24 Hours
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 9, 2015
- Messages
- 1,957
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
This forum has its issues, too much trolling occurs here.Its just a specific trolling to that guy that thinks single-ethnic nonsense (as though that can even be really defined well in the first place) is the be all end all.
Charlemagne did his part to unite the german tribes in the dark ages....and it held on for quite some time...but it just as quickly fractured into 100s of pieces...the most terrible wars imaginable were fought among them, either alone or as part of grander continental wars. These were all German speakers (to fit this guys of "language" being some marker of single ethnic blah blah)...too...and their were also long periods of unity, development and outside power projection too in between. Its just one example of a pretty powerful relevant "single ethnic" country's history....being of single ethnic composition is no guarantee for stable political union, neither is it some statistically significant likelihood compared to "multi-ethnic" states....and you rightly point out, erm at some level we can further create resolutions among single ethnic populations so they end up being multi-ethnic....there is no concrete definition here, and so the debate where to draw the magical line is quite something else too.
I don't remember the full details of this part, it's been awhile since my European history course. Did they not suffer from tribalism? Though there's no definite marker for ethnicity BD's government is satisfied with who it declares as Bengali and such. Regardless, while BD certainly has a polarized system with political parties at each other's throats, none of them are looking towards breaking up the country or creating a different state. Just a change in government, nothing further.