PDA

View Full Version : Is Ethno-Linguistic Self-Determination Actually Practical?



ValorousBob
April 19 2014, 07:08:22 PM
So I recently saw this map (http://i.imgur.com/qDuEr43.png) on r/mapporn (here's the OP on reddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/23fd99/oc_my_map_project_every_ethnolinguistic_group/)). It's an in-progress map of all ethno-linguistic groups and it demonstrates how fractured our world could really be. My first reaction to this is that giving each small group their own nation state would result in a world with thousands of tiny states with very little ability to actually get things done on a global scale. A worldwide economy would become incredibly difficult to sustain, and areas with lots of small groups (like Africa and Asia) would just get fucked even harder by countries like the United States and various European countries. The native American nations are realistically not going to return. Small nations are just going to have even less collective bargaining power and will be even more easily abused by superpowers and international corporations. Won't ethno-linguistic self determination just further increase the West's ability to abuse the rest of the world?

This also makes me really want to play EUIV.


What do you guys think?

Nordstern
April 20 2014, 02:22:52 AM
What do you guys think?

I think that many Bothans smaller neighboring ethno-linguistic groups died to bring us this information establish any given ethnic group.

RazoR
April 21 2014, 04:43:11 PM
What do you guys think?

I think that many Bothans smaller neighboring ethno-linguistic groups died to bring us this information establish any given ethnic group.

And i think some have been blown up.

Synapse
April 21 2014, 05:39:12 PM
So I recently saw this map (http://i.imgur.com/qDuEr43.png) on r/mapporn (here's the OP on reddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/23fd99/oc_my_map_project_every_ethnolinguistic_group/)). It's an in-progress map of all ethno-linguistic groups and it demonstrates how fractured our world could really be. My first reaction to this is that giving each small group their own nation state would result in a world with thousands of tiny states with very little ability to actually get things done on a global scale. A worldwide economy would become incredibly difficult to sustain, and areas with lots of small groups (like Africa and Asia) would just get fucked even harder by countries like the United States and various European countries. The native American nations are realistically not going to return. Small nations are just going to have even less collective bargaining power and will be even more easily abused by superpowers and international corporations. Won't ethno-linguistic self determination just further increase the West's ability to abuse the rest of the world?

This also makes me really want to play EUIV.


What do you guys think?

Map is broken and misleading. WRT Ethnolinguistic groups that's pretty much the only way nations have been made in the past, and I see little reason that will change going forward.

Looking at that map I have to call BS on all the broken up bits of the US from personal experience alone. having ANY difference at all is not grounds for making a new nation. It requires a difference of a certain magnitude.

More likely, US/Canada/UK could easily be a single country if not for historic tradition. US/Mexico almost certainly could not.

The idea that Ohioans wouldn't get along with people from Vermont or Pennsylvania is ridiculous though.

Aea
April 21 2014, 05:53:59 PM
That map needs to be interactive, nearly impossible to read.

Additionally it divides the US (as mentioned by Synapse) into many irrelevant groups whole "ethnolinguistic" identity comprises a very very minor part of the population.

Ignoring the whole ethnolinguistic thing however, I feel the US (and possibly other large countries) would be better off as looser confederation of states.

ValorousBob
April 21 2014, 06:54:42 PM
Looking at that map I have to call BS on all the broken up bits of the US from personal experience alone. having ANY difference at all is not grounds for making a new nation. It requires a difference of a certain magnitude.

More likely, US/Canada/UK could easily be a single country if not for historic tradition. US/Mexico almost certainly could not.

Those are Native American tribes. :lol: And yeah I agree, I don't think any western nation would really break apart like this. Maybe I didn't make that clear enough in my OP, but I think the fact that the West will NOT be drawn along all these small ethnic lines is part of the reason why the third world would get fucked by ethno-linguistic self determination. Nigeria is already getting screwed by Shell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_Delta#Nigerian_oil), splitting the country up even further will just make it easier for the oil companies.

Yeah I agree that map has some serious issues (it is a WIP after all), but I think it demonstrates the point I'm trying to make well enough. Would it really help India to splinter into a hundred different ethnic fiefdoms? I highly doubt it.


EDIT: The guy has a Imgur page (http://autismmap.imgur.com/) with some more info.

TheManFromDelmonte
April 22 2014, 09:14:16 PM
India has a federal structure in part due to the difference in culture and language in different places.

But, yes, the trap of a nation being more stable with a single homogenous language and culture is easy to fall into. It doesn't take much thinking to find a lot of places that could be more stable like the UK, Switzerland (!), USA with the spanish speaking population, Belgium (ok maybe a bit), Canada, and many more. While it's an attractive idea on first thought it's clearly nonsense, It doesn't hold up to reality at all.

So the question for me is why do I (and others) think it's a good idea at all? Are we really just inherently racist monkeys?

SAI Peregrinus
April 23 2014, 12:41:39 AM
I think people tend to overestimate the racism of others, and the extent to which racism causes problems. Separating ethnic groups doesn't fix things because the problems aren't all (or even mostly) due to racism, and the people with the problems aren't as racist as you think.

QuackBot
April 23 2014, 04:00:27 AM
So I recently saw this map (http://i.imgur.com/qDuEr43.png) on r/mapporn (here's the OP on reddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/23fd99/oc_my_map_project_every_ethnolinguistic_group/)). It's an in-progress map of all ethno-linguistic groups and it demonstrates how fractured our world could really be. My first reaction to this is that giving each small group their own nation state would result in a world with thousands of tiny states with very little ability to actually get things done on a global scale. A worldwide economy would become incredibly difficult to sustain, and areas with lots of small groups (like Africa and Asia) would just get fucked even harder by countries like the United States and various European countries. The native American nations are realistically not going to return. Small nations are just going to have even less collective bargaining power and will be even more easily abused by superpowers and international corporations. Won't ethno-linguistic self determination just further increase the West's ability to abuse the rest of the world?

This also makes me really want to play EUIV.


What do you guys think?
It really is nice.