That's important because IMHO the most important point in the language debate is that we must become much more efficient language learners. A part of my experi

That's important because IMHO the most important point in the language debate is that we must become much more efficient language learners. A part of my experience is that people start with grossly inefficient methods to speak foreign languages. Spend way too much time. Discard it as too difficult or not worth it. Another part of my experience is that speaking a foreign languages is actually totally doable. We human beings are naturally skilled at it. So what about esperanto? (One my languages). There is still this misconception (also in this comments section) that it had the goal to do to existing languages what the euro did to existing currencies. That would have been silly, fortunately it has been a non-goal from the start. What makes much more sense is that since it has a much nicer learning curve, young people and monoglots can use it as a testbed to get how to learn a language. Then reach much quicker a level where they can have a casual conversation in that or those other languages they are interested in. That strategy work actually quite well, but require a non-conformist mind. People have a malthusian approach to language learning and _will_ tell you that you are just being silly.