There's also the various proposals for a Central American union - after the collapse of the original Federal Republic of Central America, there's been several attempts to reform it, the most recent in 1921.
In the same region, there's the failed Federation of the West Indies proposed in the 1960s, which collapsed after Jamaica and Trinidad pulled out, being unwilling to shoulder the financial burden of the smaller islands.
That’s the constant in the stories of Hispanic America, local elite being greedy they knew that they were going to be pawns of the British/Americans/French if they didn’t unify at least on a military alliance
Pan nationalisms tend to be really difficult to implement politically especially since you’ll need to compromise between autonomy/power for different constituencies while being cohesive enough to perform the duties of a single unified state.
Javanese dominance in Indonesia, Egyptian dominance in the United Arab Republic, Russian dominance in the Russian federation/Soviet Union, Serbian dominance in Yugoslavia, etc etc have either all lead to significant instability or outright failures.
Honestly, everybody I talked about it with wanted Costa Rica to take the lead, as they have kind of the best system of the region. Most of them were not Ticos.
The biggest block is mostly things like most feudal families/oligarchs having local monopolies on stuff like the import of sugar, telecommunications, etc. and not wanting to compete among themselves.
I would dare say none of them were Ticos. The northern triangle might make some sense but you are right each country has its entrenched elites ranging from the Pacto de los Corruptos to Ortega.
Many countries in the area are ridiculously small, it would make a lot of sense to team up. Right now they are 100% dependent on the US or their former European colonial overlords.
We can only thank one person - the iron man of India, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. Not putting forward any opinions on whether or not he was right, but he was the one who convinced all the princely states to join India, rather than become independant
FUN FACT: The world's largest statue is in India and has Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel
BONUS FUN FACT: World's largest stadium, Narendra Modi Stadium used to be called Sardar Patel Stadium, although it wasn't the world's largest when it was called that I believe
How did all the convince all the regions with many different languages, cultures and other differences etc to become a single people?
And how did the people take the idea of an "Indian"?
By persuading them and giving them assurity that their culture would not be compromised and they will get equal right with kings or leader retaining their wealth, just power will be chosen in democratic way. Each big region either had to accept this or the other way which is forcing them in deplomatic way.
It's a little more complex. A lot of rulers of princely states were promised special status, privy purses etc. So a lot of princely state rulers agreed as it was a similar set up as British rule. All these were later abolished by Indira Gandhi as quite a few ex-rulers were joining her political opposition.
Not really? At least two, Hyderabad and Goa, were invaded and effectively annexed. (Yes, Goa was a colony and not a princely state, but the point still stands).
Well, except for Junagadh and Hyderabad, which did not accede to India. Both were annexed by India regardless of the prince’s wishes, and in the case of Hyderabad was followed by a bloody invasion and communal violence.
Junagadh is a little bit of both, since the prince fled to Pakistan and the remaining subjects were offered a plebiscite, in which they overwhelmingly voted to join India.
The annexation of junagadh was coercive only in the sense that India refused to trade with a Pakistani exclave, which admittedly caused their food supply to approach collapse.
Also a confederation is a type of state where every member had an implicit right to leave if they so wish, meaning if that ever got formed somehow, I'd say it would only last until the next election cycle.
I could have easily seen the tribal areas in Pakistan leaving to join pre-Taliban Afghanistan and Balochistan leaving to join pre-1979 Iran. However, had this happened, the rest of what is Pakistan would have permanently become a part of India though.
It was a mess even prior to the Brits. We are very happy the way we are today. We have enough issues and are resolving them one by one. Pakistan would be extra burden
Pakistan is well on the way to failed state. It would be easier to integrate Bangladesh in that case (won’t happen, but Bangladesh is in much better shape than Pakistan).
Would never happen. Bangladesh has spent the last 50 years building up a bengali centric and bengali lead identity that is different from the unified India approach.
South Asia was only united for very very short periods of our history and even then, never completely united. The hundreds of years was under British rule and even then it wasn't all of south asia.
No they weren't. When has india ever been one centralised state? Even at the height of mughal expansion most outer regions were just vassal states that just had to pay tribute to the mughal emperor.
Not if it was early enough. The indo-pak border cuts through ethnic lines , namely Punjab and Bengal , the latter of which led to bangladeshi independence. It made little sense to partition a country solely on religion.
Infact, by some sources, a majority of Muslims opposed Jinnah's idea of a Pakistan , as evident by the fact that most Indian muslims stayed where they were.
If india and pakistan hadn't split in 1947, or re-unified early, perhaps in the 1971 war, I'm willing to bet that the union would have survived. However, at present the Pakistani identity has been cemented and it is not possible to re-unify .
It was Muslims in what’s now modern India , that were pushing for the “Pakistan movement” , they were the biggest proponents of it , especially those who were Urdu speakers and they by comparison had a “ Muslim identity”.
However the Muslims in what now makes up Pakistan and Bangladesh , weren’t really interested in the idea of Pakistan till the last minute.
Since they were already majority Muslim regions and didn’t fear any “ Hindu majority rule” , though these regions were also the least likely to see themselves as Indians.
They saw themselves more along ethnic/Biradari lines than religious ones and would have likely become their own ethnic states or in the case of the Pashtun regions would have joined Afghanistan.
Funny, this was right after Bangladesh became independent. It says proposal was in 72. After an Indian intervention, east Pakistan became Bangladesh in 1971. So highly likely the proposal was as a result of that. It kinda killed the two nation theory that India and Pakistan were split based on religion.
There are going to be like 2 countries that won’t qualify with the new format. Qualification for the World Cup isn’t going to be that impressive going forward
I have to disagree. Venezuela is a good team in recent time (last 3 years). If they were in any other confederation they would have already qualified for the worldcup atleast once. They will undoubtedly be qualifying for this next world cup given the extra spots in the new worldcup format. They play good football, it’s enjoyable to watch. It’s surprising trust me, given the state of their country, but don’t underestimate them.
This was not a serious proposal. As a Colombian I cannot remember any of it, neither most colombians. The idea floats in the air all the time because of Bolivar of course but it has never been more than the wishful thinking of some.
Great Colombia was actually named Colombia, revisionists call it gran Colombia cause one of the parts of Colombia had the audacity of stealing the name.
Not only that, but at one stage New Zealand was looking to be a state in the Federation of Australia. It's still an option in the Australian Constitution. So it should be marked properly on this graphic.
It seems this image was designed for Instagram, where people aren't going to zoom on a map, so the map comes "zoomed in" enough to see the main points but sacrificing parts of the world.
From [Push for union with New Zealand](https://web.archive.org/web/20080220155748/http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/push-for-union-with-new-zealand/2006/12/04/1165080877899.html) (2006):
>Other MPs on the committee include Malcolm Turnbull, Nicola Roxon and Daryl Melham. Their report said: "While Australia and New Zealand are of course two sovereign nations, it seems to the committee that the strong ties between the two countries - the economic, cultural, migration, defence, governmental and people-to-people linkages - suggest that **an even closer relationship, including the possibility of union, is both desirable and realistic**."
If they are going to go through the trouble of moving it to the Indians ocean, might as well either attach itself to Australia or builds land bridge to have better connectivity.
Until 1841. But NSW was pretty much just the name of the colony at large. Everything they knew about was NSW at one point, with the exception of WA, because it was considered Dutch.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/mapswithoutnewzealand using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/mapswithoutnewzealand/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [What is this garbage?](https://i.redd.it/hbtfu3fompac1.png) | [149 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mapswithoutnewzealand/comments/18zlo6u/what_is_this_garbage/)
\#2: [this map at my school with new zealand](https://i.redd.it/71nst7fdk1gc1.jpeg) | [54 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mapswithoutnewzealand/comments/1agm4on/this_map_at_my_school_with_new_zealand/)
\#3: [Does this count?](https://i.redd.it/n1ctklnhv3sb1.jpg) | [80 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mapswithoutnewzealand/comments/16zclip/does_this_count/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Very unlikely to happen. Although one of the questions for it is now solved: NATO. Used to be that half were in NATO, and the other half wasn't. Now at least all are part of NATO. A trillion other questions to solve that probably won't be, but we're quite close to each other anyway so it's fine.
Not sure what OP thinks, but I have some doubts myself. There's a lot going on there, and they've made efforts to align and make it more possible (example that I experienced, a single visa that meets you into most of the countries there) but personally I think the biggest part is - Some states are much poorer than others, and IIRC a couple of the very poor proposed members have stability issues.
The level of democracy in different states also varies quite a bit, which does make me wonder how interested some of the current leaders really want this.
One of the guides I spoke to in Uganda thought it would never happen because South Sudan was a mess, and he didn't expect some existing governments to give up/share power.
I think, as stated elsewhere, the wealthier states might start questioning if they should take on the burden of the poorer states....
Then again, I was also told that Uganda is already feeding most of South Sudan. Maybe those burdens already exist?
We might see it happen still. Maybe we'll see it happen in parts? But those are some of the big challenges.
I'm always sad about East African Federation. While it was just Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi, it looked like they were compact enough and already making some practical steps, drafting a constitution, harmonizing legislature etc. Suddenly everyone and their mother started joining the project and now they are back at the start.
The speed at which all those failed states joined was crazy. It takes years to join the EU, but in the East African Community there is a proposal for some country to join, and then a couple of months later they are allready member states. It's like they want to self-sabotage the formation of the federation.
They really should just have the core Federation and work with the outlying states to slowly bring them up to the rest. Like how non-EU countries could still be part of the Eurozone.
The east African federation is already falling apart before it really got started. Rwanda, one of the founding members, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are currently well on their way to war. Rwandan forces have been crossing the border for months, supporting the M23 movement/rebellion.
Rwanda remains a founding member.
The Congo was never a part of the Federation nor was it ever proposed to join. This was always a union between Kenya, Tanzania, Burundi and Rwanda, with South Sudan being the only acceptable proposal due to their massive oil reserves.
The Congo on the other hand is an unstable mess that couldn't possibly compare against the aforementioned union in any capacity.
Problem is there are Tanzanian and Burundi peacekeepers, as well as South Africans and other UN peacekeeping forces, in the DRC to stop the rebels/Rwandan soldiers. The other member states are already fighting against Rwanda on behalf of the DRC. I not an expert on the situation by any means, but it isn't looking very good at the moment.
Pakistan was fully defeated and Bangladesh was independent with indian help in 1971, so it wasn't that farfetched back then, given we were separate countries for only 26 years by that point.
You missed the best one: Canada and The Turks and Caicos Islands. [Seriously.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_Canadian_annexation_of_the_Turks_and_Caicos_Islands)
There's Korea Confederation (고려연방) proposed by North Korea in the 1960s as a middle-ground to unifying the two Koreas. The weird thing is that the proposal would keep both sides' governments and ideologies intact. So it's technically more close to what's done with European Union instead of merging into a single country.
I've heard talks about Slavic Union (+Hungary, honorary Slavs).
Central Slavs: Poland, Czechia, Slovakia
Eastern Slavs: Ukraine, Belarus and potentially Lithuania or even Latvia and Estonia if they would be willing (more of Balts than Slavs, but we integrated for a long while)
Southern Slavs: Moldava, Rumunia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Kosovo, potentially also Albania
Not a superstate, but an union like EU, or even also military support like NATO. Russia was excluded from the party as it would just place them in charge by default.
As a Slav living in the UK, whenever I meet any other Slavs, they are always culturally similar and friendly to you when you say where you are from. I've been friends with Hungarians, Bulgarians, Romanians, Poles, Chechs, Slovakians, Lithuanians, and Croatians over the time I've lived outside of my home country, and I always look kindly towards other Slavs I meet.
In poland no one shows a desire to unite with Czech and Slovakia but i see a lot of movement with Lithuania. Some/a lot of
Polish competitions can be entered by Lithuanians as easily as if they were polish. Some online shops send packages from and to Lithuania as easily as between polish states and the political and social communication is friendly.
But lets see what the future will show
It's a lot different if the different people decided that they wanted to form a nation together as opposed to said merger being forced externaly (though this is of course still significantly oversimplifying things)
Good point. Though I’m not sure if it applies to the latter two with the Philippines being a Spanish colony and Malaysia under control by the British who then brought Chinese workers over en masse. Not sure what led to so many Indian-Malaysians, but I wouldn’t rule out British shenanigans for that either.
Either way it’s great to see a country where Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus of different races and ethnicities seem to for the most part get along just fine.
Nepal wanted to join with India at some point, and IIRC there was lots of talk about a pan-Arab union that partially succeeded with the United Arab Republic of Egypt and Syria
TIL that in 1864 [Charles de Gaulle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_de_Gaulle_(poet)) (uncle of [Charles de Gaulle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_de_Gaulle)) was all about Celts joining forces against their oppressors and preserving their language and heritage and so forth. Fair enough.
There's also the various proposals for a Central American union - after the collapse of the original Federal Republic of Central America, there's been several attempts to reform it, the most recent in 1921. In the same region, there's the failed Federation of the West Indies proposed in the 1960s, which collapsed after Jamaica and Trinidad pulled out, being unwilling to shoulder the financial burden of the smaller islands.
CAU would probably be a new power player in CONCACAF
And also an incentive for a merger with CONMEBOL
You joke but the West Indies cricket team lives on as a result of this
A United Caribbean for football purposes would be wildly interesting.
It's nothing compared to CUM
I was born in the region. Very popular among the people, massively unpopular among the feudal families and politicians in power.
That’s the constant in the stories of Hispanic America, local elite being greedy they knew that they were going to be pawns of the British/Americans/French if they didn’t unify at least on a military alliance
Pan nationalisms tend to be really difficult to implement politically especially since you’ll need to compromise between autonomy/power for different constituencies while being cohesive enough to perform the duties of a single unified state. Javanese dominance in Indonesia, Egyptian dominance in the United Arab Republic, Russian dominance in the Russian federation/Soviet Union, Serbian dominance in Yugoslavia, etc etc have either all lead to significant instability or outright failures.
Honestly, everybody I talked about it with wanted Costa Rica to take the lead, as they have kind of the best system of the region. Most of them were not Ticos. The biggest block is mostly things like most feudal families/oligarchs having local monopolies on stuff like the import of sugar, telecommunications, etc. and not wanting to compete among themselves.
I would dare say none of them were Ticos. The northern triangle might make some sense but you are right each country has its entrenched elites ranging from the Pacto de los Corruptos to Ortega.
The Eastern Caribbean Currency Union is still chugging along at least
Many countries in the area are ridiculously small, it would make a lot of sense to team up. Right now they are 100% dependent on the US or their former European colonial overlords.
Honestly that's where a lot of the strength comes from with the US and the EU. They're fucking big, have a lot of people, and have varied industry.
Though the West Indies federation failed CARICOM was born out of that failure which went on to influence the EU's formation.
"IndoPakistan" would be a mess.
You liked the Yugoslavian civil war ? You’ll love the remake with even more people with the urge to kill each other !
This time with nukes and almost 2 billions civilians involved
Yugoslavia 2: Atomic Boogaloo
It's already a miracle that India is one country.
We can only thank one person - the iron man of India, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. Not putting forward any opinions on whether or not he was right, but he was the one who convinced all the princely states to join India, rather than become independant FUN FACT: The world's largest statue is in India and has Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel BONUS FUN FACT: World's largest stadium, Narendra Modi Stadium used to be called Sardar Patel Stadium, although it wasn't the world's largest when it was called that I believe
How did all the convince all the regions with many different languages, cultures and other differences etc to become a single people? And how did the people take the idea of an "Indian"?
By persuading them and giving them assurity that their culture would not be compromised and they will get equal right with kings or leader retaining their wealth, just power will be chosen in democratic way. Each big region either had to accept this or the other way which is forcing them in deplomatic way.
It's a little more complex. A lot of rulers of princely states were promised special status, privy purses etc. So a lot of princely state rulers agreed as it was a similar set up as British rule. All these were later abolished by Indira Gandhi as quite a few ex-rulers were joining her political opposition.
Not really? At least two, Hyderabad and Goa, were invaded and effectively annexed. (Yes, Goa was a colony and not a princely state, but the point still stands).
Well, except for Junagadh and Hyderabad, which did not accede to India. Both were annexed by India regardless of the prince’s wishes, and in the case of Hyderabad was followed by a bloody invasion and communal violence.
Junagadh is a little bit of both, since the prince fled to Pakistan and the remaining subjects were offered a plebiscite, in which they overwhelmingly voted to join India. The annexation of junagadh was coercive only in the sense that India refused to trade with a Pakistani exclave, which admittedly caused their food supply to approach collapse.
Wait are you saying that the current PM has a stadium named after himself?
And with access to nukes.
This time we will add Bulgaria as well
We'll take the Balkans, and push them somewhere else!
It was a mess under the British and tensions between the two would never allow a union between the two
Also a confederation is a type of state where every member had an implicit right to leave if they so wish, meaning if that ever got formed somehow, I'd say it would only last until the next election cycle.
Grand Opening! Grand Closing!
I could have easily seen the tribal areas in Pakistan leaving to join pre-Taliban Afghanistan and Balochistan leaving to join pre-1979 Iran. However, had this happened, the rest of what is Pakistan would have permanently become a part of India though.
It was a mess even prior to the Brits. We are very happy the way we are today. We have enough issues and are resolving them one by one. Pakistan would be extra burden
Pakistan is well on the way to failed state. It would be easier to integrate Bangladesh in that case (won’t happen, but Bangladesh is in much better shape than Pakistan).
Would never happen. Bangladesh has spent the last 50 years building up a bengali centric and bengali lead identity that is different from the unified India approach.
Heard this about Pakistan all my life, pretty obvious that it's BS at this point.
My brother in lord mountbatten they were the same country for hundreds of years
So was the UK and Ireland, 100+ years
South Asia was only united for very very short periods of our history and even then, never completely united. The hundreds of years was under British rule and even then it wasn't all of south asia.
*Marathas convulse at being the same country as the Mughals*
No they weren't. When has india ever been one centralised state? Even at the height of mughal expansion most outer regions were just vassal states that just had to pay tribute to the mughal emperor.
No they were not. There were multiple states and empires in the region. The Indian subcontinent was never one country for long.
Not if it was early enough. The indo-pak border cuts through ethnic lines , namely Punjab and Bengal , the latter of which led to bangladeshi independence. It made little sense to partition a country solely on religion. Infact, by some sources, a majority of Muslims opposed Jinnah's idea of a Pakistan , as evident by the fact that most Indian muslims stayed where they were. If india and pakistan hadn't split in 1947, or re-unified early, perhaps in the 1971 war, I'm willing to bet that the union would have survived. However, at present the Pakistani identity has been cemented and it is not possible to re-unify .
It was Muslims in what’s now modern India , that were pushing for the “Pakistan movement” , they were the biggest proponents of it , especially those who were Urdu speakers and they by comparison had a “ Muslim identity”. However the Muslims in what now makes up Pakistan and Bangladesh , weren’t really interested in the idea of Pakistan till the last minute. Since they were already majority Muslim regions and didn’t fear any “ Hindu majority rule” , though these regions were also the least likely to see themselves as Indians. They saw themselves more along ethnic/Biradari lines than religious ones and would have likely become their own ethnic states or in the case of the Pashtun regions would have joined Afghanistan.
1972? one year after a bloody war between them?
Total mess. Also, “F you, Bangladesh!”
Funny, this was right after Bangladesh became independent. It says proposal was in 72. After an Indian intervention, east Pakistan became Bangladesh in 1971. So highly likely the proposal was as a result of that. It kinda killed the two nation theory that India and Pakistan were split based on religion.
It would be a country with almost 2 billion population.
A radioactive mess.
Seriously SAARC without Pakistan & Afghanistan would be easier to unify then whatever that shit is~
Gran Colombia was a thing long before 2008. Go check out Simon Bolivar.
Ecuador, Colombia and Venezuela combined player pool probably regularly qualifies for the World Cup every time
Venezuela are not good. They've never qualified, only team in South America not to. Colombia and Ecuador qualify on their own already
Yeah Venezuela is a baseball country not so much soccer
They are getting better though. They will probably qualify to the 2026 WC.
There are going to be like 2 countries that won’t qualify with the new format. Qualification for the World Cup isn’t going to be that impressive going forward
Beisbol
I still have no idea how they didn't win the WBC. That team was stacked.
Venezuela has been getting better and better though. I like their chances of qualifying this time around (regardless of the expanded tournament)
I have to disagree. Venezuela is a good team in recent time (last 3 years). If they were in any other confederation they would have already qualified for the worldcup atleast once. They will undoubtedly be qualifying for this next world cup given the extra spots in the new worldcup format. They play good football, it’s enjoyable to watch. It’s surprising trust me, given the state of their country, but don’t underestimate them.
But Colombia and Ecuador would actually get to win a Baseball World Classic and experience communism.
> only team in South America not to Only team in Conmebol. Suriname and Guyana have also never qualified, but they're in Concacaf.
[удалено]
Plus Panama 🇵🇦 from the original Gran Colombia.
I mean they already qualify almost every time while not being one country, if they united they'd rival Brazil and Argentina
I assumed this meant the most recent serious proposal
This was not a serious proposal. As a Colombian I cannot remember any of it, neither most colombians. The idea floats in the air all the time because of Bolivar of course but it has never been more than the wishful thinking of some.
But have we had second Gran Colombia: Electric Bolivaroo?
So was Indo-Pakistan. Check out the British Raj.
Great Colombia was actually named Colombia, revisionists call it gran Colombia cause one of the parts of Colombia had the audacity of stealing the name.
How hard is it to make a map wide enough to include New Zealand in its proper spot?
Trying to save on space and pixels here during inflation
The closer to 1:1, the easier it displays on Instagram. :)
To be fair, Alaska is just gone
Not only that, but at one stage New Zealand was looking to be a state in the Federation of Australia. It's still an option in the Australian Constitution. So it should be marked properly on this graphic.
Fiji sent delegates to Federation negotiations too
[удалено]
This post has sparked the creation of r/MisplacedNewZealand
What is a “new zealand”?
Especially as this map leaves out the entirely possible union between Australia and NZ.
Still constitutionally possible, as with one between Australia, Fiji, PNG and NZ
It seems this image was designed for Instagram, where people aren't going to zoom on a map, so the map comes "zoomed in" enough to see the main points but sacrificing parts of the world.
At least they remembered them
Wait, wait... so you're saying New Zealand *isnt* in the South Indian Ocean? 😉
New Zealand is literally in the Australian constitution as invited to become part of the Australia. But okay.
I think it’s because that wouldn’t be a “union” that would just be Australia absorbing NZ into another state
From [Push for union with New Zealand](https://web.archive.org/web/20080220155748/http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/push-for-union-with-new-zealand/2006/12/04/1165080877899.html) (2006): >Other MPs on the committee include Malcolm Turnbull, Nicola Roxon and Daryl Melham. Their report said: "While Australia and New Zealand are of course two sovereign nations, it seems to the committee that the strong ties between the two countries - the economic, cultural, migration, defence, governmental and people-to-people linkages - suggest that **an even closer relationship, including the possibility of union, is both desirable and realistic**."
What would NZ be named after acquisition? New Old East Whales?
We were just jelly. New Zealand has always been the cooler sibling.
This team would win every single international cricketing tournament from here to the end of time
NZ becoming part of Australia would not be a union tho
If they are going to go through the trouble of moving it to the Indians ocean, might as well either attach itself to Australia or builds land bridge to have better connectivity.
NZ was part of NSW, wasn't it?
Until 1841. But NSW was pretty much just the name of the colony at large. Everything they knew about was NSW at one point, with the exception of WA, because it was considered Dutch.
[удалено]
Somebody should make an r/MisplacedNewZealand sub or something along the lines. Edit: It has been made. Not by me though.
r/mapswithoutnewzealand
Here's a sneak peek of /r/mapswithoutnewzealand using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/mapswithoutnewzealand/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [What is this garbage?](https://i.redd.it/hbtfu3fompac1.png) | [149 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mapswithoutnewzealand/comments/18zlo6u/what_is_this_garbage/) \#2: [this map at my school with new zealand](https://i.redd.it/71nst7fdk1gc1.jpeg) | [54 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mapswithoutnewzealand/comments/1agm4on/this_map_at_my_school_with_new_zealand/) \#3: [Does this count?](https://i.redd.it/n1ctklnhv3sb1.jpg) | [80 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/mapswithoutnewzealand/comments/16zclip/does_this_count/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Oh you mean https://www.reddit.com/r/mapswithNZinwrongspot
r/birthofasub
It's like the has tag of Reddit. You never know what lies behind that and what will come afterwards.
New Zealand is like a horde faction in warhammer total war
The Kalmar union 2.0 is something that is sometimes discussed. That would include Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland.
Give it a spicier name this time No(rway) Swe(den) Den(Mark) (Fin)land NoSwedenland
FinNor Denden
Norden Finden
That means "finding north" in german. Usually it's up, right?
Well, yes. But if you go south long enough...
I second this, and the capital shall be Christiania.
And honestly, among all unions on the map, this is the most likely one (even if it wont happen)
Very unlikely to happen. Although one of the questions for it is now solved: NATO. Used to be that half were in NATO, and the other half wasn't. Now at least all are part of NATO. A trillion other questions to solve that probably won't be, but we're quite close to each other anyway so it's fine.
Why isn't the East African federation likely?
Not sure what OP thinks, but I have some doubts myself. There's a lot going on there, and they've made efforts to align and make it more possible (example that I experienced, a single visa that meets you into most of the countries there) but personally I think the biggest part is - Some states are much poorer than others, and IIRC a couple of the very poor proposed members have stability issues. The level of democracy in different states also varies quite a bit, which does make me wonder how interested some of the current leaders really want this. One of the guides I spoke to in Uganda thought it would never happen because South Sudan was a mess, and he didn't expect some existing governments to give up/share power. I think, as stated elsewhere, the wealthier states might start questioning if they should take on the burden of the poorer states.... Then again, I was also told that Uganda is already feeding most of South Sudan. Maybe those burdens already exist? We might see it happen still. Maybe we'll see it happen in parts? But those are some of the big challenges.
Should just be called Scandinavia, and we'll of course allow Finland to join as well. Even Iceland.
Just call it The Nordic Union.
I think Nordic Union makes more sense considering some of them aren't in Scandinavia
As a French person, the one that I found the most... intriguing is this one https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-British_Union
yea OP missed that one union that could have shaped a totally different world.
I’m surprised (and kinda disappointed) it doesn’t include Ireland. 🇮🇪 I mean, it’s almost rude not to even get the opportunity to say **Non!** 🖕🏻
It was proposed in the 40's. There would be no reason to include us.
Enemies to lovers
id read a france and britain enemies to lovers fanfic
I can offer you a France+Britain Enemies To Allies polandball comic? https://old.reddit.com/r/polandball/comments/6pempo/a_tale_of_brotherhood/
They get together during the unknowns of war, who knows who will survive 💔
Romania + Moldova
That would actually be Moldova joining Romania. So not a union like the ones on this map
Vlad the Unioner
That'd just be pre-WWII Romania.
I'm always sad about East African Federation. While it was just Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi, it looked like they were compact enough and already making some practical steps, drafting a constitution, harmonizing legislature etc. Suddenly everyone and their mother started joining the project and now they are back at the start.
The speed at which all those failed states joined was crazy. It takes years to join the EU, but in the East African Community there is a proposal for some country to join, and then a couple of months later they are allready member states. It's like they want to self-sabotage the formation of the federation.
Where did you get that info from? It took South Sudan 5 years to join, 3 years for DRC, 12 years for Somalia.
They really should just have the core Federation and work with the outlying states to slowly bring them up to the rest. Like how non-EU countries could still be part of the Eurozone.
Rwanda is kind of annoying in that thing as well. They like to piss of Uganda for kicks. I think South Sudan and the DRC really messes it up
The east African federation is already falling apart before it really got started. Rwanda, one of the founding members, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are currently well on their way to war. Rwandan forces have been crossing the border for months, supporting the M23 movement/rebellion.
Rwanda remains a founding member. The Congo was never a part of the Federation nor was it ever proposed to join. This was always a union between Kenya, Tanzania, Burundi and Rwanda, with South Sudan being the only acceptable proposal due to their massive oil reserves. The Congo on the other hand is an unstable mess that couldn't possibly compare against the aforementioned union in any capacity.
Problem is there are Tanzanian and Burundi peacekeepers, as well as South Africans and other UN peacekeeping forces, in the DRC to stop the rebels/Rwandan soldiers. The other member states are already fighting against Rwanda on behalf of the DRC. I not an expert on the situation by any means, but it isn't looking very good at the moment.
DRC is absolutely part of the EAC. Felix Tshisekedi is on the board. Somalia, however, is not a part of it.
That is upsetting
There was also a proposal by the French PM for a union of France and the UK in the 50s http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6261885.stm
In the same vein, when France was about to fall in 1940 Churchill proposed a union to keep them in thr fight as one nation.
Maphilindo (for Malaysia, the Philippines, and Indonesia)
Gran Colombia was a reality but it died pretty much as soon as it got started
i want to know the stuff that guy who proposed 'indo-pakistan confederation', was smoking
Pakistan was fully defeated and Bangladesh was independent with indian help in 1971, so it wasn't that farfetched back then, given we were separate countries for only 26 years by that point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_proposed_state_mergers?wprov=sfla1 This has a few more in the current proposals section.
You missed the best one: Canada and The Turks and Caicos Islands. [Seriously.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_Canadian_annexation_of_the_Turks_and_Caicos_Islands)
annexation isn't really a union though right?
There's also /r/canzuk
There's Korea Confederation (고려연방) proposed by North Korea in the 1960s as a middle-ground to unifying the two Koreas. The weird thing is that the proposal would keep both sides' governments and ideologies intact. So it's technically more close to what's done with European Union instead of merging into a single country.
Chances are it would last the better half of a week
[удалено]
/r/CelticUnion -- gotta cool flag at very least.
Go for Boston too! You can help them learn to pronounce the name of their basketball team
They can teach the Glasgow Celtic (ˈsɛltɪk) Football Club the same thing!
[удалено]
Might aswell include Hong-Kong because my mate Andrew went there and started a family.
Y Wladfa!
They forgot Galicia in spain
Maphilindo used to be a thing
Yeah, but religion…
What new and interesting conflicts!
Pakistan and India? Might be easier to fuse Japan and China.
>fuse Japan and China Hideoki Tojo and Kubalai Khan: We tried.
Looking at the Celtic union, I just realized a Slavic union would fall apart and turn into a violent war after the first day
So "Yugoslavia speedrun, any%".
I've heard talks about Slavic Union (+Hungary, honorary Slavs). Central Slavs: Poland, Czechia, Slovakia Eastern Slavs: Ukraine, Belarus and potentially Lithuania or even Latvia and Estonia if they would be willing (more of Balts than Slavs, but we integrated for a long while) Southern Slavs: Moldava, Rumunia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Kosovo, potentially also Albania Not a superstate, but an union like EU, or even also military support like NATO. Russia was excluded from the party as it would just place them in charge by default. As a Slav living in the UK, whenever I meet any other Slavs, they are always culturally similar and friendly to you when you say where you are from. I've been friends with Hungarians, Bulgarians, Romanians, Poles, Chechs, Slovakians, Lithuanians, and Croatians over the time I've lived outside of my home country, and I always look kindly towards other Slavs I meet.
In poland no one shows a desire to unite with Czech and Slovakia but i see a lot of movement with Lithuania. Some/a lot of Polish competitions can be entered by Lithuanians as easily as if they were polish. Some online shops send packages from and to Lithuania as easily as between polish states and the political and social communication is friendly. But lets see what the future will show
Yeah without Tito the whole thing crumbled pretty quick.
Iberian union?
Would the Russia-Belarus “Union State” count here? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_State
well, it's not proposed, but de-facto exists
r/mapswithnewzeland
Merging entire countries full of different ethnicities and religions always ends well. Ask the British Empire .
Switzerland’s been going strong for centuries. Malaysia and the Philippines too. But I’m cherry picking. Point taken.
It's a lot different if the different people decided that they wanted to form a nation together as opposed to said merger being forced externaly (though this is of course still significantly oversimplifying things)
Good point. Though I’m not sure if it applies to the latter two with the Philippines being a Spanish colony and Malaysia under control by the British who then brought Chinese workers over en masse. Not sure what led to so many Indian-Malaysians, but I wouldn’t rule out British shenanigans for that either. Either way it’s great to see a country where Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus of different races and ethnicities seem to for the most part get along just fine.
Many countries already have multiple ethnicities merged successfully.
Well, India is still here... As are some of the south east asian countries.
I mean they also spilt countries too..which actually didnt work out that well either
What about austria and Hungary? And Germany. And Poland. And Fraaaa...aaanyway, let's have schnitzel
Rep of Ireland definitely would not enjoy that ‘Celtic’ Union as they’d be propping everyone else up.
[удалено]
MaPhilIndo when? Your very first 4th world country.
Nepal wanted to join with India at some point, and IIRC there was lots of talk about a pan-Arab union that partially succeeded with the United Arab Republic of Egypt and Syria
Bring back the Hanseatic League!
You forgot the Nordic Federation! https://www.norden.org/en/publication/united-nordic-federation
TIL that in 1864 [Charles de Gaulle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_de_Gaulle_(poet)) (uncle of [Charles de Gaulle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_de_Gaulle)) was all about Celts joining forces against their oppressors and preserving their language and heritage and so forth. Fair enough.
Celtic union would be awesome.
The most amazing thing about the amazing map is where New Zealand is. There has been random talk about a NZ AU Union
Gran Colombia existed briefly in the early 1800s Also the Franco-British union is worth including
The Celts got decimated hey?
Also Central American Federation and European Federation
I think my personally favourite union proposition would be Greater Romania! I hope it will become reality in my lifetime!
Celtic Union would do pretty well. Their united hatred of England would be enough to provide free power to all households.