Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Northman. (Portland, Or.) 1920-192? | View Entire Issue (May 13, 1920)
4 te og demokratiske samfund. Universal- begreber som frihed og retfserdighed ud- basunertes som af amerikansk oprindelse. Nordmsend og andre oplyste indvandrere maatte uvilkaarlig smile ad de naive, men tilsyneladende for friheden begeistrede indf0dtes paastande. Begeistringen var for en god sag, og det var bedre at vise sig godmodig og overbaerende end at stille sig i kamplysten Opposition. Hvilken forandring er ikke skeet paa nogen faa aar ? Nu h0res der lidet om ret og retfserdighed for alle. Men meget h0res om “the damned foreigners” og alt deres väesen og i sserdeleshed da deres aviser i de sprog de bedst kan forstaa. Den saakaldte “frem.medsprog”-presse for- d0mmes som om den var en pest for lan det og et djsevelens verk. Alle fremmedf0dte og alle aviser, som benytter andre sprog end det engelske, kjsemmes over en kam. De beskyldes for at vsere “r0de”, de beskyldes for at staa i ledtog med radikale ophidsere mod det be- staaende samfund og forfatningen, de be skyldes for at ha bragt med sig fra andre lande samfundsfarlige lseresaetninger, de beskyldes for at vaere baade “t0rre” og “vaade” paa en og samme tid og derved at foraarsage aengstelse blandt dem, som arbeider for drikkeondets udryddelse, og for den uro, som eksisterer blandt arbei- derne som f01ge af, at de ikke faar nyde sin regelmaessige 01 og dram. F0r var det saa, at Republikanerne altid beskyldte Demokraterne for de “daarlige tider” i landet, og hvis farmernes avling ikke slog til deres forhaabninger, saa var det det politiske parti, der var ved magten, som fik skylden. Det er leit, at vi har levet saa laenge i vildfarelse, og at sandheden saa sent er kommet frem, men efter det gamle princip “bedre sent end aldrig” vil nok de fremmedf0dte herefter faa skylden for altsammen. Det er mildest talt skammelig at tserike paa, at enkelte baade Nordmsend og Svensker er faldt for fristelsen og tilladt sig at bli rasende kraftpatrioters haand- gangne msend i dette meningsl0se angreb paa deres eget og andre indvandreres morsmaal. Hvilken ufornuft, t hvilken uvidenhed, hvilken mangel paa forstaaelse af vaerdier, hvilken usseldom! Det virker forfriskende at h0re en ind- f0dt Amerikaners mening om fremmed sprogpressen og dens mission blandt vore indvandrede folkeslag. Det b0r erindres at ikke alle Amerikanere er Anglo-Ameri- kanere, tiltrods for at det sprog, som er blit landets sprog, oprindelig stammer fra England. Det engelske sprog, som idag tales i Amerika, er ikke det samme som det, der tales i England. St0rre og st0rre vil forskj eilen bli efter som udviklingen skrider frem. Danskerne fors0gte i sin tid med sit sprog at fordanske Norge. Det gik ikke. Ligesaa lidet vil det nytte til- bederne af alt britisk at “forengelske” Amerika. De indvandrede har ret til at tale sit morsmaal og ha sine aviser i sit eget sprog. Retten er medf0dt, og den kan ingen ta fra dem. Mr. Fred Clayton Butler, der er chef for amerikaniseringsvirksomheden i Indrede- partementets Bureau of Education, Wash ington, D. C., skriver blandt andet om fremmedsprogpressen i et af Departemen- tets nylig udgivne flyveskrifter, Bulletin 1919, No. 77, f01gende: “Fremmedsprogpressen er et stört og kräftig middel til sine Iseseres oplysning. Der findes vistnok fiere millioner menne- sker her i landet som tilfredsstillende kun g ||||| M IMB THE NORTHMAN kan lsese deres eget sprog. At 0delaegge dette, det eneste middel hvorigjennem vi bar anledning at bringe frem vore tanker for disse mennesker, vilde vsere daarskab. En smule eftertanke vil vise, hvor vanske- lig det vilde vsere, at forbyde udgivelsen af aviser og tidsskrifter i fremmede sprog. Det vilde da bli n0dvendig at forbyde ind- f0rselen af b0ger og alt andet, som ikke var trykt paa engelsk. Mange af verdens st0rste mesterverker vilde bli banlyst fra vort land. Vore videnskabsmsend og kunstnere vilde bli rene provinsmennesker og isoleret fra verden. Det er 0rkesl0st at tale om, at noget saadant kunde ske i Amerika”. Ja mon det? Vi faar se hvordan det gaar med loven i Oregon og de andre an greb paa tale og pressefriheden baade i og udenfor kongressen i Washington. Mr. Butlers udtalelser vidner ialfald om forstaaelse og sund fornuft. Naar sagen vedkommer de indvandrede er dette i dis se tider et sjeldent fsenomen. Derfor skal han nsevnes. Men krigens efterd0n- ninger, dumhed, uvidenhed, daarskab, selvgodhed, trangsynthed og begeistret kraftpatriotisme f01es fremdeles kraftig. H. SUNDBY-HANSEN. American Red Cross. Bureau of Foreign Language Information Service. —■Norwegian Section No. 589 THE FOREIGN LANGUAGE PRESS. In a cpuntry like the United States where the immigrated part of the inhabi tants make up so great a proportion of the population that the figures reach into several millions, the means of expression in other languages than English is abso lutely necessary. Among the immigrants of the first generation there is a contin uousness of several millions who are not capable of speaking the English language and who can read and write satisfactorily only in their mother tongue. These people are, broadly speaking, good and just folk who wish to live in peace, labor, build their homes, and educate their children to be good American citizens. It is a breach in American conception of social order and justice to “make racial distinctions.” Why, then, separate the foreign-born from the others? Who has made this breach ? Surely not the . immi grant. If you, for instance, regard the Norwegian, Swedish and Danish part of our population, we find that they came to this country, for the greater part, with the best intentions, and a clearly defined sense of justice. They had great hopes. They were en thused over America—its great economic possibilities, its free constitution, its com mon welfare and the presumed absence of the prejudices that existed here. Early and late it was piped into their ears that this is Liberty’s Land; this is the temple of justice. Nobody would ask what you w e r e—only what sort of a man or woman you are. Prejudice against all the old should be banished from this free, enlightened and Democratic sodality. The universal conception of liberty and justice was trumpeted as of American origin. Norwegian and other intelligent im migrants necessarily had to smile at the naive, but apparent enthusiasm of the na tive born’s conception of liberty. The en thusiasm was for a good cause, and it was better to appear generous and tolerant, than to assume a belligerent attitude. What a change has taken place in only May 13, 1920 a few years! Now very little is heard about right and justice for all. But much is heard about the ‘damned foreigners” and all their activities, and especially their publications in the language they can best understand. The so-called “foreign language” press is condemned as if it was a pest to the country and the work of the devil. All the foreign-born and all papers that are using languages other than the English are raked with one comb. They are accused of being “red.” They are accused of be ing in league with the radicals making inflammatory utterances against the existing social order and constitution. They are accused of having brought with them from the old countries teachings dangerous to society. They are accused of being both “dry” and “wet” at one and the same time, and thereby causing anxiety among those who labor for the abolition of the evil of intemperance, and for the unrest that exists among the labor ing element as a result of their not being able to enjoy the customary dram or draught of beer. Formerly it was so that the Republicans always accused the Demo crats of being responsible for the “hard times” in the country, and if the farmer's crop did not come up to expectations, then it was the political party in power that received the blame. It is too bad that we have so long dwelt in error and that the truth has so recently become known, but according to the old proverb, “better late than never,” the . foreign-born will no doubt hereafter get the blame for all. It is, mildly speaking, shameful to think that some, both Norwegians and Swedes, have fallen to the temptation and allowed themselves to become willing helpers of the raving, pervert-patriots, in this meaningless attack on their own, and other immigrants’ mother tongues. How monstrous! What ignorance! What lack of conception of values! What nig gardliness ! It is refreshing to hear the native born American copception of the foreign lan guage press and its mission among the immigrated races. It must be remem bered that not all Americans are Anglo- Americans in spite of the fact that the language, that has become the country’s language, originated in England. The Eng lish language that is today spoken in America is not the same as that spoken in England. Greater and greater will the difference be as our development pro gresses. The Danes in their time through their language tried to “Danacize” Nor way. That did not go. No more will it profit the worshippers of all things British to attempt to “Anglicize” America. The immigrant has a right to speak his mother tongue and to have his newspapers in his own language. This is a birthright, and no one can take it from them. Mr. Fred Clayton Butler, who is chief of Americanization activities of the Bureau of Education, Department of the Interior, Washington, D. C. writes among other things in one of the department’s recently issued bulletins. 1919, No. 77, as follows: “The foreign language press is a great and strong medium for the general en lightenment of its readers. There is found probably several million people in this country who can satisfactorily read only their own language. To destroy this, the only medium through which we have opportunity to bring forth our thoughts to these people would be folly. A little