this post was submitted on 19 May 2025
502 points (97.9% liked)

196

3483 readers
2090 users here now

Community Rules

You must post before you leave

Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).

Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.

Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.

Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".

Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.

Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.

Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.

Avoid AI generated content.

Avoid misinformation.

Avoid incomprehensible posts.

No threats or personal attacks.

No spam.

Moderator Guidelines

Moderator Guidelines

  • Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
  • Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
  • When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
  • Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
  • Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
  • Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
  • Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
  • Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
  • Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
  • Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
  • Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
  • Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
  • First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
  • Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
  • No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
  • Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
  • Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/29013460

the local will outlast us all

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 44 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (11 children)

This screenshot gets reposted a lot, and I really am not a big fan of it, for two reasons:

  1. A pub is not a country, and there are pubs in America that are older than America as well. Though this half of the planet only being known to dwellers of pub-having civilisations for a few hundred years seems to be rather much of a disadvantage.
  2. The concept of the US as a country is not very old but to the titular Yank's credit the US really is one of the oldest constitutional regimes in the world.

To elaborate on the second point, the US Constitution having been in continuous effect for nearly 250 years truly is rather impressive from a legal history perspective. While it's true that there has been a country called "France" for hundreds of years longer than the US, the French state in 1789 when the current American state began is not the same state as the French state of 2025, while the American state is still the same in its design and structure as in 1789. States are created by constitutions and laws but the idea of a "country" is nebulous and ill-defined. A state can be destroyed and replaced by revolution but the country is still there. So when someone says the USA is one of the oldest states in the world, that is mostly true.

For reference:

  • The Fifth French Republic began in 1958, or 1946 if you count the Fourth Republic. The previous French state (Vichy France) was destroyed by Nazi Germany.
  • The Federal Republic of Germany came into existence upon the entry into force of its Basic Law in 1949. The previous German state was destroyed by the Allies in World War II.
  • Spain's constitutional regime only came into place after the death of Franco in 1975. The modern Spanish state came into existence in 1978 with the ratification of its constitution.
  • The Russian state gained independence from the USSR only upon the latter's dissolution in 1991. Even if you count the Russian SSR government under the Soviet Union, remember that the Russian Revolution which destroyed the Czarist state only began in 1917 in any case.
  • The current Chinese state began in 1949 when Mao Zedong proclaimed its establishment in Tiananmen Square after kicking the Republic of China off the mainland. The Republic of China still exists in Taiwan which infamously is a cause of numerous discomforts between inhabitants of the two regions.
  • The current Japanese state was essentially created by the Americans after they occupied Japan. While the post-war constitution calls itself an "amendment" to the Meiji Constitution, in any case Emperor Meiji dissolved the previous iteration of the Japanese state (the Tokugawa Shogunate) in 1889 anyway.

The one major country I can think of right now whose government institutions can legitimately claim to have been in continuous existence for longer than the US is probably the United Kingdom. I'd say 1660 is the starting point of that, since prior to then, Britain was a republic. 1707 might be a valid date as well since it's when Scotland and England unified to form the United Kingdom. In either case that is older than 1789.

Edit: To the angry Europeans—before you comment, read the post carefully. I'm not talking about whether the US as a country is old. It most certainly is not. I'm saying that while the country is young, its institutions are comparatively old and have been in continuous operation for impressively long. No, they're not the oldest in the world by a long shot (I think San Marino takes that title) either. The idea of a country is defined by whatever the people who live in it define it to be, but the states and regimes that govern it come and go and are defined by laws and constitutions. And the one governing the United States has been around for longer than most.

[–] Enoril@jlai.lu 37 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Nop, nop nop.

You focused on the notion of state versus nation (what the screenshot talk about).

The nation of France exists since centuries and have never been reset by any war or change of leadership.

We didn't reset our identity as Franc(ais) because we updated our government system (we iterate it several time and will continue probably soon by another version).

Sometime it's monarchy, sometimes it's republic. Depend on what happens to us.

But the nation of Franc(e) started to exists when Clovis Ier merged several kingdoms at around the 500 AD. We learn that in history class when we are young and learn about our history (for those interested: wiki).

Using one of the government iteration of a nation to say: it's no more, let's reset everything is missing the point of the global message.

Does the usa reset when updating its constitution?

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Did you even read the god-damn comment?

The concept of the US as a country is not very old

it's true that there has been a country called "France" for hundreds of years longer than the US

Yes, the notion of France as a country is older than the US. But the French Republic is not. The institutions change, the country endures. The US is a young country but its institutions are surprisingly old. That's the whole fucking point.

[–] Enoril@jlai.lu 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I see your point now. If you focus on the "republic" creation, yes. USA is older than France republic by few years.

But, please, don't tell me the original writer had that in mind. He/she is talking about nation. And, for example, a monarchy (our previous gouvernement state beforethe first republic) is a valid nation definition.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah... I was like, so you think most European countries are less than 100 years old because rulers changed, or some piece of paper changed? WTF?

Certainly a display of American exceptionalism, and education.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

No, I did not say that. I said most European states are very young by comparison. And I made it very clear that this is not the same as saying that the country is very young. The American state is very old; the country is very young. Read more carefully next time.

Edit: While I'm not going to smear an entire country's education system based on the reading comprehension of one person, I do think that your accusation of "American exceptionalism" does get frighteningly close to (or is) an example of reactionary "nobody is special-ism". Every country has interesting history tidbits and is special in its own way and I don't think dismissing things with the thought-terminating label of "American exceptionalism" is particularly fair.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] zloubida@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Small correction in an otherwise very interesting message:

The previous French state (Vichy France) was destroyed by Nazi Germany.

Vichy France is the result of the destruction of the Third Republic by Nazi Germany. But de jure, the Third Republic's constitution was still legitimate until the new constitution of 1946.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] jenesaisquoi@feddit.org 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Switzerland existed continuously since 1291. San Marino since 800 something.

The USA is a child of Europe. Just accept it.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

Nobody denies that the USA is a "child of Europe[an colonisers]". San Marino I concede has institutions which have been longer than those of the USA. But the current iteration of the Swiss Confederation is not (and I refer to the state institutions, not the concept of Switzerland). The Old Swiss Confederacy was destroyed by Napoleon when he invaded and replaced by a so-called "sister republic" which governed Switzerland until his he got rid of it a few years later. What exists today is only as old as the Congress of Vienna, perhaps a little older than that if you consider the time that Diet spent arguing over the constitution.

[–] Taalnazi@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Constitutions don't make a country. People do.

If we're going by constitutions nevertheless, San Marino is older. Even when we go by founding of the country or community living there, San Marino is definitely older.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Constitutions don't make a country. People do.

I agree completely with this which is why I said basically the same thing in my comment. I'm saying that while 250 years old for a country is not very old, going 250 years without suffering some kind of complete collapse in state institutions is pretty long.

[–] doc_dish@lemm.ee 13 points 3 weeks ago

1707 might be a valid date as well since it’s when Scotland and England unified to form the United Kingdom. In either case that is older than 1789.

The 1707 Acts of Union led to the Kingdom of Great Britain. It was the 1800 Acts of Union that led to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

[–] Cris_Color@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Super interesting, thanks for sharing your knowledge!

[–] Enoril@jlai.lu 18 points 3 weeks ago

this answer contains a lot of errors and misconceptions. You shouldn't keep it in memory

[–] el_bhm@lemm.ee 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Oh fuck off. Poland had a form of democracy in the 1300s. Yes along with monarchy.

And fuck the right of with this ussr and russia. Same shit different name. Same imperialists oligarch cancer since ever it existed. Bullies and bootlickers. They are just taking turns to raid their neighbours.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

Did you even read the comment? I said that the US's government institutions are quite old, but the country is young. Yes, there has been a country named "Poland" around for much longer. But Poland has also governed by a succession of states, most not lasting very long (which as you probably know, is related to the actions of the other country you mention). I'm not saying that the idea of the US as a country is old, I'm saying its government institutions are older than usual.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So they never upgrade their old shit you mean?

[–] pressanykeynow@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

States are created by constitutions and laws

But aren't the US laws get changed all the time? The US of 35 years ago is completely different from now. Even the US from a year ago is very much different.

Edit. I also disagree with your whole notion about the states, but it's another question. I mean, by your definition the countries without a constitution do not exist.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Umbrias@beehaw.org 29 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"how old is a country" is almost nonsenscal. Constitutions have dates, countries are continuos fluid things. Ill illustrate with an example: How old is your family? do you go by your oldest relative, your last name, some ancient family tree, or do you go all the way to LUCA? it's nonsensical.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

My family is 12,025 years old, roughly.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Gutek8134@lemmy.world 28 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Wasn't Ancient Egypt thousands of years old?

[–] medgremlin@midwest.social 32 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Ancient Egypt as we think of it had archeologists that studied the original smaller kingdoms that unified to become Egypt. Cleopatra is closer to our time than she was to the building of the Great Pyramids.

And if some dumbass wants to make some kind of argument about the US being a super special first Christian country, they should know that Ethiopia was the first country to declare itself as a Christian nation in the 300's CE....and has been a contiguous sovereign state since then.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee 17 points 3 weeks ago

Ancient Egypt is generally regarded as the unifying to when Rome took over. That's like 3000 BC to somewhere around Caesars time. So like 3000 years they existed in that general form.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)

Yup. Off the top of my head, it goes back to 2000 BCE or something kinda old like that..

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] PyroNeurosis@lemmy.blahaj.zone 24 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

We'll have to get into what makes a 'nation', but the Romanov Dynasty alone was ~300 years old. Political continuity between ruling houses does not denote a new national identity.

[–] meep_launcher@lemm.ee 6 points 2 weeks ago

Are you trying to tell me that the screenshot of some post from some rando who writes super assertively is WRONG!?

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Fun fact: the city I lived in before moving was established in 1776. The one I'm in now is almost a thousand years older. The country is just about the same age as the latter.

[–] RedSnt@feddit.dk 20 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm from Denmark and the history of my city starts like this:

I oldtiden lå der et hedensk kultsted, indtil Roskilde Biskop Svend Nordmand opførte en stenkirke omkring år 1000.

translated means:

In ancient times there was a pagan cult site until Roskilde Bishop Svend Nordmand built a stone church around the year 1000.

It just so happens to be near Trelleborg, an old viking fortress, so the "pagan cult site" was viking settlement, but as it was the catholics that brought the written word, they got to write history.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm from Denmark

Me too! 🤜

[–] RedSnt@feddit.dk 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] ignotum@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago

Me too!
Is probably what i would have said if i was from Denmark

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CherryBullets@lemmy.ca 17 points 2 weeks ago

Why did they have to use the word "nation"? With that word being used, the comment is even more stupid. A nation doesn't have to be a country...

[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Americans are dumb as feces.

[–] I_am_10_squirrels@beehaw.org 7 points 2 weeks ago

Am American, can confirm.

[–] luciole@beehaw.org 13 points 2 weeks ago

New World vs Old World is so real. Am in North America, my love is from Europe. She casually has dusty books older then local archeological sites.

[–] Sophocles@infosec.pub 13 points 2 weeks ago

laughs in Byzantium

[–] KombatWombat@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

ITT: arguments about the Ship of Theseus

every country is a Ship of Theseus at the end of the day.

[–] AbsolutelyNotAVelociraptor@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

removed please, if my country hadn't discovered the land you are living in right now, you wouldn't be a nation. And my country is still there.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

You guys could have chosen a different way to settle in those lands besides going all crazy for gold and wiping out the Aztecs in the process.

While you were doing that, my country was shipping off boats full of horny guys to fuck into existence our own settlements.

Make love, not war!

[–] AbsolutelyNotAVelociraptor@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

And I agree with you. But I am not responsible for what a bunch of assholes did 500 years ago when I wasn't even the idea of a human being. I despise what they did, but I don't feel, and never will, responsible for what they did. I can (and already do) fight for their mistakes to not happen again, but I wasn't there so what they did is not my fault.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 5 points 3 weeks ago

Past mistakes can't be undone. Diferent time, diferent people, diferent way of thinking. I'm on that boat - pun intended - with you. My country started the trans-oceanic slave trade. A lot of bad juju on my ancestors tally, there.

What I do enjoy is joking with the way my country chose to settle on new lands. Most opted for iron and gunpowder, we opted for the go forth and multiply approach. The dutch were thwarted to invade Brazil because the people living there claimed Portuguese descent.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›