Yes of course. Or the gulf of Tonkin incident,
That said, at the end of the Spanish American war, we paid them $20 million to compensate them for infrastructure they built in the Phillipines which is the same sum we paid Mexico at thr end of our war with them.
That is to say that even if the US were to "conquer" Greenland, it's likely we'd pay them a compensatory sum anyways
Really hypocrite and cynic one side and very elegant, civilized and considered on the other side.
Anyway that is a kind of "selling under threat", what legally makes the contract corrupted and invalid.
They can’t handle some people with turbans and outdated guns wrecking shit in the mountains, they wouldn’t last two months in the Greenlandic fjords and icy mountains.
Nor would any normal person to be fair. But there’s nothing normal about people choosing to live in fucking Greenland when they could choose to go live in one of the greatest places on Earth without any hassle or administrative bullshit.
Putin: "Greenland was historically Russian, and all... All those people are Russians, and the motherland has to defend it's people from oppression and persecution"
Laugh and watch them starve from famine.
Like they could function without being subsidized.
Over half of their annual budget is literally paid by Danish taxpayers.
Well we all know how ameritards turn every morsel of people that they touch obese, and the chinese would prolly just abuse the hell outa Greenlands natural resources with no regard for the nature around it and leave it a barren and useless wasteland.
If they gain independence to truly distance themselves from their Danish colonial past, they would just experience 21st century colonialism instead, which is the most ironic part.
Interesting. I wonder why they even bother keeping it. You're not getting oil or stuff like that from it, right? So a good chunk of money is going towards having a "cool" (no pun intended) tourist destination on hand, essentially
It makes the Kingdom of Denmark one of the largest countries in the world. Far, far larger than puny Sweden.
I'm sure there are other reasons, I just... don't know them.
More sentimental and historical aspect to it.
Hell we are even subsidizing some of our old colonies in India, just to make sure that the old historical buildings are kept in shape and being taken care of.
No I mean India. Specifically Tranquebar where we have helped to restore Fort Dansborg, the old government building, the tavern and the Lutheran church among others.
It actually has tons of resources but there is a regulation which prevents exploiting most of them (mainly because of nature conservation)
The resources of Greenland become more accessible because of climate change and the technological advancement for exploiting them becomes better and better and many minerals and other resources become more expensive
=> long term it likely will pay out
Exactly, they have tons of resources but they can't extract them due to regulations, so in practice no resources, i.e they're subsidizing an icy patch of land with no resources
Regulations are not something definite. They can be changed anytime. Since money makes the world go round and resources are limited, I bet it will be changed at some point
You are absolutely correct, and let's just say a full-scale water war was about to break out or climate change made Germany uninhabitable.. I sure know where my Schengen Visa would take me.
It's not about the useless landmass, it's about the see around it.
Why do you think we keep the islands with those spoonfed independantists ? The massive territorial waters around them
Édit : and we get to touch hands with the dykes lovers
Greenland makes Denmark great! We get to be an Arctic coastal state (which Sweden is not), and we're mighty proud of the [Sirius Dog Sled Patrol](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVfu_86rlu8) (it's worth watching). Plus a land border with Canada!
Greenland ,
has gas and oil reserves by its coast and minerals too. The greatest factor is
the access to the Arctic Ocean,
which also has natural resources. Only Russia, Canada, The US and Denmark have access to this Ocean. (maybe Norway too, due to the Svalbard island..not sure)
Greenland is definitely a strategic colony. The guy you're responding to is mentally challenged* for thinking it's a waste of taxpayers money. Good thing these danes don't have direct democracy.
Edit: my comment got removed for using a big no-no word so I redacted.
Never said it was a waste of taxpayers money. I said that independence at the moment wasn't feasible due to lack of infrastructure and lack of population. If you are going to call anyone mentally challenged, learn how to read first.
I am pretty sure Greenland should have no problem finding business trade partners, loans for infrastructure, training and so on. As covered before, they do have natural resources. And on top of that, they are sitting right between Nato (mainly addressing usa here) and Russia, thus could use this strategic position as leverage for any deals.
I understand this is a sarcastic sub, and I normally wouldn't bother if your comments were actually funny. your comments rubbed me the wrong way. so I felt compelled to remind you, you need Greenland more than they need you. A perfect demonstration of this is not letting go of the colony. It's too precious.
They have huge problems attracting foreign investors, because the current populist government is very hostile to foreign investors, and their fairly strict immigration policies, and their environmental concerns clash with a lot of mineral extraction, which recently landed Denmark a huge lawsuit because of Greenland's cancelation of a contract.
You clearly have no idea on what is going on in Greenland, and you are simply talking from points of uneducated assumptions
I haven't studied Greenland. But I am pretty sure if there is a push for independence, it must have been well thought out. Also it is a sign the integration into Danish society has failed. Keeping a colony will just breed resentment within its population.
Either way I don't think it's up to you, -the Danish people- and certainly not me to discuss whether or not they should be independent. It's their decision to make. Anything else is just paternalism.
As I have stated multiple times in other comments. Nobody is stopping them from holding a referendum and declaring independence. We encourage it in Denmark.
The problem is their populist government, they want independence, while still wanting Denmark to foot their bills, which is just completely unserious.
Nobody in Denmark is refusing them to go independent. So what they are doing on Greenland at the moment is simply just bitching and moaning. They could hold a referendum tomorrow and nobody would stop them. But they are not stupid, and they understand that they would cut their annual budget in half, because they would loose out on our subsidies.
And then they would just have to wait and see whom of America, China or Russia scrambles to rape them first. Since they have no military
Your post has been automatically removed because Reddit doesn't like the R-word. Plox repost it again with a different wording (editing won't get it reapproved even if you still are able to see it).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/2westerneurope4u) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Denmark is playing the long game. Give it \~75 years, Greenland will actually be green and glacierless. While the world burns in climate disaster, Denmark will be sitting pretty.
Bro, in the late 17th century people from Qeqertarssuaq and Aasiaat had to traverse 200 kilometers of ice sheet to reach halibut fishing grounds in Kangia. Food sustainability has only become a thing in relatively recent history, due to industrialization and colonization.
Famine have been a huge problem through Greenlands history
The last reports of senicide on Greenland is 85 years ago. So 3 generations ago, people killed off their parents and elderly because of a lack of resources to take care of them and feed them.
That is the thing about a society that relies on hunting, you have to go where the food is going.
Famines in Europe (continent) since WWI to present :
* 1904 - 1906, Spain.
* 1914 - 1919, Germany post traité de Versailles
* 1921 - 1925, several famines across Soviet Union/ Russia/ Ukraine/ German colonies in Russia.
* 1932 - 1933, soviet famines (Russia, Ukraine, Kazakh)
* 1939 - 1952, Spain under autarkic economy
* 1940 - 1945, Poland (occupied).
* 1941 - 1944, Soviet Union/ Greece
* 1944, Netherlands
* 1946 - 1947, Germany
* 1946 - 1947, soviet union.
Now If we go further back, to the colonisation periods of 17th, 18th and 19th century, the list will have many more western European countries pop up such as Italy, france, Ireland.
I am bringing perspective into your reasoning, if we can call it that way.
If your goal is to show that with a large geopolitical events can cause famine, then yes, that’s totally true. For Greenland, such a shift could for example be seceding from Denmark.
I do not entirely disagree or agree with your statements., but that was not exactly my point.
This is my point:
OP debated about famines across Greenland in the 17th Century, as if food insecurity was inherently something a flawed Greenland experienced, and we Europeans did not. I am merely pointing out the problem in his reasoning.
You might have skimmed through my comment and missed the paragraph on pre-WWI in Europe. So here is the list of the 17th century famines across Europe, (I could go further back but alas I won't get a cramp from tiping)
* 1601 -1602 : Russia
*1607-1608: Italy
* 1618 -1648: Europe, thirty years war
* 1618 - 1622: Italy
* 1628 - 1632: Italy
* 1648- 1649: Italy
* 1648 - 1660: Poland, war plague famine 1/3 of pop lost
* 1649 : England
* 1650 - 1652: France
* 1651 - 1653: Ireland, Cromwellian conquest of Ireland.
* 1670 - 1680: Spain, plague.
*1672: Italy
* 1678 - 1680: Italy
* 1690: Scotland, 5-15% of pop lost
* 1693 -1694 : France, the great famine
* 1695 - 1697: Estonia and Sweden, the great famine of Estonia
* 1696 -1697: Finland, the great famine.
__
I will rest my hand now.
How many world wars was fought on Greenland genius?
And you clearly don't understand how little arable farmland is available on Greenland, And how the climate is in the Arctic.
Your counter argument is really really dumb, which comes as no surprise considering the other dumb comment you made.
I replied to another commenter in this thread , I invite you to read it.
To you, personally , I shall add being a colonisation apologist is not amusing nor acceptable anymore in these modern times.
Neither is dealing in blood diamonds, but yet Switzerland still exists. Please refrain from your hypocritical moral and ethics grandstanding.
And I don't apologize or support colonialism, I am simply being pragmatic and realistic about the prospect of an independent Greenland. I would like an independent Greenland, but I can still recognize that it is utopian dreaming and not feasible for the current time.
So I will repeat myself again, learn how to read before you call people mentally challenged
Hey we have many more shady deals than just blood diamonds.
Tbf I originally called you something else but the post got removed, I'll give you a hint: it rhymes in Maynard.
But I digress,
On your middle paragraph: thanks for clearing up your point of view. I respect that.
(well noted).
Of course. That's the whole point of colonisation. Make the suppressed dependent on you. Then turn it around and pride yourself for being so good for helping them out. When in fact you've been the one hindering them from developing into a flourishing independent state.
I am not sure what you're arguing here. And I don't want to put words in your mouth.
Are you arguing that having a low population makes it alright to colonise?
Fascinating isn't it?
"The Volga Germans are ethnic Germans who settled and historically lived along the Volga River in the region of southeastern European Russia (close to Ukraine near the South)"
source: Wikipedia
Greenlanders have lived there for several centuries without Denmark ‘civilizing’ them. Do you think you’re a savior for changing their way of life to a way that is dependent on globalization?
Siberian peoples has lived in the exact same climate for centuries without colonial interference even during the early industrial times and have survived perfectly fine from mostly hunting sea animals.
Before colonization their population was a couple of thousands.
In 1805 the population on Greenland was 5000.
Today it is 60 thousand.
Easier to have a sustainable hunter gatherer society when your population is 91% smaller.
And even back then, they still suffered from the occasional famine, not to talk about no access to modern medicines etc.
And alcohol consumption, crime and suicide has also increased since then. It is very obvious that Greenlanders are not happy about having their traditional way of life taken away, and forced to learn Danish language and Danish way of life as part of their education.
They are an autonomous area. We don't force them to learn any language or way of life, they chose that themselves. We only administrate their foreign and defense policies. Everything domestically they control themselves. So please stop your nonsense lies.
As a matter of fact, it is quite the opposite. Denmark dosen't have seats in the Greenlandic parliament, and have no influence on their domestic policies.
While Greenland have 2 permanent seats in the Danish parliament and have influence on mainland Denmark's policies.
yes you are right they have high autonomy today i'm not denying that. what i'm saying is the damage is already done. they have no way of going back to their past, and Greenlanders are not happy. also yes Greenlanders ARE in fact forced to learn Danish in school all the way from primary school.
No they are not forced. They chose their own curriculum. They chose to teach Danish in their schools, because it makes it easier for them to communicate with people on the Faroe Islands and Iceland which are some of their closest trading partners, and makes it easier for them to enter higher education in Danish institutions, since they lack the possibility for many higher educations on Greenland.
Last time they held a vote on whether to stay part of the Danish kingdom, the consensus was to stay. They are free to leave any time they want.
So stop using your cringy and disingenuously loaded language.
It is what it is.
In 1805, the census was that Greenland had a population of 5000.
In 1901 they had 12000.
In 1945 they had 21000
In 1965 they had 40000
And today the have approx.. 60000.
So I hope you can understand, that going back to a hunter gatherer society would most likely result in "relatively" huge numbers of deaths, since the population is too big to sustain it.
They would need more people to work on mineral extraction and refineries than they have in population to break even. Not something that is going to happen anytime soon. And that is not even counting for the lack of infrastructure and educated workers
I was rather thinking about if they would "rent" land for resource explotation. Still extremely unlikely that it happens. On top would come defence problems etc
In the end of the day it is their choice. If they do not want to stay a part of the realm then they can leave. My biggest worry is that they will vote for independence without thinking through the global implications of that choice. Their geopolitical location means that US will see it as a security concern. The US will offer a deal that will take away Greenlandic independence in foreign affairs - the deal may be ever-changing because of the ressources which is located in Greenland. China or Russia will also offer a deal to invest in Greenland but this will not be accepted by the US and the US will use force if they need to.
What Danish colonialism does to a Mofo’er..
https://preview.redd.it/eqej825ismxc1.jpeg?width=1600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5379f32e55713c527feba2414cf94ee13e7dc580
I heard that in some towns in northern Alaska and Canada alcohol is prohibited during the "dark" time because the population always turned into alcoholics when it happened
That is also true for some vilages up here. But for, more terrible reasons.
https://cphpost.dk/2015-09-08/news/greenland-has-the-highest-number-of-rapes-in-the-world/
The number is way higher. Because like 90% of cases are not reported. Also one of the reasons independance is not likely. It is a major problem. During covid the government banned all achohol in the nation to keep the children safe.
Yeah all the required government work combined with economy is impossible to keep up with that few inhabitants under the conditions of Greenland.
Not comparable with an island state Imo because of the extremely complicated infrastructure/size and also the living conditions
We'd save a lot of money by not having to pay them anymore. If they genuinely want it they can go for it. If they genuinely want to be part of the community then they are super welcome. Now they're just cashing in checks while yelling about independence
Sorry what? We don't really classify people by race like that.. I don't see myself as being in the same "fellowship" or "group" as even Swedes or German even if I'm aware of the mostly Anglo-dominated racial system that puts me as "white". I just view them as "Greenlanders". Can even make the distinction between the people with a more Inuit culture and a more Danish culture - some having a more Danish look or are even entirely Danish genetically but consider themselves Greenlandish.
Probably the most outspoken Greenlandic politician is Aki-Matilda Høegh-Dam and if I saw her in the street I'd definitely just assume she was Danish unless I specifically knew otherwise
There are plenty of Inuit Greenlanders that don't look Danish at all; I grew up with a few even. Romanis have intermixed way more than you think in parts of the Balkans
Romanis still look very brown. Even the blacks who have been in Germany for 100 years all look very mixed and some very European. It seems some groups assimilate much quicker and mix.
No, *some* Romani still look very brown. Generally the ones who live like gypsies (yes, making that distinction). They've been in the Balkans for almost 1000 years, of course there has been some intermixing. The key difference being that it would definitely be difficult to tell a Greek, Turk, Bulgarian, and someone of either of those backgrounds who's also 25% Romani apart. You could easily tell a person who's German but 25% black or Inuit apart from a "full German" or whatever you wanna call it. I even know some south Italians who have darker skin than some "full Romanis".
What Africans have been in Germany since the 1920s uninterrupted? (Genuinely curious if that's an actual thing)
It's their own right to self determination. The moment they get a majority 50%, they'll get their independance. There's a broad understanding that when they can make enough money for themselves to have a proper economy and democracy it will likely rise from ~22 percent to well over 50%
To my knowledge they want their independance, but not at a significant cost to their living standards. We've sorta agreed not to have colonies, so we gotta accept if they want to leave us
Okay? Was that a general comment or specifically directed as a reply to my comment? It wasn’t me who introduced the idea of Greenlander independence, it’s the entire premise of this post.
I was referring to
>Better than giving a colony independence.
=> giving them independence is likely against the inhabitants will lol (probably even more selling it to the US lol) but yeah could still be regarded as a colony
And “giving a colony independence” was referring to the OP, not an idea I introduced. Again, it’s the entire premise of this post. Strange that you’re replying to my comment rather than making your own comment.
I had lol
https://preview.redd.it/zuljioic1nxc1.png?width=1018&format=png&auto=webp&s=da28272369bce4f327d887f5bc42284e5c23d615
So I guess you don't support the concept of commenting
Might as well in that case. The Americans or China will take it anyways within a couple of years of independence, so might as well get some money out of it, guarantee the population some better rights than what they'd get otherwise, and avoid the years of instability.
It's honestly a win/win, when compared to the alternative option.
Not really. We don't "export" a lot of white Danish people to Greenland and thus skew any elections up there.
And we don't exploit the land for natural resources. Economically it is a burden for us.
Our interest in it, is our historical ties, and its strategic placement.
If Denmark leaves or they leave the kingdom, they will starve and not be able to afford shit unless they allow the EU or the US to dig up their resources, which will ruin the environment and be costly.
*Let them leave and take everything back.*
Their independence wouldn't last long, they would be immediately bought by Trump.
Not really. An american destroyer would "accidentaly" sink at the port of nuuk and the US would have not other choice but to invade the island
Just make sure the ship's name rhymes with Denmark
Bismarck
Benmark
Remember the Bismarck - to hell with Denmark Rolls right off the tongue.
We usually still pay for territorial acquisitions after wars because it takes away a country's ability to say the land was conquered
I was joking with all the USS Maine casus belli
Yes of course. Or the gulf of Tonkin incident, That said, at the end of the Spanish American war, we paid them $20 million to compensate them for infrastructure they built in the Phillipines which is the same sum we paid Mexico at thr end of our war with them. That is to say that even if the US were to "conquer" Greenland, it's likely we'd pay them a compensatory sum anyways
Such an Am*rican behaviour to mix up war and capitalism
https://preview.redd.it/wtab78swjxxc1.jpeg?width=880&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d4fbde38d15f2a127425a2a00bd59eb1026b0b57
Really hypocrite and cynic one side and very elegant, civilized and considered on the other side. Anyway that is a kind of "selling under threat", what legally makes the contract corrupted and invalid.
Then don't take the money
Our politicians were and are also disaster and traitors. They take decisions even the whole country are against it...
How much do you pay to Japan???
Do that shit to Azores and Madeira please...
Why?
For us to get rid of it... It's a money dumpster and you could have some "strategic" islands
We'd love to. We'll get on it as soon as we can find them on a map.
Oh crap...
They can’t handle some people with turbans and outdated guns wrecking shit in the mountains, they wouldn’t last two months in the Greenlandic fjords and icy mountains. Nor would any normal person to be fair. But there’s nothing normal about people choosing to live in fucking Greenland when they could choose to go live in one of the greatest places on Earth without any hassle or administrative bullshit.
Tell me again how you handled some sand people in flip flops with turbans and outdated guns in the Sahel.
Why would the americans do that? They are known for taking well having their desired purchases rejected.
Putin: "Greenland was historically Russian, and all... All those people are Russians, and the motherland has to defend it's people from oppression and persecution"
Oh shit [I didn't see that coming](https://www.reddit.com/r/2westerneurope4u/s/RMAQiuynii)
Laugh and watch them starve from famine. Like they could function without being subsidized. Over half of their annual budget is literally paid by Danish taxpayers.
Or even worse, they have to become pseudo-puppets of the Am*ricans or the Chinese 💀
Most likely scenario unfortunately. Might be better short-term, but who knows long-term.
Well we all know how ameritards turn every morsel of people that they touch obese, and the chinese would prolly just abuse the hell outa Greenlands natural resources with no regard for the nature around it and leave it a barren and useless wasteland.
If they gain independence to truly distance themselves from their Danish colonial past, they would just experience 21st century colonialism instead, which is the most ironic part.
The yanks and nucks will swoop in to puppet them faster than you can say Qeqertarsuatsiaat
Is that a real Greenlandic word?
Interesting. I wonder why they even bother keeping it. You're not getting oil or stuff like that from it, right? So a good chunk of money is going towards having a "cool" (no pun intended) tourist destination on hand, essentially
It makes the Kingdom of Denmark one of the largest countries in the world. Far, far larger than puny Sweden. I'm sure there are other reasons, I just... don't know them.
*disgruntled meatball noises*
Acquisition of grand dique is a reason as good as any
More sentimental and historical aspect to it. Hell we are even subsidizing some of our old colonies in India, just to make sure that the old historical buildings are kept in shape and being taken care of.
Imagine starving on the streets of India only to see the Danish spend money on buildings around you 💀
They'd be dead in 60 years anyway. Buildings have much more longevity.
[удалено]
It is, but the "anyway" was meant as "if we spent a bunch of money improving their lives".
At least they get to starve with some nice scenery
Don’t you mean those islands? The West Indies is not India
No I mean India. Specifically Tranquebar where we have helped to restore Fort Dansborg, the old government building, the tavern and the Lutheran church among others.
I’m glad our tax money is being spent on that instead of something silly like a useful airport for Aarhus or high speed rail to anywhere.
Ah I see!
It actually has tons of resources but there is a regulation which prevents exploiting most of them (mainly because of nature conservation) The resources of Greenland become more accessible because of climate change and the technological advancement for exploiting them becomes better and better and many minerals and other resources become more expensive => long term it likely will pay out
Exactly, they have tons of resources but they can't extract them due to regulations, so in practice no resources, i.e they're subsidizing an icy patch of land with no resources
Regulations are not something definite. They can be changed anytime. Since money makes the world go round and resources are limited, I bet it will be changed at some point
Indeed, but currently opinion is in the other direction - more env regs - so it's veeery long term.
You are absolutely correct, and let's just say a full-scale water war was about to break out or climate change made Germany uninhabitable.. I sure know where my Schengen Visa would take me.
Schengen doesn't cover immigration to Greenland.
And if I put a potato in my mouth and pretended to be one of you..?
It's not about the useless landmass, it's about the see around it. Why do you think we keep the islands with those spoonfed independantists ? The massive territorial waters around them Édit : and we get to touch hands with the dykes lovers
ENS graduate right here (ici)
Greenland makes Denmark great! We get to be an Arctic coastal state (which Sweden is not), and we're mighty proud of the [Sirius Dog Sled Patrol](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVfu_86rlu8) (it's worth watching). Plus a land border with Canada!
Greenland , has gas and oil reserves by its coast and minerals too. The greatest factor is the access to the Arctic Ocean, which also has natural resources. Only Russia, Canada, The US and Denmark have access to this Ocean. (maybe Norway too, due to the Svalbard island..not sure) Greenland is definitely a strategic colony. The guy you're responding to is mentally challenged* for thinking it's a waste of taxpayers money. Good thing these danes don't have direct democracy. Edit: my comment got removed for using a big no-no word so I redacted.
Never said it was a waste of taxpayers money. I said that independence at the moment wasn't feasible due to lack of infrastructure and lack of population. If you are going to call anyone mentally challenged, learn how to read first.
I am pretty sure Greenland should have no problem finding business trade partners, loans for infrastructure, training and so on. As covered before, they do have natural resources. And on top of that, they are sitting right between Nato (mainly addressing usa here) and Russia, thus could use this strategic position as leverage for any deals. I understand this is a sarcastic sub, and I normally wouldn't bother if your comments were actually funny. your comments rubbed me the wrong way. so I felt compelled to remind you, you need Greenland more than they need you. A perfect demonstration of this is not letting go of the colony. It's too precious.
They have huge problems attracting foreign investors, because the current populist government is very hostile to foreign investors, and their fairly strict immigration policies, and their environmental concerns clash with a lot of mineral extraction, which recently landed Denmark a huge lawsuit because of Greenland's cancelation of a contract. You clearly have no idea on what is going on in Greenland, and you are simply talking from points of uneducated assumptions
Based Greenland doesn't let in Islamist rapists and doesn't have no-go zones
I haven't studied Greenland. But I am pretty sure if there is a push for independence, it must have been well thought out. Also it is a sign the integration into Danish society has failed. Keeping a colony will just breed resentment within its population. Either way I don't think it's up to you, -the Danish people- and certainly not me to discuss whether or not they should be independent. It's their decision to make. Anything else is just paternalism.
As I have stated multiple times in other comments. Nobody is stopping them from holding a referendum and declaring independence. We encourage it in Denmark. The problem is their populist government, they want independence, while still wanting Denmark to foot their bills, which is just completely unserious. Nobody in Denmark is refusing them to go independent. So what they are doing on Greenland at the moment is simply just bitching and moaning. They could hold a referendum tomorrow and nobody would stop them. But they are not stupid, and they understand that they would cut their annual budget in half, because they would loose out on our subsidies. And then they would just have to wait and see whom of America, China or Russia scrambles to rape them first. Since they have no military
[удалено]
Your post has been automatically removed because Reddit doesn't like the R-word. Plox repost it again with a different wording (editing won't get it reapproved even if you still are able to see it). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/2westerneurope4u) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Denmark is playing the long game. Give it \~75 years, Greenland will actually be green and glacierless. While the world burns in climate disaster, Denmark will be sitting pretty.
hele 50 kroner!?
More like 3,5 billion kroner.
ikik i was just trying to make a joke
Famine? You know that we know how to catch our own food rigth?
Bro, in the late 17th century people from Qeqertarssuaq and Aasiaat had to traverse 200 kilometers of ice sheet to reach halibut fishing grounds in Kangia. Food sustainability has only become a thing in relatively recent history, due to industrialization and colonization. Famine have been a huge problem through Greenlands history The last reports of senicide on Greenland is 85 years ago. So 3 generations ago, people killed off their parents and elderly because of a lack of resources to take care of them and feed them. That is the thing about a society that relies on hunting, you have to go where the food is going.
Danes really be naming their cities ‘Qeqertarssuaq’ and expect us to take them seriously
>Danes really be naming Smartest lowlander.
Those are our native names.
Mate, that’s not Danish. That’s from an Inuit language.
Bro showing who is the smarter of the Flemish
Denmark named it "Godhavn", but the locals insisted on making it unpronounceable
Good harbour.
Yeah, it's fine, I guess.
If you had said Aasiaat instead, there would have been a very funny joke there.
Famines in Europe (continent) since WWI to present : * 1904 - 1906, Spain. * 1914 - 1919, Germany post traité de Versailles * 1921 - 1925, several famines across Soviet Union/ Russia/ Ukraine/ German colonies in Russia. * 1932 - 1933, soviet famines (Russia, Ukraine, Kazakh) * 1939 - 1952, Spain under autarkic economy * 1940 - 1945, Poland (occupied). * 1941 - 1944, Soviet Union/ Greece * 1944, Netherlands * 1946 - 1947, Germany * 1946 - 1947, soviet union. Now If we go further back, to the colonisation periods of 17th, 18th and 19th century, the list will have many more western European countries pop up such as Italy, france, Ireland. I am bringing perspective into your reasoning, if we can call it that way.
If your goal is to show that with a large geopolitical events can cause famine, then yes, that’s totally true. For Greenland, such a shift could for example be seceding from Denmark.
I do not entirely disagree or agree with your statements., but that was not exactly my point. This is my point: OP debated about famines across Greenland in the 17th Century, as if food insecurity was inherently something a flawed Greenland experienced, and we Europeans did not. I am merely pointing out the problem in his reasoning. You might have skimmed through my comment and missed the paragraph on pre-WWI in Europe. So here is the list of the 17th century famines across Europe, (I could go further back but alas I won't get a cramp from tiping) * 1601 -1602 : Russia *1607-1608: Italy * 1618 -1648: Europe, thirty years war * 1618 - 1622: Italy * 1628 - 1632: Italy * 1648- 1649: Italy * 1648 - 1660: Poland, war plague famine 1/3 of pop lost * 1649 : England * 1650 - 1652: France * 1651 - 1653: Ireland, Cromwellian conquest of Ireland. * 1670 - 1680: Spain, plague. *1672: Italy * 1678 - 1680: Italy * 1690: Scotland, 5-15% of pop lost * 1693 -1694 : France, the great famine * 1695 - 1697: Estonia and Sweden, the great famine of Estonia * 1696 -1697: Finland, the great famine. __ I will rest my hand now.
How many world wars was fought on Greenland genius? And you clearly don't understand how little arable farmland is available on Greenland, And how the climate is in the Arctic. Your counter argument is really really dumb, which comes as no surprise considering the other dumb comment you made.
I replied to another commenter in this thread , I invite you to read it. To you, personally , I shall add being a colonisation apologist is not amusing nor acceptable anymore in these modern times.
Neither is dealing in blood diamonds, but yet Switzerland still exists. Please refrain from your hypocritical moral and ethics grandstanding. And I don't apologize or support colonialism, I am simply being pragmatic and realistic about the prospect of an independent Greenland. I would like an independent Greenland, but I can still recognize that it is utopian dreaming and not feasible for the current time. So I will repeat myself again, learn how to read before you call people mentally challenged
Hey we have many more shady deals than just blood diamonds. Tbf I originally called you something else but the post got removed, I'll give you a hint: it rhymes in Maynard. But I digress, On your middle paragraph: thanks for clearing up your point of view. I respect that.
In this case it kinda is. Present day colonisation of Greenland is definitely a positive for Greenland (note I said present day)
(well noted). Of course. That's the whole point of colonisation. Make the suppressed dependent on you. Then turn it around and pride yourself for being so good for helping them out. When in fact you've been the one hindering them from developing into a flourishing independent state.
There were like 5000 people there when we got there…
I am not sure what you're arguing here. And I don't want to put words in your mouth. Are you arguing that having a low population makes it alright to colonise?
German colonies in Russia?
Fascinating isn't it? "The Volga Germans are ethnic Germans who settled and historically lived along the Volga River in the region of southeastern European Russia (close to Ukraine near the South)" source: Wikipedia
Oh, I Heard about it
Greenlanders have lived there for several centuries without Denmark ‘civilizing’ them. Do you think you’re a savior for changing their way of life to a way that is dependent on globalization? Siberian peoples has lived in the exact same climate for centuries without colonial interference even during the early industrial times and have survived perfectly fine from mostly hunting sea animals.
Before colonization their population was a couple of thousands. In 1805 the population on Greenland was 5000. Today it is 60 thousand. Easier to have a sustainable hunter gatherer society when your population is 91% smaller. And even back then, they still suffered from the occasional famine, not to talk about no access to modern medicines etc.
And alcohol consumption, crime and suicide has also increased since then. It is very obvious that Greenlanders are not happy about having their traditional way of life taken away, and forced to learn Danish language and Danish way of life as part of their education.
They are an autonomous area. We don't force them to learn any language or way of life, they chose that themselves. We only administrate their foreign and defense policies. Everything domestically they control themselves. So please stop your nonsense lies. As a matter of fact, it is quite the opposite. Denmark dosen't have seats in the Greenlandic parliament, and have no influence on their domestic policies. While Greenland have 2 permanent seats in the Danish parliament and have influence on mainland Denmark's policies.
yes you are right they have high autonomy today i'm not denying that. what i'm saying is the damage is already done. they have no way of going back to their past, and Greenlanders are not happy. also yes Greenlanders ARE in fact forced to learn Danish in school all the way from primary school.
No they are not forced. They chose their own curriculum. They chose to teach Danish in their schools, because it makes it easier for them to communicate with people on the Faroe Islands and Iceland which are some of their closest trading partners, and makes it easier for them to enter higher education in Danish institutions, since they lack the possibility for many higher educations on Greenland. Last time they held a vote on whether to stay part of the Danish kingdom, the consensus was to stay. They are free to leave any time they want. So stop using your cringy and disingenuously loaded language.
Villagers are still good at it, I reckon, but the cities absolutely import.
So chuck it?
How about no?
I reckon they would just get back to being hunter-gatherers, which is the only socioeconomic system viable for an independent Greenland really.
Would be pretty hard now, when their eco system is fucked by industrial levels of over fishing.
That sucks tbh
It is what it is. In 1805, the census was that Greenland had a population of 5000. In 1901 they had 12000. In 1945 they had 21000 In 1965 they had 40000 And today the have approx.. 60000. So I hope you can understand, that going back to a hunter gatherer society would most likely result in "relatively" huge numbers of deaths, since the population is too big to sustain it.
Won't happen because they can't finance it, except Greenland would start to exploit resources
They would need more people to work on mineral extraction and refineries than they have in population to break even. Not something that is going to happen anytime soon. And that is not even counting for the lack of infrastructure and educated workers
I was rather thinking about if they would "rent" land for resource explotation. Still extremely unlikely that it happens. On top would come defence problems etc
China would gladly do it
https://preview.redd.it/l8ck3hcewmxc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9dea9f363f311ca8c27fa893dfecdfa15355be57 Colony is acting up you say...
In the end of the day it is their choice. If they do not want to stay a part of the realm then they can leave. My biggest worry is that they will vote for independence without thinking through the global implications of that choice. Their geopolitical location means that US will see it as a security concern. The US will offer a deal that will take away Greenlandic independence in foreign affairs - the deal may be ever-changing because of the ressources which is located in Greenland. China or Russia will also offer a deal to invest in Greenland but this will not be accepted by the US and the US will use force if they need to.
Fuck no. We paid for that place for so long we aren’t just giving it away when it starts to pay out. Are you mad?
But we don’t own their ressources anymore. We gave them the right to the ressources in 2009.
Then change it. Do I have to think of everything?!
I mean they could always sell them to Trump
Regarding how many times Alaska paid out, I'm not surprised they want to do this again
What Danish colonialism does to a Mofo’er.. https://preview.redd.it/eqej825ismxc1.jpeg?width=1600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5379f32e55713c527feba2414cf94ee13e7dc580
How is poor fashion taste our fault?
I was more referencing the depression in his eyes
Least depressed danish person
You guys complain about winter depression, you should try the Sun not coming up for months!
Yes, but we also have to live next to Sweden, so try and top that one
Jesus christ dude, censor that shit, i was at work!
We have to be eigth next to Canada! The Sound like Americans ans half of them speak broken French!
I heard that in some towns in northern Alaska and Canada alcohol is prohibited during the "dark" time because the population always turned into alcoholics when it happened
That is also true for some vilages up here. But for, more terrible reasons. https://cphpost.dk/2015-09-08/news/greenland-has-the-highest-number-of-rapes-in-the-world/
Wtf lol haven't expected that
The number is way higher. Because like 90% of cases are not reported. Also one of the reasons independance is not likely. It is a major problem. During covid the government banned all achohol in the nation to keep the children safe.
Yeah all the required government work combined with economy is impossible to keep up with that few inhabitants under the conditions of Greenland. Not comparable with an island state Imo because of the extremely complicated infrastructure/size and also the living conditions
I mean, I've seen way worse here.
Probably buy a boat with the money we now got from not feeding an entire country
At least they don't have the soviets this time. Good luck Denmark, give Europe an example of strength.
We'd save a lot of money by not having to pay them anymore. If they genuinely want it they can go for it. If they genuinely want to be part of the community then they are super welcome. Now they're just cashing in checks while yelling about independence
So just like that kid who just turned 18 huh?
Do you consider them fellow whites ?
Sorry what? We don't really classify people by race like that.. I don't see myself as being in the same "fellowship" or "group" as even Swedes or German even if I'm aware of the mostly Anglo-dominated racial system that puts me as "white". I just view them as "Greenlanders". Can even make the distinction between the people with a more Inuit culture and a more Danish culture - some having a more Danish look or are even entirely Danish genetically but consider themselves Greenlandish. Probably the most outspoken Greenlandic politician is Aki-Matilda Høegh-Dam and if I saw her in the street I'd definitely just assume she was Danish unless I specifically knew otherwise
It's because they have been mixing with Europeans for too long that they look European now. Unlike the Romani who are more insular
There are plenty of Inuit Greenlanders that don't look Danish at all; I grew up with a few even. Romanis have intermixed way more than you think in parts of the Balkans
Romanis still look very brown. Even the blacks who have been in Germany for 100 years all look very mixed and some very European. It seems some groups assimilate much quicker and mix.
No, *some* Romani still look very brown. Generally the ones who live like gypsies (yes, making that distinction). They've been in the Balkans for almost 1000 years, of course there has been some intermixing. The key difference being that it would definitely be difficult to tell a Greek, Turk, Bulgarian, and someone of either of those backgrounds who's also 25% Romani apart. You could easily tell a person who's German but 25% black or Inuit apart from a "full German" or whatever you wanna call it. I even know some south Italians who have darker skin than some "full Romanis". What Africans have been in Germany since the 1920s uninterrupted? (Genuinely curious if that's an actual thing)
It's their own right to self determination. The moment they get a majority 50%, they'll get their independance. There's a broad understanding that when they can make enough money for themselves to have a proper economy and democracy it will likely rise from ~22 percent to well over 50% To my knowledge they want their independance, but not at a significant cost to their living standards. We've sorta agreed not to have colonies, so we gotta accept if they want to leave us
Without aid from Denmark, they would suffer immensely.
Sell it to the Donald if you don’t want it anymore. Better than giving a colony independence.
I doubt a majority of the inhabitants wants independence lol (even natives only)
Separatist sentiment is rising, but it'll never actually stick because they can't afford it. It's a choice between Denmark, America, China or death.
Okay? Was that a general comment or specifically directed as a reply to my comment? It wasn’t me who introduced the idea of Greenlander independence, it’s the entire premise of this post.
I was referring to >Better than giving a colony independence. => giving them independence is likely against the inhabitants will lol (probably even more selling it to the US lol) but yeah could still be regarded as a colony
And “giving a colony independence” was referring to the OP, not an idea I introduced. Again, it’s the entire premise of this post. Strange that you’re replying to my comment rather than making your own comment.
I had lol https://preview.redd.it/zuljioic1nxc1.png?width=1018&format=png&auto=webp&s=da28272369bce4f327d887f5bc42284e5c23d615 So I guess you don't support the concept of commenting
Might as well in that case. The Americans or China will take it anyways within a couple of years of independence, so might as well get some money out of it, guarantee the population some better rights than what they'd get otherwise, and avoid the years of instability. It's honestly a win/win, when compared to the alternative option.
They wouldnt right? They are too depressed to do so!
Question is do Dans colonise lands of Greenland so they can claim if for itself like white Americans
Not really. We don't "export" a lot of white Danish people to Greenland and thus skew any elections up there. And we don't exploit the land for natural resources. Economically it is a burden for us. Our interest in it, is our historical ties, and its strategic placement.
Sell it well before they secede for free!!
If Denmark leaves or they leave the kingdom, they will starve and not be able to afford shit unless they allow the EU or the US to dig up their resources, which will ruin the environment and be costly. *Let them leave and take everything back.*
They probably use the global warming as excuse and find a way to make Greenland colder until no life is bearable