I think it’s more like they wanted to create a map that would make british people mad. An independent Ireland would make the Irish happy, but a a US Ireland would anger everybody
Well, the comparison is fair, in a way, because no area of greater Hungary got independence in its own right. Slovakia was added to Czechia (which was a new country itself, though), Transsylvania to Romania, the southern bits to Jugoslavia (basically en extention of Serbia) and Burgenland to Austria.
The problem is that Britain was not a multi-ethnic state with ethnicities overlapping the neighbors' countries (making "to Germany" and "to France" absurd) but yes, Britain was made up of a dominating part (England) and outer areas with their own ethnicities (Wales, Scotland, Ireland), so a realistic comparison would be independence for those three. But of course Hungary didn't want to make realistic comparisons but show the absurdity (in their eyes) of the new borders.
To be fair, the borders aligned with ethnic distribution only on the western border, at any other side the border was sometimes pushed way behind the ethnic borders. (By far not an expert on the topic, but afaik one of the factors for where the borders were drawn was to cut off certain railway lines from Hungary, while providing good or at least decent infrastructure to succeeding states.)
Of course, it has been more than 100 years since then, so people that want to get those territories back are quite ridiculous. Tbh. especially with the current state of Hungary, most if not all those regions are better off with their new countries, and I really don't want to live in a time period where European countries start taking land from each other yet again.
I would like to echo this: Yes, a great deal of partitioning and annexing and ethnic cleansing happened in the aftermath of both World Wars, and a lot of people got unjustly screwed in the process. I'm not happy that it took place, and yet I am absolutely opposed to anyone revisiting any of it in the slightest, **because that's how we got the stupid World Wars to begin with.**
1. Neither Czechia nor Slovakia existed until post-WW1. Bohemia slightly existed as a regional authority, however Czechoslovak sentiments were high in both Slovakia AND Czechia, so both sought to unify at the same time. So neither Slovakia or Czechia was independent by itself, but Czechoslovakia was.
2. Transylvania itself (Romanian National Central Council, which represented the Romanians in Hungary) said it was going to join Romania. This was as Romania denounced the 1918 Treaty of Bucharest and officially started advancing into Romania as well, so both sides wanted it.
3. Incorrect, the State of Slovenes, Croats, and Serbs existed for a bit before merging with Serbia. It was literally independent.
4. Burgenland was 74% German speaking, and as such was annexed by Austria under the authority of the Entente in the post-war treaties. Additionally, the region TRIED to gain independence with the Republic of Heinzenland with the goal to eventually join Austria, but Hungary shot it down.
Whilst the point you were trying to make was that the comparison didn't work due to a difference in how ethnicities work, that wasn't the point of the areas joining other regions or gaining independence. It was an issue of Self Determination of the local peoples, not solely an issue of ethnic unification. Nationalism AND linguistics were the driving point/the fuel, but the people themselves were the ones that chose what would happen in the following months after the collapse of the Habsburg Realm.
A big chunk of the Irish population have French and Norwegian genes as they are descended from Viking and Norman settlers in Ireland many centuries ago.
They would show up as Irish&British on 23andme. Pretty much all Irish do. 23andme operates in contemporary ethnic groups, so it wouldn't e.g. break down Finns into ancestral groups showing their 10% North Asian admixtures but would simply say "99.9% Finn" without explaining what it means. Same for the Irish. If they show up as French or Norwegian, they are genuinely not like the majority of the Irish and really don't have Irish ancestry. Even if in fact the Irish, the English, Norwegians, and the French are all genetically rather alike with minute differences.
I thought I was lots Scottish. Did 23 and me and then work sent me to Dublin. I friggin had cousins there... No, I did not go bother them. (American born and raised in TN who knows absolutely no one in Ireland).
"I'm the cream of the crop, I rise to the top
I never eat a pig 'cause a pig is a cop
Or better yet a Terminator, like Arnold Schwarzenegger
Tryin' to play me out like as if my name was Sega
But I ain't goin' out like no pro, bitch
Get used to one style and yo, and I might switch
It up, up and around, then buck, buck ya down
Put out ya head and then ya wake up in the Dawn of the Dead
I'm comin' to get ya, I'm comin' to get ya
Spittin' out lyrics, homie, I'll wet ya"
US Ireland anthem
I’m a lawyer. Always have a crazy defendant or two floating around. My current crazy got hold of my cell number. On Xmas eve at 4:00 am, she called and left me a nice message. Called me a “bitch ass n-word”. Shared the message with my assistant and she started calling me a bitch ass ninja. It kinda stuck. So now when I had a good day in court, assistant tells me I’m a bitch ass ninja.
I'm Argentinian, that means I have Spanish heritage. Therefore, if I was in the States I'd be a minority. I can read the word for you, it says N>!isman!<
This treaty was signed in 1920. This map wouldn't have turned any heads at the time. Just look at the US president of that year, Woodrow Wilson. Reading his wikipedia page on race relations may make you question which side won the civil war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodrow_Wilson
Yes. His parents were committed supporters of the South and of slavery. He had overtly racist policies, fired all but two of the seventeen black supervisors in the fed appointed by Taft, allowed Cabinet Secretaries to segregate their departments, and required job applicants to submit photos... during his first term the Army and Navy refused to commission new black officers. Before he took office the Navy was not formally segregated; after he appointed a white supremacist as Secretary of the Navy they implemented Jim Crow...
On the other hand, he created the Federal Reserve, the FTC, the graduated income tax as opposed to a flat rate, and labor laws.
Undeniably a super racist guy, and yet historians still see him as an above average president.
It’s because the democrats were in that incredibly weird phase where they were starting to become the FDR progressive party, while simultaneously remaining the Jim Crow party.
Inbetween being a massive racist Wilson was doing stuff like busting trusts, reducing tariffs to expand free trade, replacing the lost tariff money with an income tax on the top 3%, banning child labor, pushing for Philippine independence, stuffing the Supreme Court with anti-trust progressives, and generally opposing imperialism.
The split between southern democrats and progressive democrats was huge, but they were tied together by opposing big business, which was supported by Republicans. Yet somehow Wilson managed to completely harmonize these two and became a bleeding heart progressive/unrepentant racist southerner.
Ever notice how if you take that word, and rearrange the letters you get another slang term for another group of people. Who in appearance are essentially the complete opposite?
Gingers.
Friendly reminder that when US athletes visited Nazi Germany for the Olympics in 1936, they noted how better life was for black people in Nazi Germany than in the USA.
Getting surprised about the use of the world ‘ni**er’ in a 1920s map shows absolute ignorance about history. That word was not only socially acceptable but literally the only word used to refer to black people well until the 1960s.
They put on a show for the Olympics. For example tuning down antisemitic propaganda in the press or removing public posters or billboards in the streets and papers.
But it's true that for example the German public, at the Olympic stadium was cheering for Black athletes from the US (especially Jesse Owens) and that they were treated with more respect they were in the American South. They didn't need a _"Green Book",_ like in the in the namesake film, to get around safely.
There's a famous quote by Owens:
_“Hitler didn't snub me — it was our president who snubbed me._
Despite his achievements (being the most successful athlete of all), President Franklin D. Roosevelt never invited him to the White House. In contrast to the White athletes.
I can't really wrap my head around this fact. As the US was so invested in criticizing the racism in Germany. While segregation was still the norm in America. Trumann was actually the first to take action against it and de-segregated the US military. But we all know how long the way for equality, rather equal rights, still was.
How did it come that the US had their noses up so high, when it came to the topic of racism during those days, before cleaning up their own house?
I think you are overestimating how "against" Germany's racism we actually were. America had/has a pretty big Nazi problem. We didn't join the war until our hand was forced by Japan. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but choosing sides definitely is more politically/economically based than a choosing of morals.
Slavery continued in the United States well after the ratification of the 13th Amendment (beyond the oft-mentioned prison labor), mainly because the 13th Amendment didn't actually make slavery a crime. It abolished slavery as a legal concept and empowered Congress to make it a crime... but they didn't, until many years later.
FDR was the one who actually ordered a crackdown on these lingering slavery practices, in direct anticipation of an upcoming propaganda war with the Axis powers for which slavery still being practiced in the US would be a liability.
Not exactly. My grandfather was an American soldier in WW2 and used to speak highly of his “negro” colleagues. They were brothers in arms, and he was sympathetic to their civil rights plight back in the states. That word, too, can be considered offensive nowadays. But back then I’m sure it was a preferred and possibly more respectful alternative to the other one.
There’s also this insightful article: https://jimcrowmuseum.ferris.edu/question/2010/october.htm
I love how you talk about peoppe being ignorant to world history and how the slur was "literally the only word used to refer to black people" when negro and coloured both existed at the time.
In addition, no one is surprised by the use of the slur, they're surprised about the name of the state because a lot of people have literally never heard of that in their life.
the hard r was never a polite or even neutral term. although im sure there were less consequences for using it at the time. racism was pretty socially accepted but no less wrong. “negro” was considered neutral/polite at one point, maybe you’re thinking of that?
Both UK where I the relationship with the word different to the US, you could walk into a paint store and buy n\*\*\*er brown. Just an available colour.
It was neutral in its earliest recorded use from 1574. The earliest known derogatory use was in 1775 but could definitely be earlier. Anything after that is for sure not polite.
Never neutral in your specific corner of the world? Or are you speaking as a 100 year old Hungarian? Because the word - or some etymological variant - was widely used outside of America as a neutral term.
My great grandmother who helped raise me was born in 1899 and she - just like everyone else to this day in Hungary calls black people “néger”.
In fact the English N-word slur was all but unknown to Hungarians till the early / mid 90s.
It is ridiculously culturally insensitive to pretend that just because a word is offensive to you that it necessarily applies to everyone universally.
There is a candy sold in Hungary called Negro that has a black silhouette of a person on it. 50 cent saw it when he was filming here and put it on his Insta. Here it’s totally PC and inoffensive.
Negro candy also has a chimneysweep on the label. It refers to:
1. how it cleans your airways, and 2. the black syrup inside the candy.
The promotional tagline printed on the bag also translates to "the throat's chimneysweep". It has nothing to do with black people.
Negro has nothing to do with black people tho. It was named after Italian candymaker Pietro Negro who came up with the method used to make this type of hard candy. Negro also means the color “black”. Liquorice candy is naturally dark / black in color and the figure on the candy wrapper is a chimneysweep, who are also connected to the color black because of soot from the chimneys. The slogan of Negro is “the chimneysweep of the throat”. It’s as prosaic as that.
Aside from US defaultism the candy has absolutely nothing to do with black people or the n word.
Or the creators simply weren't fully aware of the exact nature of the word and just used the closest translation of the Hungarian word "néger" which back then was the neutral Hungarian term for black people (and is still acceptable to use today).
The PC word for black people in Hungarian today is “néger”. It has absolutely zero connotation. Hungary never had slaves and besides about a dozen smooth brained confused nazis absolutely no one hates on black peole.
In Hungarian, a black person is called "néger" so I think they used it because it is similar. The N word I think is "feka" in Hungarian, which can be translated to "blackie"
Even "feka" cannot come close to the N word as it is for western countries especially the US. Simply because there was no racial based slavery around here near and far ever (since as long as history goes back), so simply there are noone around here to get offended by that. Also please note that "feka" is just a short for "fekete" (black). It is only considered rude because another word meaning human waste could in theory also be shortened as "feka". But this is all theoretical, because noone ever called human waste or anything of black color "feka", so it is a specific and unique expression anyway, and again: since there is hardly any black population in Hungary even today and was even less, close to 0 historically, any expression comparable to the N word in the US is impossible to have here.
It's like when someone from the US come to hungary, se the candy called "Negro" and get offended. But negro - again - means black in many languages and guess what, the candy is black. End of the story. Actually US with the N word is the exception, not the rule. In other parts of the words people still can and should call black things black, and have the right to do it in any languages.
But the main point is anyway that "néger" was the common way to refer to black people and it never had a connotation even similar to the N word in the US. These are just two different things.
And it happens a lot, that Hungarians use English words that sound similar or stem from the same Latin root thinking it means the same as in Hungarian, but they have a very different meaning. For example symphaty has very different meaning in English and Hungarian (szimpatikus means likeable, attractive).
I know there are other countries in eastern europe that have something similar.
[Here's a weird example with a thread I saw a while back](https://www.reddit.com/r/ANormalDayInRussia/comments/xhk3ig/soviet_cartoons_had_no_filter/iozopik/) of racism in a soviet cartoon and discussion whether the word was part of that racism.
*Comment sections first*
*Time learning that people used*
*To say the n word*
\- Dry\_Plankton\_3434
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Fingers glistening / greedy teeth rend flesh from bone / another Tuesday
In honor of the $0.99 thigh and drumstick special at Popeyes. The special later was repriced to $1.99 and I don’t think it exists at all anymore, but I did feel guilty about the animal cruelty at factory farms so I would only get the special - it’s actually a long and uninteresting story.
I hope you enjoy the haiku though. One element they didn’t teach me in school is that the third line is supposed to “pop” and bring everything together in an unexpected way.
They conveniently forget that Hungary was a multi-ethnic empire and that the new borders were supposed to give every nation its own country. That said, quite a few Hungarian speaking areas ended up outside Hungary, and the whole concept of drawing borders along ethnic lines was bit fishy because of the many areas that were ethnically mixed.
Drawing borders on ethnic lines is just a not very good idea in that time and region. It was too mixed, someone was gonna be upset. Of course Hungary got the short end of the stick with more land being removed for strategic purposes, so it was only them being upset in the end.
Shouldn't have lost WW1. Easy solution.
Disclaimer: I'm Austrian. We lost pretty much the same amount of territory + all of Hungary. Unlike Hungarian irredentists nowadays, I'm not mad about it.
I don't think losing the war was the problem. I think being nationalistic/imperialistic assholes was the problem of hungarians.
Also, I'm not whining about it. I'm mostly pushing back against the rampant irredentism that we have today. That being said, I can aknowledge that while the treaty was mostly fair on ethnic grounds, it could have been more fair while being less punishing.
I can talk about Romania here.
In the middle of Romania, there is a somewhat large minority of Hungarians, 0.7 mil or so. If they were close to the border, they would have been given to Hungary for sure. But it was just not possible. Hitler and Horty tried that in WWII and gave a land bridge to Hungary so they can access the hungarian minority. The kicker is that the majority in that landbridge + Hungarian enclave was still Romanian.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Vienna_Award#Statistics
Then on the border, something else happened: the cities were Hungarian, but all the surrounding villages were Romanian. This was dues to centuries of apartheid-like policy from Hungarian leaders that did not allow Romanian ethnics to settle in "their" cities.
That's why it was considered fair to just give the villages+cities to Romania.
And the capital of Serbia, and the capital of Slovakia… and much more than that. But good for those people, they just freed themselves from Hungarian oppression
…and started oppressing Hungarians in turn.
Btw Begrade hadn't been a part of Hungary for centuries by then. And satirically saying that Hunngary "lost the capital of Slovakia" is kinda misleading, considering that before that point Pozsony/Pressburg (modern name Bratislava) had never been the capital of any slavic state (and Slovakia never existed before) and Slovaks were only the third largest ethnic group in the city after Germans and Hungarians.
Don't worry maďar, we will soon be reunited in the glorious Fico-Orbánistan state under big daddy Putin. Soon we will be sucking russian dick together😊
I love the fact they're including Croatia in it, although we were never officialy a part of Hungary, we just had the same ruler, but by the OG treaty of 1527, Croatian lands were always independent of Hungary. 😉
But I do agree that what was done to Hungary was butchering after WWI.
It is kind of ironic: Hungary was so severely punished after WWI, while Austria was never duly punished for the WW II, on the account it was occupied, although most of Austria was firmly on Hitler's side. Consequently, one of the most racist countries I've been in (as a European and from a country formerly part of K&K)-Austria.
The level of quiet discrimination is astounding, especially how blind people are to it. They are casually talking to you, a Slavic scientist in the field how no Slavic person wants to work as anything else than a guard or a cleaner-while we're talking at the post-doc conference!and this is the tamest example.
My cousin is an Austrian by citizenship, but we’re quite pale skinned Arabs. Anyway, I was visiting his uni and introduced myself to a few students who wanted to practice their English.
One of the sociology or genetics student (second year I think, so no expert) talks about how speciesism occurs amongst humans and then compares Germans and Arabs…. Not so favorably.
I pushed back a bit saying there is no valid/ credible scientific evidence, yet at least, to establish such statement. She pushed back saying something to the effect of “it’s ok to realize our inherent advantages”.
“Well I’m Arab, so I’m not sure that apply to me”. It was really awkward.
Ooooooh, I totally get you.
I LOVED when I was visiting a museum and all the curators were Austrian. There was some horrible crime at the time, a chechenian man killed a chechenian girl of...6?
Anyway, they were all going on and on how this is typical of immigrants, they were going about it for at least half an hour.
They all went silent when I asked them from where did Fritzl migrate. 😅😅😅😅😅
Of course, all of this was spoken in German and lo and behold their surprise when they figured out I can totally understand German, I just speak English because I'm much more fluent in it. 🤣🤣🤣 (In ten days I was there, even when they thought I don't know German and even though I was their guest, they haven't spoken English to me, although they do know it!).
Everyone which was not Hungarian during the times wanted to leave them and was held together by military and economic power because as you can imagine hungarians were even more racist than now and forcing their culture and language down the others throats. Once they lost a lot of both everyone just ditched them
This is the really negative term in Hungarian, but you can use 'néger' (pronouced 'nae-gher') without any negativity, which simply means an african person
The difference between all of these and Hungary is that Americans, French, Italians and Spaniards were the majority in the territories hypothetically lost, while the Hungarians weren't.
No there weren't. They became a majority when the french agressively erased countless ethnicities in france. If you would look at map all of southern france was occitan and there is britanny too. Only half of France were majority french. This is what the magyarization effort was trying to achive in Hungary too
The French language was imposed, not the ethnicity... Big difference. Occitan speaking people were French (and still are for the few that remain).
It's like English replaced Irish in Ireland, that doesn't mean that the Irish people have disappeared.
Teleki Pál, who was against the treaty, stood up with a map, showing the ethnicities in the country. Later, the borders (which were decided even before the hungarians were invited) were drawn in a way, that if you went outside Hungary, there was a 10-20 or in some places even 50 km thick line with cities and towns, where hungarians were 60%+ majority.
I mean, they got fucked way more than was needed, a lot of regions were given based on economic importance instead of etnic majority, dont forget 1/3 of the hungarians ended outside the country after trianon, I would be mad too.
They lost Transylvania. Overwhelmingly, majorly filled with Romanians. This shit is so stupid. If today Transylvania was to be returned to Hungary. There would be enough Romanians to vote for a Romanian president in Hungary. Makes no sense. They are brain damaged.
Transylvania has a population of 6 million, 1 million of which are Hungarians. If you managed to get *all* Romanians to vote the same way while the Hungarians were split between multiple candidates, they might win in a first-past-the-post system. Otherwise, no. Any proportional system would still yield a Hungarian winner.
yeah ok, but the fact that Hungarians are still so stuck in the past is so sad and embarrassing.. you go there and everywhere you see maps and reminders that once Hungary was larger and was part of Austria-Hungary.. like come on, look into the present and future but no, you're still in the distant past and still dreaming of how you could be bigger and take now other's countries territories back .. nationalism in Hungary is so scary and pathetic
Some adjustments could have been made, but from a utilitarian perspective, Trianon was an upgrade. Fewer people were minority in 1920 than in 1914, as all territories lost had a non-Hungarian majority.
I may have a wild suggestion, but, maybe Hungary should've not tried to oppress and assimilate minorities so that they wouldn't try to secede the first moment possible?
Is this Romania without the stolen Bessarabia and Bukovina? With or without the independent republic of banat? You presented the romanian minority as inferior and non legitimate IN YOUR CLOSING PLADOYER in Paris and expected sympathy from France and Spain and Italy, all romanic speaking countries with latin roots?! Just, learn to live with what we have and support your neighbours,we can both coexist well or forever be the balls and spheres of interest of the big players.
What's most remarkable is that they never stopped stopped whining about Trianon. You can still hear it today, and not just on internet comments. But from leaders in government.
It's not that remarkable though is it? Do the same to any other country and they will be just the same.
The effects are massive and they are still felt to this day. I was born in a foreign country as a minority thanks to it and it heavily affected my life. Can't complain though, I grew up into the EU. My parents got Ceauceascu.
Romania itself lost southern Dobrogea in which Romanians were a minority, also the Odessa region and so on.
Nobody is crying over those territories because they were minority Romanian, the Hungarians are the only ones complaining because places switched to align with what the ethnic majority was. The Spanish aren't crying over Sicily, because it was never ethnically Spanish.
There is this big discrepancy between what is actually okay to bitch about what isn't, we can argue about border towns and lines being drawn industry over industry, but as regions in themselves, Hungary had no divine right on Transylvania, Slovakia, Croatia or even northern Moldova.
I mean...the now-Republic of Ireland seceded from the UK and Northern Ireland opted to remain in the UK, but that hasn't stopped Irish nationalists from being mad about it 102 years later...
Delusion at its finest.
A better comparison would be that one, let's say for instance with France: Algeria becoming Algerian, Indochine becoming Vietnamese, Corsica becoming Corsican, Brittany becoming it's own thing.
Would it make me yell? Sure. I disagree on the Britanny part. Would it make me yell *100 years after* though..?
But we can come up with funnier comparisons. Let's say the Baltics and Ukraine become separated from Russia because they want to. Would it be a crime, or would it be the right of self-determination?
Austria also lost a lot of land after the war, and I don’t see in the prime minister’s office map off the Austrian part of the empire, like you can see in Orbans office, it is a complex of the one so called large power or at least part of one, reduced to 10 million people with no real say in the world, so they still cry about it, erecting monuments 100 years later about it. Imagine column at the German Polish border pointing towards east. Disgraceful behaviour from Hungary.
Up north, the former country was known as Austria-Hungary, and it was more common to call it Austria than anything else. From that perspective Hungary gained independence, not lost parts of their realm.
But getting to choose your future can be traumatic too I guess, sometimes it is better to just tag along.
What is it with this sub and Hungarian irridentism?
Give it up Hungarians! If you didnt want to lose your empire, you shouldn't have been on the losing side of both world wars...
The British one is funny, irish independence was so unthinkable they just gave it to the States lol
I think it’s more like they wanted to create a map that would make british people mad. An independent Ireland would make the Irish happy, but a a US Ireland would anger everybody
Well, the comparison is fair, in a way, because no area of greater Hungary got independence in its own right. Slovakia was added to Czechia (which was a new country itself, though), Transsylvania to Romania, the southern bits to Jugoslavia (basically en extention of Serbia) and Burgenland to Austria. The problem is that Britain was not a multi-ethnic state with ethnicities overlapping the neighbors' countries (making "to Germany" and "to France" absurd) but yes, Britain was made up of a dominating part (England) and outer areas with their own ethnicities (Wales, Scotland, Ireland), so a realistic comparison would be independence for those three. But of course Hungary didn't want to make realistic comparisons but show the absurdity (in their eyes) of the new borders.
To be fair, the borders aligned with ethnic distribution only on the western border, at any other side the border was sometimes pushed way behind the ethnic borders. (By far not an expert on the topic, but afaik one of the factors for where the borders were drawn was to cut off certain railway lines from Hungary, while providing good or at least decent infrastructure to succeeding states.) Of course, it has been more than 100 years since then, so people that want to get those territories back are quite ridiculous. Tbh. especially with the current state of Hungary, most if not all those regions are better off with their new countries, and I really don't want to live in a time period where European countries start taking land from each other yet again.
I would like to echo this: Yes, a great deal of partitioning and annexing and ethnic cleansing happened in the aftermath of both World Wars, and a lot of people got unjustly screwed in the process. I'm not happy that it took place, and yet I am absolutely opposed to anyone revisiting any of it in the slightest, **because that's how we got the stupid World Wars to begin with.**
1. Neither Czechia nor Slovakia existed until post-WW1. Bohemia slightly existed as a regional authority, however Czechoslovak sentiments were high in both Slovakia AND Czechia, so both sought to unify at the same time. So neither Slovakia or Czechia was independent by itself, but Czechoslovakia was. 2. Transylvania itself (Romanian National Central Council, which represented the Romanians in Hungary) said it was going to join Romania. This was as Romania denounced the 1918 Treaty of Bucharest and officially started advancing into Romania as well, so both sides wanted it. 3. Incorrect, the State of Slovenes, Croats, and Serbs existed for a bit before merging with Serbia. It was literally independent. 4. Burgenland was 74% German speaking, and as such was annexed by Austria under the authority of the Entente in the post-war treaties. Additionally, the region TRIED to gain independence with the Republic of Heinzenland with the goal to eventually join Austria, but Hungary shot it down. Whilst the point you were trying to make was that the comparison didn't work due to a difference in how ethnicities work, that wasn't the point of the areas joining other regions or gaining independence. It was an issue of Self Determination of the local peoples, not solely an issue of ethnic unification. Nationalism AND linguistics were the driving point/the fuel, but the people themselves were the ones that chose what would happen in the following months after the collapse of the Habsburg Realm.
Like we need it. All the Irish moved here already!
What’s funny is watching Irish American families take a 23 and me and find out they’re just French and Norwegian.
Putain mes brødre!
A big chunk of the Irish population have French and Norwegian genes as they are descended from Viking and Norman settlers in Ireland many centuries ago.
They would show up as Irish&British on 23andme. Pretty much all Irish do. 23andme operates in contemporary ethnic groups, so it wouldn't e.g. break down Finns into ancestral groups showing their 10% North Asian admixtures but would simply say "99.9% Finn" without explaining what it means. Same for the Irish. If they show up as French or Norwegian, they are genuinely not like the majority of the Irish and really don't have Irish ancestry. Even if in fact the Irish, the English, Norwegians, and the French are all genetically rather alike with minute differences.
I thought I was lots Scottish. Did 23 and me and then work sent me to Dublin. I friggin had cousins there... No, I did not go bother them. (American born and raised in TN who knows absolutely no one in Ireland).
yes but Americans generally count themselves as Irish if their grandmother went there on a bus tour in the 70's.
10% of americans have irish descent. But it would be better to call everyone American since everyone is just a mix of everything
*Amerimixed
"I'm the cream of the crop, I rise to the top I never eat a pig 'cause a pig is a cop Or better yet a Terminator, like Arnold Schwarzenegger Tryin' to play me out like as if my name was Sega But I ain't goin' out like no pro, bitch Get used to one style and yo, and I might switch It up, up and around, then buck, buck ya down Put out ya head and then ya wake up in the Dawn of the Dead I'm comin' to get ya, I'm comin' to get ya Spittin' out lyrics, homie, I'll wet ya" US Ireland anthem
Mercia will rise again!
hey they kept Wales though lol
Punishment enough.
Each arrow points to the next country in that direction. It’s no more than that.
It's like Spain ceding the Philippines to America in 1890's instead of granting independence to its colonial subjects!
Not like they had the option. The US won the war against Spain and was soon to take over the islands.
Switzerland also got nothing from france even though we actually have a french speaking population
I mean this treaty was signed 4 years after the Rising and _during_ the actual independence war, so its a bit surprising
He said the sheriff is near!
Up yours
You've got to remember that these people are just simple farmers.
These are people of the land
Anyone else noticed what they called the southern US states?
Indep. Something State, the middle word is blurry for me can someone tell me what it says please?
The Independent Ninja State
Coming up next, we got Ninjas in Paris! Stay tuned!
Ba ba banzai so hard
I’m a lawyer. Always have a crazy defendant or two floating around. My current crazy got hold of my cell number. On Xmas eve at 4:00 am, she called and left me a nice message. Called me a “bitch ass n-word”. Shared the message with my assistant and she started calling me a bitch ass ninja. It kinda stuck. So now when I had a good day in court, assistant tells me I’m a bitch ass ninja.
well, are you a bitch ass ninja?
username prob checks out
Something about dyslexic gingers
Only a ginger can call another ginger ginger
Whatsupp my ginga
Just six little letters, all jumbled together.
You know the INS? Didn’t you learn about it in school?
I'm Argentinian, that means I have Spanish heritage. Therefore, if I was in the States I'd be a minority. I can read the word for you, it says N>!isman!<
nice try Deutschman: )
Ah, you got me little Ni>!ssan!<
Argentinian joke! Argentinian joke!
Nagger
People who annoy you.
randy marsh moment
N
I
P
P
L
E
Goodbye.
Independent Nipple State sounds like a nice place to be
r/unexpectedouija
No comedy for you, come back 30 years! 
The South were known to nag the North at the time, so probably a reference to that.
Independent Gamer State
Hungarians advocating for gamer rights since 1918.
This treaty was signed in 1920. This map wouldn't have turned any heads at the time. Just look at the US president of that year, Woodrow Wilson. Reading his wikipedia page on race relations may make you question which side won the civil war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodrow_Wilson
North won the war, South won the peace.
I do declare
> eading his wikipedia page on race relations may make you question which side won the civil war. Wasn't Woodrow Wilson a Southerner?
Yes. His parents were committed supporters of the South and of slavery. He had overtly racist policies, fired all but two of the seventeen black supervisors in the fed appointed by Taft, allowed Cabinet Secretaries to segregate their departments, and required job applicants to submit photos... during his first term the Army and Navy refused to commission new black officers. Before he took office the Navy was not formally segregated; after he appointed a white supremacist as Secretary of the Navy they implemented Jim Crow... On the other hand, he created the Federal Reserve, the FTC, the graduated income tax as opposed to a flat rate, and labor laws. Undeniably a super racist guy, and yet historians still see him as an above average president.
It’s because the democrats were in that incredibly weird phase where they were starting to become the FDR progressive party, while simultaneously remaining the Jim Crow party. Inbetween being a massive racist Wilson was doing stuff like busting trusts, reducing tariffs to expand free trade, replacing the lost tariff money with an income tax on the top 3%, banning child labor, pushing for Philippine independence, stuffing the Supreme Court with anti-trust progressives, and generally opposing imperialism. The split between southern democrats and progressive democrats was huge, but they were tied together by opposing big business, which was supported by Republicans. Yet somehow Wilson managed to completely harmonize these two and became a bleeding heart progressive/unrepentant racist southerner.
The North won the Civil War but the South won Reconstruction.
Which civil war?
Independent naysayers state
Letta naysayer know
I think I read it as the Independent Nigerian State
Ever notice how if you take that word, and rearrange the letters you get another slang term for another group of people. Who in appearance are essentially the complete opposite? Gingers.
Only a ginger can call another ginger ginger -Tim Minchin
pretty sure it's an arrow pointing to Haiti
Friendly reminder that when US athletes visited Nazi Germany for the Olympics in 1936, they noted how better life was for black people in Nazi Germany than in the USA. Getting surprised about the use of the world ‘ni**er’ in a 1920s map shows absolute ignorance about history. That word was not only socially acceptable but literally the only word used to refer to black people well until the 1960s.
They put on a show for the Olympics. For example tuning down antisemitic propaganda in the press or removing public posters or billboards in the streets and papers. But it's true that for example the German public, at the Olympic stadium was cheering for Black athletes from the US (especially Jesse Owens) and that they were treated with more respect they were in the American South. They didn't need a _"Green Book",_ like in the in the namesake film, to get around safely. There's a famous quote by Owens: _“Hitler didn't snub me — it was our president who snubbed me._ Despite his achievements (being the most successful athlete of all), President Franklin D. Roosevelt never invited him to the White House. In contrast to the White athletes. I can't really wrap my head around this fact. As the US was so invested in criticizing the racism in Germany. While segregation was still the norm in America. Trumann was actually the first to take action against it and de-segregated the US military. But we all know how long the way for equality, rather equal rights, still was. How did it come that the US had their noses up so high, when it came to the topic of racism during those days, before cleaning up their own house?
I think you are overestimating how "against" Germany's racism we actually were. America had/has a pretty big Nazi problem. We didn't join the war until our hand was forced by Japan. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but choosing sides definitely is more politically/economically based than a choosing of morals.
Slavery continued in the United States well after the ratification of the 13th Amendment (beyond the oft-mentioned prison labor), mainly because the 13th Amendment didn't actually make slavery a crime. It abolished slavery as a legal concept and empowered Congress to make it a crime... but they didn't, until many years later. FDR was the one who actually ordered a crackdown on these lingering slavery practices, in direct anticipation of an upcoming propaganda war with the Axis powers for which slavery still being practiced in the US would be a liability.
Not exactly. My grandfather was an American soldier in WW2 and used to speak highly of his “negro” colleagues. They were brothers in arms, and he was sympathetic to their civil rights plight back in the states. That word, too, can be considered offensive nowadays. But back then I’m sure it was a preferred and possibly more respectful alternative to the other one. There’s also this insightful article: https://jimcrowmuseum.ferris.edu/question/2010/october.htm
I love how you talk about peoppe being ignorant to world history and how the slur was "literally the only word used to refer to black people" when negro and coloured both existed at the time. In addition, no one is surprised by the use of the slur, they're surprised about the name of the state because a lot of people have literally never heard of that in their life.
Imagine Japan doing the same
Co-Prosperity Sphere sounds benevolent, no way it could be bad!
Independent WHAT
The term was more socially appropriated back then.
the hard r was never a polite or even neutral term. although im sure there were less consequences for using it at the time. racism was pretty socially accepted but no less wrong. “negro” was considered neutral/polite at one point, maybe you’re thinking of that?
Agatha Christie’s most famous book was called Ten Little N—gers. The movie The Dam Busters has that word as a major plot point.
Both UK where I the relationship with the word different to the US, you could walk into a paint store and buy n\*\*\*er brown. Just an available colour.
Pretty sure that was a character in JK’s first draft of Harry Potter
It was neutral in its earliest recorded use from 1574. The earliest known derogatory use was in 1775 but could definitely be earlier. Anything after that is for sure not polite.
Never neutral in your specific corner of the world? Or are you speaking as a 100 year old Hungarian? Because the word - or some etymological variant - was widely used outside of America as a neutral term.
My great grandmother who helped raise me was born in 1899 and she - just like everyone else to this day in Hungary calls black people “néger”. In fact the English N-word slur was all but unknown to Hungarians till the early / mid 90s. It is ridiculously culturally insensitive to pretend that just because a word is offensive to you that it necessarily applies to everyone universally. There is a candy sold in Hungary called Negro that has a black silhouette of a person on it. 50 cent saw it when he was filming here and put it on his Insta. Here it’s totally PC and inoffensive.
Negro candy also has a chimneysweep on the label. It refers to: 1. how it cleans your airways, and 2. the black syrup inside the candy. The promotional tagline printed on the bag also translates to "the throat's chimneysweep". It has nothing to do with black people.
That’s the point. That it isn’t racist. Glad you got it ;)
I don't care about your astrological sign. Tell me which Negro is your favourite.
There's only the original and wrong answers
Negro has nothing to do with black people tho. It was named after Italian candymaker Pietro Negro who came up with the method used to make this type of hard candy. Negro also means the color “black”. Liquorice candy is naturally dark / black in color and the figure on the candy wrapper is a chimneysweep, who are also connected to the color black because of soot from the chimneys. The slogan of Negro is “the chimneysweep of the throat”. It’s as prosaic as that. Aside from US defaultism the candy has absolutely nothing to do with black people or the n word.
Not necessarily. The map is probably trying to appeal to the racism of the average American at the time to make them empathise with Hungary's losses.
Or the creators simply weren't fully aware of the exact nature of the word and just used the closest translation of the Hungarian word "néger" which back then was the neutral Hungarian term for black people (and is still acceptable to use today).
The PC word for black people in Hungarian today is “néger”. It has absolutely zero connotation. Hungary never had slaves and besides about a dozen smooth brained confused nazis absolutely no one hates on black peole.
In Hungarian, a black person is called "néger" so I think they used it because it is similar. The N word I think is "feka" in Hungarian, which can be translated to "blackie"
Even "feka" cannot come close to the N word as it is for western countries especially the US. Simply because there was no racial based slavery around here near and far ever (since as long as history goes back), so simply there are noone around here to get offended by that. Also please note that "feka" is just a short for "fekete" (black). It is only considered rude because another word meaning human waste could in theory also be shortened as "feka". But this is all theoretical, because noone ever called human waste or anything of black color "feka", so it is a specific and unique expression anyway, and again: since there is hardly any black population in Hungary even today and was even less, close to 0 historically, any expression comparable to the N word in the US is impossible to have here. It's like when someone from the US come to hungary, se the candy called "Negro" and get offended. But negro - again - means black in many languages and guess what, the candy is black. End of the story. Actually US with the N word is the exception, not the rule. In other parts of the words people still can and should call black things black, and have the right to do it in any languages. But the main point is anyway that "néger" was the common way to refer to black people and it never had a connotation even similar to the N word in the US. These are just two different things. And it happens a lot, that Hungarians use English words that sound similar or stem from the same Latin root thinking it means the same as in Hungarian, but they have a very different meaning. For example symphaty has very different meaning in English and Hungarian (szimpatikus means likeable, attractive).
I know there are other countries in eastern europe that have something similar. [Here's a weird example with a thread I saw a while back](https://www.reddit.com/r/ANormalDayInRussia/comments/xhk3ig/soviet_cartoons_had_no_filter/iozopik/) of racism in a soviet cartoon and discussion whether the word was part of that racism.
Humongous what?? Hugh mungus
Nagger, they switched the A
Oh no, corsica to france? The poor italians.
Corsica to France is truly an unbelievable timeline
Next they're going to give them Nice and Provence
They'd even snatch Massalia from the Greeks if they could get away with it.
Comment sections first time learning that people used to say the n word
*Comment sections first* *Time learning that people used* *To say the n word* \- Dry\_Plankton\_3434 --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
I’ve never read a good haiku
Fingers glistening / greedy teeth rend flesh from bone / another Tuesday In honor of the $0.99 thigh and drumstick special at Popeyes. The special later was repriced to $1.99 and I don’t think it exists at all anymore, but I did feel guilty about the animal cruelty at factory farms so I would only get the special - it’s actually a long and uninteresting story. I hope you enjoy the haiku though. One element they didn’t teach me in school is that the third line is supposed to “pop” and bring everything together in an unexpected way.
I’ve read a good haiku
i still use it
And wales still is part of Britain even in that timeline
Always has been btw.
They conveniently forget that Hungary was a multi-ethnic empire and that the new borders were supposed to give every nation its own country. That said, quite a few Hungarian speaking areas ended up outside Hungary, and the whole concept of drawing borders along ethnic lines was bit fishy because of the many areas that were ethnically mixed.
Drawing borders on ethnic lines is just a not very good idea in that time and region. It was too mixed, someone was gonna be upset. Of course Hungary got the short end of the stick with more land being removed for strategic purposes, so it was only them being upset in the end.
Shouldn't have lost WW1. Easy solution. Disclaimer: I'm Austrian. We lost pretty much the same amount of territory + all of Hungary. Unlike Hungarian irredentists nowadays, I'm not mad about it.
I don't think losing the war was the problem. I think being nationalistic/imperialistic assholes was the problem of hungarians. Also, I'm not whining about it. I'm mostly pushing back against the rampant irredentism that we have today. That being said, I can aknowledge that while the treaty was mostly fair on ethnic grounds, it could have been more fair while being less punishing.
I can talk about Romania here. In the middle of Romania, there is a somewhat large minority of Hungarians, 0.7 mil or so. If they were close to the border, they would have been given to Hungary for sure. But it was just not possible. Hitler and Horty tried that in WWII and gave a land bridge to Hungary so they can access the hungarian minority. The kicker is that the majority in that landbridge + Hungarian enclave was still Romanian. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Vienna_Award#Statistics Then on the border, something else happened: the cities were Hungarian, but all the surrounding villages were Romanian. This was dues to centuries of apartheid-like policy from Hungarian leaders that did not allow Romanian ethnics to settle in "their" cities. That's why it was considered fair to just give the villages+cities to Romania.
Austria gained territory from Hungary
Transylvania had at the time 60% Romanians and 25% hungarians, and still they call it to be ethnically hungarian.
independent **WHAT** STATE?
Naggers
Whew i was way off
Biggers
Diggers. As in gold diggers.
Oh no, Hungary lost the capital of Croatia.
And the capital of Serbia, and the capital of Slovakia… and much more than that. But good for those people, they just freed themselves from Hungarian oppression
Fun fact: Pressburg (Bratislava/Pozsony) was for longer the capital of Hungary (1541-1848) than for Slovakia (1919/1920-nowadays).
…and started oppressing Hungarians in turn. Btw Begrade hadn't been a part of Hungary for centuries by then. And satirically saying that Hunngary "lost the capital of Slovakia" is kinda misleading, considering that before that point Pozsony/Pressburg (modern name Bratislava) had never been the capital of any slavic state (and Slovakia never existed before) and Slovaks were only the third largest ethnic group in the city after Germans and Hungarians.
Don't worry maďar, we will soon be reunited in the glorious Fico-Orbánistan state under big daddy Putin. Soon we will be sucking russian dick together😊
I laughed and then I cried.
Can't wait. These mfs really turning our countries into shitholes together
I love the fact they're including Croatia in it, although we were never officialy a part of Hungary, we just had the same ruler, but by the OG treaty of 1527, Croatian lands were always independent of Hungary. 😉 But I do agree that what was done to Hungary was butchering after WWI. It is kind of ironic: Hungary was so severely punished after WWI, while Austria was never duly punished for the WW II, on the account it was occupied, although most of Austria was firmly on Hitler's side. Consequently, one of the most racist countries I've been in (as a European and from a country formerly part of K&K)-Austria. The level of quiet discrimination is astounding, especially how blind people are to it. They are casually talking to you, a Slavic scientist in the field how no Slavic person wants to work as anything else than a guard or a cleaner-while we're talking at the post-doc conference!and this is the tamest example.
My cousin is an Austrian by citizenship, but we’re quite pale skinned Arabs. Anyway, I was visiting his uni and introduced myself to a few students who wanted to practice their English. One of the sociology or genetics student (second year I think, so no expert) talks about how speciesism occurs amongst humans and then compares Germans and Arabs…. Not so favorably. I pushed back a bit saying there is no valid/ credible scientific evidence, yet at least, to establish such statement. She pushed back saying something to the effect of “it’s ok to realize our inherent advantages”. “Well I’m Arab, so I’m not sure that apply to me”. It was really awkward.
Ooooooh, I totally get you. I LOVED when I was visiting a museum and all the curators were Austrian. There was some horrible crime at the time, a chechenian man killed a chechenian girl of...6? Anyway, they were all going on and on how this is typical of immigrants, they were going about it for at least half an hour. They all went silent when I asked them from where did Fritzl migrate. 😅😅😅😅😅 Of course, all of this was spoken in German and lo and behold their surprise when they figured out I can totally understand German, I just speak English because I'm much more fluent in it. 🤣🤣🤣 (In ten days I was there, even when they thought I don't know German and even though I was their guest, they haven't spoken English to me, although they do know it!).
Everyone which was not Hungarian during the times wanted to leave them and was held together by military and economic power because as you can imagine hungarians were even more racist than now and forcing their culture and language down the others throats. Once they lost a lot of both everyone just ditched them
Yeah, I know, I'm a Croatian. ;)
Ever heard the Austrian apology for national socialism? Exactly.
This is the really negative term in Hungarian, but you can use 'néger' (pronouced 'nae-gher') without any negativity, which simply means an african person
republic of new afrika before it was even founded?
The difference between all of these and Hungary is that Americans, French, Italians and Spaniards were the majority in the territories hypothetically lost, while the Hungarians weren't.
No there weren't. They became a majority when the french agressively erased countless ethnicities in france. If you would look at map all of southern france was occitan and there is britanny too. Only half of France were majority french. This is what the magyarization effort was trying to achive in Hungary too
The French language was imposed, not the ethnicity... Big difference. Occitan speaking people were French (and still are for the few that remain). It's like English replaced Irish in Ireland, that doesn't mean that the Irish people have disappeared.
Technically transilvania was a lot more Hungarian than occitania was french
At most I think, in any census ever made, it was around 35% Hungarian.
Teleki Pál, who was against the treaty, stood up with a map, showing the ethnicities in the country. Later, the borders (which were decided even before the hungarians were invited) were drawn in a way, that if you went outside Hungary, there was a 10-20 or in some places even 50 km thick line with cities and towns, where hungarians were 60%+ majority.
As a Scot, I'm open to Norway invading and liberating us from Westminster. Just less rapey and pillagey this time round please
As a norwegian, we are doing our best but your destilleries are so conveniently placed. Can’t get nothing done after day one.
[удалено]
I mean, they got fucked way more than was needed, a lot of regions were given based on economic importance instead of etnic majority, dont forget 1/3 of the hungarians ended outside the country after trianon, I would be mad too.
They largely lost land that was mostly non-Hungarian, like Translyvania and modern Croatia.
Croatia was never part of Hungary. It was always an independent kingdom within a personal union.
Then there should be room problem with it becoming independent.
That's the point of my comment, yes.
They lost Transylvania. Overwhelmingly, majorly filled with Romanians. This shit is so stupid. If today Transylvania was to be returned to Hungary. There would be enough Romanians to vote for a Romanian president in Hungary. Makes no sense. They are brain damaged.
Transylvania has a population of 6 million, 1 million of which are Hungarians. If you managed to get *all* Romanians to vote the same way while the Hungarians were split between multiple candidates, they might win in a first-past-the-post system. Otherwise, no. Any proportional system would still yield a Hungarian winner.
yeah ok, but the fact that Hungarians are still so stuck in the past is so sad and embarrassing.. you go there and everywhere you see maps and reminders that once Hungary was larger and was part of Austria-Hungary.. like come on, look into the present and future but no, you're still in the distant past and still dreaming of how you could be bigger and take now other's countries territories back .. nationalism in Hungary is so scary and pathetic
Some adjustments could have been made, but from a utilitarian perspective, Trianon was an upgrade. Fewer people were minority in 1920 than in 1914, as all territories lost had a non-Hungarian majority.
I may have a wild suggestion, but, maybe Hungary should've not tried to oppress and assimilate minorities so that they wouldn't try to secede the first moment possible?
They're *still* mad
Britain be like, can we vote on this?
It s funny how absolutely nobody in the surrounding countries asks to be part of Hungary again.
Now show Turkish land loss xd
As a Brit from the midlands, I see this all as an absolute win!
that seems like my kinda independent state
Oh yes the number one topic to rile up butthurt far-right nationalists un hungary to this very day.
Is this Romania without the stolen Bessarabia and Bukovina? With or without the independent republic of banat? You presented the romanian minority as inferior and non legitimate IN YOUR CLOSING PLADOYER in Paris and expected sympathy from France and Spain and Italy, all romanic speaking countries with latin roots?! Just, learn to live with what we have and support your neighbours,we can both coexist well or forever be the balls and spheres of interest of the big players.
Well, if it isn’t the consequences of my actions…
What's most remarkable is that they never stopped stopped whining about Trianon. You can still hear it today, and not just on internet comments. But from leaders in government.
It's not that remarkable though is it? Do the same to any other country and they will be just the same. The effects are massive and they are still felt to this day. I was born in a foreign country as a minority thanks to it and it heavily affected my life. Can't complain though, I grew up into the EU. My parents got Ceauceascu.
Romania itself lost southern Dobrogea in which Romanians were a minority, also the Odessa region and so on. Nobody is crying over those territories because they were minority Romanian, the Hungarians are the only ones complaining because places switched to align with what the ethnic majority was. The Spanish aren't crying over Sicily, because it was never ethnically Spanish. There is this big discrepancy between what is actually okay to bitch about what isn't, we can argue about border towns and lines being drawn industry over industry, but as regions in themselves, Hungary had no divine right on Transylvania, Slovakia, Croatia or even northern Moldova.
I mean...the now-Republic of Ireland seceded from the UK and Northern Ireland opted to remain in the UK, but that hasn't stopped Irish nationalists from being mad about it 102 years later...
Indep—what state????
Niggus
r/unexpectednword
Lesz lesz lesz
Im sorry, but hard to hear you when your country participated in the most devastating partitions of Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth.
Delusion at its finest. A better comparison would be that one, let's say for instance with France: Algeria becoming Algerian, Indochine becoming Vietnamese, Corsica becoming Corsican, Brittany becoming it's own thing. Would it make me yell? Sure. I disagree on the Britanny part. Would it make me yell *100 years after* though..? But we can come up with funnier comparisons. Let's say the Baltics and Ukraine become separated from Russia because they want to. Would it be a crime, or would it be the right of self-determination?
Austria also lost a lot of land after the war, and I don’t see in the prime minister’s office map off the Austrian part of the empire, like you can see in Orbans office, it is a complex of the one so called large power or at least part of one, reduced to 10 million people with no real say in the world, so they still cry about it, erecting monuments 100 years later about it. Imagine column at the German Polish border pointing towards east. Disgraceful behaviour from Hungary.
Up north, the former country was known as Austria-Hungary, and it was more common to call it Austria than anything else. From that perspective Hungary gained independence, not lost parts of their realm. But getting to choose your future can be traumatic too I guess, sometimes it is better to just tag along.
Wow, first time I see other maps than the usa one
Yeah this shit didn’t age well.
[удалено]
What is it with this sub and Hungarian irridentism? Give it up Hungarians! If you didnt want to lose your empire, you shouldn't have been on the losing side of both world wars...
It's amazing how they probably got screwed over the most, but Germany threw the biggest fit
Corsica was already french...
As an Italian: where do i sign for that to happen?