This thread is dedicated to the debate between Andres and Louis VI the Fat.
They are debating the THE WALLOON MINORITY IN BELGIUM
Questions/problems which will be discussed:
a) Should the french speaking inhabitants of Bruxelles-Hal-Vilvorde have the right to be treated in their own language by government institutions.
b) Should there be tax money available to spend in Bruxelles-Hal-Vilvorde on French education, Walloon/French cultural development, French libraries and the development of the French language in Flanders.
c) Should the French speaking inhabitants of Bruxelles-Hal-Vilvorde have the right to vote for francophone political parties;
d) Should the communes of Sint-Genesius-Rode, Wemmel, Drogenbos, Linkebeek, Kraainem en Wezembeek-Oppem belong to the Brussels Region?
Participants:
Andres (francophone point of view)
Louis VI the Fat (flemish point of view)
Upon a toss of a coin Andres goes first.
Sigurd
Opening statement by Andres:
The language border is an artificial line drawing the borders of the Flemish and the Walloon part of the country.
In the region Bruxelles-Hal-Vilvorde, which is situated in the Flemish part of the country, we find a significant minority of French speaking citizens, who do not have the right to be treated by their own government in their own language, who cannot have education in their own language, nor are there facilities for their cultural and linguistic development.
This is not acceptable. It is the individual that determines which language he speaks regardless of where they are, not some lines on a piece of paper.
The Flemish nationalists are violating the rights of the French speaking minority and base themselves on the so-called ius soli, which should not be used when speaking of linguistic matters. En plus, we must not forget that French has always been one of the official Belgian languages (and also the most important one).
What’s really striking, is the fact that Belgium is violating the European Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/157.htm) and the Flemish nationalists refuse to recognise this disgrace.
Referring to resolution 1301 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta02/ERES1301.htm), said Convention is applicable on the French speaking minority living in Bruxelles-Hal-Vilvorde.
Allow me to quote one sentence:
The Assembly singled out Belgium as one of the countries which “have significant minorities, which ought to be protected, and whose rights are not officially recognised.”
This clearly refers to the above mentioned violations of the minority rights of the French speaking community living in Flanders. To be more specific, Belgium is currently clearly violating the articles 5, 10 §2, 13 and 15 of said convention.
As for the famous “six” (the communes of Sint-Genesius-Rode, Wemmel, Drogenbos, Linkebeek, Kraainem en Wezembeek-Oppem): in these communes, the French speaking community’s rights are not violated regarding said Convention. However, in reality, the French speaking community in those communes is a majority and not a minority. Again, it is illogical that these towns should remain “Flemish”, since they are only Flemish on paper. They should belong to Brussels, as is the wish of the majority of the inhabitants of said six communes.
The current right for the French speaking inhabitants of Bruxelles-Hal-Vilvorde to vote for francophone political parties is part of the arrangements made in 1963 when the language border has been installed at the request of the Flemings. Taking away this right without any compensation for the Belgian francophone minority whatsoever, violates an earlier agreement and endangers the current Belgian state model of dialogue and compromise.
Opening statement by Louis VI the Fat
Hello,
I, a member of the Vlaams Belang (‘Flemish Interest’ political party) and Andres, unemployed francophone Belgian, and would like to discuss the rights of the francophone inhabitants of Brussel-Halle-Vilvoorde (BHV). Also known as Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde in English, or Brussel-Halle-Vilvoorde in French (since two weeks.)
Before we move on to the specifics of our subject, I would like to introduce our foreign readers to the more overarching history of our subject.
All for Flanders. Flanders for Christ.
These are the words written on the Yser Tower (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IJzertoren). This tower stands as both a monument to the Flemish movement and the Flemish losses in the Two World Wars. It is the emblem of the suffering and ultimate emancipation of Flanders. The World Wars and Flemish emancipation are connected. In the trenches of the first World War, the Flemish movement was born. Flemish peasants were commanded by French officers. In French. Many did not understand French, and died because of it. While the French dined in their quarters, we died in the trenches. Died for a Belgium in which we were second-rate citizens. Here, with our blood and tears, the Flemish determination to release ourselves from the French yoke was born.
What is Walloonia? A failed, forgotten French department. An impoverished region. A failed socialist experiment too, like the GDR, or Czechoslovakia, one that refuses to go the way of these two states. Even worse, it’s run by Francophones. Arrogant, insisting on linguistic prerogatives, thinking that they have some God given right to a power well beyond their means and numbers. They are intolerable enough when safely tucked away in their own country.
Yet…now imagine having a French minority in your country! And then have them still act…French. That is, that they think that they rule the place. That they want to impose their minority language on the 62% majority that doesn’t have French as a first language. Of course, reversely, they also think the French speakers should not have to learn Dutch.
Wallonia is a poor region. The whole region can only survive because of annual Flemish tribute, in the region of € 15 billion annually. This is what Flanders pays to Walloonia in unemployment benefits, allowances etcetera.
It was wealthy in the nineteenth century, when it still wielded all political power. This wealth was based on Flanders, which they exploited like a colony, like the Congo. Take note: even today, the Congo and Ruanda are French speaking, not Flemish speaking. We, the Flemish, wanted nothing of it. We were but another colony to control, plunder and surpress.
To quote the famous Flemish poet, Guido Gahzelle: ‘there’s something rotten in the state of Wallonia’.
What is Flanders?
Flanders is a wealthy region, one of the richest in Europe. The economic heart of Belgium. We have overtaken Walloonia’s primacy in the last few decades through two means: Firstly, economic adaptability. Unlike the Walloons, that mixture of 19th century steel and iron economy and 20th century Socialist experimentation.
Secondly, through breeding like rabbits. We are a religious, Catholic region. Our leaders spurned us on to make babies for Flanders. Our priests commanded us to make souls for Rome. And we obliged. From a clear minority we turned into a 62% majority.
Yet, we do not want to control Walloonia like they wanted, and want, to rule us. All we want is independence. But, being our reasonable self, we will settle for autonomy. Our solution is simple: the French can speak French, and the Flemish can speak Dutch. Each in their own region. Simple, no? Well, not so for the francophones. Linguistic rights for francophones mean that everybody is entitled to their language. As if there is some divine quality about French, this corrupted Latin spoken through the nose. They refuse to learn Dutch. Either that, or maybe the current Flemish Prime Minister Yves Leterme was right when he said that: “apparently, the Walloons are intellectually incapable of learning Dutch”.
Andres would like this debate to focus on four specific legal aspects:
a) should the french speaking inhabitants of Brussel-Halle-Vilvoorde have the right to be treated in their own language by government institutions?
b) should the french speaking inhabitants of Brussel-Halle-Vilvoorde have the right to vote for Walloon/Brussels political parties?
c) Should there be more tax money available to spend in Brussel-Halle-Vilvoorde on French education, Walloon/French culture, French libraries and the development of the French language in Flanders?
d) should the towns of Sint-Genesius-Rode, Wemmel, Drogenbos, Linkebeek, Kraainem en Wezembeek-Oppem belong to the Brussels Region?
First of all, please, use either English ‘Brussels’, or Dutch Brussel. Never French ‘Bruxelles’. Brussel is historically a Flemish town, stolen by the francophones. The city of Brussels itself is now bilingual. However unjust, we can live with that.
Belgium is divided in, mainly, three regions. Flanders, unilingual Dutch, Wallonia, unilingual French, and Brussels, bilingual, with special linguistic and cultural rights for minorities, i.e., the four rights mentioned above.
However, the areas surrounding Brussels, like BHV, lie in the unilingual Dutch-speaking area. French settlers have taken up camp there. In typical corrupt Belgian fashion, they managed to get themselves special linguistic and cultural rights. This is a unique legal anomaly in Belgium. A travesty, a breach of the mutual understanding that each region should have exclusive linguistic and cultural rights. Note that there are no Flemish settlements in Walloonia with special rights. This is what is at stake here: simple, mutual, equal rights for both Flanders and Walloonia. And not, like Andres would have it, endless legal blahblah that only serves to prolong Walloonia’s unjust and outlived dominance of Flanders.
Countless reasonable Flemish propositions for a compromise have been made to redress this matter. All met with a firm ‘Non!’. The Walloon political parties are so stubbornly attached to the idea of assymetrical rights for Francophones versus Flamings, that they were willing to obstruct the political stability of Belgium over this matter. No formation of a new Belgian government is possible without a settlement about BHV first. And no new elections can be held either – they would be unconstitutional without BHV being settled.
This forced the Flemish parties to take matters into their own hands. In an unprecedented move, on the 7th of this November, Flemish parties voted for the disentanglement of BHV. In effect, assimilating it into the Flemish region. The Walloon parties remained obstructive to the very end, they refused to vote and left the chamber. They whinged about this being an unprecedented, undemocratic act. Just how a majority imposing its will on a minority is not the exact definition of democracy is beyond me. More importantly, equal, mutual rights between the Flemish and Walloon regions are now secured.
I, for one, hope that the solution to BHV will end Flanders endless surrender to minority rights, and that it will prove to be a foreshadowing of a new, emancipated and ultimately independent Flanders.
Placeholder for Andres' first rebuttal
(please lock this)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.