3 ms·

In many cases, because both overlap with geographical features: the Carpathians in Romania, the Pontic-Caspian steppe in Ukraine, the green mountainous Portugal

In many cases, because both overlap with geographical features: the Carpathians in Romania, the Pontic-Caspian steppe in Ukraine, the green mountainous Portugal north of the Tagus vs the flat "montado" landscape to the south.

thrdbndndn 4y ago
>because both overlap It's easy to see why old empires/countries were divided by geographical features due to military reasons. But why would it affect the current-day political climate directly? I think the causal relation is more like Geo -> old empire -> (more things) -> current day politics like the original post implied, than Geo -> old empire Geo -> current day politics as you implied; unless I missed your point. Edit: on a second thought, I think a factor that supports your point is that geographical feature would affect corresponding industries in certain area regardless of "historical divisions". Maybe this is what you mean?
- rodelrod 4y ago
  Putting it in these terms, what I'm trying to say is something like: geography → economy → old empire geography → economy → current day politics The biggest caveat to this is that the importance of geography is conditioned by technology, and technology changes over time. So a more detailed model could be something like: geography + current tech → agriculture/commerce/industry/military → economy/culture → politics See how the dominant powers changed with the shift from bronze to iron or with the development of open ocean navigation.
  - thrdbndndn 4y ago
    Makes sense. When you said geography features, I was more thinking of natural barrier (like rivers, mountains): they were very crucial in shaping the old country border, but should have less impact today if both sides are already in the same country. So it's interesting that some of political division are still present around them, which makes me think history has its (unproportional) influence than the geography itself. But I guess it's always multi-factor and hard to tell in vacuum. It doesn't help that in most of examples in OP, the major difference between two (old) countries is the economic one, so a certain degree of Matthew effect is there.
    - t-3 4y ago
      It's been true throughout history and is still pretty true that most people never leave the area they were born in. This would cause geography, history, and internal politics to overlap in somewhat non-obvious ways.

thrdbndndn 4y ago

>because both overlap It's easy to see why old empires/countries were divided by geographical features due to military reasons. But why would it affect the current-day political climate directly? I think the causal relation is more like Geo -> old empire -> (more things) -> current day politics like the original post implied, than Geo -> old empire Geo -> current day politics as you implied; unless I missed your point. Edit: on a second thought, I think a factor that supports your point is that geographical feature would affect corresponding industries in certain area regardless of "historical divisions". Maybe this is what you mean?

rodelrod 4y ago
Putting it in these terms, what I'm trying to say is something like: geography → economy → old empire geography → economy → current day politics The biggest caveat to this is that the importance of geography is conditioned by technology, and technology changes over time. So a more detailed model could be something like: geography + current tech → agriculture/commerce/industry/military → economy/culture → politics See how the dominant powers changed with the shift from bronze to iron or with the development of open ocean navigation.
- thrdbndndn 4y ago
  Makes sense. When you said geography features, I was more thinking of natural barrier (like rivers, mountains): they were very crucial in shaping the old country border, but should have less impact today if both sides are already in the same country. So it's interesting that some of political division are still present around them, which makes me think history has its (unproportional) influence than the geography itself. But I guess it's always multi-factor and hard to tell in vacuum. It doesn't help that in most of examples in OP, the major difference between two (old) countries is the economic one, so a certain degree of Matthew effect is there.
  - t-3 4y ago
    It's been true throughout history and is still pretty true that most people never leave the area they were born in. This would cause geography, history, and internal politics to overlap in somewhat non-obvious ways.