¿Que pasa... dude?

Father "Don Jim" Tucker makes a note of the recent Washington Post article about Spanish-language TV advertisements on English-language channels, and goes on to elaborate on the prospect of a "bi-lingual" America, in his piece entitled (what else?) "Toward A Bilingual America."

Of course, he's right to point out the fallacy of the simplistically linear approach that is the Anglo-Saxon view of American history. And ultimately, a bilingual culture may be, in the broader view of things, a recognition of the way this nation might have turned out anyway, if only we had gotten on better with our Mexican neighbors, especially over the settling of Texas.

But the truth is, it didn't turn out that way. That the USA does not have an official language of record, does not mean there is not one in practice. And before we rush headlong toward English-Spanish highway signs and required bilingual education, we might ask ourselves how such diversity has served national unity in, say, Canada. (Our other neighbors, remember?) Then again, Switzerland has existed as a unified nation of four languages for centuries. But which comparison is the fairer one?

For better or worse, I believe he may be right; we may be headed toward a day when "Anglos" who speak Spanish will be better off than those who do not. This is not as apparent in my native Ohio, for example, as it is to those who spend time on either the East or West Coast.

Discuss.