Is there an English translation of the Manifesto of Raum online anywhere? I can understand about two-thirds of the sentences; I am not quite fluent enough to read the whole text. If it hasn't been published in English maybe we could translate it together as an exercise?

(BTW I'm looking at the version which is housed at...

ftp.stack.nl/pub/esperanto/esperanto-texts.dir/tireso-rauxmo-voss.txt

)

Rikat:Is there an English translation of the Manifesto of Raum online anywhere? I can understand about two-thirds of the sentences; I am not quite fluent enough to read the whole text. If it hasn't been published in English maybe we could translate it together as an exercise?

(BTW I'm looking at the version which is housed at...

ftp.stack.nl/pub/esperanto/esperanto-texts.dir/tireso-rauxmo-voss.txt

)

I've found English translation

I found this translation: The manifesto of Rauma

(It is clearly translated by a non-native speaker of English, or else translated too literally from Esperanto, but I think you should get the idea. Obviously in case of doubt regarding meaning, the Esperanto original should be considered authoritative.)

For what it's worth -- we Esperantists are a small community. The more we divide ourselves and fight among ourselves, the more we hurt all of us. We can't afford to be at each other's throats over these points that have no meaning whatsoever to anyone outside of Esperanto's community of speakers, and regardless, most people find themselves somewhere in the middle between the two sides of this issue, with views that each side has some valid points. If we were to shove out everyone with Raumist ideas from the movement, or shove out everyone with Finvenkist ideas, we would all be the poorer for it (and the community would be much smaller).

And incidentally, the more we hysterically insist over one side or another, regardless of what side that is, it looks bad to beginners and puts people off from learning.

Koran dankon pro la ligiloj, Michaleo kaj Erinja! The version at everything2.com is beautifully translated and the introduction there helps to put it in perspective.

Erinja, yes, I agree that we should avoid fighting when we can, and give each other the freedom to use and enjoy Esperanto however each of us would prefer. But dividing ourselves into factions is a very common vice; I am not sure that I always have the strength to resist it.

Rikat:Erinja, yes, I agree that we should avoid fighting when we can, and give each other the freedom to use and enjoy Esperanto however each of us would prefer. But dividing ourselves into factions is a very common vice; I am not sure that I always have the strength to resist it.

It's true but I know that I can read the Prague Manifesto (The 'founding' document of Finvenkism) and say "Yep, I pretty much believe that" and also read the Rauma Manifesto and also say "Yep, that looks about right too".

These points become highly theoretical because there is so much that both sides can agree on. Is it better to have more Esperanto congresses? I think everyone would say yes. Is it good to use Esperanto in literature? I think everyone would say yes. Is it good to encourage international organizations to use Esperanto for practical purposes? Most people would give a yes to that one as well. These are all clearly defined positions in the Rauma Manifesto and I think most strong Finvenkists would agree with this point.

I think most people would agree that we want to encourage more people to learn Esperanto - whether you take the "second language for everyone because of abstract philosophical objectives" view of it, or the "we want more people to learn so there are more cool people to talk to and to create literature and art in our language" view of it. It almost doesn't matter *why* you think there should be more speakers, so long as we agree that it is a good thing to have more speakers. People split hairs over the whys, when it really doesn't matter. It's like arguing over whether ice cream is delicious because it's sweet, or because it's creamy. Can't we all just agree that it's delicious without fighting over why?

erinja:If we were to shove out everyone with Raumist ideas from the movement, or shove out everyone with Finvenkist ideas, we would all be the poorer for it (and the community would be much smaller).

Personaly I feel very upset if other Esperanto enthusiasts unintended put myself into their political movement actions. During some Esperanto event there often will happen some organized sightseeing tour where non-willing political capture can happen very easely. In fact these Finvenkistoj misuse my presence at some sightseeing tour to simulate some political movement which does some kind of political street rally. They even are very eager to film that extensively. But by original intention thats no way some political rally! Its intented to be sightseeing tour of an international visitor group who doesn't need oversized presense of internationalism.

I also don't need some kind of manifestoj to 'lokigi min'. It should be simple consensus: Someones can not expect that everybody has to share its own pride on its conservative or creative mindset or very individual mix of both. Don't try to pocket others into your owns 'pride box'.

spreecamper:I also don't need some kind of manifestoj to 'lokigi min'. It should be simple consensus: Someones can not expect that everybody has to share its own pride on its conservative or creative mindset or very individual mix of both. Don't try to pocket others into your owns 'pride box'.

It sounds like you need to be more careful about events that you participate in. At Esperanto conventions I've attended, it has always been clear, "we are going for sightseeing", or "we are going to make a demonstration in this city's main square". I have never gone on a sightseeing tour and found myself accidentally in the middle of a demonstration. Maybe you need to ask more questions before attending an activity at an event.

Also, many Esperanto speakers enjoy filming things, always. That doesn't mean that it is a street rally. It's just that some person wants to make a home video about their experiences.

erinja:It sounds like you need to be more careful about events that you participate in. At Esperanto conventions I've attended, it has always been clear, "we are going for sightseeing", or "we are going to make a demonstration in this city's main square".

At JES and FESTO events I attended there never were some political demonstration listed. Probably thats different at IJK event. I have to confess that I seldom have time and money to participate whole event period at JES and FESTO.

erinja:I have never gone on a sightseeing tour and found myself accidentally in the middle of a demonstration. Maybe you need to ask more questions before attending an activity at an event.

Its matter to discuss when some group walks turns into some political demonstration. For me to wave some flag of whatever is first mark of an demonstration. You're right, I should think about again if I really want to participate at some IJK event. Same like UK events most IJK events seem to be Esperanto pride events.

erinja:Also, many Esperanto speakers enjoy filming things, always. That doesn't mean that it is a street rally. It's just that some person wants to make a home video about their experiences.

Thats fine as far no Esperanto flag fills up the background behind me during that video recordings.

erinja:For what it's worth -- we Esperantists are a small community. The more we divide ourselves and fight among ourselves, the more we hurt all of us. We can't afford to be at each other's throats over these points that have no meaning whatsoever to anyone outside of Esperanto's community of speakers, and regardless, most people find themselves somewhere in the middle between the two sides of this issue, with views that each side has some valid points. If we were to shove out everyone with Raumist ideas from the movement, or shove out everyone with Finvenkist ideas, we would all be the poorer for it (and the community would be much smaller).

I have been around the field of international auxiliary languages for many years, and I have come to think that to whatever extent others outside the "movement" have any awareness of the languages at all, they may think that the advocates / users are an unpleasant coterie of disagreeable cranks or else they are dreamers not to be taken seriously. (Certainly there are exceptions among outsiders, but I suspect these two attitudes have some traction.)

Erinja is quite right: "We can't afford to be at each other's throats over these points that have no meaning whatsoever to anyone outside of Esperanto's community of speakers" -- or of any other proposed auxiliary language. I participate in an online forum for another language, and in recent times there have been some heated debates about structural features of the language itself. Admittedly, I myself have participated in some of those debates, and lately I have had to catch myself so as not to put my spoon too far into the soup.

On the whole the discussions here on lernu! have been a little more civilized, which is admirable. Presenting a fractured visage to the outside world is, shall we say, not a good way to proceed.

I think the best criticism of Raŭmismo, as well as the best criticism of many current debates, is that it is merely a restating and repackaging of arguments that have existed for as long as Esperanto itself has existed. The Rauma Manifesto didn't suddenly appear in the midst of a vacuum, so naming the ideology it expresses as "Raŭmismo" is as misleading as calling the argument against neologisms "Bonalingvismo".

In the first Universal Congress there was sufficient debate over the goals of the movement that the congress felt it necessary to define an Esperantist as "everyone who uses the language Esperanto equally for whatever purposes they use it." The pamphlet "For la neŭtralismon!" brings up the problem of the use of Esperanto by state and church officials as a means of oppression- saying something like "if policemen, judges and executioners learn and begin to use Esperanto, it does not signify that our ideal will soon be realized." This is quite the opposite of the problems that people like sudanglo routinely discuss. On their side, though, the Esperanto-Association of North America disintegrated as a result of persecution of communists, and was replaced by the Esperanto-League of North America.

In literary terms, there has always been a debate between people who felt the need for a richer vocabulary, and those who have felt the need to work within the basic collection of words provided by the Fundamento de Esperanto. The latter group has *very recently* been called "Bonalingvismo", but the debate long predates Claude Piron.

Someone did not suddenly decide that Esperanto was going to be "their plaything"- if anything, Esperanto has gotten tamer over the years as it has become less and less shocking for someone to use Esperanto as their plaything. William Auld, the most recent beloved Esperanto-author, was extremely tame and conservative by the standards of our time in every respect.

The same goes for any of the so-called "weirdos" in Esperanto: we've actually gotten tamer and more conservative as a movement over time, just as the world has. Having experimented heavily during the 20th century, we're taking what we learned and rebuilding. These facts are not unique to our language or movement. The fact that, nowadays, people feel the need to assert themselves as the opposite of "Finvenkistoj", shows how strong the idea of "finvenkismo" has become over the years (even if the word itself is a pejorative). If it wasn't a powerful idea then no one would bother to disparage it.

Himself, Zamenhof felt the need to express the "Interna Ideo" for determining leaders in the movement- he wouldn't have needed to do this unless it was an issue. For some reason, though, we all tend to think these are new, pressing, hot-off-the-press problems.

I'm sorry if this veered just *a little* off-topic. I think Don Harlow has written some excellent English articles on these subjects, but I can't remember where.