issues which she considers important and would like to hear discussed in the debate tonight.

1 - Violence
2 - Gun control
3 - Health care
4 - Abuse toward women
5 - Education.

What other issues would participants here like to hear discussed tonight?

Robby

Robby: 1)National defense (military preparedness).

2) Unbrideled illegal immigration.

WillieWoody adds Military Preparedness and Unbridled Illegal Immigration to the list of topics he would like to hear at the debates. Any other personal wishes?

Robby

Robbie

I have been reading everyday in here but couldn't ever say anything any better than the posters do here. My personal wish is that they had included the other two serious candidates, Ralph Nader and Pat Buchannan, in this debate. We are only hearing what the lobbiests have paid for with their soft money.

Ellen

Talk about shivers running down one's back, your post certainly made me quiver. What a wonderful possession to have!! Too bad it couldn't be reprinted and sent out to voters today. Would it help any of us vote better? Make better choices? I don't know about that but it would certainly make the voters of today think more deeply about their freedoms and liberties.

The dignitaries and folks are moving into Notre Dame Basilica, now. Our past Prime Ministers move about with ease and no body guards. Castro is there and sitting beside past President Jimmy Carter. They were surrounded by body guards.

Did you know that Jimmy Carter worked for a bit in Canada during 1946-47? He was doing some work with nuclear scientists at Chalk River.

Comments by Edmund Morris who is currently writing a second volume of a trilogy on Theodore Roosevelt:--

"America is still a nation that values individual expression -- which is to say, free speech. Nothing is more notable in modern American campaign oratory than its careful, gray, timid quality. Theodore Roosevelt's sentences 'machine gunned' to the back of the hall, gesticulations shaking his entire body as he asked: 'Is America a weakling, to shrink from the work of the great world-powers? No. The young giant of the West stands on a continent and clasps the crest of an ocean in either hand.'

"Young people respond, albeit viscerally, to short, direct words like these. Their restless minds have no patience for circumlocutions. We older voters appreciate frank talk, too. We like to know what a candidate really feels."

As you examine Morris' words above and without giving specific names of current candidates, (remember, please, this is not a political discussion group) do you feel that this exhuberance is being shown in modern-day campaigning? Would you be affected if it was shown in tonight's debates?

Robby

Compulsory voting----perhaps that is what Americans need to get them to perform their "duty" to protect the freedom of our democracy. It seems in line with what we were saying about the need for individuals to give up certain freedoms in order to achieve and maintain freedom for all, isn't it?

I am very interested in reading the comments from our friends in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand and the fact that they are so closely interested in our presidential election because whom we elect can affect the entire world! What an awesome responsibility that places upon American citizens and their right to vote. To realize that the decision we make can affect the whole world should strongly encourage us to think very carefully on the issues and the candidates and then to get out and cast our votes in a responsible manner.

As for the debates---I wish I could be more comfortable with their importance but I can't help but think that an election that swings on the appearance and debating ability of one candidate over another is not a true indicator of leadership and integrity. Too often it is a "beauty pageant". The debates should not be the only marker we use in making our globally important decision.

Phyll

Regarding "compulsory voting" -- my question might be an oversimplification but I ask, nevertheless -- Can one be compelled to be free? Is not that an oxymoron?

Robby

I believe Australia has compulsory voting. Possibly we could hear from someone who lives there and can tell us for certain.

No one can compel you to feel free anymore than they can compel you to feel love.

Compulsory voting! Now that's one that I would find hard to justify as a privilege. It really sounds very old-time British. I would say agitate, get it on the ballot and change it!

Am I right on this? The democratic view insists that everyone in the community has vital political interests which transcend possible differences of wealth, education, or any other factor. That's my backwoods pioneer family.

In my mind, to determine the democratic quality of a particular system is a political organized society in which the government is controlled, if not directed at least with reasonable immediacy, by the people subject to that government. What about representation in that kind of government?

Did anyone else see "Frontline" last night? It really showed both Gore and Bush in the light of reality and it was not too good a view of either one. Some leadership we are choosing!!!! Here's an applause for TV FOR ONCE. It was used in a way it should be to give us a little glimpse of truth, not just boring, endless advertising hype and fancy camera work

PLEASE, FOLKS, PLEASE!! I know it's a terrific temptation to give our views of current candidates (I feel the temptation as strongly as you do) but we have political forums in Senior Net for that. This is a Discussion Group about Democracy, per se, how it works and what our reactions are to comments by deTocqueville.

Robby

Robby, i know this is about debates but if the Fourth Estate does its spin job how are we to say the debate had real value. Maybe in DeTocqueville's time things were simpler. Maybe they were real debates but now it is just a show.

A more important presidential election hasn't happened in decades. The fate of the Supreme Court rests with this election, as both parties and, especially, those on the current Court agree. The next president will likely have an opportunity to IMMEDIATELY affect the court with the first appointment, but more importantly, will likely appoint more than one during the next four years. THAT will have an effect for decades.

I'm hoping the debate will contain questions about potential Court appointments, so that those listening will FINALLY realize the implications.

Also, I'm convinced that it is the media's repetition of certain unexpected moments during a presidential debate that have as much impact as the debate itself. Gaffs, funny one-liners, serious punch-lines that drive home a point. Those moments tend to be played over and over in the television media for days----sometimes years, as we've all seen in the last few days in the tapes of prior debates. "There you go again," and who can forget, "You, Senator, are no John Kennedy."

There is something else that neither Gore nor Bush will have trouble with---something about camera savvy-ness. Or, actually, Bush has looked TOO friendly and now works to look more serious and Gore has looked too serious and now strives to get a better, relaxed looking but still presidential look. They seem even. This is in contrast to the oft-repeated tapes of Nixon's discomfort with the camera. In my mind, in this techno-age, that skill can be learned. The lessons of not having it have been learned. I don't underestimate this skill in that it's part of what the rest of the world sees when a president represents us.

No lectures, please, Robby. I've presented only neutral information and left out any one-sided perspective. After the debate, I think we can handle talking (objectively) about how each did---in general terms. Of course we have biases, since most of us here are of the opinionated-animal species. It's just that you guys always have such interesting things to say---I don't want to miss out on what you think.

Whatever our attitude toward the strengths or weaknesses of debates, I agree with Betty that "a more important presidential election hasn't happened in decades." If you are in agreement with this, then it is conceivable that something might be said (or not said) in tonight's debate that could affect vitally the outcome of our nation the coming four years and beyond. In fact, our friends in this forum from New Zealand, Canada, and Australia have constantly reminded us that the U.S. is an "elephant" that affects the entire world each time it twitches.

My own plan is to be absent from the Senior Net from 9pm to 10:30 pm (EDT)and I will be back after that to hear your reactions. Ordinarily I am a radio fan but tonight I will watch on TV because I do want to see their body movements, their facial expressions, their eye movements, etc. Sometimes messages are given off in that manner.

Robby

I wish I liked the debate process better than I do. It is about the only method available,,, but...well the election process bothers me more and more.. I would love to see campaign reform.. No campaigning until a certain trigger point.. Very very firm limits on what can be spent and how.. No exceptions for special interest groups at all. The actual persons campaign must spend the money and it must be limited. Then perhaps we could sit back and actually evaluate each candidate, not their fundraising ability. I like internet voting and think it might actually interest the youngest generation. Mandatory voting will just cause certain types to boycott the whole thing. Its more interest that will lead to more voting. On Teddy Roosevelt.. he did engender passions.. A bit too bully for me, but I can see where a good speaker could help us now.

As you watch the debate, please keep in mind deTocqueville's comments above - the one beginning with "His ideas..." and the other beginning with "Americans, who generally treat...". Did deT know what he was talking about, even 170 years ago?

Robby

Robby - You reiterate some of what I said in post #1398. While meant facetiously, it may have a ring of truth.

Judy S

Judy:

I agree with what you said in Post #1398 and I will, indeed, be watching for various facial expressions and body behavior.

Robby

I think you should listen to voice and cadence too, Robby.

I would think watching to see and evaluate how they handle un-natural surroundings with someone they have not met but are now thrown together for a period of time. Would this be similar to either man meeting a head of state from another nation at some summit or other?

Much was made today of looking at the canditates history on the internet, voting record etc. to learn about the men. I see that as very limiting. With each job there is a diffent group or team and different amount of power to claim.

The one is experienced in a State where the Railroad Commissioner has more power than the Governer and his success is in appointments and politicing. The other needed to play politics within a system established by another and therefore was also a political animal with little power.

They both want the job where they get to create team and have power to make things happen. More important is what our Canadian, New Zealand and Australian friends have been saying-- how will either man interface with other world leaders and how well will he understand the world wide ramifications of his leadership.

During deToqueville's day the U.S. was not a world power. We were still seperating ourselves from the long arm of European and British power.

My dear Americans. I wish I was as passionate as you are about politics, but I am not. I will watch the debate though and see if my predictions about the appeal of a candidate is founded on the reactions that will result. Like many people I go with my instinct and my feelings are that both candidates offer good potential for presidency. I agree about de T. that political speeches are inflated, but it seems its what the public wants to hear. I hope that they will let their true feelings come across as they discuss issues.

Robby - I agree about their facial expressions and their body language. The press usually zooms in on any little visible flaw that might put one at a disadvantage.

Ellen McFadden1 yes I did see that "Frontline" special. I thought it was very well done. After much thought because as you observed, all their warts were shown and neither looked better than the other, I concluded that we are voting based on the characteristics of two of the usual four personailties present in a typical addictive family.

We have the 'Hero' and the 'Rebel' with all the positive and negative characteristics of each role required in an family with an addictive parant.

There is a book out something about an adddictive society and possibly that kind of journalism is what we need to bring us out of our common denial of what we are and what we choose or "want" as leaders in order to support our addictions as a society.

Addictions can be many, not just substance legal or illegal.

I think a lot of us do watch these debates with a lot of cynicism. Robby I agree about watching body language. I won a book once as part of a sales attainment prize. It was on the Interpretation of Body language.. Now I watch to see if the candidate is fibbing when promises are made. It is a real eye opener to be able to tell when the public is very possibly being mislead and statements are not sincere!

Everyone should buy a book on interpretating body language!

CAROLYN

Well, folks, I just got home from the office and it is approximately a half hour until the 90-minute debate begins. The prediction is that this will be the largest single television audience of the presidential campaign - somewhere around 75 million people watching. The stakes will be far greater than the candidates had anticipated because the contest is so excruciatingly tight. The race has no front-runner.

Negotiators on both sides devoted more than six days of closed talks to the details before they emerged last Friday with a detailed agreement that spells out everything from the height of the lecterns (they will stand 48 inches high) to the number of aides each candidate can have backstage. The temperature in the hall will be 65 degrees Farenheit and there will be no props. There will be no lapel microphones. There will be more time than in the past for give and take on a single topic.

Experience has shown that the first debate is often the one that draws the highest audience. This time viewership might be diminished because NBC plans to give its affiliates the option of broadcasting a baseball playoff game instead of the debate, and Fox is scheduled to offer entertainment programming. Even so, the debates are expected to reach many more millions of people than the two political conventions this summer. For many people, it will be the first time they see the two competitors live -- and for longer than a snippet in a commercial or on the news.

Said Nelson Polsby, a political scientist at the University of California at Berkeley: "It's nearly impossible to win a debate but it is possible to lose one." We'll see.

Robby

Well, here's one person who had no intention of watching this debate or any other, and I kept to my word. My vote has not ever been influenced by speeches or performances on radio or TV, and I hope it never will be.

Mal

I don't have CNN but phoned my daughter in law who is taping it for me so I can see what you will all be discussing.It is live here too on CNN.

Carolyn

I'm back and I watched the debate. My point in watching it was to see if anything new developed (if there was, I missed it) but more importantly that that to examine their method of delivery. I am convinced that as important as issues may be, the conviction with which potential leaders present such issues has a lot to do, not only with whether they are voted in or not, but what leadership qualities they will show after they are elected. There is that "certain something," mentioned here by others, which sets a leader, a statesman if you will, apart from a politican.

Looking at deTocqueville's comments (above), did you find their answers "extremely minute and clear" or "extremely general and vague?" Were their comments in "clear, plain language" or "inflated?"

Robby

I have not got to my TV set yet, so I only have the comments of the posters on this thread to judge the "Great Debate"

Robbie. You asked "can one be compelled to vote"?. The answer of course is NO. One just pays for the priviledge of not voting.

To complicate matters further, we have preferential voting in Australia. So if there are four candidates, you mark them one to four in order of your preference. The parties also draw lots on where their candidates appear on the ballot paper. That gives what is referred to as the "Donkey Vote". That is those voters who just go down the ballot paper in numerical order.

Why does Australia vote this way. Mainly because many of the original migrants were people who had been transported from Britain because of a minor crime. (This is the fault of the Americans who won their Independence, causing Britain to find somewhere else to send all its "criminals"

). Once Australia became a Federation in 1901, the founding fathers were determined that what had happened to the original migrants could never happen again. That is why they opted for preferential and compulsory voting. One hundred years on, it may seem undemocratic, but the reasons for it, in the first place, were to preserve democracy.

It is only natural that many of us will want to discuss the Presidential Debates (a total of three) and the Vice-Presidential Debate (tomorrow October 5th) and to be specific about our reaction to particular candidates. Senior Net has given us an opportunity to air these opinions. To do so you can, if you wish, click onto the Link above in the Heading labeled PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE-PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES.

Here in Democracy in America, we will continue to examine debates, per se, as an example of what types of events exist in Democracies.

Robby

What debates? Oh I forgot all about them, and the book I was reading wasn't all that good.

)

LOL, Camron. I read a post somewhere, and in it this person said one candidate parted his hair on the left and the other parted it on the right. Or was it the other way around? Not to make light of the debates, of course, but that comment made me smile.

I feel certain that whoever wins will be groomed by people with tremendous amounts of experience to look and act in a statesmanlike way. So much takes place backstage that none of us ever hears about. Sometimes I feel as if our lives are choreographed and hope the principal actors do not forget their lines or make a misstep. Cynical? Not really, perhaps jaded a bit by living long enough to have an idea what to expect, surprises included.

That's my word for today.
Mal

You think you are cynical Mal, we will probably be going to the poles within the next 45 days in Canada...Trudeau's death leaves the voters all warm and fuzzy and would be more likely to vote Liberal. I may just boycott this election.

Our Parliament will have to be puroqued which means all Bills on the Order Paper come to an end. One of the things on the agenda was the Bill to put back the money the Libs took from Health Care and was agreed to at a Fed-Prov Conference.

The Auditor General is also to release a Report on IRDC funding and it is a real slam against the present regime. This would get buried too.

Given the disarray of the other parties the Libsw will win in any event. I am disgusted! The manipulation of the public by politicians is totally amazing.

Idris, you've said in the past that conservatives in Canada are more liberal than what we consider "liberal" here, so it's hard for me to understand what the "Libs" you mention are all about. Socialism? Is that what it is? If so, why would they take money from Health Care? Would you tell me a little bit more, please?

Mal

Mal, our Liberals and Conseratives are not that much different, as both rule from the centre were most Canadians feel comfortable. We do have a Party that is socialist called the NDP. We destroyed the Conservative Party when we ousted Mulroney. It has been replaced with a new Party called The Canadian Alliance. It is more to the right fiscally and socially. Its roots are in the West of Canada where they feel left out. They would attempt to stop legal abortions etc., if they could. They would probably be about as right wing as your Democratic Party fiscally. You must remember we do not have an organized religious right here in Canada.

Our Liberal Party during the Trudeau era put us in terrible debt. This current Liberal Party cut many things to dig us out of debt and we are doing a fine job there. They did it by cutting spending but not taxes. Indeed with the advent of the GST we are taxed more than we should be. With all of this money coming in they were able to balance the books and start paying down the debt.

We have what is called "Transfer Payments" that are collected by the Fed from the Provinces. The money is re-allocated so the poorer Provinces can have proper health care etc. The Liberals cut the transfer payments to all of the Provinces to balance the books. Now we are doing better the Provinces managed to get an agreement to put some of the money back. If there is an election this will be put on hold or deep sixed. The Provinces need the money the Feds took now for many programs that were short changed.

We are only 3 1/2 years into the present government's mandate. There should not be an election until next spring. We shall see what happens. The noises are getting louder but if the public through calls to their MPs and polling tell them not to go to the polls they may back off. In a 36 day election they can't turn the public opinion that quickly. If they start off with us resenting what they are doing they may blow their majority government.

Do any of us know how to respond to Robby's question?

Idris:

I'm not sure myself which question I asked to which you are referring!! The minutes and the hours fly by. Life and democracies move on.

But let me ask this. Let us, for the sake of discussion, say that neither candidate did very well in the debate. And let us say, for the sake of discussion, that the listening/watching public gained no additional information regarding their positions. This being so, could we nevertheless say that the very fact a debate was held is a triumph for democracy? Are there people in various nations around the world who were able to see the debate thinking to themselves: "I sure wish I lived in a nation like that. Each candidate gave his open thoughts. He will not be censored. No one will be shot. No one will be arrested. And there will be no coup." Was the debate successful looking at the event through the type of objective eyes that deTocqueville used?

Robby

Yes, of course it was. I think debates are important for that reason alone. There are many small things in a democracy we take for granted because we have always had the freedom to do them.

Idris:

I'm not sure myself which question I asked to which you are referring!! The minutes and the hours fly by. Life and democracies move on.

Robby

Well, i thought we were to evaluate the debate with an eye on all manner of small things without talking about the individual candidates. I think you were looking for body language and eye movement etc.

I watched for the first 15 minutes or so and then switched to listening on the radio. However, i have no idea how i frame what i think i heard or saw without dealing with the participants themselves.

Idris:

Oh, yes! You're correct. Was it a Senior Moment? In any event, on the Diane Rehm Show on NPR this morning, a listener said that she listened on the radio and her mother downstairs watched on TV. Although both are of the same political persuasion, they had two different reactions. Shows the power of the voice vs the image.

Robby

I wanted to see them to get an idea of what i would see in my minds eye. The relative sizes of the two men, how they stood and the look on thier faces, so i watched TV a bit.

Then i changed to radio to consentrate on the words. How they were said and did they answer the questions.

I did that very thing back in 1960. It was moving day for our family, and I was SO busy that I had to listen to the debate on the radio rather than watch it. I can remember making beds, moving stuff around, etc., while listening intently.

Well, I was over the Moon! I had nary a single doubt but what Nixon had seriously trounced Kennedy. No doubt about it. No sirree!

Imagine my astonishment the next day when I read and heard that Kennedy had soared in the polls and was declared the winner!

Idris: And what was your general reaction?

For anyone here who wants to get into specifics regarding the individual candidates, a Link above in the Heading will take you to PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE-PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES.

Robby

Robby, i have no idea how to phrase my comments without talking about the candidates. I'll wait and see how others frame their answers. I know it can be done but i'm not sure how.

Idris:

I would recommend that you click onto PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE-PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES above, go there, and then pour out your views to your heart's content. I am lurking there at this time and I believe some others who post in Democracy in America are also doing so. I understand your dilemma.

Robby

Robby, those threads are often very rough and i really don't want to fight with anyone. Besides your politics are up the American people. I sure hate reading fights.

Idris:

At the present time, they are being most civil with each other and, as I say, you will meet some of your DinA friends who are posting there right now. And of course you, and any of us, can leave that forum whenever we wish.

Robby

I just had a quick read there and you are right...they are being very civil.

)

Idris...I love your posts...Come on over..It is refreshing to ready your views on your "rowdy neighbors".(grin). You are much better informed about our politics than we are yours......

Idris:

Robby

Idris,

Robby is right about the political debate discussion. I think your valuable input would be appreciated. Marcie is keeping a stern eye on us over there and will delete anything that gets "pejorative" as she says. And most of us try to be nice to each other, I think, even when we differ. Really good and diverse opinions happening there.

Robby, I haven't deserted DinA. Just enjoying reading others for awhile.

Phyll

Well, i posted what i thought in there as i didn't know how to post it here and keep within the guidlines. If i get yelled at i'll run like heck.

)

Idris:

I read your post in Presidential and Vice-Presidential Debates and thought you did very well!! We are democracies, right? Say what you think!! (Of course, don't forget us here. You're part of the DinA family, you know.)

Robby

Idris....I loved your post....I had the same feelings about the delivery of unamed participant.....You can rest assured someone will fuss with what you said.(grin)..It's good that we can have this give and take and elect our leaders like this......Not fighting in the streets........

Idris....I loved your post....I had the same feelings about the delivery of unnamed participant.....You can rest assured someone will fuss with what you said.(grin)..It's good that we can have this give and take and elect our leaders like this......Not fighting in the streets........

Just another one of our great gifts in a democracy.

)

The importance of the American Presidency cannot be denied. But to quote a commonly made remark: "The Vice-President is only a heart beat away from the Presidency." This, I would suggest, makes tomorrow night's debate a most important one -- a debate between the two major candidates for that position.

Perhaps before we write off that debate, we should pause to examine the responsibilities of the Vice-President. The Vice-presidency of the United States is one of the two positions in the government of the U.S. that is filled in an election open to all eligible voters in every state and the District of Columbia. He or she is the second highest ranking officer in the Executive branch of the federal government, beneath only the President. Both serve concurrent 4-year terms. Traditionally Vice-presidents have had little infuence on public affairs.

The Founding Fathers who wrote the U.S. Constitution in 1787 provided that all of the "executive power" would rest in the hands of the President. Almost as an afterthought, they created the office of Vice-president in order to provide for a successor should the President die or resign.

The significance of the office relates almost entirely to the fact that the Vice-president succeeds to the presidency if the president dies, resigns, or is removed from office through the impeachment process. And, with that thought in mind, may I suggest to everyone here the thought that one of the two men you will be watching at the debate tomorrow night could conceivably be The President of The United States six months from now. A morbid thought, if you will, but a conceivable one.

Are we ignoring tomorrow night's debate? Are we ignoring the office of the Vice-Presidency? What are your opinions?

Robby

I am most definetly not ignoring the Vice Presidency..... Twice in my memory a Vice President has had to take over the office of the President.... I also think the role of the Vice has expanded over the years.......

Dear you all: I watched the debate for one hour last night. I went to bed thinking that most of what was said were promises for a better life and more money, of course I can't read between the lines like some of you can and some analysts this morning said that some were the same old promises that were made four years ago and never materialized.

Now about the appeal of one over the other. I am almost 100% who is going to be your next president. But I'm not allowed to say names. His eyes were always well focused. His movements expressing his feelings, the tone of his voice was strong and clear. He is a good orator and he has that appeal that makes him suitable for a job as demanding as President of the mighty United States.

Eloise:

Well, you can either state that preference in PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE-PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES (Link above) or you can put it in a sealed envelope, deposit here in DinA, and pull it out the day after election.

Robby

Robby - my answer to your #1481:

Ordinarily, Vice Presidents don't have much influence over what transpires during their President's terms. But, your reference to the Vice-President is only a heart-beat away from the Presidency points to the absolute importance of a Vice Presidential candidate or election winner.

A voter simply cannot ignore the potential for the VP becoming POTUS one day, for whatever reason, and a vote should certainly take that into consideration. The past term has also pointed out the importance of the VP sitting in the Halls of the Hill, in case any tie votes are envisioned.

I thought the original appointment of the losing Presidential candidate as VP was an interesting one. Imagine the outcomes on the Hill (and perhaps a change in how our representatives might vote) when the tie-breaker is not on the President's team!

Here if one person referred to another as HE it would be considered rude. When our politicians debate they would say.

Mr Bush said or Mr Gore said.

I was distracted by thinking "Oh how rude he is"

Is referring to another person in a formal setting by gender ie he or she in direct communication not considered rude in the USA ?

I will have to re watch it again (I have it on tape) and forget the address method of the candidates.

Carolyn

Gary:

Thank you very much for posting in our forum. You, yourself, are the Discussion Leader of a number of very active political discussion groups, one of which is the new one, Presidential and Vice-Presidential Debates, which has a link above for those who want to enter political discussions.

As you know, in this forum we have, for the past two months, been examining Democracies, what makes them tick, and we then compare what we see with the observations Alexis deTocqueville made 170 years ago. Many of us have been amazed at his ability to step backward a bit and look at us objectively, an example being his remark (quoted above) -- "It sometimes happens that a nation is divided into two nearly equal parties each of which affects to represent the majority." This seems to be pointed exactly at our current situation.

Robby

Yes, and as you do not have a way of having a vocal third party you just have to fight it out i guess.

We have had minority governments where the balance of power was held by a third party. This is usually a very short lived Parliament. The Party that is the government must listen to the "third party" and it gets rather noisy in the House of Commons at these times. Usually the third party will dump the government by voting against it on some point or other and we are back at the polls...

Carolyn:

Your comment about the use of the pronoun "he" brings me back abruptly to the memory of my mother telling me: "Use the man's name. Do not say 'he.'" I am afraid that this is a very common occurrence in the speech of Americans and I am as guilty as the rest.

Robby

I have my body language book here and for the life of me i can't find the "head wagging thingy" that one of them did. What the heck does that mean anywhooooo? Anyone have a book that includes this gesture??

All I could see is we had the sniffer and the sigher and no JFK either of them-- another son whose father expected his children to achieve.

This time I wish the roles were reversed and the men shooting for vice-presidency were presidential candidates.

Rarely in a country's life do we have great men anymore than once in every 50 years or so. The rest are just caretakers who do their job. Sometimes we are lucky and a great leader comes along at the right time in a nation's history.

Idris - over our nation's history, the political parties have changed, just like the leadership potential, even if only two survive at a time (as DeT points out). There is no doubt that such a change of the political party structure (remaining at two parties) is in the offing, in my opinion, in the future.

Robby - I'm sorry about that. It just came out.

Eloise:

I'm not sure what you're "sorry" about but I re-read my answer to you which was meant to be humorous and as I re-read it, it sounded kind of rough. The humor didn't come through. So I'm sorry. When it comes to political subjects, the passions come out in all of us.

Robby

Television personality Nick Clooney will be master of ceremonies for the Vice-Presidential debate to be held tomorrow night, Sept. 5th, at Centre College in Danville, Kentucky. This will be the only nationally televised Vice-Presidential Debate. The college is taking advantage of this unique event. Centre President John A. Roush said; "We want to provide an opportunity for Centre's students to enjoy the debate and the hours leading up to it in an exciting and memorable setting."

A special pre-debate program, "Celebrate America at Centre College" will present celebrity guests and several Kentucky music groups in a five-hour performance leading up to the debate at 9 pm. Scheduled to begin at 3 pm, the concert will be produced by Centre's Norton Center for the Arts. Master of ceremonies Clooney will be joined by other nationally known performers, including pianist Roger Williams, recording artist B.J. Thomas, gospel great Larnelle Harris and the Main Line Brass Band from Washington, D.C. Kentucky groups performing in the concert will include the Owensboro Symphony Orchestra with conductor Nicholas Palmer and from Danville, the Advocate Brass Band, the Danville Children's choir, and the All-Male chorus of the first Baptist Church.

Do you people in this Discussion Group believe that college students across our nation are taking these debates seriously? Are they examining the issues critically? Do they intend to vote? Is Centre College an exception merely because the debate will be held there?

What are your views?

Robby

Carolyn, I was raised with that same admonition, but most people today do not have a clue that it is rude to say "he" or "she" in the presence of the person you are speaking of.

In my family there is one child who when telling a whopper wags his head! Its kind of like a wobble. I always know when he is exaggerating or downrigh telling a fib>

Carolyn

The Constitution originally provided that "In case of the removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President..." Years later, a controversy arose over whether "the Same" referred to "Powers and Duties" or to "Office." In 1841, when President William Henry Harrison died in office, Vice-President John Tyler took the presidential oath and subseqently asserted that he was in fact holding the office of president, not merely performing the powers and duties of the presidency.

Tyler's precedent brought on another dilemma. On several occasions a president has become disabled. In each instance the vice-president has chosen not to take action in accord with the provision of the Constitution quoted herein, for fear that the disabled president might regain his health and seek to reclaim his office. If his successor was in fact president, not merely performing the powers and duties of the office, then there would be no constitutional means of returning the office to the recovered president.

The 25th Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1967, sought to remedy that situation. The amendment provides that if a president is disabled, the vice-president may exercise the powers and duties of the office, but only as acting president. The president, upon his recovery, may resume his duties. The authors of the amendment devised a complicated formula to help resolve any controversy that might arise between the president and vice-president over whether or not the former was physically able to perform his duties.

Is anyone here going to watch the debate tomorrow night between two candidates, one of whom might very well some day be The President of the United States?

Robby

Robby

I wouldn't miss the debate Robbby.....It may well be more interesting than the presidential one held Tue......

I thought about the waggle of one of the participants heads last night. Strained my brain something awful.

)

Anywhooooooo the stance, how the podium was held and waggle were vintage Reagan.

Idris....I wondered if anyone else noticed "you ain't seen nothing yet"?..Yes, I noticed and also the way his hair was combed.....What do you think his body language was trying to convey?

The average audience for all the debates that were shown on the networks from 1976 to 1992 was 67 million.
The largest audience for a presidential debate on record was for the 1980 confrontation between Reagan and Mondale. Shown on ABC, CBS, and NBC, it was watched by more than 80 million people.
The first debate between Clinton and Dole in 1996 was seen by 46.1 people.
The second debate between Clinton and Dole in 1996 was seen by 36.3 million people.
Tuesday's debate was seen by 46.6 million people.

Tuesday's debate was the first to compete with both a network entertainment show and a major sporting event. Fox and NBC networks decided not to show the debate. On Tuesday, William K. Kennard, the Federal Communications Commission chairman, rebuked NBC and Fox for their decisions.

Robby

Freedom, Democracy ???? Who is Wm Kennard to be rebuking the networks. Sounds like the govt is closer to controlling the airways than I like. More government or less government???

Cam - Perhaps Kennard should be rebuking the Commission for Presidential Debates, also, for restricting the attendance. No one will ever know what NBC/FOX might have done if there were four debaters, and not just the two that were acceptable to whomever was pulling the strings.

What NBC actually did (and no, my defense does NOT indicate any ownership or interest, darn it!) was leave it up to the LOCAL stations as to what they would carry.

Our huge NBC channel here DID carry the debate. They chose NOT to carry the ball game NBC had paid so many millions for the right to carry this season. I can understand the dilemma they were in.

What shall we look for tonight? In addition to comparing the two debates, perhaps we might compare the two moderators. Each moderator has a different approach. Will you find that one moderating style is more effective than another? How about the informality of tonight's procedure as compared to the formal procedure of Tuesday's debate? Some candidates do better in one environment than in another.

Robby

Robby---I don't know about everyone else, but I am suspecting some humor tonight. I think this may well be the most interesting of the four debates.

Maryal

I'm wondering if tonights debate representing "Democracy in America" will be overshadowed by the terrible struggle for democracy going on at this moment in Yugoslavia?

Judy S

Judy---I agree. Just the other night while the national news was on, I pointed out what was going on with Miloshovik and suggested to her that we Americans could not imagine an American president, say Jimmy Carter or George Bush, not being re-elected and then refusing to leave office. We assume there will be an orderly handing over of the reins of power. How fortunate we are.

Maryal

Judy:

You are so correct in reminding us that we are so caught up with what is going on inside our Democracy that we temporarily put out of mind the "struggle for democracy" that is happening in other parts of the world. Perhaps if the topic of foreign relations is brought up tonight, one of the candidates might point this out. It would certainly be a "presidential" thing to do even if the debate is for those who are aiming at being Vice-President.

Robby

When I grow up, I want to learn to copy and paste.

Until then, all I can do is refer you to Religion and Spirituality, Jewish Community, #573.

ROBBY, You mention, in your post 1503, the 1980 debate between Reagan and Mondale. I thought Jimmy Carter was the democratic candidate for his second term in that year? It's unimportant, I know, but just testing my memory! -- Trevor.

Trevor: You might be right but I do believe I am correct about the size of the watching audience for the various years.

I have just come home from the office, it is now 8;40 pm (EST) here and in a few minutes I will settle myself before the TV, hoping I will see a great debate. I will be back in about two hours if my eyes can stay open and perhaps all our good participants here will share their observations of the event and compare the remarks of the candidates with phrases of deTocqueville (above) such as "theatrical entertainment,"ideas that are extremely minute and clear, "ideas that are extremely general and vague," "a void," "clear plain language," "devoid of all ornament, and "inflated." Perhaps also some comments about body language and tone of voice.

Was the debate helpful to you? Did it make you proud to be part of a Democracy?

A point in question was East Timor who cried out to the world for decades and nobody listened or wanted to know. Genocide took place there on the scale of Rwanda over two decades.

I was so pleased when at last their voice was heard. I think the western world often turns their backs on the struggle for democracy and yes often Genocide because economically and trade wise it suits them.

Getting terribly cynical in my old age! Carolyn

Most of us here have spent an hour and a half examining the knowledge and mannerisms of the Presidential candidates and have spent the same amount of time examining the knowledge and mannerisms of the Vice-Presidential candidates. Taking into consideration deTocqueville's comment (above) which begins with "The American Democracy frequently errs . . .", what are your conclusions as of this moment?

Robby

Robby - (I personally believe that) The Vice Presidential candidates, in and of themselves, without any consideration for what their respective Presidential candidates and their parties expect of them, are gentlemen who could very easily step into the Presidential role.

Having said that, one individual in each case selected these VP candidates, not what I would consider a true democratic process. That will occur very shortly, as voters go to the polls to make their overall selection. That's when the democracy may well err. History will make that determination.

From any (many) given points-of-view, the Democracy has certainly erred on occasion.

Gary does not consider a Presidential candidate selecting a Vice-Presidential candidate to be a "true democratic process." Any reactions here?

Robby

I was pleased by the vice-presidential debate. Although both men more or less said what their leaders did, both said it better and remained fully in control of themselves as well as the "facts."

I felt that I was watching two adults for a change.

maryal

I feel like Gary. I liked it better, when the Vice Presidential candidacy was fought out at the convention, but I also liked it when the President was as well. The current system seems to have led to people campaigning all the time. I would bet that within days of the election, the opposition party will start popping up candidates and they will start staking out positions. I truly dislike having the constant din of candidates all of the time.

Should we go back to "fighting it out at the conventions" rather than having primaries as we do now?

Robby

Robby,

I believe Primaries are expensive, under-attended in terms of voter numbers, and in the cases of the the late date in some states, unimportant. As far as I am concerned, they should be done away with.

I think it was you and Gary discussing the possibility of the Pres. and V.P. being of different parties----I just don't think that would work. We have enough trouble when the Administration is in a different party from the Majority party in Congress. No one would ever come to agreement on anything! The country would come to a standstill. Checks and Balances in a Two Party system are necessary but there has to be some cohesiveness somewhere in order for the business of the country to go forward.

Phyll

I have heard on several occasions in the last few days from a bunch of different people that they would be more comfortable if the VP candidates were the presidential candidates. This morning I listened to an interesting exchange in which one said he'd like to see the Democratic VP candidate (see, no names, Robby) be the presidential candidate and the Republican VP candidate be the VP candidate. The other guy agreed, except he said he would flip the two choices.

These thoughts, of course, are based on the individual men involved, I think. The actual logistics of a president of one party and the VP of another are another question. I can see advantages (checks and balances, etc.) and problems (priorities and actually getting anything accomplished, to name a couple). You can see these advantages and disadvantages played out when the president is of one party and the majority of Capitol Hill is of the other (and of course, I like it best when my party is in power in both places!) Ultimately, I think our present system works the best, rather than having a president of one party and a VP of the other.

No, I don't think we should go back to wide-open primaries, but...

I think the system doesn't serve "We, the People" very well, but I certainly don't have a better option to offer. It IS important that the presidential candidate choose the person he thinks he can best work with, etc. If that person has characteristics that complement his own (or her own, in some future, utopian world), all the better. On the other hand, if the VP candidate exactly reflects the presidential candidate, that may make the presidential candidate feel better, but I don't think it serves the people well.

Very tricky, Songbird! The leader of this discussion (see, no name!) wonders if there are any further reactions to deTocqueville's comment (above) starting with "The American Democracy frequently errs . . ."?

Robby

de Tocqueville ( see above )seems to have a very jaundiced view of American politicians, they being men of low morals and capacity! I think that view, and the contrary one are true of any group, everywhere. Each of us is a human being first, and a saint, second. As soon as some person moves into a public position, ' muck rakers ' immediately begin examining those persons' private lives, looking for moral flaws. I wonder why commentators persist in doing that? It is the policies and actions of politicians that should concern us.-- Trevor

I agree totally with your comments on muck raking. Muck raking is a very good way of distracting a proportion of the public from examining the real issues!

Carolyn

Every single one of you participants here is about to receive well-deserved praise in an unusual way. It is the usual procedure in Senior Net, after a forum has completed somewhere between 1000 and 1500 postings, to move it to an archive for efficient software reasons and to start a new "chapter" so to speak. Some discussion groups go on for months and months before this is necessary. Others never find it necessary. However, in just slightly over two months Democracy in America is approaching 1600 postings!! The degree of participation by every one here has been phenomenal!!

It is absolutely necesary, therefore, to archive what has been posted so far in this forum and in the next day or so, you will see a notice here asking you to click onto a Link leading you to the "new" Democracy in America. From our point of view, it will make no difference whatsoever. Our conversation will continue as if there had been no change. And for a while you will be able to go back to review the previous "chapter." It is extremely important, however, that you immediately scroll to the bottom of the new page and click onto the "SUBSCRIBE" button - otherwise you will suddenly wonder why Democracy in America no longer comes up.

Your active participation in this forum has made it the success that it is. You have earned this extraordinary type of tribute.

We have only just begun. America moves onward and your comments about its progress will continue to be as valuable as ever.

Robby

Hi Robby and others: Haven't been here for a very long time as we have been discussing Ben Bradlee, Editor of the Washington Post during the Watergate affair, and I think what he said is pertinent to this group at present. The press (the muckrakers) prior to Watergate were kinder to politicians, e.g., F.D.R., Kennedy, etc., but once Nixon and his lies were uncovered everyone in public office is a candidate for the "kerosene journalists" (as he dubbed those who inflate the smallest tidbit of gossip into scandal). Journalists want another Watergate and are eager to find anything that might lead them to that Holy Grail.

But often, I agree with DeToc, that we do entrust our affairs with inferior people who are just handsome, talk well, are persuasive but have no more ability than you or me. How can we judge?

We are beginning another discussion on October 15th, entitled LIES MY TEACHER TOLD ME, and the first chapter of the book deals with heroification which is defined as a degenerative process that makes people over into heroes.

We are all just human, past, present, future, with good and bad in each of us. There are no heroes anywhere, in my opinion, but in times of crises in this country we have been fortunate to have capable leaders - Lincoln, FDR.

Again I have to say "Hear Hear!" We are all human and flawed. My requirements of the politician I elect are, Capability, Intelligence, Statesmanship! A man or woman who are going to do their very best to see that all citizens get a fair go!

I have to say America does need a Statesman. To be such an influence in the world you must have a President who is articulate and able to act with great diplomacy, he must be also a man to whom other World leaders will be drawn to confide their problems and fears with trust.

CAROLYN

Since July 28th we have been slowly drifting down the mainstream of life in America examining the various faces that America has presented to us. The first event that came to our attention was a political convention on July 31st. Then came August, known in many families as "back-to-school" month, and a spirited discussion on education was held here with many points of view expressed. Then along came another political convention with continued comments by our always lively participants.

Labor Day presented itself with a resulting outpouring of comments about the meaning of that holiday and the present-day condition of the work force in America. That seemed to lead naturally into America's population as a whole and its multi-ethnic makeup. As we continued to float along on this mainstream, the scene of two political debates came into view and we have just concluded a lively debate of our own on the importance (or lack of importance) of those two events. Throughout this time we have constantly been referring to the comments of Alexis deTocqueville who in his book, "Democracy in America," made some exceedingly astute remarks which, although made 170 years ago, seem to be most relevant to our life today. We have also been enriched by the knowledgeable comments about Democracy shared by our many friends from Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

We look about us once again to see what face America is presenting to us and there up ahead we see a truly American holiday -- Columbus Day. What has this holiday meant in your personal life (if anything) either as a child or in your adult life? In our childhood it was always celebrated October 12th. This year it will be celebrated October 9th (day after tomorrow) because we now celebrate these holidays on a Monday. Does this bother you? How will you be celebrating that day? What about the rest of your family? Does the thought of Christopher Columbus himself have any meaning in your life? Please share your views on this.

Robby

Robby I dimly remember when in the lower grades the teachers use to make a big deal of Columbus Day as "the man who discoverd America" It never was a very big deal to me nor is it today...........

For the first time in eight years, Italian-Americans in the Denver area are organizing a Columbus Day parade. But the plans have met with such resistance from groups opposed to celebrating Columbus that Gov. Bill Owens says National Guard units will be available to assist the police if protests turn violent. Parade organizers say the time has come to stop bowing to threats and protests over the historical role of Columbus, denounced by American Indians and by large numbers of Hispanics who trace their ancestry to the Indians, as an enslaver and murderer of many native people he encountered.

Although the battle over Columbus has been joined elsewhere as well, other cities and some states have negotiated solutions. Alabama, like the country as a whole, celebrates the second Monday in October as Columbus Day, but it also makes that day American Indian Heritage Day. South Dakota celebrates Columbus Day as Native American Day, too. Vernon Bellecourt, a leader of the American Indian Movement, calls Columbus "a colonial pirate murderer" responsible for vast genocide. "For Indian Americans," he said, "celebrating and glorifying Columbus with a parade would be for Jewish people as if German-Americans celebrated an Adolf Hitler Day."

Is Columbus Day (a national holiday) a significant day as we celebrate the "discovery" of America or are we celebrating the wrong person?

Robby

I just posted about Columbus Day in the WREX Writing Exchange discussion in Writing, Language and Word Play and urged people there to come to this discussion and tell how they feel about this holiday.

When I was a kid I thought Columbus Day was very special because I loved the idea of Columbus discovering America. Now people are saying other things about Christopher Columbus, and the "myth" I believed seems no longer to be true. I know it bothered me when I first heard of Amerigo Vespucci and his expedition to what is now South America.

I agree that American Indians have the right to be very upset about what happened to them with the arrival of Columbus. It reminds me in a way, too, of what happened in St. Augustine when Pedro Menendez and his followers went there.

I'm sure there will be talk about these things in the discussion about Lies My Teacher Told Me. Were my teachers lying to me when they told me Columbus discovered America and led me to believe that this discovery was a wonderful thing?

Sometimes I wonder if we'll ever fathom the truth from the mounds of historical myths we were taught.

Mal

Lies my teacher told me! The coming of the British to NZ was not pretty either. It sounded so rosy all from one point of view of course. When I grew up it my sympathies were for the Indigenous People. How arrogant we were (me of British descent!) We sent the missionaries first to pave the way. Then we sent the Land Grabbers to rob them blind! This was only less than two hundred years ago!

I can see the story from the other side and my view often is not popular but I stand by my convictions that we did not act honorably in a lot of situations!

Carolyn

On January 1st of this year, Pope John-Paul II, in discussing the Millennium, singled out the discovery of America as a DEFINING EVENT OF THE PAST 1,000 YEARS. The Pope asked: "What event marked the millennium that has just finished?" and gave as an answer "the discovery of America, which opened a new era in the history of humanity." He continued; "What was the geography of countries, the situation of peoples and nations like 1,000 years ago? Who was aware of the existence of another great continent to the West of the Atlantic Ocean?"

Any reactions here to the discovery of America as being singled out as a "defining event of the past 1,000 years?"

Robby

By 1492, the year Columbus arrived, people had lived in the Western Hemisphere for tens of thousands of years. Millions of people lived in an area some five times the size of Europe. Throughout the hemisphere, states and centers of high civilization had risen and fallen. The dynamic Mexica (Aztec) and Inca empires were still expanding at this time and internal migration and warfare were common. The people did not see themselves as part of an entity and spoke hundreds of distinct languages.

In order to understand what came to be called America we are often dependent on European observations. Is the America that we know today a reflection primarily of Europe or do you believe that the nation that exists today shows characteristics of the original inhabitants?

Robby

I think you have definately got the European Influence. We have an influence from our indigenous people such as two official languages. We also have our Haka which is a challenge all our sports teams do on the field before playing. It is a war dance and stirs the hearts of all of the nation. I don't see that you have anything like these customs We now sing our national anthem first in our indigenous language and then in English. I think we could do more too!

I am of Scottish / English extraction and as a child was moved by the bagpipes. Now I am more moved by the Haka.

Do you have signs in your public offices in your indigenous peoples language? We do.

Carolyn

Carolyn is quite correct in her comments about British conquest of New Zealand and various other parts of the world, but surely this is what history is all about. 2000 years ago it was the Romans, before them the Greeks and back we go. The inhabitants of the British Isles were conquered by a succesion of European invaders culminating in the Norman conquest which started in 1066. The discovery of the Western Hemisphere in 1492 was just part of the European expansion. The W.H. had existed as long as Europe, and had been peopled by a variety of "tribes". They had all reached degrees of what we call civilisation, but what they had not discovered, was the means to travel around the world by sea. The Europeans had better weapons and they colonised and conquered the areas they "discovered". At that time news of the "discoveries" might take years to be known around Europe.

The worldwide instant communication we have today, makes it easy for us to feel guilt about what our forefathers might have done. I am sure the Romans, Greeks, etc. felt no guilt about the peoples they conquered and colonised, they were only interested in expansion as were the later europeans. When you consider that a 150 years ago it took about 8 days to cross the Atlantic and over a month to get from Europe to Australia and New Zealand, it was not easy to have an instant conscience about what was happening, because news of it was not available on CNN or the BBC.

Maybe it is the idea of Democracy, which has also become commonplace because of modern communication and education, that makes us realise how badly indigenous people have been and still are being treated by the "conquerors". As that song of the sixties said "What we need, is a great big melting pot"

Carolyn. We must have both been typing our posts at the same time, whilst our american friends were asleep

. I found your post 1537 as I posted mine. I am not going to re-type after all the agony of two fingered typing! Am I right in thinking that the Maori population in N.Z. is a much larger percentage of the total, than the Aboriginals are in Australia, or the Indians in the U.S.A.? That fact alone would make it more likely that two languages and cultures exist side by side. I think it is easy to judge history by the understanding we have today, when we should really judge it in the context of those times.

Thankyou Robby for guiding me to this place.I will follow the discussions with interest here from Denmark, and look forward to read the answers to the kiwi lady. Jorgen.

Hehehe we had part of that conversation earlier in this discussion kiwi lady. In 1847 the U. S. forces after a series of heavy engagements, entered Mexico City. Only after the resignation of Santa Anna did the United States negotiated the Treaty of Guadalupe Hildago in which Mexico ceded the Southwest region and California for $15 million.

That was only 150 years ago and many U S Americans have trouble with signs in spanish as well as Mexican-Americans speaking spanish to each other on the job or children learning in spanish much less the Indians various languages being converted into public signs. Although, I must say that would be a trick since there are so, so, so, many Indain langugaes. Each tribe has it's own language. We finally after 125 years had the Chief of the Bureau of Indian Affiars just this year apoligize for the nations behavior toward native people including the deplorable treatment of Indians by the Bureau.

Carolyn: Signs in indigenous language? To my knowledge we have no signs in the language of the American Indian. In fact, I don't believe the Indians had any written language. Perhaps someone else here has more information than I on signs in America in an indigenous language. And a war dance (Haka) done on the playing field before sporting events? And your New Zealand national anthem sung in your indigenous language as well as in English? And you, of Scottish-English extraction moved more by the Haka than by the bagpipes! This has been most inspirational to me, Carolyn, and I would say an example of pure democracy in action.

Pete helps us to back up for a moment and take a true perspective of our development. As he forcibly remind us -- It was only 150 years ago (a drop in the bucket compared to the 2000+ years of conquest by Greeks, Romans, variety of tribes, Norman invasion of the British Isles, etc.) that it took eight days to cross the Atlantic and a month to travel and carry news from England to New Zealand or Australia. Now it travels in nano-seconds. He suggests that we "judge history in the context of those times." -- P.S. Pete, if you are indeed a two-fingered typist, you do marvelously well!

Jorgen: A BIG welcome to you!! If I understand it correctly, Denmark is both a monarchy and a democracy. Please help us to understand how these two can stand side by side. As we examine Democracy in this forum, perhaps we are forgetting that there are many kinds of Democracy and that Democracy in America is only one form.

Yes, Barbara, I remember the Chief of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (who himself is an American Indian) apologizing to the indigenous tribes of the Unites States for its deplorable treatment over this past century. Do you or anyone here believe that the attitude of Americans will now begin to change? After hearing what Carolyn has to say about the attitude of New Zealanders, it would appear that America has a long way to go.

And so here we are in the United States preparing to "celebrate" the arrival of Christopher Columbus a bit over 500 years ago. Are we just celebrating a "conquest" led by one man? Or would you agree with Pope John-Paul II who said earlier this year that "the discovery of America was the defining event of the past 1,000 years."

Robby

	Share your thoughts with us!
	"No better study of a nation's institutions and culture than de Tocqueville's Democracy in America has ever been written by a foreign observer; none perhaps so good." (New York Times)