Is this the first last artificial country in the world?

Belgian here. Last time I checked we became independent before Israel.
Also as long as our government manages to be stable, why'd you call it artificial? Because it was recently formed? Because other countries played a role in defining the borders? Even so, our culture was also accounted for (even if e did get stuck with the french part, we'd no sooner join the dutchies).

This is just my humble opinion but a country comes from a common culture and shared history. Usually started from a tribe with a certain way of life getting organised putting on boundaries by war in the old times to defend the territorium that provides food and shelter to live on.

Because you can draw a line and people on one side speak a dialect of the language of one of your neighboring countries, and people on the other side of the line speak the language of another neighboring country.

How is Moldova artificial? It's arguably just part of Romania that broke away, but it's no different to say, Montenegro

Common culture and shared history is relative and not an objective criteria. If an ethnic group begins a massive migration like that of the Germanic groups in the late Roman Empire, where is their country? What if new people move into those old territories? Is it their land now?

This is patently false. The Swiss speak French, German, and Italian. The Chinese speak Mandarin, Cantonese, and a myriad of other languages. The Russian Federation consists of dozens of special republics that have their own official languages, yet the Russian Federation is popularly considered to be its own country.

The point is the difference is ultimately arbitrary.

so, like Switzerland?

From my studies I recall flanders actually fighting a war of independence after 1830 but were invaded by the French imperial army and then subjegated which led to the French language being implemented and the Dutch/north part being oppressed for a couple of years.

>Common culture and shared history is relative

I do not think its relative compared that your neighbords are a static given and only change overtime as you change in your own cultlure.

The roman empire was dissolved after the invasion of the Visigoths. Same with the Vandals who invaded north africa part of them went back to Europe and few stayed behind for whatever reason they have undoublty adapting to local culture.

I would like to bring the point of argument that when provinces were ruled by a prince who was considered foreign they either had to be bought off or had a huge army present to intimidate.

Even the Hellenic invasion of Rome didn't go smooth altough you could say their culture was interchangeable.

Sparta never allowed any foreigners on their territory nor any traders to stay too long because they considered this a threath which later let to a war with the state of Athens.

What do you mean, the Flemish fighting for Flemish independence immediately after 1830?
>French language being implemented and the Dutch/north part being oppressed for a couple of years.
It was almost a century

The Belgian Revolution was not well supported in Flanders and even on the 4th of October 1830, when the Belgian independence was eventually declared, Flemish authorities refused to take orders from the new Belgian government in Brussels.[citation needed] Only after Flanders was subdued with the aid of a large French military force one month later, under the leadership of the Count de Pontécoulant, Flanders became a true part of Belgium. The situation with the province of Limburg remained unclear until 1839, when it was finally split between the Netherlands and Belgium.

You know the first independence war.

do you guys feel more Belgian or more Wallon/Flemish/Kraut

The first time i'm hearing of this
>[citation needed]
hmmm...

Common culture and shared history is only a recently adopted historiographical perspective.
What about the Dutch and the Germans? Or the Franks that became the French? Culture diverges over time and its boundaries are never entirely clear. Is Provence closer in culture to Catalonia than it is to the Ile de France? If so, why is it under the crown of France?

Arguably, the Roman Empire didn't collapse until 1453. You can't say the Byzantine claim didn't have legitimacy.

The Spartans considered themselves to be ethnically Dorians, which is the same Corinth and Syracuse. They absolutely allowed traders, they just didn't allow the Spartiates to participate, and the Spartiates were always a minority compared to the perioikoi.

I can only speak for myself but i feel more Flemish
The kraut part is a WWI meme by the way, with no relevancy whatsoever

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Flanders

It's down at the "Kingdom of Belgum"

I do renember this being mentioned in class too hence I made this thread.

As much as I love to keep discussing with you I am going off to bed but thank you for your perspective!

No mention of this on the Dutch page
Don't get me wrong as it sounds fairly plausible, but it's the first time i'm reading about this and the source is a bit questionable

belgium will always be france's back door to me

France will always a nigger infested socialist hellhole to me