Reviving Prussia: should Slavs (Poles, Russians) return stolen German lands?

[Nordarya]

Screw them all. All those feudal lords used the German people for cannon fodder. The only solution in declaring their property the property of the German People (the state) and to scrap all their titles. In other words: a republicanism.


None should be granted as England has always used those ties to sow discord between Western European nations for the sake of maintaining "a balance of power". Britain's influence in Europe should be done away with altogether as Britain is just America's peg at this point. In fact: I would do away with all national Western European embassies in London and replace them with a EU embassy and demand that there should only be one UK embassy in Western Europe - to the European Union (or rather: European Community as we should go back to the Inner Six plus Switzerland and Austria). In fact: I would extend the same to both Russia, America and China. If they want to talk, they can talk to us as a collective - rather than going bilateral and playing us against each other.



Oh. Absolutely. I think regaining those drowned lands in Northern Germany and along the Dollart and Eems are much more important.


All were as bad as the other. Screw the lot.



As usually, you think too small. I'd rather see a federation along the Swiss model between the Inner Six and Switzerland and Austria.


It is what it is.


Cognitive dissonance. The hallmark of Anglo-Saxon political culture since time and memorial.

What a wonderful idea.. seeing how Britain and America work now. (sarcasm).


But you don't live in Europe and, consequently, not in the European reality.


No. It doesn't. It would merely be a continuation of the same politicies and we're not talking about Lebensraum here. Move along: the 19th century is over.


Not at all. The French and Germans don't have any problems with the current arrangement and all that needs to be done is to expand the protections for linguistic minorities and their political representation.


You must be living in a fantasy world then as the Hanseatic League, currently, is just a collaboration between cities around the Baltic Sea without any political basis.


Not really. Until the Eighty Years' War, the Dutch didn't really go beyond the Med, the Atlantic, the Baltic and North Seas.



You're hopelessly naive then as Leicester betrayed several towns to the Spanish and had to be re-called to England within a year. He had totally disgraced himself - both here at in London.

If Prussia got Poland and Saxony got Germany, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Feeling small are you, so leeching off of Europe through your own capital of Brussels.

Royal families served a diplomatic purpose better than today's atomisation of society, but I understand that Belgium is as artificial a nation as Switzerland and Europe, so caricatures about American conditions should be sent to your own paradise, for reviling Anglocentrism even as you want Flanders to be part of a larger Frank identity.

How does Byzantine bureaucratic superstatism embody a government of the people, by the people and for the people?

You're not really helping.

Since when do English and German countries have to be Borg automatons in order to have decent relations?

I happen to value Germany's offspring in Austria and Prussia, England's offspring in Virginia and New England in one way, Anglo-German kinship in another at the basis of Mittelgermanica.

Unhindered völkisch objectives are my ideal, not artificial political melodrama.

I only mean that Ostmark belongs to Bayern, that brotherhood of Germany and the Netherlands has been too long diverted by the Ostsiedlung, in agreement with you, save the French and Italians, who have their own thing and don't fit in, any more than the current EU agenda of the whole Continent of vastly different folks forced to cohabit.

Should Lorraine belong to the Netherlands instead?

What's wrong with the wishes of burgs to freely bond and work together in the North and East Seas, instead of the Blue Banana?

I only implied that the relationship of Burgundy and the Netherlands with Spain, had influenced this maritime expansion, especially in the context of English and French economic changes no longer focused on Flemish woolens, necessitating Dutch investments elsewhere in common with all others who sailed on the high seas.

The shift from Calais to the Netherlands was a sign of progress from being drowned in France and Spain, onward to Hanover and Saxony, with Danish relations lost by infertility and revived since, for it's great that England should cast off the yoke of 1066, working through Germanic political models like Lords Protector, having a Stadthouder and Electors, before Prime Ministers, to provide proper civil service competency in the Sovereign, rather than merely divine right.

[The Lawspeaker]

If Prussia got Poland and Saxony got Germany, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Feeling small are you, so leeching off of Europe through your own capital of Brussels.

Royal families served a diplomatic purpose better than today's atomisation of society, but I understand that Belgium is as artificial a nation as Switzerland and Europe, so caricatures about American conditions should be sent to your own paradise, for reviling Anglocentrism even as you want Flanders to be part of a larger Frank identity.

How does Byzantine bureaucratic superstatism embody a government of the people, by the people and for the people?

You're not really helping.

Since when do English and German countries have to be Borg automatons in order to have decent relations?

I happen to value Germany's offspring in Austria and Prussia, England's offspring in Virginia and New England in one way, Anglo-German kinship in another at the basis of Mittelgermanica.

Unhindered völkisch objectives are my ideal, not artificial political melodrama.

I only mean that Ostmark belongs to Bayern, that brotherhood of Germany and the Netherlands has been too long diverted by the Ostsiedlung, in agreement with you, save the French and Italians, who have their own thing and don't fit in, any more than the current EU agenda of the whole Continent of vastly different folks forced to cohabit.

Should Lorraine belong to the Netherlands instead?

What's wrong with the wishes of burgs to freely bond and work together in the North and East Seas, instead of the Blue Banana?

I only implied that the relationship of Burgundy and the Netherlands with Spain, had influenced this maritime expansion, especially in the context of English and French economic changes no longer focused on Flemish woolens, necessitating Dutch investments elsewhere in common with all others who sailed on the high seas.

The shift from Calais to the Netherlands was a sign of progress from being drowned in France and Spain, onward to Hanover and Saxony, with Danish relations lost by infertility and revived since, for it's great that England should cast off the yoke of 1066, working through Germanic political models like Lords Protector, having a Stadthouder and Electors, before Prime Ministers, to provide proper civil service competency in the Sovereign, rather than merely divine right.

It shows that you don't understand European politics (or indeed; Europe) at all (which is no surprise - given that you're American). Calais had nothing to do with us but you're probably talking about the 1600 expedition to Dunkirk to deal with the pirates. Which were a problem and we got as far as Nieuwpoort when the battle there pretty much wiped out both armies (still became a victory for the Dutch Republic but in death there is no victor). You mean that aristocracy managed to put a spell on people in much the same way as a raped and abused woman still makes excuses for her rapist: it's known as the Stockholm Syndrome and the sooner we cure ourselves of this mental illness, the better. In regards to Byzantine super statism: I suppose that you favour the complete breakup of the United States as well (which means that you become China's playground but we both know you won't: you want that division for us so you lot can continue to fuck up Europe as you've done for the last 100 years). The current order (in regards to maps) in Europe is good and sound and if Austria would like to rejoin Germany one day - then it's their affair.

You don't seem to understand the maritime part of Dutch history either: going for the Indies was an emergency step because of the Portuguese closing the market and all that chatter about the Burgundian Cross flag is bullshit: for Dutch, even if they still know that flag today, it's right up there with the swastika as it was a Spanish flag. It was a flag of occupation and I, personally, would wipe my arse with it.

[Blondie]

You don't get it.

Its not about being allies. it's about balance of power.

Our interest is a strong Greece with Constantinople + ex byzantine areas to defend middle eastern christians and Europe from south east.

[The Lawspeaker]

Is this in our interest ? I think our zone of interest is mainly focussed around the North Sea, the Baltic, the Western Med (for France and Italy), the Adriatic Sea and the Atlantic.

[Nordarya]

It shows that you don't understand European politics (or indeed; Europe) at all (which is no surprise - given that you're American). Calais had nothing to do with us but you're probably talking about the 1600 expedition to Dunkirk to deal with the pirates. Which were a problem and we got as far as Nieuwpoort when the battle there pretty much wiped out both armies (still became a victory for the Dutch Republic but in death there is no victor). You mean that aristocracy managed to put a spell on people in much the same way as a raped and abused woman still makes excuses for her rapist: it's known as the Stockholm Syndrome and the sooner we cure ourselves of this mental illness, the better. In regards to Byzantine super statism: I suppose that you favour the complete breakup of the United States as well (which means that you become China's playground but we both know you won't: you want that division for us so you lot can continue to fuck up Europe as you've done for the last 100 years). The current order (in regards to maps) in Europe is good and sound and if Austria would like to rejoin Germany one day - then it's their affair.

You don't seem to understand the maritime part of Dutch history either: going for the Indies was an emergency step because of the Portuguese closing the market and all that chatter about the Burgundian Cross flag is bullshit: for Dutch, even if they still know that flag today, it's right up there with the swastika as it was a Spanish flag.

Tell me again how I'm a backwater bumpkin who must grovel before your enlightened absolutism as a cultured European. This is why England wants out, so you can piss over your dunghill without interruption. For someone who denigrates monarchy so much, you sure put the Carolingians on a pedestal, pretending their unnatural agglomeration is preferable to national determination of just, say, Holland and Flanders as one body and not being cooped up with either Frisians or Walloons, who belong with Germany and France, respectively. As for the United States to drop Texas and Hawaii, that would be like the UK dropping Scotland and Ireland and is asymmetric to Europe. You were saying in the other thread about how Europe shouldn't be just a cultureless White racial amorphous blob, but here contradict yourself by insisting on overriding natural distinctions and enforcing artificial Eurocracy that's based on the fake Holy Roman Empire. Voltaire said it best, that the HRE was none of those things. You're the fantasist, crying about the Renaissance and Enlightenment, preferring anti-intellectual Romanticism.

You cannot fool anyone. The Netherlands was still tied to Burgundy through the Spanish Corridor by Orange and Nassau, whilst the Burgundian court and Flanders grew rich together from the start, whereas ridding yourselves of the Spaniards and Austrians was in complete concord with England. Habsburgs or not, Franks have always been in the Rhineland and it the Red Cross on White bothered you, it's because foreigners stole your legacy out from underneath you, no different than faced by the Hussite Bohemians with Papal sanction of both Luxemburg and Habsburg invasions and conquests. If you could not have Burgundy, at least there's always Switzerland. No wonder you're a civic nationalist: Belgium and Switzerland, peas in a pod. I'm glad that is only a state problem for Louisiana and Hawaii.

[The Lawspeaker]

Tell me again how I'm a backwater bumpkin who must grovel before your enlightened absolutism as a cultured European. This is why England wants out, so you can piss over your dunghill without interruption. For someone who denigrates monarchy so much, you sure put the Carolingians on a pedestal, pretending their unnatural agglomeration is preferable to national determination of just, say, Holland and Flanders as one body and not being cooped up with either Frisians or Walloons, who belong with Germany and France, respectively. As for the United States to drop Texas and Hawaii, that would be like the UK dropping Scotland and Ireland and is asymmetric to Europe. You were saying in the other thread about how Europe shouldn't be just a cultureless White racial amorphous blob, but here contradict yourself by insisting on overriding natural distinctions and enforcing artificial Eurocracy that's based on the fake Holy Roman Empire. Voltaire said it best, that the HRE was none of those things. You're the fantasist, crying about the Renaissance and Enlightenment, preferring anti-intellectual Romanticism.

You cannot fool anyone. The Netherlands was still tied to Burgundy through the Spanish Corridor by Orange and Nassau, whilst the Burgundian court and Flanders grew rich together from the start, whereas ridding yourselves of the Spaniards and Austrians was in complete concord with England. Habsburgs or not, Franks have always been in the Rhineland and it the Red Cross on White bothered you, it's because foreigners stole your legacy out from underneath you, no different than faced by the Hussite Bohemians with Papal sanction of both Luxemburg and Habsburg invasions and conquests. If you could not have Burgundy, at least there's always Switzerland. No wonder you're a civic nationalist: Belgium and Switzerland, peas in a pod. I'm glad that is only a state problem for Louisiana and Hawaii.

England should never have been in in the first place. It's contributions to Europe, from a diplomatic and historo-political point of view are almost entirely negative. The fact remains that the Carolingians, for all their murder and bloodshed, did do something few other crowned bands of criminals have ever done: build the foundation for a civilisation. From the Rhineland to Tuscany, to Brabant to Austria - we all share common items in the culture. Particularly religiously and a feudal history. Now feudalism is highly negative but it also led to closely-knit communities and a strong sense of wanting local control over affairs (the German and Italian city states and the current way in which the German, Swiss, Austrian and Belgian states are organised - and to a degree also the Italian and the Dutch- are reflective of this. In fact: France too used to be far less centralised in the past).

Now, what I suggest is that the countries of Western Europe act according to their traditions and come closer together - not in an empire of some sort, but in a league or a federation where the EU coordinates foreign policy, defence and diplomacy because we both know that Kleinstaaterei leads to a fragmented Western Europe being subjugated by the United States. Which is why you Americans used your lap dog Britain in an attempt to breakup the EU because they are in competitor. So all your romantic chatter about Kings and Empires and a non-existent voelkisch ideology is just an attempt to deflect from the situation at hand: you're acting in bad faith, sir, and you know it !

Indeed: Maine and Texas are so different that they should never be in the same Union. Let Mexico rule the South-East and China take over California. America is better off separated.

[Nordarya]

England should never have been in in the first place. It's contributions to Europe, from a diplomatic and historo-political point of view are almost entirely negative. The fact remains that the Carolingians, for all their murder and bloodshed, did do something few other crowned bands of criminals have ever done: build the foundation for a civilisation. From the Rhineland to Tuscany, to Brabant to Austria - we all share common items in the culture. Particularly religiously and a feudal history. Now feudalism is highly negative but it also led to closely-knit communities and a strong sense of wanting local control over affairs (the German and Italian city states and the current way in which the German, Swiss, Austrian and Belgian states are organised - and to a degree also the Italian and the Dutch- are reflective of this. In fact: France too used to be far less centralised in the past).

Now, what I suggest is that the countries of Western Europe act according to their traditions and come closer together - not in an empire of some sort, but in a league or a federation where the EU coordinates foreign policy, defence and diplomacy because we both know that Kleinstaaterei leads to a fragmented Western Europe being subjugated by the United States. Which is why you Americans used your lap dog Britain in an attempt to breakup the EU because they are in competitor. So all your romantic chatter about Kings and Empires and a non-existent voelkisch ideology is just an attempt to deflect from the situation at hand: you're acting in bad faith, sir, and you know it !

Indeed: Maine and Texas are so different that they should never be in the same Union. Let Mexico rule the South-East and China take over California. America is better off separated.

If Europe was organised by meta-ethnic and ethnic lines, like the stem duchies of Deutschland, or Normandy, Burgundy and Gothic Aquitaine in France, that would be better than fake countries like Belgium and Switzerland.

It's you in bad faith, always downvoting and changing the subject when you fail to make a case without sneering and venomous hypocrisy in vain attempts to "put me in my place"--a tall tulip syndrome you've got. I don't think Charlemagne's empire made as much sense as that of Augustus and it's not out of an inferiority complex about not being Græcoroman. We Teutons should keep as Theodoric the Great and remain autonomous folks with much in common, not Mediterranean wannabes, but it's perfectly fine for the Byzantines to have done it their way. I'm not one for one-upsmanship about imperial titles and ecumenical ownership beyond my own folk. The fact that we Anglo-Saxons have accomplished much without resorting to the half-arsed Mediterranean establishment you worship, should be a beacon of light for fellow Teutons, but you prefer self-delusion and fighting over the scraps of haplogroup J.

More bad faith from you: I never wished countries on the Continent harm from any quarter. On the contrary, I have lauded Anglo-German revitalisation in the original progress made before Bismarck ruined this and beckoned the WWI arms race. In your sick and twisted mind, Germany and England would return to feudal servitude before Italy and France.

[The Lawspeaker]

If Europe was organised by meta-ethnic and ethnic lines, like the stem duchies of Deutschland, or Normandy, Burgundy and Gothic Aquitaine in France, that would be better than fake countries like Belgium and Switzerland.

It's you in bad faith, always downvoting and changing the subject when you fail to make a case without sneering and venomous hypocrisy in vain attempts to "put me in my place"--a tall tulip syndrome you've got. I don't think Charlemagne's empire made as much sense as that of Augustus and it's not out of an inferiority complex about not being Græcoroman. We Teutons should keep as Theodoric the Great and remain autonomous folks with much in common, not Mediterranean wannabes, but it's perfectly fine for the Byzantines to have done it their way. I'm not one for one-upsmanship about imperial titles and ecumenical ownership beyond my own folk. The fact that we Anglo-Saxons have accomplished much without resorting to the half-arsed Mediterranean establishment you worship, should be a beacon of light for fellow Teutons, but you prefer self-delusion and fighting over the scraps of haplogroup J.

More bad faith from you: I never wished countries on the Continent harm from any quarter. On the contrary, I have lauded Anglo-German revitalisation in the original progress made before Bismarck ruined this and beckoned the WWI arms race. In your sick and twisted mind, Germany and England would return to feudal servitude before Italy and France.

Again: you don't get it at all. You're not a Teutone (for starters) but a foreigner. An American. The Anglo's did indeed have a great past - knocking out small tribes around the world. As for Teutons - don't speak about Germans as if you belong to them). And what I propose is much the same as we have now: only with genuine Swiss-style democracy for those with a certain intellect - rather than your feudal fantasies. Like Hitler - you don't understand the differences between Germans and British btw. There is no Anglo-German friendship but a strong Franco-German one.

[Nordarya]

Again: you don't get it at all. You're not a Teutone (for starters) but a foreigner. An American. The Anglo's did indeed have a great past - knocking out small tribes around the world. As for Teutons - don't speak about Germans as if you belong to them). And what I propose is much the same as we have now: only with genuine Swiss-style democracy for those with a certain intellect - rather than your feudal fantasies. Like Hitler - you don't understand the differences between Germans and British btw. There is no Anglo-German friendship but a strong Franco-German one.

If I'm not a Teuton or even a Saxon, you aren't either a Teuton or a Frank. Flanders is a schizophrenic pimple on the arse of Europe, where you lay your head up inside every night and disparage free peoples you divide and conquer by the Rapefugee immigration game. Don't pass the buck to Israel where you're guilty as sin itself for all of this. You're obsessed with your Franks and have no time for Saxons, but it doesn't make your cause a just one outside your pus bubble.

[The Lawspeaker]

If I'm not a Teuton or even a Saxon, you aren't either a Teuton or a Frank. Flanders is a schizophrenic pimple on the arse of Europe, where you lay your head up inside every night and disparage free peoples you divide and conquer by the Rapefugee immigration game. Don't pass the buck to Israel where you're guilty as sin itself for all of this. You're obsessed with your Franks and have no time for Saxons, but it doesn't make your cause a just one outside your pus bubble.

I am not from Flanders so, obviously, you have trouble reading. The Dutch are formed out of Franks, Saxons and Frisians so I have all three flowing in my bloodlines and I am in my own country. I don't have to larp - I know what my country is like.