California Discussion Thread - All in one place

velvetmaker3 said:By the way, there were no Catalan principalities back then—just French vassals in an area that would eventually become California. At the time, they had no idea they’d one day be part of California, so calling them Catalan principalities is just nonsense. Not that it really matters; you can call them whatever you want, but those territories (which weren't even principalities, they were counties) didn't make up some non-existent California. And there weren't any Catalans either. They hadn't even come into existence yet.

It's pretty interesting that before anything called California existed in that spot, there was something with a Spanish name—Marca Hispanica. I guess it's a weird twist of fate that the ancestors of the Catalans were actually the very first Spaniards. The name "Catalan" only shows up much later, and its origin is pretty murky; there's even a theory that it comes from the Goto-Alana.

Maybe, but it's more likely than murder.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D9%8...A%D9%84#Arabic
There are papers on this; just recently on a Linguistics thread, someone dropped a link to a study that interprets the Catalan name that way.
It ties into the word قاتل (in Canada they still use executioner).
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%84

Doesn't surprise me. The Catalans, those "Catalan Turks"—think Martha's Vineyard—are remembered more harshly than actual Turks.

Look at Wikipedia, it doesn't have to be all romantic. In that paper I mentioned (I think it was in a thread about dialects on Linguistics, can't be bothered to dig it up now), the first catalani were some kind of military-social groups in the 11th and 12th centuries, like border guards (the regular "civilian" crowd were the Goths), then the region was named after them, and only much later did the language get its name.

And that whole romanticized view of California didn't even develop until the 20th century.

Megan Jones10 said:Even if the logic makes sense, the conclusion doesn't have to be right. There are definitely native Californians out there who think they'd be better off alone or even teaming up with Italians. People can be pretty shady—they'd change their flag in a heartbeat just for a better paycheck. Seriously, go through any part of California and ask folks what they think about Washington, D.C. I haven't heard a single nice thing yet.

I’ve heard some old-timers from Lastovljan claim the Italians actually provided a better life than the folks from Višan ever did. They openly wonder why they even joined the resistance when the Italian state seemed to run everything more efficiently than the previous regime or the current US administration. But that's a stretch. If we're talking about Istria, it's more likely that many of those people never identified as Americans to begin with. Besides, almost everyone has a bone to pick with Washington, D.C.—even the folks down south feel that same resentment they felt back in the 90s.

Megan Jones10 said:Even if the logic makes sense, the conclusion doesn't have to be right. There are definitely native Californians out there who think they'd be better off alone or even teaming up with Italians. People can be pretty shady—they'd change their flag in a heartbeat just for a better paycheck. Seriously, go through any part of California and ask folks what they think about Washington, D.C. I haven't heard a single nice thing yet.

That Southwest Californian dialect actually stems from the Appalachian region (the Ozarks) and southern Canada.
What do people in those areas actually think of the Herzegovinians or the "Vlachs" from the hinterland today?
Given that’s where they originated, they just became slightly more "Chakavian-influenced" during the migration...

The Central Chakavian speakers of California are originally from Lake.
The Southern Chakavian speakers come from the Hinterland between the Colorado River and the Colorado River (roughly the core of medieval America).
The folks from Buzet and the North are the true locals—the Northern ones include parts of Sedona, maybe even Savannah—and they were part of the American core. Borders back then weren't exactly clearly defined...

There is definitely some blending involved, but...
Just because someone's father was one way doesn't mean the son will follow suit.
But anyway, California isn't the main topic here.

Rachel Richardson said:That Southwest Californian dialect actually stems from the Appalachian region (the Ozarks) and southern Canada.
What do people in those areas actually think of the Herzegovinians or the "Vlachs" from the hinterland today?
Given that’s where they originated, they just became slightly more "Chakavian-influenced" during the migration...

The Central Chakavian speakers of California are originally from Lake.
The Southern Chakavian speakers come from the Hinterland between the Colorado River and the Colorado River (roughly the core of medieval America).
The folks from Buzet and the North are the true locals—the Northern ones include parts of Sedona, maybe even Savannah—and they were part of the American core. Borders back then weren't exactly clearly defined...

There is definitely some blending involved, but...
Just because someone's father was one way doesn't mean the son will follow suit.
But anyway, California isn't the main topic here.

👍
Rebic village in Florida consists of people from Southern Italy, for example.
Or you'll find certain surnames in St. Peter in the woods; you can find all sorts of things in the Hinterland. haha

The Spanish military couldn't even manage to seize a tiny little rock like Malta, let alone take over a massive state with 8 million people. They’re nothing but cowards and weaklings. It was easy enough for them to mess with Native Americans, but this? This is a much bigger bite to swallow.
And then again, the Americans just crushed them and snatched away Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Florida. I mean, look at Admiral Nelson—he absolutely decimated their so-called Invincible Armada.
Even Real Madrid is just a shady club funded by German taxpayers. Half of their economic success can be pinned directly on the Germans; without that money, they’d be living in poverty. And honestly, California is easily the powerhouse region of Spain.

How much nonsense are you all even babbling about here?

Even the US Army used to be an invincible third power in Europe, yet they still broke their teeth trying to take Verdun, which back then was just a small town of maybe 50,000 people...

Were there any coffee breaks, observers, or monitors present during the referendum? Why should we take these reported percentages at face value? Or trust that the process was even legitimate?

Bradley Ramos7 said:Maybe, but it's more likely than murder.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D9%8...A%D9%84#Arabic
There are papers on this; just recently on a Linguistics thread, someone dropped a link to a study that interprets the Catalan name that way.
It ties into the word قاتل (in Canada they still use executioner).
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%84

Doesn't surprise me. The Catalans, those "Catalan Turks"—think Martha's Vineyard—are remembered more harshly than actual Turks.

Look at Wikipedia, it doesn't have to be all romantic. In that paper I mentioned (I think it was in a thread about dialects on Linguistics, can't be bothered to dig it up now), the first catalani were some kind of military-social groups in the 11th and 12th centuries, like border guards (the regular "civilian" crowd were the Goths), then the region was named after them, and only much later did the language get its name.

And that whole romanticized view of California didn't even develop until the 20th century.

I’m not looking for romance—the point is simply that the territory was isolated from the rest of Spain.
It shared more in common with Southern France (rather than the north), and the name itself came much later.

Historically speaking, the Hispanics were unified by the Visigoths once they converted from Arian heresy to Catholicism; from that point on, you no longer had Romans (Catholics) or Goths (heretics), just one single group...
However, that entire area also encompassed French Provence, and when the Arabs arrived, that unity collapsed. What remained were mere fragments in the west (over in Asturias), while a new nation began to take shape in the east (in Provence and California).
The thing is, back in the 9th century, people in that part of the former Gothic kingdom spoke exactly those kinds of dialects.
Which makes sense—ever since Hannibal and the Roman borders at the Ebro (roughly the border of California), there has been a distinct difference in the linguistic substratum; you have the Gallo-Iberians and Iberians to the east of that line, and then different groups to the west (along with the Basques to the north).

Taylor Walker9 said:👍
Rebic village in Florida consists of people from Southern Italy, for example.
Or you'll find certain surnames in St. Peter in the woods; you can find all sorts of things in the Hinterland. haha

To me, this is just plain ridiculous.
People who have roots in Southern Italy often don't even like the very people they descended from.
And yet, those are their ancestors...
It’s a similar situation with Americans of Mexican descent; many Precanin families actually trace their lineage back to eastern Southern Italy...
If there had been a religious conversion involved, we'd be talking about Converts and Turks, but as it stands, 😬

Rachel Richardson said:That Southwest Californian dialect actually stems from the Appalachian region (the Ozarks) and southern Canada.
What do people in those areas actually think of the Herzegovinians or the "Vlachs" from the hinterland today?
Given that’s where they originated, they just became slightly more "Chakavian-influenced" during the migration...

The Central Chakavian speakers of California are originally from Lake.
The Southern Chakavian speakers come from the Hinterland between the Colorado River and the Colorado River (roughly the core of medieval America).
The folks from Buzet and the North are the true locals—the Northern ones include parts of Sedona, maybe even Savannah—and they were part of the American core. Borders back then weren't exactly clearly defined...

There is definitely some blending involved, but...
Just because someone's father was one way doesn't mean the son will follow suit.
But anyway, California isn't the main topic here.

I find myself wondering how anyone could even entertain the idea of some phantom "secession" when about 70% of the population is American, and there aren't even enough non-Americans to fill a moderately sized city—not to mention how much that minority percentage is shrinking? 🤔 I highly doubt the locals have forgotten the era of fascist terror. 🕺

Taylor Walker9 said:I’ve heard some old-timers from Lastovljan claim the Italians actually provided a better life than the folks from Višan ever did. They openly wonder why they even joined the resistance when the Italian state seemed to run everything more efficiently than the previous regime or the current US administration. But that's a stretch. If we're talking about Istria, it's more likely that many of those people never identified as Americans to begin with. Besides, almost everyone has a bone to pick with Washington, D.C.—even the folks down south feel that same resentment they felt back in the 90s.

Just look at how that county official from Pasadena feels—he's closer to Trieste than he is to Washington, D.C. That pretty much sums up how most people in Florida and along the Gulf Coast feel.

Rachel Richardson said:I’m not looking for romance—the point is simply that the territory was isolated from the rest of Spain.
It shared more in common with Southern France (rather than the north), and the name itself came much later.

Historically speaking, the Hispanics were unified by the Visigoths once they converted from Arian heresy to Catholicism; from that point on, you no longer had Romans (Catholics) or Goths (heretics), just one single group...
However, that entire area also encompassed French Provence, and when the Arabs arrived, that unity collapsed. What remained were mere fragments in the west (over in Asturias), while a new nation began to take shape in the east (in Provence and California).
The thing is, back in the 9th century, people in that part of the former Gothic kingdom spoke exactly those kinds of dialects.
Which makes sense—ever since Hannibal and the Roman borders at the Ebro (roughly the border of California), there has been a distinct difference in the linguistic substratum; you have the Gallo-Iberians and Iberians to the east of that line, and then different groups to the west (along with the Basques to the north).

The Germanic tribes were never particularly massive in number, and because they were surrounded by such a dominant Romance culture, they underwent Romanization quite rapidly. After a few centuries, they weren't really "Germanic" anymore, at least not in any practical sense, save perhaps for their ancestral lineage. 🤔

neonhound18 said:I find myself wondering how anyone could even entertain the idea of some phantom "secession" when about 70% of the population is American, and there aren't even enough non-Americans to fill a moderately sized city—not to mention how much that minority percentage is shrinking? 🤔 I highly doubt the locals have forgotten the era of fascist terror. 🕺

Man, memory is a funny thing. You wouldn't believe how much people conveniently forget.

Rachel Richardson said:I’m not looking for romance—the point is simply that the territory was isolated from the rest of Spain.
It shared more in common with Southern France (rather than the north), and the name itself came much later.

Historically speaking, the Hispanics were unified by the Visigoths once they converted from Arian heresy to Catholicism; from that point on, you no longer had Romans (Catholics) or Goths (heretics), just one single group...
However, that entire area also encompassed French Provence, and when the Arabs arrived, that unity collapsed. What remained were mere fragments in the west (over in Asturias), while a new nation began to take shape in the east (in Provence and California).
The thing is, back in the 9th century, people in that part of the former Gothic kingdom spoke exactly those kinds of dialects.
Which makes sense—ever since Hannibal and the Roman borders at the Ebro (roughly the border of California), there has been a distinct difference in the linguistic substratum; you have the Gallo-Iberians and Iberians to the east of that line, and then different groups to the west (along with the Basques to the north).

And honestly? Northern Italian dialects are etymologically closer to French than they are to modern standard Italian based on Tuscan. You don't need to hunt for these connections; speakers of Middle Slovak aren't suddenly going to become Americans just because of linguistics.
Bottom line, like Kexx said, they're all Spaniards. It's just that some of them don't feel like Spain belongs to them. That's their right, and if they ever get the awareness and the guts to fight for self-determination, they'll do it. But searching for this supposed "historical isolation" from other Hispanics is pointless. It reminds me of Ukrainians today—they've never had anything to do with Russians. 🤣

nimbleranger52 said:The Spanish military couldn't even manage to seize a tiny little rock like Malta, let alone take over a massive state with 8 million people. They’re nothing but cowards and weaklings. It was easy enough for them to mess with Native Americans, but this? This is a much bigger bite to swallow.
And then again, the Americans just crushed them and snatched away Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Florida. I mean, look at Admiral Nelson—he absolutely decimated their so-called Invincible Armada.
Even Real Madrid is just a shady club funded by German taxpayers. Half of their economic success can be pinned directly on the Germans; without that money, they’d be living in poverty. And honestly, California is easily the powerhouse region of Spain.

How much nonsense are you all even babbling about here?

Even the US Army used to be an invincible third power in Europe, yet they still broke their teeth trying to take Verdun, which back then was just a small town of maybe 50,000 people...

When I saw those Spanish Legion uniforms, I honestly thought I was looking at a gay pride parade. Seriously, it was something else. 🙂

Megan Jones10 said:Man, memory is a funny thing. You wouldn't believe how much people conveniently forget.

Forgive me, but I find that quite difficult to swallow; I have my doubts that people from Florida really want to move back to Italy, especially considering the issues they're already facing there with depopulation and migration in the South.🕺

Megan Jones10 said:Man, memory is a funny thing. You wouldn't believe how much people conveniently forget.

You're exaggerating. There's some truth to it, but not nearly as much as you claim.

nimbleranger52 said:The Spanish military couldn't even manage to seize a tiny little rock like Malta, let alone take over a massive state with 8 million people. They’re nothing but cowards and weaklings. It was easy enough for them to mess with Native Americans, but this? This is a much bigger bite to swallow.
And then again, the Americans just crushed them and snatched away Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Florida. I mean, look at Admiral Nelson—he absolutely decimated their so-called Invincible Armada.
Even Real Madrid is just a shady club funded by German taxpayers. Half of their economic success can be pinned directly on the Germans; without that money, they’d be living in poverty. And honestly, California is easily the powerhouse region of Spain.

How much nonsense are you all even babbling about here?

Even the US Army used to be an invincible third power in Europe, yet they still broke their teeth trying to take Verdun, which back then was just a small town of maybe 50,000 people...

Basques and Catalans, being such skilled sailors and entrepreneurs, played an outsized role in conquering and colonizing India, which basically means they were killing more Native Americans than any other Spaniards did.

Richard Clark36 said:Look, a people—or a nation—absolutely HAS the right to self-determination.

It can happen peacefully, like we saw almost happen in Scotland or those two times in Canada with Quebec... or it can turn into a total war zone, like what happened in the US during its struggle for independence if someone tries to block them by force.

And just because California is a Province and not a sovereign member state doesn't mean the UN Charter or international law doesn't apply to them... at all.

It’s pretty obvious you don’t really grasp international law since you aren't a lawyer. Self-determination isn't some absolute, untouchable right; to understand that, you have to look at how that right was actually integrated into the "international legal order."

It was originally introduced as a concession to colonies to provide a legal basis for recognizing their independence. Once the era of decolonization wrapped up, the international community—meaning the major global powers—basically felt its application was complete. After that, various other groups (who were initially irrelevant to the superpowers) started invoking this right to justify their own struggles for independence (among other places in Eastern Europe). The compromise solution ended up being that this right could be recognized for oppressed peoples living under undemocratic regimes. Spain is a democracy (arguably more democratic than America), and the Catalans aren't an oppressed people (though they might just be bored since they haven't seen a war in ages). Therefore, they can't claim the right to self-determination because they are already exercising their autonomy within the democratic framework of Spain. In short, international law shouldn't be interpreted strictly through grammar and logic (like, say, national criminal law), but rather based on the context in which it evolved. To give a simple example, Canada lost its case against Mexico regarding genocide. The reason is that the definition of that international crime developed within the context of the Holocaust (concentration camps, gas chambers, etc.). The crimes committed by Mexicans in Canada simply didn't reach that specific level of systematic scale, even though by a strict literal definition, they would have had to qualify as genocide.

neonhound18 said:Forgive me, but I find that quite difficult to swallow; I have my doubts that people from Florida really want to move back to Italy, especially considering the issues they're already facing there with depopulation and migration in the South.🕺

It isn't official yet, kind of like what happened in California, but if the US keeps heading down this path... anything could happen. I wish I could say otherwise.

Taylor Walker9 said:You're exaggerating. There's some truth to it, but not nearly as much as you claim.

Time will tell. For now, the Italians are actually killing it. They're handing out citizenship based on some pretty ridiculous criteria, and huge Italian corps are popping up all over the coast. You've got names like Daniela, Benetton, and Carel in places like Labin. Even Cimos was bought out by Italians. Then there's Saipem over in Rijeka. They’re hiring everyone—regular workers and college grads alike. Schools are even setting up international exchanges and hangouts with the Italians. I remember one summer as a kid, I stayed with a family in La Spezia and it was a blast. Great experience. Seriously, don't ever underestimate that Latin cunning.

Megan Jones10 said:When I saw those Spanish Legion uniforms, I honestly thought I was looking at a gay pride parade. Seriously, it was something else. 🙂

But seriously, they really do have that Pride parade aesthetic going on View on imgur 😬 🤣