Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

This man just claimed a new European nation. 160,000 people want to live there

littlerock.com.mt

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 157 posts

Re: This man just claimed a new European nation. 160,000 people want to live there

#81

Post by ctdonath »

inDigiNeous wrote: post #72
tinco wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very good point. Obviously the only way any country can be bootstrapped is with military power. If Liberland is serious they should immediately engage Paraduin with a show of force. Secondly, I think the best course of action would be to secure funding for buying a protectorate like situation with either Croatia or Serbia. Though I don't know what the political consequences of such a situation would be. Imag…

Obviously ? Are you from the US? If so, I can understand where you're coming from. Maybe violence is not the answer, or have you thought about this possibility ? Their motto is "Live and Let Live", doesn't that tell you something ? Or maybe you're a professional pro-war troll?

While the founding principles may be pacifist, the invading conquerers likely are not.

Re: This man just claimed a new European nation. 160,000 people want to live there

#82

Post by workingandtired »

kazinator wrote: post #77

"Live there ?" Where is that? You can't live in a nation; it's not a place, but rather a set of people, of which you can be a member . You can live in a country. A nation doesn't imply a country; nations can be displaced. Furthermore, having a certain nationality which is tied to a country doesn't mean being a resident of that country. Perhaps not all 160,000 people want to actually live in that country; maybe some o…

From the wikipedia page for nation [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation]:

The word "nation" is sometimes used as synonym for:

State (polity) or sovereign state: a government which controls a specific territory, which may or may not be associated with any particular ethnic group

Country: a geographic territory, which may or may not have an affiliation with a government or ethnic group

Thus the phrase "nations of the world" could be referring to the top-level governments (as in the name for the United Nations), various large geographical territories, or various large ethnic groups of the planet.

In general, whenever I come across the word "nation" I assume it's being used colloquially to refer to "nation-state", unless the context is specifically related to ethnic nationalistic identities.

Re: This man just claimed a new European nation. 160,000 people want to live there

#83

Post by ctdonath »

funkyy wrote: post #53

This gets much more attention than it should in my opinion. Its another micro nation that within few weeks no one will remember about. Besides stamps collectors and non-recognized passport holders.

Au contraire, I've been casually following "micro nations" for decades, and attempts are often long remembered. This one is notable as it involves actual viable land (in contrast with artificial or new/fluke natural dry surfaces), which the surrounding countries just plain don't want. It's not just a rock or platform with a flag on it.

Re: This man just claimed a new European nation. 160,000 people want to live there

#84

Post by tinco »

inDigiNeous wrote: post #72
tinco wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very good point. Obviously the only way any country can be bootstrapped is with military power. If Liberland is serious they should immediately engage Paraduin with a show of force. Secondly, I think the best course of action would be to secure funding for buying a protectorate like situation with either Croatia or Serbia. Though I don't know what the political consequences of such a situation would be. Imag…

Obviously ? Are you from the US? If so, I can understand where you're coming from. Maybe violence is not the answer, or have you thought about this possibility ? Their motto is "Live and Let Live", doesn't that tell you something ? Or maybe you're a professional pro-war troll?

If your countrymen hadn't killed 126.000 Russians, and maimed 180.000 more, you would now be governed by homophobic, corrupt and oppressive Vladimir Putin.

I am not pro-war. I am not suggesting anyone should be attacked, but if you don't have the power to defend what you stand for, you will trampled by those who do.

I am from the Netherlands. The only reason we exist is because the U.S. won the second world war, and we allied ourselves to them. We're not as strong and mighty as the Fins, we use diplomacy and money to establish our sovereignty.

Re: This man just claimed a new European nation. 160,000 people want to live there

#85

Post by ctdonath »

tormeh wrote: post #39
stefantalpalaru wrote: post #3

Nice stunt, but without an army and/or international recognition it will never be a country.

If you read the article, you would have understood that the territory is a no man's land because of a border dispute between Serbia and Croatia. The two countries will probably keep each other in check.

Reading the article gives the reverse impression: each claims the land belongs to the other; neither wants it.

Re: This man just claimed a new European nation. 160,000 people want to live there

#87

Post by ctdonath »

morganvachon wrote: post #74
ctdonath wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because otherwise independent land with no army tends to get overrun by those who do have an army. When you need one, it's too late to get one.

They don't need armies, they need allies. The problem then becomes finding an ally with a strong army but without a strong inclination to use said army to take over your micronation.

The ally needs some motivation to take on someone else's existential threats as their own. Lots of treaties and posturing may dampen would-be aggressors' motivation, but as the USA has demonstrated of late re: Ukraine vs Russia, all too often promises of military protection don't mean $#!^.

Re: This man just claimed a new European nation. 160,000 people want to live there

#89

Post by goatforce5 »

sam_goody wrote: post #8

Micro nations are not new, and they are almost never successful [1]. They are ripe for fraud: selling passports, fraudulent government bank, etc. In the event that they pick up any traction, they are swallowed by their neighbors with real armies (eg. Minerva), and the rest of the world sighs with relief. An interesting example of one that is still officially around, also claims land in Croatia, and exists just for fr…

The Principality of Hutt River in Australia is a micro nation in an interesting position. It seems as though it may be legally valid due to an administrative mistake and clever use of some obscure laws. Its continued existence seems to be largely due to the Australian government refusing to get involved any more than it really has to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Hutt_River

Post reply on HN