And for our non-British readers ...

[Wintereis]

Oh no, we are neither united nor one Kingdom. Disorganisation tends to come with a thousand-ish years of history.

Then how, in the nineteenth century, did the Kingdoms of Italy simplify themselves by nationalizing or the separate German states for that matter? The United States, in all its youth and vigor, managed to simplify itself not but sixty some years ago when the last two remaining organized incorporated territories became States. Now we only have organized and unorganized territories and, of course, States. So, why does it stand to reason that over time a nation's holdings must become more complicated? I think it has more to do with the U.K.'s particular brand of Imperialism and, when it was declining, its unwillingness to let said Imperialism go.
I imagine, in this respect, Britain is much like the former U.S.S.R. The geography and politics of the region suddenly became far more convoluted after the fall of the Soviet Union. They are still arguing over territory.

After all, the British have always been far more proud of that history than Americans. Indeed, we like to pretend their is absolutely nothing Imperialistic about the historical and contemporary United States. If one were to say the The Empire of the United States, most people would give you the oddest looks. But it is there none the less. I guess our brand of Imperialism is more of the "Love 'Em and leave 'Em" type instead of the "are you sure you want to leave me? Can't we still be friends . . . PLEASE?" type. Just ask our Filipino friend.

[The Virgin]

all this geography talk makes me kind of dizzy hehe

[fredv3b]

Then how, in the nineteenth century, did the Kingdoms of Italy simplify themselves by nationalizing or the separate German states for that matter?

I wrote 'tends' I wasn't suggesting an absolute rule. With reference to your above examples, I believe (though I could be wrong) that the initial unified Germany and Italy had significant internal complexities which were only later regularised partly through invasion and revolution.

I think it has more to do with the U.K.'s particular brand of Imperialism and, when it was declining, its unwillingness to let said Imperialism go.

While that is undoubtedly true, it doesn't explain the complexities of Britain itself. I once read that England is geographically divided up in over 100 different official ways.

I guess our brand of Imperialism is more of the "Love 'Em and leave 'Em" type instead of the "are you sure you want to leave me? Can't we still be friends . . . PLEASE?" type. Just ask our Filipino friend.

I never thought of comparing British Imperialism with de facto American Imperialism like that, a fascinating insight.

[marshlander]

why are there so many countries? can't we just trim them down into like, 50 all throughout the world? like presently, we can merge 5-7 countries as one. i hope that would happen someday.

That just has to be the nuttiest idea ...!!! Have you ever heard of a little area often known as the Middle East?

[The Virgin]

well hehe.. yeah.. i've heard of middle east..hehe.. can we also make one for europe like northern, central europe? or in america like north america or south america?

[marshlander]

well hehe.. yeah.. i've heard of middle east..hehe.. can we also make one for europe like northern, central europe? or in america like north america or south america?

I think you may have missed my point. Sorry :redface:

[The Virgin]

well, hehe.. i really suck at geography so no need to apologize..hehe