Originally Posted by
r3volution 3.0
You may need to revisit your study of history.
Most (if not all) presently existing "nations" are unions of peoples who once hated one another.
E.G. The United Kingdom (Britons, Scots, Welsh, Irish, et al), Italy (Venetians, Milanese, Florentines, Sienese, Romans, Neapolitans, et al), France (Parisians, Bretons, Occitans, Provencals, Lyonois, Burgundians, et al), Germany (Prussians, Hanoverians, Bavarians, Wurtembergers, Alsatians, et al), Russia (....an endless list of peoples). You get the idea.
In each case (the above and any number of others), they were brought together by the dominance of a central power.
Do you know that most "French" people didn't speak "French" until the 19th century (when the republican government outlawed local languages and herded speakers of, for instance, Occitan, into "French" (i.e. Parisian) public schools)? Did you know that most "Italians" still don't speak "Italian" (which is an artificial language based on the Florentine dialect) to this day? Go ask an Italian and he'll tell you that he's a Roman or a Milanese before it occurs to him to mention this abomination called "Italy."
People are united by being ruled by a common ruler, any residual unpleasantness being cured by time (per forgetfulness).
The US has fought several wars with both, attempting to conquer both (with some success against Mexico).
More recently, they have been subservient. They are de facto US territories, at least with respect to military affairs.
You miss the point.
The particular motives of the actors at the time aren't important (in the context of this discussion, anyway).
A war occurred between the states; it was extraordinarily destructive - the worst since the Napoleonic wars.
It was a result of political decentralization.
Connect With Us