You're from Virginia. You should know that they do.
The Historical Basis for Catalonian Independence
- Thread starter JohannaK
- Start date
You're from Virginia. You should know that they do.
madviking
north american scum
boooo csa down with dixie
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Yep. Just a year and a half after the Treaty of Utrecht, where Britain, the Netherlands, Austria and everybody else who was originally against the Bourbons betrayed the promises they made to the Catalonians.
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
The thread will get nowhere. Nobody can get a Catalan nationalist off his ideas about 9/11 (1714).
Lord of Elves
Suede-Denim Secret Police
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 6,976
I thought part of the whole EU thing was to get you kids to stop hating each other 
CELTICEMPIRE
Zulu Conqueror
Carpetbagger! Go back to Yankee-Land!
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Because I like to be confusing.
Peck of Arabia
Sociable Recluse
Aww, now we start talking about the War of the Spanish Succession- just as it's too late for me to join in.
I'll get right on this in the morning
I'll get right on this in the morning
By giving them something new to hate, right?I thought part of the whole EU thing was to get you kids to stop hating each other
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
Wait did Catalunya get annexed in the 1700s?
I do not want you to take offense, I like both you and JoanK, but I want to talk about this shortly. Seeing as nationalism is an cultural-idealist construct from the 19th century (and often wrong, re: how composers created idealized "folk" music to represent a biedermeier common people in that era, despicable) I don't see how a Catalonian state pre-19th is of any relevance to a Catalonian identity.
Catalonian nationalism seems to me equally nonsensical as Scottish/Celtic cultural romanticism (especially as the old Great-Scotland lads fought each other like whipped swine, or so I've been told at least) except with less sex.
That's not to say the history of Catalunya isn't interesting. Didn't some people theorize that Catalan is the last remainder of European languages before the Indo-Europeans came about and messed things up?
I'd be delighted to see some representations of Catalonian identity (read: hear "Catalonian" music) if you can show something. I'm currently studying musical anthropology and the way people construct their identities nationally is really interesting to me - so if you'd kindly present something that would represent Catalonian culture, specifically music, I'd be really happy.
~
Thread relevance:
From http://jimweaver1972.webs.com/europemaps.htm . Labeled "The Caliphate of Cordoba never falls." Not sure whether it has been posted before.
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Well, did a German even exist before the 19th Century? Does that mean that Rome is an irrelevant piece of history for Italians?
I'm pretty sure you're confusing Catalan with Euskera.
Interesting map, by the way. But the County of Barcelona should own Toulouse too!
EDIT: Best map on the site:
Spoiler :
Civ'ed
I ain't gotta explain a thing
And people say I make weird maps...
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
German-speaking communities existed but the constructed idea of a German nation state didn't. You're automatically assuming that German-speaking peoples = the German people but that idea was constructed in the 19th century as well. So no, "a German" as you understand it did not exist before the 19th century. The construction that made a supposed nation was undertaken by a number of European philosophers (mostly in Germany coincidentally while experiencing a tremendous power surge from the unification wars for the supposed "German nation" - practical coincidence you say? Maybe, but it did make the constructers a lot more powerful) and as such "a German" didn't exist and can be considered as not existing today in an objective sense beyond the citizen registry. Note that I write 'can' since it's a hell of a can of worms to begin denoting the exact qualifications of "a German", a citizens whose exact properties are diffuse impossibilities to denote correctly. The thing is, even if you can applicably state that "a Catalonian" existed in 1500something because of language and traditions, it is only theoretical application of a later invented construct you've taken upon yourself, and a construction of the "Catalonian nation" making you "a Catalonian" is no less legitimate than the construction of the "Spanish nation" making you "a Spaniard". And an equality of legitimacy maintains the status quo over anything else.
Does that mean that Rome is an irrelevant piece of history for Italians?
Uh what? I made no such claim, and I don't see how it even relates to my point. Also, even by nation state standards (the ones you utilize), the Romans didn't even speak Italian.
Map:
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Oh, excuse me, I meant a German state. In the sense of a- well, of a modern nation-state, yeah. My point is more along the lines of, well, certainly Ancient Greece is in no way relevant to today's Greek identity, aye? Although Greece had not been Greece for centuries, they surely held the glory of days past as a reason to seek independence from the Ottomans in the 19th Century!
And... legitimacy. This is a complicated thing. We must take into account that legitimacy comes from several sources, which may or may not be related. Legitimacy comes from the laws, and comes from the people. Legitimacy comes from history in a more loose way. And today, a democratic consultation to the people of Catalonia is legitimated by the people to give (or not) democratic legitimacy to the feelings of independence of this same people.
At the end of the day, historical legitimacy is directly irrelevant, and legal legitimacy can be override by the will of the people for whom the laws were made. In the end, it is the legitimacy of the people which counts. But of course, in the beginning there is this historical legitimacy. People take it and make it their idea, and then, only then, will the people give legitimacy to it. People are not objects after all, but subjects. Their minds are with their feelings, their melancholic remembrance of days of glory and their dreams of future splendour will determine the path they follow in their grey present.
Make no mistake, whoever has the idea in his head in the end will never cease its pursuit, will never care for the legitimacy of history beyond that which is given to that idea. People are blind to reasons contrary to their belief once they have been truly convinced.
And... legitimacy. This is a complicated thing. We must take into account that legitimacy comes from several sources, which may or may not be related. Legitimacy comes from the laws, and comes from the people. Legitimacy comes from history in a more loose way. And today, a democratic consultation to the people of Catalonia is legitimated by the people to give (or not) democratic legitimacy to the feelings of independence of this same people.
At the end of the day, historical legitimacy is directly irrelevant, and legal legitimacy can be override by the will of the people for whom the laws were made. In the end, it is the legitimacy of the people which counts. But of course, in the beginning there is this historical legitimacy. People take it and make it their idea, and then, only then, will the people give legitimacy to it. People are not objects after all, but subjects. Their minds are with their feelings, their melancholic remembrance of days of glory and their dreams of future splendour will determine the path they follow in their grey present.
Make no mistake, whoever has the idea in his head in the end will never cease its pursuit, will never care for the legitimacy of history beyond that which is given to that idea. People are blind to reasons contrary to their belief once they have been truly convinced.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
They abided their construct, yes.
I have no issue with democratic secession in a democracy, but until then, you shouldn't take offense when being called a Spaniard as it's all in your head regardless.
I'm probably a strange guy because I distinguish harsh reality from constructs, and I have no issue with Catalunya wanting to be independent if its people wills. I just pointed out that it wasn't what you understand as Catalonians that got annexed in 1700something simply because they understood themselves as something else entirely. That is, my strangeness is that historical legitimization is nonsense to me but if people are illusorily believing in the historical legitimization regardless, they're perfectly free to vote for what they want, and I'd actively support that of course.
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Oh, definitely. People use historical legitimization to satisfy their illusions, that is what I mean. When reality is harsh they look at past times. But I see what you mean now. But we can't know what the 18th Century people considered themselves, can we? They certainly fought to keep their right to talk in Catalan and the liberties that the pactist parliamentary system achieved with the centuries. I love to be deluded by historical constructs of former glory.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
I think they fought to preserve their right to talk in Catalan similar to me preserving the right to talk in Danish even though English would be more effecient, and that is for reasons beyond nationalism.
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
No. They fought to speak in Catalan because most knew no other language. And because they hated more the centralist Bourbon (who suppressed all Catalan liberties, as said before) than the Hapsburg candidate which would have most probably maintained the the personal union status. If only the Allies had maintained their promise to keep Catalan liberties...
Similar threads
