Your View on Multiethnic States

[Siebenbürgerin]

Here a theme on multiethnic states of the present and past, like Switzerland, Belgium, the Austrian Empire, maybe the USSR and of course the New World states. What is your view on the best system in these states:
a. a model where one culture and language is dominant (like English in the USA)
b. a model where all cultures and languages are equally protected and promoted (like Switzerland, with four official languages)?
In my view the latter is better.
Are multiethnic states a hindrance to nationalism? In my view yes, especially if the model is like a.

[Hrafn Odinnsson]

I believe in a Folkish Heathen way, may it be small now but we will see in the future.

It seems that our Germanic ancestors spoke a common language and now it has fragmented over time to dialects along with their ancient culture, I dont see a big problem with (right now) diffrent dialects and subculture of the Germanic Folk as long as they treat each other as kin / brothers (like that ever has happened). But I truely think a common Germanic tongue like Islensk/Old Norse is better for the Folk to be one.

[Sigurd]

Multi-ethnic states, especially those with sizeable numbers to each groups, do not generally work: The Roman Empire eventually crumbled, the Austrian Empire eventually crumbled, Belgium is on its best way to crumbling, this could also be true of the United Kingdom in the near enough future.

I'm not talking about small, historicall grown and readily assimilable minorities such as the Ladiners in South Tyrol, the Romantsch in Switzerland or the Sorbs in the Lausitz. They're not a demographic threat, and with their scattered population pattern are bound to seek assimiliation into the German population, or to at least identify with Germany whilst keeping some of their ancestral traditions alive.

I'm talking about cases like Belgium - this can, in the long run, not work. One group will be the leading group, and once tougher times strike, the other will emancipate itself, this is bound to create hassle, and is thus not favourable.

The only reason why Switzerland works is because of its largely federal structure. Some cantons are bilingual, but most cantons are monolingual, and with the cantons enjoying reasonably large autonomy, there is no real hindrance between the different ethnicities.

Thus, if a Pan-Germanic Empire would come to fruition, it would need to be Federation to allow Germans, Dutch/Flemish, English, Scots, Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, Icelanders etc. to keep their characteristic traditions and mentality ... as even though we're all closely related, it would still to some extent be a multi-ethnic state. And as the example Switzerland shows, multi-ethnic states can usually only work if they are so federal that the respective ethnic groups are not an obstacle to each other in their goal for self-preservation.

Whether multi-ethnic states are in their theoretical essence a hindrance to Nationalism is a tough and complex question, and again it would depend on the type: If it is a centralised multi-ethnic state, then it cannot work towards the goal of Nationalism for both groups at the same time, if it is a federated multi-ethnic state then it depends entirely on how the ethnic groups get along in questions concerning the "big picture" whilst being left to their own in regional questions pertaining to their ethnic group alone.

What is however a fact is that the multi-ethnic states we know at present and in the recent past are, perhaps with the notable exception of Switzerland, doomed to fail, much like we've seen the CSSR and USSR fail fairly recently. So if the concept is at all possible, then it is so highly impracticable that it cannot be the ultimate goal for the strict ethnic Nationalist, and would have to be adapted to a federated option for the strict meta-ethnic Nationalist.

What the concept is in any instance, even in its federated and meta-ethnic version, is clearly a nuisance though, irrespective of. As more often than not, a Multi-Ethnic state is a lot like tinder waiting to catch flame. Loose confederations or alliances between culturally and historically connected/related nations is thus perhaps a somewhat more favourable option than a "United States of Europe".

[Eoppoyz]

I want to split multiethnic states so that every ethnic groups and cultures can have their own country with their own language, culture etc.

[Nachtengel]

I don't think multiple cultures and languages can coexist equally, despite the PC claims of multiculturalists. A language will inevitably dominate over others for two reasons: numerical and pragmatic. This happens even in online communities such as this one or Thiazi: a language dominates while others are used only sporadically. People try to communicate their point to as many as possible, and thus they will resort to a language the majority speaks and understands.

I don't believe in multiethnic and multicultural states. I believe in monoculturalism. I'm opposed to the presence of integrated immigrants no matter how well they speak my language, because of racial incompatibility.

[Thusnelda]

Multiethnic states are often artificial and don´t follow tribal lines. Bargaining of monarchs, conquerors or other (from their own people) alienated governments are responsible for such states over history.

I think the best solution is to dissolve these states completely and add the several ethnic groups to their kindred population if available.
For instance, I would dissolve Belgium and add the Flemish part to the Netherlands, the Wallonian part to France and the small German part (Eupen - St. Vith) to Germany.

If a superordinate kindred population isn´t existing I´d prefer a full sovereignity of these individual ethnic groups.

[Sturmbaon]

My country was really multiethnic, and that's happened:



So, I don't believe in multiethnic states

[þeudiskaz]

A people are best unified ny their history, and culture. Perhaps an extremely small number of foreigners would be workable, but to split a state between mutliple ethinicities in large degrees... well, I can only see trouble.

[Sigurd]

BTW, whoever drew this map should also be hung, drawn and quartered. That Ladiners are counted as "Italians" is actually quite atrocious. OK, so they're not Germans but a linguistic group of themselves --- but if asked, if they had to give up their identity, 99.9% of them would rather see themselves culturally on par with the German group than the Italian group, when it came to a question they were also always more happy to side with the Germans than the Italians.

The Ladin language merely being a dialect of Italian is propaganda by the same fanatics that campaigned for a long time for an inclusion of the economically strong South Tyrol into Italy and eventually succeeded by lying to the victors about the German/Italian language barrier allegedly being at the main Alpine watersheath. I.e. Tolomei and his minions.

Just as an aside detail.

[peeps_k.nothing]

Thus, if a Pan-Germanic Empire would come to fruition, it would need to be Federation to allow Germans, Dutch/Flemish, English, Scots, Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, Icelanders etc. to keep their characteristic traditions and mentality ... as even though we're all closely related, it would still to some extent be a multi-ethnic state. And as the example Switzerland shows, multi-ethnic states can usually only work if they are so federal that the respective ethnic groups are not an obstacle to each other in their goal for self-preservation.

To me this seems like the most sound idea possible. From a medical standpoint, if each of these ethnic groups isolated themselves from one another, after a number of generations have passed you run the risk of promoting genetic abnormalities. This is evident in the number of genetic problems faced by the ashkenazi jews, such as tay-sachs, or even the greeks, who suffer from thalassemias. However, should people be allowed to travel outside of their region in order to obtain a mate, then such a problem would largely be avoided. The only problem you would really encounter then would be how the offspring should identify themselves in regards to ethnic identity. Obviously regarding oneself as a mixed ethnicity would more than likely be problematic, but then you run into the problem of whether the offspring should identify with their paternal or maternal lines.