On unrecognized states

Regardless, a Straits Crisis is coming soon: get ready lads.

The Islamic State hardly corresponds to a community of people that want to have their own state except for those that make up the organisation itself. This is like saying the national self-determination of Nazi-occupied Poland should be determined by the Nazis.

I don't think many leftists would want to recognize any of those states, especially Islamic state which I hope no leftists other than that one absolutely crazy trot organization likes.

explain now

WSWS said that everything bad about ISIS was Human Rights Imperialism.

A Maoist party in Italy defend ISIS saying that it was under attack from Russian and USA Imperialism.

Human Rights Imperialism is when an Imperialist State using "Human Rights" (which is a spook) to justify attacking. Like Yugoslavia literally fighting against Al-Qaeda (hence those mass-killings) was what NATO used to bomb it or USA using MUH INCUBATORS or MUH WMDs to justify attacking Saddam.

WSWS said that the same was being done to ISIS.

I understand why human rights as they currently exist and represent are spooks but under a socialist world, shouldn't proper human rights exist as well?

It was this Trotskyist organization called International Workers League, they don't actually like ISIS but they support them militarily because muh anti-imperialism.

icl-fi.org/english/wv/1091/syria.html

Attached: ICL.PNG (1412x65, 18.61K)

If Assad is a butcher then wtf is ISIS?

literally the only one here worth supporting is West Sahara
Literally every other one of these is just a Military base with a slapped on

Former Pinoshit tier Dictatorship turned Faux-Democracy proped up by US Japanese and R.O.K investment
Should be reintegrated into china
Literal reactionaries that want their CIA backed BAZED theocratic Monarch to come back because their form of Buddhism is superior or some shit
Should remain part of china

Swedish political scene was full of support for them until the Swedish Democrats supported it. That's how much they were hated.

Georgian here. Georgia's been siding with the EU and NATO out of fear of Russian Imperialism. Abkhazia and South Ossetia are just Russian puppets, but at this point the hope of ever getting them back as a Georgian territory is dead. I genuinely doubt that Russia would stop at these two though, given half the excuse they'd roll their tanks right down into the capital and make the country another one of their puppets, provided it won't be assimilated entirely.

That being said the lack of a real leftist party in the elections was disappointing.

In before banned

Why the fuck would the SD's support a Literal Third-World Left-SucDem National Liberation Moement?

Oh, well. It was nice knowing you.

One of the funniest cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face type of events happened when the Social Democrats finally, FINALLY, managed to bring a thing to the floor for a vote.

The thing was whether or not Sweden should recognize Western Sahara as a sovereign nation, something that's been part of their politics seven years at that point, it was even part of their election promises.

The Swedish Democrats declared their support for West Sahara and their intent to vote yes.

The Social Democrats then tanked the whole fucking thing.

Said it was something for the UN to deal with.

Saying Georgia is an Imperialist power or some shit and Rationalizing it being invaded by Bazed Russia Because it has a NATO military base in it is literally retarded and is on par with NATOphiles claiming we need to blow up every country with a Russian / Chinese base on it

Sounds like it 100% premeditated by the NATO-Right (Morocco is Basically a NATO member with how close it is to USA) To force the Left to stop supporting west Sahara or have liberal's call them Literal Nazi's for agreeing with SD on one topic or some shit

Kosovo might be the only part I'm still a bit iffy about
But that's because I'm a Kosovo Serb that was forced to leave during the NATO bombing.

I've come to the opinion that separatism should be supported on a strictly case-by-case basis. If it can result in progress and is a genuinely progressive movement, then yes. Otherwise, no. There is no automatic answer.

That's ridiculous. Just cause some rightwingers agree with something you proposed in the fucking first place doesn't mean you should stop proposing it. How the fuck can someone be so unpragmatic. Incidentally enougb, something similar to this happened in my country, where a conservative proposed building "social housing" (don't know the proper english word for it, just translated "viviendas sociales") in one of the richer part of our city and fucking communists (albeit they're revisionists) rejected his proposal.

What country?

Chile

how could you forget Sealand
They are arguably semi-recognized. In 1978 when a bunch of German mercenaries tried to take the island and failed, Sealand insisted on German diplomats coming to negotiate for their release. This sort-of constitutes diplomatic recognition.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand#Attack_in_1978_and_the_Sealand_Rebel_Government

Ok now but is there any reason at all as to why Sealand should be recognized? It's a bigger meme than any other unrecognized state.

eh, no
it's sovereignty was sort of de facto recognized in british courts for a while, but then the whole country signed a UN treaty that expanded territorial waters by several miles, putting it in British waters
the treaty also states that "'Artificial islands, installations and structures do not possess the status of islands. They have no territorial sea of their own, and their presence does not affect the delimitation of the territorial sea, the exclusive economic zone or the continental shelf'."

combine that with the fact that they've apparently gotten lazy recently about continuously occupying it, and it seems their long term prognosis for recognition is extremely poor

*whole world

I find it hilarious how that already meme of a """nation""" someone managed to have a coup which was literally one guy with a gun who took some niggas hostages.

Actually it was a helicopter full of mercenaries apparently

Recognizing Kosovo is just affirming US imperialism and expanding it.
this has nothing to do with nationalism, US only wants Kosovo for all the ore it has. Its a fucking metal goldmine

Oh really? I actually don't know the details too well, but it's still hilarious.

How has nobody mentioned the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics yet?

Do they count as unrecognized though? All those ones I mentioned are in the wikipedia page of international state recognition, and while I do like the Donetsk People's Republic I don't believe it really is a state.

I've heard that it's also being used to make Serbs Reactionary. I've heard that Serbia is one of the few places left with actual ☭TANKIE☭s.

The Whole Ukraine sit much like the Georgian one is a bit of a mess
Two Different factions of EthnoNationalists supported by two different great capitalist powers

Attached: Screenshot_20170313-144326.png (929x891, 744.52K)

Attached: haha.jpg (803x688, 75.88K)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khomeini's_letter_to_Mikhail_Gorbachev

What

Attached: 20180925_140752.png (720x405, 230.77K)

Attached: ruhollah khomeini sean connery.jpg (400x271, 14.81K)

Scuderi is a fucking retard. The "Islamic State" is in the interests of Zionist imperialism.

Attached: sahyuni daesh.png (2856x1476, 1.86M)

Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Somaliland, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Kozovo and Artsakh should be recognized

So, about those states: do they have their own mobile services, ISPs, cable providers, electricity, etc? If they don't, which countries cover their areas for those services?

...

There doesn't seem to be a great solution here. In some ways it fits better with Ukraine, but since Ukraine is hardly espousing multi-ethnic politics atm it might be best as an autonomous part of Moldova.
Should have self-determination, but be neutral and maybe demilitarized.
Obviously it would have been best if socialist Yugoslavia had survived and the status quo maintained, but that ship has sailed, and I think a land swap along with guaranteed rights for Serbs/Orthodox sites is the best solution. They should be allowed to unify with Albania too so long as Albania denounces any further irredentism.
POLISARIO is in the right. The UN referendum plan should be implemented, with first-gen settlers not allowed to vote.
This is actually the one on the list with the best chance of a peaceful resolution in the medium term. Both states are liberal democracies and they are actually on pretty good terms. They agree in principle that reunification should happen, but they've yet to agree on the details.
This seems like a situation with no sympathetic party and no good solution, other than going back in time and saving the USSR.
Since this thread is mostly hypotheticals anyway, the best outcome would be for the PRC to democratize and Tibet to gain genuine autonomy. China would get to keep "muh historical territory", the water resources of Tibet, and its strategic location. Tibetans would keep the huge economic subsidies they get from Beijing while gaining local self-governance and freedom of religion. The Dalai Lama has already given up temporal power in the government-in-exile, so I don't think there's any need to be concerned about the old regime coming back. However, this still leaves the biggest question, namely the Han migrant laborers who are despised by most ethnic Tibetans (even though they're just trying to make a living and return to their families in the East). You can't just tell citizens of a country that they can't move freely within it.
There will be no peaceful reunification unless the PRC becomes democratic or at least shows itself willing to be more hands-off with the SARs, because Taiwanese will not be willing to accept a status like Hong Kong. Even then it might be too late; fewer and fewer Taiwanese consider themselves Chinese at all (there's been a huge shift in that regard over the past ~30 years)
No opinion

And as an addendum, I doubt Taiwan would even be willing to join a hypothetical socialist democracy on the mainland. The prospects of reunification don't look very good unless China were to go liberal, which is obviously less-than-ideal in itself.

Gotta disagree, Tito keeping Kosovo was the worst idea he ever had. To put it simply: Kosovo is not Yugoslav. A Slovene can speak with a Bulgar, nobody can fucking speak with an Albanian. This was made worse by people leaving Albania to go to Yugoslavia; who were Albanian nationalists at-heart (compared to local Kosovar Albanians that had some semblance of Yugoslav identity).
You have to remember that the entire arc of history that flung Milosevic to power was the riots in Kosovo between Serbs and Albanians. Without Kosovo, there is a very real chance Yugoslavia would be around today, perhaps confederalised and likely liberalising like the other eastern bloc state but still around. Instead the Albanians got Milosevic into power by playing on ethnic tensions, then we get the Yugoslav wars.

No clue

Now what kind of meme is that

I'll admit I'm neither Balkan nor an expert on Yugoslavia (I am somewhat familiar with the Kosovar protest movement and Milosevic's rise with the whole "nobody should beat you" thing). You're certainly right about Albanians being different from Slavs. The real question here, and it's an important one, is whether class-identity or civic identity in a socialist state can overcome ethnic division. Yugoslavia's history is hardly encouraging in that respect, but there were probably some things that could have been done better. For example, there was one scrapped proposal to create a house of parliament elected on industrial lines, as opposed to the others elected on a republic basis. Perhaps a more syndicalist society could have dealt with ethnic division better, by putting the real workplace community over the imagined national one? Based on one paper I've read, early pushes for greater regional autonomy and multi-partyism came from small-time politicians looking to boost their own status, rather than from the grassroots (who were more interested in the economic recession).

The Yugoslav status-quo seems appealing since it allowed both Albanians and Serbs to share Kosovo, but maybe I'm being too optimistic.

As someone who has been to Transnistria:

Despite claiming "independence" from Moldova, it's effectively an oblast of Russia that maintains its own borders. It retains soviet symbolism everywhere but is for all intents and purposes a capitalist country. However as it's so isolated and most international corporations cannot penetrate its markets, its own home-grown corporation (Шериф/Sheriff corporation) has a monopoly on most things. That being said, it has made Transnistria into a somewhat nicer and more functional place than Moldova proper.

Transnistrians nonetheless generally see themselves as Russians and are their use of soviet symbolism is effectively identification with the Russian Federation, just as uneducated people in the west use the hammer and sickle when representing Russia sometimes, and NOT socialism/communism by any means. The only reason it isn't part of RF is because geopolitcs would mean it'd lead to hell in the region, and the RF government knows this very well, even if they'd love to incorporate it (as unlike Crimea, there is nothing connecting it with Ukraine sandwiched between)

tl;dr: somewhat functional state, Russian Federation satellite, most people apathetic to any ideology except as vatnik jingoism

Attached: IMG_2439-1200x800.jpg (1200x800, 322.2K)

Well it was less a point about ethnic divisions, and more linguistic ones. You can build bonds between two individuals, let alone nations or societies if they understand what you are saying. There's a reason Yugoslav nostalgia and neo yugoslavism lives: because the peoples can still speak to eachother. Yugoslav identity in Kosovo, if it ever really existed, is dead forever.

Wow, that is actually pretty interesting. How does one even go to Transnistria? Did you just go on vacation or something else? Also, you said it functions as a regular capitalist state but I'd assume it's just as, if not more regulated that Belarus right? It must be a pretty damn interesting place to visit.

It's pretty easy. Go to Chișinău and take a marshrutka to Tiraspol. The marshrutka will stop at the border to Transnistria and you go into the border station and register yourself, telling them where you'll stay and how long you intend to stay for and they'll give you a little piece of paper with your registration which you can keep in your passport to prove your right to be there. There's no fuss and it's all pretty easy-going. It's actually a lot easier to get into Transnistria than many other recognized states. Relations between Moldova proper and Transnistria have become a lot more easy-going over the past few years so it's all quite straightforward.

In truth, it's not that interesting. There's really not much to see in Transnistria unless you want to see a few statues of Lenin and a few old Soviet buildings. It's worth saying also though that it's not at all like you're "going back to the Soviet Union," despite what some online might say (who never experienced the USSR and think that seeing Lenin is the equivalent of such). It's more like going to some small oblast of Russia where nothing really happens except monopoly money is used worthless outside of Transnistria.

Regarding the economic side of things: it's not as regulated as Belarus in terms of government ownership of sectors, however it IS in the sense that a private corporate entity has a monopoly on most major sectors, so it functions in similar ways as a state capitalist.

If you have any more questions, I'd be happy to answer also :-)

What was the predominant language?

Tbh I'd still like to go some day. It's kinda interesting to me, you know being in a place which almost the entire world doesn't consider it a country. Imo the two most interesting states I mentioned itt are this one and Somaliland, but I'd much rather go to Transnistria than the latter. Also Transnistria is a standard representative democracy right? Or does it have some dictatorial elements?

Where do you live fren?
Romanian? Moldova?

Russian. They claim that there are many other languages, namely "Moldovan" (i.e. Romanian), Ukrainian, and even Yiddish, but 100% of the time, only Russian is heard in the streets

Yes, it is interesting until you actually go there and realize it's just another eastern European place, except a little cleaner and slightly more functional than its neighbors (due to Russian dosh of course), and it is effectively what you might get if you had an entire corporation ruling over almost half a million people while also answering to other corporate oligarchs elsewhere.

If by representative democracy you mean oligarchy, then yes. I mean, it's basically the same as the Russian Federation for all intents and purposes. There is a status quo political establishment and they wish to keep it that way as the country isn't going to shit so they effectively rig the system so it doesn't change (and yes, of course you can say the same about western "liberal democracies" but I'm sure you understand what I'm getting at). People aren't too fussed though as in eastern Europe, people are pretty alien to the idea of changing governments and tend to prefer strong-arm leaders who can just keep things from going to fires of hell, which is basically the best people have come to hope for in any government in this part of the world.

With all due respect, my man, I'd rather not say at this point. I'm quite touchy about revealing details online about myself. Hope you understand!