> In this scenario everyone speaking English or whatever is the dominant language in two generation is a good thing for economic equality and cultural cohesion.
If this is the pathway we choose/are forced down, will the term ‘culture’ be needed? We will all be the same.
California, Oklahoma, and Ireland all speak English but have very different cultures. Most large cities have different cultures within 10 miles of each other.
I bring up these counterpoints only to say that while language is a major factor in culture, there are still many other factors.
The irony here generally applies to Oklahoma and perhaps California as well, and these three regions are perhaps much more culturally similar due to the imposition of language on a region with such effectiveness. I'm not sure if that's the point they were trying to make.
I think it does make the same point. The cultural similarities were achieved but it wasn’t without loss or consequence. There may have been less bloodshed though?
While I wouldn't say they have "very" different cultures relative to almost anywhere in the non-English speaking realm, I would definitely agree that language isn't the only factor. However, more language unification would at least theoretically continue to increase cultural cohesion.
Not really, I would say France is closer to Ireland culturally than Oklahoma.
For example, Catholics are the largest religious group in Ireland and France. Oklahoma is only 4.9% Catholics with Baptist being it’s largest religious group.
If this is the pathway we choose/are forced down, will the term ‘culture’ be needed? We will all be the same.