darkweasel:Well, now I know why people see Esperanto as ridiculous.

Actually that part of the whole thing is absolutely unknown to the non-esperantist world. I wish it keep that way.

Ĝis, Novatago.

Hmm, obviously it seems very one sided this debate, so has anything good come from them. Because I see they have founded a fair few groups or at least are very active in them. Is all the belief that they are some type of cult just based on people’s beliefs, or here-say? Also I was looking at their stats on members, and they have a large following in Africa (by large I mean in compared to how many people that are part of the group) Why is this?

I also believe I'm a follower of raŭmismo as I like to promote the language, but I like the culture its already developed and prefer to add to that. But then I think I'm this way as the crazy old, green flag wielding, green hat, green clock wearing Esperantist’s who command everyone to learn Esperanto really don't do it for me.

Sounds about as much fun as 'Nova Roma'.

There's one to Google if you haven't already.

I wouldn't call them a cult. I'm sure some of them are very well-meaning. But it looks pointless from the outside, what with the powerless court system, the complicated laws and administrative structure, etc. It reminds me of my high school days, when my friends and I declared that the hallway where we ate lunch every day was now the "Republic of the Breezeway". We assigned ourselves positions and wrote a constitution and made maps of our territory. It was a sort of fun game for lunchtime.

I think my view of the Civito would be much more positive if they didn't slap a "persona non grata" certificate on those who disagree with them. It isn't a crime to write an article saying that you disagree with someone, but their loud proclamations of offence really make them look foolish.

I'm not sure what's up with Africa but as I understand it, the Civito has courted some African groups quite heavily, and I think offered them some money.

The Civito proclaims itself to be a Raumist organization but I see little in common between Raumism and the Civito. A citizenship without a country seems a bit pointless. It's a paper citizenship in every sense, it's akin to a club membership. It makes the civitanoj look like they have delusions of grandeur.

At any rate people involved with the Civito are a tiny percentage of Esperantists. I'm sure you can e-mail a Civito representative if you want to know more of their point of view.

erinja:This page has a nice summary of a few articles that have appeared in Libera Folio about the topic.

Basically they were accusing him of publishing lies; even if you believe every word they say, the worst you can accuse him of is bad journalism. It had nothing to do with feminism, as far as I understand. One of the "lies" was a typo in the name of their organization (but later corrected it when notified). In one of the articles, a FEM representative said that FEM declared Kalle to be a "persona non grata" becuase they had to defend themselves against "incorrect men" like him.

Ah. So nothing to do with feminism really, just them being either batchered insane, or having a good laugh and we're all thinking they're batchered insane?

Their decleration didn't really make sense to me. They seemed to be calling him an enemy of feminism or something like that.

Ferdinand Cesarano:I should mention that, of those who espouse this Raumist prinicple that holds that we are a people and a language minority, many will sneer at the "Fina Venko" thing. For me these two philosophies are not at all in conflict. We Esperantists are clearly a self-selected people and language minority (which is a Raumist principle); but, unlike other language minorities, which are at the same time ethnic minorities (such as the Basque and the Navajos), we are a people who gain strength by inviting everyone to join us (which is Fin-Venk-ist principle).

I'd agree, partially. Inviting people to join us is technically also a Raumist principle. Finvenkists are ultimately differentiated by wanting Espernato to be adopted by the world - a "final victory", not just a "victory'.

Ferdinand Cesarano:No one is forced to join the Civito; and no one whom the Civito doesn't like is forced to care that the Civito doesn't like them. But Esperanto is poorer for every Esperantist who mocks the Civito, and for every Esperantist who doesn't understand the good of such an organisation and such a sinteno within our people -- indeed, poorer for every Esperantist who doesn't even understand that we are a people. Ju pli da Civitanismo, des pli fortas la Esperantistaro.

From what I gather though, this Civitano is like if I said "I am now the ruler of Australia Nova! Let us form a new nation!". It's innately hard to take seriously.

Nationhood is normally a far more natural process, or a far more sudden process - e.g., bloody. The Civito seems to be neither, and possess little unifying ability.
There's several things missing:
- Regpovo/Potenco - Most important. A nation without the power of rule, or without the power to keep itself intact, safe, or assert itself, isn't so much a nation anymore. This doesn't necessarily have to be an internal power though - look at the EU for example, how a lot of power is shared.
- Akcepto - the nation needs people who accept it - e.g. adherents, and needs acceptance from those it claims to have in it.
- Formo - the nation needs to have a form, something recognisable to those who are in it, and those on the outside
- Less important: Unueco - but at the very least, a people need to be unified, but normally the idea of the nation itself is enough, looking at Indonesia, China, and other diverse countries (even if there is a predominate people, e.g. the Javanese or the Han)

The Civito thus seems to fit Erinja's decription of "playing government" - heck, it might turn into something real, but it's merely practice for if the real thing occurs.

It's also possible that the Esperanto "people" regard themselves as being dispersed and unified only by Esperanto, seeking neither power nor a definite form. They might merely wish to be the cohesive glue that keeps various groups in contact and communicating.

And then there's the distinction between Espernatists of the political and emotional charge, and speakers of Esperanto (like myself, although I am technically a "user" since I'm not particularly proficient at speaking).

erinja:I'm not sure what's up with Africa but as I understand it, the Civito has courted some African groups quite heavily, and I think offered them some money.

Erm, is that in a good way or bad way? The way you've worded that makes its intended meaning sort of ambiguous

Ferdinand Cesarano:They [The Esperanta Civito] are doing exactly what we as Esperantists should be doing: treating ourselves as a people.

Or perhaps as figures of fun?

ceigered:

erinja:I'm not sure what's up with Africa but as I understand it, the Civito has courted some African groups quite heavily, and I think offered them some money.

Erm, is that in a good way or bad way? The way you've worded that makes its intended meaning sort of ambiguous

It's intentionally ambiguous. I don't really know the situation.

-------------

As far as the Civito is concerned, yes, every club has its bylaws. But the Civito doesn't call itself a club, it calls itself a new government. When you join a club, you pay your money, and when you leave the club, no problem, you just leave. Most clubs don't have judges who meet and rule on whether you're allowed to leave! And most clubs don't charge you money to leave. At the Civito, it isn't just "leaving the club". Original Esperanto text from the Civito here, with translation:

Civito:...por retiriĝi el la Pakto ekzistas proceduro: necesas sendi la koncernan asemblean protokolon, kun subskriboj kaj akompana letero, al la Kortumo. Tiu proceduro estas praktike la sama plenumita por eniri la Pakton, solaj diferencoj estas la adreso al kiu skribi kaj ke, dum la aliĝo estas senpaga, la malaliĝo kostas 640,- svisajn frankojn (512,- eŭrojn).

...to withdraw from the Pact, there is a procedure: it is necessary to send the relevant meeting protocol, with signatures and an accompanying letter, to the Court. That procedure is practically the same one completed to enter the Pact, the only differences are the address of the recipient, and that, while joining is free of charge, withdrawing costs 640 Swiss Francs
(that's currently 707 USD or 523 EUR)

I'm not a great supporter of the UEA. But the UEA has a complicated system of committees because it does actually involve quite a few people, some thousands.

The Civito has a much more complicated bureaucratic apparatus than the UEA has, with courts, political parties, a parliament with two houses, and a population of... roughly 270 people. It's an awful lot of bureaucracy for very few actual participants. It's hard not to see it as a personal "government game" being played by its initiator and his friends.

Also, maybe declaring someone "persona non grata" makes sense when that person is a member of your organization. But serious organizations don't declare journalists to be "persona non grata" and ritually excommunicate them from the organization, simply because they write unflattering articles.

Journalists sometimes write unflattering articles. Sometimes they write things that are wrong. And sometimes they write things that are true, but you wish were not true. You have to deal with it as an adult, not as a baby. If it's wrong, you write a letter to the publication explaining why they're wrong (and perhaps publishing the letter on your website as well, as an open letter). Overblown accusations, saying that an article that someone wrote is "terrorism against the third world", only makes YOU look bad, not the person that you're calling a terrorist!

Evildela:
I also believe I'm a follower of raŭmismo as I like to promote the language, but I like the culture its already developed and prefer to add to that. But then I think I'm this way as the crazy old, green flag wielding, green hat, green clock wearing Esperantist’s who command everyone to learn Esperanto really don't do it for me.

I would like see it a kind of personal powerfullness. You seem to be capable to self-check and question your beliefs from an outside view. So, you seem to be definitive different to that kind of weired Esperantists you did point to.