Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
I see. But you do think it’s acceptable for the people who you think are worthy of naturalization to have an equal claim to things (legally) as those who have Italian ancestry, right? How far back do you need to be able to trace your roots to be considered Italian in terms of ancestry?
It's acceptable as a compromise because we need people but we should have tried a stratified form of official levels of citizenship before. But i will never be able to fully believe inside me that someone with no italian greatparent is as italian as me or my children or my parents are. It is not something you can "become" externally.
If your ancestors didn't live WW1 and WW2 in Italy and mine did, we are forever different in a way that will never change. "italian" might not be the correct word to describe that "impossible to change" difference, certainly "italian citizen" isn't (that's a legal technical expression that comes with rights and so on), but SOME word or expression is needed to be able to claim that abyssal difference.
I mean i am a pragmatist: if very strict rules make it so that not enough people come, i would be ok discussing enlargement.
But given we are currently in a situation where many more people (numerically) than we do come, it's absurd and insane not to use filters.
I think the idea that land should not be ownable is pretty dumb , because in developed countries especially in europe but not exclusively, what is valuable is what has been built there and how the land has been developed and that is ownable in a real practical sense.
I don't understand how "not owning land" allows for any economy to exist btw.
I'm regards to the latter, that's why I keep saying some practical allowance is acceptable for the good of society even though it's not morally correct (or I should say, balanced by competing moral considerations). But, it should be understood what you are allowing and should only be done to the extent that it is actually balanced by important competing interests and that does not extend to the nationalism you are talking about. I know you read that and think you understood it. Are you just playing games and being intentionally obtuse?
In the context where you're talking about denying citizenship to people living and working and even having families in Italy if they're not "Italian" enough but can't actually define what "Italian" is, it's pretty meaningless.
Even you say you're Bolognese first, European second and Italian third.
In the context where you're talking about denying citizenship to people living and working and even having families in Italy if they're not "Italian" enough but can't actually define what "Italian" is, it's pretty meaningless.
Even you say you're Bolognese first, European second and Italian third.
For the legal technicalities I could be ok giving "Italian citizenship" to anyone who I can measure to be significantly better than the median Italian under measurable elements I can quantify.
It could end up being about income in the last 10 years and/or wealth but I think we can do better than that.
But that will never be "Italian" in the sense I otherwise mean it
And one thing that is significant is that for statistics to determine how people do and so on we should actually use the 4 (or 3) grandparents being Italian.
Like the government shouldn't be judged the same if the people who do bad in society are actual Italians (it's actual constituents) or new Italians or foreign born in general.
Poverty rates of not-actual-italian shouldn't matter and so on
It's acceptable as a compromise because we need people but we should have tried a stratified form of official levels of citizenship before. But i will never be able to fully believe inside me that someone with no italian greatparent is as italian as me or my children or my parents are. It is not something you can "become" externally.If your ancestors didn't live WW1 and WW2 in
Ok, I take the WW grandparents thing as a roundabout way of getting at shared cultural experience.
I imagine you could go back to many earlier times in Italian history and there were probably people who at that time thought because this or that group in Italy didn’t have ancestors that lived through X events that they could never be Italian and you probably consider the descendants of those immigrants to be bona fide Italians today.
For the legal technicalities I could be ok giving "Italian citizenship" to anyone who I can measure to be significantly better than the median Italian under measurable elements I can quantify.
It could end up being about income in the last 10 years and/or wealth but I think we can do better than that.
But that will never be "Italian" in the sense I otherwise mean it
Why do they need to be better and not just at least maintaining the status quo?
Ok, I take the WW grandparents thing as a roundabout way of getting at shared cultural experience.I imagine you could go back to many earlier times in Italian history and there were probably people who at that time thought because this or that group in Italy didn’t have ancestors that lived through X events that they could never be Italian and you probably consider the de
A shared cultural experience with direct repercussions as to how you are brought in the world and what you get taught at home about life and so on.
It's inheritable even if not genetic, what you experience in the first years of your life is a permanent element in your life and closely linked to what your mother did experience when very young and so on.
Which is also why social class matters more and you can't fix gaps just by changing incomes unless generations pass.
I can't go back much more than WW1 because no Italy existed pre 1861, and of course people from Milan felt 0 connection to people from Sicily in 1650, to the point that when Italy got technically united, the famous sentence was coined "we have made Italy, now we have to make Italians", because nothing even remotely close to an Italian identity existed (and we didn't even all speak the same language either).
The "making of Italians" was a failed from the top attempt at social engineering by the same kind of people who control society since industrialization: the upper middle class educated professional class.
THEY shared something across Italy because the latin law studied in Sicily was the same studied in Milan and both areas taught Dante to the 2% of people who went to high school and so on.
Just to clarify my ancestors didn't eat dry pasta (like maccheroni or spaghetti) almost ever till 100-120 years ago. They didn't use a lot of olive oil either
They ate egg noodles and stuffed pasta and cooked in lard
Your actual real blood and soil Italians will suffer a lot from diseases passed onto them from people driven into the depths of poverty but according to you that can't happen because there's no such thing as society but wait what's this
When we "celebrated" 150 years of Italy in 2011 a lot of polls circulated and invariably the % of people who felt closer to their local identity than to Italian identity was higher.
Something like 50 to 30, with the remaining 20 feeling either "European" first or having no national identity at all
A shared cultural experience with direct repercussions as to how you are brought in the world and what you get taught at home about life and so on.It's inheritable even if not genetic, what you experience in the first years of your life is a permanent element in your life and closely linked to what your mother did experience when very young and so on.Which is also why social cl
The bolded is my point. Enough generations pass and people will have that shared culture. Those people you don’t think can be Italian could become the grandparents of people who a future person with your views considers part of the in-group just as people in your in-group now likely had ancestors once considered the outsiders to someone else.
Because it's better to be safe than sorry with any choice which permanently affects you.
And because the pulsion should be toward improvement not stagnation
I didn’t say stagnation, I said status quo, which would be in line with the expectations of other Italians. What if the country has dearth of low skilled labor?
He's already covered that with his patent policy of bringing in 2 to 3 times as many young women as men. Can't imagine why. LOL
I didn’t say stagnation, I said status quo, which would be in line with the expectations of other Italians. What if the country has dearth of low skilled labor?
The median Italian is terrible and the cause of stagnation (30 years of stagnant per Capita GDP, a worldwide record among first world countries).
For the bold, remember we can take in as many women as you want in my model
Are Sicilians and Sardinians cultural Italians? When I was in Sardinia there was much talk of a Sardinian culture.
We had a Sardinian exchange student live with us when I was a child, and according to her we needed to specify. She’d get irate at being introduced as Italian instead of Sardinian. And she eventually got kicked out of our house for underage drinking. Lol.
I’ve held a weird mental grudge against Sardinia ever since. I’m like a crow too, I’m gonna make this grudge intergenerational.
Can napoleon consider himself italian? Corsican.
His family was either Italian or descended from.
