Hic est epistula socio-politica. Est libera ut transferatur et distribuatur conservans versionem Latinam. Plenitudo epistulae clamatur impassibilem ad vindicationes authoritatum fitque exclusive pro humanitate. Rogamini ut honoretis naturam et destinatum illius.
This is a socio-political message. Feel free to translate and redistribute it preserving the Latin version. The content of the message is declared impassive to ownership claims and it is exclusively humanitarian. Please respect its nature and purpose.


LINGUA GLOBALIZATIONIS CONCORDISSIMAE

Hic epistula manifesta est, ostenta cum voluntate exhibitionis aspectuum defectuum evolutionis mundi nostri in processu globalizationis a perspectiva cultural-linguistica, atque cum offertoria resolutionis pro evolutione una stabili et inconflictiva (constans ex acta astrictionis consecutionum nedesiderabilium processus globalizationis, atque meliorationis climatis culturalis, socialis, oeconomici et politici). This is a manifesto, addressed with the purpose of presenting deficient aspects of our world's evolution in the globalization process from the cultural-linguistical perspective, and of offering resolutions for a stable and unconflictory development (consisting in measures of limiting the undesirable effects of the globalization process, and of improving the cultural, social, economical and political climate).


Index Contents
Introductio Introduction
Considerationes Considerations
Resolutiones Resolutions
Quaestiones et responsa Questions and answers


Introductio Introduction
Globalizatio est processus inevitabilis, in evolutione plena. Apud illius elementa constitutivas, unum habet appulsum fundamentalem directum super nos, humanitatem in totam existentiam illam, quam fiet a nunc. Est illa quod pertingit nostrae identitatem, culturam et linguam. Mundus globalizatus tendit ad linguam comunem. Qualis fuerit haec lingua atque quomodo advenerit adtributa ad statum linguae universalis, determinabit naturam constructivam aut distructivam processus globalizationis a perspectiva existentium culturae valorumque identitatum nostrorum, determinabit conditionem modi nostri coexistentialem, (at longinque) gradualitatem cooperariae, motivariam (atque efficientiam conclusam) contributionis ad communem progressionem, ac alia multa elementa afferentia evolutionis civilizationis nostrae. Sequentia praesentantur pro consideratione complura problemata globalizationis in forma actuali, subsecuta ab offertoria implicationis activae et efficientis in resolutionem globalizationis unius beneficae pro humanitate tota. The globalization is an inevitable unfolding process. Among its defining elements, one has a direct and fundamental impact on us, on humanity for its entire existence from now on. It's the one that concerns our identity, culture and language. The globalized world tends toward a common language. Which will this language be and how will it become invested in that universal position, will determine afterwards the constructive or destructive nature of the globalization process regarding prospect our existing cultures and identities' values, will determine the terms of our state of coexistance, the level of our cooperation (for a long period of time), the motivation for (and the deduced efficiency of) the contribution to a common progress, and many other elements related to our civilization's evolution. The following are presented for consideration several problems of the globalization in its current form, followed by the proposal of active and efficient involvement in the resolution of a globalization beneficial for all humankind.


Considerationes Considerations
Conflictus culturarum. A necessitate cohaesionis mundi globalis, advenit requisitio usionis linguae communae pro globalizatione. Modus usionis pro requisitione hac linguarum nationalis portat cum eo duas nedesiderabiles consequentias. Ambae prodeunt ex conflictu prodito in interactionis culturalis, conflictus in quem cultura una est linguae globalizationarii. Problema primum est quippe hoc culturarum comminatorum propter despectum attenuationis amplitudinis habentis, perditionis valorum aut quidem disparitionis illius de culturis vivis. Hae culturae habent justitiam obligationemque moralem opponere contra comminatoris existentiae illarum. Problema secundum est hoc culturae favorabilis in globalizatione. Haec cultura adveniat symbolum destructionis culturalis pro omnibus aliis culturis affectis a processu globalizationis, et adtrahat adversum se oppositionem illarum. Resolutio perfecta est autem haec, in qua conflictus omnes vitabitur. The cultures' conflicts. From the necessity of the globalized world cohesion emerges the need for the usage of a common globalizing language. The case of using for this purpose a national language brings along with it two undesirable consequences. Both ar coming out of the conflict produced by the cultures' interaction, conflict in which one of the cultures is the one of the globalization laguage. The first problem is obviously that of the cultures threatened by the prospect of diminishing their current role, of loosing values, or even by the prospect of their disappearance from the ranks of living cultures. These cultures have the moral right and obligation to oppose against the threats to their own existence. The second problem is that of the culture favored by globalization. This culture would become the symbol of cultural destruction for all the other cultures affected by globalization process, and would attract upon it their opposition. The ideal solution is that where all the conflicts are avoided.
Contaminatio politica. Differentiae (specialiusque conflictus) interculturalium contenduntur a politicis rationibus. Praesertim a gradu globali, hae absumuntur ad dissociationem communium et ad conpositionem castrorum politicorum adversorum. Itaque prae illarum usabile potentia politica, variae res apoliticae (includentes illae culturales), deveniuntur directu aut indirectu adtactas vel etiam implicatas, coactivas fungi partem pergularum opis in cursibus politicis. Consequientia autem implicationis politicae, conprobantur fieri neque pro humanitate neque pro progressione globali. Pro evolutione et progressione civilizationis nostrae requirimus autem solum politicum non-toxicatum. Resolutio perfecta adopinaretur existentiam medii talis, cum defensione insita contra amissiones laborium et proventuum. The political contamination. The intercultural differences (and particularly the conflicts) are exploited on the political playground. Especially on the global level, those are used at the dissociation of interests and at the formation of oposing political camps. Directly or indirectly, because of their exploitable political potential, apolitical domains (which includes also the cultural ones) become touched or even involved, forced to play the role of power leverages in the political games. The outcome of political involvement however, does not prove to be in the interest of humanity or the global development. For our civilization's development and progress we need a politically unintoxicated ground. The ideal solution would surmise the existence of such an environment, with an inner protection against the wastage of efforts and resources.
Oeconomia et obstacula culturalia. Oeconomicae considerationes erant et sunt significantissimae inter considerationis de qua coepiebat et sustinetur deinde phaenomenon globalizationis. A despectatio unitatum oeconomicarum, etsi variantia culturalis potest enim offerre opportunitates, ad scala autem majore illa fuit et propius fit unum impedimentum prae incremento ac expansione. Indifferenter de resolutionibus adoptatis propter aptationem ad multiculturalem multilinguisticumque mundom, sensitur tamen praepositio adoperantis in medium unum uniforme conexorium atque necessitas linguae quae servet sicut regulam in multitudine aliae linguae. Mandatio linguarum nationalium in partem talem fert nonnulla problemata naturae politicae, quas adveniunt repraesentare impedimentum in progressione et additamentum instabilitatis. Resolutio perfecta reatur linguam unam acceptam universale, impassibilem ad cursum climatis politici, inaffectam ob differentia culturalia (quam quietur quidem pro finibus culturalibus munitis, offerare apertionem veram – potiori quam apertionis politicas confactas in commercium politicum), et saltem ut habeat praerequisitionem quae donabunt ei stabilitatem temporalis. The economy and the cultural obstacles. The economic considerations were and still are the most important among the considerations because of which it appeared and is continuously supported the globalization phenomenon. From the economical prospective, although the cultural diversity might represent oportunities in some cases, on the large scale it was and still is rather an impediment for development and expansion. Regardless of the adopted solutions for adaptating to a multicultural and multilinguistical world, it is still sensed the preference for operating in an uniform conecting environment and the necessity for a language that would serve as a reference in the multitide of the other languages. The investment of national languages in this role bring up a batch of problems political in nature, that come to represent an impediment for development and a factor of instability. The ideal solution would be a language universally accepted, impassive to changes in the political climate, unaffected by cultural differences (and which even would, in the case of cultural protected frontiers, offer a real opening – a much more important one than the political openings done at the political levels), and not the least – to have pre-requisites that would grant it stability in time.
Prospectus extinctiorum culturarum. In processu globalizationis, demotio obstructionibus et apertio habent consequenter exponitium magnum ad influentiam externam omnium culturarum involutarum. Culturae semper fuerunt adinvicem interinfluentiati, sed mechanismi illarum protectorii qui constituebantur tempori, adtribuebat continuentiam per astrictionem influentiarum ad quantitates indestructivas. Nunc, praeterea factum quod processum globalizationis adquirit tractatum causantem quoque auctum generalem in intensitate influentiarum interculturalium, in exemplo linguae nationalis globalizationariae elementa culturae conjunctae per mandatum linguae eorum nanciscuntur deinde saltum trans mechanismos protectorios aliarum culturarum, tendentia compellere supra eas influentiam amplificatam, sublimitatam, destructivam. Diminutio elementorum definitoriorum in aliam culturam ad proportionis neglectabilis aut quidem ad culturarum extinctionis totalis remanet igitur dumtaxat problema temporale. Resolutio perfecta pro globalizatione sine effectu monopolii culturalis contineat acta compescentia crescentiae excessivae significantiae prae quadam lingua nationale, atque acta protectiva omnium culturarum existentium prout patrimonium civilizationis nostrae. The prospect of cultures' annihilation. In the globalization process, the elimination of barriers and the openness have as a side effect a strong exposure to the external influences for any culture involved. The cultures have been always inter-influenced one another, but the potecting mechanism developed in time granted their continuity by limiting those features to a non-destructive level. Now besides the fact that the glogalization process takes traction causing likewise a general grow in the intesity of these intercultural influiences, in the case of a national globalizing language, elements of its attached culture, though their language's mandate, are getting passage over the protective measures of the other cultures and tend to force upon these an amplified, under-limited, destructive influence. The diminution of the definitive elements of other cultures to the neglijabile levels or even cultures' total extinction is reduced in this way to a mere time problem. The ideal solution for a globalization without an effect of cultural monopoly would present measures for preventing an excessive growth in importance for any given national language as well as measures of protection for all the existing cultures as a patrimony of our civilization.
Identitates sociales perditae. Utio linguae unius nationalis pro communicationem interculturalem habet effectum demutatorum colonizatoriumque, apudque prima elementa affecta est identitates introperceptae hominum qui habitant in spatium culturale sub evolventi colonializatione. In globalizatione actuale, effectus hic est factum perceptivum – proportiones significantes hominum (quaesite illorum adpertinentium ad communitates cum gradu amplo expositionis exterae), voluntarie aut involuntarie advenerant cognoscere et adgnoscere elementa identitatum culturalium peregrinarum plus quam aequivalentium culturalium propriarum. Si phaenomena talia neglegentur aut vero sustinentur (quod revera evenit), nimirum identitates conlectivae communitatum affectarum fient perditae. Ad modum optimum sit desideranter resolutio desitus effectus tales atque custoditionis varietatis socialis identitatum (qua est solummodo varietatas naturalis tamquam ceterae). The compromised social identities. The usage of national language in intercultural communication has a changing and colonizing effect, and among the first affected elements is the self-perceived identity of the people of the cultural space under the unfolding colonization. In the current globalization this effect is a noticible fact – significant proportions of people (especially tho ones from communities with a strong cultural external exposure) wishful or unwittingly, come to know and acknowledge the identity elements specific to foreign cultures more than the equivalents of their own culture. If such phenomena are ignored, or even supported (as it is actually happening), withouth doubt those colective identities in the affected communities, will be compromised. Ideally it is prefferable a solution for non-proliferation of such phenomena and for protecting the social diversity of identities (which is a natural diversity like any other).

Indubitanter, problemata qua humanitas habet adversum, sunt numerosa et diversa. Considerationes nunciatae exponunt vix quidam de problematis (cum significantia subjectiva prae omnibus) qua accidunt in globalizationem adductam sub signo linguae national-politicae qua est citatam quam universalem. Resolutiones offeratae postquam possint vel nepossint fieri finales, sed certe sunt necessarias pro circumactu laborum nostrorum ad directiones indestructivas. Indisputably, the problems that the humanity is facing are multiple and diverse. The enunciated considerations expose only some of the problems (of a subjective importance for each of us) that occur in the globalization led under the aegis of a national-political language promoted as universal. The following offered resolutions may be or not final, but surely are necessary for reorienting our efforts in non destructive directions.


Resolutiones Resolutions
Quidam de problematibus nunciatis adgnoscitabantur pridem. Ex multoribus causis, resolutio promississima advenit fore considerata idea linguae unius quam neutrissima, quam minima controversiosa, quam acceptabilissima prae omnibus culturis. In tempore apparebant ideae (quae habebant ad basisa earum criteria tale), deinde concepta formabant se, et postmodum – diversos conatus ut convertere illa in quasdam proventus practicos. Ita advenerat fieri conceptae linguae similis Volapük, Esperanto, Ido, Interlingua, Lojban, etc. In tenditiis susceptionis ac auctii a zero unae dativae linguae similis, supervenerunt usque ad conatum unum adsumptionis in orbe doctrinae academicae, ad largam magnitudinem in multa civitatibus, quam primam linguam peregrinam (Esperanto, Societas Nationis 1921). Conata adoptantis harummodi linguarum extenduntur usque ad hodiernum diem. Veraciter autem, labores adpositi circa has linguas artificiosas numquam accipiebant sustinentionem contentam. Plus, multi a nobis non quidem audiunt ab illis. At least some of the expressed problems were acknowledged in the past as well. For many reasons, the most promising solution come to be considered the idea of a language being as neutral as possible, acceptable as much as possible from any culture's prospective. In time ideas (that had such criteria at their base) appeared, then concepts were formed, and later – various attempts to transpose those in some practical solutions. In this way had come to be conceived languages like Volapük, Esperanto, Ido, Interlingua, Lojban, etc. In the tendencies of supporting and promoting from zero a given kind of language, it even went up to an attempt of adoption in the academic education, on a large scale in many countries as a first foreign language (Esperanto, League of Nations 1921). The attempts of promoting such languages continue till nowadays. Yet in reality, the efforts invested around these artificial languages never succeded to muster a serious support. What's more, many of us probably never even heard of them.
Sed quidem, pro neutralitate, numquam fieret necessariam conceptionem linguarum novarum. Lingua una neutra, apolitica, quae honorabat necessarias practicas pro universalizatione, fit iam pridem. Est lingua discita in orbem docentium circanter super terram universam, usam pro ponti connexorium (ad communicationem qua praestabat finitionis, a legatis, naturalibus, etc.), pro basi regularum (in scientias, artis, etc.), aut scilicet allecta quam lingua creationis et utentis civici (fiens autem occasionatim publicata, independenter vel pariter cum authorum editionibus nativis), atque ens revera lingua unica quam fuit umquam verissime accepta fieri universalis – lingua Latina. But of course, for neutrality, the act of conceiving a new language was never necessary. A language that was neutral, apolitical, that was covering the practical needs for universalization, already existed. It is the language studied in the education system almost everywhere in the world, used as a connecting neutral bridge (where communication surpassed frontiers, by diplomats, scientists, etc.), as stardandization base (in sciences, arts, etc.), or even chosen as a language of creation and civic usage (still published occasionally, independently or along with the author's native editions), and being actually the only language that was ever truly accepted as universal – the Latin language.

Igitur, pro considerentiis nunciatis pridem: So, for the previously enunciated considerations:
Conflictus culturarum et prospectus extinctiorum culturarum. Cursus globalizationis naturalis est. Conditio conflictiva apud culturas non accidit sicut proventum praemeditatum, sed ex simplici ignoratione. Pro desitu conflictuum interculturalium ac effectuum illorum destructivorum, primum actum necessarium consistit in adgnitione significantiae variantiae culturalis pro valore civilizationis humanitae, oportens protegere eam. Etsi formaliter et in modo mediocri hoc est consideratum et adpellatum, practice autem variantia culturalis suffert adhuc a degradatione progressiva. Pro tractationi completa problematis advenit scilicet necessarium actum secundum, ad mandationem pro universale linguae unius neutrae sine sarcina culturali, cum destinatione prohibitionis interoisitionis coactae elementorum culturalium peregrinorum in comunitatis. Hoc actum secundum fuit unum de propositis ausuum linguarum artificialium praedictorum. Dissimiles illi autem, propositia linguae Latinae non praesentat se sicut ausus unus simplex ambitiosus, sed est invocatam quam exemplum empiricum. Viabilitas solutionis usae linguae Latinae pro lingua neutra fuit iam demonstratam aliquotiens. Plus quam necessabatur lingua Latina tunc, necessatur nunc. The cultures' conflicts and the prospect of cultures' annihilation. The globalization tendency is natural. The conflictory situation among cultures does not occur as a intentional result, but rather as a result of ignorance. To stop the intercultural conflict and its destructive effect, a first necessary measure consists in acknowledging the importance of the cultural diversity as a value of our human civilization and that it needs protection. Although formally in a limited manner this thing is considered and addressed, in practice however the cultural diversity is still suffering a continuous degradation. For a complete treatment of the problem, it becomes of course necessary the second measure, of mandating as universal a neutral language, without cultural charge, having the purpose of preventing the forced insertions of cultural foreign elements in a given comunity. This secondary measure was one of the purposes of the aforementioned artificial language projects. Unlike those projects however, the Latin language solution doesn't present itself like a simple ambitious project, but invoked rather as empirical model. The viability of the Latin language usage as a neutral solution was already proved times before. More then was needed then, this Latin language is needed now.
Contaminatio politica. In adspectu orbis politici et effectu illius super res apoliticas, necessitas existentiae medii neutrius adparet connfessa. Praeter linguam, plus aut minus, medium tale est. Atquin, utio linguae nationales in communicatione et sarcina illarum culturalis remanent in nexu satis firmo cum affiliatione politica communitatum illarum nativarum. Inter omnes aspectus neutralitatis linguae unius, neutralitas politica confirmat se, per effectum eius, premaximam. Absentia communitatis unius nativae politicae pro lingua Latina determinavit usque nunc repetitam designationem illius quam sanctuarium communicationis. Hic sanctuarium est nimis necessarium nunc. The political contamination. In regard to the political sphere and its effect on apolitical domains, the necessity for a neutral environment appears as obvious. Beside the language, such an environment exists, more or less. Yet the national languages used in communication and their cultural charge remains in a sufficiently strong connection with their native communities' political affiliation. Among all aspects of neutrality of a given language, the political neutrality proves to be, by its effect, the most important one. The absence of a political native comunity for Latin determined so far its repeated designation as sanctuary of communication. This sanctuary is so much more necessary now.
Oeconomia et obstacula culturalia. Ab inspectione oeconomica, etsi favorabilissimum remanet tamen utio linguarum nationalium, in tenditio globalizationis sunt et continuo fient desiderata ulterius plus et amplius, consilia versatilia, conversionis ad basis quam excedunt finis populorum et consultio vel reservatio possibilitatis adoptii et actudinis postmodum elementa constitutiva cum aptitudine maxima, satius universali. In perspectatione hac, elementa conservativa similia utionem linguarum nationalium ad gradum globalem augescit fieri impedimenta oeconomica. Necessitas remissionis cultural-politicae continuabit crescere et cum ea momentum naturae neutrius actorum oeconomicorum. At, a despectatione autem beneficiariorum oeconomicorum, institutio spatii unius ad gradum globalem advenibit repraesentare creatum oportunissimum in progressionem medii unius oeconomici fecundi. Inter optionis existentes, lingua Latina est resolutio pragmaticissima. Pro enumeratione enim mera quarum de consideratione, utio eius scientifica ac existentia eius perpetua magneque in mediis academicis adjungit iam satius de labore activitatum necessariarum. Requirimus universalitatem linguae Latinae sicut requirimus meliora tempora futura. The economy and the cultural obstacles. From an economical stand of point, although the most feasible for now still remains the usage of a national language, in the globalization tendency are demanded and will be demanded further more and more versatile strategies, orientation toward goals that surpass the national frontiers and adopting or reserving the posibility for later adoption and implementation of constituient elements with an increasingly larger aplicability, preferrable universal. In this prospective, the conservative elements like using national languages on the global level become economical hindrances. The role of cultural-political detachment will continue to grow and with it also the importance of neutral nature of the economical agents. Also, from the prospective of economical patients, the setting-up of a neutral space on the global level will come out as the most useful investment for development of a prolific economical environment. From all existing options, Latin language is the most pragmatic solution. To name just a few considerents, its scientific usage and its continuous presence in education at large, are already covering a lot of the necessary investment effort. We need Latin's universality as we need better times.
Identitates et clima sociale. Directio globalizatis unius quid auget linguam unam nationalem, ostendit se incongrua cum conatibus servationis linguarum nationalium (et valorarum reliquorum insitorum, adgregans identitatum culturalium). Hic non est valabile in globalizatione neutris. Adsumatio linguae neutrius in processu globalizationis contribuet ad inhibitionem effectus denationalizantis deintegrantisque identitataris. Latina est necessaria pro protectioni elementorum identitariorum et pro servationi disciplinarum extra illas nexas cum identitatibus culturisque nationalibus, et vice versa – informationes adfatae in linguam unam nationalem sunt adopinatas ut adhereant ad culturam insitam linguae illius. Plus, actum praedictum segregationis disciplinarum adpertinentium ad unam communitatem aut culturam, absque aliis disciplinis neutris, advehit cum eo appellum unum densium, diffinitionem unam meliorem patrimonii culturalis, adque adgnitionem unam firmiorem valorum identitatisque culturalis pro omni de communitate una, et in contextum unum ampliorem generalem – ad conservationem variantiae cultural-identitatariae. The identities and the social climate. The direction of a globalization which promotes a national language, proves to be incongruous with the efforts of keeping the other national languages (and the rest of the attached values, including cultural identity). This fact is not valid in the neutral globalization. The adoption of a neutral language in the globalization process will contribute to the inhibition of the of the disintegration of identity and the denationalization effect. Latin is necessary to preserve the elements of identity and to serve the domains outside those related to national identities and cultures, and other way around – the information addressed in a national language is assumed to tend toward its integration in the language's attached culture. More, the aforementioned measure of segregating the domains pertaining to a community or culture from the rest of the neutral domains brings with it a more focused appeal, to defining better the cultural patrimony, and to a stronger acknowledgement of the values and of the cultural identity for all members within a given community, and in a larger general context – to preserving the diversity of cultural-identity nature.

Praeter beneficia adportata ad vitationem conflictuum culturarum, ad vitationem polarizationis politicae, ad meliorationem perspectivarum oeconomicarum, ad protectionem patrimonii culturalis globalis, et ad conservationem variantiae cultural-identitatariae, ascitio incoercitiva linguae Latinae quam linguam globalizationis contribuet iterum ad adtenuationem obstaculorum communicationis facilis atque conaminum pro superanti eorum ad gradum individualem, ad extentionem ariae communicationis effectivae ad gradum collectivum, ad cooperationem unam globale cum adfrictibus interculturalibus minimis, et ad diminutionem effectuum adversorum agentis in medio uno certaminabile. Beyond the benefits that it brings in avoiding cultural conflicts, in avoiding political polarization, in improving the economic prospectives, in protecting the planetary cultural patrimony and in preserving the diversity of social-identity nature, the uncoercive adoption of Latin language as a globalization language will contribute as well at diminishing the obstacles of the facile communication and of the efforts needed to surpass them at the individual level, at extending the space of effective communication at the collective level, at a global cooperation with minimal intercultural friction, and at the reduction of the undesired effects of acting in a contested environment.
Lingua Latina tenet iam mandatum unum pro unificatione normis et universalizatione in disciplinis nonnullis. Resolutio currens praesentata, in essentia eius est nihil amplius quam extentio utionis linguae Latinae a habenti positione ad utionem eius exclusive in res neutris, non identitatarias et quae non adpertinent culturam unam peculiarem, res sicut artis, scientias, doctrinas (extra-culturales), technologias, atque illic ubi activitatis usitatas rerum eorum denotant saepe contactum inter-culturalem externum. Concessio enim extendentis areae huius neutrius pro rebus eis neutris, contribuet efficienter ad progressionem globalem, beneficam pro omnem factorem implicatum, a gradu individuali usque ad communitatis nationales et postremo ad gradum totae civilizationis humanae. Latin language already holds a mandate of standardization and universalization in several domains. The current proposed solution in its essence is nothing more than the extendence of Latin language usage from its current possessed position to the exclusive usage in domains that are neutral, unrelated to identities and don't belong to any specific culture, domains like arts, sciences, (extra-cultural) education, technologies, and there where the normal usage in the respective domains implies external inter-cultural contact. Allowing this extension of this neutral space for the neutral domains would contribute effectively to a global development, beneficial to all involved parties, from the individual level up to that of national communities and finally to the level of the entire human civilization.
Constitutio medii unius neutrius per adsumptionem linguae Latinae est necessaria, sed aequale necessaria advenit deinde prohibitio contaminationis medii huius et protectio neutralitatis adjunctae. Itaque directio servationis linguae globalizationis sine sarcina una politico-culturali necesse remanebit. Haec sarcina quae non commendata est, continet elementa qua adpertinent ad culturas vel communitates actuales, quam enim mores vitae, modi adordinantis, consuetudines, interactiones sociales, religiones, etc. Praeferabile est satius adoptium cursus unius qui sustinet vitam, valoris humanos et progressum. Constituing a neutral environment through Latin's addoption is important, but equally important becomes afterwards the prevention of contaminating that environment and the preservance of its afferent neutrality. In this way the tendency of mentaining the globalization language without a political-cultural charge, remains imperative. This unrecommended charge consists of elements specific to given existing cultures or communities, like lifestyles, approaching manners, traditions, social interractions, religions, etc. It is instead prefferable the adoption of a direction that supports the life, the human values and the progress.

Lingua Latina est album vexillum pacis. Lingua Latina est via per qua possumus appropinquare adinvicem sine commotio refragationis conservativae culturae coram effectibus globalizationis. Per naturam ipsam, lingua Latina non repraesentat periculum pro linguis culturisque communitatum nativarum implicatarum, et facta similia sententiarum patrioticarum non adveniebant in contradictionem connudatam cum tentione collectiva accessus ad mundum unum adibilem. Generaliter, in dispectu propagantis neutralitatis directidudinisque in medio linguae Latinae, positiones ideologicae, confessiones, et actiones pro-nationales carentur suas justificationem defensivam. Nos omnes adheremus ad meliorem mundom et esset nostra pietas cogitare ad futurum et ad quatenus contribuimus nos ad facere illum meliorem, meliorem pro nobis ac meliore pro omnibus illis, cum quibus partimus illum. In mundum unum globalizatum, paulatim minorem, oportet invenire modos quod appropinquant nos et conciliant nos in causas communis. Lingua Latina et mandatum eius pro unificatione normarum et universalizatione ministrat evidenter quam argumentum vivum pro maturitate validitateque resolutionum neutrarum. Lingua Latina continuanter repraesentat neutralitatem rectitudinemque quae necessamur, lingua Latina symbolizat etiam securitatem et non aggressionem, lingua Latina designat cooperationem praeterquam oppositiam, lingua Latina offert nobis omnibus viam unam prosperam ad progressum communem. Latin is the white flag of peace. Latin language is the way through which we can get ourselves together without stiring up the conservatoire cultural resistance aimed against the globalization effects. Thanks to its nature, Latin language does not represent a danger for the cultures and languages of the involved native communities, and factors like patriotic feelings are not any more in a strong oposition with the collective tendency of accession to an accessible world. In general, in the prospective of the promoted neutrality and corectness in the environment of Latin language, the attitudes, the manifestations, and the pro-nationalist actions are loosing their defensive justification. We all long for a better world and it's our task to think about the future and at how much do we contribute to make it better, better for us and also better for everyone else with whom we are sharing it. In a globalized world, increasingly smaller, it's imperative to find ways that bring us closer and unite us in common causes. Latin language and its standardization and universalization mandate serves already as a living proof of the maturity and validity of the neutral solutions. Latin language continues to represent the neutrality and the correctness that we need, Latin language continues to mean security and non-aggression, Latin language is cooperation instead of retention, Latin language offers us all a prosper way towards a common progress.


Quaestiones et responsa Questions and answers

Cur lingua Latina, sed non enim Graeca vetus, Sanscrita, aut quaque alia? Why Latin language and not old Greek, Sanscrit or something else?
Linguae sicut Graeca vetus aut Sanscrita forsitan habeant introrsum legata culturalia divitia, atque sunt linguae quae habuerunt aut probabiliter habent adhuc influentiam super culturas sequentem earum. Altrovorsum, influentia harum linguarum vel remansit partim solumodo una localis, vel evanuerat et remansit eadem memor in historia solum. Dissimiliter, lingua Latina habuit atque habet unam extensionem influentiamque sine aequivalenti. Lingua Latina habuit (et arguabilem iam habet) pars comparabilem ampliorem adversum quamquam aliam linguam. Lingua Latina est, si fuerimus fateri, donum conditum humanitati. Relativa autem ad quamquam linguam sicut Graecam vetrem, Sanscritam aut aliam linguam, sufficit enim meminisse quod lingua Latina habet consuetudinem unam perpetem et in hodiernum diem. Languages like old Greek or Sanscrit might have behind them rich cultural heritages, and also are languages that had or probably still have a great deal of influence over the cultures that followed afterwards. Nonetheless, the influence of these languages either remained mostly just local, or it vanished and is mentioned now just as a history fact. Unlike them, Latin language had and also has a semination and influience without equivalent. Latin had (and arguable still has even nowadays) a much larger role comparatively to any other language. Latin language is, if we'd have to admit, a gift preserved for the humanity. But relative to some language like old Greek, Sanscrit or something else alike, it's enough to be reminded the fact that the Latin language has also a continuous usage in the present.

Anne Latina lingua mortua? Isn't Latin actually a dead language?
Cultura civilizationis Romanae, ab qua genuit lingua Latina, est tantumodo hereditaria a culturis aliarum actualium communitatum. Lingua Latina non est indigene locuta in communitatibus vivis ac non adpertinet cuiusdam culturam. Nihilo setius, lingua Latina remansit condititia et omniperpetua, indifferenter a climate politico, a cursibus socialibus, ab evolutionibus oeconomicis, includens comunitates cum culturis quae non fiebant significanter cognatas patrimonii Latini. Lingua Latina fuit illa ad quam reveniebant repperire neutralitatem et conciliationem, est lingua qua fuit et est perpetim discita etsi apparentus offert nullom de commodis comparabilibus qua sunt oblata a discenti linguarum nationalium, aeque apparentus est atquin solam linguam pro qua resident quomodocumque caussae hoc feri. Ens lingua sine locutoribus nativis, quisdam nequit umquam sed mirari quomodo ea perseveravit per omnia, contumaciter ad quantates, adversum ulla praedicta rationalia, factum quod apparet praeterire rationem ipsam! Forsit oporteat nominari eam "mortua" ob quadam criteria, sed numquid est lingua Latina vere mortuam? The culture of Roman civilization, the one that gave birth to the Latin language, is at most just inherited by other present communities' cultures. Latin language is not natively spoken in any live community and does not belong to a certain culture. With all that Latin language remained preserved, maintained and perpetuated, regardless of the political climate, of the social currents, of economic evolutions, including the communities with cultures that were never significantly related to Latin patrimony. Latin language has been the one at which it was returned back to to assure neutrality and conciliation, it's the language which was and continuously is studied although it apparently offers none of the comparable benefits that are offered by learning a national language, but yet it appears nonetheless as the only language for which it somehow makes sense for such thing to happen. For a language without native speakers one can't but wonder how it resisted getting through anything, no mater how much, despite any rational predictions, a fact that seems to defy the causality itself! It's indeed necessary to call it "dead" after some criteria, but is it the Latin language actually dead?

Quare lingua Latina? Qua commoda tenet lingua Latina? Why Latin language? What advantages has the Latin language?
Lingua Latina aedifiebat se fore interculturalem. Ortus et evolutio Latinae advenerunt in ariam extensam super cunctas continentis (accessibiles in illo tempore – Africanae, Asianae et Europanae). Hoc spacium multi-continentale agregabat coque variantiam culturalem maximam ad gradum planetalem. Per naturam suam, Latina formabatur et parebat sicut copulator in atque pro circumiecto illo culturali heterogeneo. Hoc fuit evidenter factum quod contribuit postmodum ad linguae Latinae electionis. Hoc factum tale premajus est nunc. Latin language developed itself to be intercultural. Latin's development and evolution came off a space spanning on all continents (accessible in that period of time – African, Asian and European). This multi-continental space included likewise the largest cultural diversity at the planetary level. By its nature Latin was formed and existed as a binder in and for this heterogeneous cultural environment. This obviously has been a fact that contributed to later elections of Latin language. This fact is so much more important today.
Lingua Latina est lingua neutra. Lingua Latina non adpertinet ad quodam communitatem habentem locutores nativos. Adspectus ergo discriminatorius conflictoriusque, quod adparet in causam utionis linguarum nationalium apud locutores nativos et non-nativos, absens est in causam utionis linguae Latinae. Natura neutra habet pondetationem majorem et inter omnis virtutis linguae Latinae, hanc contribuit maximopere ad adtributionem ei potentiae maximae acceptitudinis incoercivae et cooptationis quae posse adtingeretur pro quadam lingua. Latin language is a neutral language. Latin language does not belong to a community with native speakers. Therefore the discriminatory and conflictory relation, which occurs in the case of a national language usage among the native and non-native speakers in respect to that language, is absent in the case of using Latin language. The neutral nature has a major importance and among all the traits of Latin, it contributes the most in confering it a maximum potential of uncoercive acceptance and adoptance that can be achieved for a language.
Lingua Latina est apolitica. Natura apolitica est aliquantulum distincta a hac neutra. Constitutio politica, etsi subtilissima, adcedit sicut criterium secessorium in multitudinem commodorum, sed adhuc quae communitas national-culturalis, quamvis neutra fiet ad quoddam tempus, nequit repromittere passivitatem politicam absolutam. Nulla de linguis nationalibus meret accipere annotans apoliticum. Pro globalizatione sana necessatur linguam sine colore politico. Per naturam eius, Latina est lingua quae non portat onus politicum. Latin language is apolitical. The apolitical nature is slightly different than the neutral one. The political character, be it even an extremely subtle one, becomes separatory criterion in regard to interests, but no national-cultural community yet, however neutral at one given moment in time, can not guarantee the absolute political passivity. None of the national languages can receive the non-political tag. For a constructive globalization it is necessary a language without political color. Latin by its nature is a language that does not carry a political charge.
Lingua Latina condicit custodiam culturalem. Linguae nationales habent effectum colonizatorium. Infusio elementorum culturalium quod inevitabiliter procedit cum utione linguae cujusdam nationalis non accidit ad utionem linguae Latinae. Lingua Latina est necessaria ideo ut offerat protectionem elementis qua inveniantur affecta causa utionis linguae unae cum effectu uno colonizatorio. Latin language offers cultural protection. A national language has a colonizing effect. The infusion of cultural elements that inevitably take place at a national language usage does not occur when using Latin language. Latin language is necessary therefore to offer protection to the elements that would become affected in the case of using a language with a colinizing effect.
Lingua Latina est terra media. Necessitas cujusdam relatio in multitudine linguarum omnium praesentium, non nova est. Lingua Latina fiebat adlecta ut adimpleat adhuc talem necessitatem et constituit jam terra communa. Continuitas cursus huius ad extensionem terrae huius communis est mere naturalis. Latin language is the common ground. The necessity of a reference for the multitude of all existing languages is not new. Latin language was chosen to play such a role before and constitutes already a common ground. Continuing this direction by enlarging this common ground is nothing but natural.
Lingua Latina est lingua logica. Consitutio systematica unius linguae contribuit ad facilitatem proquam haec imbibitur atque ad libertas expressionis quam illa lingua offerat. Lingua una logica tenet gradum superum ad systematizationem. Indifferenter ad linguam nativam locutoris, natura logica linguae Latinae contribuet multimodis et ad discitionem, et postea – ad utionem. Latin language is a logic language. The systematic character of a given language contributes to the easeness of which it is assimilated and at the offered liberty of expression. A logical language holds a high degree of systematization. Regardless of the speaker's native language, Latin's logical nature will contribute a lot both at learning and later – at usage.
Lingua Latina tenet positiam unicam. Considerens multitudo linguarum, pauca apud illas habent historiam unificationis normarum et universalizatio, pauca apud illas docentur ad modum officialem effectivumque, indifferenter ad orbem opum oeconomico-politicarum, pauca apud illas fruuntur a sustentione quae non consistit de influentiam internationalem quam habent illarum communitates nativae (sustentio enim linguae Latinae fiens in hoc contextu non adfectualis una). Lingua Latina adtenet ergo positiam unicam et pro sustentionem anticipalem unius adsumptionis ad altissimam magnitudinem, et ad consideratio caussarum pro quibus talis adoptium advenibit mereri. Latin language holds a unique position. Considering the multitude of the languages, few of them have a portofolio of standardization and universalization, few of them are studied officially and effectively regardless of sphere of economico-political influence, few of them have a support not based on the international level influence of their native community (Latin languge not being in this context just provisional). Latin language holds therefore a unique position both in the support for a preliminary adoption on the large scale, and in regard of the reasons for which such an adoption will become worthwhile.

Estne lingua Latina difficilis? Is Latin a difficult language?
Subjective, lingua unam pensitabatur fieri simplicem aut difficilem dependenter ad numerum similitudinum quas lingua propria et lingua comparata partiunt. Objective, lingua una difficile est illam plenam cum collationibus specialibus et exceptionibus – lingua cum gradum parvum ad systematizantionem. Discitio linguae unius talis requirit adtentio et contentio pro quoque exceptionem aut variationem, at ad causam extremam degeneret in necessitudinem consumptionis unicuique verbo vel conlationi verborum, sine generalizatione unam effectiva. Lingua Latina est lingua logica cum gradu supero ad systematizationem. Simplicius, habens vocabularium et regulas grammaticas, in linguam unam logicam ideae eloquitur directe, sine particularitatibus formulationis aut aliis quibusdam curis speciali. Hae curae speciales (includens particularia phraseologica) constituunt saepe partem difficile linguae unius. Lingua Latina non difficile est. Subjectively, a language may be appreciated as simple or difficult depending on the number of similarities shared between the compared language and one's own. Objectively, a difficult language is the one dominated by expressions and exceptions – a language with a low degree of systematization. Learning such language implies attention and effort for each exception and special case, and in extrem case can degenerate into assimilation of each and every word or word combination, without an effective generalization. Latin is a logical language, with a high degree of sistematization. In short, having the vocabulary and the gramatical rules, in a logical language the idea is uttered directly, without a peculiar wording or any other kind of special treatment. Those special treatments (including the phraseology peculiarities) are usually making up the most difficult part in any language. Latin language is not difficult.

Discitio linguarum nationales differt ab discitione linguae globalizationis, et discitio linguae unius nationales advenit minus necessaria. Quare? Learning national languages differs from learning the globalizing language, and the fact of learning of a national language become less necessary. Why?
Naturaliter, discitio linguae unius coepit in momento a quid confirmatur necessariam. Discitio voluntaria (a considerationibus pacificis) unius linguae nationalis peregrinae accidebat prote causa emigrationis aut incursionis prolongatae in spatia in qua quaeritur haec lingua, et plerumque hoc phaenomenon fiebat plus aut minus adjunctum cum ascitione elementorum de cultura linguae illius, quid repraesentit consequentiam unam naturalem. Nunc autem discitio linguam unius accidit primo ex postulatio pro lingua una universali, et secunde a prospectus contactuum cum locutoribus nativis. Atquin, discitio linguam peregrinam ad hic modum sumit iterum idem adsumptionem simultaneam plenitudinis culturalis cum consequentias detrimentarias adjunctas. Usually, a language learning begins at the moment when it appeares as necessary. Learning voluntarily (out of peaceful reasons) of a given foreign national language occurred primarily when it was about the immigration or incursion for long enough periods of time in areas demanding that language, and usually this phenomenon was more or less accompanied by the embracement of elements from that language's culture as well, which is in fact a natural consequence. Now however, learning a new language happens in the first place because of the need for an universal language and less because of the prospective of getting in contact with its native speakers. Yet learning a foreign language in this case means again the same automatic acceptance and cultural embracement followed by the related detrimentary consequences.
Discitio unius cuiusdam linguae nationalis ob clausulas emigrationalis non dimittetur a discitione linguae Latinae. In mandatum autem linguae Latinae, cognitio et acceptio (compulsiva) valorum culturae unius peregrinae non remanent elementa inevitabile processus globalizationis. Cognitio et acceptio illorum remanent mere optionalem. Learning a given language for immigrationist goals won't be replaced by learning Latin. But in the mandate of Latin laguage, (imposed) knowledge and acceptance of foreign cultural values do not remain any more inevitable elements of the globalization. Their knowledge and acceptance remain only optional.

Usio linguae unius nationalis in contextu uno multilinguale neutro est detrimentariam. Quare? In a neutral multilingual context a national language usage is detrimentary. Why?
Usio praeponderata linguae unius nationalis in contextu uno multilinguale neutro appareat forsit sicut compromissionem acceptabilem causa absentiae locutorium nativorum illius linguae. In contextu uno neutro in quo est usam lingua una nationalis et locutores nativi eius praesentes sunt, praeter locutores alienigenos linguae huius, factum ipsum est absolute discriminativum. Hic aspectus discriminativus non minuit se solum ad evidentem iniquitatem linguisticam. Abinde in processu discitionis linguae unius nationalis adsimiliter concorporantur elementa culturalia adjuncta, haec accidunt formare horizonta unum communem in communicatione ac ministrare quam terram cognatam communem. Concludenter fit identificabilis effectus discriminativus ad gradum culturalem, quis etsi est conpensabilis (per conamen unum ponderosum ab aditione scienti elementorum culturalium alienorum aequipollentium), permanebat plerumque solum relictum quam statum passum. Prevalent usage of a national language in a neutral multilingual context may seem like an acceptable compromise in the case of absence of that language's native speakers. In a neutral context in which a natinal language is predominantly used and its native speakers are present, in regard to the speakers foreign to that language the act itself is simply discriminatory. This discriminatory aspect is not limited just on the obvious occuring linguistical inequity. Because in the process of learning a national language there are also assimilated afferent cultural elements, these come to form a background in communication and serve as a common known ground. In effect it becomes identifiable a discriminatory relation at the cultural level, which although being compensable (through an significant effort of approaching counciously the foreign cultural equivalent elements), is usually just left out as an endured condition.
Per cursum historiae superavimus numerosas et multiplices formas discriminativas vel oppressivas. Causa discriminationis fuit quoquoversum commoda ad qua postmodo amoliebatur – signum maturitatis quam reperimus adquirere in tempore. Renuntiatio horum modorum discriminativorum est signum unum novum quid nos nobis habemus demonstrandum. Lingua Latina est gradum unum novum, passus unus novus ad adgnitionem et honorationem integritatis nostrae – humanitatis in suae totalitate. Over the history we surpassed many forms of discrimination or oppression. Each time the discriminatory causes were commodities that were later relinquished – a sign of maturity that we come to attain in time. The abolition of this kind of discriminations is a new sign of evolution that we'd have it proven to ourselves. Latin language is a new tread, a new step toward admission and submission of our integrity – mankind's in all its mass.

Resolutione linguae unius nationalis pro mandatum universale non est idoneam. Quare? The solution of mandating a national language for universal usage is not adequate. Why?
Responsum simplex – quoniam idea ipsa est onerosa, sinit aut quidem adjungit tractatus discriminativos, conflictivos ac non fructuosos. Praeterea effectus socio-culturales detrimentales memorati, medius unus tales dabit causam additam pro cursibus politicis et pro separatione in castris enim "nos adversus illos" loco conciliationem cooperationemque. The simple answer – because the idea itself is onerous, tolerates or even encourages a discriminatory, conflictory and counterproductive treatment. Beside the socio-cultural detrimential aforementioned efects, such a ground will offer one more reason for political games and separation like "us vs. them" kind of camps instead of conciliation and cooperation.
Ad considerationem linguae unius quam instrumentum communicationis universalium necessatur consideratio naturae infautivae. Natura infautiva est propositio essentialis pro justificatione conatuum adoptii. Cum aspectibus discriminativis jam mentionatis, adsumptio linguae unius nationalium ad gradum globalem inducit tum contextum colonialem. Itaque regiones accidunt perceptam ob pertentionem illius, a locutoribus linguae, sic "metropolis" aut "colonia". In talem contextum constitum per medietatem linguae nationalis respectivae, terra metropolis precedit in significantia sub complure modis, ac totaliter annotatur adeo aspectus unus novus discriminativus (nexitur ad loca). Plus, talis lingua etsi habeat satis commoda, illius autem natura vinculativa ad quamdam culturam aut quoddam locum pertingit inducere oppositionem apud quicumque sunt foras extra illam culturam aut locum. When considering a language as an universal communication instrument it's important to consider its unbiased nature. The unbiased nature is an esential premise for justifying the adoption effort. Besides the already noted discriminatory aspects, the adoption on the global level of a national language induces also a colonial bearing. In this way a territory become perceived, in regard to its pertinence, by language's speakers, as "metropolis" or "colony". In such a context established through the respective national language, the territory of metropolis takes precedence in importance in multiple forms, and overall it becomes noticeable a new (territorial-related) discriminatory aspect. More, such a language can have a lot of advantages, but its nature strongly appartenant to a culture or territory will tend to induce opposition among those outside that culture or territory.
Denique, usio ergo talis linguae in contextum unum globalem generaliter subruit propositum ipsum ob usionem imprimis cujusdam linguae. Lingua quaedam dehibet ut offerat communicationem, apertio et consensus, et ob nihil ut concitet oppositionem. Vitatio talem resolutionis degenerativas praecedit ab omni analysi pari rationali. Resolutio una indiscriminativa, inconflictivas et infautiva est praesentatur quam absolute necessariam. Inopia talis resolutionis habebat nihil secus at ut quaerat constructionem illius. Humanitas autem ministravit pro hoc jam a generationes – lingua Latina ac hoc quid advenit eam repraesentare pro nobis. In conclusion, using such a language in a global context undermines in general the purpose itself of using a language in the first place. A language should offer communication, opening and consensus, not in the least to generate opposition. The avoidance of such a degenerative solution precedes in any rational and reasonable analysis. An undiscriminatory, unconflictory, and unbiased solution presents itself as absolutely necessary. The lack of that kind of solutions wouldn't do anything but ask its construction. The humanity however, took care of this already for generations – Latin language and what it come out to represent for us.

Utio universalis unius linguae nationalis afficit negative progressionem globalem. Quare? Universal usage of a national language affects negatively the global progress. Why?
Postulans contributionum cum beneficio globali ut adportentur in quadam lingua nationale quae habet aspirationes universales, opinatur poscere locutores alienos ut accipiant contextum unum discriminativum aspicientem ad significantiam linguarum nationalis. Hoc factum consideratur fieri "compromissum consentaneum" a perspectiva locutorium nativorum, sed sicut "sacrificium" a ceteris ad optime. Tales contributiones adportatae ad gradum globalem usu lingua una nationale peregrina ducunt clarissime ad locupletationem patrimonii linguae illius in detrimento linguae propriae. Itaque, a variis causis (plerumque politicis), hic contributores alieni possunt adtenuare tenditia suorum ad utionem linguae talis, praeferentes autem linguam maternam. Qualibet, contributia quaedam advenit usam (exceptans evolutionem nationalem, igitur) ad pleraque exempla, vel per conatum unum additionale ad editionem illud in quibusdam linguis peregrinis, vel per laborem acceptionis eius ab aliis linguis alienis, vel utrobique – per aerumnam biplicem. Proventus autem est solumodo mores inhibitivae in progressione nostra. Ob demotionem talis attritus, necessatur abdicationem ad valoris unos pro beneficio valorum altorum cum potentia superiore in unire nos in causis communis. Lingua Latina non inducit resistentia politica et remunerat per naturam ipsius conata alicujus contribuabilis, ac despectatio utionis globalis exclusivae illius in disciplinis neutris offeret terram continuam necessariam utitionis contributorum globalium sine offendiculis linguisticis. Demanding contributions with a global benefit to be brought in a national language which has universal aims, means asking foreign speakers to accept a discriminatory relation in regard to the importance of their national languages. This fact is considered to be a "resonable compromise" from the prospective of language's native speakers, but as a "sacrifice" in the best case from everyone else. Such contributions brought on the global level using a national foreign language are leading naturally to enrichment of the patrimony of that language in the detriment to their own language. Therefore, from various (preponderant political) reasons, these contributors could restrain their tendencies of using such a language, preffering the mother tongue. Anyway, a given contribution becomes usable, (with the exception of intra-natinoal evolution, therefore) in most cases, either through an additional effort of publishing it in other languages, or through an effort of accessing it from other languages, or both efforts summated. The result is nothing but an inhibitory load for our development. To remove that kind of friction, the relinquishment of some values for other kind of values with higher potential of uniting us in common causes, is necessary. Latin language does not induce political resistances being recompensatory by its nature to the efforts supplied by every attendant, and the prospect of its global exclusive usage for neutral domains would offer the continuous space necessary for the global contributions usage without interlinguistical obstacles.

Demovemus obstructionis et abdimus differentias abante nos ut possimus prosperare. Anne enim est adsumptio cujusdam linguae nationalis ad gradum globalem, compromissum unum acceptabilem? We're removing bariers and eliminating the differences among us to prosper. Isn't really the addoption of a national language at the global level an acceptable compromise?
Interrogatio haec est certe subiectivissimam (et politicam). Controverse, fit possibilis ut deducamus quoddam unum "dependit a quibus interrogabis, si habent adquirere aut perdere, vel dependit ad qua aestimant". In autem contextu ampliore, adsumptio lingua nationalis adtrahit post eam seriem rerum qua saepe neglectae sunt. Adscitio irrogationis linguarum nationalis ad gradum globalem aequat adscitionem confirmationis originum nutritarum continuam pro tormentis qua habent ad basisa illorum differentias interculturales. Hoc ipsud atquin ut repraesentet modo ad connectere hominis, advenit sicut unum divisivus et citivus pro conflictibus. Ad aestimationem unam subjectivam, propositio vitationis conflictuum potest scilicet fieri diminutam quam argumentum, eadem autem consequentias reales, ac si fuerit concessum contextum cum subjectivitate inmoderata, adeo a punctu spectationis cum complure valorum accommodorum, potest fieri designatum prout acceptabile et genocidium unum. Argumentum fortasse adpareat extremum, sed infeliciter historia ipsa loquitur. The question is of course as subjective (and political) as possible. Arguable, it can be deduced a "depends whom you're asking, if one has to win or to lose from that, or depends on which are one's values". In a larger context however, the adoption of a national language carries with it a bunch of usually ignored problems. The admittance of an imposing national language at a global level means the admittance of the continuous source of conflicts that have at their base cultural differences. This in itself instead of representing a way of connecting people, becomes in fact like one which divides and fuels conflicts. In a subjective approach, the premise of avoiding the conflicts can be of course diminished as argument, as well as the real consequences, and if it would be allowed a context with an unlimited subjectivity, from an angle of a convenient enough set of values, it could be pictured as acceptable even a genocide. The argument may appear extreme, but unfortunately the history speaks for itself.
Solum compromissum quid sumus justi ut proponamus est illud quid sumus volentes ut pateremur, sed adsumptio cujusdam linguae nationalis pro universalem repraesentit veraciter jactio oneris compromissi unius realis super aliquos. Hoc repraesentit postulare a majoritate populorum globalium neque solum acceptionem ipsam linguae discriminativae, sed etiam acceptionem seriei effectuum detrimentosorum adjunctorum. The only compromise that we morally have the right to promote is the one that we are willing to accept for ourselves, but addmiting a national language as universal comes in fact as dumping the burden of the real compromise on the other's shoulders. It means asking from the majority of the world's population not only the acceptance itself of a discriminatory language, but also the entire chain of the related detrimentary effects.
Lingua Latina a natura eius vitat ab initio problemata insita optionum aliarum quae concludunt utionem linguarum nationalium ad gradum globalem. Lingua Latina repraesentit in hoc contextum, resolutionem sine compromissis. Latin language through its nature avoids from the very begining the attached problems of other options that call for using national languages on the global level. Latin Language is in this matter the solution without compromise.

Possimusne continuare cum cursu actuali, adoptans aliquomodo actiones protectivas contra effectus adversos? Can we continue with the current direction, and just addopt measures of protection for the adverse effects?
Haec est eadem una ex voluntates epistulae praesentis. Globalizatio inevitabilem est. Possibilis autem est solummodo illius tractio ad viam non-distructivam. Offerre nobis viam non-distructivam. Adsumptio linguae unius neutrius est unus ex directissimis et efficientibus modis ad prohibitionem effectuum detrimentalum globalizationis. This is one of the purposes of the current manifesto as well. The globalization is inevitable. All we can do is bring it on a non-destructive path. To offer ourselves a non-destructive path. The addoption a neutral language is one of the simplest and most efficient measures of prevention for the globalization's detrimentary effects.

Quid possumus facere (ut juvare globalizationem linguae Latinae)? What can we do (to support the Latin language globalization)?
Citatio chartae huius potest fieri inceptionem unam. Scriptia hoc conatur adire se ad modum generalem, factum quod significat existentiam libertarum pro peculiaritates. Pro alii haec epistula potest forsan fiat nimis formalem, pro alii – parum rhetoricam. Hae ideae et peculiaritates possunt fieri conpellatas per alias epistulas, dispositas aut ad modum publicum, aut ad personalem. Ad distributio literarum quae tenent causam linguae Latinae, suadetur quippe ut fieri conplectatur cum versionibus Latinaribus. Promoting this manifesto can be a start. This message is attempting to express in a manner as general as possible, which means that there is room for peculiarities. For some people this writing can be too formal, for others – not rhetorical enough. These ideas and peculiarities can be covered through other messages, publicly or privately distributed. At the distribution of the messages that support the Latin's cause is of course recommended to include Latin versions.
Discitio linguae Latinae et sustentio conatuum pro discitione aliorum, sunt vitales. Hae sunt nexas tenacem ad adibilitatem materiarum Latinarum, ergo activitates pro adauctu contino materiarum linguae Latinae sunt certe essentiales. Possumus communicare, transferre aut creare et evulgare in linguam Latinam. Possumus adherere ad communitates Latinas vel possumus instituere illas ubi non jam fiunt, possumus suscipere adhaesionem ad ideam linguae Latinae in circulis variis, possumus commendare res, hominis ac communitatis nexas linguae Latinae undique, et in circulos comitis, et extra illos. Conquaero et inventio viarum unarum effectivarum novarum pro accitione, adsumptione, suctione et absumptione linguae Latinae manet fieri necessitas perpetua ob progressionem et sustentionem efficientiae systematis unius globalis Latini. Learning the Latin language and supporting other's learning efforts, are vital. These are tightly related to the availability of Latin language resources, therefore the activities of continuous commpletion of the Latin resources are also essential. We can communicate, translate or create and publish in Latin language. We can join the Latin communities or establish them where they don't exist yet, we can support the adherence to the Latin language idea in various circles, we can reference the resources, people and the communities related to the Latin language both among Latin's supporters and the outer circles. Investigating and descovering new effective ways of promotion, addoption, assimilation and valution of Latin language stays a continuous necessity for developing and maintaining an efficient global Latin system.
Acta enumerata non exhaustiva sunt. Nos omnes, per creationem nostram, per influentiam nostram, in curriculum nostrum vitae, possumus contribuere. Nos omnes quimus suscipere et amplificare ausum linguae Latinae, ad quam maximam, per quemlibet modum comprehensivum. Consentimus ideam et ausum linguae Latinae – viam globalizationis concordissimae. The enumerated actions are not exhaustive. All of us, in our creation, in our influence, in our life, can contribute. We all can support and develop the Latin language initiative the best we can, in every way imaginable. We share the Latin language's idea and initiative – the way of the most concordial globalization.


Gratias omnibus qui adjunxerunt, adjungunt aut adjungent linguam Latinam, indifferenter pro facultatibus aut causis.
Thanks to all who have supported, are supporting or will support Latin language, regardless of means or motives.
Free Web Hosting