What's the controversy with La Civito?

While there may be a historical left bent to Esperanto I wish to make a brief update. Political parties that have a larger than usual relationship to Esperanto include the Radical Party of Italy (with some spread abroad), the Green Party of France (you might go to www.verduloj.org) , the Green Party of Ireland (where leading Esperantists are double-Green...leaders in both the Esperanto Movement and the Green Party) and EDE which stands for Esperanto Demokratio Europo. The last have given some visibility to Esperanto during European elections in France and Germany (and non-Esperantists may be the majority of supporters of the parties with Esperanto at its center.) Recently some members of the last and new members have created UNU MONDO at a Yahoo Group, but it remains to be seen if Esperanto is organzied enough outside of Europe to create Esperanto-centered political entities. SAT, on the other hand frequently tries to include Socialist and Communist Party members, and others who defend workers rights, in and outside of unions. One recent and one present parlamentarian have regulary spoken/ or speak Esperanto--both women--Ljudmila Novak (Slovenia?) and Malgorzata Handzlik (Poland). (I made no attempt to grasp their party affiliations). Lastly, back to the Civito, I think their site is www.esperantio.net.

Jorge Camacho has written a brief satiric response to his own commentary about boycotting the 68th Spanish Congress. It's worth reading for perspective:

http://esperantarespubliko.blogspot.com/2009/07/la-unua-mk-en-kadizo.html

If "La Civito" can set itself up as the Esperanto government, so can anyone . . . the whole idea is so ridiculous it's hard to believe grown people--and competent Esperanto speakers--spend their time on it.

For myself, I want to join Camacho's Esperanta Respubliko. I'd like to be "Ministro de Hundoj, Ungo-tondiloj, kaj Teo", but first I want to discuss pay.

Lee

I agree with both Beĉjo and Tim who've captured essential elements of what La Civito is about. Another way to look at it is as an alternative structure for organizing the Esperanto community: La Civito proposes itself as the government of Esperantujo (they call it Esperantio. They claim it's a democracy and that anyone can join. All you have to do is agree to their statement of principles. But it really does look like a cult of personality around Giorgio Silfer. Personally, I'm unconvinced that Esperantujo needs a government -- or a bunch of silly titles -- if it wants to be taken seriously at all.

I think you'll get a variety of answers to your question, but here's my (admitted biased) attempt.

If Raumism is basically the idea that Esperanto-speakers represent a linguistic diaspora (a minority culture), the Civito is the attempt to give that diaspora some sort of pseudo-state and government, with its own constitution, court, parliament, laws, elected officials, and political parties. Trouble is, it's a sham. There are only a few hundred members of the Civito at best, with 19 senate members. The leadership positions get passed around between the same people, all centered around one particular individual, Giorgio Silfer. The Civito's pompous language make its proclamations seem more important than they really are -- just pretend, sound, and fury, with no authority. The Vikipedio article on the Civito is entertaining -- see how many "legislative bodies" you can count. I think there's more than the US government, which represents 300 million people, not 300.

Libera Folio certainly isn't a neutral party. It takes great glee at the Civito's missteps and humiliations. There are deep personal and political differences between the Civito's leadership and the writers and editors at Libera Folio, especially Jorge Camacho, who has written at length against the Civito. He's probably giving the Civito more attention than it deserves, but it's good that there's a dissenting voice to the Civito's torrent of meaningless titles and proclamations.

I don't think the Civito is dangerous. I think it's silly, and it won't exist in twenty or thirty years, so it's hardly worth worrying about. Camacho's writings have helped to point out that the Civito has no clothes. I don't think that the majority of the Esperanto community takes the Civito seriously -- and rightly so.

I've interacted a few times with individual members of the Civito, even some of the senatanoj and vickonsuloj. Many are good and hardworking Esperantists, and I am happy to collaborate with them when I have the chance, even though I don't agree with the politics, tactics, or mission of the Civito. I also respect the writers and editors at Libera Folio, who are similarly good and hardworking Esperantists, and whose views on the Civito are closer to my own.