(PLEASE check at least 3 options you agree the most with. Thanks.)

Every single day I see the situations in which Esperanto would the perfect choice. It isn't only in international situations, but also in very internal national situations.

Every single day that we don't do something about this, is a day less that human kind will enjoy with a better language.

I have written in my Blog, several articles in English, Spanish and in Esperanto, trying to see if we get ideas about what to do, since nothing is really happening that will make things different as far as our species adopting AS BRIDGE LANGUAGE the mature Esperanto language.

Please, leave your comments after you read the Blogs, but, better than that, suggest immediate actions.

This is where you can read the blogs:

1) In Esperanto
2) In English and Spanish

Thank you for your interest.

Please, for the survey, try to check the 3 options that you agree the most with.

Also, suggest, suggest and suggest more. Include suggestions that would be aimed at making Esperanto the "Monda Ponta Lingvo" NOW, in our times, in our years, at least in our decade.

Goal: 750 million practical speakers in 10 years. Include the fact that 250 million of those will be younger than 10 years old and a lot of them have not been born as of today.

Goal: all 750 million should be proportionally distributed in all the countries of the world, except China, which should have more, proportionally.

The next jump would be 3 to 4 billion, if we get the first step.

Goals can't be reached unless they are defined.

Please, leave your suggestions and if you have negative views, please, explain why.

We need to have a lot of ideas of why or why not Esperanto should, can or can not become a real asset for human communication.

Thanks for your interest...

My own feeling is that it is only fluent speakers, who can effectively think in the language, and easily follow broadcasts or speeches at congresses, who can make a credible public case for it, or lobby politicians. I'm not yet there myself.

But even fluency is not enough. It's people who have not only attained fluency but also seen how it could help in real situations (like Claude Piron in his experience as a translator) who can usefully exert a public influence for it. Almenaux, tio estas mia opinio!

I don’t think Esperanto is a real solution but I support the idea of getting as many people as possible to learn it, because it is a major step in the right direction. It is possible to learn a lot from the mistakes of others and as Esperanto has managed to make such a spectacularly large number of mistakes ( don’t worry I am not about to detail them all - most have been covered by other people in other places ) we should be able to learn an increadible amount about how not to go about the process of international language design. So the more people we get interested in the idea, the more chance there is of producing something better than the scriblings of a retarded Polish teenager and a bunch of well-meaning, but uneducated, amateurs.

rlsinclair:Esperanto has managed to make such a spectacularly large number of mistakes... So the more people we get interested in the idea, the more chance there is of producing something better than the scriblings of a retarded Polish teenager and a bunch of well-meaning, but uneducated, amateurs.

M.C. Butler wrote at the end of his Step by Step in Esperanto that the student who studied the language as it really was would come to appreciate that the language he presumed to be able to correct was in reality the work of a genius. It was being developed and tested during Zamenhof's teenage years, but the whole thing was burned up (literally, by his father) and then reconstructed from scratch and tested all over again. So the first book wasn't published till Zamenhof was a qualified physician of 27, having been a gifted linguist from childhood - thus the word 'retarded' has no relation to his reality. It is precisely because it was not the product of hasty scribbling (spelt with two 'b's, while we are on the subject of being educated) that it has become the most successful of auxiliary languages. Being 'amateur' is no crime, nor being Polish, but so far as being 'uneducated' goes, Harold Wilson, Oxford graduate and former British Prime Minister was an Esperantist. The poet Kalocsay was a senior physician, William Auld a senior school master and there have been Nobel prize winning Esperantists like Thomson (Physics, 1906), Fried (Peace, 1911), Bovet (Medicine, 1957) and Selten (Economics, 1994). Auld was nominated for the Literature prize just before his death.

Miland:M.C. Butler wrote at the end of his...

All good points, but all you're really doing is feeding a troll.

I think that it would be great if Esperanto became a worldwide second language but I doubt it will ever happen. Logic doesn't usually play a very big role in government policy decisions. Or else a certain government that shall remain nameless might have realized that for the money they are spending attacking other countries, they could have offered free healthcare to everyone, fixed the schools, helped more poor people, etc.

In any case I prefer to focus my efforts on improving the Esperanto speaking ability of those who have already been convinced of the benefits of speaking Esperanto. I am a strong believer in the saying "Esperanton devas unue lerni la Esperantistoj" ("The Esperantists must be the first to learn Esperanto")

Regarding Zamenhof - it's my understanding that he was a poor doctor, but very good at languages. Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion of Esperanto's strengths and weaknesses but Esperanto has a lot of ingenious aspects that aren't immediately obvious. Certain elements of it that people like to complain about enable greater precision and flexibility than other constructed languages.

As Miland mentioned, it doesn't do Zamenhof justice to brush him off as an uneducated teenage retard, nor to likewise disparage Esperanto's early supporters (who were mostly very well educated - the uneducated working class, at the time, would have had little free time to spend on something like Esperanto). Zamenhof spent a great deal of time testing and fine-tuning Esperanto. If you stick with Esperanto long enough to reach a high enough level to read "Lingvo kaj Vivo", I highly recommend it. It's a collection of essays on Esperanto, the development of Esperanto, and the comparison of Esperanto to other constructed languages. Each constructed language makes certain trade-offs between being easy and being precise. Esperanto has considerable advantages to other constructed languages created by linguists or committees of scholars. On close comparison of Esperanto to constructed languages that were designed by "professionals", most of the so-called advantages of these other languages are not really advantages at all. They are grammatical simplifications that lead to ambiguity and lack of clarity, or else vocabulary choices that make words easier to learn for Europeans and more difficult for others, etc.

If you think a professional can do a better job of designing a language than an amateur, I invite you to check out Novial, Interlingua, or Ido and make your own decision.