Lega Nord has dissolved.
It’s been dissolved for years.
Secondly, the party that replaced it is not a sovereigntist party.
I recall when, in 1995, Quebec held a reference on independence, the Native Canadians living in Quebec, Cree and Inuit, voted about 95% to reject Quebec sepearatism and separate their reserves from a sovereign Quebec and remain in Canada- which the government of Quebec said they wouldn’t allow, but Canada maintained was their right.
The Right to Self-Determination usually boils down to who is splitting off or amalgamating with whom. Is Kosovo an independent country? Should Donetsk be allowed to split off from Ukraine if it so chooses? Crimea? How about Catalonia? There’s no independent nations of Biafra or Western Sahara these days, but there is a Bangladesh and East Timor.
Then again, how many times do you get to vote? Only once-and what makes that time so special?- or every few years? Marco noted that Scotland rejected independence- from a United Kingdom that was part of the EU. England and Wales voted Leave, but Scotland and Northern Ireland voted Remain. It could be arguesd that a post-Brexit UK is a substantially different place, and that Scotland should be allowed another vote.
2 Likes
Geezus, I’ve had to change my post twice cause you’ve edited it twice substantially.
Sorry- I have a bad tendency to come up with afterthoughts.
2 Likes
No worries.
Better than no thoughts!
Guy
2 Likes
It has not dissolved, but created a sister party (“Lega” without the “Nord”) to catch votes in the South. Its articles of association still state “the secession of the North” as final goal, although the party has de-facto (a bit like the Mainland claim in the ROC Constitution 
) gone past it since Matteo Salvini became leader in 2013.
Back in the Eighties and early Nineties, the Lega Nord’s goal was the independence of northern Italy through an artificial entity called Padania. The historical/cultural reasons for this claim were laughable (i.e. being descendants of the Vikings and the likes), which is why it eventually died out, although the underlying economic imbalance between North and South was (and arguably is) real.
Answering to @Brianjones with a clarification that adds on to the main topic. When the Lega Nord was created, it started as a “federation” of components from different parts of Northern Italy. One in particular, which is still the country’s biggest stronghold for the party (with percentages like the DPP in Tainan), is the Veneto (region of Venice). Due to historical reasons (the Republic of Venice existed for over a thousand years with its own language and culture until Napoleon conquered it in 1797 and Italy annexed it from Austria with a controversial referendum in 1866), independentism has always existed and has become increasingly stronger in recent years. Being born and raised there, I could witness it first-hand.
Talking about the right of self-determination, secessionism is forbidden by the Italian Constitution, which makes a hypothetical referendum for the independence of the Veneto illegal, even if the vote is open to the whole nation. Democracy at its finest.
1 Like
If you kill enough Tibetans and move in enough Han Chinese, they vote to be a part of China too.
1 Like
Marco and Brian in a Catholic high school fight.
We asked them twice, and they said no twice.
Yes.
Everywhere should be allowed to do what they want, but the question needs to be accompanied by a free and fair process. It’s not enough to assume that a minority group will want to split. Most of Donetsk is still Ukrainians. Many countries have strongholds for certain parties, but yet they don’t split even if they always threaten to split. When preparing such a vote, information access needs to be fair. They need to make an informed decision of what that entails.
I wish you didn’t edit your post halfway through a reply but nothin i can do. Anyways, Crimea didn’t get a chance to have a fair vote. Beyond the rigging, the question didn’t give Crimeans a fair chance to know what the consequences of splitting from the Ukraine meant. Even today, while life is objectively worse since the split. Would anyone agree to something that made their lives objectively worse? I feel there is more than just national pride that would go into a decision and simply painting them as ‘Russians so they must want to be part of Russia’ is doing a disservice to the complex thoughts and feelings of those people. We know this because despite being majority Han, the Taiwanese have clearly said No, multiple times, to China. I don’t think the Russians got consent from Crimeans.
Crimea got its drinking water from The Ukraine. The Ukraine does not have to support people outside its borders. If they wanted to leave, they don’t have to continue using the canal that brings fresh drinking water, that can be Russia’s job and nobody was able to communicate the consequences to leaving while the Russians have been unwilling to pay to bring in drinking water from within their borders. The Russians wanted Crimea but didn’t want to bankroll them. While lots of people point out that most people speak Russian in Donetsk, the majority are ethnic Ukrainians. Mariupol is in Donetsk and it doesn’t look like it is happy to become Russian. Quebec sovereigntists wanted to leave Canada but continue having all the Canadian advantages like the stable Canadian dollar. No no no no. You leave the house, you figure it out yourself. It’s not Canada’s obligation to nanny and bankroll an independent Quebec.
Alberta has a small sovereignty moment. But Albertans know that the lines that make up their province are arbitrary…mostly, and hard to defend. A landlocked country of Alberta could be a worse place to live because of its borders, whether they may be for trade and/or defence.
I’d argue that the Spanish government has been pouring gas on the fire with their refusal to vote. If you’re confident, give the vote and when it fails, tuck it into history. Spanish PM is just riling people up. Could Catalona survive on its own? More likely than Alberta, given they have sea access and their current border has many natural barriers. I’d argue that US states have arbitrary lines because it makes it harder for them to secede. Look at Colorado! It’s a square! Your new sovereign state is probably going to need the ability to defend itself.
Biafara I have no comment cause I don’t know much about it. Western Sahara and Moroccan controlled Western Sahara…hard to get opinion polling. Right now I’d just only recognise what they actually control.
Hard question. There is no answer. I guess when opinion polls are high enough for a change in status.
In democracies, this is not usually a thing. Spanish people aren’t moving in droves to Catalonia in a bid to keep it part of Spain. Canadians aren’t moving to Quebec. British and Irish are not moving to Northern Ireland.
Israel and West Bank settlements.
I think you need to reread the post.
There is a key word in there.
Democracy?
Usually
Outside of Israel, there really aren’t many examples if any.
And Israel is known for doing anti-democratic things.
You could add New Caledonia to this list, with the movement of European settlers there. They’ve also gone through a series of organized referenda on whether to leave France and become independent. This process (the promise of a series of referenda) was a very important part of a negotiated settlement to stop anti-colonial uprisings and forge a new political arrangement with Indigenous people there, the Kanaks. It has not been a perfect process, but it sure beats extended insurgency and brutal counter-insugency measures by the French army.
Guy
I have a genuine question for you. Were settlers going there because they were making an innocuous move across the same country or were they compelled/encouraged by the French government and otherwise would’ve not moved there?
As an Italian, I can move there myself too if I wanted. It looks like a lovely tropical island.
As I understand it, in the early days, New Caledonia was very much like Algeria, where the French wanted to relocate Europeans there to start to level the demographics (i.e. try to marginalize—population and land wise—New Caledonia’s Indigenous people).
However, one of the conditions of the referenda on independence is that newcomers (say for example Marco who just arrived with his Italian passport in hand) cannot vote. The decision is only open to longer term residents, European, Asian, and Kanak alike.
Guy
If your guns/armies are small, you are SOL. Any example that proves otherwise? We are still fairly infantile as a species, at least in comparison to the credit we give ourselves.
I am quite with @marco on self determination… but it isnt so clear cut. Why not toronto be independant? Alberta doesnt become a country because they are surrounded. Probably more likely canadians vote to expell alberta rather than albertans going to separate.
More relevant here . Orchid island. They dont totally detach because they would be screwed being alone. Gang rules. Always was, still is.
Said the supporter of Catalonia’s pro independence movement voting whatever they want with total disregard to law and decency…
1 Like