Maybe you’re not convinced that having multiple languages being in coexistence within one society is a good idea.  There are some benefits to having one language for everybody, after all.  A common language can be a good way to create unity within a country.  If everyone knew the same language, then there still wouldn’t be problems communicating with neighbors or in the streets.  There are also always the people who dislike things being different than how they are used to.  Even Benjamin Franklin was scared of being overrun with German speaking immigrants in his English speaking colony of Pennsylvania, back in 1753 (Medvedeva).  

---

I would consider that learning a language yourself would be a better way to build bridges than forcing someone else to learn a language.  One would never know their true potential to benefit society with until they try as hard as they can. Also, someone can always count on themselves, but they might never feel the need to learn your language, and it accomplishes the same goal of communication between the two of you.  Medvedeva also goes on in her research to find some data that may serve to undermine the benefits to a monolingual nation that she found. She found that, while studying both bilingual and monolingual immigrants, when it comes to their performance in school, “bilingual youths consistently performed as well as or better than immigrant youths in the other language categories,” with those other language categories being those who were immigrants, but still monolingual as one example (Medvedeva).  They also seemed on trajectory to a higher educational attainment, with higher educational ambition leading them there. Medvedeva says that, “the gifts of bilingualism are worth the costs” and the evidence supports it. Although the idea of a nation with a single nation is tempting for some, the struggle to attain one is not worth it when bilingualism also offers so many benefits.