Illegal Immigrants Plan to Boycott May 1

[Manny]

I dont see how

If a person is a legal resident of another country the police are required, by international treaty which even trumps the Consitution, to notify the arrested person's consular office and to inform the person that s/he has a legal right to meet with his/her home country's counsel. What do you suppose that would do for the speedy administration of justice in Arizona if they didn't skip the step of asking citizenship?

 

[delphi_ote]

Actually, this is what I consider to be the worst part of US immigration policy.

It's illegal to come. Therefore only those people who do not possess moral compunctions that prevent law breaking will come. It's exactly the people that stay in Mexico because of US law that I WANT here. People willing to break laws that they don't like are not folks I want around me. And as someone from the Arizona desert, I assure you that law breaking is hardly restricted to entry, at least in these parts.

As long as we're here... I think as a Federal problem all those lovely tax payers from other parts of the country should start sending CA, AZ, NM, and TX large sums of money to shore up our hospitals and schools becaues of federal laws demanding that they serve non-residents without having any funding.

Aaron

Would you break the law to feed your children?

 

[HeavyAaron]

Would you break the law to feed your children?

That's probably not enough information to answer the question. If the law was: "Feeding children is a class 3 felony" then yes (provided that I had kids.)

If you are saying that there are those in Mexico who are faced with a choice between 1) illegally entering the United States and 2) having kids starve I believe you need to back up that claim as I highly doubt it. As far as I am aware starvation is not a common problem for Mexicans and entering the US illegally generally costs hundreds of US dollars, which buys a lot of food in Mexico.

Aaron

 

[BPSCG]

More Problems With "The Illegal Immigrants' Anthem"

I've been thinking about this. In an earlier post, I remarked that the one line that Francis Scott Key thought significant enough to repeat in every stanza of The Star Spangled Banner - "And the home of the brave," is the one line that gets changed to "the sacred flag."

Why is that?

It can't be because the translation to Spanish of "And the home of the brave" wouldn't scan. As I pointed out, entire operas routinely get translated into multiple languages without changing the sense of the original; surely someone could come up with some acceptable Spanish translation. It might mean rearranging the lines a little bit, but it could be done.

It helps, I think, to look at what Key wrote, and to take it from the realm of poetry to that of prose. How would it sound, as a simple query, with some of the ornaments removed and the language updated for modern ears - but without changing the sense of what Key wrote?

"It's dawn; tell me, can you see what we were hailing at sunset yesterday?

"We were watching its stripes and stars floating above the ramparts, throughout the battle.

"We were able to see it all night long, by the light from the rockets and bombs.

"Tell me, is that star-spangled banner still waving over our country?"

And those last two words, I believe, are why "And the home of the brave," is changed in The Illegal Immigrants' Anthem to "the sacred flag." They're here, they work here, and I have little doubt that most of them love much about the principles that flag stands for. They are ready to say, "This is my flag, because it stands for much of what I believe in."

But they are not willing to go so far as to say, "This is the flag of my country."

If it's not the flag of their country, then the song they are singing is not the national anthem of the United States.

 

[Cleon]

I've been thinking about this. In an earlier post, I remarked that the one line that Francis Scott Key thought significant enough to repeat in every stanza of The Star Spangled Banner - "And the home of the brave," is the one line that gets changed to "the sacred flag."

Why is that?

It can't be because the translation to Spanish of "And the home of the brave" wouldn't scan.

Again, try singing "y la casa del arrojado" in the same syllables. You're reading way too much into this.

As I pointed out, entire operas routinely get translated into multiple languages without changing the sense of the original; surely someone could come up with some acceptable Spanish translation. It might mean rearranging the lines a little bit, but it could be done.

Acceptable to you, you mean.

"Tell me, is that star-spangled banner still waving over our country?"

And those last two words, I believe, are why "And the home of the brave," is changed in The Illegal Immigrants' Anthem

I've already explained to you why referring to it as the "Illegal Immigrants' Anthem" is incorrect.

 

[delphi_ote]

That's probably not enough information to answer the question. If the law was: "Feeding children is a class 3 felony" then yes (provided that I had kids.)

If you are saying that there are those in Mexico who are faced with a choice between 1) illegally entering the United States and 2) having kids starve I believe you need to back up that claim as I highly doubt it. As far as I am aware starvation is not a common problem for Mexicans and entering the US illegally generally costs hundreds of US dollars, which buys a lot of food in Mexico.

Aaron

My point was rhetorical. There are circumstances that would make normally law abiding people break the law. Our illegals are not a bunch of criminals. That's too simplistic.

 

[HeavyAaron]

My point was rhetorical. There are circumstances that would make normally law abiding people break the law. Our illegals are not a bunch of criminals. That's too simplistic.

Nevermind that by definition someone who commits a criminal act is a criminal (simplistic it may be... truth is not always complex.) But this is so obvious as to not be worthy of debate.

Your question seemed to indicate that there may be a higher moral principle than obeying the law in some cases. I agree. There are some times in which a higher moral principle even demands violating the law. Wanting more material wellbeing, in my mind is not one of them. (I don't consider greed to be a moral good.)

You, of course, are free to adopt a moral code which differs from mine. However, I doubt you have, in fact, adopted a moral code which includes something where greed can trump criminal law.

So, then I request of you what moral principle a large portion of the criminal tresspassers into the US have employed to justify their actions?

Aaron

edited final question for clarity

 

[delphi_ote]

However, I doubt you have, in fact, adopted a moral code which includes something where greed can trump criminal law.

So, then I request of you what moral principle a large portion of the criminal tresspassers into the US have employed to justify their actions?

I wouldn't call working at or below minimum wage "greed." They're here to escape poverty and live the American Dream.

Once again, the big statue says:

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

 

[HeavyAaron]

I wouldn't call working at or below minimum wage "greed." They're here to escape poverty and live the American Dream.

Once again, the big statue says:

I note that you addressed none of my points or questions.

I would call the motivation to acquire more material wealth greed. But call it whatever you like.

I've been there. I've read it. I support it. My more recently arrived ancestors came in via Liberty/Ellis Islands. What's your point? Oh, oh... you were once again intentionally conflating legal immigration which everyone supports with criminal entrents. That's both a strawman and knowingly deceptive.

Aaron

 

[BPSCG]

Again, try singing "y la casa del arrojado" in the same syllables. You're reading way too much into this.

Oh? You mean there's absolutely no other way to translate "And the home of the brave?"

"Y el país del valiente?"
"Y la patria del valiente?""
"Y la patria del valeroso?"

And that's just what I, a non-Spanish speaker, was able to come up with on bablefish. I have not the slightest doubt that my father, who spoke four languages fluently (he worked as a translator at the UN for awhile after WW II), and who I once found working on translating the last scene from Hamlet from English into French because he found the translation he was reading wanting, could have done it without working up a sweat.

So you mean to tell me that Richard Wagner's entire four opera cycle, Der Ring des Niebelung (The Ring of the Niebelung) can be translated from the original German into singable, meaningful English or French or Spanish, but one single line of the Star Spangled Banner can not?

You mean to tell me that Ingmar Bergman could take Mozart's Die Zauberflote (The Magic Flute) and translate it from the original German into singable, meaningful Swedish and (make a delightful movie out of it), but nobody on earth can do the same with The Star Spangled Banner?

And finally, you mean to tell me that someone was able to come up with a singing Spanish translation of the first five lines of The Star Spangled Banner, but his powers mysteriously failed him at the sixth line?

Sorry, try peddling that #$%^ somewhere else, 'cuz you ain't selling it here.

I've already explained to you why referring to it as the "Illegal Immigrants' Anthem" is incorrect.

Yes you have. And what should it be called, since we know it is not the national anthem of the United States?

 

[Cleon]

Oh? You mean there's absolutely no other way to translate "And the home of the brave?"

"Y el país del valiente?"
"Y la patria del valiente?""
"Y la patria del valeroso?"

*sigh* you're only proving my point. They all have the same issue. Again, try singing them in the same tune. "Patria" especially is rather cumbersome, and the translation doesn't quite fit. ("Patria" is usually used the same sense that "rodina" was in the USSR.)

So you mean to tell me that Richard Wagner's entire four opera cycle...

You mean to tell me that Ingmar Bergman could take Mozart's Die Zauberflote (The Magic Flute)...

Since I've already told you that I don't know opera at all, the chances of me telling you anything about opera or a translation thereof are fairly small. Try listening to what I'm saying, rather than tacking strawmen on to "you mean to tell me that."

And finally, you mean to tell me that someone was able to come up with a singing Spanish translation of the first five lines of The Star Spangled Banner, but his powers mysteriously failed him at the sixth line?

No. What I'm saying is that they did a translation that was fairly good, and a word-for-word translation simply wouldn't work. It's obvious that I'm saying that, because that's what I've been saying. In English, even, so you really shouldn't have a problem understanding it. I haven't been saying anything about operatic translations, I haven't been saying anything about someone's "powers," that's all you. And you can have at it.

Believe it or not, I get what you're saying. You don't think the translated words are convergent enough with the original song to be considered the same song. And that's ok. I just don't agree with that, and I don't think it's a fair criticism given the linguistic challenges of translating a song.

Here you can find several other attempted translations, a couple of which vary from the original even more widely than Nuestro Himno. Feel free to pick one that's more to your liking.

Sorry, try peddling that #$%^ somewhere else, 'cuz you ain't selling it here.

Well, you've obviously worked fairly hard to manufacture a reason to declare this song "unacceptable" (to you), so it's fairly apparent things like "logic" and "reason" aren't going to work.

Yes you have. And what should it be called, since we know it is not the national anthem of the United States?

"We know" is not a synonym for "BPSCG has declared," sorry. Though you might try calling the song by it's actual title, "Nuestro Himno."

 

[delphi_ote]

I note that you addressed none of my points or questions.

I would call the motivation to acquire more material wealth greed. But call it whatever you like.

I've been there. I've read it. I support it. My more recently arrived ancestors came in via Liberty/Ellis Islands. What's your point? Oh, oh... you were once again intentionally conflating legal immigration which everyone supports with criminal entrents. That's both a strawman and knowingly deceptive.

Apparently I'm a pretty sinister mastermind over here. Perhaps you're the one fighting a strawman? "knowingly deceptive" Give me a break!

Returning now to a substantive discussion...

According to my dictionary:

greed - An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth

My emphasis. That seems different than your definition. What these people want is not excessive nor more than they deserve. They've violated a minor law and have harmed no one in the process (except for stealing all our health care, of course. ) Now they're here and contributing members of our society. Treating them like criminals is not productive.

 

[HeavyAaron]

Apparently I'm a pretty sinister mastermind over here. Perhaps you're the one fighting a strawman? "knowingly deceptive" Give me a break!

Returning now to a substantive discussion...

According to my dictionary:

My emphasis. That seems different than your definition. What these people want is not excessive nor more than they deserve. They've violated a minor law and have harmed no one in the process (except for stealing all our health care, of course. ) Now they're here and contributing members of our society. Treating them like criminals is not productive.

Who said anything about treatment? I simply called criminals criminals. Strange me.

You still haven't told me what moral principle excuses this lawbreaking. Or are you willing to admit that it's both criminal and immoral? And that our system is perverse in that only criminals enter and people of moral concience stay home, which was my claim after all.

And yes, I still call their motivation greed.

Aaron

 

[delphi_ote]

Who said anything about treatment? I simply called criminals criminals. Strange me.

There are degrees of criminality. I would not refer to someone who gets a speeding ticket as a "criminal."

You still haven't told me what moral principle excuses this lawbreaking.

Yes, I did. The desire to come here and persue the American Dream and work for a livable wage. Their desire for a better life in the face of an impossibly complicated immigration process.

Or are you willing to admit that it's both criminal and immoral? And that our system is perverse in that only criminals enter and people of moral concience stay home, which was my claim after all.

I'm sure you've broken a law. Do you have a moral conscience?

 

[HeavyAaron]

There are degrees of criminality. I would not refer to someone who gets a speeding ticket as a "criminal."

I don't know Florida law. But in Arizona there is both criminal and non-criminal speeding. So, no, not all speeders are criminal speeders. I realize this isn't actually your point. The law does have degrees. In fact, of huge debate right now is should illegal entry into the United State be upped to a felony? So, while it is a matter of debate, it's considered more serious than even criminal speeding.

Yes, I did. The desire to come here and persue the American Dream and work for a livable wage. Their desire for a better life in the face of an impossibly complicated immigration process.

That desire is a moral principle? Wow... how weird. I desire to have a twin engine airplane. Unfortunately it's painfully complicated to buy and register one. Can I (morally) justify stealing one?

Funny, I just don't see desire trumping law morally.

I'm sure you've broken a law. Do you have a moral conscience?

You'd be quite correct. I'm a reformed software pirate. I regret my past actions and have changed my ways. (I don't believe being younger than 18 negates responsibility, but I was less willing to follow the rules back then.) Sincerely, there aren't a whole lot of folks who "walk the straight and narrow thin line" like I do. No one likes playing games with me. I'm a strictler for rules. And those rules matter less than laws.

Aaron

 

[BPSCG]

Since I've already told you that I don't know opera at all, the chances of me telling you anything about opera or a translation thereof are fairly small.

That's not the point, and you know it. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of music knows that opera is far more complex than what was once an English drinking song. So the translation of an opera's libretto is a far more complex matter than the translation of a short song, for many reasons:

1. Opera is much longer, so there is much more translation to be done;
2. Operas have plots; the translations must not only scan musically, they must not only make sense within the limited framework of an individual aria, but they must also be coherent with the entire rest of the opera.
3. In opera, multiple singers can be singing different things at the same time. Think of a quartet where two lovers are singing about how much they love each other, how sad it is they must part, while at the same time, two other lovers are having a quarrel. Imagine the difficulties involved in writing that music and those lyrics. Well, that's a famous scene from La Boheme. Now imagine the difficulties involved in doing a singing translation of all four parts, so they all scan, and all keep the same sense. Translating The Star Spangled Banner is child's play by comparison.

Don't give me that naive, "Oh, I don't know anything about opera, so you shouldn't use it in your argument" nonsense. There's no reason a short song can't get a singing translation, while an entire opera can.

No. What I'm saying is that they did a translation that was fairly good, and a word-for-word translation simply wouldn't work. It's obvious that I'm saying that, because that's what I've been saying. In English, even, so you really shouldn't have a problem understanding it.

You're building a strawman. I have never said the Spanish translation needed to be a word-for-word translation. I've been saying from the beginning that a word-for-word translation is not necessary - it's generally not even possible - as long as the sense of the original language is maintained. That is what I mean by a "singing translation." What's so hard to understand about that? I've explained that repeatedly, yet you keep throwing up the strawman. Why?

Look again at the Spanish version. The first five lines are not a word-for-word translation of The Star Spangled Banner. Compromises in the exactitude of the translation were made so that you could sing the words to the tune, but the meaning of those lines in Spanish is the same as they are in English. But starting with the sixth line, the Spanish words are no longer a translation of the ideas expressed in the English - they are completely new. Key never wrote those words. And the second verse of the Spanish version is almost entirely new. This is not a case of the translation being inexact. It's a case of entirely new material either being added to, or replacing entirely, ideas from the original.

Well, you've obviously worked fairly hard

No, it was no trouble at all. I did have to work hard to see how this song is not a bastardized version of The Star Spangled Banner. And failed in the attempt.

"We know" is not a synonym for "BPSCG has declared," sorry. Though you might try calling the song by it's actual title, "Nuestro Himno."

Thanks - I was hoping you would say that. Some questions:

1. Why do they call it Our Hymn? If it's a translation of The Star Spangled Banner, then why don't they call it The Star Spangled Banner? You are doubtless familiar with the song, The Girl from Ipanema, by Antonio Carlos Jobim. He's Brazilian, so the original Portugese name of the song is Garota de Ipanema. That's Portugese for Girl From Ipanema. The lyrics of English version are a singing translation of the original Portugese, and the title is therefore a literal translation of the original Portugese. Why isn't the song called, The Brazilian Girl Passing By? or The Hot Chick at the Beach? Because the lyrics express the same ideas in English and in Portugese; it's the same song, even if the English is not a word-for-word translation of the original Portugese. So why isn't Our Hym called La Bandera Adornó Con las Estrellas, if it's the same song?
2. Who is the "us" that "Our Hymn" refers to? Does it refer to all Americans, citizens and non-citizens alike? Or does it refer only to the non-citizens?
3. Did you notice that in Key's original English, he writes "our flag was still there." In the Spanish, that line vanishes entirely, replaced - irrelevantly - with "we will defend it!" In fact, nowhere in the Spanish version is it referred to as "our flag." Why not? Don't the singers consider it to be their flag? Why did the translators go to such trouble to avoid calling it "our flag"?

 

[delphi_ote]

I'm a reformed software pirate.

Then by your own standards, you're a criminal with no moral conscience.

 

[HeavyAaron]

Then by your own standards, you're a criminal with no moral conscience.

Okay, I'm going to stop here. I think you're being intellectually dishonest. You won't respond to main points or questions even though I respond to everything you say.

I admit I made mistakes in the past. I admit they were criminal and immoral. And it's my conscience that reformed my actions.

I stand by my thesis. Our system is perverse. Those folks in Mexico who would like to live and work in the US but do not solely because they feel morally bound by US law are exactly the folks I want to be here; whilest the system in place screens exactly those people out.

You clearly feel differently. That's your right. But if you wish to convince me otherwise you'll need to do better.

Aaron

 

[pipelineaudio]

My point was rhetorical. There are circumstances that would make normally law abiding people break the law. Our illegals are not a bunch of criminals. That's too simplistic.

A great many of ours ARE, in fact as tresspassers as lawbreakers they ARE criminals, is that too hard for you?

Delphi I have the utmost respect for you, but you MUST understand the suffering we are going through here at the moment, the last twelve years have been HELL

I record bands for a living, so yes I am an idiot, but I am an observant one

Our working bands are GONE. In the last three years I had ONE

Even at 500 dollar a plate resort restaraunts, the illegals are the staff...BS that they couldnt pay an american to work that

COnstruction jobs, except finish work and a VERY few other specialties are gone

GONE

Now I record parents who are living thru their kids

But a look around at any area here will tell you the same sort of story

And please all of you STOP throwing the issue of immigration in with this, noone has a problem with immigrants, this is an immigrant country

We should NOT have to coddle criminals

We should not be paying a fine of ONE MILLION DOLLARS a day because we can no longer afford to teach illegal tresspassers in spanish

too bad

 

[Cleon]

Don't give me that naive, "Oh, I don't know anything about opera, so you shouldn't use it in your argument" nonsense. There's no reason a short song can't get a singing translation, while an entire opera can.

No, BPSCG. Nice try to bully me, but it doesn't work. I know nothing about opera, so if you want to use it to discuss the subject, I have no frame of reference and cannot comment on it. Some of us try not to comment on subjects we don't know much about. You might want to try it sometime.

You're building a strawman. I have never said the Spanish translation needed to be a word-for-word translation.

Nor have I said you did. The strawman is entirely yours.

I've been saying from the beginning that a word-for-word translation is not necessary - it's generally not even possible - as long as the sense of the original language is maintained. That is what I mean by a "singing translation." What's so hard to understand about that? I've explained that repeatedly,

As I'm well aware. What you decided not to quote:

Believe it or not, I get what you're saying. You don't think the translated words are convergent enough with the original song to be considered the same song. And that's ok. I just don't agree with that, and I don't think it's a fair criticism given the linguistic challenges of translating a song.

The fact that I dare disagree with you doesn't equate to a strawman. Sorry.

Look again at the Spanish version. The first five lines are not a word-for-word translation of The Star Spangled Banner. Compromises in the exactitude of the translation were made so that you could sing the words to the tune, but the meaning of those lines in Spanish is the same as they are in English. But starting with the sixth line, the Spanish words are no longer a translation of the ideas expressed in the English - they are completely new. Key never wrote those words. And the second verse of the Spanish version is almost entirely new. This is not a case of the translation being inexact. It's a case of entirely new material either being added to, or replacing entirely, ideas from the original.

No, it was no trouble at all. I did have to work hard to see how this song is not a bastardized version of The Star Spangled Banner. And failed in the attempt.

You are repeating yourself. As I said, I understand why you don't think it's a translation. I just don't agree with you. Deal with it.

Why do they call it Our Hymn?

Have you considered asking them? Or researching the subject and find out what the producers are saying about it? I'm guessing not, since you seem to be willing to manufacture all sorts of sinister motives and you still, despite factual evidence to the contrary, refer to the song as "the Illegal Immigrants' National Anthem."

Who is the "us" that "Our Hymn" refers to? Does it refer to all Americans, citizens and non-citizens alike? Or does it refer only to the non-citizens?

Given that the people performing it are citizens, a point which you seem to be constantly ignoring, the idea that it refers "only to the non-citizens" seems slightly, well, wrong, doesn't it?

In fact, nowhere in the Spanish version is it referred to as "our flag." Why not? Don't the singers consider it to be their flag? Why did the translators go to such trouble to avoid calling it "our flag"?

Referring to the flag as "sacred" (bandera sagrada) isn't enough for you? Geez, there's no pleasing some people.

As for "going to such trouble to avoid calling it 'our flag'," well, do you have any evidence whatsoever that this was done on purpose? Or are you manufacturing a motive for political purposes?

The Wikipedia article on the subject has a link to a Yiddish translation, which also doesn't call it "our flag." (It refers merely to "the flag," "di fon". "Our flag," in case you're interested, would be "undzere fon.") Again, US citizens were the ones at work, here. Was that intentional too, pray tell? Was this part of some nefarious Jewish plot to avoid declaring allegiance to "our flag?"

Look, if you don't like the translation, fine. I'm not saying you have to. But you're taking this to ridiculous extremes.