Should would-be citizens have to learn the National Anthem?

[RandBlade]

Wow, you are a diehard asshole. With all the collapsing, oppressive, ruined, regimes on your side of the world, the best response you have to the people coming to your country is have pre-existing financial substance and education or GTFO? Absolulety zero understanding of how a country could invest in these people for a greater return later on? Zero understanding of how not supporting these people, who are already in your country, is only going to cause problems for your natural citizens?

WTF

I believe that I'm being more generous than most of the public.

With "all the collapsing, oppressive, ruined regimes" across the world (not sure about my side of it specifically?) the response of most seems to be to close the borders.
I'd open the borders and welcome with open arms any poor and huddled masses who want to work hard and build themselves an opportunity. I would legalise anyone here, allow them to work rather than refusing them the rights to work as they're an "illegal immigrant" as is currently the case.

I would not however write a blank cheque for anyone who wants to come here. Why is that "diehard asshole"? Are we supposed to invite anyone and everyone from the entire world to come here as they choose with both an open border and a blank cheque for them all? You can't see any problems with that?

What is your solution for those currently in the "collapsing, oppresive, ruined regimes" who would love an opportunity to come here and graft and make a name for themselves but the border is closed to them? Asshole.

My other part of my "open borders" policy is that its a welcome to the law-abiding. Anyone who commits any crimes would after their sentence is served get a free one-way ticket back to where they came from with no right of return.

[Nessus]

Wow, you are a diehard asshole. With all the collapsing, oppressive, ruined, regimes on your side of the world, the best response you have to the people coming to your country is have pre-existing financial substance and education or GTFO? Absolulety zero understanding of how a country could invest in these people for a greater return later on? Zero understanding of how not supporting these people, who are already in your country, is only going to cause problems for your natural citizens?

WTF

Nation states are not welfare agencies to the Third World. (Or the former Second, for that matter.) How much of an 'investment' is a society supposed to make towards people who have never seen a toilet bowl, or a hammer? What sort of time-table do you think we'll have on a return for that 'investment'?

I have absolutely zero understanding or sympathy to the idea that advanced, well-managed nation states should house, feed and educate gratis hordes of uncultured, wildly breeding non-contributors just because they have a nicer, milky coffee complexion.

Your logic seems, also, rather bass-ackwards. How exactly is taking in all these mongrels going to solve the Eurodämmerung? As Randy said, those capable of working in a highly technological society are more than welcome; more than half the people I work with are foreigners. But they've shown their worth by having advanced degrees and decent CVs. The Romany woman begging outside my door, however, is a completely worthless mouth that the Finnish state should categorically not feed. And if these, already in my country, worthless mouths begin making trouble for the Finnish populace, they should be shot. It isn't any more complicated than that.

[Ominous Gamer]

I believe that I'm being more generous than most of the public.

With "all the collapsing, oppressive, ruined regimes" across the world (not sure about my side of it specifically?) the response of most seems to be to close the borders.
I'd open the borders and welcome with open arms any poor and huddled masses who want to work hard and build themselves an opportunity. I would legalise anyone here, allow them to work rather than refusing them the rights to work as they're an "illegal immigrant" as is currently the case.

But we aren't talking about the pubic, or closed borders. We are talking about current immigration policies. All you did here was suggest that you may be a slightly less diehard asshole than the rest of the UK public. Congrats?

It takes more than the ability or willingness to work in order to succeed. Especially when you're coming from an area that treated you as subhuman, or didn't have the resources for someone to reach that ability. It takes time. What are these people supposed to do as they wait for those first couple of paychecks? Where are they supposed to live (this is usually required before a job), what do they eat?

I would not however write a blank cheque for anyone who wants to come here. Why is that "diehard asshole"? Are we supposed to invite anyone and everyone from the entire world to come here as they choose with both an open border and a blank cheque for them all? You can't see any problems with that?

No one mentioned a blank check, or even hinted at them.

I'm glad we cleared that up

My other part of my "open borders" policy is that its a welcome to the law-abiding. Anyone who commits any crimes would after their sentence is served get a free one-way ticket back to where they came from with no right of return.

Which is the catch, cause your stance would sooner create prostitutes than educators, plumbers, firemen, etc.

[RandBlade]

But we aren't talking about the pubic, or closed borders. We are talking about current immigration policies. All you did here was suggest that you may be a slightly less diehard asshole than the rest of the UK public. Congrats?

It takes more than the ability or willingness to work in order to succeed. Especially when you're coming from an area that treated you as subhuman, or didn't have the resources for someone to reach that ability. It takes time. What are these people supposed to do as they wait for those first couple of paychecks? Where are they supposed to live (this is usually required before a job), what do they eat?

If someone doesn't have the finances to last a few weeks here, why are they coming? But if people want to choose to give to charities that help people for their first few weeks here then that's fine. I'm quite in favour of tax relief for charitable donations too, so the government can help there too.

No one mentioned a blank check, or even hinted at them.

OK, so what's spending limit you put on the cheque per person then?

Which is the catch, cause your stance would sooner create prostitutes than educators, plumbers, firemen, etc.

Well given that I believe prostitution should be legalised, I wouldn't deport for that. If the people coming over are as ignorant and uneducated as you are implying then why on earth would you want them to educators?

[Aimless]

So I take it you'd abolish History lessons at schools then Minx?

If you've read my post you should be able to realise that I'd much rather abolish anthem-lessons


But, in all honesty, I think I would like to cut down a little on history. Not because history is unimportant but rather because I'd like for most kids to get the time required for them to have a better understanding of fewer but more important parts of their country's history. That being said, time in school is limited and I wouldn't mind if some of those hours of history were instead dedicated to statistics, probability, personal finances and possibly practical psychology. Anthems? Nah.

[RandBlade]

I never had an anthem lesson, but we did have one lesson a week dedicated to the School Assembly and we sang the anthem at Assembly. Do you have an objection to that?

[Aimless]

I never had an anthem lesson, but we did have one lesson a week dedicated to the School Assembly and we sang the anthem at Assembly. Do you have an objection to that?

Nope, but if someone'd threatened to fail or expel you for failing to sing the anthem, or maybe just suspend you, or say you can't eat in the school cafeteria, well I'd have had a problem with that.

[wiggin]

I fail to see why we can't expect people to learn a minimal amount of both. There are government-sponsored programs for people to study for these exams.

If I was making up a list of things people should know to 'get' the United States, our anthem would be laughably far down the list, and many other things not included on the citizenship tests would be higher on the list. Why the obsession with a largely irrelevant song? It's completely unimportant from the perspective of integration.

That's entirely irrelevant. A national anthem is a key aspect of a country's identity; it doesn't matter what the words in it are. And FYI, though it wasn't the official anthem of the US, the Star-Spangled Banner was arguably the most popular song in the US for nearly two century.

I respectfully disagree that this is a key aspect of our identity. I suspect we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

As far as patriotic anthems actually talking about the nation I think you can't get much better than Advance Australia Fair - though one can definitely challenge some of the claims in it that's beside the point. It was only made official national anthem in '84.

Yeah, I was thinking about mentioning it. Bit of a manifest destiny kind of feel to it, but definitely more relevant than many anthems out there.

Either way though, even if one can over-analyse an anthem and say that lyrically it is not the most fitting any nation is free to change its anthem whenever they want - but a would-be citizen wanting to join it should learn it and feel a sense of pride with it. It is part of what goes with the country and that is what should matter, it is not the anthem itself but what it represents. There is a reason the anthems are played at sporting events, medal ceremonies etc

Like with Loki above, I disagree. We're trying to turn knowledge of an anthem into some sort of litmus test or lower bar for patriotism, when it simply isn't. I want my fellow citizens to have pride in the Constitution, in the principles of freedom (whether personal, political, or economic), in our place in the world. I couldn't care less what they think about our (admittedly awful) anthem.

PS off-topic but query for Loki and wiggin - There are regular calls here for England to get its own official anthem (we normally use God Save The Queen but that's the UK's not England's). At the Commonwealth Games we now use Jerusalem as that topped a popular poll to find out what we should use and that regularly is one of the favourites to become our national anthem. One issue oft raised is that the Israeli's would be offended if we used Jerusalem as our official national anthem, do you think that would be an issue? Or would they shrug their shoulders and not care?

*shrugs* I'm sure you'll be able to find someone who would be offended by anything, but I doubt Israelis (or Palestinians, for that matter) would take much issue with it. It's hardly laying a claim to Jerusalem, it's clearly just metaphorical. In fact, this hymn is hardly the first or last time when Anglos have viewed their homeland through a Biblical lens. Very obviously in the US, it's clear that many of the English-speaking immigrants in the 17th/18th century felt very strongly that they were coming to a promised land, and the place names (and written documents) demonstrate that very well. It became even more extreme in the genesis of the LDS church, of course. In the UK, the curious belief in 'British Israel' is more peculiar and amusing than anything else, but it also attests to this idea of the homeland as a transplanted Israel.

Most Israelis are completely unaware of this reality, but when they are apprised of it, they are mostly mildly amused or interested, not offended. The two potential groups who could be offended are either Greater Israel zealot types or the Ultra-Orthodox. Since they're both a bit hard to predict, I don't know for sure how they'd react, but I'm inclined to think that the Greater Israel types would realize it's metaphorical and ignore it, and the Ultra-Orthodox probably wouldn't even care.

If that had been the anthem during the Mandate, though, it probably would have had a much more significant import and symbolism.

[RandBlade]

Nope, but if someone'd threatened to fail or expel you for failing to sing the anthem, or maybe just suspend you, or say you can't eat in the school cafeteria, well I'd have had a problem with that.

Not singing - not just causing a disruption - was against school policy and grounds for detention. A Jewish friend of mine was given detention because he left his Hymn Book at home and didn't bring it to [the school's Anglican Christian] Chapel.

[Aimless]

I am reminded of:



and of course:

http://discworld.wikia.com/wiki/Ankh-Morpork#Anthem

[Aimless]

Not singing - not just causing a disruption - was against school policy and grounds for detention. A Jewish friend of mine was given detention because he left his Hymn Book at home and didn't bring it to [the school's Anglican Christian] Chapel.

I suppose that can help me understand something about the origin of your bizarre stance on this matter looks like there's some use for history after all.

[RandBlade]

I suppose that can help me understand something about the origin of your bizarre stance on this matter looks like there's some use for history after all.

In hindsight I look back and think I had very good and a lucky education. I objected at the time to having to go to Chapel and sit through Bible readings while at school, having to sing the Aussie anthem despite being a Brit etc - now I'm still not keen on the Bible readings but I believe the sense of community and patriotism - even for guests of the nation not seeking citizenship - was a good thing.

[Flixy]

I would like to add that even most of the proud-to-be-dutch not-wanting-immigrants here have trouble with the anthem, I think. Or at least with more than the first verse Which is about having German blood and serving the Spanish king...

[Lebanese Dragon]

Let's change our focus for a bit here, this debate has gotten hung up on the "anthem" and not the more fundamental question.

Do we simply want our immigrants to know the basics of how to live in our society (laws, knowledge of how to get a job, customs, safety etc...) or is it important that they also know a history of who we are? Does knowing that history make for a better citizen? Or is it something we want for the sake of passing down our identity to all who live here.

[RandBlade]

Let's change our focus for a bit here, this debate has gotten hung up on the "anthem" and not the more fundamental question.

Do we simply want our immigrant to know the basics in how to live in our society (laws, knowledge of how to get a job, customs, safety etc...) or is it important that they know a history of who we are? Does knowing that history make for a better citizen? Or is it something we want for the sake of passing down our identity to all who live here.

Or should we make sure they know both. Nobody is saying that things like the anthem are the only things needed to know.

Incidentally my initial point too wasn't about whether or not the anthem is useful - its about people objecting to it because it is against their beliefs.

[Lebanese Dragon]

Or should we make sure they know both. Nobody is saying that things like the anthem are the only things needed to know.

The first part of how to function in that society we want for sure, but how important is knowing your countries history?

[LittleFuzzy]

And how would the answers differ if they were to immigrate to France or Belgium? You're not providing any reason at all for these people to feel close to England/Britain.

Well they're all in the EU anyway, right?

If you've read my post you should be able to realise that I'd much rather abolish anthem-lessons


But, in all honesty, I think I would like to cut down a little on history. Not because history is unimportant but rather because I'd like for most kids to get the time required for them to have a better understanding of fewer but more important parts of their country's history. That being said, time in school is limited and I wouldn't mind if some of those hours of history were instead dedicated to statistics, probability, personal finances and possibly practical psychology. Anthems? Nah.

*declares war*

[Lebanese Dragon]

Well they're all in the EU anyway, right?



*declares war*

I'm not really into the discussion of if history should be taught in schools. For me that's an obvious yes... human history is incredibly important, and if taught correctly it's less about dates and places than it is about circumstances and their outcomes. (motives, goals, actions, reactions)

[Ominous Gamer]

If someone doesn't have the finances to last a few weeks here, why are they coming?

If you're serious with this question, well...the answer is in the question. Chance at a better life, escaping horrible or oppressive behavior. Maybe its cause we deal with Cuba's runaways all the time, but I'm dumbfounded you're asking this.

OK, so what's spending limit you put on the cheque per person then?

I have no idea what your cost of living is, or how wildly it varies across your country. I think the more important question would be, what stipulations should be tied to the support?

Well given that I believe prostitution should be legalised, I wouldn't deport for that. If the people coming over are as ignorant and uneducated as you are implying then why on earth would you want them to educators?

convenient, legalise the most likely profession you're going to end forcing them into. I like that idea

and educators were just one example; but there is something to be said about the amazing effects a quality education has in removing one's ignorance, without removing their experiences.

[GGT]

Incidentally my initial point too wasn't about whether or not the anthem is useful - its about people objecting to it because it is against their beliefs.

So, you'd be okay if they memorize some words to pass a "test" (which most anyone can do), but you're not okay with them saying the lyrics don't reflect their beliefs? Wouldn't you rather they know the text and have an opinion, than just rote memorizing some meaningless words...to pass a test?

[RandBlade]

So, you'd be okay if they memorize some words to pass a "test" (which most anyone can do), but you're not okay with them saying the lyrics don't reflect their beliefs? Wouldn't you rather they know the text and have an opinion, than just rote memorizing some meaningless words...to pass a test?

I'm not OK with it being removed because its against their beliefs. I'm happy for it to be removed because other things are more important etc ... but if you come to the country you don't get to pick and choose which bits of it to accept based on your beliefs and reject everything else.

[Aimless]

Let's baptize the lot of 'em while we're at it

[Steely Glint]

You're not providing any reason at all for these people to feel close to England/Britain.

Learn this:

God save our gracious Queen,
Long live our noble Queen,
God save The Queen

Send her victorious,
Happy and glorious,
Long to reign over us:
God save The Queen.

O Lord, our God, arise,
Scatter her enemies,
And make them fall.
Confound their politics,
Frustrate their knavish tricks,
On Thee our hopes we fix,
God save us all.

Thy choicest gifts in store,
On her be pleased to pour;
Long may she reign:
May she defend our laws,
And ever give us cause
To sing with heart and voice
God save The Queen!

Now do you feel British?

[Aimless]

Confound their politics,
Frustrate their knavish tricks,

my favourite lines in a national anthem

[ar81]

I do not see what's wrong with "God save our gracious Queen".

[LittleFuzzy]

I'm not really into the discussion of if history should be taught in schools.

Ok. Why are you interjecting into the discussion Minx and I just started to say that you're not interested in the discussion we just started?

[Lebanese Dragon]

Ok. Why are you interjecting into the discussion Minx and I just started to say that you're not interested in the discussion we just started?

I wrote that to perhaps curb the discussion back on track. I do think the comment I gave hit the nail on the head.

[LittleFuzzy]

I wrote that to perhaps curb the discussion back on track. I do think the comment I gave hit the nail on the head.

You mean to try and shut down a discussion we're interested in and force us to discuss whatever it is you're interested in. That sort of behavior pissed me off back on Atari when the IRC crowd would use it on whoever they'd taken a recent dislike to, and it really irks me here, directed at me. If you're not interested in something you don't need to say that unless you're already party to the discussion. All you need to do is keep quiet and ignore it. And if you want to discuss something all you need to do is start doing so. If others are interested they'll reply. If they're not interested you should take the hint.

[Lebanese Dragon]

You mean to try and shut down a discussion we're interested in and force us to discuss whatever it is you're interested in. That sort of behavior pissed me off back on Atari when the IRC crowd would use it on whoever they'd taken a recent dislike to, and it really irks me here, directed at me. If you're not interested in something you don't need to say that unless you're already party to the discussion. All you need to do is keep quiet and ignore it. And if you want to discuss something all you need to do is start doing so. If others are interested they'll reply. If they're not interested you should take the hint.

Sorry

[Khendraja'aro]

If you're serious with this question, well...the answer is in the question. Chance at a better life, escaping horrible or oppressive behavior. Maybe its cause we deal with Cuba's runaways all the time, but I'm dumbfounded you're asking this.

I'm also a bit astounded at the lack of thought which is displayed in that question.

Not to mention that his own country (and pretty much all the other European countries as well, while we're at it) plays a large part in why Africa is generally such a chaotic continent. Colonialism with its arbitrary drawing of borders really didn't do them any favours.

I would like to add that even most of the proud-to-be-dutch not-wanting-immigrants here have trouble with the anthem, I think. Or at least with more than the first verse

Which is about having German blood and serving the Spanish king...

Our national anthem is only the 3rd verse of the song. The 1st one is a bit problematic due to the borders it proclaims (and this little accident between '33 and '45) and the 2nd one is just plain silly.