ABSTRACT
This subgroup endorsed the following points, in discussion with Humphrey Tonkin of the Universal Esperanto Association:
Language is a major but neglected aspect of international communication. This fact needs to be fully realized before the associated inequalities can be addressed.
Non-governmental organizations are particularly negligent in this regard, largely because they cannot afford the usual attempt at dealing with the problem: a team of translators and interpreters. They talk English and pretend there is no problem.
The fundamental issue is one of democratization. As things are, native speakers of English constitute an international aristocracy with an inborn advantage over others. And those who are proficient in English as a second language have an advantage over those who may be more competent in their respective fields but are not fluent in English (or one of the other select few languages officially in use at the United Nations).
It is essential today to know at least one foreign language, to allow one to see one’s own with some degree of objectivity.
Ideally, all children would learn Esperanto along with their mother tongues and so have the means of global communication in a common language.
Existing linguistic diversity is inherently unjust and anti-democratic because appropriate means of counterbalancing it are not adopted. This applies in particular to the United Nations Organization.
That being so, our subgroup endorsed the following proposal: That Esperanto be adopted at the United Nations as an additional official language, with the long-term objective of phasing out the others if it proves its superior usefulness.
