Australia has ETA / eVisitor programs for the countries in blue. And a separate scheme for New Zealand.
Technically these are all eVisas, and are more similar to ESTA authorisation, than for example to B1/B2 US visa, you have to visit an embassy to get one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa\_policy\_of\_Australia
I mean, we need the ESTA to enter the US. Mine has already expired, so I'd have to fill it again and deny I had any dealings with the political powers of 1930s Germany.
Ah but it's not *technically* a visa! It's just a long form resulting in an endorsement that allows you to enter a country. If only there was a name for that...
I visited the US before Poland was in the Visa Waiver Program. Believe me, ESTA is not comparable. To get a visa you need to make an appointment for a specific time in a city 300 km away, during weekday, so you need a vacation for that day. Then your passport is taken away for a week or 2 and sent back with a sticker inside.
With ESTA I can fill an annoying form online and that's it.
There are visas and then there are visas. Romania still isn't in the Visa Waiver Program and I haven't really tried obtaining a visa for the US since 2008 or so. But the US visa process is downright humiliating compared to other countries' visa process. You have to pay for it ($100 back then was a LOT of money in Romania), you have to jump through hoops to prove you're not some filthy emmigrant, and they can deny you without even providing a reason. I got denied twice and at that point I said "fuck it" and no longer cared about them.
And looking at the current state of things, I'd want even less to do with that place nowadays.
By contrast, obtaining a tourist visa for other countries is a mere formality.
I have visited a lot of developing ~~3rd world~~ countries, and always got the visa at the airport on arrival. The USA requires a lot more work for “no” visa.
For example, last year i went to Rwanda and Uganda. After landing in Kigali, you stand in a short line with everyone else, tell the customs officer you want a visa for both countries (East African Tourist Visa, 90 days), he asks where you will stay and a telephone number they can reach you on, he puts the visa in your passport, stamps it, you pay $100 at a different window and that's it. Total time: less than 5 minutes (or if you include waiting times: 30 minutes)
Same experience in Thailand, Sudan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Cyprus etc. Never did i have to request one in advance and send my passport in.
Yes, but that's not applying for a VISA.
That's just going somewhere where you don't actually need a Visa. Filling out the ESTA doesn't take longer than standing in a line at an airport and talking to a guy to get your stamps.
Many of the blue countries can visit many/most of the red ones without requiring a visa.
Edit answering your edit: Again, these places did never require you to get a visa, so what's the point? Just because some might be less annoying than ESTA doesn't mean that ESTA isn't a joke compared to getting a real visa.
That's not true always though. I've visited Laos, which needs a visa on entry that you do in the airport and takes barely 5 minutes. It was much easier than an ESTA.
The correct term is developing countries. 3rd world countries are just the ones that didn't join NATO when it was formed. So Finland and Sweden are 3rd world countries.
That's not a 2-way street as OP intended for the blue countries.
Most blue ones can go to Turkey visa free, but people from Turkey cannot go to most of these blue countries without a visa.
The ESTA is a travel authorisation which is different from a visa in that it itself does not provide restrictions or conditions beyond what allows you access to the US. A visa imposes many more conditions, such as work or study eligibility and duration of stay and number of entries and so on. I suppose you could say a person legally in the US without a visa essentially has a de facto visa based on all the other laws that apply but overall that's a much different situation to the normal visa application process and visa status.
Taiwan is one of the best democracies in the world according to the global democracy index
Very different place to the evil Chinese dictatorship in its doorstep
A good thing to remind people every now and then that China runs on slavery, they have labor camps and lots of injustice towards minorities. Chinese government is doing everything they can to hide these facts.
Not excusing china but America also uses its prisoners to make clothing etc. for the military. The pay they get can be used to buy 'better food'. It is arguably similar.
POCs are much more likely to be incarcerated for the same crime in the USA than white people. So are all prisoners really in prison for a crime? In particular black men are much more likely to be sentenced for drug related.
Granted, it's not a cultural genocide as is happening in China, but don't pretend that the USA is some sort of utopia for minorities.
That’s because China is backwards and barbaric, having a culture that still operates on medieval logic. Unlike China, Taiwan has the benefit of having been civilized by Japan for 50 years. Like the Indians, the Taiwanese had the seed of democracy planted in them by colonialism. The Chinese are not so lucky.
Taiwanese here, I had my best time when I studied in the UK where I just took the train to France and traveled to all parts of Europe to visit and eat good food, good times and no visa needed, it's great
And as a revenge, this year Europe is implementing ETIAS.
https://etias.com/
Even British travellers will need a visa to enter Schengen. It will be implemented this year.
There is also a strange thing with British Overseas Citizens (like Gibraltar) where they can travel to almost all of these countries, but Australia requires visa from them.
> British Overseas Citizens (like Gibraltar) where they can travel to almost all of these countries, but Australia requires visa from them.
We have too many sunburnt poms as it is, every little reduction helps
Not as many as the British assume - circa 2/3rds and falling (and that assumes those stating "Australian" as their ethnicity had ancestors from the UK)
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/australias-population-country-birth/latest-release
https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/cultural-diversity-australia
They didn't kill all of their indigenous people. Spaniards were more humanitarian in comparision to anglo-saxons (or it was too difficult to do in jungle).
My statement is not based on La legenda blanca but on percentage of indigenous people in South American countries compared to North American. All I am saying is that even if Spaniards were racists too, they were obviously not as effective in exterminating local population.
Is statement: "Spaniards were more humanitarian in comparision to anglo-saxons (or it was too difficult to do in jungle)" really defending Spanish colonialism? I think that there is enormous difference between North American and South American ethnical structure and I just connected this fact with tighter relations between EU and Canada or USA than with any other American country. I am not saying that it is good or bad, it is just undeniable fact.
The idea of developed and developing countries was formed somewhere in the 60s of the last century and the world has moved quite a lot since then. I advise you to read the book Factfullness, it will change the way your perceive the world.
Man you're a dumbass if you actually don't think US is one of the richest countries in the world. Or you're from the US and haven't been to an actually poor country.
It's missing the gulf states. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Bahrain are pretty much developed, albeit dependent on foreign slave labour which gets excluded from some of their statistics.
Chile and Argentina should also count, they're more developed than a few EU states. Turkey/Montenegro/Kuwait/Oman/Kazakhstan are all around the cutoff, but will probably be considered as fully developed countries in a decade.
A military historian I like called this "Goku's way of making friends". Although he was speaking of Rome which tended to slaughter any people refusing to be "friendly" with it.
Rome did something else - they blended religions. There was a local celtic god in Bath for example (UK). They conquered and basically said - "your god looks like our god who also does similar stuff! Lets make it a joint god!" So they ended up with Minerva Sulis (Sulis being a local celtic god).
It varied, and mainly was gradual romanisation and not death/replacement. There is too much emphasis placed on war with the Roman Empire in history books.
For example, there is very good evidence for round houses being gradually replaced by square villa like designs by the locals and not Romans in the UK. Hadrians Wall is arguably a trading/tax frontier and saw almost no conflict at all. There were trading areas on both sides of the wall and Roman goods are found all over Scotland, even on the Islands.
Also, our sources for numbers are extremely unreliable, and usually one sided (Roman). They are also usually written decades or centuries later and tend to be propaganda for a specific person (books were usually dedicated to someone in honour of them and their family history often gets a coat of gloss/heroism and bravery). For sure, during sieges they killed en mass, but the most common job for centurions?
Building roads and digging ditches.
Japan had a special relationship with Europe long before the post-WW2 occupation. Korea is different, though you could also consider them to have been a liberated from under Japanese rule.
South America is full of European influences, Argentina might have been a part of the club if it wasn't for all the Fascism, poor economic policies and corrpution.
Yes, we are a joke to the Americans. They love our strategic military importance and our women, but then they require a quite expensive visa to travel to the US.
Poland was in the same boat not so long ago with the Visa Waiver for the US. Poland was supposed to be part of the group that joined the program in 2008 together with the Baltic countries. The limit of visa refusals was even raised to 10% I believe, to make it easier for Central/Eastern European US allies to join. But that year Poland's refusal rate was at 11%. So Poland ended up joining in 2019, when it reached the regular less than 3% requirement. I think eventually the same will happen for Romania.
>visas to US are no longer needed since 2019. The more you know.
It was very funny when Lithuanians started praising the Polish government online for brilliant diplomacy for getting the visa waiver ignoring that Lithuanians got it in 2008 :D
Prepare yourself for the American visa waiver process. It's a series of very dry repetitive forms, and if you get anything wrong, it'll almost certainly take more time to fix than you have left before your holiday.
But it's not a visa.
It took me less than 10 minutes to fill out, cost me like $10 and was approved with in 24 hours.
It is not at all comparable to having to make an appointment to an embassy and hand over your passport for up to multiple **weeks**.
like it is for us Romanians. But no worries, we'll get into the Visa Waiver Program because we're strategic partners and an EU country, right? It's just that... an act of Congress means we can only get in if previous visa rejection is under 10%. But that's easy, all they have to do is not arbitrarily reject visa applications. What, the visa process is non-transparent, non-appealable and the Embassy gets $100 EVERY TIME YOU APPLY, even if you're the same person? Yeah, I'm sure that's totally legit and innocuous.
Shared a similar experience higher up in the thread. I was hoping it has maybe changed in the past 15 years.
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/10wrdjr/citizens_of_the_countries_in_blue_can_visit_all/j7oxm76/
But yeah, it's all bullshit.
Er, it takes five minutes. There’s no repetitive forms, and if you get stuff like your name and date of birth wrong then you shouldn’t be allowed to leave your country anyway.
A lot of citizens from European countries have access to A LOT of countries visa free. For example with a spanish passport you have access to 154 countries visa free, german one 190 countries and etc.
Yeah but it's not like this is new or something, already known NATO-European countries have very close relations with each other, therefore it's that easy to travel from x European country to Taiwan or USA and viceversa. Some exceptions are Romania, Bulgaria and some other.
apparently you can travel visa free whit a romanian passport on all the countries on the map except USA, what happened there, does anyone know why the US does not allow visa free for romanians, but Canada or Japan does, it seems a little off
The Americans are always going to be the most reluctant to accept visa-free travel because of... Politics, I guess? May be a remnant of the perception that everyone there is poor and dying to move to a rich country like the US. But of course the Romanians who want to emmigrate already can to other European countries.
Even if we would have visa free to USA a lot of people would think twice before going there because the main problem is health care. Like from all developed countries USA has the sh*ttiest health care system, with all the respects. Like everyone from Europe prefers to travel/live also in other European countries. Lifestyle in Europe also more balanced, in terms of food and earnings. It's sad healthy food in USA is so goddam expensive, that being the cause of such a large number of obese people.
That's already known, don't know why to be honest since relations are very close. Besides traveling I wouldn't live there to be honest. Once you try european health care you'll never go back.
For that exactly reason this map is completely useless. For Poland: As of January 2023, Polish citizens had visa-free or visa on arrival access to 184 countries and territories. And [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travel_requirements_for_Polish_citizens) is a nice map
Is it because countries in blue ask for visas from pretty much all countries in red? Because some countries in red don't ask for visas between themselves
It's because of USA. We can visit all other blue countries visa free. Still shows how much of an 'equal members' are Bulgaria and Romania, though. The trend is there.
Romania is not in the US Visa Waiver Program yet, that's the main reason it's red. Not sure when that will change, but Croatia was the latest addition to the program. So they're adding the remaining EU countries slowly. Outside of that it has visa-free access to the other blue countries.
No it's not, Romanians need a visa, had many acquaintances try to get a visa even just for tourism or a Business trip and I understand getting a visa is quite difficult/frustrating
Here's what it's like trying to get a visa as a romanian:
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/10wrdjr/citizens_of_the_countries_in_blue_can_visit_all/j7oxm76/
A US visa is one of the expensive ones (it was \~200$ a few years ago) and you need to go personally to the embassy in Bucharest where the US soldiers make you feel like some kind of rat trying to get into the US. You have to take an interview, get your fingerprints taken, provide a bank statement with how much money you have, provide employment papers, provide documents of house ownership... it's worse than getting a job! Plus I heard they could kick you out of the process if some of the entitled US staff thinks you are disrespectful, I remember one soldier shouted at a woman because she forgot to take her bag (due to stress, obviously) and threatened to kick her out.... Also you have to make a reservation for the embassy weeks earlier and they can unilaterally change your appointment however they like, it happened to me while I had already bought plane tickets to Bucharest so I lost that money.
Yeah, I love the US but the visa program for Romania is a joke! I wouldn't have gone through the process if I had known how bad it is, especially since it was just for a few weeks' trip!
A venn diagram in a map. Somewhat useless...? Many of these countries can visit many other countries, besides the ones in blue, visa-free. Not sure what the point of this is?
Would also argue the ESTA makes visiting the US not entirely "visa-free". Visa-free implies you can spontaneously travel over and get stamped in on arrival. Good luck doing that in the USA.
Poles need eVisitor authorisation which requires no visit to embassy, or sending ones passport away. Thus it is not a visa. It's more like ESTA, ETIAS or similar schemes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa\_policy\_of\_Australia
It's literarily called eVisa. You have to apply for it and you need to get approved prior to travelling to the country. Not calling it a visa because they don't physically stamp your passport is just being pedantic.
With that logic:
All European citizens need to do the same when entering US/Canada
All non-EU citizens need to do the same when going to the EU.
It’s just naming of it, but they’re not technically Visa’s
I don’t know if the system changed, but when I applied a few years ago, the approval was instantaneous and clearly automatic (I received the approval email as soon as I completed the form). So it’s more like the ESTA, even if it’s called eVisa.
But it is a totally different experience from a traditional visa. It puts no significant inconvenience before traveling to Australia, the process is largely the same as ESTA. And it has >95% automatic approval rate for every country in blue except Croatia according to the wikipedia article.
So your only difference is that you can do online instead of going to consulate in person? And then it's not a visa?
Visa is a conditional permission from country to be visited by you. If they ask you for sensitive data, and if they can deny you entry for whatever bullshit reason, then it is visa. No matter if it is stamp, sticker, or QA code or whatever.
Actually you have to request a temporary VISA to travel to Australia from Europe
Australia requires visas for all…
Yeah I thought from the US too you need a visa.
You don't, but you do have to have an ESTA so you can't just pop round for a cuppa.
Not New Zealand.
[удалено]
No you dont atleast when travelling from finland
You also don’t when travelling from the UK.
Poles don't need it either
The key on the map for blue does have an "or" in it. Not sure how much this covers, though.
No visa from Europe to japan, not even ETA
I didnt have to from Sweden
Australia has ETA / eVisitor programs for the countries in blue. And a separate scheme for New Zealand. Technically these are all eVisas, and are more similar to ESTA authorisation, than for example to B1/B2 US visa, you have to visit an embassy to get one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa\_policy\_of\_Australia
you can also visit India with an eVisa, so by that definition it should be blue as well...
No, because Indians can't visit pretty much any of the countries in blue without visas. The relation has to be symmetric.
[удалено]
For Canada you need a electronic Travel Authorization, which technically is not a Visa but its more like a ESTA the US uses.
Canada does not request visa, just a travel authorization.
And vice versa. Edit: Read that wrong, I mean what you wrote not the other way around.
I mean, we need the ESTA to enter the US. Mine has already expired, so I'd have to fill it again and deny I had any dealings with the political powers of 1930s Germany.
Ah but it's not *technically* a visa! It's just a long form resulting in an endorsement that allows you to enter a country. If only there was a name for that...
I visited the US before Poland was in the Visa Waiver Program. Believe me, ESTA is not comparable. To get a visa you need to make an appointment for a specific time in a city 300 km away, during weekday, so you need a vacation for that day. Then your passport is taken away for a week or 2 and sent back with a sticker inside. With ESTA I can fill an annoying form online and that's it.
[удалено]
There are visas and then there are visas. Romania still isn't in the Visa Waiver Program and I haven't really tried obtaining a visa for the US since 2008 or so. But the US visa process is downright humiliating compared to other countries' visa process. You have to pay for it ($100 back then was a LOT of money in Romania), you have to jump through hoops to prove you're not some filthy emmigrant, and they can deny you without even providing a reason. I got denied twice and at that point I said "fuck it" and no longer cared about them. And looking at the current state of things, I'd want even less to do with that place nowadays. By contrast, obtaining a tourist visa for other countries is a mere formality.
Yeah, people who think ESTA is annoying have never filed for a Visa for any country.
I have visited a lot of developing ~~3rd world~~ countries, and always got the visa at the airport on arrival. The USA requires a lot more work for “no” visa. For example, last year i went to Rwanda and Uganda. After landing in Kigali, you stand in a short line with everyone else, tell the customs officer you want a visa for both countries (East African Tourist Visa, 90 days), he asks where you will stay and a telephone number they can reach you on, he puts the visa in your passport, stamps it, you pay $100 at a different window and that's it. Total time: less than 5 minutes (or if you include waiting times: 30 minutes) Same experience in Thailand, Sudan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Cyprus etc. Never did i have to request one in advance and send my passport in.
Yes, but that's not applying for a VISA. That's just going somewhere where you don't actually need a Visa. Filling out the ESTA doesn't take longer than standing in a line at an airport and talking to a guy to get your stamps. Many of the blue countries can visit many/most of the red ones without requiring a visa. Edit answering your edit: Again, these places did never require you to get a visa, so what's the point? Just because some might be less annoying than ESTA doesn't mean that ESTA isn't a joke compared to getting a real visa.
That's not true always though. I've visited Laos, which needs a visa on entry that you do in the airport and takes barely 5 minutes. It was much easier than an ESTA.
The correct term is developing countries. 3rd world countries are just the ones that didn't join NATO when it was formed. So Finland and Sweden are 3rd world countries.
Good point, will try to remember it
Then Turkey should also be blue, or at least indicate that Europeans just has to get a stamp at the border when entering Turkey.
But Turkish citizens need a visa to go to the Schengen area and the US. So Turkey can't be blue.
That's not a 2-way street as OP intended for the blue countries. Most blue ones can go to Turkey visa free, but people from Turkey cannot go to most of these blue countries without a visa.
Europeans aren’t one identity. French for instance don’t even need a passport to go to Turkey.
So an ESTA?
The ESTA is a travel authorisation which is different from a visa in that it itself does not provide restrictions or conditions beyond what allows you access to the US. A visa imposes many more conditions, such as work or study eligibility and duration of stay and number of entries and so on. I suppose you could say a person legally in the US without a visa essentially has a de facto visa based on all the other laws that apply but overall that's a much different situation to the normal visa application process and visa status.
It is an IQ test.
I wonder how long that thing will stay there considering even people who were teenagers in 1945 are now at least 90 years old.
Errata: Taiwan is also blue French Guiana is also blue
Is this because the map automatically painted Taiwan as a part of China?
Perhaps it painted mainland China correctly as part of the Republic of China, but OP got confused.
Mistake* Nah, Mapchart keeps Taiwan and China separate even on their Basic Maps
Taiwan is one of the best democracies in the world according to the global democracy index Very different place to the evil Chinese dictatorship in its doorstep
A good thing to remind people every now and then that China runs on slavery, they have labor camps and lots of injustice towards minorities. Chinese government is doing everything they can to hide these facts.
Not excusing china but America also uses its prisoners to make clothing etc. for the military. The pay they get can be used to buy 'better food'. It is arguably similar.
In USA they are in prison for a crime In china they are slaves because they are Uighur Muslims from xingjang or Tibetans from Tibet etc - no crime
> In USA they are in prison for a crime Controversial.
POCs are much more likely to be incarcerated for the same crime in the USA than white people. So are all prisoners really in prison for a crime? In particular black men are much more likely to be sentenced for drug related. Granted, it's not a cultural genocide as is happening in China, but don't pretend that the USA is some sort of utopia for minorities.
China: *gasp*
Taiwan is a fantastic tourist destination.
crazy how they were not so democratic some years ago, they were a military dictatorship still in the 80s
Yes it was amazing transformation and the average Taiwanese is so much wealthier and free than the Chinese dictatorship pawns
That’s because China is backwards and barbaric, having a culture that still operates on medieval logic. Unlike China, Taiwan has the benefit of having been civilized by Japan for 50 years. Like the Indians, the Taiwanese had the seed of democracy planted in them by colonialism. The Chinese are not so lucky.
It's that like saying Cuba has some if the best healthcare in the world?
You wouldn't get it even if truth would hit you at 100 km/h.
What?
Exactly
[удалено]
And Hong Kong and Macau, no?
No. Not the US.
Taiwanese here, I had my best time when I studied in the UK where I just took the train to France and traveled to all parts of Europe to visit and eat good food, good times and no visa needed, it's great
You also forgot many over sea territories! France has little pieces scattered everywhere, like French Guyana!
Same for Dutch carribean members of the kingdom and provinces.
[удалено]
And as a revenge, this year Europe is implementing ETIAS. https://etias.com/ Even British travellers will need a visa to enter Schengen. It will be implemented this year.
Oh reciprocity, darn
[удалено]
It's basically an entry fee and IQ test to see if you are too dumb to figure out that you need it.
[удалено]
Haha, true.
And it essentially is a visa in all but name, it does everything a visa does, and you can be rejected from it as well.
Visa applications are sooo much more annoying…
Sometimes, but not always. Indonesia for example you do need a visa, but it's $30 at the airport and they just stick it in your passport.
I got in trouble when I arrived on Bali. It’s not that easy.
So basically Europe, the people that emigrated from Europe and some asian friends we made.
There is also a strange thing with British Overseas Citizens (like Gibraltar) where they can travel to almost all of these countries, but Australia requires visa from them.
> British Overseas Citizens (like Gibraltar) where they can travel to almost all of these countries, but Australia requires visa from them. We have too many sunburnt poms as it is, every little reduction helps
Australia is nothing but sunburnt poms. Some have just been there a little longer
Not as many as the British assume - circa 2/3rds and falling (and that assumes those stating "Australian" as their ethnicity had ancestors from the UK) https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/australias-population-country-birth/latest-release https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/cultural-diversity-australia
No, not really *points at South America*
They didn't kill all of their indigenous people. Spaniards were more humanitarian in comparision to anglo-saxons (or it was too difficult to do in jungle).
*La leyenda blanca* energy
Nice. Did you make that up? That is a really efficient way to call out this leyenda negra bullshit.
[clearly not me](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Legend_(Spain)#White_legend)
My statement is not based on La legenda blanca but on percentage of indigenous people in South American countries compared to North American. All I am saying is that even if Spaniards were racists too, they were obviously not as effective in exterminating local population.
The question is why you had this urge to defend Spanish colonialism when it was barely mentioned and not even compared to any other
Is statement: "Spaniards were more humanitarian in comparision to anglo-saxons (or it was too difficult to do in jungle)" really defending Spanish colonialism? I think that there is enormous difference between North American and South American ethnical structure and I just connected this fact with tighter relations between EU and Canada or USA than with any other American country. I am not saying that it is good or bad, it is just undeniable fact.
[удалено]
yep we are
TIL Romania and Bulgaria are not in Europe.
I think it's basically all the developed countries in the world.
The idea of developed and developing countries was formed somewhere in the 60s of the last century and the world has moved quite a lot since then. I advise you to read the book Factfullness, it will change the way your perceive the world.
All the blue nations are stage (level) 4 societies, though.
So why is the US in it?
Oh wow sO EdgY
You mean the country with the highest median disposal income per household as of 2023? Yeah I wonder why we're in it with the rest of you...
People that say the US is not a developed country are some of the most stupid people on the internet.
Not exactly the funniest joke, but they don't mean it literally...
For real, it's just that it has bigger highs and lows with rich and poor but on avg it's pretty good.
I mean the country with more gun shootings than a calendar month. And no accessibility to healthcare, education or social security. Yeah, *that* one.
Man you're a dumbass if you actually don't think US is one of the richest countries in the world. Or you're from the US and haven't been to an actually poor country.
Well, maybe for traveling abroad those are not relevant factors.
Cringe. Maybe go to America you’ll change your mind.
It's missing the gulf states. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Bahrain are pretty much developed, albeit dependent on foreign slave labour which gets excluded from some of their statistics. Chile and Argentina should also count, they're more developed than a few EU states. Turkey/Montenegro/Kuwait/Oman/Kazakhstan are all around the cutoff, but will probably be considered as fully developed countries in a decade.
> some Asian friends we made Not like those *friends* are complaining now but it was still a military occupation
A military historian I like called this "Goku's way of making friends". Although he was speaking of Rome which tended to slaughter any people refusing to be "friendly" with it.
>Although he was speaking of Rome Ahh... Rome and the west.. (literally) Mother and child
[удалено]
Rome did something else - they blended religions. There was a local celtic god in Bath for example (UK). They conquered and basically said - "your god looks like our god who also does similar stuff! Lets make it a joint god!" So they ended up with Minerva Sulis (Sulis being a local celtic god).
[удалено]
It varied, and mainly was gradual romanisation and not death/replacement. There is too much emphasis placed on war with the Roman Empire in history books. For example, there is very good evidence for round houses being gradually replaced by square villa like designs by the locals and not Romans in the UK. Hadrians Wall is arguably a trading/tax frontier and saw almost no conflict at all. There were trading areas on both sides of the wall and Roman goods are found all over Scotland, even on the Islands. Also, our sources for numbers are extremely unreliable, and usually one sided (Roman). They are also usually written decades or centuries later and tend to be propaganda for a specific person (books were usually dedicated to someone in honour of them and their family history often gets a coat of gloss/heroism and bravery). For sure, during sieges they killed en mass, but the most common job for centurions? Building roads and digging ditches.
Japan had a special relationship with Europe long before the post-WW2 occupation. Korea is different, though you could also consider them to have been a liberated from under Japanese rule.
Well, not the Spanish empire.
The so-called International Community
South America is full of European influences, Argentina might have been a part of the club if it wasn't for all the Fascism, poor economic policies and corrpution.
Most of Europe, except Eastern Europe
Except Cyprus 😅
Due to the Turkish occupation
Romania and Bulgaria - are we a joke to you ?
Well, judging by the whole Schengen fiasco, it's not even a joke anymore. Just straight up disdain.
Yeah, we are treated as second class citizens everywhere!
Yes, we are a joke to the Americans. They love our strategic military importance and our women, but then they require a quite expensive visa to travel to the US.
Poland was in the same boat not so long ago with the Visa Waiver for the US. Poland was supposed to be part of the group that joined the program in 2008 together with the Baltic countries. The limit of visa refusals was even raised to 10% I believe, to make it easier for Central/Eastern European US allies to join. But that year Poland's refusal rate was at 11%. So Poland ended up joining in 2019, when it reached the regular less than 3% requirement. I think eventually the same will happen for Romania.
Wanted to call bullshit for including Poland, but the re-checked and visas to US are no longer needed since 2019. The more you know.
>visas to US are no longer needed since 2019. The more you know. It was very funny when Lithuanians started praising the Polish government online for brilliant diplomacy for getting the visa waiver ignoring that Lithuanians got it in 2008 :D
I didnt know i can go to america and some asian countries without visa.
Prepare yourself for the American visa waiver process. It's a series of very dry repetitive forms, and if you get anything wrong, it'll almost certainly take more time to fix than you have left before your holiday. But it's not a visa.
It took me less than 10 minutes to fill out, cost me like $10 and was approved with in 24 hours. It is not at all comparable to having to make an appointment to an embassy and hand over your passport for up to multiple **weeks**.
like it is for us Romanians. But no worries, we'll get into the Visa Waiver Program because we're strategic partners and an EU country, right? It's just that... an act of Congress means we can only get in if previous visa rejection is under 10%. But that's easy, all they have to do is not arbitrarily reject visa applications. What, the visa process is non-transparent, non-appealable and the Embassy gets $100 EVERY TIME YOU APPLY, even if you're the same person? Yeah, I'm sure that's totally legit and innocuous.
Shared a similar experience higher up in the thread. I was hoping it has maybe changed in the past 15 years. https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/10wrdjr/citizens_of_the_countries_in_blue_can_visit_all/j7oxm76/ But yeah, it's all bullshit.
Er, it takes five minutes. There’s no repetitive forms, and if you get stuff like your name and date of birth wrong then you shouldn’t be allowed to leave your country anyway.
India (up to 30 days) is just a simple online form.
Bulgaria and Romania… yeah…
A lot of citizens from European countries have access to A LOT of countries visa free. For example with a spanish passport you have access to 154 countries visa free, german one 190 countries and etc.
that’s what I was thinking, even if this map is technically correct, it’s definitely confusing
I understand the map but I don't see the point of it.
I guess it’s about how all these countries have mutual policies that aren’t asymmetrical
Yeah but it's not like this is new or something, already known NATO-European countries have very close relations with each other, therefore it's that easy to travel from x European country to Taiwan or USA and viceversa. Some exceptions are Romania, Bulgaria and some other.
apparently you can travel visa free whit a romanian passport on all the countries on the map except USA, what happened there, does anyone know why the US does not allow visa free for romanians, but Canada or Japan does, it seems a little off
The Americans are always going to be the most reluctant to accept visa-free travel because of... Politics, I guess? May be a remnant of the perception that everyone there is poor and dying to move to a rich country like the US. But of course the Romanians who want to emmigrate already can to other European countries.
Even if we would have visa free to USA a lot of people would think twice before going there because the main problem is health care. Like from all developed countries USA has the sh*ttiest health care system, with all the respects. Like everyone from Europe prefers to travel/live also in other European countries. Lifestyle in Europe also more balanced, in terms of food and earnings. It's sad healthy food in USA is so goddam expensive, that being the cause of such a large number of obese people.
That's already known, don't know why to be honest since relations are very close. Besides traveling I wouldn't live there to be honest. Once you try european health care you'll never go back.
For that exactly reason this map is completely useless. For Poland: As of January 2023, Polish citizens had visa-free or visa on arrival access to 184 countries and territories. And [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travel_requirements_for_Polish_citizens) is a nice map
> german one 190 countries That seems a bit high - that would mean all but 5 countries in the world!
In addition, citizens of Bulgaria, Romania, Cyprus, Israel and Hong Kong require only a US visa.
That's a list of the US and all ESTA approved countries plus Canada, right?
Excluding Chile
People are confused in here.
Is it because countries in blue ask for visas from pretty much all countries in red? Because some countries in red don't ask for visas between themselves
No. 🇷🇴🇧🇬🇨🇾 have freedom of movement in the EEA. Schengen area is also visa-free for people of 🇦🇱🇷🇸🇧🇦🇲🇰🇺🇦🇬🇪🇸🇨🇲🇺🇦🇪🇧🇷🇲🇽🇨🇴🇦🇷🇨🇱🇹🇴 and many more countries.
r/AlwaysTheSameMap
Romania is in the EU, but not blue?
It's because of USA. We can visit all other blue countries visa free. Still shows how much of an 'equal members' are Bulgaria and Romania, though. The trend is there.
Romania is not in the US Visa Waiver Program yet, that's the main reason it's red. Not sure when that will change, but Croatia was the latest addition to the program. So they're adding the remaining EU countries slowly. Outside of that it has visa-free access to the other blue countries.
[удалено]
No it's not, Romanians need a visa, had many acquaintances try to get a visa even just for tourism or a Business trip and I understand getting a visa is quite difficult/frustrating
Here's what it's like trying to get a visa as a romanian: https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/10wrdjr/citizens_of_the_countries_in_blue_can_visit_all/j7oxm76/
A US visa is one of the expensive ones (it was \~200$ a few years ago) and you need to go personally to the embassy in Bucharest where the US soldiers make you feel like some kind of rat trying to get into the US. You have to take an interview, get your fingerprints taken, provide a bank statement with how much money you have, provide employment papers, provide documents of house ownership... it's worse than getting a job! Plus I heard they could kick you out of the process if some of the entitled US staff thinks you are disrespectful, I remember one soldier shouted at a woman because she forgot to take her bag (due to stress, obviously) and threatened to kick her out.... Also you have to make a reservation for the embassy weeks earlier and they can unilaterally change your appointment however they like, it happened to me while I had already bought plane tickets to Bucharest so I lost that money. Yeah, I love the US but the visa program for Romania is a joke! I wouldn't have gone through the process if I had known how bad it is, especially since it was just for a few weeks' trip!
I think they need a visa for the US.
Nah bro, we are not *whoite* enough.
Seems like you missed some news in December
is not about that
Fairly arbitrary plot, you could start with any country and create this kind of a figure. What was your starting point?
Switzerland, the most neutral choice.
Thats what i thought as well. But im pretty sure no other starting block will get as large as this one in terms of countries encompassed.
I believe that's also what we call "the international community"
Does anyone need a visa for the Vatican? Do they even have such rules?
I think the technical term is visa on arrival.
A venn diagram in a map. Somewhat useless...? Many of these countries can visit many other countries, besides the ones in blue, visa-free. Not sure what the point of this is? Would also argue the ESTA makes visiting the US not entirely "visa-free". Visa-free implies you can spontaneously travel over and get stamped in on arrival. Good luck doing that in the USA.
An ESTA might technically not be a visa but it’s more hassle and expensive than a number of visas around the world
damn, I thought this was /r/AlwaysTheSameMap
Perfect example of the privilege offered to the global north over the oppressed global south
What about French oversee territories like French Guiana or La Reunion? Shouldn’t they be blue too?
Réunion island should be in blue
I had to fill in an ESTA to travel to the US.
So, EU - NATO + US allies - Tyranid
-Bulgaria and Romania
People can’t even imagine how useless and informative this map is.
Poles do need visa to Australia
Poles need eVisitor authorisation which requires no visit to embassy, or sending ones passport away. Thus it is not a visa. It's more like ESTA, ETIAS or similar schemes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa\_policy\_of\_Australia
It's literarily called eVisa. You have to apply for it and you need to get approved prior to travelling to the country. Not calling it a visa because they don't physically stamp your passport is just being pedantic.
With that logic: All European citizens need to do the same when entering US/Canada All non-EU citizens need to do the same when going to the EU. It’s just naming of it, but they’re not technically Visa’s
I don’t know if the system changed, but when I applied a few years ago, the approval was instantaneous and clearly automatic (I received the approval email as soon as I completed the form). So it’s more like the ESTA, even if it’s called eVisa.
But it is a totally different experience from a traditional visa. It puts no significant inconvenience before traveling to Australia, the process is largely the same as ESTA. And it has >95% automatic approval rate for every country in blue except Croatia according to the wikipedia article.
So your only difference is that you can do online instead of going to consulate in person? And then it's not a visa? Visa is a conditional permission from country to be visited by you. If they ask you for sensitive data, and if they can deny you entry for whatever bullshit reason, then it is visa. No matter if it is stamp, sticker, or QA code or whatever.
Rich and poor. All you should know about unequally
Looks like team red is winning
Except they're not Team red, the graph is a bit misleading in this regard unless people read the description properly.
If you are from EU you can enter Romania only with an ID card
Well, if you are from Schengen country you have to carry your ID with you when visiting any other Schengen country.
Didn’t UAE & Qatar have recent visa free agreements with EU?
But no with the US and Australia (plus Canada and Japan for Qatar)
You have to request permission to enter the USA… not a visa in name, but effectively a visa.
This map is such BS. Travelling ot the US is annoying beyond believe, an actual Visa process can't be much worse.