You are no longer in your country, don't you think it's disrespectful to not speak the host nation's language?
I think the issue is not one of
speaking, but rather
being able to speak the host language to some degree. If one is able to speak the host language, this serves as a token of a willingness to integrate into the broader community (not to mention socio-economic advancement/work opportunities etc.), and thus a respect for that community. However, to suggest that immigrants jettison their native tongue in all situations - particularly group situations - seems to me just thinly-disguised racism.
Also - and I realise you're just playing devil's advocate here - the context of the "speak English mate" thing is important. It's not as if this was a public service announcement on the socioeconomic advantages of linguistic integration; it's just a bromide used to add weight to slurs like "F--- off we're full."
Personally, I believe that many immigrants would be able to satisfy the imperative to integrate into their broader host community
without learning the host language - e.g. in Chinese enclaves etc, one could be quite involved while speaking only Canto. Of course this arrangement would be more preferable for those of advanced age, limited economic means, or whatever.
you can certainly find a correlation between top-schools students with Internet activity.
True, but I still maintain that the article seems to linger too heavily on the "elite schools" rhetoric than is necessary. Look at those privileged rich white kids! The same trend is repeated on muck-up day articles, etc.
And 5000 members? get real. It's not hard to find 300k groups these days, even the small ones have at least 50k users.
Are those >50k user groups mainly "morally benign", though? Genuine question - I wouldn't know
