Why "English-language privilege" is really a much greater issue than "White privilege"

[PaleoEuropean]

China is a lot more powerful and advanced than that now. This is not the 1980's. They have already supplanted the US (or Britain, France, Germany etc.) as being the principal trading partner of many countries. What's more, many non-Westerners can relate more to China's system of authoritarian state capitalism than to Western liberal democracy. (Was it Lee Kuan Yew who taked about "modernisation without Westernisation" and "multiple modernities"?)

Westernization and Chinese Communism are all branches of Globalism. We are entering the age of National Populism. The time of the brainless consumer and desk slave is over. People are waking up.

[Tooting Carmen]

What does other countries benefiting from our advancements and industry have to do with changing borders? You are probably the most Globalist/consumerist person on this forum, don't try to lecture me . When people wan't to learn what the sauce packets at Panda Express say, they learn Chinese; when they wan't to learn how to play with the big boys and make money; they learn English. That is just a fact.

(1) Like I said earlier, I find the value system of various 'identitarians' and 'nationalists' here more than a bit warped: they put much more emphasis on "I want my grandchildren to be blonde and blue-eyed" than "I want my grandchildren to speak my language". (2) I don't support globalism and consumerism - to the contrary, I find them tacky, decadent, anti-democratic, homogenising, over-centralising, wasteful and environmentally destructive. (3) Contrary to how some portray me, I do not support unlimited immigration nor mass miscegenation. Rather, I don't believe in totally shutting the borders, much less on deporting second and third-generation ethnic minorities. As for miscegenation, I don't think it is an end in itself; rather, it is merely value-neutral, and I don't get triggered by seeing people of different colours in a relationship together like quite a few other forum members seem to do.

[Tooting Carmen]

Westernization and Chinese Communism are all branches of Globalism. We are entering the age of National Populism. The time of the brainless consumer and desk slave is over. People are waking up.

And preserving and reaffirming different national and local languages is, or at least ought to be, a big part of said populism.

[PaleoEuropean]

And preserving and reaffirming different national and local languages is, or at least ought to be, a big part of said populism.

Only white Anglo countries speak English on a day to day basis, its not like Indians or Africans even speak fluent English, their English is shit and learned as a secondary language. The whole argument is stupid. Universal trade languages have existed since the dawn of time.

[Thunder_shock]

...

[Tooting Carmen]

Only white Anglo countries speak English on a day to day basis, its not like Indians or Africans even speak fluent English, their English is shit and learned as a secondary language. The whole argument is stupid. Universal trade languages have existed since the dawn of time.

On a regional/continental basis yes, but not really on such a global basis like now. I don't accept the utilitarian argument that languages are just tools of communication; they carry history, identity, community and attachment. Defending minor languages like Welsh, Breton and Basque I will admit cannot be done using conventional economic arguments. Rather, it is about identity, culture, authenticity and fighting back against the legacy of centralisation and economic/political oppression.

[Tooting Carmen]

(1) Like I said earlier, I find the value system of various 'identitarians' and 'nationalists' here more than a bit warped: they put much more emphasis on "I want my grandchildren to be blonde and blue-eyed" than "I want my grandchildren to speak my language".

Possibly the worst examples of the lot are the self-styled 'nationalists' from various Spanish-speaking countries (including Spain itself), who'd rather marry some blonde Scandinavian or Slavic bimbo who speaks not a word of Spanish than someone who actually does speak their language but happens to be one or two shades darker in skintone.

[Laly]

An "identitarian" language? What an ambiguous concept, nothing could be more opposed to Esperanto and the universal values it conveys. While you're erecting border fences, while you're locking yourself down in your fortress Europa, Esperantists feel free like the air. Contrary to what you think, universalism inherited from the Enlightenment is still alive in many hearts.

If your wish is to catch up on old prehistoric times in search of your lost soul and roots, you'd better learn how to build a mud hut, ride a horse bareback, shoot arrows and set deer traps. It would be more useful than learning a "revived" language nobody has ever heard of.

No, an “identitarian language” is not an ambiguous concept, it’s very clear.

Even your "progressist" friends don’t believe in universalism as, for ex., they consider that a white couldn’t play the role of a black, that a white couldn’t understand a black, that a normal heterosexual couldn’t play the role of a transgender. Leftist racialism and all sorts of communautarianism are thriving.

And the universalism inherited from the Enlightenment is eminently paternalistic and contemptuous towards non-Europeans. Universalism is greatly an ethnocentrism consisting of modelling on other societies our own mental schemes. And in France, who supported colonisation? The universalist left, in order to bring the Englightenment and the benefits from the French Revolution to the peoples of the world. Léon Blum, the great icon of socialism, even said it’s the duty of the superior races to civilize the inferior ones.

The European culture has become a global Leitkultur losing at the same time its specificities. All indicators show we are living a great identitarian crisis, the traditional values have become politically incorrect, anachronistic.

And according to the great specialist of social systems Niklas Luhmann, exclusion is very important in order to build a strong society, as a random mix of values would only lead to a society thirsty for sense and regulation, where new exclusive institutions and identities would compulsory appear.

[Melki]

No, an “identitarian language” is not an ambiguous concept, it’s very clear.

Even your "progressist" friends don’t believe in universalism as, for ex., they consider that a white couldn’t play the role of a black, that a white couldn’t understand a black, that a normal heterosexual couldn’t play the role of a transgender. Leftist racialism and all sorts of communautarianism are thriving.

And the universalism inherited from the Enlightenment is eminently paternalistic and contemptuous towards non-Europeans. Universalism is greatly an ethnocentrism consisting of modelling on other societies our own mental schemes. And in France, who supported colonisation? The universalist left, in order to bring the Englightenment and the benefits from the French Revolution to the peoples of the world. Léon Blum, the great icon of socialism, even said it’s the duty of the superior races to civilize the inferior ones.

The European culture has become a global Leitkultur losing at the same time its specificities. All indicators show we are living a great identitarian crisis, the traditional values have become politically incorrect, anachronistic.

And according to the great specialist of social systems Niklas Luhmann, exclusion is very important in order to build a strong society, as a random mix of values would only lead to a society thirsty for sense and regulation, where new exclusive institutions and identities would compulsory appear.

Now it's your turn to make hasty judgements on the values I believe in. And you lump all liberals and progressionists together.
For example, I dislike when the N-word is dropped from a novel in the name of the politically correct, among many other things. My progressive friends think I am too conservative for their taste.
If I am a Leftist, then I am an atypical one.

Obviously, progressive thinkers of the 19th Century defended positions that would be seen as reactionary today, like colonialism or patriotism. Likewise, one century ago, only the Socialist and the Radical Left were in favor of a State and a Church strictly separated from each other. Today, even Marine Le Pen is utterly promoting the principle of laïcité. During the 3rd Rep she would have been considered a Leftist by the totality of the parliament members. Homosexuality and abortion were universally loathed.
It's because throughout decades and centuries, society evolves towards more progressivism. Liberals from yesterday are today's conservatives.

If you feel that Europe is suffering from a deep identity crisis, instead of pointing your finger at immigration, you should first of all blame your fellow countrymen. Do you find normal that Belgian and French parents name their children Enzo or Ryan? We reproach the Muslims for sticking to their own traditions. But the truth is that we should follow their example, and pick our children's names from the calendar of the saints.

Now back to Esperanto. Esperantists promote values like equality between races and genders, transborder brotherhood...no wonder that so many Socialists, Christians and Baha'i were seduced by this language. But Universala Esperanto-Asocio is by essence a neutral organization, apolitical and secular. Political and religious movements founded their own associations in the margins of the parent organization.
That's why I think it would be the ideal lingua franca.

What does other countries benefiting from our advancements and industry have to do with changing borders? You are probably the most Globalist/consumerist person on this forum, don't try to lecture me . When people wan't to learn what the sauce packets at Panda Express say, they learn Chinese; when they wan't to learn how to play with the big boys and make money; they learn English. That is just a fact.

Chinese are pragmatic people. And they are aware that their language is to difficult to be taught on a large scale, although they opened several Confucius Institutes throughout the world in order to promote their language and their culture. On the contrary, they know their future success largely depends on mastering the English language. Because being bilingual is a strength, and they put a big emphasis on it.

When conducting business negotiations, who do you think has the best poker hand, the monolingual Americans, or the bilingual Chinese?

[Ajeje Brazorf]

(4) The issue of language encourages much more self-hatred than does the issue of race, to the point where some self-styled "nationalists" from countries like Germany and Sweden explicitly say they don't care at all if their languages disappear.

I think they are rightly more concerned about the disappearance of their ethnicity than their language.

(5) In the case of non-Western countries, the invasiveness of English is much more detrimental to cultural integrity and self-esteem than are billboards and magazines full of blonde women.

It is not, just as Latin has not been in the past.

(6) In the case of Western countries, the invasiveness of English is much more detrimental to cultural integrity and self-esteem than are a few mosques being built.

What we call the "English" language is actually full of words of Latin and French origin, it doesn't seem to me that the English have self-esteem problems.

(7) It is estimated that around half the world's languages will die by 2050.

Sounds a bit like bullshit honestly. Those languages will probably be half unknown and will sooner or later become extinct regardless of the penetration of the English language. A lost language spoken in a remote location in Brazil or the Congo will simply be supplanted by the standard language in those countries.