Current status of Occitan?

" Why France don't ratified the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages? It isn't question of independence,it is question about regional languages rights in these regions. "


Because France is a democracy! In a democracy it is the majority that rules.

In Provence, Languedoc, Limousin, Gascogne, Auvergne, etc. 99% of people are native french speakers french and the huge majority of them feel themselves completly french, they just don't want to be obliged to speak/learn/use a language that it not their native language, and that is spoken/known by a minority (often polically very oriented) inside these regions (this minority usually have french as their first native language either by the way).

for exeple, making French and Provençal languages both official languages in Provence (where I'm from) would be complicated and useless, and 95% of the people here don't care about it.

Well we just use provençal in a folkloric way when we translate some street names in both languages: yes we have the right to do it! we have also public schools that teaches provençal (I myself had some lessons about it) and a daily TV show in Provençal, which is very understandable for french speakers (well... the people who watch it are all native french speakers)... But making Provençal equally official with french (meaning making all administrative publications, books, schools, TV, road signs, etc. is useless since the huge majority of Provençal people are french monolinguals, and since we are a democracy it is the majority that rules. It ias maybe sad for the 1% of provençal people that would want to make Provençal as the official language but that is the way it is.
In provence we have much more numerous linguistic minorities than provençal-speaking people: Arabic-speaking (about 10%), English, German and Dutch-speaking (huge number of them in the french riviera, and now also in the interior of Provence that doesn't seem to assimilate to french culture), Provençal might something like the fourth of fith most used language in PACA region.



" Why Italy can give official status to German language in province Bolzano/Bozen,but France can't give it in Alsace? Italy and France both are members of EU. "

We don't want the EU tell us what languages we have to make official in our own regions. If the majority of the population in our regions don't want these languages as official it is their choice, it is democracy.

Secondly by "Parisian centralism", people think that Parisians are an "ethny" that rule the rest of France,

I certainly don't. I have never made such a claim. Rather than 'Parisians', I refer to Paris as a centre of power and where a certain political culture took life; a capital which historically was the focal point for an ideology, a tendency if you will, that had nothing to do with local traits, nor ethnicity (Orleanais or other neighbouring Oil areas), nothing generic of the people as it could easily have happened elsewhere in Europe indeed had historical circumstances so conspired.The nation was born of the idea and not the other way round. And did local and regional elites from elsewhere participate in this 'rush to the centre' ? Of course- even before the democratic era!

This was a process which had always existed as a tendency with the Capetian monarchs but then drastically accelerated with Louis XIV and his visions of centralisation. And the ultimate irony of course, noted by Tocqueville, was that the French Revolutionaries in desposing of the monarch were working towards historical finalities of which they were unaware: they achieved a level of centralisation that the monarch could only have dreamed of.

All I am saying is that in the rush to the centre a lot of organic local hierarchy and local tradition -those ancient arrangements which had evolved over centuries- was either trampled on or foresaken, and regardless of whether the succeeding generations today consider it to have been worth it, a lot was lost and at a pretty price too, literally in lives. Consider it historical vandalism. France could still be a unified, democratic country today with a degree of federalism and yet be so much more fascinating had it respected its local traditions. The biggest loser of the ideology was France and the French themselves. Oh to think what could have been!

Compare to neighbouring Spain or Italy for instance, just as a mental exercise: do you honestly think these countries would be all the richer, all the more fascinating had they more closely followed the French patterns of centralisation? French troops tried exporting the ideology at the turn of the 19th century into these lands, Spain being a very decentralised monarchy in which local customs and ancient traditions were respected in return for political loyalty to the monarch, and 'Italy' even more so being a series of loosely connected regions, principalities and kingdoms. How was the new ideology received? It was a disaster... now you can view that as a sign of the 'barbaric' nature of these 'backward' and 'despotic' peoples (that's how many French officers considered them! ...and yet these lands had never previously sent thousands of their own people to the guilliotine!)

The Jacobin interruption upon these countries (as among other of France's neighbours) was traumatic... the local systems and practices were simply not prepared for such wanton upheaval, and you just need to study Spanish and Italian history to see the legacy which followed: a century of civil wars, economic collapse, mass migrations, constant failures of the existing political orders.

And do you want to know the irony in all of this? Go check out the cat-fighting on this forum between the most recalcitrant Spanish centralists and their Catalanist, ultranationalist Basque nemeses et al... the Spanish right spent most of the 20th century lamenting the importation of Parisian ideology into their country , blaming it, as they saw, for the spreading of Socialism, anti-Clericalism, Anarcho-syndicalism and accordingly for the previous century of upheaval visited upon them via the Pyreness. And yet today the SPanish centralist right looks enviously to the French model in terms of obliterating or obviating local and regional culture!

C'est marrant ! Il n'y a que les étrangers pour s'indigner du "non respect" de la Charte européenne des langues régionales ou minoritaires en France.

On a encore le droit de faire ce qu'on veut dans notre pays...on a déjà des émissions, journaux et autres manifestations culturelles en occitan, c'est pas comme si on avait éradiqué la langue.
Depuis un mois le métro parle languedocien à Toulouse et ça gave tout le monde alors j'ose pas imaginer l'administration en occitan.

Je ne comprends pas pourquoi les étrangers sont sans cesse choqués par le "manque" de politiques et de cultures régionales dans les régions françaises.

What's wrong with centralisation? To be honest, 99% of people from southern France don't give a damn the Occitan language . Catalans from Spain promote Catalan and sometimes also the Occitan language in France more than the French themselves. Occitan is a dead language, period.

I think this topic was started by a catalionan who wants to get Rosellon back to catalonia.
France is not spain. Most of french people love to be french and speak french no as some spaniard who hate spain and spanish.

Basque language is dead in France, it's funny to watch euskalherria weather maps which include some parts of france into euskalherria political borders. And so does with french Rosellon, they don't want to be catalan, they wanna be French and speak only french not catalan.

Spanish nationalist would be bad, but catalonian and basque nationalist are worse. They want to expand their borders to France because of their tiny territorie.

<<France could still be a unified, democratic country today with a degree of federalism and yet be so much more fascinating had it respected its local traditions>>

But all the local traditions are respected...do you really think that France is culturally the same everywhere in its territory ? The way of life isn't the same in Dunkerque than in Bordeaux, the cutural manifestation aren't the same, the food too. French culture is the result of the combination of all the local particularities.
I noticed it's something difficult to understand for the foreigners, you're not the first ;)

Catalan nationalists are specially annoying, they are like a petite France inside Spain yapping all the time against us. The Basques, despite of their brutality are Iberians in the end like the Portuguese.France should annex Catalonia and ban the ugly Catalan language. After a few generations the Catalans will be glad to speak only French like the Southern French are nowadays because they got rid of their vernacular tongues.

<<I think this topic was started by a catalionan who wants to get Rosellon back to catalonia>>

No. By an Irishman who simply has an interest in languages and history.

@ Harman, why don't you try engaging my arguments with historical examples?At least Blanc and Parisien have bothered doing so in previous posts. I may not agree with them (Parisien seems to think I'm simply repeating urban legends) but you have resorted to conspiracy theories with your response above!

Furthermore, I am not politically agitating for any present cause or movement. I am simply appealing to historical memory. Why can't we engage in a purely intellectual discussion? What is the harm? What's the worst that can come of it? That either you or I will come away from this forum having changed or even slightly altered our respective opinions? At the very least, I hope I can learn something from reading your replies.

@ Guest
Clearly you have not observed my above comment on the irony of the Spanish centralist right vs centrifugal regionalism.... where do I indicate that I am a Catalanist (whatever that means)? As if to compound the irony, you then proceed to write a hateful comment wishing a part of your country to be absorbed into France: hey maybe Catalan would be reduced to a 'Patois' and then finally disappear beneath the colossus of the French State. Oh joy! Why, you appear envious that Madrid cannot enforce (and you really mean 'enforce' don't you) the level of centralism that France has successfully done over the previous two centuries! See what is happening to you? The contradictions of your position merely reinforces the absurdity of Spanish centralists blaming 'los gabachos' for disrupting Spain's history and simulateneously wishing the same 'gabachos' would take over the governing of Spain for you: Spanish inferiority complex? The infamous 'Leyenda Negra'? Espain is different?

And yet I can somewhat sympathise with the arguments of the Spanish right with respect to the French invasion and the War of Independence!

Go figure!

<<France should annex Catalonia and ban the ugly Catalan language..>>

Why? Because Catalan speakers are able to produce a greater variety of sounds than Castilian?

And even accepting your subjective opinion, since when was aesthetic appraisal a reason for banning languages?

I'll tell you one thing, it would be a lot harder for English teachers to teach these future Catalans how to pronounce the word 'leisure', or 'zest' or 'pot' if those future generations only spoke Castilian with its limited phonetic system.

And as for the 'brutal Basques'; yes, their primitive language system was fundamental in the development of Castilian; hence Castilian (as spoken in most of Spain) is such a harsh sounding language!

And the Basques are Iberian in what sense? Culturally Geographically? Catalonia is south of the Pyrenees and part of the Iberian peninsula. Pray, what bizarre criteria are you using to disparage an entire people?

Also, note how none of the French posters above have resorted to hateful ethnic stereotypes! They may (strongly) dispute my analysis and reasoning, but I wonder whether they are too embarrassed to reduce themselves to your level of expression through insult!

To dear joosley:

You are assuming a lot of things about what I think or not and that's not good in a conversation. I never said many things you stated, but for some reason you want to believe I think that way. Did I say you are a Catalan? I don't know where are you from, you are simply a fool. A Southern French maybe? Southern French ,like the Catalans, tend to be disgusting people, specially when dealing with the Spanish. The Parisians, contrarily to what many people tend to believe, are not that cold . Sorry but that's my experience after travelling a lot across Europe. Maybe despite they no longer speak their vernacular languages and speak only French, Southern French people still have big resentment deep in their soul inherited from generations ...

Where did I say I blame "the gabachos" for disrupting the Spanish history. That's precissely what makes the history of a country interesting, to be influenced by other nations which carry different ideas, peoples, etc. The influence of France in Spain has been in general positive. The Bourbon dinasty was a step forward from the Habsburg Dinasty (which had strong germanic and federalist mentality). After the last Habsburg king died, Spain was no more than a conglomerate of different kingdoms, each one with their own language, laws, coin, and so on. The Bourbons contributed a lot to create the Spanish nation and imposed the Spanish language in the administration. Also the Bourbons banned Catalan in Spain . So I can only praise the "gabachos". By the way,gabachos is a despective term because the Spanish were mainly exposed to the Southern French, which as I said are strange folks. I prefer to call the French simply as "franceses", not "gabachos".

Where did I say anything against the Napoleonic invasion? Napoleon's brother had big plans to modernise Spain and centralise even more the administration, following the Republican French. Sadly the clerigy and the noblemen were able to cheat the Spanish people and disposed them against the French Republic.Study history you ignorant because Napoleon did find more resistence precissely in Catalonia than in other parts of Spain where the British, which in theory were allies of Spain, commited more crimes against the local population than the French invasors themselves. So once again you are wrong. Don't make assumptions about what I think, you fool.

And yes, this time you are right .I don't care if Catalonia is annexed by France because I don't consider it part of my nation, it is just a piece of land with hideous people who only cause trouble. They may say they give money to poorer Spanish regions ( they wouldn't if they could) , but I live in Madrid which has even more GDP per capita than Catalonia, so I don't need it because I live in a richer region.They can save their money into their ass. Have a nice day!.

@ Le Toulousain

I am sure that no one is persecuted for speaking minority languages in France.

What I am vindicating is the simple acknowledgement that we these languages are in the position they are today through acts of coercion. And that previous generations of people, families, schoolchildren were brutalised (and I mean that literally) and suffered - not in a symbolic sense but in a very real sense: an act of violation on their privacy. I am not for one moment suggesting that a sudden overnight conversion of France to federalism and nouveau regionalism will somehow undo the past or even be worth all the hassle and expense. No. And yes, I am wary of the elusive nature of nationalisms (Guest claims that Catalan nationalists are annoying: trust me, all nationalists can be annoying. Lord knows, my country has its fair share of them!). But I am saying that the ideology which emanated from Paris was in itself a nationalism, a violent nationalism at that.

<< What I am vindicating is the simple acknowledgement that we these languages are in the position they are today through acts of coercion. And that previous generations of people, families, schoolchildren were brutalised (and I mean that literally) and suffered - not in a symbolic sense but in a very real sense: an act of violation on their privacy. >>

-- Here again you are wrong. I cannot but confirm what have been previously said by others: this is a non-issue in France. Only very tiny groups struggle to keep alive Occitan dialects and Breton. I hope they succeed because seing those language becoming history would be a terrible loss. But let's face it, about nobody gives a flying rat's ass. In the whole country, using a common received language have been seen for centuries as a token for courtesy and efficiency. Barely anyone ever objected.

People are very "flamable" in the Occitan provinces of France. Many times people rose up in insurrections for their rights or their faith. For their dialects, never. Industrial conflicts were especially severe in the South, in the 19th century. Waves of racism raged against Italian immigrants. But there never were any linguistic conflicts.

About religious conflicts: you know probably that Calvinist communities were widespread in Languedoc. Actually, there were instrumental in introducing the French language, since they used Bibles and psalm books imported from Geneva, they taught their children in French while Catholic priests were still preaching in Langue d'Oc in their parishes. When King Louis the 14th decided to ban Protestant churches (most stupid event in our history), a civil war burst out in the mountain districts (the Cévennes). Strangely ; the rebels were French speakers and the loyalists were those speaking only 'Occitan'...

And don't start me about Brittany. As long as it was an independant duchy it was ruled from (only French speaking) capital cities Nantes and/or Rennes, the Duke's or Duchess' court used only French, the country was ruled in French. Had Brittany remained independant, Breton would probably have been eradicated long time ago. I have a feeling that being ruled from the distant French capital did better to ensure survival of Breton.

You are Irish? Alright. Just compare:

— Ireland is an island, they had under British occupation their own Parliament and a (Catholic) Church of their own, and have been independent for decades.

— Wales didn't have any Parliament nor any Church of Wales, for centuries it had been ruled from London as a part of England.

Which Celtic language is better off now: Welsh, or Irish Gaelic?

" Guest

<<You are assuming a lot of things about what I think or not and that's not good in a conversation>>

You're right. My apologies. I should have afforded you the benefit of the doubt and not lumped you into the larger generic group, or made you as representative of any group or body of opinion. You are, after all, an individual.

<<Did I say you are a Catalan?>> Again, apologies. But can you see why I understood you to be presuming me as Catalan? It's because I understood your comment <<Catalan nationalists are specially annoying>> to be a response to the message posted just before yours by Harkan: <<I think this topic was started by a catalionan who wants to get Rosellon back to catalonia>> and since Harkan was clearly referring to me (the poster who started this topic) I took your comment in that light.


<<I don't know where are you from...>> Again, let me be categorical: I am from Ireland.

<<The Bourbon dinasty was a step forward from the Habsburg Dinasty (which had strong germanic and federalist mentality)>>

<<...A Southern French maybe?>> No. Southern Irish.

<<...Southern French ,like the Catalans, tend to be disgusting people...>> Have you told this to Le Toulousain? Or do I seem so repulsive to you that I automatically remind you of a Southern Frenchman or a Catalan? No assumptions here, I would just like some clarification.

By the way, you do know that the word 'disgusting' tends to be a false friend between the Spanish-to-English translation, right? In English, 'disgusting' does not mean 'unpleasant' or 'desagradable'; it means 'repellent', 'odious', 'filthy'. A very hateful term. Especially one to be using about ethnic groups.....I'm sorry, there I go again 'assuming' what you meant!

<<The Parisians, contrarily to what many people tend to believe, are not that cold... >>
Are you assuming that I hold a particular view about Parisians? That's hardly fair, is it? No where did I make any assumption of the like, any comment whatsoever about the Parisian people, their characteristics, their hospitality etc. As it happens, I too have been to Paris; twice. My experience of Parisians? Quite similar to yours. The ones whom I met? Mostly nice individuals, polite, hospitable and helpful as well as a few unpleasant people and then still some others who didn't provoke any strong feelings in me either way, good or bad. That is, like any other people anywhere.

<<Maybe despite they no longer speak their vernacular languages and speak only French, Southern French people still have big resentment deep in their soul inherited from generations ... >>
Le Toulaisain seems to have gotten over his.

<<The Bourbon dinasty was a step forward from the Habsburg Dinasty (which had strong germanic and federalist mentality)... >>

A step forward? The Hapsburgs attained a level of commercial and international expansion uprecedented by any Spanish dynasty before or since. The diffusion of the Castillian language (which I love by the way) overseas is due in large part to their administration. What was wrong with a federalist mentality? They succeeded in securing the allegiance to Spain of the various crowns and principalities who became active participants in the Spanish Empire (I don't know a single Catalan nationalist who would take pride in this) and all this without trampling their local customs. Again what is wrong with federalism? The most successful liberal democracy in the world today (the United States) is defined by its federalism. I happen to think Europe could have avoided a lot of turmoil and bloodshed had it been more respectful of local autonomies. It's a two-way thing, Guest; the centrifugalists may be a modern day irritant and, true enough, nationalists tend to be foolish (what grounds are there for advancing politics through sentiment?) but believe me, they weren't always this way. Treated well, they can be willing partners. Or maybe that ship has sailed....

<<After the last Habsburg king died, Spain was no more than a conglomerate of different kingdoms, each one with their own language, laws, coin, and so on. The Bourbons contributed a lot to create the Spanish nation and imposed the Spanish language in the administration>>

-Britain was also a conglomerate of different kingdoms at that time; didn't stop them from rising throughout the 18th century to become the dominant world power, did it? The Scots were happy to tag along as long as the Empire was benefiting them too as equal partners! Scotland also preserved its own legal system (Roman Law) as opposed to the English norms and its education system was also free of control from London. By 1900 Scotland was one of the wealthiest regions in the world per capita. Poland-Lithuania also become the largest kingdom of contiguous territory in Eastern Europe despite being practically a federative and elective monarchy. Why should diversity have been a threat to peace, partnership and prosperity in the case of Spain?

<<The Bourbons contributed a lot to create the Spanish nation and imposed the Spanish language in the administration>>

-'Create' a nation? How? A nation is the sentiment of a people. How does an administration create sentiment? Even Josep Pique uses this argument AGAINST Catalan nationalists whenever they get a bit too excitable.
-imposed the Spanish language? The Spanish language had already prospered and spread rapidly in the preceding centuries without any need for legislative 'imposition'. Ever heard of the expression "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?" It was hardly conducive to harmonious relations a century later.

<<Also the Bourbons banned Catalan in Spain>>
-Well, I would find something discomforting about this, wouldn't I? Banning languages. What next?



<< I prefer to call the French simply as "franceses", not "gabachos" >>
- I'm glad to hear that. Like you, I can't stand when people use derogatory terms to classify ethnic or national groups. Again, I didn't intend to imply that you yourself would ever use this term to describe French people, but rather was attributing it to a view commonly held amongst many, though not most, Spaniards. My mistake for lumping you in with the collective and not respecting your individuality again. I should have been more precise in my language. Apologies once again.

<<Where did I say anything against the Napoleonic invasion?>>
- I never accused, implied or inferred that you supported the Napoleonic invasion. Again, read my paragraph concerning the ironies of France's interaction with Spain in this period.

Napoleon's brother had big plans to modernise Spain and centralise even more the administration, following the Republican French
- He intended to achieve all these big plans in his capacity...as a puppet ruler? What a stunning success that proved to be!
- Centralising the administration = An observation lacking any value judgement. But good or bad, and reasons why/why not?
- Just because Pepe's proposals were idealistic and well-intentioned did not make them automatically good ideas. Lenin made the trains run on time, Ireland's Prime Minister in the 1930s, De Valera, dreamt of incubating a romanticised pure agrarian society which had suffered a century of previous famines into a haven in which small agricultors would be the economic backbone of the nation. His practical measures to implement these sweeping reforms? Importation tariffs on agricultural produce and suicidal tit-for-tat trade war with neighbouring Britain leading to increased poverty, mass emigration and cultural insularity. Lesson learned? Intentions are not the same in practicality as they are when held in imagination. But a mature political culture is one which will accept responsibility and admit its accountability for the deeds it carries out, regardless of how things turn out and contingent factors.

<<Sadly the clerigy and the noblemen were able to cheat the Spanish people and disposed them against the French Republic>>
- I can't believe I am about to defend the Catholic Church here! But can you even understand their slight fear at the anti-clericalism (note, not the same thing as 'secularism') of the French troops considering what had happened over the previous two decades within France? You know, when churches and convents were shut down ( a disaster for the French urban poor, by the way, who missed out on charity works), priests, monks and nuns, beaten, harassed and even murdered. A foretelling of what was to come in Spain throughout the 1830s (Remember? The rumours about how the Jesuits were infiltrating other religious orders and poisoning the city of Madrid's drinking wells...well, it helped justify a few church burnings), the senseless violence. Why on earth should the clergy have expected to receive decent treatment by invading Napoleonic anti-clerical forces? Now, you could argue that they should have been a bit more 'politic' and tried to accomodate the French prescene there. But it's easy for you or I to summon the courage which they may or may not have lacked when faced with this situation two hundred years ago.

- Also, I love the tone of conspiracy theory here. The invisible hand selling out Spain, the dark hidden forces working from the shadows to manipulate the people. Generally not advisable to flaunt this in a History conversation, regardless of era and location.

<<Study history you ignorant >>
- I did. Formally. At University Level. B.A. And I continue to read it avariciously.

<<Napoleon did find more resistence precissely in Catalonia than in other parts of Spain>>
- A good point which only serves to reinforce my argument that Catalans and other regional entities did often prove incredibly loyal to the Spanish nation. And you would have these patriots annexed by France?
- And yet you say that they are like <<..a petite France inside Spain...>>? What did they have to do to prove to your satisfaction? You really set the bar high for peoples from peripheral regions regardless of their historical experiences!



<<,...the British, which in theory were allies of Spain, commited more crimes against the local population than the French invasors themselves>>
- Britain were in fact allies of Portugal, and felt obliged to intervene (as per terms of agreement since the 14th century- Western Europe's oldest military entente) in the event of Napoleon usurping Portugal's sovereignty. Britain could just have easily returned home after expelling French forces from Portugal. Luckily for Spain, she didn't. And so indeed the 'guerilleros' were able to count on an ally. And one which didn't occupy Spain after helping to liberate it. And without this intervention there would have been no Constitution at Cadiz in 1812.


- indeed the British soldiers did have a tendency to be rewarded by their officers for their bravery and discipline in the form of allowing them to get drunk and unruly, stealing, fighting, occasionally raping and quite conceivably murdering members of innocent local populations along their way. But did this ever amount to large-scale premeditated murder? Was it official regimental policy to target local populations for politically-motivated killings? And remarkably for a Protestant country, it didn't even bother go around burning and desecrating Spanish churches. French troops on the other hand...

<< Don't make assumptions about what I think, you fool..>>

- Another insult, but I won't return fire. Throughout this reply I have tried to maintain some civility and avoid resorting to insults or coarse language, clarifying where necessary and apologising where proper... and believe me I am trying; but seeing as how exerting this has been, I think I can at least indulge myself the following:
to continue to make assumptions about you, and about what you think, since I spot a continuous trend as I progress through your text. Namely, that you will continue to insult me. Not that I'm too offended- there have been worse displays of behaviour on this forum before and besides, you were probably in a bad mood due to some other preocupations (you see? I'm also willing to make charitable assumptions to your benefit!).
I will also assume that you don't like a certain people/peoples and ethnicities and freely insult them, something which I have not resorted to once throughout this topic. So, before we continue...

are there any more ethnic groups whom you consider to be 'hideous'?

What about Jews? Africans? Romani?

Should I assume the way you think about them?


PS - I'd love to know just how prosperous Madrid would be if it didn't have the cash injection that all national capital and administrative cities receive. And you speak for Madrid not needing Catalans' money, but I think the more prescient question is where and how the government (based in Madrid) decides to redistributes said money to which regions for those spending projects (he says nervously looking at administrative ethics in Andalucia and Extremadura) which Catalans may find to be wasteful, inefficient, or simply trousered by the local elites. It's a common gripe that happens in many large countries.

This thread is about Occitan . You seem rather obsessed on Spanish affairs. There is nothing more irritant for me than seeing a foreigner who has no clue discussing about Spanish politics.I'll give you an advice: don't do this in real life. On the internet it might be fine. "If it wasn't for the Catalan's money...". And if it wasn't for the Spanish market (Andalusia is 25% of it) the Catalan companies would go into bankrupcy, you FOOL. Just a bunch of nonsense, I'll not waste my time discussing the rest of your message. It's worthless.

And yet you contributed a post about Catalan (and Basque) affairs.

Foreigner, yes, a guiri. One who lived and worked in Spain.