Showing posts with label New Nations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New Nations. Show all posts

Italian guy creates his own nation

Italy has always been a land of micronations, city-states, and enclaves. Even today, San Marino and Vatican City are tiny independent nations surrounded by Italian soil. So why not one more? That's the idea of Luca Sellari, the new mayor of the Italian city of Fillettino. When the Italian government decided to save money by forcing towns of less than 1,000 to merge with neighboring cities—that was enough to hatch Sellari's plan. He wants to make Fillettino (pop. 598) an independent kingdom. And who will be the monarch? Sellari thinks he'd do the job just fine. He even started printing up money with his face on it.

Sellari isn't the only mayor in Italy trying to save his city from annexation. Some towns on the bubble are inviting displaced Libyans to come and live. Others have pointed out that the cost savings of merging the small cities is actually less than the Italian Parliament spends on catering. It's not likely Fillettino will succeed, but politics in Italy has never been predictable. (You can read more here.)

The Rodney Dangerfield nation

"I don't get no respect" ...that was the catchphrase of comedian Rodney Dangerfield. And it might as well be the slogan of the new nation of South Sudan. 48 days after independence... and it's still not on Google Maps. These things take time, you might think. Not really. When rebel forces took control of Tripoli this week, Google changed names on its Libya map within hours. Yes, hours. But South Sudan is still waiting.  There's an excellent article about all this at Mashable. Maybe South Sudan should just change it's name to South Dangerfield. At least then it would get some attention.

Impossible to get an accurate world map?

Today is the first business day of a world with 196 nations (South Sudan was added on Saturday). So where can you get an updated world map? It's harder than you might think. National Geographic isn't selling one. One of the best sources of free maps is the CIA, but their Africa map has not been updated either. Maps.com isn't selling an updated map. Even Google and Bing are not showing the new nation (although I expect them to soon. Let me know when you see it). The British Guardian put out an updated map, but I must say that the coloring is annoying, and it's not easily downloaded. One might expect this lack of maps if South Sudan had been created by some overnight coup. But that's not the case, this country was the result of a treaty signed 6 years ago.... plenty of time to get up to speed. The oddest example is the CIA... the guys who are supposed to be ahead of the curve in world affairs. I'm sure they're not stumbling around today, "What, a new nation?! We better get on this!" So, to reassure the American public that they are on top of things... please, update your maps, CIA.
[My map is only regional, but you can see it here.]

Why Sarah Palin should be in Sudan

Last week, Sarah Palin reversed her plan to go to Africa for July 9th creation of the world's newest nation: South Sudan. That's too bad. No matter what you think of Sarah Palin, she really should go there. Her presence quite possibly could save lives. Here's the deal: Sudan is suffering from genocide, and when famous folks go there, the region gets media attention—and that makes it harder for mass murders carry out their evil deeds. That's why George Clooney went... good for him! And Franklin Graham has gone dozens of times, setting up hospitals, and doing other charitable work.

In the Arab (and Muslim) north, they want to operate under Sharia law. In the Black (and Christian) south, they don't. That's the reason for splitting the country in two. But if that was all there was to it, this wouldn't be much of a story. The thing is, as Graham explains it, northerners have been exterminating those in the south. Graham adds that “Pastors were nailed to trees. We have been able to identify 1,000 churches destroyed.” The genocide continues because the world has not paid much attention. But when celebrities show up.... well, the world notices. Things get better. That's the power of celebrity (like it or not!)

Sarah Palin had announced she would go for the July 9th birth of the nation, but last week she cancelled—without a good excuse. Fox personality Greta Van Susteren also planned to go... then she cancelled too. Even Secretary of State Hillary Clinton cancelled her plans to go because of "security concerns." That's all too bad. We need more famous people in Sudan, not less. Hey, let's send those Kardashians over... maybe they can do something useful for a change.


Sudan's split is looking ugly

It's just a matter of days now until Sudan splits into two nations, and the divorce is looking ugly. The problem is that the south has the best oil fields, but the north has the pipeline that gets the oil to market. So they have to work out a deal. I'm not optimistic. Heck, the NFL can't even work out a deal. The two Sudans haven't even agreed on a border yet! That's like walking in to the lawyer's office to sign the final divorce papers... without having settled who gets the kids. This can't go well. Then again, Sarah Palin will visit on the day the split becomes official, so maybe she can negotiate the whole thing. Sure. (My map above shows the pipeline and oil fields) More from Reuters.

Sarah Palin's birth of a nation

On July 9th, South Sudan becomes the world's newest nation. That same day, Sarah Palin plans to visit South Sudan. I can't decide if this is good, bad, or just weird. I can say that this has been under-reported in American media. First of all, the border remains something of a war zone, so I hope Sarah Palin is packing heat. Kidding aside, is it really wise for Palin to release information about her trip so far in advance? When the president or other high official goes to a war-torn country, it's all top secret until they are actually on the ground.... because (if it's not obvious) that gives bad guys less time to plan.

I'm not saying Palin shouldn't go. Perhaps her presence will call attention to the atrocities in this ravaged country... or give encouragement to the (extremely) new government. But it seems like poor judgement to release this information so far ahead. (ABC News' Dana Hughes is one of the few reporters to stay on top of this story. ) More on South Sudan's nationhood in our previous post.

New country born July 9, 2011

Your globes and wall maps will be obsolete in just 30 days! That's because on July 9, a new independent nation enters the world. It's South Sudan, born of a treaty between the factions that split the nation of Sudan. The south, which is largely Christian, felt increasingly that independence was necessary to ensure religious freedom (Most northerners are Muslim). Even though this split is only a month away, I was surprised to find a lack of decent maps visualizing this historic change. I especially wanted to see a map that showed the marked climate differences between the dry Sahara north and the more fertile, wetter, south. I couldn't find a map like that, so I made one. The bigger version here has much more detail.  (updated, thanks SP)

Nationhood for Scotland

Just the name "United Kingdom" implies that at one time the kingdom was not so united. Even casual observers know that many folks in Northern Ireland would like to secede from the United Kingdom and join Ireland. But fewer people are aware that Scotland also has it's share of separatists who want to create a independent nation of Scotland. Reading about this in the Globe and Mail, I was surprised there was no map, but I guess everyone in the U.K. knows where Scotland is. But us Americans, we need a map. So here's a map of what the British Isles would look like under the separatists plan.

Rick Perry wants to be president.... of what?

North America's 4 biggest nations—according to Rick Perry.
What country does Texas Governor Rick Perry want to be president of? Late last week, he stuck his toe in the presidential waters, but he didn't clarify which country he thought he might want to lead. Remember, in 2009, he said Texas has a right to secede from the United States and form its own country. So is he considering running for president of the United States of America? Or the Nation of Texas?

Rick Perry might be a great potential US president—or not—I don't know. What I do know is that he makes a lot of mistakes about geography and history. For example, we noted before that he seems to think Juarez is in Texas (it's actually in Mexico). Also, while he's correct that Texas has a unique right to split into separate US states, there is nothing anywhere that supports his claim that Texas has a special right to secede from the Union. Creating new states is totally different from seceding... any 6th grader should understand that. America has added new states 37 times. But the US government has never allowed any state to secede. There was a big war over that.

Admittedly, there is a serious school of scholarship that suggests secession should be legal. Thomas Woods makes a compelling case. But even if that's so, Texas has no "special" right to consider secession. It has the same right that Idaho has.

And fast drivers take note... would a Perry presidency mean the whole country gets an 85 mph speed limit... like they have in Texas??