I just find the German plural "Handys" especially funny! It is a little bit like "liverwurst" back home and when you eat two of them they are "liverwursts".
BTW both of us are having a great time in Germany on vacation. It is very exotic for us and there are many things to explore. Like we are not used to using stairs - houses in Florida are usually one-story so we are having to learn to use stairs. And everybody here is always running! Floridians are slow pokes. The people here run down the subway stairs like rabbits and we wait with them for the train to come!!!!

Wow, that question made me laugh.

I think one of the greatest strengths the raciest community has is language diversity. A second language like Esperanto doesn't intend to eradicate a culture or native language, but rather provide a way for cultures to share themselves with each other. I would think this would be quite the opposite to what racists want.

But what am I going on for? You are obviously trolling.

Last year, a guy was pulling a similar argument with me. Apparently, in order for it to be used as the world's auxiliary language, it would have to be required and people would have to be forced to learn it and sankta fek! it would lead to lingual oppression of everybody in the world!

But he showed me. He went on to learn Spanish. o_O Hard core, right?

I also think the person who answered the question doesn't really know what the goal of Esperanto is. I really don't think their logic is sound, as accepting that Esperanto is mainly European (at least in terms of vocabulary) isn't by any means an argument for how ‘racist’ or ‘genocidal’ it is.

And I also agree with marcuscf when he says

Anyway, what I thought when I read that message is:
"As opposed to what?"
(1) Is Esperanto worse than isolated people who can't communicate with others? (2) Is Esperanto worse than using an ethnic language for communication?

Answers:
(1) No.
(2) No.

Because what does this person expect? To see nations and cultures totally isolated from each other? Or do they think that using English is a better alternative? I say no.

His latest response to an anonymous question:
[Note: I now realize he isn’t really worth anybody’s time, at least not mine.]

Anonymous asked:
Are all supporters of the Esperanto movement racist?

To support the Esperanto movement (as in, the movement which seeks to establish Esperanto as a second language for everyone in the world) one would have feel that linguistic diversity is a problem which could be solved by teaching everyone a language that is indisputably Eurocentric, then somehow ignore the fact that basically every lingua franca or “universal” language which came before it has had the effect of reducing linguistic and cultural diversity and enabling empires, corporations, ideologies, and even culture to become universal in their influence as well.

So, in answer to your question - yes.

So, I'm Akhav, the author of that tumblr post and the responses to the various questions some of you asked. I stumbled across this thread quite accidentally and thought I'd clarify a few things.

Firstly, all of you seem to assume that because I am opposed to Esperanto as an "international/world language/lingua franca" that I must support another IAL, English or a national language. I don't - I'm arguing for all of you to shelve the idea of an international auxiliary language because even if one is devised in such a way where it is linguistically neutral, it will inevitably become a language of commerce as did every lingua franca (local or international) which came before it. That will have an adverse effect on language diversity - not only do I know this from all of the major historical examples:

• English and its effect on countless languages but major examples are Native American languages, Maori language, Irish language and Papua New Guinea
  
• Tagalog and how it has became synonymous with "Filipino" despite the fact that about 80% of the country speaks a different language natively - not every Filipino is happy about that
  
• Arabic, Turkish and Farsi and their effect on the languages of the Berber people, the Kurds, the Gagauz, Shabaki, Yazidi, and Roma languages
  
• Mandarin and its effect on virtually all of the nearly 300 languages spoken in mainland China
  
• Swahili and its effects on East African languages (including Hadza - hypothesized to be among the oldest language in the world) - indeed, 80% of the world's endangered languages are in Africa
  
• Spanish and Portuguese and their effects on the indigenous languages of South and Central America
  
• Latin and Proto-Indo-European (languages) and their effect on the languages of Western Europe.

Esperantists typically argue that the aim is not to replace national languages but for Esperanto to be used as a second language - that's all good and fine, but although discriminatory language policies are a major catalyst for language extinction, language death often occurs for the simple reason that parents stop teaching their languages to their children in favor of the dominant political or commercial language. It's for that reason that my immigrant father didn't teach me Spanish as a child growing up in the United States (I learned it on my own nonetheless) and that his great grandparents taught their children Spanish (instead of their native language) and that my mother's ancestors didn't teach their children Irish.

In any case, I won't get in too deep here, but this is a link to my main post on this matter which wasn't referenced here and addressed many of your points:

http://akhav.tumblr.com/post/24188279789/against-e...

Also, to the guy who said there are no native speakers of Esperanto controlling Wall Street: ever heard of George Soros? One of the richest people in the world?

A point from my post I'd like to bring up here though:

A lot of you are suggesting that there are only two options: advocate for Esperanto as a world language, or advocate for English or another national language as a world language. You are missing another very important option: learn national languages, particularly national languages which are endangered, discriminated against and marginalized, particularly those of your living relatives and ancestors, and particularly those which are spoken in your communities. That is the only way we can simultaneously protect language diversity and become more connected as a species without putting entire cultures in peril. Consider the fact that 80% of the world speaks just 1.1% of its languages, and that at the current rate 40% of all languages still spoken will be extinct in 10 years. Don't take my word for it - do your own research. But if that statistic scares you, understand that lingua francas historically have only been at odds with language diversity and have been the main catalysts for language extinction. So learn Esperanto if you will, but don't advocate for its large-scale international adoption - the Esperantos before it have done enough damage as it is.

It's a simple fact that it's more useful to learn as a first language one that will aid your career and ease communication with others. So there'll always be a majority of parents that will never stop teaching the most useful language to their kids, for fear of disadvantaging them otherwise.

So given that this will always be the case, why not promote and make a language like Esperanto the most useful? English is all well and good and useful, but incredibly complicated and difficult to master, like most natural languages. Learning it occupies an incredible amount of time, for very little reward. You'll always be at a disadvantage to the natives. If one day parents can say that Esperanto is the most useful language to learn for jobs and communication etc then everyone will have an easier and fairer time.

The reason why it sounds like many Esperantists suggest that you either advocate Esperanto or some other world language, is probably because they are coming from this practical viewpoint. As the world becomes increasingly connected, as anyone in the world with an internet connection can read this post, we'll need a means of communication each other. Language is a response to our communication needs, and if our communication needs include the need for speaking with others worldwide, then we'll always have a world language.

So advocating to have no world language is just like putting your fingers in your ears and shouting "LA LA LA!": ignoring a practical issue that's not going to go away.

I happen to be a language nut, and enjoy learning bits of obscure languages, and want to get around to learning some more well-spoken natural languages. But even with that urge, I simply don't have the time for it all! I have confidence only in my English ability.

I think your idea otherwise is a wonderful one. We should always dabble in other languages, and try to provide ways for others to do the same. I was always frustrated that I couldn't find much learning material for Frisian... It's incredibly fun to learn how other cultures express things. But fundamentally, even with people who find this fun, finding the time is difficult. So imagine others who only see language as a practical means to communication and how little time they can devote to it! It's not a bad thing to want to maximise your benefit from language in as little time possible. I.e. by learning Spanish, I gain many places that I can communicate in, places I'm likely to visit. By learning Frisian though...

Ultimately, we must try to do your idea at the same time as having a world language. People like you and I care about those other languages, and want to see them learnt too. But this will always be balanced with our practical needs.

So given that we have to have a world language, pray that it will be Esperanto, so that after a couple years of learning it, people can turn their full attention to endangered languages. Rather than spending their lives grappling with English.

"Language death" is a part of the world's natural cycle just as physical death is. There was a time when people were mostly agrarian, lived mostly in small villages, were mostly uneducated, traveled by horse or ox cart, and most people rarely went more than 20 miles from the place they were born during their entire lifetimes. In such a world, the language of a given village will be slightly different from the village just a short distance down the road. With improved travel, education, and communication many of these local dialects will naturally die out. It's not a sudden death- they become gradually replaced by a language that encompasses a larger region. Today, English is slowly becoming that language in the world. I believe that a language such as Esperanto, if enough people were to learn it, could slow that creeping progression by providing a neutral means of communication. The fact that there are diverse languages in the world is not seen as a problem, communication is the problem. Esperanto could actually play a great part in preserving these diverse languages because it would put less pressure on people to learn English (or whatever the dominant language may become in the future) for fear that they won't be able to communicate effectively on a worldwide basis without it.

Husaaved: You are missing another very important option: learn national languages, particularly national languages which are endangered, discriminated against and marginalized, particularly those of your living relatives and ancestors, and particularly those which are spoken in your communities.

When I first read the "racist and pro-genocide" thing, I thought, wow, this person has clearly never spent a single second at an Esperanto event. And this last statement confirms it.

It doesn't sound like you know very many Esperanto speakers. In my experience, Esperanto speakers are much MORE likely than the general population to be interested in learning minority languages, and at Esperanto events, you frequently meet people who have studied languages with very small speaking populations. That's part of why "aligatorejoj" (events where Esperanto speakers practice speaking other languages to each other - not Esperanto, and not their native languages) are popular.

Esperanto tends to be more popular among linguistic minority populations than majority. Catalonia has a strong Esperanto group, as does Quebec. I would venture to say that the Quebec Esperanto group is probably more active than Canada's nationwide group. As a small linguistic minority, Esperantists tend, as a group, to be extremely interested in supporting other linguistic minorities, and extremely interested in learning about other languages, even less widely spoken ones. We at lernu.net (I'm on this site's governing team) and the foundation that financially supports us are investigating possible ways to use our online learning technologies in support of other minority languages. This is the kind of work that most Esperanto speakers would support.

For me personally, Esperanto has been a wonderful way to meet interesting people from all over the world and visit them in their countries, to get to know different cultures, and to talk to people who actually experienced world events that I only saw on the news before. I think back to all of the times when I visited a new country and local Esperanto speakers guided me around the local sites, introduced me to their food, their culture, their history, and their customs. I have personally gained so much from having learned Esperanto, which is why I help others to learn it (but only if they're interested - I don't go around promoting it, and with people I don't know well, I avoid mentioning that I speak it, to the point of being evasive when people ask me certain questions about my travels). It's hard to reconcile that with a statement like "racist and pro-genocide", particularly since our community is very small and utterly without political influence.

As a final note, we Esperanto speakers are a tiny minority in the world's population, and without any kind of political power, yet you seem to worry about Esperanto's success, enough to write an insulting blog post about it. Your criticisms might be more valid if Esperanto had any chance at all of actually becoming "everyone's second language". I think that will never happen, so you might as well quit worrying about it.

If you're bothering to write ill-informed blog posts about Esperanto, it must be that you feel that we have some chance of achieving some measure of success internationally. I would be interested to know why you think that's the case, because from within the Esperanto movement, I just don't see it.