Yet another reason for the term: colonista.
Thanks, Uncle Bill.
Posted on 03/14/2002 5:06:50 PM PST by RCW2001
Yes ---while these people demand all the rights of citizenship in the US, you'll never once hear them want rights for Americans in Mexico. In fact they don't want Americans to own anything in Mexico.
Mexican politicians already have claimed the right to campaign for votes in the US, Fox did quite a bit of that in his campaign. I can't understand why Bush is just letting this happen. Clinton I could understand because he'd have sold us cheap to anyone.
To Sidebar...your right, this wasn't 'breaking' but this one 'jerked my chain'. Thanks for not burying it to 'no bar' status.
so mexico decides to have absentee ballots, and this is "colonization"? i'm missing something here.
We are an interesting study. America has gained much from the people who came here, worked hard and loved her. And assimilated. But we Americans have also given up something; we have no longer have a common race, - as in Japanese in Japan. Now even our founding religion (Christianity) is being stripped from us by "citizens" who do not love America's heritage. It seems to me we have brought in so many immigrants, that they have not changed, WE have changed. We are indeed a salad bowl, NOT a melting pot. No clearly defined way, just pockets of "diversity." I have trouble accepting it all. The blueprint for tearing down a culture has been successfully caried out on Russians, Chinese...
Remove all cultural heritage
Get hold of kids early to indoctrinate them
government control of media (or as in our case, ONE party/
Outlaw religion
moral relativity (helped along by no religious principles)
Voila! By default citizens look to government, not God, to save them
well. i'm sure they consider themselves native.
You are overly paranoid.
Re-read and breath deeply.
This is designed to hurt the PRI...so I say, "Great".
Uh huh sure overly paranoid right OK i beleive you yep
NOT
If they become a citizen of the USA OF THIS COUNTRY OF OURS then pray tell why would they need duel citizenship this dont have anything to do with colonization either its just plain wrong try and go to mexico and live become a mexican then VOTE here in the USA and see how far you get
"Congress will have to decide," Hernandez said. "There are differences of opinion."
Mexican activists in the United States hailed the administration's effort Thursday as a strong first step.
Is this a Brigadier term?
SPECIAL REPORT
By August Gribbin
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
November 15, 1999
Martin Ford is a third generation Irish-American. But he wants to be a first generation Irishman -- a dual citizen.
Patricia Campos, a first generation Salvadoran-American, has dual citizenship. And she's quite content with that.
Trouble is, a lot of others aren't. And therein lies an ongoing dispute.
Like thousands in the 40 million-strong Irish-American community, Mr. Ford is asking Ireland to make him a naturalized citizen so he'll simultaneously be Irish and American. Yet the trend Mr. Ford is following and the dual citizenship of Americans like Miss Compos trouble many of their American compatriots.
The very idea of dual citizenship -- or "political polygamy," as some call it -- challenges cherished assumptions about what it means to be an American. It prompts questions about loyalty and personal identity and evokes emotional responses.
More to the point, dual citizenship is emerging as a major topic among immigration's advocates and foes. It's being debated among academicians and lawyers to the point that Stanley Renshon, a City University of New York political scientist, proclaims, "It's a huge issue -- and I'm saying that with an exclamation point." It's huge, Mr. Renshon insists, "because of the sheer number of dual citizens now involved."
He says seven of the 10 countries from which most immigrants have come from 1981 to 1996 "now have some form of dual citizenship for those who live in -- or are born in -- the United States of parents from that country.
"Add to that number the children of illegals and the offspring of the dual citizens' children," he urges.
"Think of that. We're talking about an enormous number of people. Nobody has an inkling of the number of dual nationals. This is a gigantic group within our culture."
Some 70 nations, including Canada, Italy, Israel, South Africa, Jamaica and New Zealand allow their citizens to retain or regain citizenship or nationality after becoming naturalized in another nation.
Importantly, Guatemala, India, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, El Salvador and Mexico -- countries whose residents are emigrating to the United States in record numbers -- allow dual nationality.
All except Mexico allow their dual citizens to vote in their homelands. The Dominican Republic is even debating the feasibility of allotting two seats in its legislature for representatives of New York's Dominican-American populace.
Mexicans keep, or can regain, "nationality," which bestows property rights and other benefits but withholds the right to vote. Mexico distinguishes between "citizenship" and "nationality." Voting there is a prerogative of citizenship.
It's true that when foreign nationals become U.S. citizens, they swear to "renounce and abjure absolutely and entirely all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty. . . ." But State Department officials confirm the oath is not enforced and is likely unenforceable.
Says a department spokesman: "The United States allows dual nationality. It doesn't keep track of persons who are something else besides a U.S. citizen. And there is no such thing as being less than a full U.S. citizen with all the rights. We have no interest in a person's dual nationality or whether he votes in a foreign election -- that's not an expatriating act."
Regardless, some argue that letting a U.S. citizen gain or retain citizenship in another nation makes it impossible for the person to give undying, undiluted devotion to the "one nation, indivisible . . ." that Americans pledge allegiance to.
Along with others, Mr. Renshon is passionate on the point. He declares:
"I've heard people say that dual citizenship is like a marriage. You can have loyalty to a spouse and friends. You can have multiple loyalties.
"But the model is more of parenthood and childhood. Feelings of attachment, a sense of belonging and a sense of the knowledge of place are deeply imbedded when you are 2 or 3 or 4 years old. So how can people say these experiences don't count for much? It is foolish to believe that."
Further, Mr. Renshon argues that dual citizens born in the United States learn from the outset that they "are not American first but something else and American. That is much different than learning you are Colombian, or Mexican or American."
Critics like Mr. Renshon say dual nationality cheapens American citizenship and robs immigrants of the incentive to melt into mainstream America. They say it defies U.S. history and tradition and stimulates "ethnic separatism," which one day will split the United States into a bunch of battling ghettoes.
In 1849, historian and diplomat George Bancroft said that a nation should "as soon tolerate a man with two wives as a man with two countries." He said "common sense . . . repudiates" what he called "double allegiance."
Thirty-seven years before that remark, the United States went to war with England partly because the British refused to acknowledge the U.S. nationality of Englishmen who had become U.S. citizens. The British shanghaied former Englishmen among U.S. merchant crews, forcing them to serve in the British navy.
More recently, President Theodore Roosevelt called "the theory" of dual nationality, "a self-evident absurdity."
However, Mr. Ford and others don't see it that way.
On the cusp of a new century in an emerging global economy, they see advantages to being a citizen of two countries.
For a special few, dual citizenship has tax advantages. But most see it as a way to get a different passport and obtain the right to get a job, start a business and own property in another land.
The New York Law Journal reports "U.S. lawyers with a European heritage often qualify for a citizenship that permits them to practice anywhere in the European Community. And nationals of other countries do the same. By naturalizing in Canada, an Irish nurse can qualify for a . . . permit to practice her profession in the United States."
Hofstra University law professor Peter Spiro, a former State Department official, says, "Dual nationality should be facilitated rather than discouraged."
He states:
"A dual Mexican-American citizen who advocates policies that benefit Mexico is little different from a Catholic who advocates policies endorsed by the church or a member of Amnesty International who writes his congressman at the organization's behest."
Mr. Spiro and others argue that U.S. dual citizens help spread U.S. democratic ideals, foster international communication and understanding and solidify ties to the home country.
Besides, they tend to send money to relatives and to invest in their native lands. That's said to be a stabilizing influence that works to the United States' advantage.
Indeed, one way or another, money often motivates dual citizenship. Belize, the Central American state, sells citizenship for $25,000 a head. The islands of St. Kitts and Nevis charge $200,000 per person.
Mere dollars won't buy Irish citizenship though. Petitioners must prove ties to the "auld sod."
Mr. Ford, 45, is an anthropologist and head of programs at the Maryland Office of New Americans, a refugee resettlement agency in Baltimore.
New Jersey-born, he attended schools there, earned a doctorate from the State University of New York, joined the Peace Corps and taught in Liberia. He qualifies for Irish citizenship because his grandparents are Irish-born.
He explains, "I'm following the lead of my cousin, Jack Daly, an international aid worker. He got Irish citizenship so he could travel overseas more easily, using the European Union passport. Irish citizenship entitles you to that. I want the passport for the same reason. Ireland's been neutral so long its people can travel to places where U.S. citizens fear to go."
The powerful EU passport permits people to live and work in Ireland, England and on the Continent without other permits or visas. That's an advantage for those seeking jobs in the flourishing Irish software industry and for those in American companies expanding to Great Britain or elsewhere overseas.
"For me though," says Mr. Ford, "Irish citizenship is cultural citizenship. It's not political. I don't give up any allegiance to this country. I'm American. But the affinity with my ancestors that citizenship permits is something I want -- it defies logic and pragmatism."
Miss Campos says about the same.
A labor activist, she was born in San Miguel, El Salvador. With two brothers and her father she fled civil war there in 1988, arriving here when she was 15. She taught herself English, went to high school in Alexandria and worked her way through Cornell University, earning a master's degree in 1997.
Dual citizens "can be loyal to two countries," she says, explaining that to her dual citizenship means being connected to her homeland, which she loves. Still, she adds, "I embrace the U.S. Constitution and democracy."
But suppose it became necessary to break the connection --suppose El Salvador and the United States were at war?
"Immigrants all struggle with that question. I respect and love democracy and what this country stands for. I am committed to it. This is the country where we are investing our lives and money. But at the same time we also -- as individuals -- connect with our homeland, where our culture and identity come from."
Immigrant after immigrant echoes similar sentiments.
Jamaican-American Shirley Nathan Pulliam is a member of the Maryland House of Delegates who came to the United States in 1960.
She says, "It's not true that dual citizenship keeps people from assimilating. That's just something anti-immigrants say, and it amazes me."
Venezuelan Baltran Navarro celebrated his first anniversary as an American Nov. 1. He came to the United States in 1989 and now heads the Johns Hopkins Hospital Men's Public Health Clinic.
He's convinced that "dual citizenship is a wonderful idea, because no one who comes here as an immigrant relinquishes the patriotic tie to the homeland."
"The United States is a nation and a concept. You embrace it and want it, but you don't want to break your ties altogether. Like marrying. You don't break the ties with your mother and father. Yet those of us who chose this country love it, will stand by it, will die for it."
And finally there's another view.
Says Guatemalan-American Joac Ramirez, a mechanical engineer at Baltimore's Loyola College:
"There's no advantage to me of being a Guatemalan citizen. I live more here. I tell people, 'Learn about the U.S. politics, learn about the benefits of people with traditions of freedom of expression and freedom of speech.' That's what's important."
Yet another reason for the term: colonista.
Thanks, Uncle Bill.
When the first nuke goes off, we'll see if any brains return to the American citizen.
Do you suppose being a Bushbot would make one immune to fallout?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.