The linguistic-ideological division between Wallonia and Flanders is institutionalized through the principle of monolingual territoriality within federalism in Belgium. The disaggregating nature of...Show moreThe linguistic-ideological division between Wallonia and Flanders is institutionalized through the principle of monolingual territoriality within federalism in Belgium. The disaggregating nature of the federalization processes is substantiated by the ideological-linguistic differences between the subnational groups, in efforts to mitigate such differences. In a globalizing world, these motivations have been tested through empirical data involving a sample population of students in Flanders. The language use and language knowledge of these students showed that, the acquirement of plurilingualism is increasing, involving the use of English as an international language prominently. Interestingly, monolingual territoriality is a protecting institutionalization of the monolingual language ideology in Belgium. Rather than an outdated perspective that plurilingualism is a threat, the acquirement of English could form a mitigating mechanism across the borders within and outside Belgium.Show less
The lobbying for federalism in Europe has a long history with many associated movements. One of the oldest federalist initiatives is the Paneuropean Union (PEU), formally established in 1924. A...Show moreThe lobbying for federalism in Europe has a long history with many associated movements. One of the oldest federalist initiatives is the Paneuropean Union (PEU), formally established in 1924. A later addition to the lobby movements was the Union of European Federalists (UEF), which was established in 1946. So far, no federal Europe has been established, and with recent events such as the Brexit this goal seems farther away than ever. Does this lack of success then mean a failure of the decades of federalist movements and lobbying? The PEU and UEF have been researched on three components, namely: ideology, membership and organization structure, and lastly, envisioned federal structure. Ideology-wise, the PEU and UEF had a very different base; the PEU founding ideology could be described as conservative with strong nationalistic elements, while the UEF had a background in socialism and communism, with a strong opposition towards nationalism. Research on membership also shows a large difference between the PEU and UEF. The PEU gained much attention with attracting many notable individuals in the realm of politicians, industrialists and nobility, such as Benito Mussolini and Otto von Hapsburg. The PEU’s following then was rather small and elitist. Contrary to this, the UEF had a much larger following since its inception. Lastly, on the topic of structure, both organizations remained relatively vague on the exact execution, but both agreed on sole military rights for the European federal government or a proposed economic unity. Concluding, although the direct initiatives of the federalist movements might have failed, the reasons for which they considered federalism necessary have to a large degree been successful. Not to mention, the continued attention for federalism, which has led to these movements’ being discussed decades after the factShow less
