|
Crowsbeak posted:
Greek and Turkish populations were both resettled back to their "native" countries as a result of the Greco-Turkish war. Not that there probably wasn't violence as well, but it was a part of the peace deal.
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 07:26 |
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:
There was mutual ethnic cleansing as part of the Treaty of Lausanne. While ethnic cleansing might have a gotten a bad name in the latter half in the 20th century, the architect of the deal actually won the Nobel Peace Prize for the plan.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
esquilax posted:There was mutual ethnic cleansing as part of the Treaty of Lausanne. While ethnic cleansing might have a gotten a bad name in the latter half in the 20th century, the architect of the deal actually won the Nobel Peace Prize for the plan. Yeah, it wasn't just that. Over a million Muslim Europeans got displaced permanently in the war of 1878. Not to mention the thousands displaced in the Greek War of Independence. Then we have the expulsions fallowing the Balkans wars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 05:21
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:EDIT: Another fun fact: while under illegal South African rule (depicted in your image, since Namibia is labeled South-West Africa with a date of 1986), Namibia had its own Bantustans: Skeleton Coast 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:Stuff like this reminds me of Bir Tawil, which may be my favorite place in the world due to the politics of it: What I really like is how the Bir Tawil/Hala'ib Triangle issue really brings the petty, playground nature of international politics to the fore. For those who don't know, because both lay claim to Hala'ib, both are also waiting for the other to claim Bir Tawil. The reason is that if either claims Bir Tawil, the other will immediately turn around and go "Aha! If you claim Bir Tawil that means we get Hala'ib! Nya-nya! It's only fair after all!" Bir Tawil is far, far poorer than the Hala'ib Triangle, which is why that deal is obviously one neither want to be on the wrong side of. So they sit there waiting for the other to make a move, so they can thumb their noses at them and grab the good part.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:
Except the ethnic cleansing in the 20s involved three times more people on the Turkish side, not to mention Turkey's policies against Armenians and Assyrians. Not trying to justify anything the Greeks did but I don't think all sides are equal. also: tables.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Except the ethnic cleansing in the 20s involved three times more people on the Turkish side, not to mention Turkey's policies against Armenians and Assyrians. Not trying to justify anything the Greeks did but I don't think all sides are equal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 06:33
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:You can say what the Greeks did was evil without saying what the Turks did was okay. Morality is not zero-sum. I'm not trying to suggest otherwise, but I don't think we should lose sight of the raw numbers involved.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 07:47
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Except the ethnic cleansing in the 20s involved three times more people on the Turkish side, not to mention Turkey's policies against Armenians and Assyrians. Not trying to justify anything the Greeks did but I don't think all sides are equal. And more than a million Muslims got forced out o Bulgaria in 1878. Wow its like how I said that the Balkans consisted of a bunch of nations willing to do anything to keep themselves linguistically and religiously pure. Really if your going to go at the turks why not go at all of them for being horrible? Also while I think turkey should apologize for the genocide against the Armenians. However the situation of the Greeks it has no reason to. Speaking of the Armenians. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 08:28
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:The reason is that if either claims Bir Tawil, the other will immediately turn around and go "Aha! If you claim Bir Tawil that means we get Hala'ib! Nya-nya! It's only fair after all!" khwarezm posted:Except the ethnic cleansing in the 20s involved three times more people on the Turkish side, not to mention Turkey's policies against Armenians and Assyrians. Not trying to justify anything the Greeks did but I don't think all sides are equal. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 08:33
|
|
|
On the other hand, it's not like these Muslims just happened to live there, they were settled there after the Ottomans conquered it. And really, just look at the current situation in the Ukraine. I don't know how peacefuly Turkey and Greece could have coexisted without "swapping" their populations so that they are more homogeneous. The Balkan wars show pretty clearly how fast things can go bad if you have different religious groups in one country, and nearly every day there is violence between Christians and Muslims in Africa.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 08:49
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I thought it wasn't because of it being fair, but because claiming Bir Tawil requires accepting the version of the border which puts Hala'ib in the other country. Sudan taking Bir Tawil means they've accepted the original border, while Egypt taking it means they've accepted the revised borders. Yeah, that's why. Torrannor posted:On the other hand, it's not like these Muslims just happened to live there, they were settled there after the Ottomans conquered it. That, or people just converted. quote:And really, just look at the current situation in the Ukraine. I don't know how peacefuly Turkey and Greece could have coexisted without "swapping" their populations so that they are more homogeneous. The Balkan wars show pretty clearly how fast things can go bad if you have different religious groups in one country, and nearly every day there is violence between Christians and Muslims in Africa. That's bullshit though. Based on what we know of the world, it's entirely possible to build a poly-ethnic and even poly-religious state. It just requires that both sides agree that they won't make a big deal out of it. The real problem is that the people of both sides want to subdue the other for reasons of national pride. PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 08:55 on Apr 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 08:51
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:That, or people just converted.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 08:57
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:
History shows it either requires so much autonomy they might be considered an independent country anyway, or an iron fist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 08:59
|
|
|
Riso posted:Kosovo was an illegal vote, with a questionable quick recognition by third parties, while under the military "protection" of said third parties. Speaking of Kosovo...  International recognition as of Lesotho's recognition in February 2014. Spain's opposition to recognition is obvious; they don't want to give the uppity Catalans any ideas, after all. They very much love territorial integrity (unless it's to regarding Melilla or Cueta).
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 09:01
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:That's bullshit though. Based on what we know of the world, it's entirely possible to build a poly-ethnic and even poly-religious state. It just requires that both sides agree that they won't make a big deal out of it. The real problem is that the people of both sides want to subdue the other for reasons of national pride. I don't understand. It can work if they don't make a big deal about it, but neither side was ready to do that so it obviously would have failed? And how many countries are there which are poly-religious and stable? And I mean really poly-religious, not just following different sects of the same religion, or very closely related religions (Buddhism/Hinduism). Even Malaysia seems to deteriorate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 09:14
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Yeah, a lot of the people expelled were ethnic Greeks (in the case of Greece) who just happened to have ancestors who had converted at some point. At least as far as I'm aware. And exactly who counts as an ethnic Turk and Greek seems to have been based mostly on religious affiliation anyway. I know there's a bunch of Greek speakers in the Trabzon region who weren't expelled in 1920 specifically because they were Muslim, and I'm sure there's many cases on both sides of the border. Riso posted:History shows it either requires so much autonomy they might be considered an independent country anyway, or an iron fist. Yeah, there's plenty of autonomy involved, but the point is that people by and large aren't killing each other. Torrannor posted:I don't understand. It can work if they don't make a big deal about it, but neither side was ready to do that so it obviously would have failed? And how many countries are there which are poly-religious and stable? And I mean really poly-religious, not just following different sects of the same religion, or very closely related religions (Buddhism/Hinduism). Even Malaysia seems to deteriorate. It's difficult sure, but it just seems clear that a multi-ethnic or multi-religious state isn't doomed to inevitable failure. As for truly multi-religious states, it's true there aren't many, but that's hardly surprising given the evolution of most nation states. The one example that comes to mind is Singapore, which is all over the damned place faith wise. Granted that's something of a special case since it's tiny and basically a police state, but that's proof that it can work. And I wouldn't say it's fair to dismiss variations among the Christian sects either; we spent centuries trying to kill each other over that stuff, but we've managed to move past it. PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 09:22 on Apr 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 09:16
|
|
|
All this talk about ethnic cleansing in Greece, and nobody's mentioned Thessaloniki? Map showing areas of Thessaloniki destroyed in the Great Fire of 1917 Before the Great Fire, Thessaloniki was a really diverse city with a Jewish plurality and a large Turkish population. The fire burned down most of the Jewish houses, and most of them ended up emigrating to other places in Europe, America or Palestine. After the end of the war, most of the Turks were expelled during the population transfers, and a bunch of Greeks expelled by the Turks moved in. What was left of the Jewish population obviously did not fare well under the Nazi occupation.  Ethnic composition of the population of Thessaloniki, 1500-1950
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 09:20
|
|
|
The makers of first strike seem to side with Sudan, to what little extent the game's borders resemble reality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 09:24
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:And exactly who counts as an ethnic Turk and Greek seems to have been based mostly on religious affiliation anyway. I know there's a bunch of Greek speakers in the Trabzon region who weren't expelled in 1920 specifically because they were Muslim, and I'm sure there's many cases on both sides of the border.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 09:24
|
|
|
Javid posted:The makers of first strike seem to side with Sudan, to what little extent the game's borders resemble reality. Sudan actually immediately recognized South Sudanese independence, even though there's some disputed territory. e: you were talking about the border with Egypt, my mistake. Phlegmish fucked around with this message at 11:28 on Apr 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 09:30
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:And I wouldn't say it's fair to dismiss variations among the Christian sects either; we spent centuries trying to kill each other over that stuff, but we've managed to move past it. How many Christian states exist where one sect doesn't have a clear majority? On the top of my head I have the UK, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Germany in Europe, and the usual suspects of the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. And even in the UK, the Anglican Church has a clear majority and I only include them because of Scotland and especially Northern Ireland, and we had Christian on Christian violence less than a generation ago. Am I missing states?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 10:12
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Speaking of Kosovo... This map is perfect for a game of "guess the border and territory disputes".
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 10:44
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:The one example that comes to mind is Singapore, which is all over the damned place faith wise. Granted that's something of a special case since it's tiny and basically a police state, but that's proof that it can work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 10:52
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:And more than a million Muslims got forced out o Bulgaria in 1878. Wow its like how I said that the Balkans consisted of a bunch of nations willing to do anything to keep themselves linguistically and religiously pure. Really if your going to go at the turks why not go at all of them for being horrible? Also while I think turkey should apologize for the genocide against the Armenians. However the situation of the Greeks it has no reason to. Speaking of the Armenians. Why did Turks genocide Armenians, but didn't kill other non-Turks in the same area?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 11:14
|
|
|
^^Edit: Because only Armenians were numerous enough to prevent a Turkish majority in these regions?ulvir posted:This map is perfect for a game of "guess the border and territory disputes". But that cannot be the reason for all those states that didn't recognize Kosovo. Why would North Korea not recognize it but SK did? They had other reasons. And why are Slovakia and Belarus not recognizing it? Why does Turkey, when they have Kurds that would love to declare an independent Kurdistan?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 11:15
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Why did Turks genocide Armenians, but didn't kill other non-Turks in the same area? Well, the Ottoman authorities also carried out brutal ethnic cleansing campaigns against Assyrians (which has limited recognition as a genocide) and Greeks (which is generally recognized as a genocide) in the same time period. Kurdish tribal forces where largely aligned with Ottoman interests at the time, Kurdish ethno-nationalism was still in it's infancy and had limited support outside of Alevi groups (who had experienced long running discrimination on religious grounds) and the Zaza. The majority of Kurds where Sunni and supported the Ottoman Caliphate, Kurdish nationalism really didn't begin to blossom until the abolishment of the caliphate and Ataturk's turkification reforms.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 12:50
|
|
|
Quite a few Kurds were actually involved in the Armenian genocide, as perpetrators that is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 14:18
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:And more than a million Muslims got forced out o Bulgaria in 1878. Wow its like how I said that the Balkans consisted of a bunch of nations willing to do anything to keep themselves linguistically and religiously pure. Really if your going to go at the turks why not go at all of them for being horrible? I'm having trouble finding figures as high as a million people for the 1878 expulsions and, wow, its almost like it was chiefly carried out by Bulgarians and Russians rather than Greeks or Armenians which was the original topic of discussion! quote:Also while I think turkey should apologize for the genocide against the Armenians. However the situation of the Greeks it has no reason to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
Riso posted:History shows it either requires so much autonomy they might be considered an independent country anyway, or an iron fist. This is straight nonsense. The single clearest counterpoint is the Roman Empire which was officially bilingual, in the sense that officials did and were expected to speak two languages, and very multicultural for virtually its entire history. And, with the notable exception of the Jews, they hardly adopted an "iron fist" with respect to cultural minorities. Living in Toronto, multicultural and multilingual states seem perfectly functional to me. In Canada history shows we've been pretty successfully running a bi-cultural, bi-linguistic and bi-religious state for over a 150 years. And, since 1982 multiculturalism (as opposed to biculturalism) has been constitutionally entrenched. Sometimes Quebec is a bit nuts about protecting the French language and culture, but their government just lost an election on efforts to push back multiculturalism. Also, historically speaking, I think the idea of monocultural, monoreligious states is really an artifact of nineteenth century European ideology, now exported worldwide. Before the nineteenth century it was probably the norm everywhere in the world for people in one country to speak many different languages and practice multiple religions. The Austrian and Turkish empires, as European examples, particularly point to that. They collapsed, but they successfully did not collapse for literally hundreds of years, which seriously challenges the thesis that multiethnic states are unstable. In most European countries it wasn't until their governments "educated" their "dialects" out of them that people adopted a single, standardized language. This process is ongoing in China as we speak. Gleri fucked around with this message at 15:33 on Apr 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I thought it wasn't because of it being fair, but because claiming Bir Tawil requires accepting the version of the border which puts Hala'ib in the other country. Sudan taking Bir Tawil means they've accepted the original border, while Egypt taking it means they've accepted the revised borders. That's what Mister Adequate was saying. If Egypt says, "ok fine, we'll take Bir Tawil," then Sudan can say that Egypt is respecting the second set of borders which gives Sudan Hala'ib. The opposite applies, too. So they have a standoff over Hala'ib with Bir Tawil as a proxy. And I decided to look up a map of Egypt, they seem to be split on flat border vs. Sudan having Hala'ib. Some maps include both. The maps that have a flat border seem to be associated with Egyptian interests (Ancient Egyptian stuff, tourist maps), so that's not surprising.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:06
|
|
|
Gleri posted:Living in Toronto, multicultural and multilingual states seem perfectly functional to me. In Canada history shows we've been pretty successfully running a bi-cultural, bi-linguistic and bi-religious* state for over a 150 years. And, since 1982 multiculturalism (as opposed to biculturalism) has been constitutionally entrenched. Sometimes Quebec is a bit nuts about protecting the French language and culture, but their government just lost an election on efforts to push back multiculturalism. Gleri posted:Also, historically speaking, I think the idea of monocultural, monoreligious states is really an artifact of nineteenth century European ideology, now exported worldwide. Before the nineteenth century it was probably the norm everywhere in the world for people in one country to speak many different languages and practice multiple religions. The Austrian and Turkish empires, as European examples, particularly point to that. They collapsed, but they successfully did not collapse for literally hundreds of years, which seriously challenges the thesis that multiethnic states are unstable. In most European countries it wasn't until their governments "educated" their "dialects" out of them that people adopted a single, standardized language. This process is ongoing in China as we speak. Spoeank posted:That's what Mister Adequate was saying. If Egypt says, "ok fine, we'll take Bir Tawil," then Sudan can say that Egypt is respecting the second set of borders which gives Sudan Hala'ib. The opposite applies, too. So they have a standoff over Hala'ib with Bir Tawil as a proxy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I reacted to the last "It's only fair after all!" bit, which doesn't sound like a legal argument to me, but some sort of morality based compromise. Oh yea, I can see how it could be read that way. I assumed that it was his way of putting what I said. Not like, "well you get Bir Tawil, so we get Hala'ib, otherwise I'm telling mom you can't share!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
Gleri posted:This is straight nonsense. The single clearest counterpoint is the Roman Empire which was officially bilingual, in the sense that officials did and were expected to speak two languages, and very multicultural for virtually its entire history. And, with the notable exception of the Jews, they hardly adopted an "iron fist" with respect to cultural minorities. He's a fascist, fyi. Don't waste your time on him.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:26
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:That's what Mister Adequate was saying. If Egypt says, "ok fine, we'll take Bir Tawil," then Sudan can say that Egypt is respecting the second set of borders which gives Sudan Hala'ib. The opposite applies, too. So they have a standoff over Hala'ib with Bir Tawil as a proxy. Fun fact: there's a third nominally-contested territory along the border that was created at the same time: the Wadi Halfa Salient, but neither Sudan nor Egypt care very much about it since it's now largely been drowned by Lake Nasser. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:45
|
|
|
Posted this in the Pictures thread by mistake: How close do you live to a chemical plant?  Looks like I'm doing pretty well:  Half of the ones in my state (so...2 of them...) are just the Ben and Jerry's plants. I imagine the chemical is just a refrigerant. The mid-west really loves its chemicals.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:58
|
|
|
DrBouvenstein posted:Posted this in the Pictures thread by mistake: There are like five yellow dots in my immediate area but all of them are wastewater treatment plants. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
Gleri posted:This is straight nonsense. The single clearest counterpoint is the Roman Empire which was officially bilingual, in the sense that officials did and were expected to speak two languages, and very multicultural for virtually its entire history. And, with the notable exception of the Jews, they hardly adopted an "iron fist" with respect to cultural minorities. But Canada is a bad example. First of course in that these two languages are not native languages but instead imported from Europe, which points to the origin of Canada's success. Insofar as the First Nations can be ignored, the Canadians started with a mostly clean slate. You cannot compare Canada to Greece, which suffered under Turkish/Ottoman rule for centuries, after being conquered only a few decades after Columbus voyages. In a series of holy wars no less. Is it any wonder that there is animosity between the Turks/Muslims and the Greeks/Christians, which far exceeds any ethnic/religious conflicts in Canada? And about the Roman Empire: So the early Christian martyrs who died because they refused to worship the Emperor... that's not a good example, is it? And of course the Roman Empire did split later, along linguistic lines no less.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:I'm having trouble finding figures as high as a million people for the 1878 expulsions and, wow, its almost like it was chiefly carried out by Bulgarians and Russians rather than Greeks or Armenians which was the original topic of discussion! Well when the Greeks do, the Turks should as well. Crowsbeak fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Apr 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 07:26 |
|
|
Torrannor posted:On the other hand, it's not like these Muslims just happened to live there, they were settled there after the Ottomans conquered it. What? Their families had been living there for hundreds of years. That they aren't "native" to the land doesn't mean they have no right to live there. Or should we all be okay with getting expelled from the Americas because it's not where we're "actually" from.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 16:33
|
|