Yesterday saw 1.5 million Catalans march for independence from Spain, and with Scotland holding an independence referendum in 2014 will we see two new states emerge in Europe? What will be the implications for Quebec?
sort by best latest
I am not sure if Quebec would have the same linguistic rationale as independent language communities. There is France. More, those have been English Canadians to stir 'a little', forcing English. There might be no issue, if this practice goes.
England wouldn't put much in your pot - it would try to and often take; you know you could be better off.
More, the British military installations don't make Scotland a better place.
I don't think this would be about big or small fish.
According to the Barnett Formula, used for decades, a greater proportion of UK taxpayer money actually goes to Scotland than England.
@MJ Fenn, Here you go - the greatest undiscovered economic miracle on this planet - England. Probably, a still greater proportion goes for Australia and Canada. Wales and Cornwall have to live of the leftovers... ;)
I'm staying in Ireland now. I really don't comprehend, understand, and see why this should be so long for Ireland to become one country.
PS: All the major parties in Northern Ireland and the Republic are signed up for the present constitutional arrangements. Given the bloodletting in even the recent past, how would your proposed solution in Ireland work preferably?
@MJ Fenn, Simplistic or not, I'd simply see Ireland unite. The internal problems would be milder without the division factor. Legal issues over activity could be discerned under the legislation of united Ireland.
teresapelka: You might wish to look up Northern Ireland Troubles on the Web. Even the Republic of Ireland has removed Irish unity without the agreement of Northern Ireland from its Constitution.
@MJ Fenn, I do not mean forced solutions. There's a referendum scheduled for 2016, I think. There are factions to oppose unification, yet they do not have allegiance for Ireland as well as any majority in the country, the North included.
teresapelka: Of course, you may express what you wish. Opinions abound. A demographic and historical fact, which would not be hard to find out is that there has up to now not been a majority in Northern Ireland in favour of uniting with the Republic.
@MJ Fenn, what would be your sources, specifically?
teresapelka: For example, look up on any easily accessible Online source such as wikipedia 'Northern Ireland' and 'Troubles', and 'Constitution of Ireland' and 'Articles 2 and 3'. There are of course lots of widely divergent opinions about it all.
@MJ Fenn, you wouldn't have any specific contemporary sources, therefore? It's 2012 and your reference to the Troubles is no referendum.
terespelka: If you look at an Online encyclopedia article such as 'Politics of Northern Ireland', subsection 'Views on the Union' surveys, updated to 2010; from NI Life & Times on Long Term Policy for Northern Ireland,: little change over many ye
@MJ Fenn, I meant 2012 opinion polls and surveys; if you'd care, I've written my hub, the boxes here are too small, as your answer also shows :)
teresapelka: If you have seen polls results from 2012 as well as from 2012, that's good. I suppose my point is also, be aware also of history. People of Irish Republican outlook often tend to have a strong, historical awareness.
@MJ Fenn, I'm not denying historical awareness to any Irish faction; probably, you say 'Northern Ireland' and not 'overseas England', for example, owing to contemporary as well as historical identification. :)
There is Basque. There is no Texan.
Interestingly, the historic Basque area includes a part of south-west France, as well as northern Spain. There are various dialects of the Basque language, and not all people in the wider Basque area speak any one of those dialects.
Dominance is not prevalence; prevalence might be dominance - but then, think about prevalence, again :)
The supra-structure takes, it does not cash in. Why make states to incorporate territories - to dispense cash?