Vestitor:

Tempodivalse:Now, would it be nice if Esperanto suddenly gained massive international support and had a billion speakers? I think so; I'm not disputing that. I merely question whether it is worthwhile to try or hope to bring about out such an outcome, or make such an outcome the focus of our time in Esperantujo.

That is just self-defeating, and probably a contradictory statement. You think it would be great if the language gained widespread traction, but don't think it is worthwhile to try or even hope?

Nonsense on stilts.

The rhetorical flourish aside, I don't see how my statement is self-contradictory.

There are many possible things in life which it would be nice to have, but which are, realistically, not worth striving for, or spending too much energy hoping for. To use an extreme example, it would be nice for me to win the lottery, but I would say it is hardly worth my time to buy lottery tickets, especially when I could be using that time to focus on other goals or interests which are more attainable and more personally enriching to myself.

You might disagree that Esperanto's mass adoption is similarly improbable, but that doesn't make the statement self-contradictory.

And if one does assume that it is improbable, then there seems nothing self-defeating here, any more than there is something self-defeating about not buying lottery tickets despite acknowledging that it would be nice for you to win the lottery. My priorities, in this case, are elsewhere - personal growth and enrichment.

And again, this is in no way a criticism of those who want to go and actively promote Esperanto; just a plea to acknowledge that values among Esperantophones vary.

Good idea. We could just say "there should be an international language". Then, if they accept that, they will naturally choose Esperanto because it is the biggest and most well suited

I am glad that you warm to the idea, Alkanadi. But it is of course more than promoting the idea that there should be an international language. It is rather that the only equitable solution and practical solution is an 'artificial language', and one that has been designed specifically for that purpose, (for which English, or any of the national languages, haven't been so designed).

It is still very instructive to read what Zamenhof himself had to say on the subject.

Look through the Fundamenta Krestomatio - scroll down to section VI, Artikoloj pri Esperanto, first item.

For me, it is simply a question of having different values (the old Raŭmism vs Finvenkism split

Not so old, Temp.

Raŭmismo as a formalised point of view with its explicit defeatism only dates back to the 1980's. (Is it just a coincidence that it appears around the time of the emergence of Punk?)

Before that those Esperantists who were just interested in Esperanto out of intellectual curiosity, or from an aesthetic point of view quietly pursued their interest without any proselytising.

Tempodivalse:

Vestitor:

Tempodivalse:Now, would it be nice if Esperanto suddenly gained massive international support and had a billion speakers? I think so; I'm not disputing that. I merely question whether it is worthwhile to try or hope to bring about out such an outcome, or make such an outcome the focus of our time in Esperantujo.

That is just self-defeating, and probably a contradictory statement. You think it would be great if the language gained widespread traction, but don't think it is worthwhile to try or even hope?

Nonsense on stilts.

The rhetorical flourish aside, I don't see how my statement is self-contradictory.

Maybe more vicious circle than self-contradictory: Thee says "it would be nice...." but then says it's not worthwhile to even try......but if we don't even try, thy "would be nice" is very probably not going to happen.

A

Raŭmismo as a formalised point of view with its explicit defeatism only dates back to the 1980's. (Is it just a coincidence that it appears around the time of the emergence of Punk?)

What makes you think Raumism is connected to punk? I haven't seen this connection made before, I'm intrigued now ...

Before that those Esperantists who were just interested in Esperanto out of intellectual curiosity, or from an aesthetic point of view quietly pursued their interest without any proselytising.

The name "Raumism" might be relatively new, but it seems that the ideas behind the name have been around somewhat longer. It could be traced all the way back to the Boulogne declaration of 1905, where an Esperantist was defined anyone "who knows and uses the language Esperanto...for whatever aim he uses it for." No mention of needing to support a certain worldview. (Yes, I know the rest of the Declaration is decidedly finvenkist.)

I suspect that you don't hear about the pre-Raumism Raumists so much because they tended to not be so vocal.

Tempodivalse:
No mention of needing to support a certain worldview.

This makes it seem as though it is a religion or a crank ideology. It's hardly that, it's just promotion of a very useful means of communication.

Maybe more vicious circle than self-contradictory: Thee says "it would be nice...." but then says it's not worthwhile to even try......but if we don't even try, thy "would be nice" is very probably not going to happen.

In a nutshell: I (usually) do not find it worthwhile to spend effort/time to try to bring about highly improbable outcomes, when I could use that effort/time for endeavours which are closer and more attainable, and can more reliably bring about some kind of positive outcome.

Don't we adopt this attitude all the time? I cited the lottery as an obvious case; there are others. It would be nice if I could land a top-notch tenured job at an Ivy League school, but the amount of effort I'd put in trying to get accepted with no qualifications just isn't worth the tiny probability that I'd achieve my goal. Why not instead do something with that time that I can realistically attain and/or enjoy - e.g., take a pottery class, go for a master's degree at a small local college.

It seems to me that the main issue is whether Esperanto's mass adoption is similarly improbable or implausible. Can't we ask that question without being labelled defeatists?

Vestitor:

Tempodivalse:
No mention of needing to support a certain worldview.

This makes it seem as though it is a religion or a crank ideology. It's hardly that, it's just promotion of a very useful means of communication.

I didn't mean to imply that. If you prefer, we could say that the Bolougne definition of "Esperantist" has no mention of needing to promote Esperanto. There are no preconditions at all, aside from knowing the language and using it in some way.

If you prefer, we could say that the Bolougne definition of "Esperantist" has no mention of needing to promote Esperanto. There are no preconditions at all, aside from knowing the language and using it in some way.

The difference between the idea that all are welcome to learn Esperanto and Raŭmismo, is that this explicitly rejects the idea of any sort of fina venko, and positively advocates turning inward and ignoring the world.

It's all a bit Goth, like some angst ridden teenager painting the walls of his bedroom black.

If the early Esperantists had all been Raŭmists, the language wouldn't be where it is today.

There is in any case an inherent contradiction between concentrating on developing Esperanto's own culture and at the same time ignoring an important part of it.

sudanglo:...that this explicitly rejects the idea of any sort of fina venko...

If Esperantists want a final victory then there needs to be incentives to learning and speaking it.

Right now, it seems to be a bit of a hobby for people. If there was a financial incentive then people will learn it. Could it help someone get a job?

Maybe we (me included) could pool a little bit of money and give it to some of the poorer Esperanto associations around the world. Or, maybe we need some type of lobby group.