Lieber Johannes,
ich schreibe Dir privat, weil ich keine Lust mehr habe, diese Diskussion auf der
LI-Liste fortzuführen. Nur soviel. Ich stimme Dir hier (wie ja auch sonst
meistens) im allgemeinen zu. Allerdings ist es nicht nur im Interesse der
Bourgeoisie, daß die Immigranten die Mehrheitssprache lernen, sondern ebensosehr
in dem der Arbeiterbewegung. Trotzki schrieb am 10.5.1930 (ich zitiere aus der
engl. Ausgabe)in einem 'letter to Klorheit and to the Jewish workers in
France':"...Do the Jewish workers in France, in theirmajority,consider
themselves permanent immigrants,ordio they< expect to leavethe country in the
near future? I believe the first is more correct.If this is the case, it is very
important toacquire the French language. In the givensituation,this is not only
in the interest of each person, but also in the political interest of the French
andinternational working class." Für das Nicht-Lernen der Sprache oder für das
sichvonder unterdrückerischen Gesellschaft Abschließen gibt es alle möglichen
nachvollziehbaren Gründe, aber es ist 'selfdefeating' und nicht progressiv. Es
ist z.B. nicht progressiv, wenn die Chefs türkischer 'linker' Gruppen (wie mir
aus glaubhafter türkischer Quelle mehrfach versuchert wurde) ihre rank § file
Mitglieder nicht nur nicht auffordern, Deutsch zu lernen, sondern sie daran zu
hindern versuchen. Der Hintergrund war im allgemeinen ein doppelter:
1.Abhängigkeit von den Führern, die natürlich Deutsch lernten, 2. Zusammenhalt
'linker' Gruppen,die nationalistisch praktisch ausschließlich auf die Türkei
orientiert waren.
Beste Grüße, Lothar
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
> Nestor wrote:
>
> > But the basic question is "why does not the German
> > formation work in order to have these migrants learn German?". In
> > Argentina, European migrants were very proud that they did not speak
> > the same language that the unworthy locals, but the Argentine
> > formation took the pains to educate them into our own language, and
> > if not themselves their children were lucky not only to learn Spanish
> > but also to attain a higher level of education they would have ever
> > attained in Europe. There was an interest of the Argentinian ruling
> > classes to include those newcomers into the country. There does not
> > seem to exist such an interest among the German ruling classes today.
>
> I have been away from any computer for a few days so I could not comment
> on the 'language' discussion. As I have stated before anything relating to
> immigration is in my opinion of key signifigance for revolutionaries in
> imperialist countries. Unfortunately the discussion heres has got a
> personalized
> tone sometimes, and I fear comrades outside Germany got a wrong impression
> about reality in Germany.
>
> Actually there are very few immigrants who do not know enough German to
> communicate. Almost any job in Germany will need at least very basic German
> language skills, only in very few jobs (cleaning, kitchen) you can get along
> without any German.
>
> Furthermore there are no 'ghettos' in the US-American sense of the word.
> There are several resons for this fact. Due to the industrial structure of
> Germany distribution of immigrants is relativly even (e.g. compared to the
> UK). Immigration to Germany is coming from several countries, all having
> different languages, thus simply the 'critical' mass of forming a national
> ghetto
> lacked. When Germans refer to certain inner city areas as ghettos, its just
> a neighborhood with a high percentage of immigrants from different nations,
> but even there the 'lingua franca' will be German.
>
> Generally the ruling class in Germany has a economic interest that the
> immigrants learn German, thats why there is state funding for language
> classes.
> The reason is obvious: most jobs require at least some German. After all
> one of the economic benefit (for the capitalist class) of immigration lies in
> the fact that almost no education has to be paid for, since immigrants
> usually arrive, when having finished their eductation in their home
> countries. So
> paying for just a language course is a very cheap way of geting a fully
> educated worker.
>
> Of course there are immigrants who do not know any German and even did not
> try (or get a chance) to learn it. Mostly they are women from the first
> generation of immigrants. Generally they came a few years later than their
> husbands and never intended to work in Germany. Given their daily life, they
> simply dont see much profit from learning a more or less difficult language at
> their age. From their perspective (opposed to the perspective of a German
> university graduate) a not so stupid decission.
>
> >From the discussion I got the impression Anton (and Nestor at least in the
> case of Argentina) are favouring the idea of some compulsory language
> courses for immigrants. Let me say I oppose this for various reasons. The
> first
> one is just a practical one: I dont think you will make much progress in
> subject you are just forced to study, especially learning languages needs
> some
> sort of effort from the student if there should be any success.
>
> The second reason why I oppose compulsory language classes is political:
> In the present discussion in Germany 'language' just stands for 'integration'
> a term hated by most immigrants in Germany today. I will show in a
> seperate post, why 'integration' is the key bourgeois ideology in the field of
> immigration in Germany today.
>
> Johannes
>
> --
> Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leninist-International mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
> http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international
_______________________________________________
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international
