Recent Posts

1
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism
« Last post by Toddler Thork on Today at 09:59:05 PM »
They, or at least some Flemish nationalists, are looking to be reunited with the Netherlands. They don't want to be part of Belgium. If we put the Netherlands and Belgium into the same European superstate, everyone gets their way.
This is not true at all. The Flemish do not want to be unified with the Netherlands at all and opinion polling shows that. You just made that up to suit your narrative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Netherlands_ideology#Opinion_polling


The nations of ancient Greece, Rome (before it became an empire), Egypt, the borders of Portugal were defined in 1139 almost 1000 years ago, Japan is a couple of thousand years old, even France was founded in about the 5th century. Nations have been around for a very long time.
Ancient Greece went through a variety of different forms of government at different times, Rome was absorbing other nations long before it became an empire, Portugal — though nominally independent — has had many Spanish kings, and Japan has been repeatedly divided and reunified over the centuries. It is true that I should have said that the idea of a democratic nation-state hasn't been commonplace until the last couple of centuries, but even then, it certainly hasn't been as stable as you are implying.
What? You said there were no nations and that it was a modern creation. I showed this to be more made up nonsense from you. Now you are saying I'm implying that it is stable ... well it is. Some of these countries ... mine included, span a thousand years or more. Find me a thousand year old federation and we'll talk.


There was no self-determination for the English people before England became a constitutional monarchy — they had no vote for whom their unelected kings married.
??? Why would we choose another man's wife for him? This is the British Isles. Not Love Island.
In 1215AD we get the magna carter. From that point on ... English peasants have a say.


What on earth are you talking about?
I'm English. England has been around for ages. The UK is a unitary state. A country of countries ... my country still exists thank you very much.
I don't think you understand what a unitary state is. The internal subdivisions of the UK are irrelevant, and England's existence as such a subdivision does not make it a nation-state — it is a nation, but not a state.
I never said it was a nation state. You said my COUNTRY has only been around for 200 years. I disputed that. My country ... England, has been around much longer. Now you are arguing against a thing I never said.


Also, I made a suggestion for Australia ... I feel like you ignored it.
Quote from: Thork from ages ago
I propose that New Zealand and Australia become part of the Federation of China. I mean, they are all near each other in the Pacific and it would allow people to travel between them all without passports. Many Chinese already live in Australia so really it just makes sense. Plus think of all the great food. The nation state seems to be dead anyhow. Joining China seems to be the only sensible option available to Australia ... you know, now that we've accepted that the nation state is impossible. Enjoy your fried bat and dog sandwiches.
2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism
« Last post by xasop on Today at 09:38:49 PM »
So these people aren't looking to be united under one umbrella ... ok, noted.
They, or at least some Flemish nationalists, are looking to be reunited with the Netherlands. They don't want to be part of Belgium. If we put the Netherlands and Belgium into the same European superstate, everyone gets their way.

Look ... a war took place lasting almost 100 years over this. There was much terrorism. Many people died. We sorted it out ... its called the Good Friday agreement. Its done. We aren't going back on that or we'll be back at war.
You have already jeopardised the GFA, while celebrating the achievement. You don't have the moral high ground here.

The nations of ancient Greece, Rome (before it became an empire), Egypt, the borders of Portugal were defined in 1139 almost 1000 years ago, Japan is a couple of thousand years old, even France was founded in about the 5th century. Nations have been around for a very long time.
Ancient Greece went through a variety of different forms of government at different times, Rome was absorbing other nations long before it became an empire, Portugal — though nominally independent — has had many Spanish kings, and Japan has been repeatedly divided and reunified over the centuries. It is true that I should have said that the idea of a democratic nation-state hasn't been commonplace until the last couple of centuries, but even then, it certainly hasn't been as stable as you are implying.

False. We had all those foreign royals not because they were defeating us, but because we arranged marriages to secure further powers and alliances. At no point in history have the Germans defeated us and put a German king on the throne. Nor the French. William the conqueror was a Norman ... descended from Vikings ... not gauls. The Dutch never beat us either nor the Spanish. Marriage is not 'the might of the sword'. Learn2diplomacy.
I am aware that not every monarch came to the throne through might, but these marriages were not arranged with input from the people of England, they were arranged by royal families only interested in keeping power for themselves, and those royal families gained their power through might in the first place. There was no self-determination for the English people before England became a constitutional monarchy — they had no vote for whom their unelected kings married.

What on earth are you talking about?
I'm English. England has been around for ages. The UK is a unitary state. A country of countries ... my country still exists thank you very much.
I don't think you understand what a unitary state is. The internal subdivisions of the UK are irrelevant, and England's existence as such a subdivision does not make it a nation-state — it is a nation, but not a state.
3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by Rama Set on Today at 09:16:54 PM »
It's just funny to me that it takes this much malfeasance to lose your law license.

There's a whole team of lawyers in on this.  As far as I know they're still practicing law.  I'm starting to think that getting disbarred is an exceptionally rare event.

I’ve been listening to lawyers chatter on the topic since the election and the consensus is that disbarment is exceptionally rare and is almost exclusively limited to mishandling of client funds.
4
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism
« Last post by Toddler Thork on Today at 08:59:49 PM »
Other than religion, Flanders shares a language and culture with the Dutch but not with the Walloons, which is why there is a strong Flemish nationalist movement today.
So these people aren't looking to be united under one umbrella ... ok, noted.

They felt they had more in common with the English because the English planted them there to ensure dominance. Even so, they make up barely a majority of the population of Northern Ireland today, and they are easily a minority on the island of Ireland, which should never have been partitioned in the first place.
Look ... a war took place lasting almost 100 years over this. There was much terrorism. Many people died. We sorted it out ... its called the Good Friday agreement. Its done. We aren't going back on that or we'll be back at war.

The nation-state hasn't even existed for thousands of years. It is a modern invention, accompanying the rise of Western democracy.
The nations of ancient Greece, Rome (before it became an empire), Egypt, the borders of Portugal were defined in 1139 almost 1000 years ago, Japan is a couple of thousand years old, even France was founded in about the 5th century. Nations have been around for a very long time.

For most of recorded history, Europeans were ruled by whoever had the mightiest sword, which is why England has had French, Spanish, Dutch and German kings over the centuries.
False. We had all those foreign royals not because they were defeating us, but because we arranged marriages to secure further powers and alliances. At no point in history have the Germans defeated us and put a German king on the throne. Nor the French. William the conqueror was a Norman ... descended from Vikings ... not gauls. The Dutch never beat us either nor the Spanish. Marriage is not 'the might of the sword'. Learn2diplomacy.

We don't accept it is impossible. I live in one. One that has not been invaded for over 1000 years.
Wrong again, even if we ignore the fact that your country has only existed for a little over 200 years.
What on earth are you talking about?
I'm English. England has been around for ages. The UK is a unitary state. A country of countries ... my country still exists thank you very much.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_state#United_Kingdom

World champions of war and empire. One with a Queen which we like.
Glad someone does. She's also the queen of Australia and we all think she's a bad joke.
That's because you've been given a foreign Queen. She's not even Australian. You've been utterly cucked.
5
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by crutonius on Today at 08:35:22 PM »
It's just funny to me that it takes this much malfeasance to lose your law license.

There's a whole team of lawyers in on this.  As far as I know they're still practicing law.  I'm starting to think that getting disbarred is an exceptionally rare event.
6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism
« Last post by xasop on Today at 08:28:19 PM »
You've been living in Europe for what ... a year and they've turned you into Adolf Hitler already.
Still haven't got the hang of counting?

No it bloody well isn't. You are so ignorant. The Netherlands is culturally Dutch reformed (protestant) and the Flemings and Walloons ... now Belgians ... were Catholics. The Walloons didn't want to be ruled by a bunch of Protestants. They wanted to join up with their Catholic brethren to the south and so the FOUGHT A WAR for their independence!
The Walloons are the southern half of Belgium, not the northern half. While it may have been true once that religious differences were the most important factor to most people, the Netherlands is now majority irreligious with more Catholics than Protestants. Other than religion, Flanders shares a language and culture with the Dutch but not with the Walloons, which is why there is a strong Flemish nationalist movement today.

Christ on a bike. The Protestant Irish in the North felt they had more in common with the English, than with the Catholics in the south. Are you seeing a pattern yet? They voted by a landslide to remain part of the UK, when the Republic left. Their choice.
They felt they had more in common with the English because the English planted them there to ensure dominance. Even so, they make up barely a majority of the population of Northern Ireland today, and they are easily a minority on the island of Ireland, which should never have been partitioned in the first place.

Catalonia doesn't belong to Spanish culture,
Interesting. All Catholic, all speak Spanish ... all in Spain. Are you trying to offend as many people in one post as is possible?
Spanish is not their first language. If we're counting a second language imposed upon a group as identifying their culture, why did you vote to leave the EU? More Europeans speak English than any other language.

Of course they're all in Spain. If they weren't in Spain, they wouldn't be an example of nation-states not aligning with national identity.

Frisia doesn't belong to Dutch culture,
Besides actually being in the middle of a bunch of Dutch states and all the people speaking Dutch.
Once again, not as their native language.

There are Germans in Italy, Hungarians in Serbia and Russians in Latvia, alongside many more examples, but I think my point is clear.
That because people move around, nation states should be abolished? Better idea ... how about we stop all this immigration. It seems to lead to invasive populations demanding unreasonable changes upon the indigenous inhabitants.
I am not talking about recent migrations, I am talking about established communities that, in many cases, pre-date the formation of the nation-states you so love.

In principle, some of these have straightforward solutions,
I'll concede that the slaughter of all the people who oppose your ideas seems reasonably straightforward.
That doesn't sound straightforward at all, no. Why would you bring it up?

The nation state has functioned just great for thousands of years. It is hardly impossible to achieve. Any map you care to look at has borders and nations. In fact ... almost everyone on earth lives in a nation and not some other kind of organisation. It's a system that works.
The nation-state hasn't even existed for thousands of years. It is a modern invention, accompanying the rise of Western democracy. For most of recorded history, Europeans were ruled by whoever had the mightiest sword, which is why England has had French, Spanish, Dutch and German kings over the centuries.

So doesn't work for the US, doesn't work for australia ...
I didn't say it doesn't work there. Both of those federations have significant problems, but they also provide substantial benefits to everyone involved.

but will be a dead cert for success in Europe where millions of people with around 40 languages will all be part of the same superstate and literally no one will be offended at having fought wars for independence to be lumped in under German rule.
Germany has 19% of the population of the EU. I know you're having trouble counting today, but 19% is significantly less than the 50% needed for them to "rule" a democracy.

We don't accept it is impossible. I live in one. One that has not been invaded for over 1000 years.
Wrong again, even if we ignore the fact that your country has only existed for a little over 200 years.

World champions of war and empire. One with a Queen which we like.
Glad someone does. She's also the queen of Australia and we all think she's a bad joke.

Why do you like the idea of Europeans killing each other so much?
Oh dear. It's not just counting, is it? Is it really this much of a struggle to read?

I thought you said Europe had the best democracy in the world. That doesn't sound very fair.
I guess reading must be difficult for you, then. I never said that.

Think about the current football tournament. Run by UEFA. Or the Eurovision song contest. Do either of these two stop at Europe?

Israel and Azerbaijan will be part of the EU in no time and then deals will be struck for all kinds of shenanigans. If the Aussies can be in the Eurovision, I see no reason why Germany wouldn't want them bending the knee in the EU too.
Indeed, a song contest is entirely comparable to a political union with the power to make fiscal, trade, immigration and foreign policy decisions. Bravo.

My prediction ... Australia will be part of the EU by 2040. The EU is just a trade deal that takes your sovereignty. I can't see Aussie politicians having any backbone to stop that.
Oh dear, we're back to the "trade deal" nonsense. If you're going to come bleating through every thread I make about the EU, can you at least try to learn about what it is?

He is suggesting the UK (my country) gets broken up to achieve his federalist dream.
What happened to not caring about Northern Ireland?
7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism
« Last post by Pete Svarrior on Today at 07:47:09 PM »
The last person to try to ram through a federalist European dream had a tiny moustache and got 75 million people killed.
Ouch, you missed a fair few in between! No surprises there, though.
8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism
« Last post by Toddler Thork on Today at 07:38:52 PM »
If we assume for a moment that federalism is desired,
As a living breathing European I can assure you, it isn't.
You voted not to have a say on this. Get over it, snowflake.

He is suggesting the UK (my country) gets broken up to achieve his federalist dream. The last person to try to ram through a federalist European dream had a tiny moustache and got 75 million people killed.
9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism
« Last post by Pete Svarrior on Today at 07:26:06 PM »
If we assume for a moment that federalism is desired,
As a living breathing European I can assure you, it isn't.
You voted not to have a say on this. Get over it, snowflake.
10
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: European federalism
« Last post by Toddler Thork on Today at 07:13:39 PM »
You've been living in Europe for what ... a year and they've turned you into Adolf Hitler already.

Why won't you respect other people's right to self determination?

For instance, the northern half of Belgium is culturally Dutch,
No it bloody well isn't. You are so ignorant. The Netherlands is culturally Dutch reformed (protestant) and the Flemings and Walloons ... now Belgians ... were Catholics. The Walloons didn't want to be ruled by a bunch of Protestants. They wanted to join up with their Catholic brethren to the south and so the FOUGHT A WAR for their independence!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_Revolution

The Republic of Ireland's border with the UK should be in the Irish Sea, not through the middle of Ireland.
Christ on a bike. The Protestant Irish in the North felt they had more in common with the English, than with the Catholics in the south. Are you seeing a pattern yet? They voted by a landslide to remain part of the UK, when the Republic left. Their choice.

Catalonia doesn't belong to Spanish culture,
Interesting. All Catholic, all speak Spanish ... all in Spain. Are you trying to offend as many people in one post as is possible?

Frisia doesn't belong to Dutch culture,
Besides actually being in the middle of a bunch of Dutch states and all the people speaking Dutch.

and Åland doesn't belong to Finnish culture.

There are Germans in Italy, Hungarians in Serbia and Russians in Latvia, alongside many more examples, but I think my point is clear.
That because people move around, nation states should be abolished? Better idea ... how about we stop all this immigration. It seems to lead to invasive populations demanding unreasonable changes upon the indigenous inhabitants.

In principle, some of these have straightforward solutions,
I'll concede that the slaughter of all the people who oppose your ideas seems reasonably straightforward.

nevertheless made politically challenging by the dominant culture's reluctance to grant a minority self-determination. Others cannot be reasonably solved regardless of political circumstances — no matter how you draw up the Germany–Poland border, you are going to leave some people on the "wrong" side, unless you create a maze of exclaves. We can therefore conclude that the nation-state is an impossible idea to achieve in practice, outside of isolated (in the literal sense) examples such as Iceland.
The nation state has functioned just great for thousands of years. It is hardly impossible to achieve. Any map you care to look at has borders and nations. In fact ... almost everyone on earth lives in a nation and not some other kind of organisation. It's a system that works.

Federalism as an alternative to nation-states
So doesn't work for the US, doesn't work for australia ... but will be a dead cert for success in Europe where millions of people with around 40 languages will all be part of the same superstate and literally no one will be offended at having fought wars for independence to be lumped in under German rule.

Once we accept that the nation-state is impossible,
We don't accept it is impossible. I live in one. One that has not been invaded for over 1000 years. World champions of war and empire. One with a Queen which we like.

the primary argument against European federation disappears.
So by declaring a falsehood, you can validate a falsehood.

Furthermore, the EU already has a better democratic system, in my view, than either the US or Australia.
Are they lacing the water with something over in Europe? How do you all believe this tripe?

I don't think we should ignore the problems present in other federal systems, but I no longer believe their existence is a reason not to try to do better, either.
Sounds like "just because communism has never worked before its just because no one tried to do it properly but this time would be different". 🙄

Any concrete proposal for federation should look at federal systems around the world, adopt their strengths, and learn from their weaknesses.
Why do you like the idea of Europeans killing each other so much?

If we assume for a moment that federalism is desired,
As a living breathing European I can assure you, it isn't.

a resident of Malta has roughly ten times as much political power as a resident of Germany. Also, the requirement for unanimity in the European Council has no place in a federal system.
I thought you said Europe had the best democracy in the world. That doesn't sound very fair.

In summary, I do now support European federation, but I do not see it happening until at least the 2040s — enough time for Ukraine and Georgia to submit their applications to join, and if accepted, for them to be integrated into the union. Enough time to reform the democratic system, and enough time — hopefully — to work through the issues blocking adoption of the euro and Schengen. But only time will tell.
Think about the current football tournament. Run by UEFA. Or the Eurovision song contest. Do either of these two stop at Europe?

Israel and Azerbaijan will be part of the EU in no time and then deals will be struck for all kinds of shenanigans. If the Aussies can be in the Eurovision, I see no reason why Germany wouldn't want them bending the knee in the EU too. My prediction ... Australia will be part of the EU by 2040. The EU is just a trade deal that takes your sovereignty. I can't see Aussie politicians having any backbone to stop that.


I propose that New Zealand and Australia become part of the Federation of China. I mean, they are all near each other in the Pacific and it would allow people to travel between them all without passports. Many Chinese already live in Australia so really it just makes sense. Plus think of all the great food. The nation state seems to be dead anyhow. Joining China seems to be the sensible option available to Australia ... you know, now that we've accepted that the nation state is impossible. Enjoy your fried bat and dog sandwiches.