Integration

Integration: The Only Way it Can Work

View fullsize

The concepts of multiculturalism and integration are the darlings of the media and the subjects of many controversial social, economic and political exchanges. It’s certainly not a new one, since, going as far back as the fourth century AD, Aurelius Ambrosius, bishop of Milan and emperor of Rome, coined the expression: “When you are at Rome live in the Roman style; when you are elsewhere live as they live elsewhere.”  This more genteel precursor of “If you don’t like it here, go live somewhere else” implied: If you want or have to live somewhere else but your home country, you would do well to adjust to their ways, adapt to their customs, respect their laws, and learn their language.

The linguist in me would first like to point out that “cultural integration” means “The bringing of people of different racial or ethnic groups into unrestricted and equal association.” And “equal” means that all people, native or imported, have the same rights and obligations, responsibilities and privileges. Therefore, it excludes the option for newcomers to say “We want to live here but we won’t learn your language, will reject your customs, and refuse to respect your laws.”

On the one hand, it is a social and emotional necessity for all people to keep their original roots alive in order to define and preserve their personal identities. Having myself immigrated to the U.S. from France at 21, well over 50 years ago, I am certainly not xenophobic. From day one, I felt compelled to learn the language and understand the culture. I needed to feel that I belonged and to become independent enough to stop needing help at every turn to navigate through each day. While watching TV, I would make a list of all the words I didn’t understand, then look them up in my bilingual dictionary. I would do the same with newspapers and books, and also practice my pronunciation endlessly. At the same time, I never felt that this integration process was to the detriment of my attachment to my own culture and language.

On the other hand, it is a universal moral duty to incorporate less fortunate people into our respective societies. However, it should be a reciprocal agreement of mutual respect, as well as a joint commitment of mutual responsibility. The host nation gives immigrants the opportunity to avail themselves of all the advantages and benefits of living within its borders, and, in turn, immigrants do their best to adapt to its laws and customs -- including learning its language -- to become productive members of its society. It can and should be a win-win situation, as it was at the turn of the 20th century, when the huge wave of immigrants who came through Ellis Island greatly contributed to our country’s growth and prosperity.

Therefore, if the cultural heritage of all its people is to be given its deserved value in any society, the only way to build and maintain harmony and respect – therefore peace -- is to find the one common denominator that will unify and connect all members of a community or country. And language is the only such link available to any and all people, no matter where they were born, and regardless of their race, religion, gender, creed or color. It is a statement of belonging and unity, which will project a more benevolent image of immigrants onto the local people, who will tin turn be more inclined to consider each newcomer as “’one of us” instead of “one of them”.

However, flying in the face of a growing body of evidence, there are still people who believe it’s possible to preserve a strong sense of harmony and national unity despite an ever-increasing inflow of immigrants, without setting any limits or requirements. When those immigrants ignore local customs, speak only their own language, and follow only the laws of their native country, it’s time to heed Theodore Roosevelt’s injunction: “Every immigrant who comes here should be required within five years to learn English or leave the country. We might then be able to avoid the destructive unrest ubiquitous in European countries in the last few years, where nationals have started feeling like foreigners in their own country, invaded on their own turf.

I don’t see how integration can be a reality without the host country making learning the local language the first required step to being adopted into its local community and its culture. I realize it’s more difficult to learn a new language for adults and older people. But the immersion principle remains the same at any age: the more one hears and practices it, the faster one will learn to use it effectively by observing and imitating.

Once verbal  communication is established to ensure survival in a strange land, immigrants can start to grasp the nuances of idioms, to understand gestures and responses, and adopt the expected behaviors ordained by local customs. They then become able to interpret the many codes required to wade successfully through the maze of societal norms. None of which implies or requires imposing or renouncing their own, which they should be free and eager to preserve in their respective home environments. That is what really transforms an immigrant into a bi-cultural person.

As a corollary to my position, I believe it is necessary to make English the only official language in our country. And so not as a punitive measure towards immigrants, but as a means to promote their rapid integration while striving for the unity necessary for cohesion to reign in the land. Instead of offering Spanish or other versions of official printed documents and telephonic messages, it would be more productive to provide mandatory ESL classes to all adult immigrants as soon as they are settled. By the same token, citizenship should not be awarded to anyone who cannot reasonably well communicate verbally and in writing in the host country’s language.

As Emperor Aurelius said, when in Rome, do as the Romans do…