I still can't get over reading about white supremacists and Lucky Star in the same post - it begs the question where many Esperantists are first inspired to learn the language, because clearly it's not because we're a whole lot of Gandhis.

Regarding the other variety of conlangs, in my personal investigations into them, I believe there is a large cloud of misconception that other conlangs are actually competing against each other somehow. Ido is primarily competing against EO, no doubt - but then again, Ido is pretty much Esperanto rebranded. But things like Interlingua are mistaken as being competitors too; I believe Gode himself once said something about all those wanting Interlingua to go up against Esperanto were really just Esperantists speaking Interlingua instead (I believe that was in a Don Harlow article provided by Miland once).

And if Esperanto was a state religion, Toki Pona is a form of meditation, or was intended to be so by Sonja Kisa - I think the reason that's been confused as a fullhearted IAL is due to young (read: older than me ) disillusioned Esperantistetoj who believed in simple=better, and well, Toki Pona is pretty damn simple (ironically, I find Volapük easier). And then there's Lingua Franca Nova, which to Interlingua what Italian is to Latin - And we could then call say that, for what Italian is to Latin, Interlingua is sort of toLatino Sine Flexione (although, Latino Sine Flexione only retains the vocabulary and pronunciation of Classical Latin, as the title may hint)

Of course, Interlingua could be the IAL by accident, it's entirely possible, but at the same time so could Esperanto, or [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volapük]Volapük[/url] could even be resurrected (I'm all for that actually ), ultimately it becomes an issue when people misbelieve that there can only be one language used for world wide communication, and draw in competition or raise the stakes as if it matters. I'm alright speaking gibberish for the worldwide language to be honest, it works well.

(Looking at the links - we can see that, in essence, the only two competing for the same space are EO and IO (who are currently parading over the body of a somewhat critically injured Volapük, now will someone get a medic for this guy?). Interlingua, LFN and LSF are all off in their happy world of being pan-romance-speaker-languages, and Toki Pona's not even intended for being of auxiliary use at all).

Chainy:

Hispanio:Unbelievable

How is it possible that an Esperantist can be a Neo-Nazi or a white supremacist, and so on?

Very possible. I was also shocked when I first came across this kind of thing. On the Libera Folio, the former president of the Ukrainian Esperanto Society made some very racist comments.

And then, there's a certain group of Esperantists within Europe, who like to whip up fear about Muslims eventually taking over Europe - and these Esperantists almost seem to have in their minds the idea of using Esperanto as some unifying force to hold together the people they regard as being 'true Europeans'... All very bizarre and utterly mad.

I know of that, too. Zlatko Tišljar, for instance, scares me much. I personally think that there are other IALs that are much suitable to his purposes...

As to Hispanio's rhetorical question and Chainy's post, it should be noted that the "interna ideo" can be interpreted both universalistically and particularistically, which leads to two opposing versions of the same idea. [To be elaborated on sooner or later.]

Chainy:We shouldn't all get too cosy with the idea that all Esperantists simply must be nice people. Ultimately, it's just a language and racists, people against this religion or that, etc - they can all find their own reasons for learning Esperanto and they are not always nice and happy ones!

Now that I've recovered from the initial shock of all this, I don't really see it as a problem. After all, Esperanto is just a tool and we can't control how people use it! Just as when we meet any new person, we need to check them out first, work them out, and we need to do the same with other Esperantists - rather than just assume they must be ok!

I've realized that, too. It's so sobering.

Chainy:It's worth looking into just who runs these Esperanto associations etc - I wouldn't want them proposing dodgy things in my name! But then there's quite a debate going on about this - whether Esperanto organisations should be politicised etc (The European Esperanto Association seems to have a few leading members, who think they should be)

Oh, well, I have had read of nasty accusations regarding Dr. Dasgupta (the current UEA president) and the newly-elected Academians. But I don't care about the mudslinging. I'd rather read about the Respubliko.

I think it's an easy solution with relation to other auxlangers. My constant line is that you shouldn't learn Esperanto if it doesn't appeal to you. I speak Esperanto because I like it and I enjoy it. If someone else enjoys Ido (Novial, Interlingua, etc) more, then that person should spend their time with those languages.

I am really not interested in arguing about whether Esperanto is better than these other languages. To me it is better, but someone else might have a different idea of "better". A person who is so argumentative about which is "better" probably won't ever be a devoted Esperantist, so I shouldn't waste my time.

Regarding racists, it's a tricky thing. I have only limited experience with it. At one Esperanto event, a friend of mine (who you could easily guess was Jewish, based on his name) confided in me that another Esperantist, whom I had known casually for some years, had just made some anti-Semitic comments to him. My friend reminded this person that Zamenhof was Jewish. But somehow it didn't matter to that person.

I've met Esperantists who believe in various conspiracy theories which are personally offensive to me. I have had Esperantists affirm to me that they believe in a world-wide Jewish conspiracy. It doesn't matter what you say, you can't convince them that this isn't true. Outside the US, I have run across Esperantist 9/11 conspiracy theorists (it's weird that they should express these ideas to me - I live in the DC area and I personally know people who were in the Pentagon when the plane hit, who saw bits of luggage and airplane parts at the site - and people burned alive so quickly that their bodies still sat at their desks. Yes, it was definitely an airplane, not a missile.)

I've never met an Esperantist white supremacist but I guess it doesn't surprise me that much. What does surprise me is that this person admitted to being a white supremacist. If someone told me that I should meet Esperantists in a place where I knew I wasn't welcome, I'd probably just say "Oh, ok, great idea", rather than putting myself into the position of explaining why I wouldn't be welcome. It's a relatively easy issue to deflect.

Chainy:a certain group of Esperantists within Europe, who .. whip up fear about Muslims..have in their minds the idea of using Esperanto as some unifying force to hold together 'true Europeans'..

Someone should tell them that
(a) Iran was the first country to sponsor Esperanto at the League of Nations, and this was stymied by that most European country, France.
(b) Ayatollah Khomeini approved of Esperanto (at first), and recommended its study by religious scholars in Qom.

That's apart from the interna ideo.

Some old-timers in our local DC group have made some mention of a former president of the group who was heavily into the UFO scene. This person's UFO obsession nearly killed the group, or so I hear. It was long before my time, and I couldn't get anyone to spill the juicy details!

I've asked a difficult question, indeed. Is there any official position from the UEA and TEJO regarding Esperantists espousing hate ideologies (racism, homophobia, Islamophobia, etc.)? Are they really officially "unwelcome"?

But I do see, that "welcoming" them can easily become a bone of contention. And we need internal cohesion within the movement. Yet, it feels strange, that while we welcome communists and anarchists, we are not that open towards fascists. Maybe because fascists almost drove us to extinction in the past...

For now, it's not yet a major problem, since they are only a few. But as we see the rise of the EEU, whose ideas are chauvinistic, to say the least (as this article shows), we have to face this problem sooner or later.

The non-ideological differences meanwhile are just plain amusing. Ju pli diverse, des pli bonege~! They give color to the community, and they enrich our understanding of the world.

@Erinja: Oh, reminds of that show "UFO Hunters". I wonder what they did under his guidance. Maybe a congress in Roswell? Kidding aside, one has to separate his personal hobbies from his official duties. Too bad, that he mixed them up.

@Patrik

UEA/TEJO ne povas doni al si la rajton jugxi kiu rajtas kaj kiu ne rajtas esti membro, aux eble nur en ekstremaj kazoj.

Aliflanke, estas ne nur membroj sed ankaux asocioj kun kiu UEA estas en rilatoj (listigita en jarlibro), kaj antaux engagxigi en rilatoj kun gxi, oni kontrolas kelkajn ecojn de la asocio.

Radio~!:In the UK .. one individual .. is spamming members of the landa asocio with .. the newsletter published by his local "9/11 truth" movement..

I recall one 9/11 conspiracy article in Monato.

Whether the spammer is connected to this I don't know, but it may be worthwhile to write to him as individuals, to get removed from the mailing list.

I would see no problem with conspiracy theorists and UFO aficionados but I'd agree that it goes from being an interesting cultural point to a "what the" when it involves excessively pushing and becoming a dominating topic, especially since in regards to this mailing list, I take it many people aren't exactly fussed about some fringe theories (otherwise they would have joined that conspiracy truth group themselves).

@ Patrik: I assume that there's a bit of a complication involving tolerance and the the position of UEA/TEJO (I don't know the official stance though). Especially since occaisionally there can be a time and place for intolerance (surely no one here would be condoning of the actions of various religious extremist groups, such as the Taliban). But of course there's the fine line between "the Taliban is being bad" until some silly person decides that by extension "if taliban = islam, and islam = widespread, oh noez the worldz gonna end!" . I guess it's just hard as humans to draw a line without causing controversy some way or another (in the case of the Taliban and Islam, the line is clear, Islam is a peace promoting religion and should be treated with peace, the Taliban is a militant organisation and therefore does not promote peace, maybe someone can find a better issue that's less clear cut, like evolution vs. religion).

EDIT: Jan's message translation clears things up a bit:

Jan Aleksan:@ Patrik:
UEA/TEJO can't give themselves the right to judge who is allowed or not allowed to be a member, or possibly only in extreme cases.

On the other hand, there are not only members but also associations which the UEA is in relations with (listed in the yearbook), and before engaging in relations with them, they verify various traits of the associations.

Thanks! I know that I should write in En, But My mind automatically switch to Eo...