The author appears to have assumed out of panic a predictable position of impotent moralistic fist-shaking against the classic
overflowing river of objectivist/social darwinist bullshit maneuver. Allow me to dam the flood with practical concerns.
We do not know everything there is to know about linguistics or language in general.
Assembling data about languages helps us get a grasp of theoretical possibilities and advances our understanding of the field.
Intentionally ignoring data is the hallmark of ignorance and wishful thinking; in a word - stupidity.
Therefore every language is worth, if not "saving," at least cataloging and studying and deconstructing and understanding.
The WA can provide a little extra means for experts to carry out such cataloging, where they might not have had the opportunity or budget to do so with currently available resources; therefore (and by the very nature of what is being studied) this is reasonably an international issue.
There are less than infinity languages to catalog; thus the endeavor is not fruitless.
Therefore the
fundamental intent of this resolution is sound and worthwhile (though, please, argue all you want about means and scope).
Thus:
- "They're dying? Let them die!" arguments are useless both to this debate and to people in general (whoever they are and wherever they may live; misanthropy for misanthropy's sake is so... adolescent);
- "...and we shouldn't bother to learn about them on the way out!" arguments are just plain wrong, whether they stem from smug self-satisfaction that I myself speak a cool, popular language that I share with billions, or from the silly and absurd notion that some data isn't worth gathering and you can know whether it is or not before you gather it.
Therefore the resolution is worth discussing in specific terms.