Thursday, May 16, 2013
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
In the days and weeks after the Boston Marathon bombing, leftist whack job rags and reporters were grasping at any straws they could find to avoid saying the brothers Tsarnaev were Muslim jihadi terrorists. One grasped straw was the the disaffected, detached, and culturally restricted immigrant child gambit.
The New York Times, naturally, had to get in on the latest scam theory with this April 22, 2013 piece written by Marcelo M. Suárez-Orozco and Carola Suárez-Orozco, the dean and a professor, respectively, at the U.C.L.A. Graduate School of Education and Information Studies who are, with Irina Todorova, the authors of "Learning a New Land: Immigrant Students in American Society,"
The two brothers accused in the Boston bombings — Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, who was killed on Friday, and his brother, Dzhokhar, 19, who was captured later that day — were around 15 and 8, respectively, when they immigrated. Both attended Cambridge Rindge and Latin, that city’s only public high school. They were not part of our study, but they fit the demographic profile of the subjects of our research: birth to families displaced by war or strife, multiple-stage (including back-and-forth) migration, language difficulties and entry into harsh urban environments where gangs and crime are temptations.
Many newcomer students attend tough urban schools that lack solidarity and cohesion. In too many we found no sense of shared purpose, but rather a student body divided by race and ethnicity, between immigrants and the native born, between newcomers and more acculturated immigrants. Only 6 percent of the participants could name a teacher as someone they would go to with a problem; just 3 percent could identify a teacher who was proud of them.It worked for a short time and some of the information is probably useful, but all in all, it's useless in explaining the brothers Tsarnaev who are - or, were - Muslim jihadi terrorists and the theory was dismissed by the majority of thinking people. Ultimately, NYT readers debunked the 'pity the poor little immigrant story' with their own stories of immigration, assimilation, and acculturation to the American milieu. This NYT comment to the Orozco story is most excellent and evokes strong connective feelings in me -
Kalidan - NY
One reason for the Muslim youth (whether native born or immigrants) that become radicalized while living in the relative comforts of the west has to do with identity.
Becoming who they become - hate filled nihilists vowing revenge and wishing destruction over imaginary grievances -seems much to do with finding community with others who think like them, and a psychosocial environment that gives them refuge from the cold loneliness and the grief of having put up with a large number of petty slights in the environment. Maybe so, but I don't want you to fix that.
As an immigrant, I find the cold, disinterested, disconnected America intensely attractive and meaningful. One can think, read, do, write what one wants; the freedom I cherish is afforded me because no one cares. I really like it this way.
I love that I am left alone. It is likely that the radicalized youth call it rejection, and hate it. They rush into the arms of hate peddlers.
It is not the responsibility of America (or Americans) to assimilate me. It is your sacred responsibility to follow the constitution that guarantees freedom for you, and from you. I will pay my taxes (rent money), and stay on the straight and narrow, I promise. You promise to remain what made you great: dispassionate, disinterested, and cherishing the freedom to be left alone above all else.
I did not lose my way to socially engineered Cuba, I came looking for the promise of the US. Please don't change it.