|
Farecoal posted:Bosnia had been under Austrian military administration since 1878, although it wasn't officially annexed until 1908. I should mention that the "United States of Austria" plan was thought up by Archduke Ferdinand. Look this idea that what Balkans needed are cleanly delineated nation states of all the different ethnicities is incredibly delusional. First of all, it's really hard to even determine what the ethnicities are. Southern Slavic ethnicities are mostly based on small linguistic differences and there is a ridiculous number of edge cases because all southern Slavic languages are on a dialect continuum. Secondly, before the cleansing, assimilation, and displacement of the last century there were literally no clean lines you could draw. Since the borders have always been amorphous and shifted between this empire or that people just lived wherever, instead of a uniform beige on that map the southern Slavic region should be a Pollock painting. E: Before you bring up religion I wanna say that the correlation Serb=Orthodox / Croat=Catholic was not all that strict back then. Also it creates even more edge cases. The only thing that even had a chance of working is some kind of state in which they could live together. Italy and Germany only unified in the late 19th century; the cultural/linguistic differences between their regions are far greater than the ones within Yugoslavia and they actually do have a history of intense warfare between them. SaltyJesus fucked around with this message at 22:12 on May 2, 2014 |
#
?
May 2, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 18:08 |
|
|
skipThings posted:For a German Revanchist such as yourself, yes Austrian revanchist AFAIK. There are very few people who are thick-skulled enough to get through the german guilt-indoctrinational education system unscathed AND have the mental capacity for a second language.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
goethe42 posted:Austrian revanchist AFAIK. There are very few people who are thick-skulled enough to get through the german guilt-indoctrinational education system unscathed AND have the mental capacity for a second language. Does Austria have that, though? I remember someone on SA saying once that "Austrians got the completely unasked for and completely undeserved favour of being treated as Hitler's first victim instead of as his first collaborator".
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
SaltyJesus posted:Look this idea that what Balkans needed are cleanly delineated nation states of all the different ethnicities is incredibly delusional. First of all, it's really hard to even determine what the ethnicities are. Southern Slavic ethnicities are mostly based on small linguistic differences and there is a ridiculous number of edge cases because all southern Slavic languages are on a dialect continuum. Secondly, before the cleansing, assimilation, and displacement of the last century there were literally no clean lines you could draw. Since the borders have always been amorphous and shifted between this empire or that people just lived wherever, instead of a uniform beige on that map the southern Slavic region should be a Pollock painting. Um, I agree with you though? I was just correcting you saying that Bosnia was not yet part of the Austrian empire.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:Does Austria have that, though? I remember someone on SA saying once that "Austrians got the completely unasked for and completely undeserved favour of being treated as Hitler's first victim instead of as his first collaborator". Austrians are quick to remind us that Mozart was austrian, but Hitler? Hitler was german.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:Austrians are quick to remind us that Mozart was austrian, but Hitler? Hitler was german. "The greatest trick the Austrians ever played was convincing the world that Hitler was German." --some guy probably
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Um, I agree with you though? I was just correcting you saying that Bosnia was not yet part of the Austrian empire. Yeah, but it was their weird unrecognized vassal-state, not an integral part of the empire. (Like Croatia which has been in a personal union with Hungary since like the 12th century.) It wasn't the most stable annexation either. Only Bosnian Croats were happy with it and even then only initially, nobody else in Bosnia wanted it. The Muslims were pissed they were ruled by Christians now and the Serbs wanted to unite with Serbia. E: I guess what I'm saying is it would've probably ended up being administrated directly for a while. Not a state in its own right or part of the Croatian state. SaltyJesus fucked around with this message at 22:29 on May 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
goethe42 posted:Austrian revanchist AFAIK. There are very few people who are thick-skulled enough to get through the german guilt-indoctrinational education system unscathed AND have the mental capacity for a second language. drat, lots of whiny German rightwingers around today, maybe Germans should have been better at their pompous World Dopmination ambitions like the English and French so the whiny grandchildren of Wehrmacht soldiers could mope around in the German version of the EDL ( like Pro Köln ) without being hassled by the education system too much 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
esquilax posted:Then use China/Tibet as an example. It's likely that President Xi allowing Tibet to secede would be politically unacceptable for him, and that they would "have no choice but to invade". It still doesn't mean that their leaders don't have agency over the situation, and it doesn't mean that we should shrug our shoulders and say "well, they had to do it." Our understanding of our own civil war would inform our national discussions about this hypothetical. Lincoln and the north made a conscious decision to maintain the Union (PS this was a good thing), and were not simply dragged into a war by the seceded south with no ability to peace out. Circumstances can be pressing, but most people, not least people in power, still have a choice to make. I don't think it's a pedantic distinction -- history has a wealth of people who defied the "inevitable" decision and made things far worse than they needed to be. As mentioned, it also enables contemporary leaders to use the same excuse: that they have no choice but to act.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
esquilax posted:vvv Sorry I think there's more to historical analysis than "these are the good guys, these are the bad guys"
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
My point isn't that Lincoln could not have chosen to let the South go. My point is that Lincoln would not have chosen to let the South go. That he would not have made that choice doesn't rob him of agency, it just speaks to what he happened to believe. It's the Gay Black Hitler argument from the MilHist thread.esquilax posted:vvv Sorry I think there's more to historical analysis than "these are the good guys, these are the bad guys" I don't know if history really has good guys, but holy poo poo does it ever have bad guys.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 23:28
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
This is a map of world administrative divisions last updated late 2013.  Cool how the scale is so different by country. Here's the legend:  Also, it would sure be cool if the lower tiers were edited to fainter colors to make this map easier to use. e: In some places, like Russia, the blue divisions aren't necessarily important ones, just broad groupings. Vivian Darkbloom fucked around with this message at 23:40 on May 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Oh god why is that not a .svg?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
skipThings posted:drat, lots of whiny German rightwingers around today, maybe Germans should have been better at their pompous World Dopmination ambitions like the English and French so the whiny grandchildren of Wehrmacht soldiers could mope around in the German version of the EDL ( like Pro Köln ) without being hassled by the education system too much I‘m sorry, I‘m mobile posting, so I tried to keep it short. Didn't work, so I'll spell it out for you: 1. Riso is Austrian (which you know, judging from your past posts in D&D) 2. An average german student enjoys about 6 to 8 weeks of education per schoolyear related to the holocaust/3rd Reich, in basically every class, except for maybe maths, physics and sports, unless the teacher can find a link somewhere even for those. 3. Those few that are thick-skulled/dumb enough to not even be impressed by this effort (i.e. revanchists) usually also lack the intelligence to master a second language, which would enable them to post on Something Awful. 4. Austrians, like Riso, are to my knowledge not educated in this way, because Austria views itself as Hitlers first victim instead of a more than willing participant. 5. Revanchists believe that their country was treated unfairly in the past. German children are thoroughly taught that this is not the case for Germany and only the dumb ones don't get it (and may grow up to be revanchists). Austrians are not educated in the same way and may come to the notion that retribution is warranted for Austria, even if they are intelligent enough to hold their own in an english language political discussion forum. 6.It's loving annoying that the good things Austria and Germany share, like Beethoven and Mozart, are seen as austrian, while the bad things (starting two world wars) are seen as german. Regarding the "right-wingers" in this thread, the only one spouting nationalistic prejudice about other people(s) (germans) is you.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:
I love the great, gaping hole of nothingness in the middle of Australia.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
There's a much bigger version of the map over here.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
Austria (and Bavaria) are widely known as the right wing backwaters of Germany. And Switzerland is even worse, but they're basically mountain hermits who speak unintelligible moon language and never interact with the outside world.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
A political map because words bore lurkers. Very interesting to me because it is doesn't follow the usual red/blue divide. PittTheElder posted:My point isn't that Lincoln could not have chosen to let the South go. My point is that Lincoln would not have chosen to let the South go. That he would not have made that choice doesn't rob him of agency, it just speaks to what he happened to believe. It's the Gay Black Hitler argument from the MilHist thread. A Buttery Pastry posted:There is. It's just that your version of historical analysis seems to be some semantic bullshit about no one being LITERALLY forced to do something, when it's perfectly obvious that people mean something like "one side is responsible for like 99% of the push towards conflict, and the actions of Lincoln/the Allies were both morally correct and an absolutely predictable consequence of the decisions of the Confederates/the Nazis." This is not the same as absolving any leader who claims a conflict was inevitable however, it is a view based in an understanding of the specific topic being discussed. To bring it back to the initial cause of the derail, saying the south started the war before Lincoln came into office implies that he had no role in starting it, and that his (morally correct) actions did not matter in starting the war. I think he deserves the credit for acting to save the union, and saying it began before he came into office robs him of that. I feel a characterization that Lincoln was an actor in starting the civil war (as opposed to a passive observer or inheritor) is more generous to his legacy, more true to fact, and is a more useful/more appropriate lens to view other secession crises. I feel Lincoln's role in starting the war is mostly downplayed due to fear of supporting "War of Northern Aggression" ideas, and that the distinction between Lincoln as a proactive member in starting and continuing the war and Lincoln as a reactive inheritor of the war is not semantic or pedantic. We are doing him and ourselves a disservice when we describe his actions as "consequences" instead of "choices".
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
esquilax posted:A political map because words bore lurkers. Very interesting to me because it is doesn't follow the usual red/blue divide. oh god, ohio's growing
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:Can someone explain to me why Lousiana voted for Lincoln when it was part of the Confederacy? Atlanta: lol
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
Peanut President posted:"The greatest trick the Austrians ever played was convincing the world that Hitler was German." It's like how Andy Murray's nationality changes based on whether he's winning or losing.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Austria (and Bavaria) are widely known as the right wing backwaters of Germany. This is patently false. As an American having spent a year in Austria (mostly Vienna, but a lot of my friends hailed from Upper Austria and Salzburg), I can assure you that HC Strache is derisively referred to as "Little Hitler" among most university-age kids. Protesting is a national pastime. I once met a dude at a bar who hailed from Branau am Inn, and when I asked where that was, he said with a very sullen expression that it was where Hitler was from. All the Austrians I met seemed to be in the "guilt-inducing education" camp.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
esquilax posted:A political map because words bore lurkers. Very interesting to me because it is doesn't follow the usual red/blue divide. One of the interesting things about this is that except for Florida and Texas, these bans were citizen's ballot initiatives. IIRC, Florida's was an executive order. For all the red meat race baiting that state legislatures are prone to doing, college admissions are still a third rail somehow
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
esquilax posted:I agree that Lincoln would never have chosen to let the South go, in the same way that Bush and Congress would never have chosen to leave Afghanistan alone after 9/11. I mostly view those as tautologies. As long as we recognize that wars are subject to choices, and that people's actions actually matter in history, and that we can morally judge people based on their actions, I think we're in agreement. But would any president, in 1861, have allowed half the country to secede? I agree, Lincoln did have to choose an action that resulted in war, but unlike things like the war in Afghanistan or Iraq or anywhere else, any president would likely have responded to southern secession similarly. For that reason I have a very hard time blaming Lincoln, personally, for starting the war, because he had no control over the secession. Anyway, in related Civil War discussion, people have a hard time wrapping their minds around the idea that the war was fought on the Confederate side to preserve slavery, but was not fought on the Union side to end slavery. Neo-confederates will like to say and to cite quotes showing that the goal of the North was to preserve the Union rather than to end slavery, therefore the war can't have been about slavery. But the one conclusion does not follow the other, and to come to it you have to completely ignore the South's actions and motivations at the start of the war. Sucrose fucked around with this message at 05:50 on May 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:oh god, ohio's growing
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
Well, certainly by a year in, abolition was a serious motive if for no other reason than to utterly break the back of the Southern elite as a retribution for secession and the bloodiness of the war. You don't have to be William Lloyd Garrison to sympathize with the ideals of the Emancipation Proclamation if your little Johnny has just come home legless from Antietam: what better way to strike at Jeff Davis and the band of rich, cotton-growing traitors who seceded and caused the war to begin with than by destroying the planter elite's livelihood? Freeing the slaves as a retaliatory/punitive measure was explicitly the war aim from 1862 onwards, well before general abolition of slavery nationwide was embraced.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 06:57
|
|
|
Sucrose posted:But would any president, in 1861, have allowed half the country to secede? Buchanan. 
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 07:42
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:oh god, ohio's growing If state population mattered in national politics Ohio would be way less relevant in the first place.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 07:51
|
|
|
synftw posted:If state population mattered in national politics Ohio would be way less relevant in the first place. Less relevant, yes; still very relevant, considering it's the 7th most populous state.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:Well, certainly by a year in, abolition was a serious motive if for no other reason than to utterly break the back of the Southern elite as a retribution for secession and the bloodiness of the war. You don't have to be William Lloyd Garrison to sympathize with the ideals of the Emancipation Proclamation if your little Johnny has just come home legless from Antietam: what better way to strike at Jeff Davis and the band of rich, cotton-growing traitors who seceded and caused the war to begin with than by destroying the planter elite's livelihood? Freeing the slaves as a retaliatory/punitive measure was explicitly the war aim from 1862 onwards, well before general abolition of slavery nationwide was embraced. The Emancipation Proclamation was really an entirely political move. It had no actual effect other than the political aims that it attempted to achieve. Strikingly and in order not to lose support within the slave-owning border states, the Emancipation Proclamation did not take effect in those states (I think mostly Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri and Kansas), but as you said, was intended as a punitive measure that would only take effect within states that were still in rebel hands.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 08:34
|
|
|
Jedi Knight Luigi posted:This is patently false. As an American having spent a year in Austria (mostly Vienna, but a lot of my friends hailed from Upper Austria and Salzburg), I can assure you that HC Strache is derisively referred to as "Little Hitler" among most university-age kids. Protesting is a national pastime. I once met a dude at a bar who hailed from Branau am Inn, and when I asked where that was, he said with a very sullen expression that it was where Hitler was from. All the Austrians I met seemed to be in the "guilt-inducing education" camp. I'll counter your anecdote and say AARB, All Austrians are Bastards. Youth movements in Europe are very different from youth movements in America. I applaud that, they tend to be much more radically left-wing. Based on my own anecdotal experience, that is because if they get hurt during a protest they can get medical care and have it be a "jugendsuende" as opposed to a crippling debt or bankruptcy that they carry with them their entire life. But when it comes to places like Austria, let's not pit anecdote vs. anecdote. It's a great rhetorical strategy but let's look at Haider. I applaud Austria saying "Go gently caress yourself!" to BZOe. But SPOe is the same sort of shitshow that SPD is. "Youth rebellion" is much more prominent in Europe, I'll agree. Because they get to be. They still grow up to be NIMBY fuckers. Not as bad as Americas, sure. Anecdotally, the German educational system is racist as gently caress and has absurdly obvious structural problems. It also really respects blue collar workers. Every American I knew living in Germany from a blue collar background really, really noticed that difference. But to me, that is all the more reason to loving hate the CD(S)U. Those fuckers aren't as bad as Republicans but if they all got killed tomorrow I'd be 100% OK with that.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 08:46
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Bosnia had been under Austrian military administration since 1878, although it wasn't officially annexed until 1908. I should mention that the "United States of Austria" plan was thought up by Archduke Ferdinand. Funny thing, Bosnia is STILL ruled by an Austrian dictator. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Representative_for_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina Also what really annoys me about the watch is that it was made for left-handed people. quote:the Emancipation Proclamation did not take effect in those states (I think mostly Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri and Kansas), but as you said, was intended as a punitive measure that would only take effect within states that were still in rebel hands. It went only in effect in areas "under rebellion" or something like that, so slave holding states like Maryland and the ones you mentioned were not affected. If there hadn't been the constitutional amendment it would have caused quite a problem because Lincoln actually had no legal right or powers to free any slaves. quote:I applaud Austria saying "Go gently caress yourself!" to BZOe. Only crumbled after their #1 guy died. Not that it mattered there's a replacement. quote:It also really respects blue collar workers. A blue collar education is what we refer to as "learned something smart". quote:But to me, that is all the more reason to loving hate the CD(S)U. Those fuckers aren't as bad as Republicans but if they all got killed tomorrow I'd be 100% OK with that. So much for the famed liberal tolerance.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 08:58
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Anecdotally, the German educational system is racist as gently caress and has absurdly obvious structural problems. Care to expand on this?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 09:42
|
|
|
Riso posted:Also what really annoys me about the watch is that it was made for left-handed people. Wristwatch chat. It looks to me that if you flip the watch over the screw would be on the right, for easy access when wearing on the left arm, which is what right handed people should be doing. Unless the map is upside down on the back I do not understand why you have any objections.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 10:28
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:Outside of Newport and downtown Providence, yes. I'm kinda late here, but  Rhode Island outside of Newport and Providence consists of forests, coastline, and small towns. Rhode Islanders, your state is pretty cool, why do you hate yourselves? Go eat some clams and chill out.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 11:14
|
|
|
Goddamn, America hates secessionists. They hate and despise those people. In fact --    Oh, wait.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 11:15
|
|
|
What's the deal with this? Never heard of it before.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 11:27
|
|
|
SaltyJesus posted:Care to expand on this? It is not really racist as gently caress, but Germany has one of the highest correlations between education and wealth of the parents and success in school for their children in the developed world. It doesn't matter if you are a poor German or immigrant, you will likely have a bad education. Of course this screws over immigrants as well in many cases, since they tend to be poorer than the average German. If this is racist is also a matter of definition, since the vast majority of immigrants to Germany are whites as well.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 11:34
|
|
|
Disco Infiva posted:What's the deal with this? Never heard of it before. All other info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_West_Florida
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 11:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 18:08 |
|
|
Well it's not like the Civil War indicates that U.S. hates secessionists. If that war would have happened in pretty much any other country in the world there would be a lot less white Southerners around these days. Seriously, compared to the conclusion of some European/Asian/African civil wars the losing side got of really really really easy. And there was basically no major atrocities against the civilian population/mass executions after the war was over which is really really really rare civil war-wise.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 12:00
|
|