Are government leaders who are not fluent in english less intelligent?
By manong05
@manong05 (5027)
Philippines
February 28, 2007 8:41pm CST
Senators and congressmen who couldn't express themselves well in English are often looked down upon and are objects of mockeries and jokes. This may be true here but I don't see it happening in other countries where their leaders are bringing with them their own interpreters whenever they attend social or international functions where English is the medium.
Can they have plausible excuses not to learn English?
2 people like this
4 responses
@tatzkie (644)
• Philippines
1 Mar 07
I believe affluent english is not a basic guideline for good leadership. However in the legislative, the branch that makes the laws, with full of negotiating going on. I think it will be a handicap on the part of the legislator if he/she lacks the necessary communication tools.
@MntlWard (878)
• United States
1 Mar 07
Well, it's true in the US because English is the predominant language. George Bush had to get a passing grade in English for 12 years to get a diploma. He also has a college degree and at least two semesters of English are required for a degree, and some degrees require more than that.
So why should a leader of a country which generally speaks another language be considered unintelligent? They shouldn't: they're just less educated in the English language.
Of course, George Bush doesn't have that excuse, since he should have had at least thirteen years of English education, so he's considered less intelligent for that reason (and others).
@manong05 (5027)
• Philippines
1 Mar 07
There's a lot more to be expected from a native language speaker compared to someone whose english is a secondary language. Yes you are right, english being the native language doesn't necessarily mean mastery and fluency in the language on the part of the native speakers. They also have to study for a good number of years.
@bluewings (3857)
•
1 Mar 07
I think ,the knowledge of English or the lack of it shouldn't be a criterion for judging a politician or any other individual.Language is a matter of choice and comfort.It's the understanding of social perspective,honesty(sadly),ideas and their execution that are more important when it comes to a politician.Today ,it's english;Tomorrow it could be French or Chinese and then the non native english politicians won't have the advantage,but a visionary,an intellectual won't be sent packing because there will always be abundance of translators and interpreters ,but counted few who can understand how the future will present itself and shape the constitution accordingly to benefit the masses.
