The Brits are right: Speak English!

THE LONDON terrorist attacks on July 7 and July 21 changed British Prime Minister Tony Blair. He had long been reluctant to make the fight against Islamo-fascist terror a domestic issue. Last week he outlined security measures to deal with radical clerics who incite violence.

Many of Blair’s proposals would be unconstitutional under U.S. law. For example, the British could deport a person for “fostering hatred, advocating violence to further a person’s beliefs or justifying or validating such violence”; “condoning or glorying terrorism” would be illegal under proposed anti-terrorism legislation; and organizations suspected of fomenting hatred would be controlled.

Of particular interest is a measure that reads in part: “It is now necessary, in order to acquire British citizenship, that people attend a citizenship ceremony [and] swear allegiance to the country.” That’s not much different from U.S. law. But Blair wants to impose an additional requirement: To become a British citizen, one must “have a rudimentary grasp of the English language.”

This requirement would violate Section 203 of the U.S. Voting Rights Act, which requires that bilingual election materials and assistance be made available when a foreign language reaches critical mass in the general population. For example, California recall ballots in Los Angeles County were printed in English, Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese, Korean and Tagalog. The intent of Section 203 is laudable: A member of a “language minority group” should face no obstacles in exercising the franchise. But its effects are pernicious.

U.S. law, in effect, tells new citizens that they can be fully engaged in U.S. democracy without understanding the language of its election campaigns. It further suggests that secondhand knowledge of politics, through translation or others’ interpretations, is an adequate substitute for the ability to hear and read about the candidates and the issues.

Naturalized citizens must demonstrate a fundamental understanding of U.S. history and civics. Isn’t it reasonable to expect them also to be able to communicate, at a basic level, in the language of U.S. politics? A passing knowledge of English shouldn’t be too much to ask of those who seek the right to vote that so many American soldiers have died to secure. Requiring citizens to understand basic English isn’t bigotry. But supporting a system that encourages American citizens to accept a life without meaningful participation in politics and civic life -- that’s bigotry.

To end the separatism and disengagement that flourishes in part because significant portions of his country cannot speak English, Blair wants to make basic knowledge of English a requirement for British citizenship. There can be no true national unity when citizens cannot understand each other and participate in the majority culture.

Britain has learned that lesson -- the hard way. Let’s hope the United States will learn it through observation rather than bitter experience.