Some countries have areas/communities/federal subjects that are autonomous de jure or de facto. However, many of these regions are not actually autonomous, without getting too into current politics. Is it possible for the government mainly composed of members of majority nationality/race of a nation to give a region formal autonomous status, with a leader from a titular nationality and language laws, or is any pretense of autonomy doomed like Soviet korenizatsiya?
Actually Autonomous Regions
- Thread starter Beatriz
- Start date
I am telling you about the case that I know best, Italy: now even though it is not a federal state, there are regions with a special statute, which enjoy very large autonomy, both administrative and economic, so much so that a percentage of laws do not coincide with those national. Autonomy that derives from historical reasons (for example in Sicily to politically end the revolt against Rome that developed from 1944 to 1951) or linguistic (the case of Sardinia, with its own neo-Latin language or of the Italian Tyrol, where German is spoken) In addition, due to a very advanced law on linguistic minorities (with its contradictions, the largest Italian linguistic minority, the Romanesh, is not protected) part of these autonomies are extended to the local community and municipality level.
In fact, South Tyrol is so autonomous (Bolzano being an autonomous province inside an autonomous region) that the German-speaking community actually enjoys more autonomy inside of Italy, than it would enjoy if South Tyrol were just another land of Austria; the only comparable example might be Eupen-Malmedy in Belgium.
Honestly, I'd extend the deal enjoyed by Bolzano and Trento to every single province of every single region in Italy, having the country be born an unitary state rather than a federal one was a mistake we're still suffering the consequences of, more than a century and a half later.
Devvy
Donor
What is your definition of being "autonomous"? The definition I think, is self governing whilst belonging to a wider country (and thereby not fully sovereign), so I'm interested to know which areas you think aren't actually autonomous?
Could you give any examples of what you mean? I'd argue, similar to above, that in Europe many of the autonomous areas are so; Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have significant autonomy whilst remaining part of the UK, just as Catalonia does in Spain, or many of the German states.
There are such examples (though perhaps not many); Greenland is autonomous to such an extend that they even left the EU unilateraly; Statute of Westminster increased (already substantial) autonomy to such a level that the countries became practically completely independent; Serbia and Montenegro before the separation had separate currencies and hard custom border between them; and Bosnia and Herzegovina is holding together by spit and polish, the two entities doing whatever they please.