I am curious about the apparent tension between the Flemish and Walloon peoples of Belgium. I know that recently, both regions of the country have been granted greater autonomy. Is it simply that they are different peoples, with langauge and customs distinct from one another, and therefore wishing to establish their own states? Or are there examples of cruelty, poor treatment, or discrimination towards one another in the distant and/or recent past that have made it desirable for them to split apart from one another?

Belgium is an artificial state carved out of Netherlands in 1830 after French agents instigated a separatist revolt in Brussels by the Walloons. The majority of the people were Dutch speaking Flemings but they were ruled by the French speaking minority.

After WWII a new constitution system gave the minority veto powers over any change in the political system.

Then nannystate socialism came into play with large transfers of wealth moving away from Flemish to the industrial Wallonia regions. Flanders annually paying 10 per cent of its gross regional product to Wallonia. So yes there is regional tension brought about by a governmental system designed by the Francofiles to keep the 2 regions at odds against each other and to exploit the Flemish .

Anyway with 6 million Dutch-speaking Flemings in the North, 3 million French-Speaking Walloons in the South,
70,000 Germans in nine Eastern municipalities ;a combination of all in Brussels ,the EU emasculating the notion of nationhood in Europe , and a Muslim invasion to boot ; can Belgium still be a country in anything but name? What I find refreshing is that so many subcultures in Europe are claiming autonomy.

Thank you tom. All this time I though it all started over a stolen pig.