Literacy does not grant citizenship. Nor does it deny it. In fact, literacy should be held above these trivial issues and held upon the same level as critical thought. To be blunt, yes, reading incorrect grammar that switches in and out of the first person or that tosses around articles and verbs like a salad causes this aspiring English teacher to cringe. However, no matter the height of the horse being ridden, it would be careless to deem those same butchers as lower citizens. Literacy does not rely on one ubiquitous language, and it certainly doesn’t revolve around only English. This should lead to the obvious, an immediate divorce between Literacy and Citizenship.
The opposing side of every argument must be fully understood in order for an opinion to be drawn out. Thus, it must be understood that in the attempt to maintain a national identity, America has based its literacy tests on the native language of the country. This statement essentially says; If you want to live and prosper within OUR borders, vote in OUR elections, and be protected by OUR military, then you must be Literate in the English language. On top of all of this, in a world ruled by capitalism, the government places a hefty charge on the test. The idea is simple, assimilate and appease, or forfeit the basic rights given to those willing to do so.
It is odd that a country founded on immigration should receive new immigrants with such hostility. It is even more unusual that they should place such restrictions on these immigrants. The issue at hand however, remains to be Literacy. To these immigrants–in this system– Literacy means citizenship. Literacy is the gate to basic rights, and in collaboration with previous definition, Literacy becomes tough to obtain. This leads to the question, after understanding each side, where do you stand?
The points you bring up are certainly thought provoking. One point you mentioned that I found interesting is: “It is odd that a country founded on immigration should receive new immigrants with such hostility.” This is so true and I’m sure many people don’t consider this when thinking about immigration today. I would say that currently one way people view immigration is as threatening, possibly why the government feels the need to be so hostile and restrictive; therefore, forcing immigrants to take such tests. But in reality, is taking a literacy test, or becoming literate in the English language, really going to prove an immigrant to be less threatening than another? Quite honestly, I would say that the most threatening immigrants could be the ones who are best prepared for these tests for the simple reason that groups will go to any limits to harm America. So what is this literacy test really preventing? Or what is it trying to prevent? It is impossible for America to be a single-language country anymore. With so many languages being introduced to our country, sooner or later the test isn’t going to matter anymore if you’re literate in English or not, because there are going to be other languages becoming prevalent. And even still, if an immigrant family passes the literacy test and is literate in English, at least for the purpose of passing the test, it is likely that they are going to join or form a community centered around their language; therefore, not even practicing their English literacy.
Or you could say that the English language is going to matter more as additional languages are brought into the country, because having common language would become more valuable. You can have signs in two languages, but not eighty-two. So you could say that the test would be least valuable if we had only one language, because almost everyone—native and immigrant—would know it well already.
At best, you could say that the rising diversity of languages in this country will have no effect on English-language literacy. If you’re here from Finland and you’re living in a community that speaks only Finish, it won’t matter very much to you if there are two or forty languages spoken outside of your community.
Literacy has been a tool that has been used against those who want to better themselves for too long. While I understand the merits of having a citizenship text, because people should know something about the country they’re coming into and how it was built, I do not think it should hold as much weight as it does. The people who are choosing this country, who willingly want to become citizens are asked to know more about this place than the people who were just fortunate enough to be born here. Students in the US take around 12 years of history classes and in a room of close to 20 of students not all of us could pass. I think that says something about the way that our citizenship test is structured. If people who speak English natively and grew up learning about the United States cannot retain the information to pass this test, how can a person who is learning a new language be expected to also learn hundreds of years worth of information?
Everyone has been raising really interesting points here. If someone is trying to become a citizen but cannot pass the test involving the history of the U.S. and the various laws and structure of our government does that mean he/she cannot be a citizen? Does it matter if that person is unable to complete the test in English? What is more frightening: someone who struggles to complete the citizenship test or someone who comes into the country and can finish the test without any issues? Once someone is a citizen, he/she can vote without any knowledge of the candidates other than names on a ballot. However, in order to obtain the right to be a citizen and choose to be uninformed we expect potential citizens to take a test on our history and laws in the language we choose and we want some level of literacy. I’m not sure what the right answer is; I guess it’s a good thing I’m not in charge of our country’s immigration laws. I just know there are different requirements based on someone’s status of citizenship and I’m not sure which is the right one.
I find it preposterous that this is still the system in place for immigration in the U.S. America is known as “The Great Melting Pot” and yet we hold ourselves in a very ethnocentric view of things. While I understand the idea that knowing the language of the country you’re moving to will make your life easier, it’s not entirely necessary. As we saw in Viera’s essay, many Portuguese families managed to make it just fine with a little help from the community. It just seems a little strange that a country that was built on immigration, and has no official language, would be this adverse to letting people in.