Quote:
Originally Posted by Mynydd
Not without pain. Western Germans still resent Eastern Germans in a similar fashion as Northern Italians resent Southern Italians. They consider E. Germans as a financial burden to W. Germans.
Instead of Terroni they call them Ossies.
Not the best example  |
I would actually like to research the question accordingly as apart from name-slandering and tax-moaning I'm not informed much on the question. I read some material on the Italian question which gave quite a distinct perspective.
Given the fact that the union of Italy was done mostly my masonic revolutionaries who like all masonic revolutionaries didn't want their ideas limited to their nation, it is also important to note that the Kingdom of Italy was created to be ruled by a King from the North of the country. Some southerners claim that that was mostly the start of the current economic slumber of the South, although frankly I'm reticient to believe this. However, unless I'm given more plausible material I won't discard the notion accordingly.
Frankly, I don't view positively this intranational regional bickering when every nation's fatherland is submerged through illegal migration, and when liberal progressivism is eroding our nature in a gradual manner destroying any semblance of true and proper communal being. I'm referring specifically to marginal regionalistic movements, who have little plausible capabilities to gain secession or independence through democratic means, and instead of dealing with a greater impending identitarian catastrophe bicker with closer kindred peoples while their lands are flooded by migrants against their will.
If a State is in place, whether it is truly a nation-state or not, those pretending to work for their people's identity should use such channels unless they fantasise some popular insurgence which will work wonders. Autonomy can be achieved through positive and not negative approaches. Explaining the benefits of a proposed situation is much more effective politically and psychologically than focusing on the negativity of the present. Negativity is good to block impending threats, not to herald new situations.
This doesn't mean denying the right to greater autonomy if not outright independence if the popular will is such, as denying this would be contrary to the natural right of subsidiarity and tantamount centralistic despotism. A unitarian state denying subsidiarity to those that demand meet and have the force to gain it can only claim to have a veneer of democracy and not a true and proper one.