Non-discriminative communication. Why Esperanto?

Theme of the outcome

Others and/or Cross-thematic

Description of the outcome

The deep problems in communication during the Forum clearly showed how necessary would be the introduction of one common, neutral and democratic language of international communication. The idea, that this language should be the Esperanto, is at present for most of the participants more than fantastic.
Swedish organizers were trying to solve the communicative problems in an other democratic way endeavoring to make it possible that every speaker could speak in his/her native language, but it often only aggrevated the linguistic chaos and the incapability to understand each other. The speakers of so called „lesser used languages”, and mainly those who couldn’t speak English suffered from this the most. While those participants whose mother tongue was English, or who were from neibouring coutries, and whose practice in English had been better than that of other nations, often led the discussions and could speak as needed, the members who had to fight with linguistic problems, could express themselves with great difficulties, and suffered great disadvantages in communication.
Two lectures dealt with communication problems: the one was that of Seán Ó Riain’s, an Irish diplomate and the president of the European Union of Esperantists ”Intercultural Dialogue in a Global World?”. Mr. Ó Riain argued with strength for Esperanto as the best solution for international linguistic communicative problems. He spoke about the great costs which could be spared by EU introducing Esperanto (it mounts to cca. €25 bn per year), he also empasized those unjust advantages which some few nations enjoy by the present linguistic situation (eg. about €16 bn per year economic profit for GB economy), he also mentioned dangers of the general spreading of English for other languages and also for the cultural identity of Europe itself.
Another speaker who also argued for equal rights in communication and for Esperanto, was Veronika Heé an university teacher from Hungary. She participated in a seminar which was organized by the members of nations and ethnics with very severe problems of linguistic disadvantages: Basques, Catalans, Kurds etc. Her argument followed a line of thoughts from the general question of linguistic discrimination, through the economic, psychic etc. disadvantages which the speakers of so called „lesser used languages” undergo, and the necessity of one common neutral language of communication, up to the thought that this function could be fulfilled rightly only by Esperanto, as a planned and therefore neutral language. This argument is not unknown to Esperantists but deserves promotion among people who are not yet aware of not only the cultural, but also political and economic dangers of the unilateral spread of English as the general means of international communication. She also touched the problem why Esperanto isn’t successful enough in gaining role. Among the causes she emphasized that in media are mostly asked experts who actually live from linguistic problem and non-communication: language teachers, translators, linguists, so a generally bad image of Esperanto has been formed ever since from its birth. Nations whose language is used as international means of communication have enormous economic profit from language course tourism, so they are strongly contrainterested against a really democratic solution of communicative problem .

These facts together with the week presence of Esperantists on the Forum should stimulate much more effective activity of Esperantists in the future, having in their reach a vast community of people who are keenly searching for the ways of creating a more just and livable society. Into the frame of this search necessarily belongs also the cause of linguistic equity. Esperantists on the hand should make greater efforts to convince the people of Social Forum about the rationality and usefulness of using Esperanto, and the community of the Forum on the other hand should be able to realize their own interest in choosing a more just way of international communication than using the English, and so becoming the passive means of its final victory.

Esperantists’s proposal sounds: if European Unio was able to choose a neutral currency in Euro for the benefit of all, let it choose also a neutral common language, the Esperanto!