Thread: Belgian elections

Originally Posted by WoI

It's not the language issue that splits communities. And the split that does exist isn't along linguistic lines. The language issue is just an effective strategy to lure the gullible into acceptance of the real goal : the destruction of the social achievements of the last two centuries by right wing politicians.

What does language have to do with social achievements?

When Dewever visits the Cercle de Wallonie, the Walloon employer's organization, you'll hear something very different from the empty nationalistic rhetoric :
Dewever en Wallonie et en Francais

Old news (Broadcasted on the flemish televison)

It's seems that you didn't listen very well. Dewever explained that only a transfer of federal powers to regional powers can help the economy of both regions.

The language bullshit is just the electoral ploy. The real issue is right vs. left, employers vs. employees, rich vs. poor. Dewever is just a Flemish Thatcher.

It's about socialistic Wallonia and Brussels against a liberal-conservative Flanders.

The language issue is another problem. That's about the violation of the constitution.

I can't say anything about joining a manifestation for the right of newspapers to write CD-ROM instead of cédérom. As far as I am concerned, I feel it's not very important.

I was against the law, at the time, but it's not because I was feeling that my "freedom of expression" was being infringed. Spelling is no freedom. Actually Spelling IS Rule.

Sure, you can write "Mayonnaise " or "Majonäse" in German but you can't write "maillonèse".

Besides I have too much a high opinion on what the "freedom of expression" is about than to fight for the way to spell a word.

Regarding the "voluntary guidelines" for orthography in Austria, I have my doubts too. I remember that at the time of the "Rechtsschreibreform" debate in Germany, the big deal was that publishers had to spend tons of money to republish everything. It's not like they had a choice.

The choice between new and old spelling in German speaking countries is temporary: the time from one generation to the next. I learnt German at school with the old "Rechtsschreibung", but my girls are learning the new one. They don't have a choice really. Is it affecting their liberty of expression ?

Now, as for the choice of the words (Chinese or French?), this is precisely the conviction of the law: for any word in a foreign language, there is the exact meaning but in French.

Is the message any different because you are saying "Let's go" instead of "On y va". No, it's the same meaning.

Therefore, I opposed the Loi Toubon, at the time, because I think:
1) It's useless (as a way to protect a language)
2) It is common for a language to take in foreign words, there is nothing wrong with that
3) I don't think that the French language needs any protection anyway

Now, I don't oppose it anyway because, to be very honest, if it weren't for Hellfigger, it's not a law I have been thinking about for the last 15 years, it is not affecting my life in any way (or I see affecting what you call the liberty of expression, it's the first time I hear this argument).

Originally Posted by Sucre

The loi Toubon has no influence ... on Dutch.

French Flanders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by WoI

It's not the language issue that splits communities. And the split that does exist isn't along linguistic lines. The language issue is just an effective strategy to lure the gullible into acceptance of the real goal : the destruction of the social achievements of the last two centuries by right wing politicians.
The language bullshit is just the electoral ploy. The real issue is right vs. left, employers vs. employees, rich vs. poor. Dewever is just a Flemish Thatcher.

You're saying that like NVA has some kind of secret agenda. It's no secret that NVA is supported by the VOKA (network of flemish companies) and its ideology is more (European sense) liberal than the ideology of the liberal party OpenVLD itself.
That's the reason why I vote NVA.

Originally Posted by Sucre

I can't say anything about joining a manifestation for the right of newspapers to write CD-ROM instead of cédérom. As far as I am concerned, I feel it's not very important.

I was against the law, at the time, but it's not because I was feeling that my "freedom of expression" was being infringed. Spelling is no freedom. Actually Spelling IS Rule.

Sure, you can write "Mayonnaise " or "Majonäse" in German but you can't write "maillonèse".

You can. No one is going to stop you at least if your the boss and say you want to have it that way. No law is forbidding you to do that. Its your own decision. Of course that does not say that anyone will understand you necessarily, but I think its safe to put the decision over that on the level of the author rather than the state level.

In other words: Should be publishing of texts like these be outlawed?

Es wird scho glei dumpa,
es wird scho glei Nåcht,
drum kim i zu dir her,
mei Heiland auf d' Wåcht.
Will singen a Liadl dem Liebling, dem kloan,
du mågst jå net schlåfn, i hör di nur woan.
Hei, hei, hei, hei! Schlåf süaß, herzliabs Kind.

...

Besides I have too much a high opinion on what the "freedom of expression" is about than to fight for the way to spell a word.

The right to use a foreign word if you think its appropriate is much more than just a silly fight over spelling. But even the latter should be one that falls into personal responsibility rather than the nanny state.

Regarding the "voluntary guidelines" for orthography in Austria, I have my doubts too. I remember that at the time of the "Rechtsschreibreform" debate in Germany, the big deal was that publishers had to spend tons of money to republish everything. It's not like they had a choice.

They had, at least in Austria. No law forced them. The neue Rechtschreibung is only obligatory for schools and the administration.

Das amtliche Regelwerk regelt die Rechtschreibung innerhalb derjenigen Institutionen (Schule, Verwaltung) für die der Staat Regelungskompetenz hinsichtlich der Rechtschreibung hat. Darüber hinaus hat es zur Sicherung einer einheitlichen Rechtschreibung Vorbildcharakter für alle, die sich an einer allgemein gültigen Rechtschreibung orientieren möchten; das heißt Firmen, speziell Druckereien, Verlage, Redaktionen – aber auch Privatpersonen.

The choice between new and old spelling in German speaking countries is temporary: the time from one generation to the next. I learnt German at school with the old "Rechtsschreibung", but my girls are learning the new one. They don't have a choice really. Is it affecting their liberty of expression ?

Not at all. You have to know the rules of your language. To make good use of your language you have to know the rules first. When you have learned what the rules are, you should be educated enough to know if you want to break them.

Now, as for the choice of the words (Chinese or French?), this is precisely the conviction of the law: for any word in a foreign language, there is the exact meaning but in French.

Which is of course illusionary nonsense.

Is the message any different because you are saying "Let's go" instead of "On y va". No, it's the same meaning.

"Let's go" sounds more direct if you ask me, "on y va" a bit more passive. You could also use it for text variation or to add some specific taste to a certain situation.

Now, I don't oppose it anyway because, to be very honest, if it weren't for Hellfigger, it's not a law I have been thinking about for the last 15 years, it is not affecting my life in any way (or I see affecting what you call the liberty of expression, it's the first time I hear this argument).

If you were a writer you might think differently. But maybe French writer even like that law, which would be a bit ironic however.

Originally Posted by Thanatos

French Flanders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't really see what the Wiki article has to do with the loi Toubon.
"Our" Flemmish are peaceful and cheerful.

Watch this.
YouTube - bienvenue chez les ch'ti : la bande annonce

It's all in Ch'ti!

Originally Posted by Thanatos

French Flanders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aux armes, citoyens ! The Flemish will invade France to conquer la Picardie !
LOL, Than, if you're going to claim that region as 'Flemish' will you equally give up Antwerp and Limburg which are historically as much a part of Flanders as Wallonia is ?

Originally Posted by Thanatos

You're saying that like NVA has some kind of secret agenda. It's no secret that NVA is supported by the VOKA (network of flemish companies) and its ideology is more (European sense) liberal than the ideology of the liberal party OpenVLD itself.
That's the reason why I vote NVA.

Secret ? No.
But there's a helluva lot NVA voters that aren't even aware of their plans with social security, unemployment, pensions, etc because the 'blame the Walloons for everything' creed is all that is propagated.

The difference between what Dewever says on populist occasions such as his gimmick with the trucks that symbolically drove to Wallonia with the alleged transferts with what he says when he meets the Cercle de Wallonie is more than demonstrative of this discrepancy.

Speaking of transferts, where was the NVA when a handful of bankers, Flemish, Walloon, Bruxellois but also Dutch and French, got a transfert of scores of billions of euros as a reward for cooking the books for a decade and the megalomania of a single (Flemish !!!!) person ? Is 'solidarity' towards the already extremely rich a lesser problem than solidarity with those that actually might need it ?

"On y va!" is not more passive than "lets go" since it means the same ... Maybe in Austrian ears, French will sound passive an English not, but since the loi Toubon applies to French speakers, that's irrelevant in the discussion.

There is also "ça y va!" for manifestations, that sounds a bit more revolutionary.

As for spelling, of course, you're always free to have a bad spelling.

But, still, sorry, I can't get warm on the issue. The language in France has been regulated since Richelieu who founded the Academie Française. Maybe that's the reason why I don't see a problem if the State tells me to write cédérom instead of CD-ROM. No, I do not feel less free. OK, I am a socialist and my mind is alienated.

Besides, the topic of this thread is not the way France protects its language - a very interresting topic for sure - but the way Flander protects its own, with the particularity that the Flemmish live in a bilingual State.

You have fallen in Hellfigger's trap who is trying to "relativise" what is happening at the moment in Belgium by finding similar examples abroad and attacking the messenger - in this case me - .

Well, no. A line must be drawn. There is nothing wrong in protecting a language. But I find it wrong to discreminate against the minority language of the people living in the same country, especially when the reason is that they allegedly did the same 150 years before. I call this sick because it seriously affects the life and for that matter the freedom of thousands of people.

Originally Posted by WoI

It's not the language issue that splits communities. And the split that does exist isn't along linguistic lines. The language issue is just an effective strategy to lure the gullible into acceptance of the real goal : the destruction of the social achievements of the last two centuries by right wing politicians.

When Dewever visits the Cercle de Wallonie, the Walloon employer's organization, you'll hear something very different from the empty nationalistic rhetoric :
Dewever en Wallonie et en Francais

The language bullshit is just the electoral ploy. The real issue is right vs. left, employers vs. employees, rich vs. poor. Dewever is just a Flemish Thatcher.

You are actually saying the same as Thanatos . He too argues that the language and community issues are not important. It's just about "fixing" Belgium. What's important is that you have on the one hand those who know how to run a country and on the other hand those lazy socialists who know how to spend money.

What I think is that by now you can't separate the two. It's a layer on top of the other one. Your fucked up electoral system deepens the divide since the Flemmish and Walloon can't be in the same parties !

And last but not least, if people are brainwashed, they believe in what they say.

Originally Posted by Sucre

As for spelling, of course, you're always free to have a bad spelling.

But, still, sorry, I can't get warm on the issue. The language in France has been regulated since Richelieu who founded the Academie Française. Maybe that's the reason why I don't see a problem if the State tells me to write cédérom instead of CD-ROM. No, I do not feel less free. OK, I am a socialist and my mind is alienated.

You clearly have a different tradition in France. So much for sure that could explain quite a lot of our different views.

Besides, the topic of this thread is not the way France protects its language - a very interresting topic for sure - but the way Flander protects its own, with the particularity that the Flemmish live in a bilingual State.

Actually it is about Belgian Elections, but I get your point. Nonetheless I would really appreciate it if you could tell me how dialects are affected by this Toubin law. To be more specific, how it effects both spoken and written French dialect in commercial use. Is it outlawed or are there exceptions or did I get something wrong? As far as I got t there exist exception for the original speech in movies, but I did not get the details there as well.

To give you an example. There exist for example in Austria songs in dialect. The lyrics are often sold within textbooks or in other forms as are the records. Is it possible to do the same in France? Am I allowed to publsh lets say a rhime in dialect or a French dialect based book?

You have fallen in Hellfigger's trap who is trying to "relativise" what is happening at the moment in Belgium by finding similar examples abroad and attacking the messenger - in this case me - .

Well, no. A line must be drawn. There is nothing wrong in protecting a language. But I find it wrong to discreminate against the minority language of the people living in the same country, especially when the reason is that they allegedly did the same 150 years before. I call this sick because it seriously affects the life and for that matter the freedom of thousands of people.

There are two things, first I am not at all loosing out of sight what they are doing in Belgium currently. That language fight is of course almost comical in its extend

Originally Posted by Sucre

Besides, the topic of this thread is not the way France protects its language - a very interresting topic for sure - but the way Flander protects its own, with the particularity that the Flemmish live in a bilingual State.

Flanders is not a bilingual region. Only Dutch is an official language. The same in Wallonia where French is the only official language. Only Brussels is bilingual.

Well, no. A line must be drawn. There is nothing wrong in protecting a language. But I find it wrong to discreminate against the minority language of the people living in the same country, especially when the reason is that they allegedly did the same 150 years before. I call this sick because it seriously affects the life and for that matter the freedom of thousands of people.

There is no historical minority in Flanders, the frenchspeaking people are coming from Brussels or Wallonia the last 50 years. Why should we give them exclusive rights? The only thing we ask except the political structure is that they speak dutch with the local authority.

Besides, the belgian revolution was an french revolution. The flemish cities were pro-netherlands.

Mediator Vandelanotte takes a step back.

After appointing multiple mediators, royal mediators, informateurs, pre-formateurs, negociators, a clarifyer (??), etc, rumours go that the king will now appoint an inquisitor.

Originally Posted by Thanatos

... rumours go that the king will now appoint an inquisitor.

Sounds reasonable.

... an inquisitor ... After a conciliator, Belgium now needs an inquisitor ?

Are we back to the dark times ?

I will answer the other posts later. (I need to work too, can't spend my life discussing Belgian fucked politics.)