Talk:Flemish Movement

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[2005 & 2006 comments][edit]

"The movement is unique in that it is dominated by right-wing politics, whereas similar movements in Ireland, Basque, and Quebec are dominated by left-wing politics." Unique? Seems a rather strong claim to me, compare with Lega Nord in Italy for instance. I wouldn't even know if left-wing separatism is a trend. Junes 10:41, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This article needs some serious revisions. It is not at all neutral. "Flemish culture -- if such a thing exists." "Militants." Etc etc etc.

For example: the myth told is actually quite true, there simply weren't Dutch-speaking officers and the French-speaking officers ended all of their speeches with "...et pour les flamands, le même chose" (French), this means "...and for the Flemish, the same thing". This page is totally anti-Flemish movement. It should be more objective... Dancet 18:28, 8 May 2006 CET

French minority[edit]

"In the 1930s the Flemish movement grew ever larger and larger and Dutch was recognized for the first time as the sole language of Flanders, and the sizable French-speaking minority of Flanders started being subjected to all sorts of administrative prickles who continue to this day."

The last part of this sentence is totally incorrect:

- there has never been a French-speaking minority in Flanders;

Hm, I more or less agree, altough not totally. There was indeed never a period when a certain part of flanders was inhabited by a local majority of French-speakers. As such, the french-speakers can not be considered in the same perspective as the catalans and the Basques in Spain, or the Scots in Great-Brittain. However, just as there are allophone groups in Flanders since centuries (e.g. Yiddish- and German-speakers), there are also French-speaking groups in Flanders since a while. So, no national minority. --Lucas Richards 15:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at it that way the French-speakers are indeed an allophone minority (like the Turcs), but I wonder where those German-speakers are:-) --Dionysos1 18:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- and if there is, it's certainly not sizable;

Correct. Even the figures from the most militant French-speaking groups (very small groups however), never go beyond a few percent of the total flemish population. --Lucas Richards 15:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And not even a sizable allophone minority indeed. --Dionysos1

- the French-speakers are not subjected to all sorts of administrative prickles; claiming that the Flemings rag them is wrong and unfair; as explained below.

Agree with this; I've seen many claims from militant French-speakers, but I'm still waiting on the first objective account that confirms that French-speakers are illegally discriminated against or harrassed in Flanders. --Lucas Richards 15:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flanders historically was an homogeneous Dutch (Flemish, Brabantic and Limburgian dialects) speaking area. During time some parts (French Flanders, region of Dunkirk and Calais) were annexed by France and entirely gallacized. The region of present-day Flanders, in the meaning of 'the northern part of Belgium', has always been Dutch-speaking as well. Brussels, originally a Dutch-speaking (and Dutch only) city was after Belgian independence (and French being the only official language, although the majority of the population spoke Dutch) largely and actively frenchified, reducing the Dutch-speakers to a minority. This evolution began at the end of the 19th and remained during the 20th century and has not yet come to a halt.

During the second half of the 20th century, French-speakers moved to the suburbs around Brussels which were Dutch-speaking. Those towns were frenchified as well and in most of them French was either recognised as an official language (next to Dutch) (and thus added to the bilingual area of Brussels) or linguistic facilities (a light form of bilingualism) were installed.

This was a short history of what could be called the French minority of Flanders. But it's clearly a minority of immigrants, not an historical minority as the Swedish in Finland.

Therefore claiming that through unilingualism of Flanders the French-minority is subjected to prickles is wrong (towns became bilingual or they achieved facilities) and unfair (it is an immigrant minority).

This is the reason why I have deleted this sentence and I advise everyone to take a neutral and fair status in this article since it is a very sensitive subject to all parties.

PS: I suspect a non-native speaker of English (like me) of having written this sentence because prickles who continue is as far as I know no good English. (could 156.109.10.17 be French-speaking?) By the way, the person who wrote this has a strong anti-Flemish wikipedian history.Dionysos1 20:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Against![edit]

Looks to me that the Flemish movement is much wider than only separatists! On the Dutch page, it apparently mentions 5 major tendencies within the Flemish movement. The separatists are only one of them. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about the Flemish movement could clarify this further.

  • Do not merge I agree the Flemish movement is more than just political, and certainly more than just separatist. Bejnar 05:22, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Do not merge for the same reason.Dionysos1 18:41, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Merge ![edit]

The Flemish movement is a much broader concept than advocacy of Flemish independence (separatism, calling for the splitting of Belgium in two or more independent states). Where there is no majority in favour of Flemish independence, probably a majority of the "Flemish people" (Dutch speaking Belgians) would defend their Flemish identity, as opposed to "Belgicism" or francophilia. Moreover, there is a Flemish cultural movement, totally distinct and not to be identified with any political point of view.

Flandern und Deutschland by Kurt Kerlen[edit]

The Library of Congress gives the subject of this 1917 book as "Flemish movement."

I'm only interested in knowing more about Kurt Kerlen.
This author also wrote/edited/compiled Boche and Bolshevik.
My contribution is to let you know about the old Library of Congress use.
Can anyone tell me anything about Kurt Kerlen besides this author's association with Nesta Webster? Was Kerlen an important figure in the Flemish movement?

Thanks.

Inadvertently I failed to sign the above.--Ludvikus 23:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The Dutch dont need protection[edit]

I strongly advocate that the lead be changed from saying that The Flemish Movement protects the Dutch Language. It doesn't. It protects the Flemish dialects that have historically been spoken in Flanders. If there are no objections, I will change it tomorrow. In Belgium the nomenclature for that entity (Dutch Language) is Flemish! It's roots in Dutch are acknowledged, but its proper name is Flemish always. That designation gives a name to a people, the Flemish people. Duly recognized thruout history as a seperate and recognizable people. I respectfully request that editors recognize this fact and resist changing it so that it is something that solely pleases The Dutch. It doesnt please the Flemish, to be sure.--Buster7 (talk) 21:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary. Flemish as a language doesn't exist. Colloquially the Dutch as spoken in Belgium is called Flemish, as much as in most languages the Dutch as spoken in the Netherlands is called Hollandic. Dutch is Dutch and is not proper to any country. To address the Dutch as it is spoken in Belgium with Flemish is only a minor inaccuracy, but to state that it is a different language is completely incorrect. If you're not convinced, you should get informed first before exporting your fantasies to wikipedia. Not a single academic would be taken seriously if he'd say Flemish and Hollandic (to you, only that is Dutch) were two seperate languages. The difference to be made is of the same degree as the difference between American and British English.--Hooiwind (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree here. I'm from Flanders myself and "hollandic" is the same language. It's a bit like english in the UK and english in the USA. Same language but a different accent and there are some words that are only used in Flanders or Holland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.195.160.160 (talk) 18:45, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it is true for the Nederlanse that the both of you speak...no question. But, the Flemish that I speak is from the 1950's. Any of the real historic "taals' of either West or East Flamders are very dis-similar to the current Dutch derivative spoken in Belgium. A better example than British/American might be Portuguese and Spanish. These are not fantasies. Please see:[[1]] for a differing opinion.--Buster7 (talk) 23:19, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Flemish from the 1950's you speak is not the current language in Flanders. In schools, public institutions and the official Flemish newspapers and television stations, the AN (Algemeen Nederlands - General Dutch) is used, both in the Netherlands and Flanders. I too speak my own West-Flemish dialect at home, which could be seen as a separate language from Dutch as much as Frisian is a separate language from Dutch. Nonetheless, officially we all speak Dutch and it is the lingua franca between people from different Flemish dialects (West-Vlaams, Oost-Vlaams, Brabants and Limburgs). The written Flemish language is exactly the same as Dutch, which is even recognised by the site you gave (http://www.hermanboel.eu/dossiers-vl-ned.htm). So no, it's not like Portuguese-Spanish (different languages), it's like English with an American accent, and English with a British accent (different accents). Don't mistake me for someone who doesn't like his mother tongue, but I also like to get the facts right...
To state my point even more clearly: http://taalunieversum.org/taalunie/wie_zijn_wij/ => Nederland en Vlaanderen ontwikkelen al sinds 1980 een gemeenschappelijk beleid voor het Nederlands. (transl: Since 1980, the Netherlands and Flanders are developing a shared/unified policiy concerning the Dutch language.) So sorry, but 1950 is 60 years ago, times have changed.

84.195.160.160[edit]

84.195.160.160, could you please have someone correct the English in your contributions before adding them? Thanks! Rbakker99 (talk) 14:51, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, without any intent to criticize, your contributions while welcome are in serious need of work. Also, I might suggest that you create an identity. It's more fun that way!--Buster7 (talk) 00:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Movement begins[edit]

The last sentence of this section needs to be clarified but I'm not sure how. Any Ideas?--Buster7 (talk) 03:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The last section, Post War I believe it's called, is a huge mess. Capitalization alone is a task. Miss-spelling, etc. are many. The claims made in this section require verification. Please have someone copy-edit entries before they go into the encyclopedia.--Buster7 (talk) 12:48, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From what I have read and been told about this whole issue, the "Flemish Movement" in fact seems to have confused language with class. Their resentment would have been better directed against those who spoke French, rather than the language itself. The nobility and other members of the ruling class in Flanders chose to speak French, basically, because of its greater international prestige, but they were still Flemings. They were not foreign invaders. The present campaign seems to target the French language wherever it is spoken, even if the speakers are from the "lower" classes and are historically native speakers (or descendants of Walloons who abandoned their French-based dialect - of which there were quite a large number - to speak Standard French). It appears to be no different from the alleged earlier campaigns to crush Flemish or, to put it another way, two wrongs do not make a right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rioblen (talk • contribs) 10:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Transfers[edit]

I would like the section "Transfers" to be documented and their figures supported by serious sources. Adumoul (talk) 00:52, 21 September 2008 (UTC) I would like this whole article to be rewritten... it's about an ideology that wants to be considered as a culture, find some sources to say otherwise.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.86.26.143 (talk) 08:18, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The section about Transfers has serious issues with WP:NPOV. Only one POV is used. One source I have removed, because it was on a totally biased site (one that promotes the Flemish independence). Also other sources are not that good (like 'Het Nieuwsblad'). GoldRenet 16:38, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the whole article is badly cited and only had one POV. GoldRenet 16:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...et pour les Flamands, la même chose...[edit]

This very common quote is linked here to king Albert I. Could somebody give a reliable source of it, because I can't find one. Other sources say that the quote originates from the orders from French-speaking WWI officers, directed at the Flemish soldiers, so if king Albert I didn't use it this should be removed. Felix Atagong (talk) 10:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LDD are confederalists[edit]

I added List Dedecker to the confederalists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.208.98 (talk) 20:19, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Extremists?[edit]

Calling VB, Voorpost, NSV and others extremists doesn't seem neutral to me. Therefore I changed it to "radical right-winged". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.208.98 (talk) 20:25, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

De Coster[edit]

De Coster did write Uijlenspiegel but he wrote it in French so I don't think he can be counted as a "Flemish Movement" (or whatever its supposed to have been and become) protagnist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.86.12.167 (talk) 21:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Be thy own judge and thou shalt be forgiven[edit]

"To many of the Flemish nationalists the reasons for their collaboration were understandable." This sentence has no meaning! It says something between

1° that many flemish nationalists cautionned collaboration 2° they understood what they did 3° the frustration by the french speakers pushed them into collaboration and so it is acceptable

Go ask Bart De Wever how many jews were put on the trains during this period! Has it ever been understandable? Nice piece of post-war fascist rhetorics!! How many Flemish are proud of this? Flanders is indeed in need of some cultural identity!

it's a shame that after such an interesting start, the flemish movement is still now being held hostage by the right-wing parties (whom have never been benefical to culture, or is it the other way around? that lack of culture....)

This article has to be rewritten! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.86.0.140 (talk) 06:14, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Flemish Martyr Synrdome"[edit]

What the hell is this? That "Pour les flamands, la meme chose" might not have a source, it's exemplary for how the Flemish were treated in the army. You couldn't become officer without knowing French, even though the majority of the soldiers were Flemish. Anyway, it's far less from the truth than someone who invented Flemish Martyr Syndrome... Go look it up in google, count the hits of "Flemish Martyr Syndrome" (5) and "Pour les Flamands, la meme chose" (761). I'd like to try the "Irish Martyr Syndrome" on some random wikipedia page, and watch how I get banned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.181.82.242 (talk) 15:25, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

References provided in this article should not be one-sided: They must also include some non-Flemish sources. Comptrad (talk) 12:57, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Roeselare Hugo Verriest -1.JPG Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Roeselare Hugo Verriest -1.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:52, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are not neutral. Recent sources form the Flemish Movement itself are lacking. F.e. Marc Reynebau is generally considered as an opponent of the Flemish Movement. Van Haegendoren is a Flemisch Mover, but a older one, who died before 2000. The imago of Verriest seems correct to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.196.40.81 (talk) 10:39, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

authenticity citation by Rogier in section "French Flanders"[edit]

The authenticity of the supposed citation by Charles Rogier:

"Les premiers principes d'une bonne administration sont basés sur l'emploi exclusif d'une langue, et il est évident que la seule langue des Belges doit être le français. Pour arriver à ce résultat, il est nécessaire que toutes les fonctions civiles et militaires soient confiées à des Wallons et à des Luxembourgeois; de cette manière, les Flamands, privés temporairement des avantages attachés à ces emplois, seront contraints d'apprendre le français, et l'on détruira ainsi peu à peu l'élément germanique en Belgique."

is quite contested, as can be seen in the articles on Charles Rogier in the Dutch and French Wikipedia and elsewhere. Beyond that, in the quoted resource (Leclerc 2008) it is said that the quote is from a letter to Lord Palmerston, not to Raikem, and the questionableness of the citation is clearly mentioned. I think this should urgently be revised. I won't do it because I feel my English is not good enough.

Greetings, kikkertje

[Untitled][edit]

Added many references, only one remains for which I couldn't find any reference in the collections I have access to. If anyone feels like adding more references, please do, articles like this are always in grave need of them. I took the liberty of deleting the "references are needed - template". Many Good Wishes, --131.111.219.247 (talk) 20:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Untitled bis][edit]

Please update this article:

'The ensuing deadlock has led to the fact that at the time of writing (August 2011) no federal government has yet been formed and no compromise that might serve even as a basis for further negotiation has emerged.'

We are proud to say that finally we have formed a government. All te problems solved then? i beg to differ.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.119.214.170 (talk) 12:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Flemish Movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:13, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Flemish Movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:57, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replace "Militant" with something else[edit]

This article refers to separatists as "militants". I think that's very biased and unfair. "militant", in English, is often used to refer to groups using violence to achieve an objective in mass media, and readers may conflate the dictionary definition (used in this page) with the mass-media one. A more experienced editor suggested that this page should use the word "radical" instead. I disagree with that too. This article says that the "militants" are defined by them wanting independence. However, separatism isn't always considered radical: the Wikipedia pages for Quebec, Basque and Catalan separatist movements only use the word "militant" in reference to paramilitary groups (Catalan), and the word "radical" is only used to refer to the radicalization during the Spanish Civil war (almost a century ago) towards Franco, who was very authoritarian and anti-democratic (Basque). Also, the Flemish "militants" have much more popular support in Flanders than separatists in all of the regions I mentioned, making them less radical by definition. SentientObject (talk) 00:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Flemish_Movement&oldid=1206439828"