La Vendée


	Corsica


	Occitania


	A Free Wales


	A Freer Catalonia - The Financial Times


	The Independence of Catalonia


	Sue Stirling: Now let us turn to the English question... - the Independent


	Why Scotland needs Independence?


	Aspirational Slovenia - The Scotsman


	Basque used for the first time at the EU Council of Ministers


	France fails to implement UN recommendations on 'regional' languages


	Is Quebec setting a vital example for Basques?


	Quebecers are a nation within Canada


	Les régions d'Europe narguent leurs Etats - Liberation


	Will Slovenia be the European whipping boy?


	La région qui deviendrait Etat sortirait de l'UE - Liberation


	Carantha's Observation

The Flag of Vendée


	Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité?


	La Vendée


	A French département with historical burden

A nation killed by French revolutionists

Masonic France wants to cover up the genocide in its history and on its territory

Vendée is a department in west central France, on the Atlantic Ocean. In the Vendée, 31 members, elected through universal suffrage, govern the affairs of the department, with 28 members on the right-wing and 3 members on the left-wing. This assembly is headed by Philippe de Villiers. The Prefect represents the French State in the department.The department is crossed by four rivers: the Sèvre Nantaise (135 km), the Vendée (70 km), the Lay (110 km) and the Sèvre Niortaise (150 km).

The Vendée has been cited as the most economically dynamic department in France by L'Express magazine in a 2006 survey. Its economy is characterized by a low rate of unemployment (around 7% in late 2006 against over 9% nationally) and a very high proportion of small and medium sized enterprises (one business for every 14 inhabitants).

The name Vendée is taken from the Vendée river, which runs through the south-eastern part of the department. – That is not true, in fact, the name derives from the Vends (Veneti), who, in Roman times, had settled in this region and also in nearby Brittany, known in ancient times as Armorica. In the spring of 57 BC, when Julius Caesar invaded Gaul, his Roman commander Marcus Licinius Crassus defeated the Vends in the area of today's Brittany and Vendée.

Today, La Vendée is a French département

History

Towards the end of the Roman empire, the Vends of Armorica resisted courageously the Roman occupation. Only after fierce fighting they were finally defeated and forced to retreat. In consequence, the Romans killed and led away almost the entire male population of the country. A nation was destroyed. Then, the Celtic people from the British Isles arrived in Armorica. It became a Celtic province and adopted the name Brittany. Only some names bear witness of the ancient Vends (Veneti).

In the nearby province, what is today Vendée, the inhabitants offered no resistance. They evidently preserved their original Vendic (Venetic) culture and identity still for a long time until they were Romanized, or better said Frenchified in the Early Middle Ages.

The area today called the Vendée is part of the former province of Poitou. In the south-east corner, the village of Nieul-sur-l'Autise is believed to be the birthplace of Eleanor of Aquitaine (1122 - 1204) and was part of her Kingdom. Eleanor's son, Richard I of England (the Lionheart) often based himself in Talmont. The Hundred Years' War (1337 - 1453) turned much of the Vendée into a battleground.

Since the Vendée held a considerable number of influential Protestants, including control by Jeanne d'Albret, the region was greatly impacted by the French Wars of Religion, which broke out in 1562 and continued until 1598. Eventually King Henri IV issued the Edict of Nantes and the Wars came to an end. When the Edict of Nantes was revoked in 1685, it caused many Huguenots to flee from the Vendée.

Die Füße im Feuer

Conrad Ferdinand Meyer
(1825-1898)

Wild zuckt der Blitz. In fahlem Lichte steht ein Turm.
Der Donner rollt. Ein Reiter kämpft mit seinem Roß,
Springt ab und pocht ans Tor und lärmt. Sein Mantel saust
Im Wind. Er hält den scheuen Fuchs am Zügel fest.
Ein schmales Gitterfenster schimmert goldenhell
Und knarrend öffnet jetzt das Tor ein Edelmann ...

   - "Ich bin ein Knecht des Königs, als Kurier geschickt
   Nach Nîmes. Herbergt mich! Ihr kennt des Königs Rock!"

   - Es stürmt. Mein Gast bist du. Dein Kleid, was kümmert's mich?
   Tritt ein und wärme dich! Ich sorge für dein Tier!"

Der Reiter tritt in einen dunklen Ahnensaal,
Von eines weiten Herdes Feuer schwach erhellt,
Und je nach seines Flackerns launenhaftem Licht
Droht hier ein Hugenott im Harnisch, dort ein Weib,
Ein stolzes Edelweib aus braunem Ahnenbild ...
Der Reiter wirft sich in den Sessel vor dem Herd
Und starrt in den lebend'gen Brand. Er brütet, gafft ...
Leis sträubt sich ihm das Haar. Er kennt den Herd, den Saal ...
Die Flamme zischt. Zwei Füße zucken in der Glut.

Den Abendtisch bestellt die greise Schaffnerin
Mit Linnen blendend weiß. Das Edelmägdlein hilft.
Ein Knabe trug den Krug mit Wein. Der Kinder Blick
Hangt schreckensstarr am Gast und hangt am Herd entsetzt ...
Die Flamme zischt. Zwei Füße zucken in der Glut.
- "Verdammt! Dasselbe Wappen! Dieser selbe Saal!
Drei Jahre sind's ... Auf einer Hugenottenjagd ...
Ein fein, halsstarrig Weib ... 'Wo steckt der Junker? Sprich!'
Sie schweigt. 'Bekenn!' Sie schweigt. 'Gib ihn heraus!' Sie schweigt.

Ich werde wild. D e r Stolz! Ich zerre das Geschöpf ...
Die nackten Füße pack ich ihr und strecke sie
Tief mitten in die Glut ... 'Gib ihn heraus!' ... Sie schweigt ...
Sie windet sich ... Sahst du das Wappen nicht am Tor?
Wer hieß dich hier zu Gaste gehen, dummer Narr?
Hat er nur einen Tropfen Bluts, erwürgt er dich." -
Eintritt der Edelmann. "Du träumst! Zu Tische, Gast ..."

Der Reiter lauert aus den Augenwinkeln: "Herr,
Ihr seid ein kluger Mann und voll Besonnenheit
Und wißt, daß ich dem größten König eigen bin.
Lebt wohl! Auf Nimmerwiedersehn!"

Der andre spricht:
"Du sagst's! Dem größten König eigen! Heute ward
Sein Dienst mir schwer ... Gemordet hast Du teuflisch mir
Mein Weib! Und lebst ... Mein ist die Rache, redet Gott."

Henri de La Rochejacquelein at the Battle of Cholet in 1793

by Paul-Emile Boutigny, (19th C.), Musée d'art et d'histoire de Cholet, France.

The revolt

It is also remembered as the place where the peasants revolted against the Revolutionary government in 1793. They resented the changes imposed on the Roman Catholic Church by the Civil Constitution of the Clergy (1790) and broke into open revolt in defiance of the Revolutionary government's military conscription. A guerrilla war, known as the Revolt in the Vendée, led at the outset by an underground faction called the Chouans (tawny owls), cost more than 100,000 lives (much more!) until it ended in 1796.

The Revolt in the Vendée is the subject of Ninety-Three (Quatre-vingt-treize), the last novel by the French writer Victor Hugo. In the writings of Karl Marx regarding revolutionary struggles in various countries, he uses the term "a Vendée" as meaning "a focus of persistent counter-revolutionary activities".

In the mostly rural region of the Vendée, political sentiment in 1793 was Royalist. The farmers regarded many institutions of the young republic - new taxation, general conscription, the abolition of old regional and local privileges, as a threat to them rather than as an asset. They were outraged about the execution of the king.

The National Convention, on February 24th, had decided on the conscription of 300,000 men, scheduled for March 12th 1793. On that day, preparations for the revolt were made in St. Fleurent le Vieil. The population of other places joined; the Vendean militia fought revolutionary troops; the Vendeans, in March-July, militarily, held on pretty well; they undertook offensive operations, occupied Angers on June 19th.

The Vendée insurgents were organized in a number of armies, commanded by able leaders (Charette, d'Elbee, La Rochejaquelein, Stofflet), many of whom were noblemen and had previous military experience. On August 1st the National Convention decreed the destruction of the Vendée. Kleber, commissioned with the execution of that decree, with an army of 100,000, arrived at Nantes September 6th. On Sept. 19th his forces, the Blues, were defeated by the Whites (Vendeans) in the Battle of Torfu.

"Monsieur Henri", the youngest general of the Christian forces in La Vendée

The massacre

In October the Vendeans suffered several defeats; on Nov. 4th they won at Fougeres, on Dec. 12th at Le Mans. On Dec. 23rd at Savenay, the core of the Vendean army was surrounded and annihilated. The Blues (Republican side) committed massacres, first against those regarded instigators of the rebellion (priests), against prisoners of war, and then against the entire population of rebel villages, not sparing women, children and the old. Several Vendean units were still in the field; fighting was bitter and Vendeans occasionally still won victories (March 25th 1794, April 17th).

On July 28th Robespierre was executed in Paris; the terror phase of the French revolution was over. Carrier, one of the revolutionary commanders in the Vendée campaign, was executed on December 16th. Fighting ceased (Dec. 26th, 1794); on Feb. 17th, 1795, the Treaty of Junay was signed, regarded a peace treaty for the Vendée. The rebellion was resumed in 1795 and finally abandoned in 1796.

The Vendean rebellion was a climax in the history of the French Revolution. Because of the obstinate, determined resistance of the Vendeans the Jacobins escalated their policy of terror, not only sentencing individuals regarded enemies of the people, but pursuing a policy of genocide. This escalation of violence brought the downfall of Robespierre, the Jacobins, the Convention.

Many reforms the Vendeans had revolted against were still in force; but the fight had been extremely costly in human lives, over 200,000 dead. The Concordate Napoleon signed with the pope in 1801 restored the Catholic Church in France.

In 1815, when Napoleon returned from Elbe for his Hundred Days, La Vendée refused to recognize him and stayed loyal to King Louis XVIII. General Lamarque led 10,000 men into La Vendée to pacify the region. In 1850, British author, Anthony Trollope published his book La Vendée, detailing the history of the region and the war. In the preface he pays tribute to Madame de la Rochejaquelein on whose memoirs of the war he based his story.

Apremont, Vendée

A French genocide

In 1986 Reynald Secher wrote a controversial book entitled: A French Genocide: The Vendée, in which he argued that the actions of the French republican government during the revolt in the Vendée (1793 - 1796), a popular Royalist uprising against the Republican government during the French Revolution, was the first "modern" genocide. Secher's claims, in addition to his political and religious affiliations, caused a minor uproar in France amongst scholars of modern French history, as mainstream authorities on the period – both, French and foreign - published articles refuting Secher's claims. In the rebellion, initially the Vendée rebels gained the upper hand, so on August 1, 1793, the Committee of Public Safety ordered General Jean-Baptiste Carrier to carry out a pacification of the region. The Republican army was reinforced and the Vendéan army was eventually defeated.

Under orders from the Committee of Public Safety in February 1794, the Republican forces launched their final "pacification" (the Vendée-Vengé or "Vendée Avenged") - twelve columns, the colonnes infernales ("infernal columns") under Louis-Marie Turreau, were marched through the Vendée, and, according to Secher, killed, both, rebels and civilians indiscriminately. When the campaign dragged to an end in March 1796 the estimated dead, both, Republicans and Royalists, numbered between 117,000 and 500,000, out of a population of around 800,000.

Insigna of the Vendean royalist insurgents.

Note the French words 'Dieu Le Roi' beneath the heart-and-cross, meaning 'God (is) the king'.

Reaction of the Masonry

The French Revolution is one of the top items in Masonic ideology, which is directed against the Catholic Faith and Church. Therefore, Reynald Secher soon was criticized by many Masonic historians, who, in order to persuade the public of their seriousness, added to their names the epithet “University of…”.

Secher's allegation of genocide, Claude Langlois (of the Institute of History of the French Revolution) derides as "quasi-mythological". Timothy Tackett of the University of California summarizes the case as such: "In reality... the Vendée was a tragic civil war with endless horrors committed by both sides - initiated, in fact, by the rebells themselves. The Vendéeans were no more blameless than were the Republicans. The use of the word genocide is wholly inaccurate and inappropriate."

Hugh Gough (Professor of history at the University College Dublin,) considers Secher's book an attempt at historical revisionism that is unlikely to have any lasting impact. Peter McPhee roundly criticizes Secher, including the assertion of commonality between the functions of the Republican government and Communist totalitarianism. McPhee does this by pointing to what he considers to be a number of dubious assumptions and flawed methodology on Secher's part. Other scholars, who have published against Secher's thesis, include: Julian Jackson (professor of Modern history at the University of London), and professors of Modern history and related fields François Lebrun of the University of High-Brittany-Rennes II, and of the University of Paris, I-Pantheon-Sorbonne, Paul Tallonneau, Claude Petitfrère, and Jean- Clément Martin.

Not everything that shines is Gold

Peter McPhee says that the pacification the Vendée does not fit either the United Nations' CPPCG definition of genocide or that of Frank Chalk and Kurt Jonassohn ("Genocide is a form of one-sided mass killing in which a state or other authority intends to destroy a group, as that group and membership in it are defined by the perpetrator") because the events happened in a civil war. So it was not a one-sided mass killing and the Committee of Public Safety did not intend to exterminate the whole population of Vendée as parts of the population were allied to the revolutionary government.

However in Genocide and Gross Human Rights Violations Kurt Jonassohn writes "The reason we consider this a case of genocide is that exterminatory intent was clearly stated in the orders of several generals as well as in the several decrees passed by the government". Further support for Secher comes from Adam Jones, who wrote in Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction - a summary of the Vendée uprising, citing Secher and others, supporting the view that it was a genocide, and Pierre Chaunu, a professor of history at Paris IV-Sorbonne University.

Other historians have employed the term "genocide" to describe the massacres made during the civil war in the republican camp, such as Jean Tulard. Stéphane Courtois", a Director of Research at the CNRS who specializes in the history of Communism, tells of how Lenin compared the people of Vendée to the Cossacks, and expressed joy at subjecting them to the program Gracchus Babeuf, "the inventor of modern Communism", characterized as "populicide" in 1795 against the people of the Vendée. British historian Ruth Scurr states that the actions of the revolutionaries, such as mass executions by grapeshot fired from cannons and group drownings in the Vendée, constitute crimes against humanity that they would today be held accountable for under the European human rights legislation they themselves pioneered.

Secher attracted further controversy in 1991 with his publication Jews and Vendeans: From One Genocide to Another, comparing the fate of Royalist Vendeans with Jews in Nazi Germany.


	Its flag portrays a Moor's head in black on a white background

Corsica

Independence has always been the issue here.

Corsica is now a region - or rather a colony of France

Should the independence of Slovenia also set an example for this nation?

Corsica is usually considered one of the 26 régions of France, although strictly speaking Corsica is a "territorial collectivity" (collectivité territoriale) by law. As a territorial collectivity, it enjoys powers slightly more important than other French régions, but for the most part its status is quite similar to the status of the other régions. Corsica is referred to as a "région" in common speech, and is almost always listed among the other régions of France. Although the island is separated from the continental mainland by the Ligurian Sea, politically Corsica is considered part of Metropolitan France. Corsica is famed as the birthplace of Napoléon Bonaparte.

Un peu de l'histoire

With the collapse of Byzantine control, the island came under various influences, including Arabs and Lombards. Pisa took control of the island during most of the Middle Ages but it finally fell to Genoa in 1282, following the Battle of Meloria against Pisa. Corsica successively was part of the Republic of Genoa for five centuries. Despite take-overs by Aragon between 1296-1434 and France between 1553-1559, Corsica would remain under Genoese control until its purchase by France in 1768. The adventurer Theodor von Neuhoff was briefly King Theodore of Corsica in the 18th century.

Ajaccio, centre of Corsica

An important figure in Corsican history is Pasquale Paoli, a general and patriot who struggled for Corsican independence against Genoa and then France, called Il Babbu di a Patria (Father of the Nation). It was essentially with him that the Moor's head ("Testa Mora") became Corsica's emblem in 1760, harking back to the period when Corsica had been controlled by Moors (850 to 1034).

Paoli founded the first University of Corsica (with instruction in Italian), and in 1755 proclaimed the Corsican Republic. The Corsican Constitution would later be used as a model for the American Constitution (Saul 1992, 55–61). Paoli, however, was defeated by the French army, and the island came under French rule. Paoli died in exile in London in 1807. His legacy was taken initially by the irredentism of the Corsican Italians and now by the actual political movements for the independence of Corsica from France.

Group of singing Corsicans

Corsica is also the birthplace of Napoleon Bonaparte, who was born in Ajaccio, into minor nobility. Following the French conquest of the island, Corsican nobles were offered the ability to gain French titles if they could prove their genealogy sufficiently. In an attempt to do so, Napoleon's parents traveled to court in France, and, like many other Corsican nobles, sent their son to school there.

During World War II, while Germany occupied northern and western France, Corsica was part of Vichy France (1940-1942) and then occupied by the Kingdom of Italy from 1942-1943. In the first half of the 20th century, many Corsicans (like Petru Giovacchini) had advocated the unification of the island with Italy. -In recent decades, Corsica has developed a thriving tourism industry, which has attracted a sizeable number of immigrants to the island in search of employment.

Striving towards Independence

Corsica is currently governed almost as any other région of France, as explained in the introduction. There are several movements on the island calling for some degree of Corsican autonomy from France, or even full independence. Generally speaking, autonomist proposals focus on the promotion of the Corsican language, more power for local governments, and some exemptions from national taxes in addition to those already applying to Corsica.

We have a land, a people, a language, a culture!

The French government is opposed to full independence, as it would threaten France's unity, but has at times shown support for some level of autonomy. There is support on the island for proposals of greater autonomy, but polls show that a large majority of Corsicans are opposed to full independence.

Some groups who claim to support Corsican independence have carried out a violent campaign since the 1970s that includes bombings and a few assassination attempts, usually targeting pieds-noirs and other non-Corsicans, or buildings and officials representing the French government. The peaceful occupation of a pied-noir vineyard in Aléria in 1975 marked a turning point when the French government responded with overwhelming force, generating sympathy for the independence groups among the Corsican population. However, events such as the murder of préfet Claude Érignac on February 6, 1998 (for which Yvan Colonna was arrested five years later) have only served to convince many in Corsica, as well as in the French government and the general French public, that Corsican nationalists cannot be trusted with more autonomy. Recent attacks on Muslims have reinforced this opinion.

The attacks of Corsican “nationalists”, of course, are the consequence of the Paris centralist denationalization policy towards the Corsican people. The “opinion” is created by press and TV, which are financed from public funds and never report in favour of truth and righteousness.

I am Corsican and I am proud

Who are the pieds-noirs? They are Algerian-born French people, who had to leave Algeria, when it became independent. The French government settled them in great numbers in Corsica, in order to denationalize the indigenous people. Corsicans opposed in a violent way.

In 2000, Prime Minister Lionel Jospin agreed to grant increased autonomy to Corsica in exchange for an end to violence. The proposed autonomy for Corsica would have included greater protection for the Corsican language - Corsu, the island's traditional language (which is also considered to be a dialect of Italian), whose practice and teaching, like other regional or minority languages in France, had in the past been discouraged. According to the UNESCO classification, the Corsican language is currently in danger of becoming extinct. However, the plans for increased autonomy were opposed by the Gaullist opposition in the French National Assembly, who feared that they would lead to calls for autonomy from other régions (such as Brittany or Alsace), eventually threatening France's unity as a country.

In a referendum on July 6, 2003, a narrow majority of Corsican voters opposed a project from the government of Jean-Pierre Raffarin and Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy that would have suppressed the two départements of the island and granted greater autonomy to the territorial collectivity of Corsica.

The flag of Occitania

Occitania

A forgotten European nation in Southern France,
But very much alive!

Slovenia, an independent nation of only two million inhabitants, is a true challenge for several nations in Europe, which, despite the fact that they have a population of over two million, are not independent. As sharply critical politicians of great powers, Russia in particular, expressed at the time of Kosovo's declaration of independence: if this nation gets international recognition, than many nations in the world want recognized independence, too.

And then what? Should the identity, language and culture of small nations be sacrificed in order to invigorate the expansionism of great powers? An example of this is Occitania in southern France. It has a political historical tradition, a proper language, but it is completely dominated by Paris, its policies and French fashion.

Occitania (Occitan: Occitània) refers to the lands, where Occitan is the traditional language in use, generally nowadays as a minority language. Most of Occitania is in Southern France, other parts are in Italy (Occitan Valleys in Piedmont and Liguria), Spain (Aran Valley in Catalonia) and include Monaco; so the main languages in Occitania are nowadays French, Italian, Catalan and Spanish. In Aran Valley, Occitan is a local official language besides Spanish and Catalan.

Gascon

Present-day area where the Occitan language is spoken. It is about a linguistically mixed area, where Occitan became a minority language in contrast to French.

Under Roman rule most of Occitania was known as Aquitania while the northern provinces of what is now France were called Gallia (Gaul). The names Occitania and Occitan language themselves appeared in Latin texts from 1290 and during the following years of the early 14th century (Patria Linguae Occitanae, Occitana lingua). They derive from the name Lenga d'òc that was used in Italian (Lingua d'òc) by Dante in the late 13th century. Occitan and Lenga d'òc both refer to the centuries-old set of Romance dialects that use òc for "yes".

Occitan History

Written texts in Occitan appeared in the 10th century: it was used at once in legal then literary, scientific and religious texts. The spoken dialects of Occitan are centuries older and appeared as soon as the 8th century, at least, revealed in toponyms or in Occitanized words left in Latin manuscripts, for instance.

Occitania was often politically united during the Early Middle Ages, under the Visigothic Kingdom and several Merovingian and Carolingian sovereigns. In Thionville, nine years before he died (805), Charlemagne vowed that his empire be partitioned into three autonomous territories according to nationalities and mother tongues: along with the Franco-German and Italian ones, was roughly what is now modern Occitania from the reunion of a broader Provence and Aquitaine. But things didn't go according to plan and at the division of the Frankish Empire (9th century), Occitania was split into different counties, duchies and kingdoms, bishops and abbots, self-governing communes of its walled cities.

Tolosa

Tolosa - Toulouse, the historical and cultural centre of Occitania

Since then the country was never politically united again, though Occitania was united by a common culture which used to cross easily the political, constantly moving boundaries. Occitania suffered a tangle of varying loyalties to nominal sovereigns: from the 9th to the 13th centuries, the dukes of Aquitaine, the counts of Foix, the counts of Toulouse and the Aragonese kings rivalled in their attempts at controlling the various pays of Occitania.

Occitan literature was glorious and flourishing at that time: in the 12th and 13th centuries, the troubadours invented courtly love (fin'amor) and the Lenga d'Òc spread throughout all European cultivated circles. Actually, the terms Lenga d'Òc, Occitan, and Occitania appeared at the end of the 13th century.

Raymond VI de Tolosa (1156 - 1222)

+ S' RAIMUNDI DUCIS NARBONE COMITIS TOLOSE MARCHIONIS PROVINCIE

But from the 13th to the 17th centuries, the French kings gradually conquered Occitania, sometimes by war and slaughtering the population, sometimes by annexation with subtle political intrigue. From the end of the 15th century, the nobility and bourgeoisie started learning French while the people stuck to Occitan (this process began from the 13th century in two northernmost regions, northern Limousin and Bourbonnais). In 1539, Francis I issued the Ordinance of Villers-Cotterêts that imposed the use of French in administration.

Lomagne

Occitanian provinces

In 1789, the revolutionary committees tried to re-establish the autonomy of the "Midi" regions: they used the Occitan language but the Jacobin power neutralized them. The 19th century witnessed a strong revival of the Occitan literature and the writer Frédéric Mistral was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1904.

But from 1881 onwards, children who spoke Occitan at school were punished in accordance with minister Jules Ferry's recommendations. That led to a deprecation of the language known as la vergonha (the shaming): everyone spoke Occitan in 1914, but French gained the upper hand during the 20th century. The situation got worse with the media excluding the use of the langue d'oc. In spite of that decline, the Occitan language is still alive and trying to gain fresh impetus.

Bèziers

Bèziers, March17, 2007, manifestations for recognition of the identity of Occitania

Occitania today

There are fourteen to fifteen million inhabitants in Occitania today. According to the 1999 census, there are 610,000 native speakers and another million persons with some exposure to the language. Native speakers of Occitan are to be found mostly in the older generations. The Institut d'Estudis Occitans (IEO) has been modernizing the Occitan language since 1945, and the Conselh de la Lenga Occitana (CLO) since 1996.

Nowadays, Occitan is used in the most modern musical and literary styles such as rock 'n roll, folk rock (Lou Dalfin), detective stories or science-fiction. It is represented on the internet. Association schools (Calandretas) teach children in Occitan.

The Occitan political movement for self-government has existed since the beginning of the 20th century and particularly since post-war years - Partit Occitan and many others. The movement remains negligible in electoral and political terms. At a time of Europe's emerging, it wishes Occitania to become a federation of strong regions, with a lively culture and open to the world. Major demonstrations in Carcassonne (2005) and Bèziers (2007) and the week-long Estivada festival in Rodez (2006) suggest that there is a revival of Occitan language and culture. However, in France, Occitan is still not recognized as an official language, as the status of French is constitutionally protected.

A Free Wales

Like in the case of Slovenia, Wales, too, will very probably declare independence in foreseeable time.

Carantha

Plaid Cymru the Party of Wales believes that our current toothless Assembly should be replaced by a People’s Parliament for Wales. By giving the people of Wales the tools to do the job we can improve the health and wealth of our people.

Fundamentally Plaid Cymru believes that the people of Wales are sovereign - what that means is that you and I and all of our friends, neighbours and communities should decide the future of our country. This shouldn't be about an internal Labour Party fudge - this is about the future of public services in our country, and therefore we believe that a wide-ranging public debate should be followed by a referendum where the people of Wales are asked whether they wish to create a proper parliament for Wales.

The autonomous province of Wales - Cymru of 2.950.000 population (2005). Wales is officialy blingual, with English and Welsh language. The Welsh Language Act 1993 and the Government of Wales Act 1998 provide that the Welsh and English languages should be treated on a basis of equality.

Cardiff, chieftown of Wales

Plaid believes that every person living in Wales is a citizen of Wales, whatever their background, wherever they were born, whatever the colour of their skin, whatever language they speak. We are about building a better Wales – and to do that we need everybody here to make that commitment to Wales. All Labour want to do is to talk Wales down and plant scare stories that we wouldn’t do better running our own affairs. Plaid Cymru's View:


	•	We believe that the people of Wales are sovereign and that it is our right to determine our own future

•

We believe that the current New Labour designed Assembly is an utter shambles due to its lack of power and lack of direction

•

In the longer term we believe Wales should take its place among the nations of the world as a free and independent country

•

Wales’ place is at the heart of Europe and as such we strongly believe in cooperation amongst European countries.

We have consistently argued for the democratisation of the European Union – if it is truly to succeed then it must be a People’s Europe rather than a Bureaucrat’s Europe.

Title of the Cardiff daily. It is the British oligarchy, who pulls the wires of the mass media which controls the public mind. The majority of them cannot imagine an independent Wales.

Economic Success

Plaid Cymru the Party of Wales believes that the current ‘Barnett Formula’ for the funding of Wales is outdated and unfair. It is not a question of whether Wales can afford to be independent but whether it can afford NOT to be independent.

In the 21st century economy small country success is everywhere to be seen. Eight of the ten richest countries in the world by GDP have populations under 10 million.

Plaid Cymru's views:


	•	The Barnett Formula used to calculate the amount of public expenditure devolved to Wales is based on population rather than needs of Wales. Under the current devolution settlement the Barnett Formula should be altered to ensure a fairer funding formula for Wales.


	•	We support fully the Richard Commission Report which recommended an extension of the powers of the Assembly, to include primary law-making powers on devolved issues –like the Scottish Parliament.


	•	However, our ultimate constitutional aim is to secure independence for Wales in Europe. This would require the support of the Welsh people expressed through a referendum, and would involve full national status for Wales within the EU and the UN.


	•	Wales should have the powers to vary taxation and control its own economy in order to mirror the success of other small European nations


	•	To benefit fully in the global market, Wales needs to develop its own laws and institutions, set its own tax rates and represent itself at international institutions.

Carantha:

Recently, as Slovenia recognized the independence of Kosovo, it was expressly pointed out during the parliamentary discussion, that each nation has the right for self-determination. So, we are confident that Slovenia would be among the first states to recognize the independence of Wales.

A freer Catalonia

Financial Times
Published: June 20 2006

Catalans, Spaniards and Europeans all have reason to be proud of Sunday's democratic decision to expand the powers of self-government available to the citizens of Catalonia. The Catalans wanted it. The Spanish parliament mandated it as constitutionally lawful. And the European Union provides a framework - part architecture, part shock-absorbers - that should make such exercises perfectly ordinary.

In Spain that is not yet the case. Since the death of Franco and his noxiously parochial dictatorship just over three decades ago, Spaniards have successfully created a confident and prosperous democracy. But the federal dimension of this democracy has, from the outset, been a work in progress.

The deep-rooted and culturally in-eradicable nationalism of Basques and Catalans - who fought with the Republic during the 1936-39 civil war - still excites visceral opposition from Spain's right, and discomfits its more Jacobin left. All credit, then, to José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, the Socialist prime minister, for insisting that more devolution, to the extent that it democratically empowers those of Spain's citizens who want it, will strengthen the country. José María Aznar, Spain's former prime minister, says Catalonia's new statute of autonomy will "Balkanise" Spain. Yet countries as diverse as Spain (or the former Yugoslavia) cannot for ever be constrained by a straitjacket of centralism against the will of their people(s).

Catalonia's new powers, moreover, are modest. The row over Catalans' right to call themselves a "nation" is, frankly, anachronistic. Article 2 of Spain's constitution already recognises the country contains different "nationalities". New rights of judicial independence are appropriate and do not override Spain's highest courts. The tax question is more complicated - and more exaggerated.

Barcelona will now share responsibility for tax collection with Madrid. The Basques, by contrast, already collect nearly all their own taxes. The real issues, obscured by the emotive rhetoric, are those of equity and fiscal responsibility.

Within Spain's asymmetric federalism and still uneven economic development, it is vital to uphold the principle of fiscal solidarity: transfers from rich to poorer regions, or to put it more concretely, from Catalans and Basques to Andalusians and Castillians. Equally, the link between taxation and representation is important. Regional governments, which, apart from the Basques, have not had to raise their own revenue, have been profligate.

But the overriding public good of enhanced Catalan autonomy is political. It gives Catalans more room to breathe. It also sets a precedent for constitutionally expanded home rule just as Mr Zapatero embarks on even more difficult negotiations with the Basques - designed to take the gun out of Spanish politics once and for all.

The Independence of Catalonia

The Economic Viability

Catalonia is one of the countries, to which independent Slovenia sets a shining example. This is an article which clearly states why more and more nations are striving toward independence. Because of expropriation by centralistic structures.

By Xavier Sala-i-Martin, Columbia University and UPF
This script has been prepared for a conference at the Omnium Cultural
Translated by Eva Guler

Once upon a time, there was a country with a 6 million population, with an area of 40,000 square kilometres. The country had as next door neighbour's two big European powers, traditionally colonists, whose languages were a constant threat to the existence of the local language. The auto-governed population was being forced to speak and use two (or more) languages. The capita growth of this country was high, one of the highest of the world, a complete economic success. Is this science fiction or reality?

When we speak about the independence of Catalonia , the first question that a non-economist individual would ask me (being an economist myself) is "if Catalonia would be viable" to sustain itself as an independent nation. If Catalonia would not be viable as an independent economy, the description on the first paragraph would be science fiction and therefore it would not exist. But, the country that I have described is an actual fact and it is a country that exists and it is independent: I am talking about Switzerland.

Catalonia inside of Spain

Switzerland has a 6 million population and approximately 40,000 square kilometres. Switzerland borders with Germany and France, two European powers, traditionally colonists and the local language, the Swiss-German (which is different to German) is being threatened by the French and German languages (and Italian as well, which is spoken by a very small minority in the south of the country). So, before we even begin to talk, you can see that the arguments given against the viability of Catalonia as an independent nation are basically erroneous: if Switzerland is viable (and not only it is but it is also the second richest country of the world) why wouldn't Catalonia be, if also, our country is not up in a range of mountains, has a sea port and it has an easier access to the rest of the world?

In this script, I will try to analyse the arguments that the anti-independents use to demonstrate that Catalonia is not viable as an independent country. The most common argument is "Catalonia is too small to be able to become an independent nation". The truth is that no serious economist can agree with this statement. There is no economic theory that says that a country must be of a minimum size to be viable or that bigger countries in size are more viable than small ones. If this theory exists, it would be totally wrong because, in the world we live in, the expenditure per capita or the economic growth figure of a country cannot be related to the size of a country (measured, for example, by area and/or population). It is simply false that larger countries are more economically successful. If not, then why do we find amongst the poorest countries of the world, such big countries like China , India and Russia? And how come we find, in among the richest countries of the world, countries like Belgium, Holland and Switzerland?

Another argument against independence is that "a country can not prosper without natural resources like land, gas or petroleum, and Catalonia doesn't have any". This theory is also completely false. For example, Japan or the "miraculous tigers" from East Asia (Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea and Singapore) are not producers of petroleum or natural gas, and the fertile land to which they have access to, is very limited, (actually, both Hong Kong and Singapore are one city countries!). Saying this, the economic growth accomplished by these countries during the last decades has been spectacular.

Even more, if we apply this argument to our text, it is true that Catalonia, even though it has a great quantity of fertile land, does not produce some of those natural resources... but neither does Spain. So, independence would not bring any loss in this instance.

Barcelona, the church of Sagrada Familia projected by Antoni Gaudi is still under construction. It is a reflection of spiritual and creative power of the Catalonian people, who are striving for independence.

Also, there are economic arguments that lead you to conclude that to have natural resources can be a bad thing for the long-term growth (the economists named this phenomenon "Dutch Decease"). The argument can be summarised this way: when a country has a lot of natural resources (for example, petroleum) it dedicates a great quantity of resources to develop that particular sector and it tends to forget other sectors. In particular, it tends to forget the innovative and technological sectors, which generate the technological changes that guarantee long-term growth. So, these countries that are specialists in the production of petroleum and other primary materials do not focus on educating the population or adopting modern technologies and finish up by being poorer than they would have been without petroleum. The typical examples of countries that have suffered from this "Dutch Decease" are Mexico and especially Venezuela, countries that have become poorer after discovering rich petroleum banks.

This is a very attractive argument and we have shown examples, which support this theory. The truth is, that is, when we analyse all the countries in the world at the same time (instead of just looking at Mexico and Venezuela) we will realise that there is no relationship between the wealth of having natural resources and economic growth (on the other side of the argument we will find examples given that the most richest African countries are South Africa and Botswana, two rich countries in natural resources, specifically in gold and diamonds). So, it is not true that to have natural resources would be good, but neither can be said that it could be necessarily bad.

The usage of natural resources, obviously, is a necessity if you want to gain economic growth. And, if one doesn't have them, these can be obtained by other methods. The most logical and normal way of doing it is to do it by international trading, and not through political submission. And even more, to belong to a small country is favourable because it is an incentive to the government and all economic agents to compete and improve, because the alternate protectionism is not an option. The problems that nowadays the Spanish government face today over the very famous "artilleros" created during the alienated Spain from the Franco era, a Catalonian state would have never have had it. A Catalonian state, logically, would be one that is open to trading with all the countries of the world (including Spain).

A third argument against the economic viability of Catalonia is this: "Isn't it enough to compete with Paris , London , New York or Hong Kong , that now you also want to compete with Madrid"? This statement is also totally wrong. Catalonian businesses are already competing with the ones in Spain; we may or may not be the same political unit. The interstate competition is as big as the international one. Who, does the reader think, the Costa Brava hotels compete with? They compete with the Italian hotels, the Moroccan hotels and the Greek hotels, but the biggest competition comes from Spanish hotels in the south of Spain (Costa del Sol) and even from hotels from the coast of Tarragona (Costa Dorada) which are in the same Catalonian state.

So, the independence of Catalonia would not bring a very substantial increase in competition to the one we already face. And if, there was an increase, it would be very favourable, as an economist and as a user, we should always applaud any new competition due to its tendency to bring better quality and lower prices on products and services.

Continuing the same theme, another argument against the independence is that "to leave Spain would be suicidal because Spain is our biggest market for the Catalonian businesses". But the question is: Why? Why would the Spanish people buy our own cava and spend their summer holidays in the Costa Brava? Because they love us like good compatriots that they are? Or maybe because given the price and quality of our product that is the best they can do? Clearly the true answer is this last one. So if independence does not affect the price and quality we offer now, then the Catalonian markets would not lose.

Catalonia, still an autonomous province, but with an unrestrained striving after independence

It's a fact that the biggest international market is your neighbouring country. The biggest market for Mexico is the United States of America. The biggest market for Taiwan is China and the biggest market for France is Germany. Does the reader think that in reality that this then is a favourable argument for Mexico to be the 51st state of the United States of America ?

There are some people that claim "the dissolution of countries at the present time, is against the current trend in a time when Europe is nearing a one common currency, a one fiscal system, a one military unit and a one political unit. To speak about separatism and independence at the end of the 20th century is old-fashioned and it is out of tone". I think that this quote is not acceptable for several reasons. First, it is not true that there is a trend at the end of the 20th century to create a great super government like the European one. In fact, in 1946 there were 74 countries in the world and in 1995 there were 192. So, if there is a trend in the world, it is not the reduction of the number of countries but it is exactly the opposite, therefore, the evidence on which this is based is simply false. Secondly, the theory is based on the presumption that one political and one economic unit are beneficial (and, to go against the current trend is bad). Personally, I have enormous doubts about the wishful European project, based on the creation of one bureaucratic superstructure that will end up sinking all European economies. And thirdly, it is not necessary to venture into economic cooperation with the rest of the European countries from Spain. It can be perfectly done from Catalonia .

Finally, the most feared argument: "to obtain the independence, we need a war and this would be more costly than any other economic benefit that you could get out of it; can't you see what happened in Bosnia with the disintegration of the old Yugoslavia"? This is half true and half false. It's true that the independence is not wanted if the price we have to pay to obtain it is a war. But what is not true is, that the only way of obtaining independence would be through war. Historically there have been two ways about drawing borders: war and monarchy marriages. This last one has not fully disappeared yet, but monarchy marriage is not used together with a political goal. The war, on the contrary, is still being used. But we find ourselves in the 21st century and we should need to have faith in freedom and a civilised democracy. Plus, the history of the last 20th century can bring some optimism in giving us many examples of countries like Slovakia, Estonia, Leetonia, Lithuania and many more old soviet republics that have achieved the independence in a very peaceful way.

Economic progress is gained by a creative population willing to work, a legal system that guarantees investors property rights, incentives to companies to innovate and to adopt new technology. An educational system which helps the population to be more productive and a good government who encourages internal and external trading and never sinks a productive economy with excessive taxes, with a fair bureaucracy and intolerable corruption and maintains a fiscal and monetary stability. From this point of view, the independence would not be a positive one if, a supposed government and Catalonian institutions, would not demonstrate their capability to fulfill the above points or if these could actually be worse than the ones from a Spanish government. Today we do not know how a Catalonian government would do it. What we know for certain is that the way it has been done previously and how the Spanish government is currently doing it. And the truth is that the cards dealt are not in favour of the Spanish people.

Recent history shows us that the independence of Catalonia is more and more viable every day. Some recent studies show that the increase of international trading is linked with economic viability of new countries. The argument is that international trading is a good substitute to a political union as an enlarging tool from the markets and as the international markets keep growing, is less necessary to have a large country to be able to sell the products in a way that when the international trading increases, so to the independent tendencies. In an article previously written at Harvard University, professors Alesina and Wackier have demonstrated that in the 20th century recent history these tendencies are confirmed, which means that, not only the independence of Catalonia is possible but is positively possible.

Montserrat, a monastic extraterritorial enclave beneath Catalonia. It is the Catalonian spiritual centre, and during the dictatorship of gen. Franco, only in Monserrat Catalan was used as the official administrative language.

With what I have written, I have tried to leave aside the nationalism and patriotism to exclusively focus in the economic viability of a Catalonian state. I am not saying that the independence would be a wish come true (this would be a different topic) or that there are non-economic arguments that need to be looked up when we ask for it. What I am definitely saying is that there should not be any doubts about the independence being completely achievable from an economic point of view.

And this is true even when we take into account the financial crisis that some (not all) of the countries have been through recently.

An important economic argument that needs to be used when you weigh the costs and benefits of independence, which is the fiscal deficit. The recent study from "L'Institut d'Estudis Autonomics" estimates that the Catalonian fiscal deficit in respect to Spain during the 90's has been approximately 900,000 million pesetas (even though the current tendency has decreased, the amount continues to be spectacular).

What does this mean? Well, the Catalonians pay certain taxes to Madrid. From these taxes, a quantity comes back to Catalonia for public expenses, social benefits, etc. Another quantity, however, stays in Madrid and never comes back. This is the Catalonian fiscal deficit, and all these moneys add up to around 900,000 million pesetas during the 90's.

To understand how much 900,000 million pesetas are, divide this amount by a population of 6 million and the total would be 150,000 pesetas per person. This means that a typical Catalonian family of 4 (father, mother and 2 children) pay every year 600,000 pesetas to Madrid that never comes back. Can the readers please ask themselves what would they do with 600,000 pesetas extra every year? : Go to Disney World (the one in Florida, not the one in Paris) with the whole family every summer?

Buy a bigger house (600,000 pesetas every year are 50,000 pesetas every month that can be used to ask for a loan for a bigger and more luxurious property)? Or, buy a car worth 1.2 million pesetas every two years? Or, buy a BMW every five years? A lot of things can be done with 600,000 pesetas every year, can't they? Well, forget it, because this money is not coming back to Catalonia, and this is a very important economical cost.

The main benefit is this sham, they tell us, is the interregional solidarity. But one thing is solidarity, and this thing is, that they steal your wallet out of your pocket.

Sue Stirling: Now let us turn to the English question...

Public opinion towards the Union is changing most dramatically in England

The Independent
Tuesday, 1 May 2007

Today marks the tercentenary of the Act of Union between England and Scotland, and rather than celebrate, it looks like a marriage heading for the divorce courts. This has triggered an intense debate about the Union's survival prospects. Incredibly, though, such debate has focused almost exclusively on developments north of the border. Little account has been taken of what people living in England - who make up 85 per cent of the Union - think.

You might say that there is no English SNP riding high in the polls, and that English nationalism lacks the political dimension that exists in Scotland. Besides, the English are relaxed about Scotland's propensity to reflect on whether she should stay or go.

There is truth in these claims, but they overlook a number of important points. Most significantly, perhaps, is to recognise that public opinion towards the Union is changing most dramatically in England. While Scottish support for the SNP may be up in the election, support for independence has barely altered in 20 years. In England, however, support for an English Parliament has shot up, and some polls even suggest there is now a majority in favour of the English going it alone. Add to this the growing tendency for the English to define themselves as "English, not British", up from 30 per cent in 1992 to 40 per cent in 2005, and you begin to get a sense of a stirring restlessness within England.

These polls may exaggerate the true feeling of opinion, or misrepresent support for particular policies, but they at least give a sense of the direction of travel. And there are a number of reasons to believe that English indifference to the Scots - and the Union - will continue to be transformed into frustration or even antipathy.

Firstly, there are the unaddressed devolution anomalies that are fuelling a sense of injustice among the English. Scottish MPs continue to vote on laws that apply only to England. The English taxpayer - via the Barnett Formula - continues to subsidise Scotland.

Secondly, the perception of such injustices will grow in prominence if a Scot becomes prime minister, and especially so if, as many polls predict, his majority in England falls further. Under such conditions, Gordon Brown would increasingly rely on Scottish (and Welsh) MPs to pass bills. Think also of the reaction in England if, under a hung parliament, Gordon Brown struck a deal with Ming Campbell. There would be cries of rule by the Scottish Raj.

Thirdly, an SNP-led coalition in Scotland is likely to create constitutional commotion, pressing for new powers and challenging Westminster's authority. Alex Salmond knows full well that in picking fights with Westminster, over Trident and nuclear power stations, for instance, he will fan the flames of English nationalism. Under such circumstances it might end up being the English who determine the fate of the Union. Devolution will rightly be regarded as one of the great triumphs of the Blair years, but unless the English Question is addressed all this good work may come undone.

So what needs to happen? Perhaps the simplest solution is "English votes on English laws", which would bar Scottish MPs from voting on English matters. Simple but fundamentally unworkable, as William Gladstone discovered when wrestling with the same idea over Irish Home Rule. It would create a constitutional crisis greater than the West Lothian Question itself, since it raises the prospect of a UK government being unable to govern England, its largest constituent part. For this reason it has been rejected as a viable policy solution.

The problem with the West Lothian Question is that it is the wrong question. The real question that needs addressing is how can we improve the way England is governed? An English Parliament is not the answer but restarting the devolution process is. The real English curse is not the presence of Scottish MPs in Westminster but the fact that England is so overcentralised. Addressing this English question would see a much greater devolution to local people. If Brown is the pluralist he claims to be then he must prove it here.

The Barnett formula needs to be replaced with a fairer funding system. This could be linked to giving Scotland greater fiscal autonomy.

If there is a lesson from the past 10 years then it is the need to think about the Union as-a-whole, rather than dealing with the nations in isolation. To deal with this Brown should establish a UK-wide constitutional convention that looks at the needs of the constituent parts of the UK, and addressing the grievances in England, in particular. If not, the future of the Union looks far from certain.

The writer is director of the Institute of Public Policy Research North

Why Scotland needs Independence?

Does the Slovenian example incite also Scotland?

Carantha :

In 1999, after an absence of 292 years, Scotland regained her Parliament. It has very limited powers and responsibilities, with major policy (taxation, economy, transport, defence, foreign policy, broadcasting) still decided by Westminster - but it is a Parliament nonetheless. For nearly 300 years Scotland had been completely trapped in an unequal political Union with England and Wales (the United Kingdom) that eroded Scottish ideals, institutions and her economy. These web pages were originally created in the heat of the political battles of 1996/97, with the aim of raising awareness and the profile of the Scottish Issue - whether it was the negative effects of London Rule, or the silencing of Scottish dissent - these were all hard fought points that had to be made. That debate has moved on, underpinned by the bulwark of a new limited Parliament.

We now live in a very different Scotland. Huge social and economic problems remain -but many are now open to democratic scrutiny like never before, and the old structures are creaking, dismantling and moving forward in slow progress. The press still largely controlled, owned and operated by non-Scottish interests remains openly hostile to 'independence' without actually knowing what defines 'independence' in this modern, digital, war-torn world. But few outside the self-obsessed media doubt that Independence is a process, not an event, and a process that has already begun.

Free Scotland from the old way of thinking. See Scotland from a different perspective. We can strike out and negotiate with the world ourselves. Whether it is encouraging direct transport