Padania

VoCSe said:
WI northern Italy seceded in the '90s (peacefully)? I'm presuming that applying for EU memebrship would be an early step.
could have happened only in a scenario of a very bad economical recession, with italy (and likely some other state like Spain or greece) failing badly the parameters for euro stability.
Matter of fact, this was the scenario predicted by the Northern league (separatists).
I am not so sure you would have had a peaceful separation (Tchecoslovakia style, just to be clear). OTOH, maybe something similar to waht happened for Slovenia and Croatia. some bluster by the central government, but economical woes are so great that they cannot take care of everything.
 
VoCSe said:
WI northern Italy seceded in the '90s (peacefully)? I'm presuming that applying for EU memebrship would be an early step.
Would (southern) Italy then remain in the EU? Would Padania join NATO?
250px-Padanien_Flagge.png
 
Umberto Eco (of "The name of the Rose" fame) once wrote a satire where Padania secedes and rest-Italy also falls apart into the Papal states, the kingdom of the two Sicilies, and the Sardinia free state. While the latter three do good economically (Papal states selling merchandising, Sardinia becoming a giant floating casino [with help by the Aga Khan] and the Sicilies selling cheap pizzas to Africa [the mafia is involved]), Northern Italy suffers because they essentially have to export "wine to France, cheese to the Dutch, watches to Switzerland, electronics to Japan, beer to Germany and cars to Sweden".
 
Northern Italy will do very well because it's the wealthiest area of Europe. Only adding south Italy to the mix brings the statistics down. Sort of like Germany is actually three countries with the industrial, former communist, and tourist areas. Or is there a german posting here who can tell me the actual facts?
 
Nah, Germany isn't like that. Both the industrial and rural areas are split: Some areas have modern industries and the third sector and do good, some are stuck with old industries and do bad (Ruhr, Bremen, Saarland). Same on the country: The Alps are doing good because of tourism, but many other areas don't. And then, there's the between - areas with little cities which are neither the one nor the other and do average. And comparing Italy and Germany: Yes, East Germany is the German mezzogiorno, but some people say that Germany has done more to narrow the gap in 15 years than Italy has done in 150 years.
 
Yeah I know. I heard that when Bossi called a secession rally once a greater number of people attended a counter-secession rally organized by Fini.

Still, if Italy gets very bad it just might be possible. I'm hoping someone will come up with a plausible ATL for it.
 
Max Sinister said:
Nah, Germany isn't like that. Both the industrial and rural areas are split: Some areas have modern industries and the third sector and do good, some are stuck with old industries and do bad (Ruhr, Bremen, Saarland). Same on the country: The Alps are doing good because of tourism, but many other areas don't. And then, there's the between - areas with little cities which are neither the one nor the other and do average. And comparing Italy and Germany: Yes, East Germany is the German mezzogiorno, but some people say that Germany has done more to narrow the gap in 15 years than Italy has done in 150 years.
You should try and visit the former communist lander. the difference between east and west is quite strong, and most of the money poured into east germany was actually pocketed by western companies.
My guess is that western germans would renounce unification today, if they only could. And eastern germans would be even more eager to do the same.
 
VoCSe said:
Yeah I know. I heard that when Bossi called a secession rally once a greater number of people attended a counter-secession rally organized by Fini.

Still, if Italy gets very bad it just might be possible. I'm hoping someone will come up with a plausible ATL for it.
it would almost be easier to come out with a plausible ATL for scottish independence :D
Internal migration from the south accounts for some 30% of the population in N. Italy. What are you going to do with these guys? send them back by train?
 
Max Sinister said:
Nah, Germany isn't like that. Both the industrial and rural areas are split: Some areas have modern industries and the third sector and do good, some are stuck with old industries and do bad (Ruhr, Bremen, Saarland). Same on the country: The Alps are doing good because of tourism, but many other areas don't. And then, there's the between - areas with little cities which are neither the one nor the other and do average. And comparing Italy and Germany: Yes, East Germany is the German mezzogiorno, but some people say that Germany has done more to narrow the gap in 15 years than Italy has done in 150 years.


I think the division between 3 countries is quite a theory.

Economically, the 3 more southern states do well, Hessia, Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, and that´s not caused by tourism, but because it´s industries are modern, many research facilities and good universities. Of course, directly in the Alps tourism is a major branch, but attributing the success to the fact that you can go skiing is like saying "New York is an important city because the UN resides there"

One might add Hamburg in the north is doing well, but the old industrial areas in the Ruhr and Lower Saxony are in a pretty bad condition.

The East sees mainly a big structural unemployment rate, but with much difference between the North and South. THe south-eastern states and the area around Berlin are in fact catching up while the North East is depressed. That part relies on agriculture and tourism.

The mezzogiornio: I´d rather say Northern Germany is our mezzogiornio as we are pouring money into maintaining old structures for decades. While at least the south-eastern states do quite well.
 
Hm, I´m trying to formulate a convincing POD for a Europe where the bigger countries effectively break up;
- In Italy, the industrial North, in absolute disregard for the economic analysis of Umberto Eco :) is fed up with alimenting the South and secedes.

- Spain: Catalonia takes the autonomy much further and secedes.

- Germany: 1990: Grand coalition comes out of the election, Economic crisis deepens, the federal side milks the well-to-do southern states.

in a political climate change that has seen the secession of several regions, Baden-Württemberg and Bavaria split and form some kind of south german state.

Thoughts?
 
LordKalvan said:
You should try and visit the former communist lander.

I've been there. Truly, some areas are a bit run-down, there are too many new nazis, and many young people leave it... but if you consider what we had to start with around 1990, it's not too bad.

LordKalvan said:
the difference between east and west is quite strong

I didn't say it wasn't, I just pointed out that 1) it was even bigger a few years before since 2) a lot has been done. Not everything in the right way, though.

LordKalvan said:
and most of the money poured into east germany was actually pocketed by western companies.

Unfortunately, yes. A lot of money has been wasted that way (estimates are, more than one billion Euro [billion in the European sense; you Americans would call it a trillion!]). Well, at least it didn't go to the mafia.

LordKalvan said:
My guess is that western germans would renounce unification today, if they only could. And eastern germans would be even more eager to do the same.

Not really. People complain a lot, there are many jokes about the topic, but no political party wants to split Germany again, not even the PDS / Linkspartei, and even they are a minority in East Germany.
 
Steffen said:
Economically, the 3 more southern states do well, Hessia, Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria

The mezzogiornio: I´d rather say Northern Germany is our mezzogiornio as we are pouring money into maintaining old structures for decades. While at least the south-eastern states do quite well.

You're deliberately overlooking one point: Oh-so-good Bavaria has RECEIVED more money than it gave until around 1990, when the reunification changed everything. Suddenly, Bavaria became a country that had to give the other Länder more than it got back. Exactly at that time CSU politicians started to scream about how unfair Bavaria was treated.

What about if the other Länder suggest cutting the Länderfinanzausgleich completely if some decades into the future Bavaria does worse again? Or what if they'd said "ok, in the future Bavaria has to give less - but then, we want the money we gave you in the past back"?
 
Max Sinister said:
You're deliberately overlooking one point: Oh-so-good Bavaria has RECEIVED more money than it gave until around 1990, when the reunification changed everything. Suddenly, Bavaria became a country that had to give the other Länder more than it got back. Exactly at that time CSU politicians started to scream about how unfair Bavaria was treated.

What about if the other Länder suggest cutting the Länderfinanzausgleich completely if some decades into the future Bavaria does worse again? Or what if they'd said "ok, in the future Bavaria has to give less - but then, we want the money we gave you in the past back"?

I don´t overlook the point. it´s essentially the proof that the LFA can be a viable instrument of structural policy if used correctly. But if it´s not used correctly, it´s an unfair advantage for states who do not seem to have any inclination to do better in the future.
Saarland, for example, has the final kindergarten year for free. That´s quite nice, but it would be nicer if it would be paid from Saarland´s taxpayers money.
Without the LFA; Baden-Württemberg, bavaria and Hamburg are the top 3 states considering state financial ressources per capita, afterwards, we are place 12.

I think Roland Koch put it best: "The biggest structural problem in the Land Hessen is we finance Rheinland-Pfalz".
So it´s not about stinginess or jealousy, but a question how long you can maintain a measure without challenging the logical raison d´etre.
 
LordKalvan said:
Internal migration from the south accounts for some 30% of the population in N. Italy. What are you going to do with these guys? send them back by train?

My father was one of those migrants. My idea would be of seceding not only the noerth, but also, for both politca, strategical and economic reasons, most of the center of the country (except, of course, Rome) and tiny bits of the south (the inner, mountainous and poorer reaches where mafias do not dominate, from Molise to inner Campania and Basilicata/Lucania). The rest, Rome and the coastal south, should go its way, and I do not doubt it would prosper much more than now. As for Sardinia, it could be independent if ti wants, though I have nothing against Sardinians.
The southern migrants to the north, quite obviously, are here and would remain here, unless they should find unbearable living in the new state - dont' call it "Padania", please, I prefer "useful Italy".
 

Thande

Donor
This gives me an idea...we've had a lot of 'Balkanised Europe' type threads where it's assumed the breakup happened several centuries ago, but how about an FH Balkanised Europe thread? Where every major European country has broken up into at least three components...
 
@basileus: Funny idea. Fortunately the two Italys aren't in danger of starting a war with themselves - their long border would be undefensible. And why do you think that South Italy would prosper afterwards?
 
basileus said:
My father was one of those migrants. My idea would be of seceding not only the noerth, but also, for both politca, strategical and economic reasons, most of the center of the country (except, of course, Rome) and tiny bits of the south (the inner, mountainous and poorer reaches where mafias do not dominate, from Molise to inner Campania and Basilicata/Lucania). The rest, Rome and the coastal south, should go its way, and I do not doubt it would prosper much more than now. As for Sardinia, it could be independent if ti wants, though I have nothing against Sardinians.
The southern migrants to the north, quite obviously, are here and would remain here, unless they should find unbearable living in the new state - dont' call it "Padania", please, I prefer "useful Italy".
Well, I am a "padanian" aborigin, tracing my ancestry back to th 15th century, and actually i lived very close to you before deciding to migrate to a better climate :D and, as a matter of fact, i was in the Northern League. Which I have to admit was a substantial failure, even if (or maybe because) it was an answer to the Northern malaise. One should wonder what might have happened in the early nineties if the NL directorate had a real political manifesto, and a sense of realpolitik too (I've done that a lot, btw, and can just regret that a padan camelot turned out to be just a colossal failure :(
I don't disagree with you: A Northern italy including Tuscany, umbria and marche would be a very nice and effective state ( a federal one, mind. My political sympathies are all with the early American federalists :) ).
At least i can blame garibaldi, and the thoudand Northern boneheads who were dragged into that stupid filibustering in 1860 :mad: Btw, include also the British among the guilty parties: without the support of the royal navy, garibaldi adventure would have ended before starting.
Or you can go back another 12 years, and think what might have happened if the 1848 revolutionaries had been a bit more sensible and realistic. Some day i would like to write a TL where the insurrection of Lombardy and Venice turns into a success, and the North becomes a federal republic, sooner or later absorbing Romagna, the duchies and Tuscany, and ultimately kicking out the savoys :rolleyes:
 
Top