Talk:Politics of Belgium

message: Shouldn't it be party chairman instead? Wouter Lievens 12:16, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Party 'President' 

message: Can we reword this Paragraph, Id do it, but im having trouble finding the meaning...
Belgium does not have elections similar to presidential elections, where only one person can be elected; rather, seats in the parliament, city council or similar are elected, the occupants of which then vote who gets to be prime minister, mayor, governor, etc. This is probably one of the reasons why Belgium does not have a two-party political system, but that there are more than two influential parties per language region.
Keeperoftheseal 16:02, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reword... 

message: Has Belgium a bicameral parliament (Chamber and Senate), or has it officially a heptacameral parliament (Federal Chamber, Senate, Flemish Parliament, Walloon Parliament, Brussels Parliament, Chamber of the French Community and Chamber of the German Community)? According to the subsidiarity treaty (subsidiariteitsbeginsel) which describes every parliament as a Chamber of the Belgian parliament, in order to weigh heavier on EU-politics ...; anyway, I'm not sure, but I heard it somewhere, somewhen ... --Lord Snoeckx 19:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multicameralism? 

message: The article is written exclusively from the Flemish (Dutch-speaking) POV. It does not contain Francophone opinions. It does not explain why there is resistance on the Francophone side to the splitting of Brussels-Hal-Vilvorde district, or the link with the issues of the Brussels periphery and the so-called "facilities"Giordaano 14:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Flemish point of view

message: This section is misleading. It states that at the foundation of Belgium, Flemings did not have the same rigths as French speakers. This overlooks the reality that at the time most educated Flemings could speak French since this was the language of education and administration in Flanders even before Belgium existed. At the same time, Walloons were not all French native speakers themselves (cf. article on Walloon language) and therefore had the same problems as Dutch speakers if they didn't speak French and had to deal with the administration.
A better statement is that at the foundation of Belgium, Flemings and Walloons who didn't speak French did not have the same rights as Flemings and Walloons who spoke French.
Comment 1: while some may believe that French was imposed in Flanders at the foundation of Belgium because the Southern part was French speaking and had a better economy, the reality is different. In fact, the elite in Flanders had been French speaking for centuries (Flanders came under French rule in the 12th century, while Wallonia was part of the Holy Roman Empire; since then an increasing number of Flemings adopted French as their mother tongue). Hence, one of the reasons why Belgium declared independence was because William I of the Netherlands wanted to impose Dutch as the language of education and administration in Flanders, a thing that the French-speaking Flemings did not want to happen. 
Comment 2: because Walloons are French speakers today does not mean that this was the case at the foundation on Belgium. In fact, French was the language of the educated people only in Wallonia. However, Walloon speakers preferred to switch to French as their native tongue rather than to develop a movement to gain equal rights and to preserve their language, as happened in Flanders. We can think of 2 reasons to explain this different development in the North and in the South of Belgium: 
- 1. French is a romance language and is easier to learn for Walloon speakers than for Dutch speakers 
- 2. Dutch was already recognized as a state language in the Netherlands and a standard version had been codified, whereas Walloon comprised at least 3 different regional dialects with no clear standard version (still the case today)
As a result, more and more people abandoned the Walloon language in Wallonia. As a consequence, the Walloon language is today on the Unesco Red Book of Endangered Languages.
Comment 3: since the Flemish nationalistic movement gained force, most French-speaking Flemings were pressed to switch to Dutch or to move to Brussels and its surroundings. Today, "Fleming" and "Dutch-speaking Belgian" are almost synonymous terms. But one must not forget that this was not always the case and that French played a predominant role in the history of Flanders, long before Belgium was created.
Wimul 14:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Linguistic challenge

message: The following lines were at the end of the first paragraph in the Political Parties section. They seem to be particularly opinionated and inflammatory as well as uncited. If anyone cares to salvage them, please try rephrasing and citing appropriately before reposting.
:At the same time, this is, for the French-speaking parties, a serious indication against their own claim for a more regional stress in the Belgian federalisation (as opposed to the community-focus :favoured by the Flemings).  The Flemish parties currently all favour to reform the Belgian federal political system to (at least) a confederal system whereby the regions are the centrepiece of the :political system.  Some parties, most notably the New Flemish Alliance (N-VA) and Vlaams Blok, even favour the division of Belgium.
128.208.150.188 (talk) 01:37, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political Parties