this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2026
23 points (89.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

46719 readers
626 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I mean the whole school I went through kept nailing in our heads how much a foreign language would benefit you. I guess this went under the noses of whoever like teaching kids to balance a checkbook.

top 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 19 points 2 hours ago

Everyone coming up with conspiratorial reasons why this is not the case but it's much simple than that. It's not feasible and it's expensive and the returns aren't really worth it.

Kids in school have a bunch of other subjects they have to learn besides foreign languages. You can add one or two languages but then at some point you will need to remove other subjects to add more or you need to keep kids in school even more. Both are not really feasible. Then you need to hire teachers for all these new languages which most places won't do.

Another issue is with the way they teach languages in schools. They expect you to pass a test and not actually learn the language so a lot of the languages will not "stick" as the students lack immersion and practice with that language. I can speak for myself, I have learned two languages besides my native language in school: French and English. I had French since 2nd grade, which is 10 years of French classes and English since 5th grade which is 7 years of English classes. Today I can speak English fluently and like 3 words of French. The difference was that I was always immersed in English, though video games, movies, songs and so on. Not so much with French. I have noticed the same pattern with most of my friends and family members.

[–] justdaveisfine@piefed.social 29 points 3 hours ago

In my own experience, if you pick up another language but don't use it on an at least a semi-regular basis, your skills in it get real rusty real fast.

[–] splendid9583@kbin.earth 2 points 1 hour ago
[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 18 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Because the system is designed to make it so you never leave and you never have the upper hand.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

English has 1.5B fluent speakers spread across the entire globe. Hardly an insular language.

This is far more about discrimination - freezing migrant families out of public sector jobs and services, segregating English speakers from minority speakers, abolishing First Nations language and culture.

Also very important to keep Americans from reading foreign language press.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Sorry, but I really am failing to make the connection between how learning a second language as an optional class leads to "freezing migrant families out of public sector jobs and services". You don't even need to speak English to access those most of the time. In my city, nearly all public services are available in English and Spanish at the minimum, and frequently Chinese, Vietnamese, and Russian as well.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

I really am failing to make the connection between how learning a second language as an optional class leads to “freezing migrant families out of public sector jobs and services”.

American public school kids don't normally get access to electives until at 6th grade (sometimes not until 8th or 9th grade depending on the state and district). So "optional" in theory is a deliberate effort to delay bilingual learning in practice.

Mono-lingual populations are more easily primed towards hostility against minority speakers. So your senior staff is biased towards English as a primary language when hiring the next generation of public workers. And these workers are increasingly both unable and unwilling to provide services in secondary languages. This creates a natural barrier for any minority speaker from even interacting with public bureaucracies.

In my city, nearly all public services are available in English and Spanish at the minimum, and frequently Chinese, Vietnamese, and Russian as well.

Bigger and more egalitarian cities, with large minority-language populations can staff their departments with fluent minority-language speakers. And under more liberal and egalitarian governments, they do. But as the population grows more reactionary, these kinds of skills get drummed out of the bureaucracy.

This isn't even a new problem in government.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told 2,500 troops Tuesday about the foreign-language skills he championed as a congressman, an active-duty Army officer was complaining about the paucity of military personnel who can speak anything other than English.

But it has become an increasingly domestic issue, as fascists take command of the bureaucratic core.

On March 1, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 13166, which designated English as the United States’ official language. This Executive Order is no longer theoretically in effect, and existing federal civil rights laws and regulations require language access for individuals with limited English proficiency in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.

Nonetheless, numerous federal entities are pursuing policies prioritizing English as the only language, effectively reducing or eliminating Spanish.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 12 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

It hasn't really been an economic necessity or cultural priority like other countries.

Most countries who have a population who speak more than one language usually either have a variety of languages spoken within/near the country or rely on ESL speakers to participate in the international workforce.

With English being the current lingua franca, Americans already know the current dominant language. There is really only one major language which is relevant to neighbors, but Americans are usually in the more dominant economic position and there is a cultural aversion to adopting Spanish more.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 6 points 2 hours ago

This is the correct answer.

If you live in SE Asia for example you speak your local language at home but you need to learn English for work.

If you already speak English at home then you already know how to speak English at work.

[–] ageedizzle@piefed.ca 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

There is really only one major language which is relevant to neighbors

Spanish

French Canadians would like to have a word with you

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 37 minutes ago (1 children)

They could, if they were economically relevant on the continent. Spanish and Portuguese are far more relevant when interfacing with international trade in the Western Hemisphere.

I pointed out cultural reasons for maintaining a language as well. The USA, as a country, has no current cultural reason to have portions of the country maintain a different language.

[–] ageedizzle@piefed.ca 1 points 32 minutes ago* (last edited 27 minutes ago) (1 children)

Is Canada not economically relevant to the continent? French is an official language of Canada, on equal footing as English. By law anything sold in Canada must include both English and French labelling, software, instruction manuals etc. For parts of the US that trade a lot with Canada, French is at least as economically relevant as Spanish.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 27 minutes ago (1 children)

Quebec isn't Canada.

Having to get documents translated is a cost of doing business in Canada. You don't have to speak both languages to conduct business in Canada.

[–] ageedizzle@piefed.ca 1 points 20 minutes ago (1 children)

Quebec is in Canada, it’s also not the only Francophone region in Canada. There are also most certainly major economic zones in Canada where you would need to know French to conduct business. And I assume you could also hire a translator for Spanish, no?

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 10 minutes ago

But we're talking about economic utility. Quebec isn't Canada; it is much smaller.

In contrast, Mexico has a GDP near Canada as a whole and there isn't a bilingual legal framework to support business deals. Furthermore, there are more Spanish speaking countries to make deals with in the Western Hemisphere; the closest that French has is Haiti.

[–] mrmisses@lemmy.world 10 points 3 hours ago

Because it would upset the racists (republicans)

[–] jqubed@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I know it varies from state to state, but where I’ve lived it’s an “elective” in that you got to pick which language to take of the available options (some schools might only have two choices, others four or even five), but taking a certain number of foreign language credits was required for graduation. If you wanted to go beyond the minimum and had room in your schedule you could.

[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 hours ago

Same way where I grew up in South Dakota, except each school only taught one language.

[–] JigglySackles@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

The problem in the US is that besides English, you might be exposed to some Spanish. And not much else unless you seek it out. Or have immigrant friends. Without consistent practice, and some more native speakers, any learned language just rots away.

I learned German for several years in college. It was fun. Went to a local brewhouse with my classmates and talked in simple german while we had dinner, it was a good time. Now, other than my own attempts at saving my whithered skill, and a couple bedtime songs for my kids, I don't use it.

And even when I was better at it, using it as a tourist in germany was moderately helpful, but it wouldn't have been nearly enough skill to pass any kind of immigration language proficiency exams.

[–] TheFogan@programming.dev 7 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

I'd say because half of america's goals involve not understanding other cultures and believing whatever nonsense the corporate overlords want to say about them.

I still have to laugh at when american's went on chinese tiktok to work around the possible bans, and the chinese were all like "wait, you really do have to pay out the nose for an ambulance ride, I thought that was propoganda by our government" meanwhile a lot of american's were learning half of the horrors of china were extremely overstated or manipulated.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

meanwhile a lot of american’s were learning half of the horrors of china were extremely overstated or manipulated.

Crazy how quickly the Chinese travel vlogs get demonetized on YouTube. Google execs really do not want you knowing how nice East Asian cities are.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

As someone who is Chinese and living in the US, Americans who have not been to China overestimate its shittiness and people who have been to China once or twice overestimate its glamour. Outside the cities, the rural areas can be real shit-holes. I've been to a tea plantation where there were a total of six electric plugs in the entire village and the toilets flushed with a bucket which had to be filled from a pump outside. It's not the level of rank poverty you see in many developing countries, far from it, but it's a lot worse than even the poorest parts of Appalachia in the US, where at least people usually have electricity and running water.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Outside the cities, the rural areas can be real shit-holes.

One of the more notable achievements of the last two decades of Chinese economic improvement has been the degree of urbanization, particularly in the western end of the country. This used to be a point of criticism among western economists (Chinese Ghost Cities being a popular meme during the '00s/'10s). Now we just don't talk about Chengdu or Lhasa or Lanzhuo at all.

It’s not the level of rank poverty you see in many developing countries, far from it, but it’s a lot worse than even the poorest parts of Appalachia in the US

In my experience, having done a little traveling through Appalachia and the northern end of the Gulf Coast, urban migration has solved a lot of the back country issues by hollowing out the country's interior. If we didn't build a highway through a chunk of the state, people just stopped living there.

Chinese rural communities have experienced a similar hollowing out, particularly in the 80s and 90s when the prosperity on the coasts fully eclipsed the poverty of the western interior. But because agricultural labor was seen as critical to social stability, the state simply refused to let people leave. The end result was an enormous black market population that became a nightmare to manage. And so the late Deng and Hu governments (and early Xi government - although by then much of the work was done) spent a significant amount of resources and labor back filling rural development. Hu, in particular, was a champion of the rural west thanks to his policy of low taxes and high investment.

This didn't eliminate the developmental black holes on the Chinese map. But the expansion westward was its own kind of economic revolution. One that culminated in a virtual elimination of the poverty the country had become known for during the Reagan Era.

The difference in approach - demanding people move to the cities rather than demanding public spending move to the country - is a critical point of divergence between American Neoliberal and Chinese Socialist domestic policies.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 1 points 50 minutes ago

I do have to agree with you there. Though too much urban migration does come with its own problems. Chief among them that I observe is that it severely depressed wages and lack of work. China is moving through its own sort of gilded age right now with rapid technological advancement and extreme inequality.

For a purportedly socialist country, China lacks a lot of state infrastructure that comes along with that. The USSR guaranteed work and bread, at a minimum (mostly), but in China, a curious sight emerged which I observed in some of the poorer neighbourhoods of Hangzhou: old people pushing around carts of discarded cardboard boxes and tin cans. They weren't employed as cleaning workers. They were collecting these to sell for their recycling value. And even though the Westerner might laugh at the notion of making a living collecting literal garbage for pennies, it only takes fourteen pennies to make a yuan and ¥5 will buy a bowl of rice, fending off starvation for another twelve hours. Now, homeless people collecting rubbish to sell for scrap does also happen in the US, but the US at least doesn't claim to be a socialist country.

China has no functional social safety net, government assistance is minimal, and workers are exploited by a ruling class of wealthy elites with minimal interference from the state, in a shockingly similar way to capitalist countries. You cannot even form a real trade union in China, because all big companies are already "unionised" with workers represented by farcically corrupt organisations which work in tandem with the capitalist bosses.

I will give one more example: Coco is a nationwide chain of beverage stalls which sell tea, coffee, and juice drinks. I walked past a location in Shenzhen which was advertising that they were hiring. Their offer of pay: ¥200 a day, for a 10-hour shift, six days a week. In one of the most expensive cities in the country. I took a photo of this but I couldn't find it to post.

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 2 points 3 hours ago

Rednote's been a fascinating natural experiment in cross cultural communication that we need to repeat at scale

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 hours ago

We needed ~"3" levels of language classes to graduate in my school (7th and 8th grade effectively counted as 1 level, so it was really 4 years). You could elect to take extra if you wanted.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 1 points 2 hours ago

Because school in the US isn't about creating a well educated population.

[–] Canconda@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago
[–] veggay@kbin.earth 2 points 2 hours ago

Because the US educational system is not made to give students the upper hand anymore, it's meant to make yall obedient and dumb enough so that what's going on politically could happen. An educated public would've never voted for Trump.

[–] SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Go on radio.garden and try to find non-english music. My point is it's wild how much English has become a common language worldwide, even if it's not the first language

If every state had a different language they'd be more like europeans that have second and third languages as a normal thing. But it's almost all English, everywhere all the time unless you are near Mexico.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

Americans always have the upper hand in other countries by simply speaking English louder and slower until our needs are met.

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 2 points 3 hours ago

Back in the renaissance ancient Greek and Latin were needed to study ancient texts, so knowing them was needed for university. These requirements lasted into the 20th century so high schools taught it for college track students. These days they'll take any language. The methods of teaching and the structural contours of this shape how language learning is thought of to this day

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Ok so well then all the work is on OUR kids then and not the rest of the worlds kids to learn American? Why is the world so unfair to USA? We are too big of a country, it is unrealistic to learn languages, even one is hard given how rural and unique the American countryside is. The only hope we have is if pickup trucks evolve to be able to speak for us and keep us connected when we finally become unable to learn even a single language.

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 hours ago

Learning a second language takes a lot of time and effort, and I don’t think the US likes either of those things, not the funding required for them.