W(h)ither Unionism and Loyalism?

[Lang Spoon]

At least T Dan Smith wanted to rebuild Newcastle and had some kind of vision however corrupted: the SLab hegemony in the west coast (and Fife/Dundee) was about fuck all bar neglect, clientelism and corruption.

[Bizarre Löw Triangle]

i don't think that last part is true. BaME English people voted to remain in the EU; in fact, their voting patterns are remarkably similar to Scotland's. i think that's why i see Scottish nationalism somewhat through the lens of desolidarisation.

But the crux of the issue is there: what qualifies Bretons to have their own nation-state, while Black and Arab Parisians and Quercinois (yes there are some!) are stuck under French rule? Can we justify self-rule by describing the French presence in Brittany as "colonial", without making a connection to the surveillance and repression of its other racial and religious minorities who do not have a historic claim to territory? If "European identity" was a real thing, wouldn't it be possible to choose it as your primary or indeed exclusive identity, just as i can choose to call myself British and disclaim my Englishness or Scottishness? (In any case, i fear the take-up would be minimal, as the EU isn't awfully popular among BaME people in continental Europe.)

What i'm struggling to appreciate is the lure of ethnocultural nationalism in the 21st century, as anything more than expediency. But then i'm one of Theresa May's citizens of nowhere: a foreigner in every nation.

IMO the main ethnocultural nationalism in the 21st century isn't coming from separatist movements, but rather from unionists. Separatism is the reaction, rather than the cause.

This is true across Europe at the moment (where ethnonationalism isn't necessarily incompatible with belief in "the European project"). The main danger comes from the people who already have the power of the state behind them.

I don't think it's solidarity to have Priti Patel able to kidnap people in Cardiff as well as Birmingham - on the contrary i think that the retreat of the British state from Wales and Scotland has the potential to weaken its grasp elsewhere (both morally and practically - police "mutual aid" sees Welsh and Scottish officers deployed to police unrest in English cities). Of course this all depends on what an independent Wales would end up looking like.

[Belhaven]

IMO the main ethnocultural nationalism in the 21st century isn't coming from separatist movements, but rather from unionists. Separatism is the reaction, rather than the cause.

This is true across Europe at the moment (where ethnonationalism isn't necessarily incompatible with belief in "the European project"). The main danger comes from the people who already have the power of the state behind them.

This seems to be the case in Spain, but I struggle to see how it applies to other countries outside Britain.

[ad hoc]

This seems to be the case in Spain, but I struggle to see how it applies to other countries outside Britain.

You could argue that it is certainly present in Romania. The new far right AUR party came from nowhere to get 10% in the recent elections partly through appeals to fighting back against a pretty much imaginary Hungarian irredentism.

[Diable Rouge]

This seems to be the case in Spain, but I struggle to see how it applies to other countries outside Britain.

Similarly, the AfD emphasising "German national values" in response to the migrant crisis.

[NHH]

You could argue that it is certainly present in Romania. The new far right AUR party came from nowhere to get 10% in the recent elections partly through appeals to fighting back against a pretty much imaginary Hungarian irredentism.

I was watching an ISS flyover of the Carpathians on my Apple TV last night and it struck me how fucking massive they are and how 'obvious' a population divider they would be, but when wikipedia-ing today, saw that the population on the Hungarian side of the mountains was 60% Romanian in the 1910 census, which was staggering, as I'd assumed the transfer of Transsylvania to be punishment for Hungary as an 'aggressor' in WW1to give Romania land on the European plain, rather than to unite a province that was majority romanian with Romania. So what's the story there Ad Hoc - why did the Carpathians not create ethno-linguistic divides in a way that the Alps and Pyrenees do?

[Lang Spoon]

Catalan and Basque are spoken both sides of the Pyrenees.

[ad hoc]

I was watching an ISS flyover of the Carpathians on my Apple TV last night and it struck me how fucking massive they are and how 'obvious' a population divider they would be, but when wikipedia-ing today, saw that the population on the Hungarian side of the mountains was 60% Romanian in the 1910 census, which was staggering, as I'd assumed the transfer of Transsylvania to be punishment for Hungary as an 'aggressor' in WW1to give Romania land on the European plain, rather than to unite a province that was majority romanian with Romania. So what's the story there Ad Hoc - why did the Carpathians not create ethno-linguistic divides in a way that the Alps and Pyrenees do?

How long have you got? It will take me a fair while to do this question justice, but i'll try and have a go at it later

[NHH]

If there's good stuff on the web, just link rather than compose a reply yourself

[ad hoc]

Basically, the starting point is that even at the beginning of the last century it didn't really make sense to talk about Romanians or Hungarians (in Transylvania at least). There were Romanian speaking people and Hungarian speaking people, but it was a very feudal place that was pretty much down to the village/tribe level (though as it was part of Austro Hungary, the nobility were all Hungarian (speaking)). Also, one could argue that Transylvania was for centuries a multicultural place - there were large populations of various different ethnic groups (such as they could be identified) - Magyar, Romanian, Schwab, Saxon, Szekely, Jewish, Rroma, Slovak, Polish, Kun, Pechemeg, Serbian, and so on. (There is a tangent here about Hungarian history and it's multicultural nature, which perhaps I'll put in a second post)

So, for a long time, Transylvania was a very mixed place, ruled over by Hungarians (but in a very feudal way, so essentially there were villages of Hungarian speaking serfs and villages of Romanian speaking serfs, and others). But it was a rich place, with fertile land - especially compared to Moldova and Wallachia, where other Romanian speaking peoples lived, so over time, there was a migration of people from those regions, to the point where in 1910 the population of Transylvania was 54% Romanian speaking (that's the number I have from here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic...ustria-Hungary ).

Does that basically answer the question?

*Trianon, by the way, only served to formalise the truth "on the ground" that was already there. As the first world war ended, the Romanians conquered Transylvania, and in fact most of Hungary ( which had become, by that time, Soviet Hungary under the very short lived Kun government), and actually took Budapest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungar...93Romanian_War

[laverte]

Bizarre Löw Triangle . All good points. i'm learning a lot here.

IMO the main ethnocultural nationalism in the 21st century isn't coming from separatist movements, but rather from unionists. Separatism is the reaction, rather than the cause.

Oh, unquestionably. i'm just surprised that the nation-state is – still – the chosen model of separation. The nationalist parties' credo seems to be "We can do the same thing, but better." i think for all its flaws the SNP has shown that's fair enough, especially in a climate of Brexit and Tory intransigence. It just seems to demand a lot of political work and energy for an outcome which doesn't feel all that transformative. Plus, strategically, i can't see a path to the promised land of independence without whipping up more of the ethnocultural stuff that makes me uneasy.

I don't think it's solidarity to have Priti Patel able to kidnap people in Cardiff as well as Birmingham - on the contrary i think that the retreat of the British state from Wales and Scotland has the potential to weaken its grasp elsewhere (both morally and practically - police "mutual aid" sees Welsh and Scottish officers deployed to police unrest in English cities).

That's a good point. How can left-leaning unionists show solidarity with those who might hijack and transform British identity without legitimising its present incarnation or the activities of the British state?

i have a nasty feeling that a post-British state would plunge ever deeper into denial and lash out yet more aggressively at its own minorities and the rest of the world. It would be less effective if it had to do this in isolation, rather than supported by Trumps and Orbans and Rupert Murdochs worldwide.

Of course this all depends on what an independent Wales [and Scotland!] would end up looking like.

i think that's absolutely key and i'm keen to read people's opinions about it. Who would count as Welsh/Scottish? What form would the border(s) take? What, ideally, would be the most important changes to relations with England, English power, and English people?

[Belhaven]

Similarly, the AfD emphasising "German national values" in response to the migrant crisis.

Yes, of course, virtually every country in Europe has racist parties hijacking 'national values' for its own purposes. I was more thinking along the lines of governments of centralised states actively opposing separatist movements by imposing its own identity as the only legitimate one.

[NHH]

So, for a long time, Transylvania was a very mixed place, ruled over by Hungarians (but in a very feudal way, so essentially there were villages of Hungarian speaking serfs and villages of Romanian speaking serfs, and others). But it was a rich place, with fertile land - especially compared to Moldova and Wallachia, where other Romanian speaking peoples lived, so over time, there was a migration of people from those regions, to the point where in 1910 the population of Transylvania was 54% Romanian speaking (that's the number I have from here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic...ustria-Hungary ).

Does that basically answer the question?

Yes - thanks! The info I didn't realise was the relative richness of the land, making it an attractive place to go to, knowing there was a) opportunity and b) existing pockets of people who shared your language to the extent that it wasn't like migrating to a 'foreign' country.

[Patrick Thistle]

i think that's absolutely key and i'm keen to read people's opinions about it. Who would count as Welsh/Scottish? What form would the border(s) take? What, ideally, would be the most important changes to relations with England, English power, and English people?

There's a lot of discussions in IndyCyrnu Twitter about Indy Wales being run by people who.live in Wales (rather than "Welsh") and criticism is usually made of Westminster rather than "England". There is a definite tendency to make the distinction between the two. Also to assert Welsh independence as pro-Wales rather than anti-English.

If Wales was.independent and you lived there then you would be a citizen of Wales. You might not want to identify as Welsh so there is a distinction. (I have an Italian friend who has lived in Cardiff all long time. Her young daughter is learning Welsh and says she is Welsh. But my friend will always be Italian.)

Similarly I think if I emigrated to Canada I would always be some degree Welsh even if I became a citizen of Canada.

With regard to borders I don't think any Welsh nationalists want hard borders. But if Wales went into the EU then it would have to have them. However I could see that coming from the England side if they didn't want a porous border acting as a "back door" into precious England. Historically the border was always delineated from the England side, dating back to Offa, King of Mercia.

[ad hoc]

Yes - thanks! The info I didn't realise was the relative richness of the land, making it an attractive place to go to, knowing there was a) opportunity and b) existing pockets of people who shared your language to the extent that it wasn't like migrating to a 'foreign' country.

Also, Transylvania, while part of Austro-Hungary, was always a slightly independent place. It was rarely part of Hungary in its history, but rather a semi independent principality. It was never in the Ottoman empire for example, while Hungary was (I think it was kind of vassal state, left alone by the Ottomans under a kind of deal, but still broadly independent). So up until the last years of the Austro Hungarian empire there was no real push to create a kind of national identity/language for the region. (Only after 1867 really)

[Duncan Gardner]

Patrick Thistle agreed on the 'residence qualification' (for want of a better term). If you live in Wales or Scotland you get a vote and ultimately citizenship. Some bloke whose granda left 200 years ago (IE, me) doesn't per se

[Lang Spoon]

The SNP plan is for all people resident in Scotland at Indy to be future Scots citizens. Also anyone born in Scotland or whose parents are Scottish.

[Lang Spoon]

Yes, of course, virtually every country in Europe has racist parties hijacking 'national values' for its own purposes. I was more thinking along the lines of governments of centralised states actively opposing separatist movements by imposing its own identity as the only legitimate one.

France?

[Lang Spoon]

Re relations with England Laverte, pre-Brexit I'd say things were healthier between Ireland and England/U.K. than Scotland/England attitudes. At governmental level U.K./England wasn't imposing its will on its smaller neighbour, they were usually cordial allies of Neo-Lib Buccaneers versus Sclerotic Continentals when it came to arguments in the EU.

[Diable Rouge]

https://twitter.com/BBCJayneMcC/status/1347313176669540354

[elguapo4]

I'd love to see how long they last around bothar Sean Choill.

[Levin]

Wallachia was a land of fantastic hats. As shown by Aferim! Which is really good film.

Was there ever a Wallachian or Transylvanian identity? Or were they too tied up in feudal lordships and identity was by language and culture?

Are there an other current countries that were split between two polities for so long as what is now Romania? The modern borders of former Yugoslavian states match up to once extant AH/Ottoman borders don't they?

[Nefertiti2]

Wallachia was a land of fantastic hats. As shown by Aferim! Which is really good film.

Was there ever a Wallachian or Transylvanian identity? Or were they too tied up in feudal lordships and identity was by language and culture?

Are there an other current countries that were split between two polities for so long as what is now Romania? The modern borders of former Yugoslavian states match up to once extant AH/Ottoman borders don't they?

Germany

[Nefertiti2]

United Kingdom

[Sporting]

Catalan and Basque are spoken both sides of the Pyrenees.

Catalan is spoken in three countries.