I did not know where to post this and decided on here.
Has anyone heard of the Neo-Bourbon movement?
(Part of there English website is here)
As Catholics, obviously we want peace in the world. For this very reason of wanting peace, should we support secessionist movements like this, or oppose it? Your opinions?

Haven’t heard of it; but I’ve heard of it now.
I could use a little neo-bourbon myself.

Until 1860, the citizens of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies were respected and esteemed in all the world beacuse they were citizens of an ancient and prestigious kingdom - the kingdom of the Normans, the Swabians, the Anjous, and the Aragons. We are respected and esteemed because we were subjects of a king that belonged to the Bourbon dynasty - an ancient dynasty but one capable of governing with wisdom and love.

Upon all of this is the unbearable weight of the destruction of our historical consciousness, of our culture, of our traditions,and of our identity - the pain of the destruction of our white flags with gold fleurs-de-lis, our national anthem, and of all the symbols that were respected by the ancient and glorious Neapolitan nation.

I’m sure the Lega Nord (a real Italian political party with members in ‘La Camera dei deputati’ - the Italian equivalent of the House of Representatives) welcome the idea - their policy, briefly, is to ‘dump’ the south of Italy which it considers a criminal (in more ways than one) waste.

I don’t know a thing about Italy or its politics.

I do know that it was a great nation - bringing the Catholic community art and music.

The fact that they had a Bourbon King would seem to indicate that they were a part of Western European and proud of it so I don’t understand a secessionist movement.

So the south has some problems, Italy is still a great nation.

The point of Neo-Bourbonism is that the north is abusing the south and that the south wants to be free from the north,** not **that the south has problems.

My impression is that the north is not all that taken with the south either.

There are sessionist movements everywhere in which small entities seek to remove themselves from the aegis of larger states. A few examples: In Hawaii separatists want to take the islands from the United States and give them back to Native Hawaiians; Tibetans want an autonomous state of their own; in the 90’s Quebec had a referendum prompted by separatists (it didn’t pass); the League of the South hasn’t got over the Civil War yet and wants to establish a southern state consisting of the old states of the confederacy. Some of the efforts are successful. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, various states got their autonomy back such as Georgia, Estonia, Ukraine. However, East Germany dissolved and was united again with West Germany.

All of these movements are supported by myths about how wonderful things were in the past and how bad things are now. The Neo-Bourbon story is typical. All this just reflects human nature.

As Kaninchen will tell you (as she seems to know more than me on this subject) Italy in any sense is a realtively modern collection of previous states glued together over time and in a variety of circumstances. Saying Italy gave the world great art and music etc. would be true in the sense that states that were once independent and now form the entity we call Italy did so. But it would also be untrue as at the time much of that art and music was been produced the areas it was been made in would not have seen themselves as Italian in the sense we use the word.

This is true, and the “glueing together” didn’t occur that long ago.

I think I’d count as a Italophile (to say the least) - il “bel paese là dove 'l sì sona” won me over as a child.

You’re right about Italy being a reasonably recent creation - though in terms of allegiances it’s really more ‘campanilismo’ (attachment to one’s own ‘church tower’ - locality counts very strongly) rather than the regionalism you get in other European countries.

Even the language is something of a fabrication - the differences between the dialects were such that they could be mutually incomprehensible. With unification in the 19th century the dialect of Tuscany was adopted as the ‘norm’ and the basis of Italian as we now know it.

Interesting - as it stands I could be viewed as something of a seperatist given my own political outlook but I am beginning to come around to T.H. White’s argument that taken past a certain point seperatism or nationalism makes us all into a pack of monkeys throwing bananas at each other from various trees. The north/south divide is there in a lot of countries - although sometimes it’s reversed, where in the UK the north is seen as the poorer, more rund-down part of Britain (although no-ones yet seriously suggested secession) in my home country of Ireland for years the Irish republic was the run-down bit, although that’s ironically reversed itself now.

Really most of the nation states we see in Europe are relatively recent creations even those that sometimes appear to be older. Germany is for example a very recent creation historically speaking as well to cite an example.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit