Esperanto, universalism and the Jews
Three critique letters to the rebuttal to Tony Karon’s “How Jewish is Israel” (essay #62) are followed by the author’s response.
City: Cambridge, UK
Subject: Comment on Prof. Anbar's rebuttal to Tony Karon’s How Jewish is Israel?
Comment: When Prof. Anbar says that "supranational universalism [...] is likely to be as short-lived as Zamenhof’s Esperanto," can I take it that he means it has survived for well over a century with almost no government backing, it enjoys hundreds of events attracting thousands of visitors every year, and is currently enjoying a resurgence of popularity, thanks in part to the internet? Yes, I'm sure that's what he meant.
City: Wroclaw
Subject: Esperanto lives.
Comment: http://www.infoisrael.net/cgi-local/text.pl?source=4/b/viii/220520065 claims Esperanto was short-lived. A funny claim for me, since I (a native English speaker) use it every day with my girlfriend (a native Polish speaker). Although it is true that Zamenhof designed the language with a European-inspired vocabulary, nonetheless the language is just as popular in Asia despite your author's belief. Asians who have learned it agree it is far easier than English or other national languages despite the Euro-influence on the vocabulary. Indeed, there is a daily one-hour radio broadcast in Esperanto from China, and Beijing hosted the Universala Kongreso de Esperanto in 2004.
City:
Rochester, NY, USA
Subject: Why do you think Esperanto was shortlived?
Comment: Today there are 2-3 million people who speak and use daily Esperanto. Why write in your article that it was "short lived"? Check www.esperanto.net to enlighten yourself.
My Dear Esperanto users:
A number of Esperanto users who read my article were taken back by my statement that Dr. Ludovic Lazarus Zamenhof’s Esperanto universal language has been short lived. They tell us that Esperanto is still alive, as it is being used by 2 to 3 million people. Thanks for enlightening me.
However, this was not what Dr. Zamenhof had in mind. Dr. Zamenhof, a thoughtful Jew believed that language is a barrier to international communication and understanding, and that a universal language will result in the eventual breakdown of national barriers. Zamenhof rightfully understood that language is probably the most distinct feature of nationhood. Our Prophets understood this already thousands of years ago, when they considered “language” to be synonymous with “nation” (see Isaiah 66:18; Jeremiah 5:15; Zechariah 8:23). Esperanto – a single international language would imply the eventual abolition of nationhood and of national borders, and as a consequence the elimination of conflicts between nations. However, in Genesis Chapter 11 we read the legend that God produced nationhoods by preventing men from using a single language. Whether this was a good or bad divine idea is open to discussion by theologians. However, sociologists and historians tell us that this is an inevitable result of human nature.
Universalism advocated by Tony Karon and his friends, whom I criticized, advocate a non-realistic single global nation, presumably using a single global language (Esperanto or another). This is why he has been vehemently opposed to Zionism – the essential manifestation of Jewish nationality. Karon’s ideology is evidently diagonally opposed to the prevailing Jewish view of the real world (not of the world at the End of Days). Karon is entitled to his opinion as was Dr. Zamenhof. However, in his apparent idealism Karon bashes the legitimacy of the Jewish national homeland. Singling out the State of Israel for his anti-nationalistic attack, while tolerating the existence of hundreds of other nations, makes him a hypocrite and a flagrant Jew-hater.
Coming back to Esperanto, even if I accept the figure of 2 to 3 million users of this artificial language, they constitute less than a thousandth of the world’s population. Esperanto users, who are similar in number and political clout to radio amateurs or to philatelists in the age of the Internet, are not living up to the aspirations and vision of Dr. Zamenhof, which like those of Tony Karon were not realistic.
Judaism has produced many universalistic ideologies. Esperanto has been just one of them. The vision of the End of Days, when there will be peace upon Earth, is another. These visions, which are all closely related but unfortunately, are unlikely to be realized in our lifetime.
Michael Anbar Ph.D.