First of all this is wishful thinking: you propose no realistic policy, you simply wish that humanity will stop being humanity.I think first and foremost we should reject the divide-and-conquer agenda set about by world leaders and learn to appreciate one another's diversity
First of all this is wishful thinking: you propose no realistic policy, you simply wish that humanity will stop being humanity.
Second of all what does it mean to "appreciate another's diversity"? Share your territory and political power with them? Under which terms? Your own liberal framework, or for example half of your liberal framework and half of the Sharia? Do you expect that you culture will prevail with a little exoticism or do you intend to destroy both of your respective cultures by blending them?
Then everyone needs to be able to communicate with each other. Well almost everyone anyway.
Humans mainly interact in three ways: cooperation, trade, or force... and variations thereof.
In only one of these is communication less vitally important... guess which one.
It is difficult enough to engage in trade or cooperation with those whose culture, customs and norms differ dramatically from what you're used to... add in an inability to communicate clearly and the difficulties became almost insurmountable.
Diplomats have first-class translators to help them understand the people they are negotiating with, including parsing nuances in the language.
You don't have that. When you find yourself in a potential conflict or misunderstanding with people who don't speak any language you know, resolving that conflict is going to be extremely difficult.... let alone feeling comradely or brotherly towards those whose words and intentions are unknowable to you.
Forcing everyone to learn all of the world's languages is not the answer. There are at least 6,500 languages currently spoken on Earth. Even if we limit it to the relatively common ones, there are 23 languages spoken by about half the world's population.
Most people have enough trouble learning ONE new language, maybe two. There's a reason people who speak 5 or more languages are rare. It is difficult for most people to learn new languages.
The answer seems obvious: everyone learn one language, the SAME language. It can be a second language, in addition to your native one, but it needs to be the one everyone else learns... then communication is far easier, trade and cooperation become much more feasible and violence less likely.
At present, English is the most common second language in the world. That's a good start, but English or something needs to be taught universally as a 2nd language if we expect to ever have even the slightest chance at this "peace and brotherhood across the planet" idea.
The current number of English speakers, both native and second language, is estimated to approach 1 Billion already. 55 nations officially teach English as a second language; English speakers can be found individually in almost any nation in some numbers. Seems like an obvious choice.
Or if you don't like English fine offer an alternative, but SOME single language needs to become the Common Tongue of Earth if we're ever going to get anywhere together as Species Humanity.
I didn't say you were. I asked whether "appreciating another's diversity" actually means for you living together on equal terms, which implies to sacrifice things important to you to make room for things important to them.Jesus ****ing Christ, dude. I wasn't talking about implementing Sharia law.
Universal translators are being created already. Pilot earpiece
There's been civil wars with very similar language, as you know. North and South Korea in particular loath each other. As well, there's been a crazy number of languages spoken within a single country or allied force that managed to band together. Look at world war 2 alliances (german and japanese and italian, english and russian). Geo-political barriers, ideology, and economic interests have more to do with such conflict i suspect.
Yes, at times 'the other' gets dehumanized to the point of oppression, and language is a huge part of being different. Would we ever build a wall around canada? Mexico, being a foreign language is easier to vilify, but that's only part of it. They also just *look* more different than canadians. But i believe that's about the extent of the damage that can be done, in modern times. No one will risk war due to language barrier. The higher ups have plenty translators also
In other words you want to destroy all human cultures but a single one in order to instigate your little totalitarian internationalist project. And of course since people will disagree you will have to enforce it upon them with bullets to create peace.
No, thanks, I prefer sovereign nations: my country, my culture, your country, your culture. Tourists welcome, immigrants not so much. It is stable, democratic, it works, and it makes mankind more diverse, richer and interesting.
Universal translators are being created already. Pilot earpiece
1. I can't even understand the English of many Americans.
2. A universal language will not achieve world peace. I point to civil wars as evidence.
3. English is a much more difficult language than many others. I consider Spanish the simplest language.
Indeed, the author's premise that conflicts come from communication difficulties is extremely naive.
Modern theories of conflicts emphasize the role of social identities as the most common cause of conflicts. At most language is one of the many identity factors, but there is also religion, skin color, geography, nationality, culture, ...
The best way to reduce conflicts is to account for human nature and minimize conflicting interactions. Partitioning people into homogeneous nations is the surest way to achieve this, along with well designed mechanisms for international relationships, especially trade.
Forcing people to live together and attempting to destroy our nations, cultures and sovereignties will only cause a century of blood baths. Immigration and the EU are highways to hell.
Before I answer this, let me apologize first as it seems that you do not want this language to replace others but simply for people to be able to communicate through another (foreign for most us) language.Obviously it is only one of several aspects of same. I'm not trying to build a blueprint for world peace; I'm addressing ONE issue I consider a prerequisite, the ability to communicate with reasonable clarity.
I didn't say you were. I asked whether "appreciating another's diversity" actually means for you living together on equal terms, which implies to sacrifice things important to you to make room for things important to them.
As for me, I do not want to sacrifice things that are important to me in my own country. This is why I oppose further immigration.
Then everyone needs to be able to communicate with each other. Well almost everyone anyway.
Humans mainly interact in three ways: cooperation, trade, or force... and variations thereof.
In only one of these is communication less vitally important... guess which one.
It is difficult enough to engage in trade or cooperation with those whose culture, customs and norms differ dramatically from what you're used to... add in an inability to communicate clearly and the difficulties became almost insurmountable.
Diplomats have first-class translators to help them understand the people they are negotiating with, including parsing nuances in the language.
You don't have that. When you find yourself in a potential conflict or misunderstanding with people who don't speak any language you know, resolving that conflict is going to be extremely difficult.... let alone feeling comradely or brotherly towards those whose words and intentions are unknowable to you.
Forcing everyone to learn all of the world's languages is not the answer. There are at least 6,500 languages currently spoken on Earth. Even if we limit it to the relatively common ones, there are 23 languages spoken by about half the world's population.
Most people have enough trouble learning ONE new language, maybe two. There's a reason people who speak 5 or more languages are rare. It is difficult for most people to learn new languages.
The answer seems obvious: everyone learn one language, the SAME language. It can be a second language, in addition to your native one, but it needs to be the one everyone else learns... then communication is far easier, trade and cooperation become much more feasible and violence less likely.
At present, English is the most common second language in the world. That's a good start, but English or something needs to be taught universally as a 2nd language if we expect to ever have even the slightest chance at this "peace and brotherhood across the planet" idea.
The current number of English speakers, both native and second language, is estimated to approach 1 Billion already. 55 nations officially teach English as a second language; English speakers can be found individually in almost any nation in some numbers. Seems like an obvious choice.
Or if you don't like English fine offer an alternative, but SOME single language needs to become the Common Tongue of Earth if we're ever going to get anywhere together as Species Humanity.
It is written, "there will be no peace."
Barring some catastrophic worldwide event, such as an asteroid or attack from another species, bringing every nation together in a common goal, world peace is pure folly.
If you read the thread, I already said I am skeptical of the notion at best, but believe better communication would be helpful in general.
Ok. Hypothetical...
You're an engineer. Shimoneroni Jebukiuki is also an engineer. You are given the project to build a Moshenator, which will require expertise in both your specialties.
Shimoneroni Jebukiuki speaks only Northern Mesophilian, which you not only don't speak but have never heard of. Nor does anyone else in the company except one guy and he's on a trip to Bermferked Quijipt for the next six weeks.
So... how you gonna build that thing?
Then everyone needs to be able to communicate with each other. Well almost everyone anyway.
Humans mainly interact in three ways: cooperation, trade, or force... and variations thereof.
In only one of these is communication less vitally important... guess which one.
It is difficult enough to engage in trade or cooperation with those whose culture, customs and norms differ dramatically from what you're used to... add in an inability to communicate clearly and the difficulties became almost insurmountable.
Diplomats have first-class translators to help them understand the people they are negotiating with, including parsing nuances in the language.
You don't have that. When you find yourself in a potential conflict or misunderstanding with people who don't speak any language you know, resolving that conflict is going to be extremely difficult.... let alone feeling comradely or brotherly towards those whose words and intentions are unknowable to you.
Forcing everyone to learn all of the world's languages is not the answer. There are at least 6,500 languages currently spoken on Earth. Even if we limit it to the relatively common ones, there are 23 languages spoken by about half the world's population.
Most people have enough trouble learning ONE new language, maybe two. There's a reason people who speak 5 or more languages are rare. It is difficult for most people to learn new languages.
The answer seems obvious: everyone learn one language, the SAME language. It can be a second language, in addition to your native one, but it needs to be the one everyone else learns... then communication is far easier, trade and cooperation become much more feasible and violence less likely.
At present, English is the most common second language in the world. That's a good start, but English or something needs to be taught universally as a 2nd language if we expect to ever have even the slightest chance at this "peace and brotherhood across the planet" idea.
The current number of English speakers, both native and second language, is estimated to approach 1 Billion already. 55 nations officially teach English as a second language; English speakers can be found individually in almost any nation in some numbers. Seems like an obvious choice.
Or if you don't like English fine offer an alternative, but SOME single language needs to become the Common Tongue of Earth if we're ever going to get anywhere together as Species Humanity.
All sorts of people around the world understand military force, and the language they speak has nothing to do with it. It is a very useful thing for a nation like ours to make clear that it can and will do inflict great harm on nations or groups who dare to cross it. I don't give a damn if any foreigners like the U.S. I care only about making them so sure what will happen to them it they carry out hostile acts against the U.S. that they never dare try.
Hire a skilled translator. I have actual working experience in this exact kind of problem which is working with others who do not speak your language at all, and having no translators or translators with very limited capacity to translate. There are days you just want to shoot all the people who cant speak your language. I got very good very quickly at Pictionary and pigeon name your language most of which I have forgotten now. You have a skilled translator and the headaches become exponentially less and related to common communication errors we all have and deal with when dealing with others that speak our language. That problem you presented, you hire a translator or wait for other dude to come back. Easier cheaper and just plain better all around.
Sorry, the Moshenator has to be up and running within four weeks, and translators who speak English and Northern Mesophilian are almost impossible to come by.
Seriously, my point being... if you both spoke a common language even as a second language, it would make things a lot easier, no?
Oh yea it would be easier. Problem being that herding people is like herding cats, getting them to go in the same general direction takes a fire and a whole hell of a lot of catnip. The problem will be picking the second language and getting people to adopt it. Mandating it wont work near as well as just letting the world shrink some more and let the end result come organically.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?