Debate #1: Preserving culture and language

[eyrei]

The topic of this debate is whether we should preserve dying cultures and languages.

For the purposes of this debate, the preservation of dying cultures and languages will be defined as taking active steps to provide for the continued use of traditions and the language in today's world.

Specific points that will be covered will be:

1. In what ways might cultures and languages be preserved, and how has this been done historically?

2. What is there to gain and/or lose from the preservation of such dying cultures and languages?

3. Identify at least one culture and language that is considered 'dying' in today's world, and analyze what is being done to preserve or not preserve this culture/language. Is this being handled according to your belief on the subject?

You may write of other points, but these 3 must be addressed very clearly in your post. This phase of the debate will continue for 48 hours or until all participants have responded. I will then make a post moving the debate into the next phase.

Since this is a trial debate, all who made posts in the Participant selection thread may participate, and it will not count towards having participated in a debate for future selection.

 

[eyrei]

Debate rules

1. The topic for the debate will be established beforehand via a 'Debate Ideas' thread. The moderator would then post the thread topic, followed by a number of 'points' that must be addressed at least to some degree for the post to be accepted.

2. Each person's first post in the thread will begin with their thesis statement, followed by a paragraph for each point regarding how it relates to their thesis. Each point must be addressed in some fashion, and the length of any post in the thread will be limited by what the post character limit is for a single post.

3. After 48 hours, the debate would move to the next phase, which would be the Clarification phase, where, if they wish to, each poster may make one post asking for clarification of definitions or ideas which they did not understand from other posters. This is not the place to make arguments against those points.

4. Each poster would then be allowed one post to address questions asked to them in the second half of this phase.

5. After another 24 hours, the debate would move to the Argument phase, where each poster will choose a certain number of points made by other posters that he/she wishes to make an argument against. The number of points each poster may address will be decided by the moderator.

5. After probably 48 hours, the debate would move to the Defense phase, where each poster may defend their points against whatever arguments were offered against them in the Argument phase.

6. The final phase would basically be a free-for-all discussion like most of the threads we are used to, and would begin after each debater has made their Defense phase post.


The number of debaters and the selection of the participants will be decided by the moderator. No debater may participate in two consecutive debates unless there are not enough people, and preference would be given to those who have not had a chance to participate in one. Applications to participate would be made in a separate thread after the topic is decided on.

A separate thread for less structured discussion for the topic will also be opened, and open to all.

Do not address other debaters directly in your first post. That is for later.

 

[Scuffer]

Thesis:
That dying culture/language should only be given help to survive if there is a genuine will amonst those of that culture to preserve it. A culture preserved solely by enthusiasts and folk historians inevitably demeans and trivialises it. Therefore, cultures that are dying and where there is no general will to fight for it amonst those to whom it refers, are best recorded in text and left as a testiment to what was.

1. Culture may be preserved in an environment that allows them to thrive/survive, a free market of culture perhaps. In Wales, after years oppression, the welsh language has been given special status. It is taught to the age of 16, there is a dedicated television channel, there are other legal obligations. It is thus supported.

2. What can be lost is the actual identity of the culture, to be replaced by a whimsy celebration of the twee-est parts. Re-enactments of pagan culture in England are polite events to be politely appaulded, and don't have any relevance to the actual culture they represent. I have read convinving arguments that Native American culture represented as viewed through the eyes of missionaries (eg Passage to Juneau, Johnthan Raban), to better fit Christian beliefs - e.g. respect for nature used to be fear of the capriciousness of nature, that there was no Great Spirit. If true, these cultural preservations do the original a great diservice. If true, alas, the true culture may be lost forever. Whether or not it is true, and I am no expert, I hope you can appreciate the damage done. It would be better to have a true record, or an active practice. A pastiche does no one any favours.

3. I will chose Welsh. It may not be dying now, but it was in the very recent history, and the actions are relevant. FYI, I am English and speak no Welsh, but have lived here for 9 years, and consider it my home. As mentioned in 1, steps have been taken to give it support. Whether it grows and survives is now up to those whose identity it is. It is spoken by perhaps 10% of the population, and they all speak fluent English as well. It is an important part of identity, but not the sole factor. Whether it is done according to my beliefs will depend on the future. If the language becomes less used and begins to die again, its history, culture, poetry, is intact in many texts. This is concordant with my beliefs, and so long as it is kept from the hands of those who would seek to trivialise it with 'traditional' costume, it will remain so. Given the vigour and verve with which the fight against its demise has been fought, I hope it remains viable.

 

[Rhymes]

Thesis: We should not interact with the natural process of culture emerging/culture dying. As long as a culture has something to bring to a certain group of people, it will continue to exist, if not, it will rightfully disapear. Same goes for language.

1) A culture or language will be preserved when there is a need to do so, or when the nation that adopted this culture/language is influencial enough. Example; latin was preseved through time for 2 reasons: 1- its utility, since new emerging languages take their roots on it, scholars must have kept track of latin as a reference line. 2- Because of the importance of the Roman empire ; the amount of historical writings, arts and achievments that come from the roman era and that are written in latin asks the need to preserve the dialecte.

2) There is not something to gain from every culture or language. Those that do not bring enough knowledge or diversity (or else) might be saveguarded for a short amount of time (lets say a couple of centuries) by some fanatical groups,but it is in vain, and it will eventually fade in history. On the other hand, Cultures/languages that generate new ideas or that are essential in the understanding of our past dont need our support ; even if their practice comes to die, their existance will be remebered and interested people will always have the opportunity to aknowledge them through study.

3) I am living in one culture that according to many of us, has to be protected and threatens to disapear : French-Canadian. We are 6 millions, of witch many are immigrants, in a see of 320 million english north-American. Everybody has to be bilingual to stand a chance in a work environement, and more then ever, english is becoming the main business language. We are not making as many babies as we should but we still need a population growth so we have to accept more and more immigrants that dont always bother learning french when they can easily live in english only.

To preseve our culture, I must admit that there is more whining then concrete actions.

According to my believes, and if I put aside my personal emotions, there is no real need to preseve it. Its hard to say, but our popular culture is pretty similar to the english-canadian one, maybe a little less self-centered, but still pretty similar. As for our history, its role in the age of discovery will make sure that our presence on the continent will be remembered for a long time.

 

[MaisseArsouye]

Thesis : We have to preserve as many cultures and languages as we can, especially if the population wants so. Cultures and languages we can't preserve because of any reasons should be recorded as human patrimony.

1.
To be preserved, a language and/or a culture has to be recognized by the state to which it belongs. This kind of statement is quite recent. Many states recognized only one language and have a trend to impose a "state culture" that fits political interests. So people having another language/culture than the officiel feel like second class citizens and leave away their identity to take the one the state porpose them. To reverse this, states has to recognized their inner diversity and stop fearing it.

There could be some concrete actions :
- allow schools to teach languages of the minorities, even one or two hours a week
- allow people to use their language for their relations with the state
- give minorities some cultural autonomy

But the most important is to change minds !

2.
What's the gain to know who we are ? For people belonging to a dying culture, it's important to feel recognized. Why should they forget who they are, their identity ? If we let those people live thei identity, we win on a moral point of view.

On another point of view, diversity is mankind wellfare. It's in the relation with the other, that we express ourselves. Saving a language/culture, it's saving a way of thinking, a way to see the world.

3.
I live in such a dying culture : Wallonia.

In the past, people here spoke walloon. Only educated persons spoke french. And it was so from the IX to the beginning of the XX century. As Wallonia was split into a couple of feudal states, it was no problem. There was no central power to impose a language.

When Belgium splited from Netherland in 1830, it choosed french as the only official language. So, the use of french became compulsory in relations with the state, in school, in courts,... Later, dutch became the co-official language and we went to the the regional unilinguism : Flanders -> dutch , Wallonia -> french.

Schools teached in french, but people stil spoke walloon with friends, with familly, at work,... But t he idea came that "good Belgians" speak french and dutch, and speaking walloon was a brake for learning french. So, people were ashamed to speak walloon, even at home. The generation of my grand father still spoke walloon. In my generation, only 20% of us are still able to speak, and 5% able to write it !!!!

When Belgium became federal, it created the Walloon Region and there was hope we could, at last, promote our culture and identity. But culture was not let to Regions, but to "Communities". Walloons and freench-speaking people of Brussels are the "French Community or Belgium". One more time, they deny our identity.

The solution is simple : break away that "French Community of Belgium" and let Regions deal with cultural politics. Opinions polls show that 60% of Walloons want the FCB to disappear. If we did, we could make walloon official and try to preserve it in the private sphere. We could even learn it schools, only 2 hours a week would be enough.

 

[AVN]

I don't think that dying languages and cultures should be preserved. They are dying because people see advantages in using another language or by changing their habits. For example the language most used in international communication is English and given the globalisation more people will use it and after a certain period it will even become their first language.

In some sort of way I consider it a natural evolution and the fact that languages and cultures are dying can even be considered a sort of progress for society. In the case all people are using English communication between people will be much easier.

The same can be said of cultures. People will change their habits because they have learned from others. For example foreign food was 50 years ago almost not known in our country. We had our traditional kitchen. Nowadays eating "foreign food" on a regular basis is common for most Dutch. IMHO it's an enrichment.

I will now answer the questions.

1. The preservation of cultures and languages has been done in several ways.
- Closing the borders for foreigners (something which Japan has done for centuries).
- Forcing the use of the own language, for example by teaching students no foreign languages.

These are the two most drastic examples but history has shown that it leads to backwardness or at least less progress for a country.

2 In general I don't see advantages in preserving cultures and languages as I pointed out above. However information of languages and cultures should be saved for historical, scientific and linguistical reasons. IMO that should be done, because that information will be valuable for future generations.

3. It's difficult for me to find one culture or language (where I have enough knowledge of) that is considered dying in today's world , but if I look at my own Dutch culture it is changing and IMO with increasing speed. I already mentioned the changes in the Dutch kitchen, but another is the increasing replacement of St. Nicholas (a typical Dutch festivity were presents were given to children) by Santa Claus.

And English is becoming a more and more important language in our country.

And the government is doing nothing to stop these changes. On the contrary certain aspects are even encouraged. Nowadays students start learning English at a much younger age and we even had a minister of education who proposed to make English the official communication language at universities.

Given my opinion on this subject it shall be no surprise I don't have problems that no actions are taken to preserve the original Dutch culture and language. They aren't dying at the moment, but I seriously doubt that they still exist in a few centuries.

 

[eyrei]

Moderator Action: This debate will now move to the clarification phase, which will last 24 hours or until all participants have made their post. Basically, if you don't understand something someone said, or think it could be phrased more clearly, quote it and ask. If you don't have any questions, post that you don't so we might move through this phase more quickly.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[AVN]

The generation of my grand father still spoke walloon. In my generation, only 20% of us are still able to speak, and 5% able to write it !!!!

The fact that only a minority of the Walloons can speak and write Walloon is that in your opinion a consequense of "some sort of oppression" or is it because a majority of the Walloons consider(ed) their own langauage inferior.
Can you please elaborate on this.

 

[MaisseArsouye]

Given my opinion on this subject it shall be no surprise I don't have problems that no actions are taken to preserve the original Dutch culture and language. They aren't dying at the moment, but I seriously doubt that they still exist in a few centuries.

You think so, OK. But honnestly, I can't think somebody thinks his culture is disappearing and doesn't do anything to save it. So I would like to understand your point of view. Could you explain more? You think dutch culture/language will disappear and...
...we can't change it and it's a pity ?
...we can't change it and it's natural ?
...we could change it but you don't care ?

 

[Scuffer]

The solution is simple : break away that "French Community of Belgium" and let Regions deal with cultural politics. Opinions polls show that 60% of Walloons want the FCB to disappear. If we did, we could make walloon official and try to preserve it in the private sphere. We could even learn it schools, only 2 hours a week would be enough.

Would you be in favour of a complete Walloonian breakaway from the rest of Belgium in order to preserve the culture exactly as you wanted, and what would be the down sides of this?

 

[eyrei]

Moderator Action: Would the debaters please resond to the questions put to them now.Don't go into more detail than is necessary to clarify your position. The argument phase is coming up.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[MaisseArsouye]

The fact that only a minority of the Walloons can speak and write Walloon is that in your opinion a consequense of "some sort of oppression" or is it because a majority of the Walloons consider(ed) their own langauage inferior.
Can you please elaborate on this.

It's the result of the politics of the belgian state.

When Belgium became independant in 1830, we could have choosen walloon ( along woth flemish ) as official language. There were more people speaking walloon in 1830 than people speaking maltese, lithuanian or estonian now ! But we didn't, we choosed french fror political reason. It made people feel like their language was inferior.

Would you be in favour of a complete Walloonian breakaway from the rest of Belgium in order to preserve the culture exactly as you wanted, and what would be the down sides of this?

Of course, it would be easier for a Republic of Wallonia to preserve its own language. But my choice between an independant Wallonia and going back to France is not done. And this last choice wouldn't automatically save walloon language, but would preserve better walloon culture.

Actually I'd like Belgium to split for several reasons : historical, political, economical and cultural. Cultural differences between Walloons and Flemishs create different political points of view. Most of times, non-linguistic debates at the parliament turn to a clash between Wallonia and Flanders, making this country unefficient. And it happens for important things as well as everyday life. Examples :
voting right for foreigners : Wallonia was pro, Flanders was anti
total ban of smoking in restaurant and cafes : Wallonia is pro, Flanders is anti
speed limit on highways ( now 120 ) : Flanders wants 110, Wallonia wants 130
merging dutch and belgian football champs : Flanders is pro, Wallonia is anti
adoption for gays and lesbians : Wallonia is pro, Flanders is anti
...

Preservation of walloon culture and language is an argument for spliting Belgium. But it's not the only one, and in my mind, it's not the most important.

 

[AVN]

You think so, OK. But honnestly, I can't think somebody thinks his culture is disappearing and doesn't do anything to save it. So I would like to understand your point of view. Could you explain more? You think dutch culture/language will disappear and...
...we can't change it and it's a pity ?
...we can't change it and it's natural ?
...we could change it but you don't care ?

I believe it's a natural process which can be delayed but not stopped. And trying to delay or even stop this process will result in less progress for society. People change their habits/language etc, because they think that will create a better situation for them and I don't think that governments should try to stop such changes.

Another thing is if governments force people to change their language/culture. This is another situation with which I disagree.

It should be a free choice for the people.

 

[eyrei]

Moderator Action: Sorry guys for not moving this to the next phase sooner. OT has been...well...interesting the last couple days, and has taken much of my attention. For the time being, AVN will be the moderator for this debate, in that he will move it from phase to phase as needed. Eyrei.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[AVN]

Just as a reminder we do have the Argument phase now, where each poster will choose a certain number of points made by other posters that he/she wishes to make an argument against. Because of the limited number of participators I don't think it's necessary to restrict the number of points one can argue against.

Reacting on these arguments can be done in the next phase.

Let's try to make our arguments within 48 hours. Success

 

[AVN]

I have no points to argue against, because I more or less agree with Scuffer and Rhymes. The only person with a different POV is MaisseArsouye. But the basic circumstances he describes are different. He describes a situation in which people's language/culture were not accepted. And in which the Walloons were more or less forced to accept another language/culture.

So I only have a question now for MaisseArsouye. Is it acceptable for you that the Walloon culture/language disappears if the majority of the Walloons preferred another culture/language (this means it would be their own choice) ?

 

[MaisseArsouye]

So I only have a question now for MaisseArsouye. Is it acceptable for you that the Walloon culture/language disappears if the majority of the Walloons preferred another culture/language (this means it would be their own choice) ?

If it was a totally free choice, I would accept it of course. What I reject is political pressure that makes a people feel inferior And this happened in quite every countries. Every state wants its people to feel united, so that there's a trend to unification. This is one of the worst points about nation-states.

BTW, I don't reject french culture ! Accepting french culture was a great opportunity for my people, but it's a pity it quite erased walloon language I feel walloon and french, just like people do in Normandy or Provence. We have a double culture : our own and another one we share with a great nation and millions of people in the world. My models are Catalunya and Ireland where local and international language live together. I could also talk about Malta, Luxembourg, Senegal,... I think it's possible to preserve our walloon identity inside the french culture. I think it's possible to be ourselves while being open to the world.

 

[Scuffer]

I also am in broad agreement and have nothing further to add .

 

[AVN]

I guess we understand the POV of each other (at least I do and I believe the other participators in this debate do that too.).

Because no one has argued against some point made by some other participator in this debate I consider this debate finished.

I like to thank the participators for their participation

I hope to discuss another issue with you in the future

Thanks.

 

[Rhymes]

i think the idea was great, but the topic was not enough controvertial to generate a vigorous debate. About this topic, I feel like we all have our opinions and its just fine, I can't argue with what the others think!