andogigi:

Frankouche:Tsss tsss no vote please.

I wonder if throwing the "Plena Ilustrita Vortaro de Esperanto" to president Obama could be a better idea than a simple electronic erasable vote

I wouldn't throw anything at the guy. There's been enough of that involving shoes.

4 days till the deadline, I agree with Frankouche (but I don't understand the subtle jokes about throwing objects, is this to do with news with Obama? I've been more interested in South Africa vs. Australia boxing day test so U.S. news has barely gotten my attention).

ceigered, I think this is an oblique reference to President Bush's visit to Iraq, where a journalist from that country threw his shoes at Bush to show his dislike.

I'd like to throw out a question for everyone to think about, though. I agree that it would be great if schools and universities began offering courses in Esperanto. But do we need to get governments involved in this?

Some time ago I read an article where some well-known Esperantist was being asked if he thought it a good idea to prod the European Union to adopt Esperanto as an official language. He answered that he thought it a good idea to keep Esperanto and govermental bureaucrats as far apart as possible (my paraphrase, not his exact words). He remarked that Esperantists pretty much control change in their language by accepting or rejecting changes. But if bureaucrats from any country, whether it be the U. S., the European Union, China, Russia, you name it, get involved with Esperanto, they are certain to mess things up for us.

My philosophy is simple though a bit cynical: keep government out of it. They screw up ninety percent of everything they get their hands on. Esperanto might (or might not) be better known today if it weren't for World War I and II. Who started the wars? Governments, of course. As I said, that is a cynical interpretation, but I'll leave it to you to decide how much truth there is in it.

But governments are good at certain things, such as educating entire countries, and so can definitely help spread Esperanto. Isn't it very unfinvenkish to condemn government involvement for fear of change?

Of course it would be very desirable to have teachers and learning books in some way accredited by the Akademio, or at least have the Akademio oversee it.

I wish I could find the article that I read although it's been 6 or 8 months ago that I read it. But it was written by a big-name Esperantist like Don Harlow or maybe Claude Piron. I just don't remember who wrote it or what website I saw it on. But it was not my idea. I was simply passing it on.

It didn't have anything to do with fear of change though. It was more about knowing how bureaucrats operate. What they endorse, they take over.

Who would you rather have telling you how to use the grammar and vocabulary of Esperanto -- some committee composed of lawyers and politicians who may or may not know anything about the language, or experienced speakers on the language?

Your second paragraph made a lot of sense and doing it that way might be desirable. But when governments start allocating money to a project, it becomes politicized. I simply urged caution.

Rogir:But governments are good at certain things, such as educating entire countries, and so can definitely help spread Esperanto.

I'm not sure I agree with the idea that governments are good at educating citizens. It is my opinion that the American government has been doing a TERRIBLE job with schools in the United States.

However, when it comes to language reform, it is often governments which have taken the lead in the past. When America was ruling occupied Japan, we instituted character reform to make it easier to read. After the revolution in China, the government did something similar but on a much larger scale. While controversial, both proved to be successful.

I must say, however, that jawq81 has a very valid point. Politicians are terrible at just "leaving things alone". If they get their hands on our language, I wouldn't be surprised if they try to alter it.

I found that article that inspired my opinion that letting government bureaucrats get their hands on Esperanto would be a poor idea. Here it is and many of you have probably read it before. Nevertheless, I'm curious about what you feel about it.

Esperanto: A reply to some arguments against Esperanto, by Don Harlow
http://esperanto.org/us/USEJ/world/kontraux.html

Q. Esperantists all agree that Esperanto should be made the official language of the European Union . . . Don't they?

A. Fortunately, I'm not a citizen (first-class or second-class) of the European Union, so I don't have to look at what would be most advantageous for the EU. I am an Esperantist, and tend to look at what would be most advantageous for Esperanto. And, as far as Esperanto becoming a tool of the EU gov't, I just don't see it.

1. Esperanto doesn't belong to anybody -- and hence it belongs to everybody who wants to use it. Unless a couple of other heavyweights were to decide, at the same time as the EU, to make Esperanto their official language (and I don't see that happening!), the EU would, in effect, become the new owner of Esperanto; so, farewell, our vaunted cultural and political neutrality.

2. And, once the EU had decided "in principle" to adopt Esperanto, who's to guarantee that a couple of Eurocrats, munching at a McDonald's in Brussels, would not decide to "repair" the language. A century of use has shown that "repairs" (they are commonly called "reforms") are generally the products of people who read through Teach Yourself Esperanto once, decide that because Zamenhof didn't do it in the same way the French do he was dead wrong, and set out to fix up the language. In other words, most proposed reforms of Esperanto are definitely not for the better. Mostly they end up in the garbage can ("dustbin", if you prefer) of history. The EU would have the clout to ensure that, good or bad, this would not happen.

I think that the adoption of Esperanto by the EU would be a step toward resolving a multitude of problems that plague the organization -- including the serious one of making it more democratic. But I don't think that it would do Esperanto any good, and so I'm not terribly enthusiastic about the idea. And I know that there are other Esperantists -- including many in the EU itself -- who agree with me.

There are open questions to the Obama administration on Change.gov. This is really Change.gov this time

Search for Esperanto and vote.

If anything we can bring Esperanto to the light and ears of the new Administration. I am expecting that only Americans can vote, but I do not know for sure.

Multilingual instructions on how to vote: http://esperantofre.com/eroj/EoChange.htm

I believe that change.org is intended only for US citizens, and therefore I do not intend to vote on it.

I have specifically asked about this, and they said that this was for everyone - not just US residents, so please go an vote and tell everyone about it.

I can send you their reply to my question if you like... =)