Independence of the Venetian People or the State Lombardo-Veneto and the Veneto Regional Council?

Anyone who proclaims independence should at least know how to respond to the basic question: independence of what ?

for example, There are Sardinian separatists.

Nobody asks what they are fighting for because the situation seems very clear: Sardinia is an island, and inside there are the Sardis, they fight for their independence.

This is a clear example of nationalism because if you look closer, things aren't actually that obvious even then.

For example, there is the problem that the Sardinian people cannot be identified in a single language, because in Sardinia they exist at least 5 linguistic communities, of which 4 historical (centuries-long presence).

In fact, in Sardinia are spoken 2 Sardinian language variants, an ancient one in the south and a more recent one in the center, and among them they are partially intelligible, even if it's their problem because I speak Venetian, italiano, French and English do not understand a butt in both cases.

In Sardinia though, the so-called northern Sardinian language is actually of Corsican-Genoese origin and even I, who am from the Veneto, understand it more or less, while Catalan is spoken in Alghero (but I find a community very threatened with extinction due to the lack of protection of the Italian state).

Furthermore, during the 1900s they arrived in Sardinia well 2 of Venetian waves, the first Carbon, and Venetian language still exists, while the second, more haggard, north of Alghero , it was made up of refugees from Istria and Dalmatia, whose Venetian idiom today seems to disappear as the people who suffered genocide.

But if we leave these differences, an island forces you to a common destiny, and it allows you to say that it is a unique Sardinian people with some linguists differences.

So what the Sardinian separatists want is clear enough: the independence of Sardinia which belongs to the Sardinians.

So you could say: a Sardinian state has already existed ? The answer is yes, but since then it became Piedmont-Sardinia, and then Italy, in practice they are asking for independence from their original state which has in the meantime transformed into a Moloch.

The Sardinians are therefore asking for recognition as a Sardinian people of the independence of a Sardinian state as large as Sardinia.

E’ a feasible ? There is a legal hope for their dreams ? Meanwhile, it must be said that the “Sardinian people” it is recognized as existing both by the current statute (which is a law of constitutional rank) both from the previous statute that preceded the Italian Constitution. In short, they have a legal recognition of the existence of “Sardinian people”, which is so important that it is coveted by Catalans who have recently been turned down.

In international law, every people has the right to their status, but there is no definition “engineering” of the people, if there were, it would be the formula that would explain humanity and history itself. But if you already have a law that recognizes you, the problem is already over.

The Sardinian separatists ask a state for the Sardinian people, but they cannot pretend to return to a state that already existed, then ask for a new State Sardo.

Be careful, because here lies the whole problem of every pro-independence activist: independence of the people or independence of ex-state ?
Under international law, a new state can be asked for a people, and then we speak of Self-Determination of Peoples which is partially regulated and envisaged
International law also governs the case of a return to the sovereignty of an already existing state, and then it comes back to’ “self-government” , and it is a much more defined legal process with many rulings on the matter, but all subsequent cases concerning the 1840.
There is also a theoretical path of liberation of the peoples at war who call themselves the Liberation Movement , but it is neither safe nor peaceful, ie necessarily imply a state of oppression and genocide, and another does not entitle the recognition automatically, They have to recognize others ( on this there is my article)

Because I said all this? To explain to the independence of Lombardy, Veneto and Friuli that our future is linked and unique. And I explain.

We make the effort to imagine taking Sardinia and put it down to the Po Valley, with the north of Sardinia attached to Liguria. E’ a geographical monstrosity, but the big problem would become another: I am still “Sardinian people” those bordering Liguria because they speak a dialect of Ligurian ?

Suddenly what seemed clear and obvious is no longer. The Sardinian people would go into trouble because they would no longer have that territorial unity that clearly defines their borders, and he would be forced to cut their own definition of people according to other criteria, as a language, History, existence of a state, etc. etc. .

At that point the Sardinians would perhaps even be tempted to value the existence of an original and aboriginal ethnic, because in that case it might come in handy to define their own existence.

Now we look at the Venetian people and we try to define it on the map ( obviously after having replaced Sardinia in its place!).

I have already said many times that the Venetian people can be cut out on the map using one or more criteria, of course those required by international standards. They identify a people by language , to history, the historical and legal affairs, sociological criteria, wanting with’ archeology, or religion, in some cases the genetic basis. None of these criteria are mandatory, but the more there is, the better.

On the genetic data of the Venetians we have no answers, maybe censor them, but in any case I believe that for the very history of the Venetians and for their non-racist mentality, they would have no ultimate value rather than returning to the culture. On the other hand, it would probably be discovered that the Venetians are a people of Indo-(center)European, mixed with the Greeks, i cretesi, to which then they are mixed different Balkan ethnicities, and even some army including Huns, Lombard, some ethnic Germans as cimbri, and then the French rapes, Austrians appollaiamenti, Italian, German etc etc..

If instead we take the language as the main criterion for defining the “people Venetian”, which is one of the most important features of culture in general, then we can easily make a map of the presence on the territory that would go from the west of the Garda (if we do not consider the Brescia as a variant of the Venetian language), to the north of Mantua (speaking Venetian), and it would include the province of Trento (speaking Venetian) and Veneto (speaking even though the Venetian “cadorino” it's different ) and the whole upper Adriatic (the part “VENEZIA” the Friuli-Venezia-Giulia region) including Trieste (also for the mass of Istrian refugees) , but not Udine (where it comes from Friuli) , and perhaps still some Adriatic islands, but also pieces of Albanian coast (We still speak Venetian).

The one above is certainly a map of the Venetian people on a very precise linguistic basis.

This being a bit’ more elastic, as linguists say that all the dialects of northern Italy are descendants from the ancient language Venetic, It could define even the Po-Venetian people (!), but it would not commonly understood Venetian people.

If the principal criteria for defining the “people Venetian” take for example the common belonging to a state, Also looking to the next legal steps, then the Venetian people also legally own the whole territory from Bergamo to Udine which for centuries belonged to the Venetian Republic, then comprising the bergamaschi, the bresciani, the Venetian and Friulian, but would not include Trento and Trieste, nor the north of Mantua, and would be a people speaking different variants of Late or different languages (Friulian is a language). This definition of the Venetian people would be very similar to that in the criteria of the Sardinian people, like the Swiss and many other peoples who have multiple languages.

looking elsewhere, Catalans call for the creation of a new state on the basis of language and Catalan culture, but it would be a new state never existed, and for this they have a lot of difficulty as the right to create a new state is much more complicated if not made impossible when you lack a legal history to oppose. For a cultural and linguistic oppression claim is strengthened, but this is not the case with the Catalans, if anything it is of the Venetians. Even the Sardinians have autonomy, and this in a sense give them.

In fact, it does not exist in international law the law of absolute right of a people to become independent, it must first obtain international recognition which is granted only when all the other states that matter agree (they call her “international community”. In fact, a people is recognized when it gives its sovereignty to the states that recognize them, or to outstanding banks, or the oil companies. Sad but that's the way it is. As mentioned, these unwritten practical problems are even stronger for liberation movements than, as demonstrated by the case of Libya and Syria, they are recognized only when the state can be stripped of their flesh , even when there are violent armed conflicts.

If we leave the idea of ​​people in the modern sense, and we go back to the law of the states the question is quite different even if intertwined. The Scots are making this journey, they demand the return to the sovereignty of a former state, Scotland. Their state history goes back in time, Scotland joined England, and at the international level before 1840, date of entry into force of the right of peoples to speak out on annexation. Technically Scotland would not have the right to re-sovereign because it was annexed before 1840. Fortunately, the Scots have not the Roman government, and they were granted by the Crown of England the right to break away again in a referendum. So if the Scots does not matter what's inside Scotland, the people correspond to the residents of the territory of the former state.

As seen approaching the cases of Scotland and Catalunya in the case of the Venetians did not at all meaning.

But there is hope if as the main criterion for defining the “people Venetian” take the common belonging to a state, rather we have well 2 choices:

the Venetian Republic and the Lombardo-Veneto.

The Venetian republic, however, was invaded before 1840 , He has no sovereign right to return if not ,as for Scotland, with the authorization of the current states. The idea of ​​requesting the Venetian Republic back, invaded in 1797 it is not practicable because precisely, chopped in 1798 and then merged with the Duchy of Mantua and Milan in 1815 in Lombardy-Venetia.

If, on the other hand, we ask for the independence of Lombardy-Venetia, a state existed for 50 years, it can become sovereign again, and if we certainly do not place ourselves anymore or only in the wake of the speeches “ethnic”, but on those of the independence of states, we are in a path of independence (one of the states) much more consolidated than that of peoples' independence. On the other hand, the Venetian people from Bergamo to Udine are included there.

Then the Venetians (with Lombard, Mantuans and Udinese) they are lucky if you put in the perspective of requiring back their Lombardo-Veneto State, that is, on the bed of the law of the states but with the Venetian people inside who are legally recognized and who created the institutions with a self-determination made legal.

What to ask the Venetians referendum …….. a region that was to become? REALLY!!!!!

A region cannot become a state, nor will such a principle ever exist or be recognized, because it would jeopardize the existence of every state in the world. The case of Kosovo has risked creating this precedent, and was immediately blocked, proving that the stability of the world is at stake. Kosovo does not even exist as a state for the’ UN that defines a territory of Serbia under international interim government.

The Venetian politicians who proposed the referendum in the region are destined for rubbish, because they have proposed a path that does not exist internationally, which is not a path of the people nor a path of the state.

In fact, the consultative referendum on the independence of the Veneto is neither the referendum of the Veneto people, nor the referendum for the return to a former state, but the referendum of an Italian region that does not differ in some way for ethnic uniqueness (Venetians are elsewhere ) nor for legal uniqueness (the region as it is today never existed as a state).

If you want to make the referendum of the Venetian People of linguistic or legal basis, it should be done and in all the territories where there are the Venetian people, and therefore it is not possible in all cases to pass off the regional one as a referendum by the people of Veneto. The international court will certainly not fall for it and will declare it an inadmissible result as for Kosovo.

Some wise guy might propose a referendum for the return to the Serenissima, to be held, however, in all the territories of the Serenissima with the consent of Croatia, Albania and Greece. Wishes.

Unfortunately, the restoration of the Serenissima Republic is not legally possible, because at the time of the fall the peoples had no right to speak about their fate.

The restoration of the Lombardo-Veneto State ? This is possible and legally very plausible, and it does not endanger any established legal principle internationally, that is not a nuisance to world peace.

Rather, if the community of states did not recognize the sovereignty of Lombardy-Venetia, They would deny the human rights of peoples and individuals, and not only, they would deny international legislation on the right to territorial integrity of states. Plainly, if you skip the principle of “as long as the state is legitimate and does not behave badly with colonized subjects”, Russia will start again to stir up the Russian minorities as it did in Georgia, and he would do it in Poland, Estonia, Belarus etc. etc.. The US would invade Syria and many other countries in defense of human rights (even if we know that this was not the case for Iraq). Perhaps China would also take India, Japan and who knows what else. So break out a third world war and there would be massive bloodshed in the world.

That is why they cannot say no to our sovereignty of the Lombardy-Venetia state, which is a state illegally invaded by Italy before 1859 (Lombard region and venetaa) and then in 1866 (Venetian region and friulian) .

Having said all that, it is clear that it cannot be sold that the Venetian people are the residents of the Veneto region. This concept demonstrates ignorance not only of international law, but also the history and the Venetian language.

Then the separatists wonder : you know what to fight for ? a people, a state or a chair in the regional council ?