CSU: Immigrants should speak German at home, CDU says LOLwhat ?

[Famous Mortimer]

Monolingualism is objectively inferior to multilingualism if the one language isn't the language that everyone else around you speaks.

I do think ag made fair points about speaking at home though.

[Tender Branson]

You make me sick.

Well, under normal circumstances I wouldn't even bother to debate further with you because you clearly do not understand what I was talking about in this thread and I advise you to read it again. You clearly want to put me into a Nazi-corner, which is not warranted. You seem to be driven by Austria- and Germany hatred too. My position is in fact not much different to integration approaches of many center-left parties, who acknowledge certain problems within some parts of the immigrant community that need to be tackled. While speaking the new language at home as often as you can is not the solution that will solve every problem, it's a good start though. Your laissez-faire approach (and that of many in the center-left) often solves nothing and only intensifies the problems that immigrants face.

[palandio]

Well, the whole argument has been derailed a bit.

There are indeed some fears regarding a heterogenous society that cannot be entirely neglected: Conflicting loyalties, "parallel societies" with incompatible moral and political values etc.

But I think that children not learning their parents' mother tongue (that's what your approach is about, as far as I understand you) won't help in any regard. It might even harm them, because if their parents don't speak the local language properly, many children will only have come into contact with an inconsistent, reduced, expression-poor and grammar-poor language until they go into kindergarden.
I agree with you that immigrants should learn the local language and eventually adapt basic values compatible with the new environment. I just think that your proposal won't help.

In my opinion the language question is neither the problem nor part of the solution.
1) There is indeed a cultural problem with some immigrants. You see that it is not a linguistic problem because there are quite a lot immigrants that are culturally similar or assimilated but still bilingual.
2) There is a social and literacy problem not only with some immigrant communities, but also with parts of the growing non-immigrant lower class.

[ingemann]

Well, the whole argument has been derailed a bit.

There are indeed some fears regarding a heterogenous society that cannot be entirely neglected: Conflicting loyalties, "parallel societies" with incompatible moral and political values etc.

But I think that children not learning their parents' mother tongue (that's what your approach is about, as far as I understand you) won't help in any regard. It might even harm them, because if their parents don't speak the local language properly, many children will only have come into contact with an inconsistent, reduced, expression-poor and grammar-poor language until they go into kindergarden.
I agree with you that immigrants should learn the local language and eventually adapt basic values compatible with the new environment. I just think that your proposal won't help.

In my opinion the language question is neither the problem nor part of the solution.
1) There is indeed a cultural problem with some immigrants. You see that it is not a linguistic problem because there are quite a lot immigrants that are culturally similar or assimilated but still bilingual.
2) There is a social and literacy problem not only with some immigrant communities, but also with parts of the growing non-immigrant lower class.

Basically this.

The problem is that in order to adapt the people to society in correct way, would need a extensive linguistic education for the theacher, in order to understand the difficulties of the learner. Tender's  laissez-faire approach is problematic in solving the problem.

Clearly someone is changing Tender's post to something other than what I read, when you people read it, or laize faire mean something completely else to you,  like "not throwing a complete hysterial hissy fit, when politicians suggest that it's a good idea that the parents help their children learning the official language of the land they live in".

Tender's post in this thread at worst have been moderate heroic, if we have to say something bad about his posts. But mostly I see a person, who try to set this in context and explain, when something have been translated wrong. While the other side mix strawmen, with rampant racism and bigoted verbal assaults on Tender based on his etnicity.

[ag]

Tender's post in this thread at worst have been moderate heroic, if we have to say something bad about his posts. But mostly I see a person, who try to set this in context and explain, when something have been translated wrong. While the other side mix strawmen, with rampant racism and bigoted verbal assaults on Tender based on his etnicity.

I do not find his "corrected" and "properly translated" version any less objectionable than the original. Especially given his comment about talking English at home if he immigrates to the US - that clarifies his meaning enough for me.

Once again, I do not object to CSU, I object to the position of Tender Branson in this thread.

[Peter the Lefty]

I didn't say "all Jews are rich" I said generally Jews are not impoverished like semi-literate Middle Easterners. I will stand by that statement.

As it's been said, you need to check up on your European History.  You are referring to a specific time period, so I suggest you actually try to know something about said time period before making up statements about it.

[Yeahsayyeah]

Tender, the main thing is, that "jemanden zu etwas anhalten" which was the wording of the original proposal etwas anderes ist als "jemanden zu etwas ermutigen".

[Tender Branson]

Tender, the main thing is, that "jemanden zu etwas anhalten" which was the wording of the original proposal etwas anderes ist als "jemanden zu etwas ermutigen".

Not according to the "Duden":

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course a matter of interpretation: Some might interpret it as "do it, or be punished !" and some might interpret it as "encourage". I'm one of the latter ones.