Live data from Hacker News

New era for Gibraltar with removal of border controls with Spain

bbc.com

111–120 of 125 posts

Re: New era for Gibraltar with removal of border controls with Spain

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Colonialism" is a weird Western guilt fetish that some others successfully milk. After 10 generations, the people are every bit as local as the previous population was. 300 years is such an abyss of time that most of us would fail to name a single of our ancestors by name. Kladsko was a Czech city from approx. 1000 to 1742. The old town still looks a bit like very small Prague [0]. Was lost in a war (to the Prussian…

> "Colonialism" is a weird Western guilt fetish that some others successfully milk Colonialism is the historical basis of almost all of global society today. It's not at all weird to be concerned with it when it still drives so much of the relative power dynamics between states and between people(s) today. The example you're giving of Czechia and Prussia simply isn't an example of a colonial action.

Do you consider the historic Arabic expansion across the middle east to be colonial, or is colonialism when boats?

Re: New era for Gibraltar with removal of border controls with Spain

#113
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, in theory, they should! :) Imagine a world where expansionist acts of violent injustice could be undone.

I do not disagree, where does it stop though. We would have to go back to when Homo sapiens and Neanderthals killed each other.

It seems to stop when the argument can't be used to attack Western colonialism.

Re: New era for Gibraltar with removal of border controls with Spain

#114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Colonialism" is a weird Western guilt fetish that some others successfully milk Colonialism is the historical basis of almost all of global society today. It's not at all weird to be concerned with it when it still drives so much of the relative power dynamics between states and between people(s) today. The example you're giving of Czechia and Prussia simply isn't an example of a colonial action.

Do you consider the historic Arabic expansion across the middle east to be colonial, or is colonialism when boats?

I'm not sure what you mean by "when boats" exactly it why you used that phrasing, but it seems like an attempt at pre-emptively mocking a strawman, framing it as childish. That's not very nice rhetoric, is it?

These terms are well defined and it would serve you well to simply consult a dictionary.

But in short colonialism implies the use of colonies (surprise surprise) meaning the use of settlers to control or displace populations. There from comes the name

It also differs from other forms of expansionism in a few important ways.

- The power class structure is built on trade imbalances which move resources from the colonised land to the metropole without building up local economies.

- There's no absorption, the territories tend to remain separate and the colonised people can't become citizens or equals with those colonising them.

- And it's understood when speaking about things like the "colonial era" or "historical colonialism" that there was a deal of racial justification and stratification along racial lines.

You'll quickly be able to compare this list to whatever historical event you like.

Re: New era for Gibraltar with removal of border controls with Spain

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you consider the historic Arabic expansion across the middle east to be colonial, or is colonialism when boats?

I'm not sure what you mean by "when boats" exactly it why you used that phrasing, but it seems like an attempt at pre-emptively mocking a strawman, framing it as childish. That's not very nice rhetoric, is it? These terms are well defined and it would serve you well to simply consult a dictionary. But in short colonialism implies the use of colonies (surprise surprise) meaning the use of settlers to control or displa…

You can mock the grammar of "only colonialism when boats", but AFAIK when the Soviet Union accused some Western power of engaging in colonialism and got "well, you have your Central Asian dependencies" as an answer, they were quick to refine their definition of "colonialism" to include a "transmaritime" checkbox. So, yeah. FWIW there have been those who accused modern nation states of practicing "internal colonialism" in the sense that oftentimes all the money, support and political representation goes overwhelmingly to some select places while the rest of the country is treated as a convenient reservoir of cheap labor.

Re: New era for Gibraltar with removal of border controls with Spain

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not according to the people who live there. Or in fact, Spain, who ceded it to the UK hundreds of years ago. Or do you think Spain has a legal right based on geographic proximity to enforce a culture on those people despite existing treaties, laws, culture and democracy?

> to enforce a culture on those people despite existing treaties, laws, culture and democracy? Britain has been doing this to Ireland for the last 800 years. You still continue to hold their land, oppress its people and do your best to exterminate what shred is left of their language. If Chinggis himself rose from the grave, I'd care a lot more about his thoughts on these matters than a Brit's.

Well, that's not true, is it?

I say this as somebody who is paternally British and maternally Irish. My great-grandfather was in the Royal Irish constabulary, but his eldest daughter (my great Aunt), married a leader of the IRA. Most of my Irish great uncles came to England from Ireland and enlisted in the British Army and the RAF in WW2 while Ireland remained neutral. After the War, some of them returned to Ireland, some of them stayed in England.

The real picture of life on the ground is complicated, and I'm going to assume you are not living amongst it, by your use of "their" when talking about Ireland.

At the point of Irish independence it was decided that those parts of Ireland who majority wanted to be part of the Irish republic should form a republic, and those that didn't (the six counties of Northern Ireland), would remain part of the United Kingdom. And so it is today.

The 100+ years since have held multiple chapters in the story, including murders on both sides, terrorism in the UK (including an attempt on a sitting Prime Minister's life), oppression of republicans in Northern Ireland, and a hard-fought and wrung out peace agreement.

The current First Minister of Northern Ireland is the leader of Sinn Fein, a formerly proscribed (read: banned), party that was considered the "political arm of the Provisional IRA" (they are the terrorists who bombed PM Margaret Thatcher).

The way we got to that state was the Good Friday agreement in 1998. That allows people in Northern Ireland to express both their Britishness and their Irishness (yes, they can have both! In the same person!), without fear of reprisal or judgement, either culturally or officially. People explore their cultures as they see fit. They vote for people as they see fit, even if London doesn't particularly like the leaders they vote for. They live. And they have a say in how things should be.

There is no oppression of the language. Gaelic is slowly flourishing again in the Republic, and those who wish to use it in Northern Ireland can do so. There's no mandate for dual language road signage in Northern Ireland as there is in Wales, but there's no real ask for it either: at some point it might happen, in the same way the Welsh Language Act came about in 1993 (another sign of UK government encouraging self-determination - the Welsh Assembly).

Successive recent governments of the Republic of Ireland for their part are happy with this situation: the price of keeping the peace if the six counties were handed over to the Republic today would likely bankrupt the Irish treasury (and it would have been worse during The Troubles): it would break the Good Friday agreement, there would be a rise of terrorism and so on. They know they'd have to ask for external assistance, and then we're just back to the worst of The Troubles.

The vast majority accept the right to self determination is the way, now, and for the future. Over time, it's expected the appetite within Northern Ireland to become part of the Republic will grow within the population itself. This is because of demographic change: the unionist population is slowly becoming a minority (funny how when a Catholic demographic of Republicans are told not to use birth control their birthrate is higher than the Protestant population who do use birth control - I am here today thanks to this marvellous papal determination :) ).

One day, there will be a vote. One day, change will happen.

But it won't be because of something being imposed. Or an imposition being removed.

I suggest you do a little more research, and look into what's actually going on with the UK here. The history of it - as with the history of most things - is rich, complex, sad, hopeful, and lived. It's not a slogan. It's not a talk given by a politician at a fund raising event. It's not the quip given by a guy you hear talking about it in a bar or at a dinner table who never set foot in any of the countries he's talking about. Just be a bit more curious.

Re: New era for Gibraltar with removal of border controls with Spain

#117

> After years of negotiation involving Spain, the EU and the UK, the solution has been to align Gibraltar with the European customs union and the Schengen European free travel zone. > Travellers arriving from countries outside Schengen, such as the UK, will have to show their passports to Gibraltarian and Spanish officials at the territory's airport and port. So an L for the UK as Gibraltar has again freedom of movem…

It's really ridiculous how little discussion there was about places like Gibraltar and Northern Ireland before the Brexit vote. Looks like NI voted ~55% remain and Gibraltar ~95% remain, but too bad, England voted ~53% leave, so screw all you little overseas territories with actual land borders who are most directly impacted.

> It's really ridiculous how little discussion there was about places like Gibraltar and Northern Ireland before the Brexit vote.

> Looks like NI voted ~55% remain and Gibraltar ~95% remain, but too bad, England voted ~53% leave, so screw all you little overseas territories with actual land borders who are most directly impacted.

Most people only care about things like that when they're on the losing side of a vote. When they win, the attitude is "fuck you, we won, comply."

See: the total lack of respect from urban US voters/politicians for the different social policy preferences rural areas often want.

Re: New era for Gibraltar with removal of border controls with Spain

#118
post #3

From a purely geographical point of view, it is so absurd that there is even a debate about to which land mass Gibraltar "belongs" to. As a colonialist, I would find it very difficult to justify my own behaviour nowadays.

The British government have a strong, well-established (since ~1950), and arguably inflexible attitude towards "right to self-determination". Meaning: the people who live in a place get to decide who governs them and their society. People in Gibraltar, The Falklands, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and Northern Ireland all have different wants, needs and asks of the UK, and the UK honours all of them. There are…

> The British government have a strong, well-established (since ~1950), and arguably inflexible attitude towards "right to self-determination".

> Meaning: the people who live in a place get to decide who governs them and their society.

Except for Scotland, of course.

Re: New era for Gibraltar with removal of border controls with Spain

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Gibraltar has been part of the UK for over 300 years and the people are all UK citizens. Is this your standard for whether or not something is colonialism? Do you apply it consistently throughout, even when its inconvenient for you?

My definition of colonialism generally involves people being subjugated and being treated as less and involuntarily part of an empire. People in Gibraltar are British citizens with full rights by definition. Land borders that one doesn't like doesn't equate to colonialism. It's just a land border that you don't like. The people of Gibraltar voted almost 100% to be British on more than one occasion. Trying to make the…

Would you hold that standard towards Angola in 1973?

The vast majority of its inhabitants were portuguese citizens with the exact same rights and duties as any other portuguese citizen in Lisbon. The majority of that territory (and certainly the parts with most of the population) was portuguese for 500+ years.

Re: New era for Gibraltar with removal of border controls with Spain

#120
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time and time again the Gibraltar people tell Spain they don't want to be part of Spain Time and time again Spain complains Time and time again hypocrites I don't mind if you believe that "land makes right" or if you believe that "people have rights", but be consistent

I am saying, for the third time, that the people of Gibraltar are sovereing and have the right to choose. Same with Ceuta and Melilla.

"a similar agreement could be done with Gibraltat belonging to Spain, which I would consider fairer"

Take your colonial desires and stuff them back in the 18th century where they belong

Post reply on HN