Remix.run Logo
deepsun a day ago

> Caribbean nation of Curacao

It's the first time I hear someone calls Curaçao a "nation". It's just the normal Dutch island, not even some special status territory. Yes, it's in Carribean, but why do they omit "Dutch" and call it a "Carribean nation"?

zamadatix a day ago | parent | next [-]

I find words in the same category as "country", "nation", "state", etc are increasingly used interchangeably. Largely because they tend to be far more specific than people mean to be... but also because generic terms like "polity" never caught on in the mainstream. A similar thing is how "nation-states" would appear to be the only type of place worth worrying about highly organized attacks from in infosec, until you ask them to define what they consider a nation-state.

That said, I don't think it's accurate to paint Curaçao as just another normal Dutch island the same as any other. It's really a constituent country that's part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, just not a sovereign state or a nation.

adastra22 a day ago | parent | next [-]

A nation-state is a state whose borders and (originally) citizenship are largely defined by a singular nationality. Israel and Japan, for example. Belgium and Canada are not nation states: they are split into French and Flemish, and Anglo and French nationalities, respectively.

It is a 19th century term that rarely applies these days, but still sees some residual usage.

zamadatix a day ago | parent | next [-]

To complete the other half of the story for those not familiar: most all infosec references to "nation-state attack" instead use it to mean "government backed attack" (regardless if a nation-state is involved in the context).

1718627440 12 hours ago | parent [-]

What if they use it to mean entities that are both states and nations, as opposed to the states, that some nations are composed of.

cwillu 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Anglo, French _and Aboriginal_ nationalities. That's not a minor detail to exclude.

kijin 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's hard to use them consistently because there isn't a single universally accepted definition.

Most people would consider the Netherlands a "country", but now we have a country within that country. Israel is a state, Japan is a state, but there are 50 states in the United States. "[People's] Republic of XYZ" generally refers to a sovereign state, but Russia has republics inside. You can't just call something what the locals call it and expect that your readers will get the picture. Even worse, people are often deeply divided as to what a given territory should be called.

So I will generally forgive journalists for picking a neutral-sounding, ambiguous expression in cases like this. What matters here is that the Dutch control this airspace, regardless of Curaçao's status within their kingdom.

mr_toad a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Lots of small islands have similar status, for example The Cayman Islands, Bermuda & Puerto Rico.

renewiltord 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm a state actor because I always remember my lines when I go up on stage.

wkat4242 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not part of the country the Netherlands anymore. They voted to leave.

They're still in the kingdom which means they're not completely on their own but nation is a good word.

IncreasePosts a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Curacao has been a country that is part of the kingdom of the Netherlands since 2010.

a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
GuinansEyebrows a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

technically, it's a country within the Kingdom :)

behnamoh a day ago | parent | prev [-]

the bigger question is: what business does the Netherlands have all the way across the ocean in an island? Who gave them the "right" to own it?

deepsun a day ago | parent | next [-]

What do you mean "all the way across the ocean". From where? The distance from Curaçao to the Dutch people is exactly zero.

What "right" are you talking about, is there an agency where we file a claim, and it issues us "rights"?

All people from all nations, tribes and states came from somewhere, sometimes even replacing the local population. Sometimes peacefully, like Anglo-Saxons pushed out local Britons in England, sometimes violently, like Normans invaded and conquered England.

Or like the rich and diverse American Indian history -- tribes came and went, sometimes replaced, pushed out, conquered or assimilated with previous peoples who lived there. Please define "right".

IAmBroom 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Sometimes peacefully, like Anglo-Saxons pushed out local Britons in England

The Battle of Chester has entered the chat.

No one ever "peacefully" pushes anyone else out of their homes.

deepsun 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Naah, I'm pretty sure history can find an example of pretty much anything. Here's another example (just less researched) -- Slavic dispersion in Europe. And I'm 100% sure there a lot of other examples of peaceful expansion or assimilation, because for the most history land was abundant, but shortage of hands to tend to it. There was just no reason to fight (and record it).

It doesn't mean some kings declared that land their own (some declared everything), but they couldn't enforce it. So usually it boiled down to main argument whether something is "yours" -- collecting taxes (aka tribute). As long as someone's can enforce collecting tribute, then they deserve to have the title of "owning" it.

Btw, One of the ways historians determine whether migration was mostly peaceful is by looking at archeological gender structure -- if there's a lot of female immigrants (e.g. Slavic expansion), then they are more likely to be moving by whole families. But if there are few females -- more likely it was invasion (e.g. Huns). Not absolute signal of course, as nothing is in history.

behnamoh a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

WheatMillington a day ago | parent | next [-]

OK so now do America and Hawaii or Puerto Rico.

a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
adastra22 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

How far is Hawaii from the USA?

gpvos 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We didn't have the right, obviously, but it has happened and we need to deal with the current situation. And the Netherlands has offered them sovereignty multiple times in the last fifty years, they can leave anytime they want. But nowadays they want to stay in the kingdom, mostly because it offers them some security and stability.

wkat4242 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The same business the US has in Guam or Puerto Rico, the UK in the Bahamas etc. It was a colony. They decided to become independent but still part of the kingdom of the Netherlands which was their choice. So the current status is such because the people of Curacao have decided they wanted it this way.

crote 16 hours ago | parent [-]

To be more accurate: the same business anyone who isn't a Native American has in the US.

khuey a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You could pick up a history textbook and find out.

AniseAbyss a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]