This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Secession article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The UNPO is probably not a reliable source. So, don't overemphasis on it. According to page " UNPO Membership" : [1], every group that pays the application fee, possessing the will to be identified as a Nation or People , will be a member of this group . That is not a reliable organization or source .It seems to represent extreme minority positions and also appears to be a questionable source. It does not appear to be received as credible or widely acknowledged as a credible organization.-- Larno Man ( talk) 15:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Can someone add something about Tamil secessionist movement in Sri Lanka? I don't know enough about to write the section by myself. M.Campos ( talk) 13:14, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
HI! I belong to the SoCal Republic for a new Southern California State! But the ultimate goal is Southern California Republic! I Understand there is a place (see Google search) for Secession movements. Maybe Vermont will be the first US State to "revolt" and get out of the New American Nation we now have?! I Know that there is also great secessionist feelings in Catalonia (Spain they hate being called Spanish there by the way!) To Secession whereever it may be! Andre' Andreisme ( talk) 23:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I propose that the (very long) list of secession movements be removed. We already have links for the lists of historical and active autonomist and secessionist movements, so why list all those countries here? This article should concentrate on arguments for and against secession and the history of the idea. Furthermore, the see also section is entirely too long. Many of those concepts or examples should be discussed in the article and the repetition removed. As it stands currently, this article is mostly made up of lists. --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 02:40, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
The terms "secession" and "secede" are being misused by this article. They correctly refer to withdrawal from a federation, not to independence from a unitary state such as France nor a unitary (albeit devolved) state such as the United Kingdom. 86.176.119.146 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC).
I don't think it is accurate to portray the Scottish independence movement as a "secessionist" one. What the Scots want is an end to the jointly agreed Act of Union of 1707 between England and Scotland. Scotland did not surrender its sovereignty to England nor England to Scotland, they agreed to pool it. Scotland is not therefore breaking away from the United Kingdom, because the United Kingdom in its original form (1707) would no longer exist after the termination of the Union.
What remains of the "United Kingdom" would be a new state, not (not) its successor entitled to the assets and representation in international forums and organizations. Freedom1968 ( talk) 20:06, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Couldn't a national government "secede" from the union of states by blatantly ignoring their limits in the federal constitution? Or is that another term? - FreedomWorks! ( talk) 13:43, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
I would not call the dissolution of Czechoslovakia a secession, because both arising states agreed on it. — Petr Matas 09:37, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
I agree. Indeed the same could be said of Scotland were it to vote for independence. Freedom1968 ( talk) 20:52, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Psychonaut, the section is written as a blog with one-sided of point of view. There are major faulty statements
Aleksandr Grigoryev ( talk) 15:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
In my research, I found a source (ISBN:9780754677024) [1] that state the origin of the secession term is the Latin words se (apart) and cedere (to go). I hope there are those who know Latin who could help explain the difference (if there is) to the term secessio used in the article. Darwin Naz ( talk) 00:03, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
References
is the link to the Partition of Belgium relevant? I believe it is a different case from the session of Belgium and the NeTherlands. The hypothetical split of Belgium is not the same as the Belgian Revolution of 1830.
Is this split even part of "secession", and does it deserve a separate mention, or should it be deleted? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.11.213.100 ( talk) 20:48, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Not only that, it was perhaps the 'most significant secession in modern times. This is was a secession according to philosophers and historians, [1] and also according to the Wiki list of secessions. Not to mention, the article's own list of types of secession has "Colonial wars of independence from an imperial state" as type #2. The only 'argument' against mentioning the American Revolution as a secession is ... some USAmericans are offended with this usage. Lame! PhilLiberty ( talk) 23:22, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Rjensen, there are many historians who refer to the American Revolution as secession. Here is a quote and article discussing the distinction.
Nowhere is the under-theorized character of secession and the confusion that results from failure to distinguish it from revolution more evident than in the habit of describing the conflict with Britain and the North American colonies as the “American Revolution.” It is true that there were whiggish themes from the ideology of 1688 about restoring the rights of Englishmen, and there were Lockean themes about self-government. But the act of the British colonists in America was an act of secession. It was neither whiggish, nor Lockean, nor Jacobin revolution. The colonists did not seek to overthrow the British government. Commons, Lords, and Crown were to remain exactly as before. Indeed, many of the colonial leaders, such as Adams and Hamilton, admired the British constitution and government, and sought to imitate its best features. They wished simply to limit its jurisdiction over the territory they occupied. They wished to be let alone. [2]
PhilLiberty ( talk) 18:12, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Donald W. Livingston is a fringe neo-Confederate activist. Rjensen ( talk) 18:49, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
The American Revolution article now begins: "The American Revolution was a colonial revolt for secession from the British Empire which occurred between 1765 and 1783. ..." PhilLiberty ( talk) 18:44, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
References
Chechnya fought and lost the war. Xx236 ( talk) 08:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Explain secession and the principle of nationality ? 196.189.240.103 ( talk) 12:00, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Secession article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The UNPO is probably not a reliable source. So, don't overemphasis on it. According to page " UNPO Membership" : [1], every group that pays the application fee, possessing the will to be identified as a Nation or People , will be a member of this group . That is not a reliable organization or source .It seems to represent extreme minority positions and also appears to be a questionable source. It does not appear to be received as credible or widely acknowledged as a credible organization.-- Larno Man ( talk) 15:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Can someone add something about Tamil secessionist movement in Sri Lanka? I don't know enough about to write the section by myself. M.Campos ( talk) 13:14, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
HI! I belong to the SoCal Republic for a new Southern California State! But the ultimate goal is Southern California Republic! I Understand there is a place (see Google search) for Secession movements. Maybe Vermont will be the first US State to "revolt" and get out of the New American Nation we now have?! I Know that there is also great secessionist feelings in Catalonia (Spain they hate being called Spanish there by the way!) To Secession whereever it may be! Andre' Andreisme ( talk) 23:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I propose that the (very long) list of secession movements be removed. We already have links for the lists of historical and active autonomist and secessionist movements, so why list all those countries here? This article should concentrate on arguments for and against secession and the history of the idea. Furthermore, the see also section is entirely too long. Many of those concepts or examples should be discussed in the article and the repetition removed. As it stands currently, this article is mostly made up of lists. --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 02:40, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
The terms "secession" and "secede" are being misused by this article. They correctly refer to withdrawal from a federation, not to independence from a unitary state such as France nor a unitary (albeit devolved) state such as the United Kingdom. 86.176.119.146 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC).
I don't think it is accurate to portray the Scottish independence movement as a "secessionist" one. What the Scots want is an end to the jointly agreed Act of Union of 1707 between England and Scotland. Scotland did not surrender its sovereignty to England nor England to Scotland, they agreed to pool it. Scotland is not therefore breaking away from the United Kingdom, because the United Kingdom in its original form (1707) would no longer exist after the termination of the Union.
What remains of the "United Kingdom" would be a new state, not (not) its successor entitled to the assets and representation in international forums and organizations. Freedom1968 ( talk) 20:06, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Couldn't a national government "secede" from the union of states by blatantly ignoring their limits in the federal constitution? Or is that another term? - FreedomWorks! ( talk) 13:43, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
I would not call the dissolution of Czechoslovakia a secession, because both arising states agreed on it. — Petr Matas 09:37, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
I agree. Indeed the same could be said of Scotland were it to vote for independence. Freedom1968 ( talk) 20:52, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Psychonaut, the section is written as a blog with one-sided of point of view. There are major faulty statements
Aleksandr Grigoryev ( talk) 15:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
In my research, I found a source (ISBN:9780754677024) [1] that state the origin of the secession term is the Latin words se (apart) and cedere (to go). I hope there are those who know Latin who could help explain the difference (if there is) to the term secessio used in the article. Darwin Naz ( talk) 00:03, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
References
is the link to the Partition of Belgium relevant? I believe it is a different case from the session of Belgium and the NeTherlands. The hypothetical split of Belgium is not the same as the Belgian Revolution of 1830.
Is this split even part of "secession", and does it deserve a separate mention, or should it be deleted? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.11.213.100 ( talk) 20:48, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Not only that, it was perhaps the 'most significant secession in modern times. This is was a secession according to philosophers and historians, [1] and also according to the Wiki list of secessions. Not to mention, the article's own list of types of secession has "Colonial wars of independence from an imperial state" as type #2. The only 'argument' against mentioning the American Revolution as a secession is ... some USAmericans are offended with this usage. Lame! PhilLiberty ( talk) 23:22, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Rjensen, there are many historians who refer to the American Revolution as secession. Here is a quote and article discussing the distinction.
Nowhere is the under-theorized character of secession and the confusion that results from failure to distinguish it from revolution more evident than in the habit of describing the conflict with Britain and the North American colonies as the “American Revolution.” It is true that there were whiggish themes from the ideology of 1688 about restoring the rights of Englishmen, and there were Lockean themes about self-government. But the act of the British colonists in America was an act of secession. It was neither whiggish, nor Lockean, nor Jacobin revolution. The colonists did not seek to overthrow the British government. Commons, Lords, and Crown were to remain exactly as before. Indeed, many of the colonial leaders, such as Adams and Hamilton, admired the British constitution and government, and sought to imitate its best features. They wished simply to limit its jurisdiction over the territory they occupied. They wished to be let alone. [2]
PhilLiberty ( talk) 18:12, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Donald W. Livingston is a fringe neo-Confederate activist. Rjensen ( talk) 18:49, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
The American Revolution article now begins: "The American Revolution was a colonial revolt for secession from the British Empire which occurred between 1765 and 1783. ..." PhilLiberty ( talk) 18:44, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
References
Chechnya fought and lost the war. Xx236 ( talk) 08:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Explain secession and the principle of nationality ? 196.189.240.103 ( talk) 12:00, 14 June 2022 (UTC)