I listened to an interesting podcast over lunch and thought it might be worth it to share it here in light of recent posts, particularly the biweekly question of when Belgium will split, who will go with who and the likes. [Here is the link (Spotify)](https://open.spotify.com/episode/5HcMDqZUVdgR6vBDuyRYHA?si=sl-l2XJMTjGYsOySSGbM_g)
The podcast is an interview of 2 historians from the ULB (in French, 1 Flemmish, 1 Bruxelloise), and it touches many contemporary topics regarding the current state of research on Belgian history, the linguistic question (from a cultural perspective & from a political one), colonial questions, and other things.
Whatever your views on any of the topics and the extent of your knowledge, it’s definitely worth it to pay attention to people who dedicate so much of themselves to the topic.
Something that stuck with me is their perspective (which seems to be shared in this group) that the linguistic division is much more prevalent in the political sphere than in most interactions we Belgians have with one another. They also point out how Wallonia and Flanders are very recent social constructs, which basically did not exist before the 60s if I remember correctly. I don’t mean to deny a classist oppression that took place between a French speaking elite and the rest of our population, but people used to be very fluid with languages without it posing any issue. They also pointed out how we lack national heroes or national examples. Maybe we don’t need any though.
Anyway, have a listen if you have some time, it’s good! On my end, I wish we could go back to fluid languages and roll deep in dialect, as I know that mine (Bruxellois) is pretty much dead
2 comments
Ah Pieter Lagrou, the Bruno De Wever from the ULB :).
~~both their grandfathers were collaborators and their primary area of research is the Second World War/the Flemish Movement. Neither holds extreme right sympathies in case you were worried.~~
>their perspective (which seems to be shared in this group) that the linguistic division is much more prevalent in the political sphere than in most interactions we Belgians have with one another.
tbf I came to that conclusion after university courses on the history/politics of Belgium
> They also pointed out how we lack national heroes or national examples.
There is some overlap on these lists
[De Grootste Belg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Grootste_Belg) and [Les plus grands Belges](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_plus_grands_Belges).
I think Magritte, Herge, Simenon, Rubens, Mercator and Vesalius also have national appeal in addition to the ones on both lists. I can name a few that aren’t on the list too like Adolphe Sax, Leo Baekeland, Justine Henin, Kim Clijsters, JCVD,…
>I know that mine (Bruxellois) is pretty much dead
Is it? I thought it was quite alive. It’s very distinctive and recognisable.
OP as a Belgian, for al that is holy: It’s Fle**m**ish, not Fle**mm**ish, damn it.
As a side note: Is it me or are the topics on /r/belgium lately all about what divide us in Belgium rather than what unites us? I’m starting to see a trend. I don’t know if the NVA and/or VB started to campaign early or Russian intelligence is stoking the fires, but my spider senses are tingling.