Who is the all-time most known (ethnic) Pole?

[Peterski]

Rothaer,

I Google-searched "difference between nation and ethnicity".

Here is the result:

"A nation is generally more overtly political than an ethnic group. A nation has also been defined as a cultural-political community that has become conscious of its existence, autonomy, unity and particular interests."

I think I agree with this explanation.

[rothaer]

Not a DNA test, just the state of being. Just because something is not consciously known doesn't make it irrelevant or untrue.

Agreed. If someone doesn't know his genealogical ancestry to a notable extent, then a DNA test can be helpful. But the relevant facts must still be his genealogical ancestry to a notable extent and not the DNA test result. Otherwise we would inevitable redefine something because there was never before a relevance of the pure facts that a DNA test provides.

if a Pole was adopted into a family of a Germans and grew up identifying and living as German without ever knowing their origins, does that make them ethnic German? Or are they still a Pole fundamentally. I tend to see ethnicity indelibly tied to blood, what other word is there for it? Race I suppose, but that's taken on a broader meaning.

Peterski gave that somewhat tricky to decide example and my eventual answer was that such an individual is neither Pole, nor German, as he fullfills not enough the various ethnicity criteria (common culture, common ancestry (blood), common history, common language, internally being perceived as a member of that ethnicity, externally being perceived as a member of that ethnicity and viewing oneself as part of that ethnicity - not all of these criteria have to be fulfilled though) for any of them.

[Creoda]

Nationality and ethnicity are not the same thing.

His nationality was undisputably Polish, just like in the case of Władysław Anders for example (ethnically German):

Tbh I've always hated the word ethnicity, it's a modern word invented by a French sociologist I believe (of course a French cunt had to muddy the waters of national identity). Nationality and ethnicity should mean the same thing, but we don't live in that world. Copernicus lived in a time before the concept of ethnicity separate to nationality existed, so much of these hair splitting definitions are moot.

[rothaer]

So Germany wasn't a nation before 1871?

I have avoided that term myself as I consider it ambigous and thus unclear as for how it is used. So for a factual exchange I consider it hindering. And as I want to communicate with others I can not ignore how that term is perceived and make it clear by an own definition that others can not relate to.

Therefore I prefer not to answer that question in the terms of nation as it would not enlight anything. There was a German people (etnicity) before 1871 and also a Germany (which is the land that is traditionally German settled) and various Germans states. And all this for abt. 1,200 years.

There is factually nothing more that could be enlighted by speaking about a nation, so when I want to express clearly that term can easily be refrained from.

The difference to an ethnicity is this: someone in Australia or America can be ethnically English or Scottish, but their nationality is Australian or American. Someone like Wayne Rooney can be of English nationality and therefore play for England in international football, but he is mostly Irish ethnically.

I can relate to that usage and at a first glance, however, it confirms my perception about its ambiguity and lack of clarity. But I will re-read your examples a number of times and try to find out whether there is a factual content that is beyond the meaning of ethnicity and citizenship (belonging to a state).

[Peterski]

Nation is basically "political ethnicity" (see above).

There is also an interesting book about this:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=TSL-IYgM8EE

[rothaer]

Rothaer,

I Google-searched "difference between nation and ethnicity".

Here is the result:

"A nation is generally more overtly political than an ethnic group. A nation has also been defined as a cultural-political community that has become conscious of its existence, autonomy, unity and particular interests."

I think I agree with this explanation.

Me too.

But it's a foggy term and I can not yet see what its usage yields beside comparably clear terms like ethnicity and citizenship (belonging to a state). I've actually since long refrained from its usage in favour of expressing and being understood clearly.

[Peterski]

But it's a foggy term and I can not yet see what its usage yields beside comparably clear terms like ethnicity and citizenship (belonging to a state). I've actually since long refrained from its usage in favour of expressing and being understood clearly.

It is not foggy, at least not compared to ethnicity (which is equally foggy).

I already explained above that nation is basically "political ethnicity".

Nation is not tied to citizenship because there exist also stateless nations (e.g. Poles 1795-1918, Jews before Israel, Kurds today, etc.).

[rothaer]

Tbh I've always hated the word ethnicity, it's a modern word invented by a French sociologist I believe (of course a French cunt had to muddy the waters of national identity). Nationality and ethnicity should mean the same thing, but we don't live in that world. Copernicus lived in a time before the concept of ethnicity separate to nationality existed, so much of these hair splitting definitions are moot.

A surprising to me take on that.

I agree on that nationality (natio = birth) in older usage equalled what is today called ethnicity. But I guesss you will agree on the fact that today nationality is also used for expressing the citizenship. And after these different usages to my perception are abt. on peer, that term is spoiled for any clear communication. But the other two terms are not (yet), regardless of which cunt did what.

[Peterski]

[Creoda]

A surprising to me take on that.

I agree on that nationality (natio = birth) in older usage equalled what is today called ethnicity. But I guesss you will agree on the fact that today nationality is also used for expressing the citizenship. And after these different usages to my perception are abt. on peer, that term is spoiled for any clear communication. But the other two terms are not (yet), regardless of which cunt did what.

I would agree that nationality is used to express citizenship generally, but in some cases not. The concepts of nation and nationalism however are usually expressed as independent of state/citizenship. A nation doesn't just come into being or cease to exist at the stroke of a pen. The Irish state wouldn't have come to exist in 1921 if not for the pre-existing reality of the Irish nation that forced it.

Ethnicity may seem more clear (if not for the fact that it confused national identity, so we have to have some bs distinction between ethnic and civil nationalism), but it has no political connotation; it's divorcing the people from the state named after them, exactly what the anti-white elites want.

Citizenship may be clear now but the funny thing is that until the 1980s everyone in the UK/British Empire was officially a subject, not a citizen.