Witproduct
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2009
- Messages
- 25
That's no Flemish flag, but a Brabantian Lion, which is on the national emblem of Belgium since like forever. I think it's safe to use it, because it represents a centralized state (though ruled by a French-speaking elite throughout whole Belgium/Southern Netherlands), and that's exactly the Belgian empire you happen to focus on.
Very still, the avarage (Walloon or Flemish) Joe in Belgium doesn't know jack-
about his history (education on that subject just sucks and it also has been altered by our school system for propaganda means, that's why they hardly touch it), so it's safe doing anything with Belgium.
National emblem with the nine original provinces: with Brabant in the centre (despite Antwerp actually being Brabantian also).
Anyway, the reason why our history education sucks is because it would make too many people realise the Belgian independence was nothing but bad for Flemish and only good for the Catholic Church and the Francophonie, and while many people are 'cool' enough to not be emotional nationalists, it's not really helping modernizing our state and neither would 'patriotic history' help, because in the recent past Flemish were taught to hate the Dutch and admire the French (while Walloons were taught the same, but with less Hollandophobia).
Results of 'patriotic history' of the past is: Hollandophobia, inferiority complex, Walloons thinking Flemish isn't Dutch ("a deformed Dutch" is what they were taught at school, just like French were taught Corsican be 'a deformed Italian' and Alsatian 'a deformed German' with France as model state), international community thinking Flemish isn't Dutch (BBC even calls our language Flemish occasionally because they always read Francophone press) with of course the one occasional Fleming who doesn't know the mechanics behind this also calling his language 'Flemish'(*), but also communitarian turmoil within Belgium.
Also, Flemish nationalist version of history neither is good, especially our symbolism is a joke (and despite what, for instance, the Routard Guide about Belgium tells you, the overwhelming majority of Flemish don't take it seriously and neither are a fan of. It was used to (in a later state) promote Belgium's independence from France, and that was best assured if Dutch wasn't completely replaced by French.
(*): Some Flemish Catholic priests and bishops didn't like people reading 'Protestant' Dutch nor 'Atheist' French, and this is why in an earlier era there were many Flemish taught to call their language Flemish over Dutch, despite it being a dialect of that language (and perfectly understood, even in its particularist forms). Indirectly though, by blocking off the popularity of French in Flanders, did they aid in Flanders remaining Dutch-speaking once Belgium evolved toward democracy.
Very still, the avarage (Walloon or Flemish) Joe in Belgium doesn't know jack-
about his history (education on that subject just sucks and it also has been altered by our school system for propaganda means, that's why they hardly touch it), so it's safe doing anything with Belgium.National emblem with the nine original provinces: with Brabant in the centre (despite Antwerp actually being Brabantian also).
Anyway, the reason why our history education sucks is because it would make too many people realise the Belgian independence was nothing but bad for Flemish and only good for the Catholic Church and the Francophonie, and while many people are 'cool' enough to not be emotional nationalists, it's not really helping modernizing our state and neither would 'patriotic history' help, because in the recent past Flemish were taught to hate the Dutch and admire the French (while Walloons were taught the same, but with less Hollandophobia).
Results of 'patriotic history' of the past is: Hollandophobia, inferiority complex, Walloons thinking Flemish isn't Dutch ("a deformed Dutch" is what they were taught at school, just like French were taught Corsican be 'a deformed Italian' and Alsatian 'a deformed German' with France as model state), international community thinking Flemish isn't Dutch (BBC even calls our language Flemish occasionally because they always read Francophone press) with of course the one occasional Fleming who doesn't know the mechanics behind this also calling his language 'Flemish'(*), but also communitarian turmoil within Belgium.
Also, Flemish nationalist version of history neither is good, especially our symbolism is a joke (and despite what, for instance, the Routard Guide about Belgium tells you, the overwhelming majority of Flemish don't take it seriously and neither are a fan of. It was used to (in a later state) promote Belgium's independence from France, and that was best assured if Dutch wasn't completely replaced by French.
(*): Some Flemish Catholic priests and bishops didn't like people reading 'Protestant' Dutch nor 'Atheist' French, and this is why in an earlier era there were many Flemish taught to call their language Flemish over Dutch, despite it being a dialect of that language (and perfectly understood, even in its particularist forms). Indirectly though, by blocking off the popularity of French in Flanders, did they aid in Flanders remaining Dutch-speaking once Belgium evolved toward democracy.
