The only thing these nice commentators are advocating for is not blasting the character of others not conforming to your worldview. You are allowed to have an opinion, but the way you judge the choices of other people is rather unproductive.

All I see here are people going against me without offering a real reason as to why a fragmented world, the status quo, should be promoted.

You do realize the ironic of your claim that English is currently the most prevalent language is also the status quo, right? If the Earth is to used a single language, why would that be English (besides the status quo, which you obviously dislike)?

It is one thing to point out the benefits of certain ideas that differ from the status quo, but being dogmatic and rude will gain you no points.

Ok fine, you've drawn me in.

The main counter argument is that you simply have no right dictate how others communicate, despite your declarations of improved efficiency and increased idea proliferation. I think people who spend tons of money on clothes and other trappings are wasting resources and contributing to unhealthy societal development, yet I do not go around demonizing these people. I kindly share my view to receptive listeners, while also attempting to recognize my own biases and inability to perfectly understand this massively complex world. Do you also go around proselytizing SUV owners for their massive waste of gasoline? Why not?

Lastly, it would be impossible to quantify this, but I wonder how much cultural richness, diversity of thinking, etc we would be losing if all of the sudden everyone was forced to only use English? My bet is that it would not be a trivial loss.

Anyways, I wouldn't be surprised if translation technologies make this discussion completely moot in the next couple decades.

The adjective "lazy" only makes sense as a part of a specified context - there needs to be some agreed upon "work" or "use of energy" that the alleged lazy person is neglecting, or some shared purpose. This conversation is a non-starter because you assume these foreign-language speakers are operating under the same context as you.

It's kind of like if I called you lazy for not going to the store and buying me a case of beer every week. EDIT: OK not exactly, but you get the point... demanding large life changes from others because you claim there is a benefit. This is the epitome of egotistical exuberance.

Since you seem intent on furthering this conversation, here's an honest suggestion for you if you want to truly think about what you are arguing. Extensive academic thought already exists related to the argument you are trying to make -- in short, that it is worth restricting diversity in order to normalize cultures across the globe:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postcolonialism

Postcolonialism, and especially postmodernism, are very complex concepts that require a great deal of study to grasp, but it may be worth your while if you want a serious challenge to your argument.

Is anyone here arguing in favor of colonialism? This is equivalent to comparing people who disagree with you to Hitler. Thanks for your "extensive academic thought," which I note you did not even bother to summarize here. I think this thread is over.

P.S. While I do think some of the statements made by cliveowen were insensitive, I also think that teaching people English (or another world language) in addition to their native tounges would help break down barriers between people, and lead to a better world overall.