Re: a discussion on OIT: attention moderator

--- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
. . .

> > > >
> > > > Look at how Third World dictatorship create
> enemies
> > > > through linguistic differences and thereby
> prop up
> > > > their regimes. On the other hand, Latin
> America is a
> > > > failure because linguistics was not strong
> enough to
> > > > hold it together. Geography defeated it.
>
> Ethnicity defeated it. Hispanic America still
> contains those tribes
> that were obliterated in Angol America. You can't
> expect them to feel
> a common solidarity just because they switched to a
> new language.

I disagree. I live in El Salvador and neither I nor
any Salvadoran can distinguish between most Central
Americans --unless they speak with a real
stereotypical accent and use off the wall words and
expressions linked to specific regions. In all of
Latin America, the linguistic diversity is about the
same as the US and certainly less than Germany or
Italy. In fact, if someone from any Latin American
country speaks in a neutral, middle class accent no
one would know where they're from.
There are countries like Colombia where there are
extremes of ethnic diversity and regional accents and
yet they do function as countries. Colombia probably
as much diversity than the rest of Latin America put
togther.
The Native American identities have been surpressed
ever since the conquest and only in the Bolivia,
Ecuador, Guatemala, Paraguay and Peru are there
meaningful Indigenous communities large enough to
define the nation. Even in those countries, they are
submerged and isolated. In the Caribbean and other
regions, there is a large percentage of the population
of African ancestry but they have almost completely
fused into an Afro-Hispanic culture that has
influenced much of the rest of the Spanish-speaking
world. So culture was not the issue, given that the
elites of all of Latin America shared a common
simulacrum of Hispanic culture. Geography impeded
communication to the degree that local thugs were able
to set up their own governments. And there were many
local thugs who failed --the failed states of Los
Altos, Zacatecas, Yucatan, Las Guayas, etc.

>
>
> > > > North America
> > > > was defeated by ideology: Tories vs. Yankees.
>
> The American Revolution took place before
> Romanticism and with it
> linguistics became an issue.
>
> > > > If linguistics had triumphed, the US would
> include Canada
> > > > and Quebec would probably be another
> Louisiana.
>
> You just couldn't wait to get your democracy, could
> you? ;-) Another
> 100-150 years and Canada had been yours, in orderly
> fashion.

And maybe with a better system than in the US

>
> > > > Yet the historical moment seemed to dictate
> whether or not
> > > > linguistics, geography or ideology would
> prevail.
> > >
> > >
> > > Again, I'm not sure what you and Torsten mean by
> "linguistics" in
> > > these statements. In regard to Latin America
> and North America, I
> > > think you're referring to shared language,
> language identity as
> > > opposed to political identity. But I don't see
> why
> > > Quebec should become another Louisiana just
> because it would be
> > > surrounded by U.S. English speakers rather than
> Canadian English
> > > speakers ("if linguistics had triumphed"). Or
> maybe I'm being too
> > > critical.
> > >
> > > Andrew
> >
> > As a significant part of Canada, Quebec was able
> to
> > maintain its language and culture. Louisiana, as a
> > miniscule part of the US, was completely swamped
> and
> > forced to adopt English. The Quebecois often
> complain
> > about their fate in Canada. Whatever the merits of
> > that argument, their fate would have been
> > significantly worse as part of the US --in
> cultural
> > and linguisitc terms. Millions of New Englanders
> and
> > others are of Quebecois ancestry but the French
> > language AFAIK, doesn't even make it across the
> > border. I lived for a year in NY on the Quebecois
> > border where almost everyone was of Quebecois
> ancestry
> > and none of them spoke a word of French, although
> > Quebec was right next to them.
>
> By the time Canada received (not took) its
> independence, the
> Quebequois had had time to get their victim story
> together (Acadia,
> Angeline etc), and Romanticism flourished in England
> too.
>
>
> Torsten
>
>
>
>