claudre
Administrator
Rei de Samba
Posts: 128
|
Post by claudre on Jul 17, 2009 3:15:33 GMT 10
Greetings!
There is a debate that we are having in the Lusophone community that I find very interesting and would like to lay before you all.
What to think of micronations that take the names of real, contemporary, UN-member, nations?
In the Lusophone Sector this - which I consider an abhoring micronational practice - has become something constant. We already have among us in the lusophone sector:
Kingdom of France Kingdom of Portugal Kingdom of Italy Kingdom of Great Britain
All these nations claim the territories of the (macro)nations of the same name, and import features from the original states, as well as symbols. They have no originality, and as much as some pretend to be a "revival" of old regimes, they are not being very sucessful, lacking citizens and participants, never being able to get as busy and active as did Pasargada, Orange, Porto Claro and Reunion.
Some lusophone micronations are considering to not endeavour diplomatic relations with them, which I think is a bit extreme, as much as I can understand.
These micronations tend to cause so much confusion, and trouble, as they claim to be nations that actually exist! We often receive emails from people who believe Réunion is a real sovereign state because we have relations with a few of those nations.
Also, the lack of originality concerns us. Micronationry is a creative activity, and it has become famous for the peculiar micronations, their unique symbols and titles.
What are your opinions about this practice? Does it have a parallel outside the lusophone sector? Do you know of other stories other than YUGA? Does this mean micronationalism is changing? Is it good, bad, or irrelevant?
Yours,
Claudio de Castro
|
|
|
Post by commiczar on Jul 17, 2009 3:35:14 GMT 10
Greetings !! Great subject...... "A micronation by any other name...is still a micronation"[/i]; however, that being said, in my own opinion....if one is truely serious about what I prefer to refer to as the Micronational Movement, which is as rich in it's diversities as the "macro" community of nations, then one must attempt to establish / create a state / govt that is unique within it's own spheres-of-influence; which is to say: although some of the micronations within the Greater MicroSphere may accept another micronation that lays claim to the name of a "macro" nation, respect *might* not be as easily achieved. One can adapt and/or adopt bits-and-pieces here-and-there, from one's own "macro" neighbor-nation(s), as "imitation is the purest form of flattery", and almost *ALL* "macro"nations have at one time or another, "borrowed" ( stolen ) a thing-or-two now-and-then from their "macro" neighbor-nation(s); however, to "borrow" ( lay claim to ) a "macro" nation's entire kit-and-kabootle ( name, territory, flags, symbols, etc.... ), without creating at least some self-individuality.....well, therein lies the rub. Some cross-identification is to be expected, especially if the "macro" nation physically and historically has surrounded the Founding Fathers of a micronation; however, as already stated, a *complete* lay to claim of an entire "macro" nation's heritage and history, is out of the question, and totally out of the real realm of reality as we know it. Here again...merely my own personal opinions. Once again...a great subject to discuss and debate !! Regards !! __________
|
|
|
Post by commiczar on Jul 17, 2009 6:34:10 GMT 10
Greetings !!
An amendment...........
If a micronation were to be founded as a restorationist movement, whereby it's government's agenda was to restore a "macro" nation that is "no-more", then there could a bit more "wiggle-room" with regards to that micronation's legitimacy.
One might want / need to add the word "New" *before* the original and traditional "macro" nation's name too. ( i.e. "Britian" would become..."New Britian", "France" would become "New France", etc...)
Such as in the case of the Confederate States of America / CSA, which has had many resurrections over the years; as well as, the Dominion of British West Florida, which is a well known and highly respected MicroGovt.
A restorationist movement mirrors many of the characterisitics of a secessionist movement; both of which, reflect pre-exisitng traits of "macro" nations, as most ( not all ) have been "macro" nations at one time or another in the past. ( i.e. Alaska, Hawaii, Vermont, Texas, California, etc, etc.... )
These movements constitute another level of micronationalism; in fact, many of such movements could / should be considered more as a "Government -in-Waiting"[/i], than as a "micro" nation. ( personal view-point )
Regards !! __________
|
|
|
Post by D. N. Vercáriâ on Jul 17, 2009 6:55:18 GMT 10
If someone's *seriously* willing to challenge a macronation, good luck, but I will not touch that matter with a long pole and security gloves.
But I don't think that's the intention of these micronations that you mention. I've seen similar things amongst German micronations, a virtual mock CSSR, a virtual mock GDR and what not. I think it's obvious that these things are mockery or toy stuff.
Nothing's wrong with that, I'd say - it's simply some kind of fun that I'm not interested in. And seeking "diplomatic relations" to such a thing would be pointless, because of the totally different scope of things - as if a soccer club wanted to meet a chess club for a match.
|
|
George
Global Administrator
Head Honcho and Spangle of the Cosmos
Posts: 2,997
|
Post by George on Jul 18, 2009 6:03:40 GMT 10
Personally, I don't see the point of aping a "real" country - present or historic - unless one is playing some sort of wargame, like "Diplomacy".
...but I also don't see the point of running any entirely virtual micronation; it takes up a lot of time and produces no measurable or practical physical outcome.
To my mind such pursuits are nothing more than a form of frivolous personal entertainment suited to introspective (and often completely delusional) social misfits who lack the capacity to achieve anything of actual subtance in the real world.
|
|
|
Post by commiczar on Jul 18, 2009 7:06:20 GMT 10
[/size] who lack the capacity to achieve anything of actual subtance in the real world.[/quote]
Greetings George !!
I can appreciate your personal views, and I can even accept some of them......to a point......
However.....
I personally couldn't , nor wouldn't go as far as to brand any citizen and/or leader of a "virtual" micronation, as *delusional*, or as a *social misfit*; as there is no definitive definition for the concept of micronationalism; nor is there yet, any regulatory agency / authority that governs the MicroSphere of Nations. ( i.e. no central "macro", nor no central "micro" authority )
Therefore, diversity is a sort of adhesive that bonds all micronationalist together; whether we like it or not. ( i.e. "the pot calling the kettle black" kind of thingie )
One reason:.................
A "Virtual State" could in time, and with sufficient sacrific, eventually evolve into a "real-earth" *physical* micronation; however, as your words seemed to alluded to......too much time spent on a "virtual" presence, may make for a longer and harder road to follow to arrive at any "physical" presence.
The world, since the introduction of the affordable and personal internet and computer, is evolving into infinite possibilities; and as such, who is to say that one day the "macro" powers-that-be, won't seek a need to establish some sort of "virtual" *territory*; something more that what the "macro" governments already have ventured into....such as "virtual warfare", "cyber attacks", etc...
Just my personal perspective.....
Regards !! ___________
|
|
George
Global Administrator
Head Honcho and Spangle of the Cosmos
Posts: 2,997
|
Post by George on Jul 18, 2009 7:36:45 GMT 10
A "Virtual State" could in time, and with sufficient sacrific, eventually evolve into a "real-earth" *physical* micronation Can you think of any that have done so? Off the top of my head I can think of one - Reunion. The micronational world is full of virtual entities that are born in a blaze of glory and then die with a whimper - sometimes over a matter of days - sometimes weeks, sometimes months and very occasionally, years. The vast majority never progress beyond the website/forum/blog/ stage. Good intentions and a website do not a micronation make. The only thing that counts in the real world are tangible, measurable, physical outcomes.
|
|
George
Global Administrator
Head Honcho and Spangle of the Cosmos
Posts: 2,997
|
Post by George on Jul 18, 2009 7:49:15 GMT 10
I personally couldn't , nor wouldn't go as far as to brand any citizen and/or leader of a "virtual" micronation, as *delusional*, or as a *social misfit*; as there is no definitive definition for the concept of micronationalism; nor is there yet, any regulatory agency / authority that governs the MicroSphere of Nations. ( i.e. no central "macro", nor no central "micro" authority ) There are dictionary definitions for "delusional" and "social misfit", and those are what my comments are based upon. I'd argue that someone who establishes a micronation that consists of 1 website while simultaneously "seriously" claiming half of Antarctica, Albania, Alabama or Albany is delusional, by any rational definition, because - failing a miraculous turn of events the likes of which have never before occurred in the history of the world - their authority is simply never going to extend over those pieces of geography. Ever.
|
|
claudre
Administrator
Rei de Samba
Posts: 128
|
Post by claudre on Jul 18, 2009 11:24:19 GMT 10
A "Virtual State" could in time, and with sufficient sacrific, eventually evolve into a "real-earth" *physical* micronation Can you think of any that have done so? Off the top of my head I can think of one - Reunion. I am flattered...but... Wait....George! Has Sarkozy given me what is mine accordingly to the Imperial Constitution of 1997? :-) If he has, please tell me and I will go down there and take over... And offer free stay in all the 5-star resorts to each and all of you Yours,
|
|