Ghetto Superstar: Newt Gingrich Belittles 400 Million People in Five Seconds

Last Saturday, former U.S. House Speaker and potential Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, speaking before the National Federation of Republican Women, argued that immigrants should be immersed in English and “taught the language of prosperity, not the language of living in a ghetto.” [See also the SwampBlog.]

A few days later, on Fox News’s Hannity & Colmes program, Gingrich claimed that he wasn’t referring to Spanish specifically, noting that the term “ghetto” was historically used to indicate a Jewish residence. So from this, are we to infer that Gingrich and the Republican Women who applauded are concerned about having to print ballots, road signs, and government forms in Hebrew, or perhaps, Yiddish?

Gingrich’s explanation is ridiculous and insulting. The context of the comments was the eradication of bilingual education programs, which are overwhelmingly, though not exclusively, taught in both Spanish and English. So he clearly was referring to Spanish-speaking immigrants, and his backpedal is embarrassing.

It’s important to note that this was not a slip of the tongue. Gingrich was not speaking extemporaneously, and when asked to clarify, he did not shy away from the word “ghetto.” It is a reflection of his stereotypes of Hispanics, his disdain for the poor, and the arrogance and ethnocentricity he brings to public service. Let’s examine the core assumption he makes: If people come to this country from a nation where English is not spoken, they have an obligation to learn English, and the public sector (i.e., schools) has no obligation to help them.

The reality is that most immigrants come here to make sure the lives of their children will be more hopeful, and few if any would discourage those children from learning English. But where will that happen if not in school? How are students who are learning English expected to keep up in History, Math, Science, Music, etc. if those courses are taught exclusively in a language that they don’t speak fluently yet? Surely Gingrich isn’t endorsing a policy that would allow thousands of children to fail and perhaps drop out of school altogether, distancing them ever further from the “prosperity” that he so proudly advertises. And what of the parents of these children? If they do not speak English when they come, when is it that they should learn it? After their second shift of the day in the field, the factory, or the store? Perhaps Mr. Gingrich will endorse subsidizing these families while the adults attend a community college to learn English.

But policy preferences aside (logical arguments can be made for English immersion curricula), the language that Gingrich chose, used and then defended is illustrative of a culture of privilege that is centered on middle-class values. From that perspective, non-English speakers (specifically Spanish speakers) are simply too lazy or stubborn to learn a new language. People who live in ghettos have repeatedly made bad choices in their lives and therefore deserve not to have access to safe, well-maintained and affordable housing. And the children of these delinquent adults are guilty by association – too bad for them that they were born to parents who have either chosen to decline their fair share of the American dream or were born in a country with even fewer economic and educational opportunities for the poor. Those of us born into privilege must be here because we deserve it. Or we’re lucky – our parents earned it. Or, perhaps, God has smiled upon us and “blessed” us. Wonder why God didn’t bless everyone. That song directs Him to “bless America” (“and,” as Chris Rock’s character in Head of State would say, “no place else!”).

Living in the ghetto has a lot of disadvantages, but few who experience it daily would put language near the top of the list. If Gingrich and his followers are really concerned about folks who live in the ghetto, they might start with jobs, training, health care, maintenance, health standards, and (surprise, surprise) education. After all of those things are addressed, we can then turn to a discussion about how language is keeping immigrants and their children from realizing the American prosperity that is apparently simply there for the taking for those who choose to do so. Just think how much Picasso, Cervantes, Franco, Villa and other Hispanic artists, scientists, politicians, and authors might have accomplished if they had just been forced to work in English rather than remain in the ghetto!