So firstly the literal format and writing of the article is rough/buzz feed-y which isn’t particularly shocking or notable.
However if there was a fascimomter on you, as one reads the article, it will quickly increase to a boiling point that reflects an overflowing abundance of fascism.
These far right folk just can’t stop making leftism sound cool I swear.
“The bloke who created it, Ludwik Zamenhof, developed a political and religious philosophy (a cultish offshoot of Judaism that looked more like something straight out of The Communist Manifesto).”
(I genuinely don’t think hofism is a thing but regardless yes it was an optimistic idea to create a universal second language for all of the world)
Since the article is written by a fascist (even if they didn’t intend to be open about that), it isn’t shocking that the first point is essentially nazis on ‘Jewish Bolshevism’
Literally a second later
“The most crucial kind of diversity is the diversity of thought and opinion.” :kombucha-disgust:
“Even with constructed languages like Tolkien Elvish or Na’avi for example, if you look at the enthusiasts, you’ll find a wide array of people from all sorts of ideological backgrounds. They might be completely opposed to each other as far their opinions of the world are concerned but they come together for a common passion that they both share.
Now, I’m not saying that there absolutely aren’t any learners of Esperanto who don’t care about its politics or aren’t part of the status quo (see this **depressing Reddit thread ** for example).”
I’m scared, Reddit is already depressing as is
“a whole bunch of extreme far leftists who are OF COURSE politically correct”
TFW you’re the only nazi at your conlang event - sad Escobar waiting meme. -
“Without doubt the most common and sensible reason why myself and so many others are turned off Esperanto is that it has no authentic culture.” The fascimomter is sweltering
“Esperanto has no country or geographical ties to an ancestral homeland. :what-the-hell:
“[Esperanto strived to be] A true international language.
The common argument against this of course is that we already have that.
It’s called English” :deeper-sadness:
Imperialist is a bit strong, but it’s certainly Eurocentric. There’s also the fact that you can already do what Esperanto promised (communicate around the world) with English. And that hasn’t done shit to help the peoples of the world unite in harmony.
That’s fair, honestly more meant western-pilled essentially.
I’m personally wondering is it a useful gesture to firstly (of course) acknowledge/support all native languages and then introduce the universal language where no one is a native speaker. ‘Equal playing field’ is maybe part of this idea but cannot be truly stated (euro-centric for one)
A universal language is at odds with supporting native languages. Socio-economic factors inevitably drive marginalized people away from their native tongue to the more economically/culturally dominant one. The only real language justice is economic justice.
Maybe even just considering if it was even possible as a gesture, hmm [upon reflection, if one can’t offer universal economic justice, as you noted, then any “universalist” language will be forced even if unintentionally onto “the world” with consequences to natural languages]
Also English being so wide spread/“universal” does further illustrate how the widespread adoption of a language being tied to economic/cultural necessity does anything but unite human society
(But I can forgive an optimist)
idk why its assumed a universal conlang would behave at all like english, an imperially enforced market tounge does. if enough of the world decided to all forfeit the prestige & cultural dominance of using their langs internationally (the pre-req for this discussion to even be relevant) for a conlang, that means a portion of the earth diverse enough and committed enough to internationalism exists. which is kind of hard to imagine without a mostly complete world socialism.
