Man I hope so, since I 'v e listened to him as well that would put me in the clear for several idiotic things I have done. and.... Since I've seen Pele, Maradonna, Kempes and Baggio play I am going out this Sunday and demand that the ref award me a hat trick!! It is my right by god and country! Do not challenge my "superiority by association".
I don't. If someone's going to post this thread on this part of the bords, and we think his concern about "Mexicanization" is worth discussing, you're going to hit these other topics.
No. You're confounding "affirmative action" w/ race. THE MAJORITY OF "AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" RECIPIENTS ARE WOMEN. Ppl focus on race b/c they don't realize that a.a. was instituted to promote the advancement of women AND minorities in the public sector. By the way: "your" is a possessive adjective. "you're" is a contraction of the phrase "you are".
Kpaulson is right. The Chivas thing has opened up a can of worms. Some people, myself included, see the Chivas project as an anti-assimalationist statement. So, there you have it. Really, I find it a bit naive to think that discussions about Chivas USA, or whatever the hell you want to call it for now, wouldn't become touchy. I sure as hell don't believe in one culture in a monolithic sense. But I do believe that a tenuous cultural consensus does exist in this country. Who knows exactly what the hell it's based on but I would assert that it's based in part on some shared cultural experiences and shared language. I believe in the unifying capacity of language so I'm not timid in my assertions that English is the de facto national language. Beyond that, I do believe that certain Anglo-Saxon values are at the core of our culture and that they have been essential to our country's advancement. I'm not even an Anglo-Saxon. But I'm clever enough not to dismiss WASP culture in this country as just a bunch of unhip, dead white guys. My family came over, kept its religion, busted its butts in textile mills and chemical factories, got on with it and managed to fit in and prosper a bit. We were always taught to respect people who were different. We've always had friends and associates from all walks of life. We realized that there was a world beyond our living rooms and churches and neighborhoods and that, though not perfect, it was pretty damn good. So when a proposal comes along to establish a major league sports team that flies in the face of what we've been taught, we wonder and raise our hands. When we who raise our hands are dismissed as "Anglos" and xenophobes, we get pissed off. And when someone suggests that the English language just isn't good enough for everyone and that maybe we'd have all been better off trying to get ahead in a social system that resembles something out of 15th century Iberia, we really start to get pissed off.
And if you don't like that, too bad. We'll just keep antagonizing each other. But please don't get indignant if you can't understand the perspective of those who have a problem with Vergara's ghettoized, us versus the anglos and white guys vision of an MLS team.
Chowderhead, I agree that it's understandable that people may get offended at the idea of a Mexican-identified team in MLS, but it's probably worth noting a couple of points along the way. First, I think the idea that we live in a country with a cultural consensus just isn't accurate. Reasonable people disagree about such things all the time, but let me just suggest a Texas-New England contrast. I've spent most of my adult life in Houston, but also three years in the Boston area for school. I don't think there's a consensus between those two areas on some fairly big and basic ideas about what sort of society we ought to have. I'm not suggesting that the differences between Texas and Mass in how people think about the roles of the state, the individual, religion, etc. tell the whole story. I'm just pointing to that particular example to illustrate that we live in the same nation state, but we're not really in the same cultural nation. Second, as pointed out above, many of us who live in places like Texas or California view Mexican culture and the Spanish language with a little less alarm than many people who didn't grow up in this neck of the woods. It's all just part of the backdrop. Most of us even sort of like it. Whereas some people in other parts of the country may see Chivas in MLS as an affront to all sorts of cultural norms, many of us in the Southwest just don't see this sort of thing as a threat or as an anti-assimilationist statement. Finally, we should also note that clubs may start out identified with a certain community, but broaden over time. Many clubs in South America were originally founded by and for certain immigrant communities (e.g., Palestra Italia, Portuguesa, Vasco, etc.). Most of those clubs have expanded their fan bases over the years, even though some of them still draw support from certain immigrant communities. I have no idea what the future holds for MLS or Chivas, but it may be the case that Chivas, while always historically identified with the Mexican immigrant community, may undergo a similar broadening process over time.
Yar - I'm getting sick of the Chivas situation - though I remain optimistic that eventually, it'll shake out ok. But the extremes on both ends will be bitter. Vergara did his team no favors by dealing so fast and loose with MLS. It's partly a cultural thing to drive a hard bargain, but with the outrageous things his employees said, the changes in interest, locale and terms, he didn't establish himself as someone with any respect for the sport. yes, it's his money and MLS needs it, but it's good to be gracious at the dinner party - otherwise, people want to leave. Yet the ones really turning my stomach are the reactionaries who squealed outrage at every turn, even the harmless, fun all-star game where MLS beat Chivas. Vergara said a few things to hype the game and some people on these boards went crazy with indignation and tales of MLS betrayal. Eventually, I think the new team will conform to all MLS rules and regulations, but with a certain distinction. Teams need personality to survive - Chivas USA will have a Spanish flavor, perhaps, but that doesn't mean that English isn't "good enough" - it just means that this team will speak more Spanish - a language that many people speak, or can easily learn. A culture for a team is not a racial divide - anyone can learn a language. No one disputes the fact that Arsenal, for example, has a French flavor - it's even an undertone in the competition with Man U. It gives the rivalry energy. We would get a similar energy here in MLS, but if the name-calling continues, and Vergara and Co. provoke more panic, people could easily become too bitter to even accept the fact that the reality isn't so terrible.
Huh? Care to elaborate? Moorish Spain (Granada) or Christian Spain? Portugal? Aragon? Aragon's Mediterranean empire? Well-reasoned arguments are welcome. Ignorance and straight up stupidity are ridiculed. You gotta admit, many of the most "intellectually challenged" posters are/were anti-Chivas. A certain unnamed president would have 2 words to describe them: Ignancy.
Good point Anderson! To all who are paranoid over Chivas USA being started by a Mexican investor to tap the Mexican immigrant population here in the states please take note of the history of Futbol in the Americas. Many clubs in South America, Central America, and Mexico were founded by immigrant communities. As someone had posted on another thread; Club Deportivo Guadalajara was founded by a Belgian immigrant and some French students living in Guadalajara Mexico. Their team colors mirror the French Flag. As anyone who follows the MFL knows that Club Deportivo Guadalajara has gone onto to represent everything that is Mexican. Give Chivas USA a chance.
Great stuff, Anderson. Some of us actually think that Chivas USA would be a pro-assimilationist statement. After all, the status quo is that people of Mexican origin overwhelmingly follow only Mexican League teams. Some of MLS's past decisions have helped to keep Mexican-American fans away. If Chivas USA opens the doors and Mexican-Americans start to identify with teams that make their homes here, then that's the first step towards building a shared culture. I think we all need to recognize that assimilation is a long, slow process. When the first Beinekes came to this country, their farming community spoke primarily German for nearly 100 years. Perhaps some would characterize them as evil anti-assimilationists. I tend to think they were just being themselves.
I've noticed that I have less problems (in general) w/ Southwest posters than others. it's like none of the rest of the country is on the same page. (This is not a value judgement, btw.)
There is no single culture in the US. It is pretty close to zealotry to believe that we have a single culture or that we should. I have nothing in common with the East Coast, the Midwest, or the South. I have never even been to the South. It is basically a foreign country to me. I grew up in the Southwest and am very much influenced by Latino culture. It pisses me off to hear people bash Latinos as if they are foreigners. In the Southwest, they are not foreigners. The Southwest used to be part of Mexico for those who don't know their history. Show respect for the different cultures and regions in this country. One major aspect of conservatism is to band together in groups of like-mindedness and shun everyone else. Someone in this thread described conservatives as being into "god, family, and country" ... yeah, your version ... and to hell with everyone else. Check out this website. It is a graphic representation of the theory of 9 Nations of North America. http://www.harpercollege.edu/~mhealy/g101ilec/namer/nac/nacnine/na9intro/nacninfr.htm
You know, it really is amazing. I preface remarks by saying that I don't believe in a monolithic culture in this country, I continue by asserting that a tenuous cultural consensus exists based on who knows what, I suggest that certain Anglo-Saxon values lie at the core of whatever the hell it is that makes whatever the hell it is that we are, and...Pero bueno... Guys, as I've suggested before, I've made the effort to get comfortable with the Chivas idea. But everything surrounding it stinks. Sure, I've considered that it could be a way of getting Mexicans more involved, a way of making them feel included and empowered and loved and all that crap. But where does it stop? I'll take into consideration all of the high-minded crap that you guys spew (The lecture on regional differences was a real eye-opener. Thanks. Coming from New England where every 40 miles there is a different accent and distinct cultural flavor I never realized that such differences existed. Then the preumption of cultural superiority from the Southwest Mafia; I need a bit of laughter on a Sunday morning. And then the history lesson on ethnic-based teams). And fact, let's assume that you're right. WHERE DOES IT STOP? We're all different, right? We have nothing in common, right? Fine. I'll recede into my ethnicity and you can all screw. I won't care about you. I won't fight for you. I'll deny that I have any neighborly responsibility for you. And maybe someday we'll have a Boston-based Irish-only team. And we can go back to the good old days of enmity and suspicion. That's what you want, right?
Well, a good laugh on a Sunday morning is always a good thing. Sorry if anything came across as lecturing. The point about regional differences wasn't based on an assumption that New Englanders know nothing about regional differences. It was based on the assumption that some people outside the Southwest may not have an accurate understanding of how Mexican culture and the Spanish language fit in this region. I think that's an accurate assumption. But at any rate, sorry for any offense, none intended. As to your question about where does it stop, I think we have different ideas about what "it" is. You still appear to be reading it (i.e., Chivas, or Mexican investment more generally, in MLS) as some sort of anti-assimilationst statement or threat to a cultural consensus. As we've suggested above, that's not how it plays to many of us in this part of the country. Your slippery slope argument is based on an assumption about what Mexican investment in US soccer means. But if you start from assumptions that reflect more accurately the culture of a region, then you don't have to worry about receding into isolated ethnicities. It's not that we didn't understand the point you were making about a cultural consensus. It's that we disagree.
Anderson, You have brought a good spirit to the debate and I commend you for that. We could possibly agree more than what appears to be so. To me, it really has nothing to do with the fact that the team in question is Mexican. It's that we run the risk of taking steps towards cultural apartheid. (Not that it matters, but I have great respect for Mexican culture; we vacation there regularly, we constantly sing Mexico's praises to the annoyance of many of our Colombian relatives and acquaintances; I even have two Tri camisetas). I'm willing to acknowledge the primacy that Mexicans enjoy among immigrant groups. I'm willing to concede that they bring a passion for football. The question is, does that justify the unique and controversial step of setting up a team along ethnic lines in a society that may find such a thing offensive? Will Mexicans and Mexican-Americans feel more included or will they argue that being apart is the answer? Generations of us have been taught to include and now it seems that one of the groups that many of have sought to understand want to set itself apart on the football pitch. That could be the answer or the right the thing to do, but should that be the example for every group? And if Mexicans alone are conceded a further degree of apartness because of their numbers and unique love of football, we risk not so much cultural apartheid but cultural Belgiumization. Is that what we want? Maybe we do. But there's no guarantee that such a thing will be pretty.
Re: Re: Boarders Language Culture Right on the the money....This is not really rocket science. If chivas come into the MLS we will see an increase of revenue into the league and as long we can have few U17 training with a different sistem it will benefit our young players base for our national team.
Chowder, I always appreciate when you bring your own "high-minded" lectures to this particular debate, so I'm a bit surprised you've taken offense to others doing the same. My question for you (bear with me-- the setup is long): The last time we had de facto apartheid in this country, it wasn't brought about by immigrant groups being insular. Instead it was brought about by people that considered the Irish/Swedes/Italians/younameit to be unfit to live in their neighborhoods. It was brought about by people that would never have allowed a team of black folks to play in their sports leagues. Given that this is our country's history, why do think including a team that past segregationists would have shunned is a return to old-style segregation? Please don't think for a second that I am comparing you to those segregationists from the past. IMHO, there are some people who cynically use the "equality" principle to further unequal ends, but I don't think that applies to most people on these boards.
Impresive guys.. this is a impresive display of of eloquence and command of the kings language ...But and I repeat BUT where is the common sense.? What this soccer society find really offensive is the fact that we can't whoop Argentina and Brasil at will and if it take the whole mexican league to join MLS on the cruzade to make USA SOCCER the most powerfull entity of the planet .... SO BE IT
Well, Mr. Paulson, yes, I can see why you would find my objection to what I called "high-mindedness" hypocritcal. My point was that I didn't need the presuppostion of elevated principles while being instructed about something so basic as regional culture. Pero bueno... The old style "segregation" that I fear is not so much that of the old establishment from different groups (though that wouldn't be something to desire) but instead enmity among groups, though I suppose that you could and should argue that all assimlated groups have become part of one dominant monolith. But today's assimilated America and yesterday's ruling class are different things. I'm not concerned that the Episcopalians might not let us join their country clubs. I'm fearful of a precedent that may encourage the Irish, Italians and Blacks to be at each other's throats again. Off to Mass.
See Chowder, I guess where we differ is in our assessment of how far our society's come already. If you believe Mexican-Americans are already included in our "cultural monolith" in meaningful ways, then yes, having a separate team for Mexican-Americans will increase segregation. If, instead, you believe as I do that Mexican-Americans are not fully included in our culture, then including a team largely of Mexican-Americans actually decreases segregation. At the end of the day, with Chivas USA, more Mexican-Americans will be playing in the US first division.
At the risk of lecturing, I think we need to be clear that Chivas won't be setting up a team along ethnic or national origin lines in terms of employment. Federal and state law prohibit it and MLS has very good counsel that won't allow a policy that ensures easily foreseeable litigation. What Chivas may, and presumably will, do is market to the Mexican community. To the extent that you consider marketing to a specific ethnic or national origin market offensive, then, well, there you have it. But let's just be clear that when we say "setting up a team along ethnic lines" we're really talking about rhetoric and marketing - not employment policy. And Chowderhead, I appreciate your argument about Belgiumization. But there's a reason why some of us have pointed to regional culture in response to your argument. And it's not an attempt to instruct you about the concept in general. It's an effort to point out that your concerns about ethnic isolationism simply don't apply to Mexican culture in this part of the country. You're responding to a general argument, but we're making a specific one to which your general reply doesn't apply. Mexican culture is already integral to the regional cultural of this part of the country. There's nothing foreign or isolating about it. Assimilation takes time. Even meaningful integration takes time. As suggested above, bringing more Mexicans into MLS may ultimately increase the rate of those processes. Then again, it may not. We'll have to wait and see how it sorts out. But there's already a dominant soccer culture in this part of the country. It's Mexican. Attempting to bring more of that culture into MLS is an integrationist move. It's worked in other countries in the Americas (see lecture a few posts above). Maybe it'll work here, maybe it won't. But finding out isn't going to turn us into the Flemish and Waloons.
Why do racial differences have to lead to enmity? I just don't get it. It seems like deep down you will always have enmity towards other races, and you feel guilty about it, and so to correct this you want everyone to homogenize and pretend that we are all part of the same group. On some levels we are, and on others we aren't. That is just the way things happen when you get 300 million immigrants together in one huge continent. I think defining the extremes the way you do makes it hard for you to empathize with the "tolerant of differences" position. People can be different, speak different languages, wear different clothes, believe in different gods, and still manage to care for each other and get along. All it takes is tolerance. A lot of people talk about tolerance, but really they are stuck in their dogmatic vision of how people should behave and believe and fear anything outside of that box. We should care about each other because we are all living beings, not because we are or aren't of the same racial stock or citizens of whatever nation-state. Does a Mexican-styled team, which doesn't seem at all outlandish in the Southwest, really disrupt the ability for you to care for your fellow human being? - Paul