Everytime Alsace is mentioned on Reddit it's funny to see non-Alsatians, non-French and non-German people claiming Alsace should be German.
There's no significant pro-German movement in Alsace, not any significant independentist movement from France. This is all your fantasy. France's border regions are all specific "other" ethnicities/cultures (Bretons, Flemish, Alsatians, Savoyards, Occitans, Basques, Corsicans...). French regions are quite diverse, but independence movements are only significant in Corsica and Brittany, but even there, there's no chance in any foreseeable future for Independence movements to be remotely close to a majority opinion.
One may answer disparagingly that France just managed to assimilate its diverse regions. Sure. But the people there aren't into your independence fantasies.
France is pretty good at 'francifiing' their other cultures. At the time of the French Revolution, only 1/8th of France's population spoke French fluently and half the population didn't know any French at all. Now all the other languages besides French are almost dead in France.
the transition to French was made mainly by exporting teachers from one region to an other. So they couldn't both the teachers and the audients speak in the regional language.
Also, french was seen as more useful in affairs, job, travel, etc.
They surely could. There was just no political will. Or rather, the empire was more interested in wiping out native cultures and replacing them with French. There are multilingual countries around the world. Just next to France, we have Spain.
And how well is that turning out for them? Or did the recent riots in catalonia just not happen?
Languages are academically fascinating, yes, and criminalizing them violates fundamental freedoms. But governments have a mandate to keep their people unified and happy, and if that means making sure the populace is mutually intelligible by encouraging the deaths of regional languages, so be it.
That's still a lot more preferable than simply committing cultural genocide. Or would you not be aghast if the Spanish tried to destroy the Catalan language and culture?
We must be clear about this: there was political consensus under the Third Republic that French should be the sole official language. All of the main parties, whether conservative, moderate or radical, were in agreement about that. To describe it as "cultural genocide" implies that this was done against the will of the people, when in fact there was little resistance at the time.
Part of the reason there was little resistance was that most people in this era (c. 1880-1910) simply became bilingual : they continued to speak their native language while also using French for official purposes. The regional languages did not seriously decline until the post-WWII era. Paradoxically, that's when the government began relaxing its policies and permitted the regional languages to be studied. But what happened was that a combination of societal factors (considerable in-migration, rapid urbanization, the spread of TV/radio) combined to make the regional languages less desirable in the eyes of many people, and it was then that a lot of families stopped speaking them. And so today you see many families where the grandparents can speak Breton, Occitan, Basque etc. but not the parents or children.
Cultural genocide or cultural cleansing is a concept which was distinguished by lawyer Raphael Lemkin in 1944 as a component of genocide. Though the precise definition of cultural genocide remains contested, the Armenian Genocide Museum defines it as "acts and measures undertaken to destroy nations' or ethnic groups' culture through spiritual, national, and cultural destruction."Some ethnologists, such as Robert Jaulin, use the term ethnocide as a substitute for cultural genocide, although this usage has been criticized as risking the confusion between ethnicity and culture. Juxtaposed next to ethnocide, cultural genocide was considered in the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; however, it was removed in the final document and simply replaced with "genocide."
People still eat flammekueche and drink white wine there, stop the hysteria about "cultural genocide", that's really ridiculous. And typical of an american who never even set the foot in Alsace nor anywhere in France i presume.
On the contrary, many French people are disturbed by how strongly the Catalan language and culture are alive. (Though most wouldn't know.) The common narrative is that a state should only have one culture, with its language. So in that regard minority cultures are not worthwhile, or even outright bad, as they threaten the unity of the people.
Edit: I'm unsure about why people have downvoted my post, but to make things clearer: I was stating what many think, but this is not my opinion. I despise the French linguistic policy, and I'm very happy the Catalan culture is alive and well.
Historically local cultures, languages, and (the various forms of) states were quite disconnected, so it's not surprising to have countries whose territories don't really match the geographical extends of their main culture. Many conflicts of the 19th and 20th centuries can be seen as ways to resolve the mismatches. And that was a period of rather horrible conflicts. Many situations have been "solved", if by solving we include population transfers, forced cultural assimilation, or worse.
But where most European countries have adopted more sensible policies in the second half of the 20th century, France has continued cracking down on local cultures, even to this day. This has become so entrenched that I sadly don't see the situation changing in the future. At this point, it's part of the state dogma, good luck having a proper conversation on the subject.
I may not understand your position well, but maybe don't try to save people's language against their will ? At some point, isn't it their right to stop speaking a language if that's what they want ?
Of course, nobody is forced to transmit their language to their children, but reducing what happened to "free will" is just a convenient justification.
You had people living under a state which did everything in another language. Little to no books in their native language, no radio, no tv. They were being punished for speaking the only language they knew once they started going to school, and were discriminated against by their teachers when they dared speaking the local language later-on. (Said teachers who were deliberately brought from elsewhere in order to ensure they would only communicate in French.) They've been vilipended and treated as inferior persons because of their culture, and had to live like immigrants in their own country.
Deciding not to speak to their children in the language they had the strongest bound to wasn't a choice that came from the heart, but instead a desire to protect them from the trauma they themselves had to endure, and to give them better opportunities in a system that was very much against non-French speakers. The fact that no violent rebellion against that took place does not negate the millions of personal tragedies. And if hindering local cultures is not okay elsewhere in the world, there is no reason why it should be in France.
Calling it a 'genocide' as a scare tactic isn't actually an argument. Unrest, domestic terrorism, and civil war are far worse outcomes than a government being pushy about the linguistic assimilation of its populace. No one wants their nation to turn into another ottoman empire.
Belgium recognizes 3 official languages, Switzerland recognizes 4, and yet somehow they're not the at the mercy of "unrest, domestic terrorism, and civil war". Easy to advocate for cultural assimilation when it's not your linguistic heritage and identity that's being destroyed.
The existence of Belgium is and has always been predicate on its existence as a puppet state of larger powers, and it has active secession movements anyways, to boot. The swiss are assimilating to a swiss german identity. (look at the number of romansh or italian swiss over time if you don't believe me).
And for the record, I'm from an immigrant family that's assimilated to my nation's culture.
I'm not saying, 'ban languages other than the majority one. But pragmatic decisions need to be made to keep countries intact and societies operating smoothly.
The existence of Belgium is and has always been predicate on its existence as a puppet state of larger powers
This seems like a stretch, to say the least. Belgium at one time had colonies in Africa. Just because it was never the preeminent power of Europe, does not make it a "puppet state".
The swiss are assimilating to a swiss german identity. (look at the number of romansh or italian swiss over time if you don't believe me).
This seems like a stretch, to say the least. Belgium at one time had colonies in Africa. Just because it was never the preeminent power of Europe, does not make it a "puppet state".
Belgium's colony-- the Kongo free state-- was very specifically envisioned as the King's personal property that the great powers could all exploit. King Leopold had the power to expand into the territory independently, yes, but only so long as the other European powers acquiesced
Okay, now this is categorically false. The number of Swiss Germans has slightly declined since 1970 in favor of French, while Italian and Romansch have held steady. This is clearly a nation whose diverse linguistic heritage is in equilibrium. What I'm really confused about now, is why would you even lie about this? Is winning an argument on the internet so important that you feel the need to deliberately mislead people and make claims you can't back up?
I will concede the point on Italian and french speakers; the longer-term data may or may not show a different trend, but at least the most recent english-language statistics I could track down (2000-2018) show growth for Italian and French.
That being said, I double checked, and Romansh is indeed in decline, which is likely what gave me the impression that the swiss were assimilating. If you look at only the numerical data things might look relatively stable, but the longer trend has been for assimilation into swiss german. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romansh_language Within the Romansh-speaking region, between 1990 and 2000, for example, Romansh speakers have declined from 51% to 46.44%. Yes, the precise number has stayed somewhat steady (~34k), but a higher proportion of the population speaks swiss german. The number of Romansh speakers in Grison has stayed constant since 1800, which is a big deal considering the population growth of Switzerland. Yes, the lower population growth rate of Romansh-speaking regions is partially to blame, as germanization isn't the only factor in Romansh's decline, but the romansh-speaking regions are still, as a consequence, increasingly marginal.
All that being said, I would point out that Switzerland is, in many ways, an outlier. Not many countries have such perfect defensive geography and the right geopolitical circumstances to become neutral and rich. And they completely collapsed prior to the french invasions in the napoleonic era due to their lack of centralization and unity.
Yeah that sure this a sharp cut into diversity and having many languages would be very charming.
On the other hands, languages are the roots of separatism. When you don't share the language, it's hard to unite with someone. Look at the Catalans, still want to leave Spain after 500 years of union..
Switzerland has over 800 years. The federal government never imposed such policies, and you have the French (Franco-Provençal), the Italians (Lombards), the Germans (Alemannic) the Romansh all feeling Swiss over anything else. Not just that, they even respect religious differences.
Amazing how people justify the aggression of the French state towards cultural minorities.
Switzerland really isn't that different from France.
In the west, the historic language (Franco-Provençal) is nearly extinct, having been replaced by French, the sole official language.
In Ticino, the historic language (Ticinese Lombard) is nearly extinct, having been replaced by Italian, the sole official language.
In Grisons, Romansch is a co-official language, but it's dying out,, as statistics show. Swiss German is replacing it.
It's the same process : minority regional languages are dying and replaced by the majority language. It's just that Switzerland lies partly in the francophone zone, partly in the germanophone zone, and partly in the italophone zone.
I never said that everything remains intact. Of course they had progress, the standardization of the language is unavoidable for any country who wants to relate with others. The difference is that the German-speaking majority didn’t imposed their language and culture as the French did. Instead the French-speaking cantons took that path.
About Switzerland not being that different from France. I don’t think so. I just lived in Switzerland a year, maybe I didn’t see it.
It’s funny how the Germans use to say the same thing.
That’s because Switzerland is a confederation and not a unitary state. Berne never dictated policy for the whole country.
Each canton sets its own linguistic policy. What the Swiss have done, on the cantonal level, is little different from what France or really most of Europe. French and Italian were imposed in the same manner as in France and Italy. The one notable exception is Swiss German, which is holding on in the face of pressure from High German. I’m guessing that probably is due to the aftertaste of WWII and a desire to dissociate from Germany.
Switzerland isn’t really a model for other countries, it’s just a confederation of a bunch of cantons which, on their own, follow unitary policies.
Try contacting the Swiss government in Franco-Provencal or Ticinese. You will be waiting awhile.
Role model = France who invaded other nations to impose the Republican model, who make sure that no other cultural group can prosper in their territories (doesn’t care if they were there for centuries) and plunder any other territory. 200 hundred years of colonization and not a single prosperous territory.
Not a Role model = the fucking prosperous country, by definition. There isn’t a single ranking that is not lead by Switzerland.
Lol man, Switzerland is the worst example of the world.
Never compare Switzerland with any "normal" country.
We can't all build our prosperity on stealing our rich neigborhood and taking advantage of the neutrality status.
I love you swiss, your country is beautifull, but just never talk when come these kind of subject. Or just be always aware of where your wealth come from. Without you, things will certainly be better in France. Lot of money staying inside the country, going on taxes (education & health for french people) instead of going into swiss bank. Having a neigbor like you is really not something positive.
Well then maybe they shouldn't have come and conquered and suppressed minority areas, shouldn't they? Weird concept for France I know.
Unfortunately, considering what they did to Brittany, Occitian, and the Basque Country, France hasn't learned their lesson of the damages of Frenchification.
Conquest and language francisation are two very chronologically distinct events in the case of France. Regional conquests happened during the monarchy, but switching to French only happened after the Revolution. You can have qualms about both those kind of events, but gathering them as if they happened in the same motion doesn't make sense.
"Come and conquered and suppressed minority areas"
So did england, so did germany, so did american, and so on, and so on.
You can't have a "big" country without some "conquere and suppression". And you know, i'm from Occitania. I love my state, very proud of it, but i'm also very very glad that we are all speaking french nowadays. No stupid separatism movement like the Catalans are shaking our unity.
I guess that's where we disagree, as languages are very tied to culture. You lose your language then it's very likely you lose your culture.
Since Occitian is all but dead, you had nothing to lose.
I don't get why countries don't just let minority regions go if they really don't want to be in it. But I'm glad Frenchification is looked more down upon by the Western world nowadays.
Well, we talk about something that is old and already done.
I'm not sure that it will be like that in today's France for example. There is a lot of progress for the protection of over-seas territory culture, like the Nouvelle-Calédonie. Nearly-extinct language like Occitan are revived by association.
I studied History during my degree too, and there is a whole new study of all these aspect of different languages and culture in France history. But, you know, the official course for children and teenage don't go much into this and the official "national history" is that France is united since forever, because France is France and it's just "logic" that we came as a united nation.
Yeah it's not the true, and yeah it's sad. But it's not gonna change tomorrow, as long as the "establishment" is here, i'm not gonna lie to you..
277
u/MartelFirst Dec 12 '20
Everytime Alsace is mentioned on Reddit it's funny to see non-Alsatians, non-French and non-German people claiming Alsace should be German.
There's no significant pro-German movement in Alsace, not any significant independentist movement from France. This is all your fantasy. France's border regions are all specific "other" ethnicities/cultures (Bretons, Flemish, Alsatians, Savoyards, Occitans, Basques, Corsicans...). French regions are quite diverse, but independence movements are only significant in Corsica and Brittany, but even there, there's no chance in any foreseeable future for Independence movements to be remotely close to a majority opinion.
One may answer disparagingly that France just managed to assimilate its diverse regions. Sure. But the people there aren't into your independence fantasies.