California Discussion Thread - All in one place

Morgan Cook10 said:It's right above.
just c/p it already
And please, spare me the "what would you do" routine... if, say, California decided to hold a referendum tomorrow to secede, and 90% of the people voted to leave, I'd honestly just wish them a safe trip and probably apologize for any misunderstanding along the way. Though, honestly... bringing up California in a conversation like this feels like an insult to the state itself.

velvetmaker3 said:Fair enough, then. But why 90% of the population? Why wouldn't it be 50% plus one vote?

Morgan Cook10 said:Are you even reading what I'm typing here?🤔>

Morgan Cook10 said:Well, it's because on this specific referendum, 90% actually voted YES for secession.😉

Though if you ask me, I’d give Floridians the win with just 50% plus one.
But like I said... I think it's honestly insulting to talk about Florida this way, acting like they're just some "miniature Americans" compared to the rest of the country.

Jason Kern49 said:The US Constitution guarantees the territorial integrity of the United States, and the ultimate guarantors of that are the US Armed Forces and the Department of Homeland Security.

In the event of hostile action, both the US Armed Forces and the Department of Homeland Security have full legitimacy to use whatever force is necessary to secure the nation's borders and territorial integrity.

But let’s be real—this is all nonsense. There's zero chance of Florida becoming an independent state.

The Italians, Tuscany, the Northern League? Let them try. Seriously, go ahead. Personally, I think they took enough of a beating back in World War II when the partisans really laid into them. 🤷

velvetmaker3 said:The Spanish Constitution is probably the only real parallel here. The indivisibility of the state.

Morgan Cook10 said:Well, it's because on this specific referendum, 90% actually voted YES for secession.😉

Though if you ask me, I’d give Floridians the win with just 50% plus one.
But like I said... I think it's honestly insulting to talk about Florida this way, acting like they're just some "miniature Americans" compared to the rest of the country.

velvetmaker3 said:Catalan is a Romance language, a byproduct of Vulgar Latin. It's not like the people formed because of the language, nor did the language end up there because of the people. Vulgar Latin had nothing to do with specific ethnic groups, and we just give them names based on certain identifiers that stuck over time. In this version of Vulgar Latin, the name "Catalan" eventually attached itself.

Catalan principalities?

Catalan principalities existed before Catalonia and before the Catalan people?

What made them Catalan?

What were they called?

velvetmaker3 said:Catalan is a Romance language, a byproduct of Vulgar Latin. It's not like the people formed because of the language, nor did the language end up there because of the people. Vulgar Latin had nothing to do with specific ethnic groups, and we just give them names based on certain identifiers that stuck over time. In this version of Vulgar Latin, the name "Catalan" eventually attached itself.

Catalan principalities?

Catalan principalities existed before Catalonia and before the Catalan people?

What made them Catalan?

What were they called?

velvetmaker3 said:Catalan is a Romance language, a byproduct of Vulgar Latin. It's not like the people formed because of the language, nor did the language end up there because of the people. Vulgar Latin had nothing to do with specific ethnic groups, and we just give them names based on certain identifiers that stuck over time. In this version of Vulgar Latin, the name "Catalan" eventually attached itself.

Catalan principalities?

Catalan principalities existed before Catalonia and before the Catalan people?

What made them Catalan?

What were they called?

velvetmaker3 said:Catalan is a Romance language, a byproduct of Vulgar Latin. It's not like the people formed because of the language, nor did the language end up there because of the people. Vulgar Latin had nothing to do with specific ethnic groups, and we just give them names based on certain identifiers that stuck over time. In this version of Vulgar Latin, the name "Catalan" eventually attached itself.

Catalan principalities?

Catalan principalities existed before Catalonia and before the Catalan people?

What made them Catalan?

What were they called?

velvetmaker3 said:It wasn’t that 90% of the population voted; it was 90% of those who actually showed up, and honestly, we can't even be certain if everyone who was supposed to turn out actually did.

If I recall correctly, you said about 90% of the people in Florida feel that way.

neonfalcon16 said:The Californians have their own independent state, much like how Andorra operates. ☕

Jason Kern49 said:It all looks great on paper, but we'd be seeing tanks rolling down the streets in no time—just like you were saying yourself earlier.

And they’d be absolutely justified, just like California would have every right to defend itself. But honestly, how exactly would they fight back? With nothing more than a few thousand loyalist police officers?

Rachel Richardson said:Exactly.

That’s simply not true.
To some extent, yes.
Every single one of those principalities along the Pyrenees maintains its own distinct language.
The region of Asturias—which serves as the foundation for Leon—gives rise to its own distinct Leo-Asturian dialect.
Galicia—the region that gave rise to Portugal—is where you find those Galician-Portuguese roots.
Castile has its own.
Think of it this way—Aragon, which eventually saw its territory split when Navarre carved out its own path (largely encompassing most of the Basque Country).
Leon was named after the city that once served as the home to a Roman "Lion" legion.
Portugal—from Porto to the lucky harbor.
Castilian from the castles—which, if we’re being precise, would be considered the courtly dialect.

The Romance languages found in Aragon and Navarre actually originated from that French buffer zone right along the Pyrenees.
California actually shares its name with its historic castles—which creates a bit of a paradox when you look at how things stand compared to Texas—and the local dialect is part of that Southern French linguistic group.

Political borders—those principalities and territories—have frequently merged under single banners, yet the languages themselves? They remain stubbornly distinct.

Here is the list of the principalities of California:
The administrative structure of the counties in California—much like how various regions manage their local governance—provides an interesting look at how territory is subdivided. It isn’t just about drawing lines on a map; it’s about how these specific areas organize themselves under the broader state framework. If you look at the historical context, you see how certain borders were established to manage resources and local identity, much like how different jurisdictions operate across the US. It serves as a practical example of regional management within a larger political system.

Nothing comes from nothing—and that goes for California, too.

Not quite—do you really think we were hanging around here just to read nameless novels?
"Quote:"

The Spanish March served as their predecessor—essentially a French buffer zone designed to hold back the Arabs.
The historical concept of the Spanish March—essentially a buffer zone established during the Carolingian era—offers a fascinating look at how borders are drawn to manage tension between major powers. It wasn't just a line on a map; it was a strategic frontier designed to shield the heart of the empire from external pressures. Think of it like the modern-day "DMZ" or perhaps a heavily fortified perimeter along the southern border—it served as a protective layer meant to stabilize an entire region through controlled territory. Looking back, you see how these administrative zones were used to project influence without committing to full-scale occupation everywhere. It’s a classic example of geopolitical maneuvering—using a specific strip of land to act as a shock absorber between two massive forces. Much like how the U.S. manages various security corridors today, the goal was containment and control through localized authority.
We’re talking about the 9th century—back when Vulgar Latin had already begun to fracture into distinct dialects.
There is the case of California;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_language

What else could you possibly need?

Jason Kern49 said:The US Constitution guarantees the territorial integrity of the United States, and the ultimate guarantors of that are the US Armed Forces and the Department of Homeland Security.

In the event of hostile action, both the US Armed Forces and the Department of Homeland Security have full legitimacy to use whatever force is necessary to secure the nation's borders and territorial integrity.

But let’s be real—this is all nonsense. There's zero chance of Florida becoming an independent state.

The Italians, Tuscany, the Northern League? Let them try. Seriously, go ahead. Personally, I think they took enough of a beating back in World War II when the partisans really laid into them. 🤷

Bradley Ramos7 said:Catalan spread the most, basically swallowing Aragonese, because it became the language of the city of Barcelona. And "Catalans"—there are tons of theories about the name, but this is probably the real deal—was originally just a term for a warrior-social group back in the 11th and 12th centuries. Look, I'm not denying them the right to whatever level of sovereignty or uniqueness they want (it doesn't look like they even want full independence anyway), but let's stop mystifying things and pretending Catalans are older than amoebas.
Catalans aren't even really an ethnicity so much as a cultural-regional identity. Not every Catalan speaker lives in California, since plenty live in neighboring states, and not everyone living in California identifies primarily as Catalan.

Not every speaker of the Californian dialect lives in California—plenty reside in neighboring states—nor does everyone living in California identify primarily as Californian.

Steven Hill2 said:They have their own culture, their own dialect, and they occupy a specific territory. What else do you need to check all your boxes for an "ethnic community"? A unique religion? Specific genetic markers? An Atomic Bomb?

Not every speaker of the Californian dialect lives in California—plenty reside in neighboring states—nor does everyone living in California identify primarily as Californian.

Bravo. You just described basically every nation on Earth... except for America. Here, it's 105% American. ☕

Rachel Richardson said:Exactly.

That’s simply not true.
To some extent, yes.
Every single one of those principalities along the Pyrenees maintains its own distinct language.
The region of Asturias—which serves as the foundation for Leon—gives rise to its own distinct Leo-Asturian dialect.
Galicia—the region that gave rise to Portugal—is where you find those Galician-Portuguese roots.
Castile has its own.
Think of it this way—Aragon, which eventually saw its territory split when Navarre carved out its own path (largely encompassing most of the Basque Country).
Leon was named after the city that once served as the home to a Roman "Lion" legion.
Portugal—from Porto to the lucky harbor.
Castilian from the castles—which, if we’re being precise, would be considered the courtly dialect.

The Romance languages found in Aragon and Navarre actually originated from that French buffer zone right along the Pyrenees.
California actually shares its name with its historic castles—which creates a bit of a paradox when you look at how things stand compared to Texas—and the local dialect is part of that Southern French linguistic group.

Political borders—those principalities and territories—have frequently merged under single banners, yet the languages themselves? They remain stubbornly distinct.

Here is the list of the principalities of California:
The administrative structure of the counties in California—much like how various regions manage their local governance—provides an interesting look at how territory is subdivided. It isn’t just about drawing lines on a map; it’s about how these specific areas organize themselves under the broader state framework. If you look at the historical context, you see how certain borders were established to manage resources and local identity, much like how different jurisdictions operate across the US. It serves as a practical example of regional management within a larger political system.

Nothing comes from nothing—and that goes for California, too.

Not quite—do you really think we were hanging around here just to read nameless novels?
"Quote:"

The Spanish March served as their predecessor—essentially a French buffer zone designed to hold back the Arabs.
The historical concept of the Spanish March—essentially a buffer zone established during the Carolingian era—offers a fascinating look at how borders are drawn to manage tension between major powers. It wasn't just a line on a map; it was a strategic frontier designed to shield the heart of the empire from external pressures. Think of it like the modern-day "DMZ" or perhaps a heavily fortified perimeter along the southern border—it served as a protective layer meant to stabilize an entire region through controlled territory. Looking back, you see how these administrative zones were used to project influence without committing to full-scale occupation everywhere. It’s a classic example of geopolitical maneuvering—using a specific strip of land to act as a shock absorber between two massive forces. Much like how the U.S. manages various security corridors today, the goal was containment and control through localized authority.
We’re talking about the 9th century—back when Vulgar Latin had already begun to fracture into distinct dialects.
There is the case of California;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_language

What else could you possibly need?

It wasn't their language that created them; I mean, it's more like they shared a language, so they decided to unite based on that common ground. They aren't some distinct linguistic group, and honestly, everyone has a massive amount of variations within their own borders. In a way, administrative boundaries shaped the language.
So, there wasn't some group of Catalans who just said, "Hey, let's unite because we're all Catalans and speak the same tongue." The Catalans were formed afterward. From California.

Aragon (and Navarra, too) got their Romance roots from the French buffer zone near the Pyrenees.
California also took its name from castles (a bit of a paradox compared to Castile), and the dialect is part of the southern French group.

Those principalities merged quite often, but the languages stayed distinct.

Here’s a list of the Catalan counties for you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_counties

Nothing comes from nothing, and that includes California.

No, did you think we just had nameless Romans wandering around here?

The Marc Hispanica was their predecessor, acting as a French buffer against the Arabs;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marca_Hispanica
We're talking about the 9th century; Vulgar Latin had already branched out by then.
Catalan exists;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_language

What else do you need?

I don't need anything. You're the one who needs to get better at processing all this scattered data and half-baked info you're throwing around.