|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
From the US thread because it doesn't belong there:
On September 17 2025 20:49 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2025 20:34 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 20:06 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 19:29 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 19:17 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 18:28 MJG wrote:
dictated by Westminster. Thank you. ??? Westminster has dozens of Scottish MPs and Lords. It's not an English parliament. Please stop talking about the UK lmao.  EDIT: And even if it was an English parliament, Scotland had an independence referendum were they voted to remain within the UK. That was an agreement that foreign policy decisions would be taken by Westminster. It is 57 out of 650. I am not even sure what you arguing. Fact is England runs UK. You may type till your fingers start bleeding, but it wont change this. You may explain why, you may rationalise it, but it wont change the fact itself. Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have devolved parliaments that handle many domestic decisions independently, so the idea that England runs the UK is categorically false. You're a clown lmao. EDIT: I'll stop derailing the US Politics thread now lol. Dude FFS: Show nested quote +On September 17 2025 20:34 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 20:06 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 19:29 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 19:17 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 18:28 MJG wrote:
dictated by Westminster. Thank you. ??? Westminster has dozens of Scottish MPs and Lords. It's not an English parliament. Please stop talking about the UK lmao. EDIT: And even if it was an English parliament, Scotland had an independence referendum were they voted to remain within the UK. That was an agreement that foreign policy decisions would be taken by Westminster. It is 57 out of 650. I am not even sure what you arguing. Fact is England runs UK. You may type till your fingers start bleeding, but it wont change this. You may explain why, you may rationalise it, but it wont change the fact itself. Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have devolved parliaments that handle many domestic decisions independently, so the idea that England runs the UK is categorically false. You're a clown lmao. EDIT: I'll stop derailing the US Politics thread now lol. Show nested quote +On September 17 2025 19:29 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 19:17 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 18:28 MJG wrote:
dictated by Westminster. Thank you. ??? Westminster has dozens of Scottish MPs and Lords. It's not an English parliament. Please stop talking about the UK lmao. EDIT: And even if it was an English parliament, Scotland had an independence referendum were they voted to remain within the UK. That was an agreement that foreign policy decisions would be taken by Westminster. Show nested quote +On September 17 2025 18:28 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 18:16 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 14:14 Acrofales wrote:On September 17 2025 10:33 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 10:23 Vivax wrote:On September 17 2025 09:50 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 05:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
When people think "Civil War", are they basically imagining the far-right going to war to keep the West Coast in the Union, rural vs urban wars around the country, North vs South, or what?
I don't know that enough of the US populace gives enough of a shit for an actual civil war.
I imagine more of a general "balkanization" with some conflicts internally (from oppressed groups) and between regions over resources and such. See you dont have single culture any more (like western/US culture) you have liberal culture and conservative culture and 2 cultures cant coexist within the same borders. One have to take over. No nation has a single culture except maybe China and other Asian nations. Western culture doesn‘t even exist. It‘s too fractured for that. Which is why you can have different experiences in Italy, the UK, France, US etc. In terms of anthropology, when it has its own language, it‘s something of their own. The point is for them to be able to coexist because it‘d be pretty boring if we only had one. Of course they do. There is French culture, British culture, US culture. They are all different with different traditions, history even effing food. If you think different cultures can coexist within the same borders, then you are mistaken. Ask native Americans, ask St Bartholomew/ du Plessis how did that work out in France, check what papist is, or what happened in Granada. This looks like a post by someone who has never been to France. Or Britain, despite supposedly living there. Despite the French monarchy's best efforts to unite French regions with a single language, centralise everything in Paris, and multiple religious genocides, there's still a significant difference between regions. The British government was never as zealous in its fervour to create homogeneity, and that's why the Welsh still speak Welsh, and the Scottish Scottish. Two different Gaelic languages that have nothing at all to do with English. The Scots wear the fact that they aren't English as a badge of pride. Even within England, the north and the south have large differences and a language such that if they each speak their own dialect they can barely understand each other. The linguistic difference between York and Portsmouth is probably larger than between any two US states. Re France: Yes there are differences between regions, yet this are variances within the same culture. Picardian may be Picardian but he is also still French. The way it works is that may maintain certain traditions, but certain values are non negotiable. That why Henry de Navarre could become king but... "Paris is well worth a Mass" Re Britain: Really thats your example? So we have island with (for simplification) 3 kingdoms, which united. It just so happens that main legislative body is in Westminster and decides what other 2 can decide by themselves. During Brexit referendum Scotland voted to remain, how did that work out? Thats the subdue part. See English were vey good at this sort of thing, thats why they were empire. It is much cheaper to allow certain traditions to remain intact, and just draw the lines which you are not allowed to cross. Whats within this lines, over time, will define culture. Scotland voted to remain within the UK during the Scottish independence referendum. Remaining in the UK entailed foreign policy being dictated by Westminster. Brexit definitely falls within the realm of foreign policy. You should've stopped posting about the UK after your Guy Fawkes' Night blunder. EDIT: British culture is so resolutely incapable of adopting or coexisting with other cultures that our national dish is a curry...  Show nested quote +On September 17 2025 18:16 Razyda wrote:
and just draw the lines which you are not allowed to cross.
You do realise you are agreeing with me? But yeah thats not a discussion for US Pol.
I'm not agreeing with you at all.
You said that the English subjugate the Scottish.
If that was true then there wouldn't have been an Independence referendum, there wouldn't be a devolved parliament, Scotland wouldn't have a number of MPs proportional to its population, and so on and so forth.
The Scottish people voted to remain within the UK, which means they voted to continue collective decision making on foreign policy at Westminster. That isn't subjugation, that's cooperation.
Look to your own country's history and you'll see what true subjugation looks like.
|
On September 17 2025 21:16 MJG wrote:From the US thread because it doesn't belong there: Show nested quote +On September 17 2025 20:49 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 20:34 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 20:06 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 19:29 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 19:17 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 18:28 MJG wrote:
dictated by Westminster. Thank you. ??? Westminster has dozens of Scottish MPs and Lords. It's not an English parliament. Please stop talking about the UK lmao. EDIT: And even if it was an English parliament, Scotland had an independence referendum were they voted to remain within the UK. That was an agreement that foreign policy decisions would be taken by Westminster. It is 57 out of 650. I am not even sure what you arguing. Fact is England runs UK. You may type till your fingers start bleeding, but it wont change this. You may explain why, you may rationalise it, but it wont change the fact itself. Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have devolved parliaments that handle many domestic decisions independently, so the idea that England runs the UK is categorically false. You're a clown lmao. EDIT: I'll stop derailing the US Politics thread now lol. Dude FFS: On September 17 2025 20:34 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 20:06 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 19:29 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 19:17 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 18:28 MJG wrote:
dictated by Westminster. Thank you. ??? Westminster has dozens of Scottish MPs and Lords. It's not an English parliament. Please stop talking about the UK lmao. EDIT: And even if it was an English parliament, Scotland had an independence referendum were they voted to remain within the UK. That was an agreement that foreign policy decisions would be taken by Westminster. It is 57 out of 650. I am not even sure what you arguing. Fact is England runs UK. You may type till your fingers start bleeding, but it wont change this. You may explain why, you may rationalise it, but it wont change the fact itself. Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have devolved parliaments that handle many domestic decisions independently, so the idea that England runs the UK is categorically false. You're a clown lmao. EDIT: I'll stop derailing the US Politics thread now lol. On September 17 2025 19:29 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 19:17 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 18:28 MJG wrote:
dictated by Westminster. Thank you. ??? Westminster has dozens of Scottish MPs and Lords. It's not an English parliament. Please stop talking about the UK lmao. EDIT: And even if it was an English parliament, Scotland had an independence referendum were they voted to remain within the UK. That was an agreement that foreign policy decisions would be taken by Westminster. On September 17 2025 18:28 MJG wrote:On September 17 2025 18:16 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 14:14 Acrofales wrote:On September 17 2025 10:33 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 10:23 Vivax wrote:On September 17 2025 09:50 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 05:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
When people think "Civil War", are they basically imagining the far-right going to war to keep the West Coast in the Union, rural vs urban wars around the country, North vs South, or what?
I don't know that enough of the US populace gives enough of a shit for an actual civil war.
I imagine more of a general "balkanization" with some conflicts internally (from oppressed groups) and between regions over resources and such. See you dont have single culture any more (like western/US culture) you have liberal culture and conservative culture and 2 cultures cant coexist within the same borders. One have to take over. No nation has a single culture except maybe China and other Asian nations. Western culture doesn‘t even exist. It‘s too fractured for that. Which is why you can have different experiences in Italy, the UK, France, US etc. In terms of anthropology, when it has its own language, it‘s something of their own. The point is for them to be able to coexist because it‘d be pretty boring if we only had one. Of course they do. There is French culture, British culture, US culture. They are all different with different traditions, history even effing food. If you think different cultures can coexist within the same borders, then you are mistaken. Ask native Americans, ask St Bartholomew/ du Plessis how did that work out in France, check what papist is, or what happened in Granada. This looks like a post by someone who has never been to France. Or Britain, despite supposedly living there. Despite the French monarchy's best efforts to unite French regions with a single language, centralise everything in Paris, and multiple religious genocides, there's still a significant difference between regions. The British government was never as zealous in its fervour to create homogeneity, and that's why the Welsh still speak Welsh, and the Scottish Scottish. Two different Gaelic languages that have nothing at all to do with English. The Scots wear the fact that they aren't English as a badge of pride. Even within England, the north and the south have large differences and a language such that if they each speak their own dialect they can barely understand each other. The linguistic difference between York and Portsmouth is probably larger than between any two US states. Re France: Yes there are differences between regions, yet this are variances within the same culture. Picardian may be Picardian but he is also still French. The way it works is that may maintain certain traditions, but certain values are non negotiable. That why Henry de Navarre could become king but... "Paris is well worth a Mass" Re Britain: Really thats your example? So we have island with (for simplification) 3 kingdoms, which united. It just so happens that main legislative body is in Westminster and decides what other 2 can decide by themselves. During Brexit referendum Scotland voted to remain, how did that work out? Thats the subdue part. See English were vey good at this sort of thing, thats why they were empire. It is much cheaper to allow certain traditions to remain intact, and just draw the lines which you are not allowed to cross. Whats within this lines, over time, will define culture. Scotland voted to remain within the UK during the Scottish independence referendum. Remaining in the UK entailed foreign policy being dictated by Westminster. Brexit definitely falls within the realm of foreign policy. You should've stopped posting about the UK after your Guy Fawkes' Night blunder. EDIT: British culture is so resolutely incapable of adopting or coexisting with other cultures that our national dish is a curry... On September 17 2025 18:16 Razyda wrote:
and just draw the lines which you are not allowed to cross.
You do realise you are agreeing with me? But yeah thats not a discussion for US Pol. I'm not agreeing with you at all. You said that the English subjugate the Scottish. If that was true then there wouldn't have been an Independence referendum, there wouldn't be a devolved parliament, Scotland wouldn't have a number of MPs proportional to its population, and so on and so forth. The Scottish people voted to remain within the UK, which means they voted to continue collective decision making on foreign policy at Westminster. That isn't subjugation, that's cooperation. Look to your own country's history and you'll see what true subjugation looks like.
Do you know what independence is?
Also devolution:
"Devolution differs from federalism in that the devolved powers of the subnational authority may be temporary and are reversible, ultimately residing with the central government. Thus, the state remains de jure unitary"
Unitary state:
"The United Kingdom is an example of a unitary state. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have a degree of autonomous devolved power, but such power is delegated by the Parliament of the United Kingdom, which may enact laws unilaterally altering or abolishing devolution"
"As of the 2024 election there are 543 constituencies in England, 32 in Wales, 57 in Scotland and 18 in Northern Ireland."
Do the numbers, I am done with the topic.
|
The numbers are proportional to the populations involved.
Each nation is proportionally represented within Westminster.
Do you know what subjugation is?
Subjugation would mean no representation, and certainly no devolution or independence referendum.
|
United States43240 Posts
Keep in mind when Razyda talks about the UK that he famously stated that Brits are weird because every year we have a celebration to honour Guy Falkes even though he tried to blow up Parliament. His knowledge of Britain mostly comes from having watched V for Vendetta once.
|
United States43240 Posts
On September 17 2025 22:42 MJG wrote:
The numbers are proportional to the populations involved.
Each nation is proportionally represented within Westminster.
Do you know what subjugation is?
Subjugation would mean no representation, and certainly no devolution or independence referendum.
Scottish parliamentary districts are famously smaller leading to Scotland being over represented in Westminster relative to its population. It’s called the West Lothian question. Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. English MPs cannot vote in Holyrood on Scottish matters, Scottish MPs are entitled to vote in Westminster on English matters. A classic example of this from our childhood would be Labour pushing through university top up fees in England. The Labour whip forced it through by a margin of 5 votes, of which 72 came from Scotland which was exempted from the fees. English MPs resoundingly defeated the bill and yet it became the law of England anyway.
|
The % of Scottish MPs vs. % of Scottish people in the UK is similar enough that it doesn't bother me. It's within the margin of error that I'd consider proportional. Unless I've made an error in my calculations, which is definitely possible because I only looked it up very quickly, I think it's something like 9% vs. 8% at the moment.
The fact that there isn't an English parliament for issues that only involve England is definitely an issue, but there isn't any political will to do anything about it. Which is strange because the Conservatives (or "the right" generally) would benefit as Scotland always leans more to "the left" than England does, as demonstrated in your example.
Anyway, we can both agree that Razyda doesn't know what they're talking about.
|
On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly.
You are not making argument you think you making.
K, now I am done with the topic.
|
Northern Ireland26044 Posts
On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic.
What is your argument?
|
On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument?
Initially his argument was that only homogeneous cultures can form successful nations. That was thoroughly destroyed, so he moved on to something about the English subjugating the Scots (in particular, probably also the Welsh and Irish). If this were 1745 or so he might have a point, but it isn't, so that argument also got debunked. So who knows what he's pivoting to now.
|
On September 19 2025 01:47 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Initially his argument was that only homogeneous cultures can form successful nations. That was thoroughly destroyed, so he moved on to something about the English subjugating the Scots (in particular, probably also the Welsh and Irish). If this were 1745 or so he might have a point, but it isn't, so that argument also got debunked. So who knows what he's pivoting to now.
Lol that was literally not my argument, and my argument wasnt destroyed in any way.
On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument?
Whole UK thing came up as an example in US politics thread (if thats the part you asking about, it starts with post #104697 - not retyping all of that) , ironically it was Acrofales who brought it up.
|
Northern Ireland26044 Posts
On September 19 2025 10:27 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2025 01:47 Acrofales wrote:On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Initially his argument was that only homogeneous cultures can form successful nations. That was thoroughly destroyed, so he moved on to something about the English subjugating the Scots (in particular, probably also the Welsh and Irish). If this were 1745 or so he might have a point, but it isn't, so that argument also got debunked. So who knows what he's pivoting to now. Lol that was literally not my argument, and my argument wasnt destroyed in any way. Show nested quote +On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Whole UK thing came up as an example in US politics thread (if thats the part you asking about, it starts with post #104697 - not retyping all of that) , ironically it was Acrofales who brought it up.
What is your argument?
I’ve read that thread and I’m not particularly sure
|
On September 19 2025 10:30 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2025 10:27 Razyda wrote:On September 19 2025 01:47 Acrofales wrote:On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Initially his argument was that only homogeneous cultures can form successful nations. That was thoroughly destroyed, so he moved on to something about the English subjugating the Scots (in particular, probably also the Welsh and Irish). If this were 1745 or so he might have a point, but it isn't, so that argument also got debunked. So who knows what he's pivoting to now. Lol that was literally not my argument, and my argument wasnt destroyed in any way. On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Whole UK thing came up as an example in US politics thread (if thats the part you asking about, it starts with post #104697 - not retyping all of that) , ironically it was Acrofales who brought it up. What is your argument? I’ve read that thread and I’m not particularly sure
That in US there are pretty much 2 different cultures now (conservative/liberal) and one has to take over, because 2 separate cultures cannot exist within the same borders.
|
Which is still wrong because the US is an incredibly large country. If we paint with a wide brush, West coast vs East coast is a big example of, say, two Democratic voting regions of the country that are wildly different in beliefs, culture, ethnic and religious makeup, etc.
Same deal with countries that people might see as homogeneous like China. It’s such a large country that there are multiple parts where people speak languages different than what people may consider to be the official language.
|
On September 19 2025 11:12 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2025 10:30 WombaT wrote:On September 19 2025 10:27 Razyda wrote:On September 19 2025 01:47 Acrofales wrote:On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Initially his argument was that only homogeneous cultures can form successful nations. That was thoroughly destroyed, so he moved on to something about the English subjugating the Scots (in particular, probably also the Welsh and Irish). If this were 1745 or so he might have a point, but it isn't, so that argument also got debunked. So who knows what he's pivoting to now. Lol that was literally not my argument, and my argument wasnt destroyed in any way. On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Whole UK thing came up as an example in US politics thread (if thats the part you asking about, it starts with post #104697 - not retyping all of that) , ironically it was Acrofales who brought it up. What is your argument? I’ve read that thread and I’m not particularly sure That in US there are pretty much 2 different cultures now (conservative/liberal) and one has to take over, because 2 separate cultures cannot exist within the same borders.
Almost no part of that argument works.
You'd have to support your claim that the US is pretty much 2 different cultures now, which as I mentioned is exceptionally difficult if you're not in the US.
You'd have to support your claim that one has to take over, because what?
You'd have to define "two separate cultures cannot exist within the same borders" because it very obviously doesn't work with common understandings of the words 'culture' and 'borders'.
It seems like a nonsensical argument.
|
On September 19 2025 11:12 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2025 10:30 WombaT wrote:On September 19 2025 10:27 Razyda wrote:On September 19 2025 01:47 Acrofales wrote:On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Initially his argument was that only homogeneous cultures can form successful nations. That was thoroughly destroyed, so he moved on to something about the English subjugating the Scots (in particular, probably also the Welsh and Irish). If this were 1745 or so he might have a point, but it isn't, so that argument also got debunked. So who knows what he's pivoting to now. Lol that was literally not my argument, and my argument wasnt destroyed in any way. On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Whole UK thing came up as an example in US politics thread (if thats the part you asking about, it starts with post #104697 - not retyping all of that) , ironically it was Acrofales who brought it up. What is your argument? I’ve read that thread and I’m not particularly sure That in US there are pretty much 2 different cultures now (conservative/liberal) and one has to take over, because 2 separate cultures cannot exist within the same borders.
Papau New Guinea has 700 tribes within its borders.
They live peacefully together for the most part, happy with their different cultures, happy living within the same borders.
|
On September 19 2025 11:12 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2025 10:30 WombaT wrote:On September 19 2025 10:27 Razyda wrote:On September 19 2025 01:47 Acrofales wrote:On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Initially his argument was that only homogeneous cultures can form successful nations. That was thoroughly destroyed, so he moved on to something about the English subjugating the Scots (in particular, probably also the Welsh and Irish). If this were 1745 or so he might have a point, but it isn't, so that argument also got debunked. So who knows what he's pivoting to now. Lol that was literally not my argument, and my argument wasnt destroyed in any way. On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Whole UK thing came up as an example in US politics thread (if thats the part you asking about, it starts with post #104697 - not retyping all of that) , ironically it was Acrofales who brought it up. What is your argument? I’ve read that thread and I’m not particularly sure That in US there are pretty much 2 different cultures now (conservative/liberal) and one has to take over, because 2 separate cultures cannot exist within the same borders.
On September 19 2025 10:27 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2025 01:47 Acrofales wrote:On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Initially his argument was that only homogeneous cultures can form successful nations. That was thoroughly destroyed, so he moved on to something about the English subjugating the Scots (in particular, probably also the Welsh and Irish). If this were 1745 or so he might have a point, but it isn't, so that argument also got debunked. So who knows what he's pivoting to now. Lol that was literally not my argument, and my argument wasnt destroyed in any way. Show nested quote +On September 18 2025 22:00 WombaT wrote:On September 18 2025 21:47 Razyda wrote:On September 17 2025 23:34 KwarK wrote:
Additionally England is the only constituent member of the UK that lacks its own national assembly. You are not making argument you think you making. K, now I am done with the topic. What is your argument? Whole UK thing came up as an example in US politics thread (if thats the part you asking about, it starts with post #104697 - not retyping all of that) , ironically it was Acrofales who brought it up.
Huh? How is this any different from my rephrasing that as "only homogeneous cultures can form successful nations"? Sure, it's the contraposition that the US being non-homogeneous (anymore) cannot exist as a nation. But I was just giving the UK as an example of a clearly non-homogeneous culture that has been successful for a few hundred years. So clearly it's possible (and literally everywhere I go, I see countries with multiple different cultures coexisting. It isn't always easy, but mostly people realize that they're better off compromising and continuing together than splitting up. Even Belgium isn't actually interested in breaking apart into Flanders, Wallonia and East Belgium, despite all kinds of laws that promote strict segregation among regions rather than encourage unity!
Unless your argument was that this is a unique, exceptional, US phenomenon. In which case I still think it's bollocks, but at least you've effectively avoided using other countries as counterexamples. You do gain the additional baggage of arguing why the US is so exceptional in this aspect. And fleetfeet already gave a bunch of objections to the exceptional US thesis as well.
|
Using Belgium as an example is quite ironic because the 2 largest Flemish parties want us to break up and at least one of them wants us to join The Netherlands.
We have an extremely unhealthy political climate where no one really gets along which results in out governments literally not forming for months on end after an election after every single election. It's ridiculously frustrating.
|
On September 19 2025 17:52 Uldridge wrote:
Using Belgium as an example is quite ironic because the 2 largest Flemish parties want us to break up and at least one of them wants us to join The Netherlands.
We have an extremely unhealthy political climate where no one really gets along which results in out governments literally not forming for months on end after an election after every single election. It's ridiculously frustrating.
Sure. I know enough about Belgium. There's a separatist movement. It is a large minority. It's similar to Catalonia, or for that matter, Scotland. There has been a strong separatist movement in Flanders for at least 30 years now. Yet Belgium still exists. I mentioned it precisely because it still exists. Belgium gained its independence roughly 200 years ago and has been mostly disfunctional ever since. Yet, when push comes to shove, they hold together.
Also, I find it extremely ironic that there is a Flemish party that wants to swap Brussels for The Hague again, almost 200 years after the separation. I'd almost argue that that makes Razyda's point even weaker. Part of the separatists in Belgium don't want independence. They just want to align according to language rather than religion (the main reason for the split in 1830): there are many different aspects of culture and no area is truly homogeneous in the first place. Even the Netherlands has a Friesian separatist movement, and Limburg complains about being ignored as well. Even Luxemburg (as tiny as it gets) has 3 different languages, and a significant urban-rural divide (but no separatists as far as I know of).
I am right now on vacation in South Tyrol, a region of Veneto that Italy won from the Austro-Hungarian empire in WW1. You hop from one valley to the next and the leading language changes from Italian to German to Ladino. The religion jumps from Catholic to Protestant. The food is now mostly fused, but there's knödeln and kaiserschmarrn sitting next to ravioli and pizza. There's a beer culture as in Austria, and a wine culture as in the rest of Italy. And yes, Veneto has a strong independence movement, but that's about Venice, which is yet again completely different. I don't see how Razyda's logic would work here at all.
|
Zurich15355 Posts
Switzerland checking in with multiple cultures and subcultures within it's borders.
Zürich Swiss Germans have little on common even with Wallis Swiss Germans other than language (barely, it's also pretty distinct). Never mind with Ticino or La Romandie.
|
I've been thinking about multiculturalism and scaling lately. Perhaps it's doable up to a few dozen million people, but starts to fall apart when it's reaching 100+ millions of people as the sheer size of the society you're experiencing and echochambering causes for a very frictionless route to polarization.
It might very well be that in 200 years we look back at the US in 2020 era as a nation that didn't install enough guardrails to curtail this phenomenon which ultimately caused its downfall. We'll see how the West copes with its hedonistic nature in the forseeable future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
