Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Forum - Perennial Ideas and Debates that cross societal/time boundaries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old September 22nd, 2017, 03:57 PM   #21

deaf tuner's Avatar
hier is da feestje !!!
 
Joined: Oct 2013
From: Europe
Posts: 10,559
Blog Entries: 27

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offspring View Post
Tbf, Vegeta is awesome. …
Absolutely.

Sadly, a bit difficult to find around here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offspring View Post


If you're not using rationality, then what are you using as a way to measure/compare the movements? …
It's not exactly about that, my remark.

A real nationalist doesn't need rational economic arguments for his cause.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offspring View Post

I heard the Flemish are sometimes mistreated by the Walloons, like when calling for ambulances (forced to use French).
IDK. But I have a slight doubt on mistreatment, especially on intent of mistreatment.

The real problem is that Francophones in a very very large majority do not speak Flemish (English isn't far better). Nerlandophones, on the other hand, in a very large proportion, do speak French.

(Somehow understandably) Flemish are very touchy on that.
deaf tuner is offline  
Remove Ads
Old September 22nd, 2017, 04:07 PM   #22

Offspring's Avatar
Internet Zombie
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: România
Posts: 6,135
Blog Entries: 8

Quote:
A real nationalist doesn't need rational economic arguments for his cause.
That's a clear no true Scotsman.
Quote:
But I have a slight doubt on mistreatment, especially on intent of mistreatment.

The real problem is that Francophones in a very very large majority do not speak Flemish (English isn't far better). Nerlandophones, on the other hand, in a very large proportion, do speak French.

(Somehow understandably) Flemish are very touchy on that.
The last two paragraphs contradict the first one.
Offspring is offline  
Old September 22nd, 2017, 04:09 PM   #23

Offspring's Avatar
Internet Zombie
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: România
Posts: 6,135
Blog Entries: 8

Quote:
Autonomy is not independence, it is just the self government of the local inhabitants. Székelyföld being independent of course has no reality and i don't think if it is demanded at all.

here is their proposal for how they imagine their autonomy, it is not secret
Autonomy is the first step towards independence. It wasn't a coincidence that they presented their autonomy project on the same day as the Scotland referendum, they celebrated Kosovo's independence (two of them where even there to celebrate it) and asked Romania to recognise Kosovo.

Plus, it was DT who brought it up, not me, in a thread about independence.
Quote:
i guess for the same reason why the Romanians didn't move out from Hungary before 1918.
That's whataboutism. I'm talking about the present.

However, if you really want to go down this path, fine. The Romanians in Transylvania ended up being part of Romania when Romania got Transylvania. If you are comparing the two situations, then you're saying the Hungarians in Székelyföld want it to be part of Hungary. This contradicts your idea that they only want autonomy.

Last edited by Offspring; September 22nd, 2017 at 04:17 PM.
Offspring is offline  
Old September 22nd, 2017, 04:19 PM   #24

Offspring's Avatar
Internet Zombie
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: România
Posts: 6,135
Blog Entries: 8

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offspring
Autonomy is the first step towards independence. It wasn't a coincidence that they presented their autonomy project on the same day as the Scotland referendum, they celebrated Kosovo's independence (two of them where even there to celebrate it) and asked Romania to recognise Kosovo.
Even if they really just want autonomy, the state should still treat it as a first step to independence and deny it. It's too risky not to.
Offspring is offline  
Old September 22nd, 2017, 04:27 PM   #25
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Western Eurasia
Posts: 3,430

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offspring View Post
Autonomy is the first step towards independence. It wasn't a coincidence that they presented their autonomy project on the same day as the Scotland referendum, they celebrated Kosovo's independence (two of them where even there to celebrate it) and asked Romania to recognise Kosovo.
it is not necessary a step toward independence, there are a lot of autnomous regions in Europe that stopped there, of course it would partly also depend on the future developement of the ethnic relations, but imo the geographical circumstances would always make it practically impossible to make it idependent.

Quote:
Plus, it was DT who brought it up, not me, in a thread about independence.That's whataboutism. I'm talking about the present.
nah, i think the motive is the same, they don't want to leave their birthplace for the same reason why the Romanians didn't want to leave it a century ago. Because they may don't like the state above them, but love their birthplace. It was just a silly suggestion to ask them why don't they move away. Normally people leave their homeland only in case of physical danger to their existence.
Tulun is offline  
Old September 22nd, 2017, 04:37 PM   #26

Offspring's Avatar
Internet Zombie
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: România
Posts: 6,135
Blog Entries: 8

This:
Quote:
Having regard of the undertakings made by the representatives of the Romanian Nation at the Great
National Gathering of Alba Iulia on the 1st of December 1918, according to which: “Each people will
study, manage and judge in its own language by individual of its own stock and each people will get
the right to be represented in the law bodies and to govern the country in accordance with the
number of its people.”;
doesn't even make sense. That's not part of our laws. Transylvania currently belongs to Romania in accordance with the Treaty between Hungary and Romania from 1996, not in accordance with Alba Iulia.

It didn't even make sense right after 1918. Ion I. C. Brătianu, the 11th of March, 1925:
Quote:
D-lor, trebuie să limpezim, odată pentru totdeauna, ca să nu mai fie eroare: Statul român, integritatea naţională a românilor nu este rezultatul Albei Iulia, Alba Iulia e o manifestare de neîndoielnică însemnătate, în această operă de integritate, dar temeiul, realitatea care a creat această integritate este tratatul de alianţă pecetluit cu sângele a opt sute de mii de ostaşi (…) Temeiul Statului nostru este tratatul şi dorobanţul”!
My translation: "Gentleman, let's be clear, once and for all, so that there will be no error: the Romanian State, the national integrity of Romanians, is not the result of Alba Iulia, Alba Iulia is an undoubtedly meaningful manifestation, in the process of integration, but the foundation, the reality which caused this integration is the treaty of alliance sealed with the blood of 800 000 soldiers [...] the foundation of our State is the Treaty and the Soldier".

He's talking about the Alliance Treaty of 1916.

Btw, before asking for territorial autonomy, UDMR asked for cultural autonomy and pretty much got most of it. Back then, they continuously differentiated between cultural and territorial autonomy and said they are not interested in the latter. Now, they are doing that with territorial autonomy and independence.

Last edited by Offspring; September 22nd, 2017 at 04:43 PM.
Offspring is offline  
Old September 22nd, 2017, 04:38 PM   #27

Offspring's Avatar
Internet Zombie
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: România
Posts: 6,135
Blog Entries: 8

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulun View Post
it is not necessary a step toward independence, there are a lot of autnomous regions in Europe that stopped there, of course it would partly also depend on the future developement of the ethnic relations, but imo the geographical circumstances would always make it practically impossible to make it idependent.



nah, i think the motive is the same, they don't want to leave their birthplace for the same reason why the Romanians didn't want to leave it a century ago. Because they may don't like the state above them, but love their birthplace. It was just a silly suggestion to ask them why don't they move away. Normally people leave their homeland only in case of physical danger to their existence.
Check out my edited post (#23) and post #24.

Last edited by Offspring; September 22nd, 2017 at 04:42 PM.
Offspring is offline  
Old September 22nd, 2017, 04:45 PM   #28
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Western Eurasia
Posts: 3,430

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offspring View Post
Check out my edited post.
i see it if you mean this part:

Quote:
However, if you really want to go down this path, fine. The Romanians in Transylvania ended up being part of Romania when Romania got Transylvania. If you are comparing the two situations, then you're saying the Hungarians in Székelyföld want it to be part of Hungary. This contradicts your idea that they only want autonomy.
but it doesn't change my answer. Transylvanian Romanians before 1918 didn't know of course that they will end up in Romania, yet they stayed there. You suggested that Hungarian nationalists should move away from Romania because already have their nation state (Romanians also already had back then). My reply is still the same :
they don't want to leave their birthplace for the same reason why the Romanians didn't want to leave it a century ago. Because they may don't like the state above them, but love their birthplace. It was just a silly suggestion to ask them why don't they move away. Normally people leave their homeland only in case of physical danger to their existence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offspring View Post
Even if they really just want autonomy, the state should still treat it as a first step to independence and deny it. It's too risky not to.
to this part i can't really say anything, looking at the map i find it an irrational fear.

Last edited by Tulun; September 22nd, 2017 at 04:49 PM.
Tulun is offline  
Old September 22nd, 2017, 04:52 PM   #29

Offspring's Avatar
Internet Zombie
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: România
Posts: 6,135
Blog Entries: 8

I also meant the part where I'm saying the state should treat it as if it's the first step towards independence. Look at what's happening in Spain and look at what happened with Kosovo. Why on Earth would we want that?

You mentioned there are regions like that in Europe. My reply is that I couldn't possibly care less.

Quote:
Transylvanian Romanians before 1918 didn't know of course that they will end up in Romania, yet they stayed there. You suggested that Hungarian nationalists should move away from Romania because already have their nation state (Romanians also already had back then). My reply is still the same :
they don't want to leave their birthplace for the same reason why the Romanians didn't want to leave it a century ago. Because they may don't like the state above them, but love their birthplace. It was just a silly suggestion to ask them why don't they move away. Normally people leave their homeland only in case of physical danger to their existence.
You're absolutely wrong. Plenty of Romanian nationalists from Transylvania did go to Romania.

Some Romanian nationalists were imprisoned for treason by Hungarians.

The Romanian nationalists who remained weren't fine with being part of Hungary. They wanted Transylvania to be part of Romania.

30 000 Romanian Transylvanian soldiers who fought for Austria-Hungary and were captured by Russia were released to fight for Romania, btw.

Your comparison is deeply flawed.

In a thread where people talk about Catalonia and Hungarians in Romania are mentioned, it makes perfect sense to mention that an independent Hungary does exist, while an independent Catalonia does not.

Last edited by Offspring; September 22nd, 2017 at 04:58 PM.
Offspring is offline  
Old September 22nd, 2017, 04:57 PM   #30

Offspring's Avatar
Internet Zombie
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: România
Posts: 6,135
Blog Entries: 8

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulun View Post
to this part i can't really say anything, looking at the map i find it an irrational fear.
Very poor people (even for Romanian standards) constantly voting with the same party is also irrational. So, maybe their desires are irrational.

Last edited by Offspring; September 22nd, 2017 at 05:03 PM.
Offspring is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology

Tags
advantages



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are there advantages to being shy? Jake10 Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 29 April 30th, 2013 03:00 AM
Advantages of self-deception Rosi Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 12 March 12th, 2010 08:25 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.