Language has always been an intensely political issue. Dr L.L. Zamenhof knew this in the late 19th Century when he founded ““, a constructed language that he hoped would act as a politically neutral lingua franca for the world. The number of speakers of Esperanto today is contested, but estimates vary from as few as 10,000 to up to 2 million globally. One 2001 estimate put the total number of active / fluent speakers at approximately 130,000 to 300,000 – with up to 150,000 of these being in the EU.
If you had learnt esperanto, you could see that it is fully convenient to play this role. Because it belongs to none, everybody can feel at home in it and express his feelings and even make jokes without fearing to make a mistake. Only a neutral language can build a public opinion. Of course it would be more difficult for politicians to use “wooden tongue” (double talk). Maybe for this reason they don’t want to hear of it.
PRAYER FOR THE ANIMALS - by Dr. Albert Schweitzer
Penelope can you support your idea with some facts please..How did you come to this conclusion..? How can you say that no other language than Esperanto will allow everyone to participate..(blah blah blah…)…Isn’t Esperanto a language that i will have to learn? What makes you think that i will learn it easier than english? Please elaborate?
Thank you for the polite answer and opportunity to debate.
For better or worse, much of Hegel's historicism has become part of our contemporary intellectual baggage. The notion that mankind has progressed through a series of primitive stages of consciousness on his path to the present, and that these stages corresponded to concrete forms of social organization, such as tribal, slave-owning, theocratic, and finally democratic-egalitarian societies, has become inseparable from the modern understanding of man. Hegel was the first philosopher to speak the language of modern social science, insofar as man for him was the product of his concrete historical and social environment and not, as earlier natural right theorists would have it, a collection of more or less fixed "natural" attributes. The mastery and transformation of man's natural environment through the application of science and technology was originally not a Marxist concept, but a Hegelian one. Unlike later historicists whose historical relativism degenerated into relativism tout court, however, Hegel believed that history culminated in an absolute moment - a moment in which a final, rational form of society and state became victorious.
You wrote that the time needed for learning to speak fluently…
Cruelty to animals is an issue that concerns most of us that take pride inbeing "spiritual beings". Although none of us would be capable ofpersonally inflicting pain and suffering on an animal, inadvertently, at somepoint, we may have contributed to cruelty and abuse to animals. I write thisopen-letter to you because I, myself, in my younger years, was not aware of theextent of some of the cruelty and abuse inflicted upon animals that I know aboutnow, most of which (if not all) could be avoided/aborted if only we would allbecome aware of ways that we can contribute to the protection of animals and oftheir rights.
It’s up to the Esperanto people now to make it happen.
I am not suggesting that we should all become activists in the literal senseof the word, but even without joining an organization, without being "officially" an activist,even if you are not a 100% vegetarian, there are still so manylittle and big things that we all can do to help animals and to support theanimal rights cause! Dont think for a moment that any "little" action that you arecapable and willing to take would not make a difference, because "if itwasnt for every drop of water, there wouldnt be an ocean" (quotingBriggite Bardot, on the same issue).