International Auxiliary Language

[Comrade-Z]

Just imagine how much easier organizing internationally would be if we could all use an international auxiliary language?! Just think if we could exclaim in a commonly-understood language, "Workers of the world, unite!" (Nor do I think capitalists would be opposed to this, interestingly enough. It would be a lot cheaper and more efficient to only hire translators in the auxiliary language, write warranties and packaging stuff in the auxiliary language, etc.) This should be a practical, easily attainable goal.

I'm thinking along the lines of a Kyoto Protocol type of document, except dealing with mandatory auxiliary language instruction around the world. Even if this only applied to public schools at first, if it got going then even private schools would willingly jump on board as well because learning this auxiliary language would be the most useful thing to do.

There are a number of possibilities for the language to use. Esperanto would be a nice, neutral language to use, although this project would have to start from scratch if that was chosen. Instead, I'm thinking English would be another good alternative (and no, I'm not just saying this because I speak English). Let me explain:

According to wikipedia:

[English] is extensively used as a second language and as an official language in many other countries. English is the most widely taught and understood language in the world, and sometimes is described as a lingua franca[1]. Although Modern Standard Chinese, Hindi and Spanish have more mother-tongue speakers, English is used by more people as a second or foreign language, putting the total number of people with a knowledge of English worldwide at well over one billion.[2]

Furthermore, since English is a language with a low ratio of native speakers to second-language speakers, there is less favoritism involved with English compared to other widely-used languages.

Even so, native English speakers would still have an inherent advantage (knowing their native language and the auxiliary language at the same time), which is why native English speakers should have a slightly different requirement to even the playing field: an equivalent amount of time (4 semesters) spent studying either foreign cultures, non-Anglo history, linguistics (especially with regards to proficiency in understanding foreign pronunciation schemes), and/or another foreign language of choice. This also makes sense because, as the most influential economic and cultural power in the world today, English speakers should also take up the greatest responsibility for understanding other cultures and societies, the effect that Anglos have had on those societies, and for bridging the communication gap with non-English speakers.

It must also be stressed that this will not prevent people in other countries from learning in their native language, speaking in their native language, or from studying other foreign languages as well. It would just mean that they must at least learn the international auxiliary language (4 semesters of secondary school education in the subject). The goal is not to assimilate everyone in the world as native English speakers. The goal is to give everyone basic proficiency in an international auxiliary language of some sort (which could be English or, if people wanted, Esperanto).

We need an international campaign, even a movement, for this. It is that important and that attainable.

Internationalists, I call upon you to demand an International Auxiliary Language NOW!

[Fawkes]

English is one of the hardest languages still spoken to become fluent at. I would recomend Esperanto because, though I've never bothered learning it myself, you are supposed to be able to become fluent at it in less than three weeks. In other words, it is supposed to be incredibly easy.

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by Comrade-[email protected] 04, 2007 04:22 pm
an equivalent amount of time (4 semesters) spent studying either foreign cultures, non-Anglo history, linguistics (especially with regards to proficiency in understanding foreign pronunciation schemes), and/or another foreign language of choice. This also makes sense because, as the most influential economic and cultural power in the world today, English speakers should also take up the greatest responsibility for understanding other cultures and societies, the effect that Anglos have had on those societies, and for bridging the communication gap with non-English speakers.

I think this part is a very bad idea. Honestly, as an internationalist I still don't want to spend 4 semesters studying things if I do not find them interesting. I doubt you would get support for this from any large amount of students.

[Y Chwyldro Comiwnyddol Cymraeg]

a vout (internationally) should be taken to decide what the language should be

[Springmeester]

Check out Esperanto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto).

[Pawn Power]

English is already quickly becoming a world wide auxiliary language but not because of internationalism or a desire for proletariat struggle. It is understood that the dominate culture and language are inherited by those under it and in this epoch the United States as the largest and most influential empire in history.

Together, with the push of the English language through the former British Empire, English has become the language of choice. It is popularly taught in schools of those within the empire and encouraged among others in gaining economic elevation. Simply, you learn the language of those that got the power and money.


Is the attainment of an international auxiliary language necessary or even advantageous for a communist revolution? As the means or communication increase internationalism generally increase. The people of the world become more familiar with each other and recognize their parallel problems and oppressors. I think we are seeing the growth of internationalism from the proliferation of the internet.

I would always encourage others to learn another language, not simple for communication but for the many other rational attributes it gives you. Indeed some languages will allow you to communicate with more people, depending on ones situation and location. However it is who you want to communicate which determines the language learned. I think that bilingualism and multilingualism should always be supported in the desire for increased communication. Should it be tantamount in revolutionary politics? Maybe not, considering the most work is appropriately done more locally in which there is enough communication to organize, though in many places ( cities in particular) multiple languages are spoken locally.

The question that should be asked to figure out if an auxiliary language is essential is; is language today a considerable obstacle of organization and networking?

[Pawn Power]

Originally posted by Freedom for [email protected] 04, 2007 10:59 pm
English is one of the hardest languages still spoken to become fluent at.
I would say Hopi is much more difficult language to become fluent at.



I would recomend Esperanto because, though I've never bothered learning it myself, you are supposed to be able to become fluent at it in less than three weeks. In other words, it is supposed to be incredibly easy.

Esperanto is only easy to learn if you already speak a European language.

Forget more then half of the world who don't use the Latin alphabet. :rolleyes:

[Fawkes]

I would say Hopi is much more difficult language to become fluent at.
I meant the hardest widely spoken launguage.

I suggested Esperanto just because I've heard that it is easy, I don't actually even believe that an international language is necesary.

[Comrade-Z]

Originally posted by violencia.Proletariat+January 05, 2007 04:10 am--> (violencia.Proletariat @ January 05, 2007 04:10 am)
Comrade-[email protected] 04, 2007 04:22 pm
an equivalent amount of time (4 semesters) spent studying either foreign cultures, non-Anglo history, linguistics (especially with regards to proficiency in understanding foreign pronunciation schemes), and/or another foreign language of choice. This also makes sense because, as the most influential economic and cultural power in the world today, English speakers should also take up the greatest responsibility for understanding other cultures and societies, the effect that Anglos have had on those societies, and for bridging the communication gap with non-English speakers.

I think this part is a very bad idea. Honestly, as an internationalist I still don't want to spend 4 semesters studying things if I do not find them interesting. I doubt you would get support for this from any large amount of students. [/b]
You're right, I'm thinking of this in a reformist way...using the pre-existing channels to push this through.

Instead, an alternative would be a grass-roots movement of self-education in an auxiliary language, motivated by the obvious utility of such a thing. First, we'd need some sort of World Social Forum with elected delegates from every country. Then we'd need to vote on a language. Then communities could pledge support and efforts to learn this international auxiliary language. I guess that's probably the better way to do this.


The question that should be asked to figure out if an auxiliary language is essential is; is language today a considerable obstacle of organization and networking?

I don't know what others have experienced, but it is for me. I only know English and French. Therefore, it's difficult for me to meaningfully contribute to the struggles of local Latino groups, which is one of the hot areas of action recently with the immigration debate and everything...I hope to learn Spanish as soon as possible, but I just haven't had time so far....