this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
208 points (96.8% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35393 readers
6 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This godforsaken country is introducing the bill that allows to strip people of birth-given russian citizenship for some things - like desertion and discreditation of army (which happens every time you question war)

So, my question, if someone loses all citizenship, what happens next? Is their life basically over? Is there a way to re-gain citizenship (like, in another country)? Can they be deported?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 88 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I honestly don't know, I remember someone got trapped at an airport once because their country stopped existing while they were there

[–] [email protected] 86 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tom Hanks made a documentary about it.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Are you talking about The Terminal? Unless he made a second movie about the same guy, the word"documentary" seems like a stretch.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 year ago

I think they are using the term documentary as a joke.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I think they were making the type of joke where people will call movies "documentaries" when they're really "fiction that can kind of almost be attributed to real events"

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is so infuriating. The country didn't disappear overnight. The land is still there, they could have sent him back. Even if the country was nuked to ashes, they could just accept him as a political refugee.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

didn't some poor cosmonaut get trapped in space because his country stopped existing whilst he was up there?

edit: sergei krikalev

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It was someone suffering from a mental illness or personality disorder. They went out of their way to be stuck at the airport. Refused help from family, refused help from a reporter who actually went through the trouble of proving his citizenship. He wanted to be at that airport and live that life.

[–] [email protected] 86 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You become stateless, and it’s a legal nightmare. Most countries won’t deport you, because they have nowhere to deport you to. But some countries like Australia will detain you until you get citizenship elsewhere. Sort of a catch-22, where you need to apply for citizenship to get out of prison, but can’t because no country wants to grant you citizenship because you’re in prison. The act of being stateless in itself isn’t a crime, but living somewhere without a visa is, and some countries (like Australia) don’t automatically grant visas to stateless people without some other reason like a refugee application.

Prior to the 60’s, it used to be much more common, because most countries use a legal concept called Jus Sanguinis, which basically means that citizenship gets passed from parents to children via birth. America, on the other hand, uses something called Jus Soli, which grants citizenship based on you being born in the country. But if the parents aren’t eligible to pass their citizenship on and the country they’re in doesn’t practice Jus Soli, then the child would be stateless. Back in the 60’s, most Jus Sanguinis countries agreed at a convention to provide emergency citizenship to individuals who would otherwise be born stateless.

These days, the largest causes are typically financial/records keeping issues in third world countries, or are due to politics like you’re describing. In the former, imagine a Jus Sanguinis country where you need to prove who your parents are. But they don’t have copies of their birth certificates or your birth certificate, and you don’t have money to get new ones. There’s also an administrative fee when you try to file the paperwork, and you can’t afford it. In the latter, it’s often due to good old fashioned racism. Certain ethnic groups being denied citizenship (like the Uyghur Muslims in China, or the Koreans in Japan following world war 2.) It’s also commonly due to authoritarian governments stripping citizenship for arbitrary reasons like you’ve mentioned. Russia isn’t the first to strip citizenship; It’s also common in parts of the Middle East.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

America, on the other hand, uses something called Jus Soli, which grants citizenship based on you being born in the country.

I would clarify this from "America" to "most of the New World".

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

Dude this is sick! I've grown up my whole life in the US and never realized how many other countries do this. Wikipedia has an incredible map: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli

[–] [email protected] 83 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Asia and the Pacific - 1.582 million registered

Africa - 715,089 registered

Europe - 570,534 registered

Middle East and North Africa - 372,461 registered

Americas - 2,460 registered

These are really interesting numbers, I wonder if it has to do with immigration policies

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

A lot of it has to do with racism and not allowing full citizenship rights to minority groups.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Example of the above:

In the lead up to the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar, the government published a formal list of every recognized ethnic group in the country to specifically exclude the Rohingya. This allowed them to paint the group as “illegal immigrants from Bangladesh” (despite having been in the country for centuries), remove their citizenship and thus their rights to education and work.

Link about the 1982 citizenship law: https://burmacampaign.org.uk/media/Myanmar’s-1982-Citizenship-Law-and-Rohingya.pdf

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

A huge reason I'd assume is soviet occupants in post-soviet countries. Correct me if I'm wrong here, many of Russians from soviet era living in Baltics with no Russian citizenship and haven't applied and passed local citizenship, are stateless. This is due to requirements like knowing the local language

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Okay, my initial reading of these numbers were that the Americas must be shit at accepting people, then I did a short wiki dive and it has this:

Jus soli in many cases helps prevent statelessness.[11] Countries that have acceded to the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness are obligated to grant nationality to people born in their territory who would otherwise become stateless persons.[12][a] The American Convention on Human Rights similarly provides that "Every person has the right to the nationality of the state in whose territory he was born if he does not have the right to any other nationality."[11]

And now I'm thinking maybe the numbers are so low in a good way?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

That was a good read

[–] [email protected] 58 points 1 year ago

Wait, you are trans and in Russia? That seems like reason enough to flee, I wouldn‘t wait until they become aware enough of you to strip your citizenship. Maybe Finland would be ok: https://en.seta.fi/human-rights-support/asylum-for-the-lgbt-and-activists/

Good luck, I hope you will be safe.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You should still be able to apply for refugee, asylum, permanent residency, or citizenship in other places. Whether or not that's realustica and feasible is another issue, but legally, you're fine: Your citizenship status at home won't affect your ability to seek a new home.

[–] ICastFist 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I suspect the best bet at the moment would be trying to ask Finland for asylum, since they're not allied with Russia. Getting within their territory might be challenging, though, as I suspect they'll require identification and/or outright block Russians from entering. Also, I have no idea how to proceed once within a different country. Maybe one of the baltic states might also work?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

or outright block Russians from entering

If you've been stripped of citizenship for opposing the war, are you still Russian?

Obviously that's semantics, and what matters will be whether Finland still considers you Russian, but I think it would be in their benefit to allow entry to former Russians who are explicitly opposed to Russia's bullshit

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I bet even if they tried to deport you, they wouldn't know where to, since you technically don't have a home country

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago

Russia is not part of the UN convention that forbids making a person stateless, but I don’t think that would have mattered anyway.

As a stateless person, you can seek asylum in almost any European country.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago

Found this article from a US gov't site that talks a lot about this, kind of interesting to read.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago

You can get Brazilian citizenship if you are statelessness, here's an article about it . Iirc, you can do this from anywhere on the world, but doing it from inside brazillian territory would make it easier.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What happens is that you become a stateless person, just like the Palestinians once where. I can't speak for Russian law.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

Many palestinians are still stateless world wide around 5 million persons.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

That's still true for a lot of druze I the Golan heights, and while it doesn't have a drastic effect on their daily lives, traveling abroad is an absolute nightmare

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

If your home country revokes your rights as a citizen, I would imagine that it gives you justification to claim refugee status with the UN.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

God, I honestly hope they revoke mine. Come what may, I don't think the general opinion about Russians will change any time soon.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Once I can get citizenship in another country, I'm gonna publically burn my russian passport - but not earlier

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I'd advise against it if purely for ease of life in your new home country. Some, like UK require you to still have dealings with your previous country.

For example if i want to change my surname to my wifes name, home office demanded that i change the surname in my original passport first. They even say that if you need to physically go to your country of origin to do so, you have to unless they will kill you (for example persecution of LGBT). But i donno what kind of proof they would need to support this claim.

I have a strong suspicion that "burned my passport as a statement" would not qualify, even if it means supporting a terrorist state with cash (because consular services are paid by cash in 3rd world countries.)

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You'll want to read up on Shamima Begum. She's currently stateless right now. Here's another article from Time if you want more information. Though her case is a bit different since she's a terrorist

[–] tram1 5 points 1 year ago

What happens is The Terminal, staring Tom Hanks :P

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Why should life be over?

There are just some rights that you don't have anymore. Some duties, too.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They did not want to think it through for they didn't care.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

International human rights organizations

Maybe be comw a fugitive and leave

load more comments
view more: next ›