In Austria, we have a movement advocating for the secession of our westernmost province, Vorarlberg—either to join Switzerland or to strike out on its own. Predictably, the voices in Vienna (where I live) recoil in horror and immediately produce a colorful assortment of reasons why this is unthinkable, impossible, unconstitutional, immoral, economically disastrous, or otherwise forbidden by the sacred texts of the republic.
I very much doubt there is a real majority for this idea in Vorarlberg itself. Secession talk often sounds louder from afar than it does on the ground. But if there were a clear majority? Personally, I would wave them goodbye without theatrics. Why on earth should anyone be forced to remain in a country they no longer want to belong to?
There is, of course, a condition—an unfashionable one. All the advantages that came with membership must evaporate along with the membership itself. You don’t get to keep the benefits while rejecting the structure that produced them. No cherry-picking. No sentimental aftercare package.
History is quite clear on this. Scotland accepted the Union with England because the empire offered a stage on which Scots could rise far beyond what a small, isolated polity could provide at the time. That was a trade. Like all trades, it came with costs and benefits, neither of which can be retroactively edited out.
The same principle applies elsewhere. Greenlanders alone should decide whether they want to remain, leave, or stand entirely on their own. But whichever option they choose, they should also carry the full weight of that choice—economically, politically, and strategically. Independence is not a vibe. It is a balance sheet.
Self-determination is meaningful only when paired with responsibility. Anything else is just cosplay with flags.
