Re: Re: Lombardy and the Lombards

I understand that dialogue is important, and from different perspectives. Those of Northern Italian descent are maybe only 10% of the total of “Italian-Americans,” and if you discluded California, then it would be much less than that. So, therefore, the pathologies of Mezzogiorno-descended people are unfairly attached to us. In other words, we are cheated out of who we really are. That is the reason for utilizing the name “Padanian,” as an identity. Perhaps a description like “Lombardo-Venetian,” would make sense, except for the fact that someone would feel left out.

Locally, there is a well-organized “Piemontesi nel Mondo,” and a “Tuscany Club of California.” There’s a “Lucchesi nel Mondo” and a “Ligure Club.” Old regional loyalties are still ingrained, and those people are the great majority over us. They do not see themselves as “Lombard,” which they only attach to “Lombardia.” It’s not really important, pragmatically, whether or not “Padania” was ever unified, as it offers at least a catch-all term to use. The LN flag is not used, as you see. Additionally, the accepted norm here is still “Italian-American.”

We’re all the products of where we live. Because “Italians” here are descended from mostly the north, and are from all over “Italy,” the safe feeling is to just say “we’re all united,” rather than accept the fact that this dynamic ONLY exists here in this small part of America, and NOT elsewhere. In Italy, it may well be more reasonable to have a different name, like the “Union of Tuscan-Lombard States,” but here there are different obstacles to face. A catch-all name becomes important.

.