Robert D. King's Should English Be The Law?

Should English Be the Law?
Arguing in support of a tolerant linguistic America, Robert D. King’s liberal article Should English Be the Law? explores the political polarities (and numerous grievances) consequential to governmental interception of national language. Concluding with a don’t fix what isn’t broken recommendation, King fails to validate social conflict as greater than communication barriers. Commencing his article by stating language as a “political force” then later noting it as a “convenient surrogate for other national problems” the reader stands hard pressed to solidify language as the root cause of a national identity crisis (King, 1997/2013, p. 483 & 490). King further hints to a “unique otherness” within countries that are
From Benjamin Franklin’s concern over German immigrants failing to learn English to Theodore Roosevelt’s propaganda that with one flag must come one language, King describes the strong feelings of the founding fathers. Transcending further back in history, King identifies the creation of the debate during the 18th century Romanticism movement; the argument gives merit to the importance of language development before politics. There is not truly a means for validating this claim; however, even this argument was a cover for deeper French Revolutionary concepts. During the revolution, many individuals required the use of Italian to communicate propaganda amongst regions. Post war, the nation “became aligned with language” selecting French for the entire country (King, 1997/2013, p. 487). Overall, King’s article poses a soft approach, in favor of diversity, through historic examples of other country’s challenges. King grants subtle hints that cultural beliefs are truly the heart of the issue, but disguised in a roquelaire of language. King further notes the lack of a national identity as the challenge to many modern nations’
With a high likelihood of growing immigrant numbers in the U.S. it stands paramount to have a healthy debate on what is best for the society – to mitigate the formation of deeper fissures on the sensitive topic. “Language, as one linguist has said, is ‘not primarily a means of communication but a means of communion,’” (King, 1997/2013, p. 492). Michael Schwalbe (2008) further expresses the importance of language when he states: “Knowledge itself is the past living in our minds and habits. Our language – each word, each grammatical rule – connects us, not only to each other, but also to a common human past,” (pg. 46). Let us be certain, that when addressing the needs of today, we do not neglect the cultures of those that provisioned