The ethnicity of the US is as varied as that of any other nation, or, if I may, any other "area". The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were written in English because the majority of colonists were British. During the debates in drafting the Constitution, there was some debate about adopting a common language, but it received little attention.
There are areas in the US where Spanish is an accepted language, and with the language goes a degree of ethic "sense" and community. The current administration has unleashed a " Christian, White Man's" screed that has divided us; on the other hand, it has made many realize that we must do more to ensure equality.
There has never been a nation that is hermetically sealed from its neighbours. Even North Korea has Chinese, Japanese and Russian minorities. In the United States, Spanish, French and all manner of First Nations languages are spoken widely. Persian-speaking refugees and east Asians have cohered together in tight-knit communities, mostly in urban areas. A hundred other ethnicities have done the same.
There is, of course an apples and oranges distinction between the US and just about any European country, but the needs of any given minority inside the borders of a country that neighbours its homeland are pretty much the same. Everyone deserves a sanctioned outlet to preserve his/her identity-and that should include native language. It doesn't necessarily require a massive investment from the national government-but it should not be squelched, either.
Language laws in many countries are complicated and controversial. Do you attempt to limit the number of languages (ideally to one) to boost national identity, efficiency in education and simplify commerce? Or do you embrace diversity, deal with the inevitable silos of inefficiency and navigate the discrimination that comes with it? For a Hungarian speaking population of maybe 70k in Ukraine it makes little sense for the Ukrainians to divert any resources needed to support a minority language (20 languages are spoken in Ukraine). I'd hope even the Transcarpathians would be more interested in saving thousands of lives by investing in ballistic missile defense instead. Plus Ukraine has a much bigger language problem going forward with will they continue to have Russian as a national language (spoken by 30%). Understandably they'll likely decide: нет.
Peter Magyar's clout in Europe is currently pretty high for a country the GDP and population size of Hungary. He's young, charismatic, smart and a good ambassador for Hungary. If he wants to continue to influence European politics above his weight class that will require understanding the direction the winds in Europe are blowing and get on board. Zelensky is a tour de force and Peter would be wise to get on his coattails. Otherwise soon when someone mentions Magyar they'll only be talking about Robert Brovdi and his birds.
I think the issue here is deeper. Can two democratically oriented leaders leading two nations who have been at each other's throats on and off for centuries find a way to get along and elbow out the fascists who want to stoke the fires of resentment for their personal gain? This meeting of Magyar and Zelensky is more important than we think, I think. Don't be mislead by the "merely 70 to 80 thousand" thought.
I see no problem in minority rights being honored. Many right wing Americans don't know it but there are small ethnic enclaves all over America. Hispanic are obvious, but Somali, Hmong, Yiddish, German, Scandinavian, Coptic Egyptians, Amish, Mennonite & others. I am always happy to meet these interesting Americans. I hope that Ukraine manages to help all it's minorities to live full lives & respect their heritages. Inclusiveness only hurts Christian Nationalists, & that is a good thing.
The ethnicity of the US is as varied as that of any other nation, or, if I may, any other "area". The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were written in English because the majority of colonists were British. During the debates in drafting the Constitution, there was some debate about adopting a common language, but it received little attention.
There are areas in the US where Spanish is an accepted language, and with the language goes a degree of ethic "sense" and community. The current administration has unleashed a " Christian, White Man's" screed that has divided us; on the other hand, it has made many realize that we must do more to ensure equality.
There has never been a nation that is hermetically sealed from its neighbours. Even North Korea has Chinese, Japanese and Russian minorities. In the United States, Spanish, French and all manner of First Nations languages are spoken widely. Persian-speaking refugees and east Asians have cohered together in tight-knit communities, mostly in urban areas. A hundred other ethnicities have done the same.
There is, of course an apples and oranges distinction between the US and just about any European country, but the needs of any given minority inside the borders of a country that neighbours its homeland are pretty much the same. Everyone deserves a sanctioned outlet to preserve his/her identity-and that should include native language. It doesn't necessarily require a massive investment from the national government-but it should not be squelched, either.
Language laws in many countries are complicated and controversial. Do you attempt to limit the number of languages (ideally to one) to boost national identity, efficiency in education and simplify commerce? Or do you embrace diversity, deal with the inevitable silos of inefficiency and navigate the discrimination that comes with it? For a Hungarian speaking population of maybe 70k in Ukraine it makes little sense for the Ukrainians to divert any resources needed to support a minority language (20 languages are spoken in Ukraine). I'd hope even the Transcarpathians would be more interested in saving thousands of lives by investing in ballistic missile defense instead. Plus Ukraine has a much bigger language problem going forward with will they continue to have Russian as a national language (spoken by 30%). Understandably they'll likely decide: нет.
Peter Magyar's clout in Europe is currently pretty high for a country the GDP and population size of Hungary. He's young, charismatic, smart and a good ambassador for Hungary. If he wants to continue to influence European politics above his weight class that will require understanding the direction the winds in Europe are blowing and get on board. Zelensky is a tour de force and Peter would be wise to get on his coattails. Otherwise soon when someone mentions Magyar they'll only be talking about Robert Brovdi and his birds.
I think the issue here is deeper. Can two democratically oriented leaders leading two nations who have been at each other's throats on and off for centuries find a way to get along and elbow out the fascists who want to stoke the fires of resentment for their personal gain? This meeting of Magyar and Zelensky is more important than we think, I think. Don't be mislead by the "merely 70 to 80 thousand" thought.
Péter, this is a balanced and insightful, hopeful report. The best of yours I've read (but I haven't read all of your stuff). Thanks for educating me.
I see no problem in minority rights being honored. Many right wing Americans don't know it but there are small ethnic enclaves all over America. Hispanic are obvious, but Somali, Hmong, Yiddish, German, Scandinavian, Coptic Egyptians, Amish, Mennonite & others. I am always happy to meet these interesting Americans. I hope that Ukraine manages to help all it's minorities to live full lives & respect their heritages. Inclusiveness only hurts Christian Nationalists, & that is a good thing.