Who is European?

[Angantyr]

We have a thread as to who is white. But more importantly, who is a true European?

One obvious criterion would be that a person or his ancestors are located in Europe. This would include most commonly accepted Europeans, as well as Albanians, Tatars, most Caucasian peoples, and, depending on where one places the boundary of Europe, the Armenians and Georgians.

A second potential criterion would be following a European faith (or lack thereof), such as Christianity, European Paganism, Atheism, Agnosticism. But, it would exclude people following non-European belief systems, such as Islam, Buddhism or Hinduism. This would exclude Tatars, some Albanians, some southern Slavs such as Bosnians, who have accepted Islam, and many but not all people of the Caucasus. I note here that someone chose Hinduism as his religion on a thread about what religion do you follow.

Related to beleifs, is there a psychological component? Can a person said to be acting white? Is a douchbag liberal who is selling out his own people still European if all known ancestors are from Europe?

Would language be a deciding criterion? Are only those speaking a Indo-European, Basque, Finno-Ugric language European. This would include the Armenians, but not the Gerogians. It would include the Albanians. This would exclude the Maltese, who speak a dialect of Arabic, a Semitic language. It would also exclude all Turkic peoples. This would exclude some, but not all Caucasians, as the Ossete speak an Indo-European language. Moreover, on its own, this would include Iranians and East Indians, who would obviously be excluded for other reasons.

We then come to genetics. Would a European have to belong to a specific haplogroup? Or at least would his nationality have to belong in the majority to an indigenous European haplogroup, such as R1a, R1b, I1, I2 and N? This would exclude most Maltese, Greeks and Albanians and a significant chunk of southern Slavs, southern Italians and others. Heck, this criterion and only this criterion would exclude me as I belong to G2, a Caucasian group.

How about proceeding right to the genome to answer the question. Over 95% of Europeans are homozygous for the A allele at rs1426654. The remainder are heterozygous, or homozygous G, which is fixed on Asian, African, Amerindian and all other populations. Using rs1426654, rs2555364, rs16960620, it is possible to categorize the ancestry of a person as either European, African, Asian or mixed with significant accuracy.

Most of us necessarily use visible phenotype to make a decision about being a European. Would the presence of an epicanthic fold be an issue? Or would we exclude those whose skin is of a certain darkness? Or could we use some other anthropometric basis, many of which are hard to describe, but we can all recognize an East Indian when we see one without any actual measuring.

Would we have to include history? The Maltese are just Christianized Arabs, as the Albanians are Islamized Europeans. The Turks were a small asiatic elite that assimilated many Indo-European peoples in Anatolia, such as Hittites, Lydians, Galicians and Greeks.

Or is being European something ineffable? Something we all know in our hearts?

Perhaps, an answer to this question will settle a whole lot of other questions.

[Vargtand]

I'm not, I'm Scandinavian!

[Óttar]

The Maltese are just Christianized Arabs, as the Albanians are Islamized Europeans.

Speaking Arabic (or a language descended from Siculo-Arabic for that matter) does not make one an Arab. Lovers in southern Spain would write letters to one another in a language using Arabic script.

Secondly there were IE Buddhists and some ancient Greeks who adopted Hindu Dharma. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliodorus_pillar

This large post IMO is a broad attempt to establish some kind of Council of Chalcedon or Nicaea, and I fear that we may be headed in a Skadite direction with this spontaneous trend toward centralization.

[Angantyr]

Speaking Arabic (or a language descended from Siculo-Arabic for that matter) does not make one an Arab. Lovers in southern Spain would write letters to one another in a language using Arabic script.

Secondly there were IE Buddhists and some ancient Greeks who adopted Hindu Dharma. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliodorus_pillar

This large post IMO is a broad attempt to establish some kind of Council of Chalcedon or Nicaea, and I fear that we may be headed in a Skadite direction with this spontaneous trend toward centralization.

The Arabs certainly conquered Malta and stayed. And left an indelible mark linguistically and genetically. Moreover, if an ethnicity's native language being Semitic does not make the ethnicity Semitic, what does? Are Turks Turkic, or are the simply Aegeans who speak Turkish?

So, some ancient Greeks adopted Hindu Dharma. Some Germans have converted to Islam. These are personal choices. This does not make Hinduism or Islam European religions.

The truth of the matter is that I am hardly Skadite. I accept a rather braod definition of European that would include Albanian and Maltese and Armenian. There might even be a secular Europid Turkophone out there who would not offend my sensibilities. Although I would not want my daughter to marry an Albanian or a Maltese or a Turk, or any swarthy person for that matter as I want my descendants to ressemble me as I ressemble my ancestors with pale skin, light eyes and blond or red hair. Nor would I encourage immigration from any European border areas.

[Goidelic]

Speaking Arabic (or a language descended from Siculo-Arabic for that matter) does not make one an Arab. Lovers in southern Spain would write letters to one another in a language using Arabic script.

Secondly there were IE Buddhists and some ancient Greeks who adopted Hindu Dharma. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliodorus_pillar

This large post IMO is a broad attempt to establish some kind of Council of Chalcedon or Nicaea, and I fear that we may be headed in a Skadite direction with this spontaneous trend toward centralization.

Most of the Maltese aren't Arabic, though some have such Arabic admixture present in the population along with North African. I'd question the racial validity of an dark Maltese or Sicilian, more so than an dark Albanian, because they vary a lot due to Southern Euro Island populations.

[Beorn]

http://www.greece-map.net/europe/europe-map.gif


With the exception of Turkey and perhaps arguably a few other border countries, the above is Europe.

All people of European stock who live inside Europe are Europeans, and those who don't are not. (or are European descended at least).

It should also be noted this subject has been tackled to some degree in this thread: So where do you consider Europe? (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=351&highlight=europe%3F)

[Goidelic]

The Arabs certainly conquered Malta and stayed. And left an indelible mark linguistically and genetically. Moreover, if an ethnicity's native language being Semitic does not make the ethnicity Semitic, what does? Are Turks Turkic, or are the simply Aegeans who speak Turkish?

So, some ancient Greeks adopted Hindu Dharma. Some Germans have converted to Islam. These are personal choices. This does not make Hinduism or Islam European religions.

The truth of the matter is that I am hardly Skadite. I accept a rather braod definition of European that would include Albanian and Maltese and Armenian. There might even be a secular Europid Turkophone out there who would not offend my sensibilities. Although I would not want my daughter to marry an Albanian or a Maltese or a Turk, or any swarthy person for that matter as I want my descendants to ressemble me as I ressemble my ancestors with pale skin, light eyes and blond or red hair. Nor would I encourage immigration from any European border areas.

Here's where I disagree, any Albanian is genetically and culturally more European than any Armenian or other Caucasus nation, how many Balkan Dinarids, Pontids and Balkan Alpinoids are in Armenia and the Caucasus? There are Russian and German diaspora immigrants living in Armenia since the 19th century, so some have mixed with such immigrants. The Caucasus nation's show many South/Central Asian links in their genomes, they sometimes end up in the heart of the Middle East cluster, but most don't, whereas most Albanians don't have such South/Central Asian links and have assimilated into the larger Balkanic stock gene pool.

Maltese are basically Southern Europeans, similar to Sicilians, Calabrians and other Southern Italians.

Turks come in all shapes and sizes, you never know what you're gonna get, besides the European part of Turkey is full of many assimilated Balkanics who genetically are very similar to Greeks, Bulgarians, Albanians and some Serbs this day and age, still Turks aren't European. 97% part of Asia.

[Psychonaut]

http://www.greece-map.net/europe/europe-map.gif

I don't consider Azerbaijan, Armenia, etc. to be European at all.

[Beorn]

I don't consider Azerbaijan, Armenia, etc. to be European at all.

Which is why I said "arguably" :)

[Jägerstaffel]

I'm not, I'm Scandinavian!

European?

Me neither apparently.

[Guapo]

European?

Yes you are.

By the way, according to The Union of European Football Associations Israel is part of Europe :D

[Rhobot]

Here's where I disagree, any Albanian is genetically and culturally more European than any Armenian or other Caucasus nation, how many Balkan Dinarids, Pontids and Balkan Alpinoids are in Armenia and the Caucasus? There are Russian and German diaspora immigrants living in Armenia since the 19th century, so some have mixed with such immigrants. The Caucasus nation's show many South/Central Asian links in their genomes, they sometimes end up in the heart of the Middle East cluster, but most don't, whereas most Albanians don't have such South/Central Asian links and have assimilated into the larger Balkanic stock gene pool.

Maltese are basically Southern Europeans, similar to Sicilians, Calabrians and other Southern Italians.

Turks come in all shapes and sizes, you never know what you're gonna get, besides the European part of Turkey is full of many assimilated Balkanics who genetically are very similar to Greeks, Bulgarians, Albanians and some Serbs this day and age, still Turks aren't European. 97% part of Asia.

I don't think there are many Russians or Germans in Armenia. Those that are there do not intermarry with the native population (some of them are members of religious sects like Molokans). Armenia and Georgia are not strictly speaking European, but they are more so than Azerbaijan.
Azerbaijan is culturally, linguistically, religiously Middle Eastern, far more so than either Armenia or Georgia.

[Brännvin]

Yes you are.

By the way, according to The Union of European Football Associations Israel is part of Europe :D


Anything is european on now days, I'm just waiting for some decades to the Maghreb to be part of Europe ;) :D

[Guapo]

Anything is european on now days, I'm just waiting for some decades to the Maghreb to be part of Europe ;) :D

of course it's all politics.They can't be in the AFC and play teams like Iran ;)

[Goidelic]

I don't think there are many Russians or Germans in Armenia. Those that are there do not intermarry with the native population (some of them are members of religious sects like Molokans). Armenia and Georgia are not strictly speaking European, but they are more so than Azerbaijan.
Azerbaijan is culturally, linguistically, religiously Middle Eastern, far more so than either Armenia or Georgia.

Yeah, but all of the Caucasus region shows many South/Central Asian genome links. They can be culturally as European as it gets, but their genome's fail to be up to European standards.

[Creeping Death]

We have a thread as to who is white. But more importantly, who is a true European?
I really cant relate to a lot of other Europeans in different areas of the continent, I wasnt born in Europe but I have lived there twice in my life, my parents immigrated from there. I am North European I feel at home with Scandinavians, Poles, Baltics, Irish, Dutch, German etc. But I grew up within the immigrant Irish community and I am more happier with them those are my people. Greeks and Southern Europeans as well as East Europeans are dark skinned with Brown eyes and Black hair something that I cant see as a European trait a lot of the Southern Italians I knew as a child hung around Lebanese. True Europeans in my eyes would be North Europeans light skin and light or red hair.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

I really cant relate to a lot of other Europeans in different areas of the continent, I wasnt born in Europe but I have lived there twice in my life, my parents immigrated from there. I am North European I feel at home with Scandinavians, Poles, Baltics, Irish, Dutch, German etc. But I grew up within the immigrant Irish community and I am more happier with them, those are my people.

Interesting.
In a place like Johannesburg,the "immigrants" are like birds of a feather.........
They stick more together than with the South African English or Afrikaner.
I have never found a reason than only" Soulfulness " for lack of a better word.

[Creeping Death]

Interesting.
In a place like Johannesburg,the "immigrants" are like birds of a feather.........
They stick more together than with the South African English or Afrikaner.
I have never found a reason than only" Soulfulness " for lack of a better word.
My parents immigrated from Ireland we all went to Roman Catholic Schools with mostly Irish kids with Poles and Italians as well. My parents mixed with other Irish parents so I am more inclined to the Irish side but in our neighbourhood we had Scandinavian and Baltic kids, just what I am comfortable with.

[Loki]

A good way to measure: if someone considers a kebab as one of their own ethnic cuisine dishes, then it's a "no".

[Tabiti]

Europeid, surrounded by other Europeids, with Europeid parents, behaving like European (no religious extremism, descent IQ level and so) and living within the borders of Europe (excluding European parts of Turkey).

P.S. We discussed that thousands of times.

[Absinthe]

P.S. We discussed that thousands of times.

Yes! ;)

And thinking that I've been on the forum since 2004, I am kind of tired of this constant sense of deja-vu... :cool: I really can't stand another of those "who is white/who is Aryan" discussions... :)

[Poltergeist]

This discussion is being repeating itself for one thousand times, on various nationalist fora for the last several years.

[Beorn]

A good way to measure: if someone considers a kebab as one of their own ethnic cuisine dishes, then it's a "no".

The British go ever so close to that definition then. ;):D

[Tabiti]

The British go ever so close to that definition then. ;):D
What about Kebab lovers?:rolleyes:
The ones that are not disgusted by Kebab's makers and their hygiene seem to find their ethnicity close to their own. The same goes for black music Europeid fans...

[Angantyr]

My intent with this post was quite different. It was with a view to developing clear, fair and agreed upon rules for who can register as a European at this forum. I read all the posts about banning Tonsor, which was too narrow and personal. I also read all the posts about Albanians, which though more encompassing, failed to deal with all the possibilities and instead raised specific ethnic hostilities between Albania and its neighbours.

What if we get an Armenian who wants to join? Do we go through with this process once again? My hope was to avoid this by developing a set of specific criteria, such as
- Is from or descended from only continental Europe as defined with the Urals as its eastern boundary and the Caucasus as its southern boundary.
- Is from an ethnicity that speaks an Indo-European (excluding Indo-Iranian), Uralic (excluding Samoyedic) or Basque language as its ethnic and national language.
- Does not follow a non-European religion, such as Islam, Buddhism or Shinto.
- Is not a universalist or miscegenator.
At the edges of Europe, some tough decisions have to be made and these rules exclude Maltese, Armenians, Muslim Albanians and others, but so be it.

[Rhobot]

Yeah, but all of the Caucasus region shows many South/Central Asian genome links. They can be culturally as European as it gets, but their genome's fail to be up to European standards.

Just what is a "European standard" for one's genome?
Geographically these countries are not technically European, but I don't believe they are more closely related to south and central Asians than to southeastern Europeans. In fact, this seems NOT to be the case based on some genetic studies that show Armenians clustering with Europeans in general rather than south Asians (both dalits and Brahmins) or central Asians from the Altai Mountains (Bauchet et al 2007).
Measuring European Population Stratification with Microarray Genotype Data
(http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=17436249)

[Loddfafner]

Who was it that said the Wogs start at Calais?

[Luern]

Who was it that said the Wogs start at Calais?

That wasn't William.

[Macedonia]

We have a thread as to who is white. But more importantly, who is a true European?

One obvious criterion would be that a person or his ancestors are located in Europe. This would include most commonly accepted Europeans, as well as Albanians, Tatars, most Caucasian peoples, and, depending on where one places the boundary of Europe, the Armenians and Georgians.

A second potential criterion would be following a European faith (or lack thereof), such as Christianity, European Paganism, Atheism, Agnosticism. But, it would exclude people following non-European belief systems, such as Islam, Buddhism or Hinduism. This would exclude Tatars, some Albanians, some southern Slavs such as Bosnians, who have accepted Islam, and many but not all people of the Caucasus. I note here that someone chose Hinduism as his religion on a thread about what religion do you follow.

Related to beleifs, is there a psychological component? Can a person said to be acting white? Is a douchbag liberal who is selling out his own people still European if all known ancestors are from Europe?

Would language be a deciding criterion? Are only those speaking a Indo-European, Basque, Finno-Ugric language European. This would include the Armenians, but not the Gerogians. It would include the Albanians. This would exclude the Maltese, who speak a dialect of Arabic, a Semitic language. It would also exclude all Turkic peoples. This would exclude some, but not all Caucasians, as the Ossete speak an Indo-European language. Moreover, on its own, this would include Iranians and East Indians, who would obviously be excluded for other reasons.

We then come to genetics. Would a European have to belong to a specific haplogroup? Or at least would his nationality have to belong in the majority to an indigenous European haplogroup, such as R1a, R1b, I1, I2 and N? This would exclude most Maltese, Greeks and Albanians and a significant chunk of southern Slavs, southern Italians and others. Heck, this criterion and only this criterion would exclude me as I belong to G2, a Caucasian group.

How about proceeding right to the genome to answer the question. Over 95% of Europeans are homozygous for the A allele at rs1426654. The remainder are heterozygous, or homozygous G, which is fixed on Asian, African, Amerindian and all other populations. Using rs1426654, rs2555364, rs16960620, it is possible to categorize the ancestry of a person as either European, African, Asian or mixed with significant accuracy.

Most of us necessarily use visible phenotype to make a decision about being a European. Would the presence of an epicanthic fold be an issue? Or would we exclude those whose skin is of a certain darkness? Or could we use some other anthropometric basis, many of which are hard to describe, but we can all recognize an East Indian when we see one without any actual measuring.

Would we have to include history? The Maltese are just Christianized Arabs, as the Albanians are Islamized Europeans. The Turks were a small asiatic elite that assimilated many Indo-European peoples in Anatolia, such as Hittites, Lydians, Galicians and Greeks.

Or is being European something ineffable? Something we all know in our hearts?

Perhaps, an answer to this question will settle a whole lot of other questions.

The Albanians are atheist in majority , not Muslims .:icon_yell:

[Absinthe]

An Albanian Macedonian? :rofl:

It must be Aemeric pulling our leg again!!! :D

[Macedonia]

An Albanian Macedonian? :rofl:

It must be Aemeric pulling our leg again!!! :D
I was invited from Illyria Proboards from a user called Vlach83 !
:(

[Absinthe]

I was invited from Illyria Proboards from a user called Vlach83 !
:(
What can I say... I am speechless! :p

[Goidelic]

We have a thread as to who is white. But more importantly, who is a true European?

One obvious criterion would be that a person or his ancestors are located in Europe. This would include most commonly accepted Europeans, as well as Albanians, Tatars, most Caucasian peoples, and, depending on where one places the boundary of Europe, the Armenians and Georgians.


I'd argue some Tatars are European, given they are only 1/4 or 1/8th Tatar, highly Europeanized with something else, like 3/4 Russian and 1/4 Tatar. Some Tatars can look Slavic/East Nordid. Same with Armenians and Georgians who are really 1/4 Armenian and Georgian and something like 3/4 Soviet German diaspora living in Armenia or Georgia. As for Albanians and Bosniaks they're Europeans, same with Greeks and the rest of Europe. "white" is a subjective term, it includes some Mestizos as well in that.

[Macedonia]

I'd argue some Tatars are European, given they are only 1/4 or 1/8th Tatar, highly Europeanized with something else, like 3/4 Russian and 1/4 Tatar. Some Tatars can look Slavic/East Nordid. Same with Armenians and Georgians who are really 1/4 Armenian and Georgian and something like 3/4 Soviet German diaspora living in Armenia or Georgia. As for Albanians and Bosniaks they're Europeans, same with Greeks and the rest of Europe. "white" is a subjective term, it includes some Mestizos as well in that.
Right !
Not !
The Albanians have a strong White identity !
The Bosniaks doesn't ! I don't want to be a Serb supporter but who lives in Bosnia and Herzegovina knows about the 110.000 Muslim colones from Asia ! The Bosniaks was trying to colonize the Serb lands ! Fortunately all these people lose the Bosnian citizenship and was kicked back in the Middle East !

[Äike]

Right !
Not !
The Albanians have a strong White identity !
The Bosniaks doesn't ! I don't want to be a Serb supporter but who lives in Bosnia and Herzegovina knows about the 110.000 Muslim colones from Asia ! The Bosniaks was trying to colonize the Serb lands ! Fortunately all these people lose the Bosnian citizenship and was kicked back in the Middle East !

The large amount of red in your signature is hurting my eyes, could you please fix it?

[Goidelic]

Right !
Not !
The Albanians have a strong White identity !
The Bosniaks doesn't ! I don't want to be a Serb supporter but who lives in Bosnia and Herzegovina knows about the 110.000 Muslim colones from Asia ! The Bosniaks was trying to colonize the Serb lands ! Fortunately all these people lose the Bosnian citizenship and was kicked back in the Middle East !

Yeah, I always thought Bosniaks were rather a composition of Islamified Croats and Serbs, however genetically Europeans, whereas Albanians were mainly through and through, their ethnicity through many ages, prehistoric to the ages. :)Thanks for Bosniak history. :wink:);)

[Macedonia]

The large amount of red in your signature is hurting my eyes, could you please fix it?

No , this is the real flag of MACEDONIA !
In my avatar there is the real coat of arms of MACEDONIA !
:thumbs up

[Äike]

No , this is the real flag of MACEDONIA !
In my avatar there is the real coat of arms of MACEDONIA !
:thumbs up

Maybe you'll use a smaller version of your Macedonian flag?

[Macedonia]

Maybe you'll use a smaller version of your Macedonian flag?
If you was an Admin , yes I will doing it immediately !
But you are not !:D

_________________

Macedonia is in a difficult moment and needs the support of anyone !
:thumbs up

[Angantyr]

I'd argue some Tatars are European, given they are only 1/4 or 1/8th Tatar, highly Europeanized with something else, like 3/4 Russian and 1/4 Tatar. Some Tatars can look Slavic/East Nordid. Same with Armenians and Georgians who are really 1/4 Armenian and Georgian and something like 3/4 Soviet German diaspora living in Armenia or Georgia. As for Albanians and Bosniaks they're Europeans, same with Greeks and the rest of Europe. "white" is a subjective term, it includes some Mestizos as well in that.

I met a redheaded girl from Crimea. She spoke Russian. She had natural red hair. She looked European. But, I subsequently found out that she was a Tatar and a (nominal) Muslim. Despite my own predilections (towards red hair), I would have to classify her as non-European because of her faith. That is why the question of who is European is more than where is Europe and who is white.

[Angantyr]

An Albanian Macedonian? :rofl:

It must be Aemeric pulling our leg again!!! :D

I have to agree that an Albanian identifying himself with the pseudonym "Macedonian" is peculiar at best. It is bad enough that the Greeks and the people of FYROM are claiming that name without the Albanians doing it, too.

[Will]

It is bad enough that the Greeks and the people of FYROM are claiming that name without the Albanians doing it, too.

Mind your own fucking business.

[Angantyr]

Mind your own fucking business.

Truth is my business. Apparently, vulgarity is yours.

I have reported your post and requested that you be banned.

[Beorn]

I know it is a very, very touchy subject, but I'd like to remind people to remain at a good level of conduct, please. :)

Thank you.

[Goidelic]

I met a redheaded girl from Crimea. She spoke Russian. She had natural red hair. She looked European. But, I subsequently found out that she was a Tatar and a (nominal) Muslim. Despite my own predilections (towards red hair), I would have to classify her as non-European because of her faith. That is why the question of who is European is more than where is Europe and who is white.

She probably had significant Mongol blood anyways.

[Will]

I know it is a very, very touchy subject, but I'd like to remind people to remain at a good level of conduct, please. :)

Thank you.

I apologize for that. Ignorant know-it-alls who insult my heritage are easy to get under the skin.


Truth is my business. Apparently, vulgarity is yours.

Oh yes, I'm in the business of vulgarity...not that the sentence makes sense.


I have reported your post and requested that you be banned.

Want some cheese with that whine? I didn't even insult you there, just used a word which you can hear in R rated movies. Grow up and stop crying.

[Gooding]

Let's see..a Colonial American of largely British heritage..maybe I could consider myself a Diaspora Brit?:D

[Goidelic]

Let's see..a Colonial American of largely British heritage..maybe I could consider myself a Diaspora Brit?:D

Lol Yeah, I consider myself a diaspora Brit-Irishman living abroad in America, as well.

No but really, I enjoy both my heritages but would rather be all Old Stock/British rather than 1/2 Irish Catholic, but that's the way everything ended up. ;)

You can't choose your heritage, but can definitely prevent it and be proud of it. :p :p

[Will]

You can't choose your heritage, but can definitely prevent it and be proud of it. :p :p

Surely you meant something along the lines of 'protect'. :p

[Goidelic]

Surely you meant something along the lines of 'protect'. :p

Yes, spelling error. :D;)

[Gooding]

I'm rather of the opinion that the best way to protect and show pride in our heritage is to share it by having quite a few offspring.LOL, I'm close to "purity", but honesty demands I speak of my 1/8 French Creole(mixed with German, Swiss, Catalan(very distant) and Occitan), my reckoned 1/16 German and German Swiss(added up from certain ancestors of my maternal grandfather and my maternal grandmother's father) and 1/64 Amerind blood( Cree, according to my great-uncle John on my father's side).The rest of it's English,Scottish, Ulster Scots and Welsh that all four of my grandparents have in more or less abundance.:p;):D

[Cail]

Europeans are all those who speak an Indo-European language within European continent. Basically, Germanics(English), Romance(Latin), Slavic, Greek, Albanian, Baltics, Celtics. Exception only is Iranian, Anatolian and Indic.

Map: http://mathildasanthropologyblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/mapindoeuropeangroups.jpg

Also those who are culturally and racially descendant of European races: Dinarics, Alpines, Mediterreneans, Nordics,,, etc.

[Psychonaut]

Europeans are all those who speak an Indo-European language within European continent. Basically, Germanics(English), Romance(Latin), Slavic, Greek, Alban.

So...that would exclude Finns, Basques, etc. from being European. :....

[Goidelic]

So...that would exclude Finns, Basques, etc. from being European. :....

I think Finns are partly under Baltic, even though they're Finnic, and Basques are partly under Romance or at least similar, even though they have their own language Basque. :)

[Psychonaut]

I think Finns are partly under Baltic, even though they're Finnic, and Basques are partly under Romance or at least similar, even though they have their own language Basque. :)

Not really. Basque is not a Romance language and neither is Finnish a Baltic one. Using language alone as a determinant for 'Europeanness' is ridiculous.

[Goidelic]

Not really. Basque is not a Romance language and neither is Finnish a Baltic one. Using language alone as a determinant for 'Europeanness' is ridiculous.

I agree it's best for an individual basis to judge, that's why I rely on genetics. :) Although, languages do provide lots of European-like type continuity following genetics. ;)

[Psychonaut]

I agree it's best for an individual basis to judge, that's why I rely on genetics. :) Although, languages do provide lots of European-like type continuity following genetics. ;)

Genetics alone is no good either though. There are plenty of folks in China and India who are within five steps of (at 12 markers) of R1a1s like me. There is no one magic bullet. The determinant must be an aggregate of things including language, genetics, location, etc.

[Cail]

I mentioned language side by side genetics.

Basques, Finns and Hungarians do not speak Indo-European but they are racially European. Language is pretty consistent with genetics if you ask me.

[Psychonaut]

Language is pretty consistent with genetics if you ask me.

What? You yourself are a great example of just how wrong that is. You, on this board and in the nation you're residing, speak English. If you have children in Canada, they too will speak English. Genetically, you will never be English, nor will your children. There are currently broad blusters of genetic types in different regions of the world, but the trends of mass immigration that we're seeing are destroying the genetic integrity of these regions and making the picture less and less homogeneous.

[Cail]

That's true but i dont see how that contradicts what i said. Linguistics tell us a lot about people movement into Europe. I have a hard time understanding whats a "genetic English".

Regarding Physical Anthropology

England is composed of
3% Borreby
5% Brunn
8% Hallstatt Nordic
20% Anglo-Saxon (Hallstatt Nordic altered by mixture with Upper Palaeolithic Brunn)
30% Keltic Nordic (Central European Nordic)
2% Noric
2% Falish
5% Tronder
15% North Atlantid
10% Paleo Atlantid

Albania is composed of:
10% Alpine (mainly in the south)
5% Noric
20% Meds (Atlanto and Pontid)
The rest Super Dinarids and Dinarics.

All these transcend national borders.

For example:

Alpine type (found in parts of central Europe, hence the name, as well as parts of Balkans). As other UP this type is wide faced or brahicephalic (which in Greek means wide headed or Brahi/wide and kephalos/head), of medium height and of robust built. It has been in Europe in such form since around 20,000 years ago. Many known thinkers from ancient Greece appear to be either Alpines or Dinaroid-Alpines (in most cases). Dinaroid Alpines were mainly also Dorian Greeks while many continental Celts were also Alpines (unlike British Celts which were mainly Keltic Nordic).

Luxembourg:....80% Alpine
The Czech Republic and Slovakia....40% Alpine (Czech part mainly)
France............30% Alpine (central and eastern continental regions)
Austria .......... 20% Alpine
Greece............ 20% Alpine (most common in Epirus),
Germany ........ 15% Alpine (most common in Baden and Bavaria)
Switzerland ..... 15% Alpine (most common in the south and east)
Hungary.......... 15% Alpine (most common in the south),
Italy................15% Alpine (most common in the northwest),
Bulgaria............15% Alpine,
Poland.............10% Alpine
Romania...........10% Alpine,
Albania.............10% Alpine (mainly in the south, Epirus)
Belgium:.......... 5% Alpine (both most common in Wallonia)

[Cail]

but the trends of mass immigration that we're seeing are destroying the genetic integrity of these regions and making the picture less and less homogeneous.

True that is if people mix with other non-European races. That is likely to change your genetic make up to great degrees.

[Psychonaut]

Kreshnik...

a). Unsourced statistics are less than worthless.

b). Genotypes and phenotypes are quite different and cannot currently be correlated by scientific means.

c). What is genetically English is somewhat varied, but distinct enough that an English (or, dare I say British) R1a is readily discernable from a Slavic R1a, a Tocharian R1a or an Indian R1a.


True that is if people mix with other non-European races. That is likely to change your genetic make up to great degrees.

I'm just as concerned with European immigration as I am non-European. Mass immigration from any source is damaging to the host society.

[Cail]

You are associating a single haplogroup(R1a) with a single ethnicity?

I'm just as concerned with European immigration as I am non-European. Mass immigration from any source is damaging to the host society.

Then you are concerned for the wrong reasons. Inter-European migration is not as damaging as non-European migration.

p.s (look at french national soccer team)

[Aemma]

What? You yourself are a great example of just how wrong that is. You, on this board and in the nation you're residing, speak English. If you have children in Canada, they too will speak English. Genetically, you will never be English, nor will your children. There are currently broad blusters of genetic types in different regions of the world, but the trends of mass immigration that we're seeing are destroying the genetic integrity of these regions and making the picture less and less homogeneous.


Yes but you can't take that as an example Psy. English is the lingua franca, it is an exception to the rule in any country. You and I speak English and I am not English and nor are you. Now if Kreshnik were living in Quebec let's say and his children would HAVE to attend French language school, then yes that argument stands. But I really don't think that any argument can be made using the English language as an example.


I think the notion of "genetic integrity" can't really be applied to all places of the world, especially not a country like Canada that's primarily known as being heavily populated by a New Canadian population especially as of late, but from dot too though. (And before people get on my back about being too PC and calling New Canadians "New Canadians", I'll use whatever term I please thanks very much. It's my country!) I do think that New Worlders do elude some conceptual pidgeonholes sometimes. I dunno. This is all stuff I'm still trying to figure out.

[Psychonaut]

You are associating a single haplogroup(R1a) with a single ethnicity?

That's exactly the opposite of what my post said. The regional variant of R1a1 that is found in Britain is easily differentiated from the variant found in Poland, which is in turn distinct from the Indian, Khazak, Tocharian, etc. variants.


Inter-European migration is not as damaging as non-European migration.


So say you, and your opinion is bound to be informed by your situation as an immigrant. Personally, I am concerned by trends in mass immigration from any source.


Yes but you can't take that as an example Psy. English is the lingua franca, it is an exception to the rule in any country. You and I speak English and I am not English and nor are you. Now if Kreshnik were living in Quebec let's say and his children would HAVE to attend French language school, then yes that argument stands. But I really don't think that any argument can be made using the English language as an example.

Sure, but either way, they won't be principally speaking Albanian. That was my point.


I think the notion of "genetic integrity" can't really be applied to all places of the world, especially not a country like Canada that's primarily known as being heavily populated by a New Canadian population especially as of late, but from dot too though. (And before people get on my back about being too PC and calling New Canadians "New Canadians", I'll use whatever term I please thanks very much. It's my country!) I do think that New Worlders do elude some conceptual pidgeonholes sometimes. I dunno. This is all stuff I'm still trying to figure out.

IMO, the gulf that separates a Canadian (who's almost guaranteed to be of British or French descent) from an immigrant from the Balkans are quite stark.

[Cail]

Sure, but either way, they won't be principally speaking Albanian. That was my point.

You are assuming too much. My kids will learn the Albanian language. They will also be fluent in English language given that they will be born Canadians.

IMO, the gulf that separates a Canadian (who's almost guaranteed to be of British or French descent) from an immigrant from the Balkans are quite stark.

Maybe but the gulf that separates British from French is also quite stark. :D

[Cail]

So say you, and your opinion is bound to be informed by your situation as an immigrant. Personally, I am concerned by trends in mass immigration from any source.

First, im a Canadian citizen. I took vows for this. But the Brits and France are pretty new in this continent as well.

So you are against mass immigration but not immigration totally? I think i have similar conservative views as you do. Difference being is that i don't care if a German or any other European [inset here] immigrates to Canada. He is likely going to integrate easily in society.

Are you aware that there are thousands of Germans immigrants in Canada? Plenty of people immigrate from Britain to France. What is your view about this?

[Psychonaut]

But the Brits and France are pretty new in this continent as well.

The difference being that we did not immigrate here, we created Canada and the US. Our (the French Candadians here) ancestors were the first to set foot on Canadian soil since the Vikings. This was nearly 500 years ago, which is hardly recent and is hardly comparable to immigration.


So you are against mass immigration but not immigration totally? I think i have similar conservative views as you do. Difference being is that i don't care if a German or any other European [inset here] immigrates to Canada. He is likely going to integrate easily in society.

Are you aware that there are thousands of Germans immigrants in Canada? Plenty of people immigrate from Britain to France. What is your view about this?

I am a Nativist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativism_(politics)). I believe that a nation belongs to the descendants of those who created it, and that after the formation of a nation is complete, immigration should be generally disallowed. In regards to my own nation, I think that a complete moratorium on immigration (from all sources) would do us worlds of good right about now.

[Aemma]

Sure, but either way, they won't be principally speaking Albanian. That was my point.

But that's my point too; they'll be speaking the lingua franca which is English, despite Canada having 2 official languages which in all practicality tends to be a bit of a farce since a significant portion of New Canadians don't bother having their children learn French, unless they reside in Quebec. Many don't learn both official languages but only English, the lingua franca which just happens to be one of our official languages.

And it is true, Kreshnik's children will more than likely be fluent in not only English but Albanian as well. We have a mandate in our province's educational system to offer heritage language classes to whomever requests it. But I'm hoping that you'll enroll them in a French Immersion program too though eh Kreshnik! ;) :D


IMO, the gulf that separates a Canadian (who's almost guaranteed to be of British or French descent) from an immigrant from the Balkans are quite stark.

But that's my point. Canada's cultural complexion is NOT that cut and dried anymore. And to some degree I'm not so sure it ever was once it ceased being New France. Thereafter, the floodgates were open: Not only did the English come but so did the Scots, the Irish, and later the Germans, and the Ukrainians.... Still among the oldtimer French Canadians, the only true Canadians are those of French descent. The rest are all called "les anglais". :shrug:

[Cail]

that you'll enroll them in a French Immersion program too though eh Kreshnik

I was planning to do that. A friend of mine has put his daughters in French Immersion.

So actually they will be trilingual. They will learn Albanian at home, English with friends, French at school.

[Aemma]

that you'll enroll them in a French Immersion program too though eh Kreshnik

I was planning to do that. A friend of mine has put his daughters in French Immersion.

So actually they will be trilingual. They will learn Albanian at home, English with friends, French at school.


Good man! :thumb001:

[Cail]

I am a Nativist. I believe that a nation belongs to the descendants of those who created it, and that after the formation of a nation is complete, immigration should be generally disallowed. In regards to my own nation, I think that a complete moratorium on immigration (from all sources) would do us worlds of good right about now.

So you are against Germans[and Scots,Irish,Brits] who have come to Canada in the last years. They are pretty much immigrants. Just for sake of consistency.

[Psychonaut]

So you are against Germans[and Scots,Irish,Brits] who have come to Canada in the last years. They are pretty much immigrants. Just for sake of consistency.

I'm not Canadian, so it's not really my business, but if my nation were seeing large numbers of German immigrants you can bet I'd oppose it. Immigrants displace Natives, plain and simple. Some immigrants are more racially, linguistically or culturally assimilable than others, but every single immigrant that works inside my country is taking a job from an American, making it that much harder for Natives to earn a living and find a place to live.

[Cail]

It's a matter of opinion and i respect that. I also think you are wrong[economics side] that a job is taken away. It does not work exactly like that.
Here is one of my favorite author opinion on this matter. I don't totally agree with him. I think only certain unqualified immigrants should not be allowed to immigrate. :thumb001:

Anyways enjoy :thumb001:


One-Fifth of an American
How much is an immigrant's life worth, exactly?

How do you justify a border fence? Why is it OK to consign millions of unskilled Mexicans to lives of desperate poverty? I'm told it's because Americans should care more about their countrymen than about a bunch of foreigners. OK, but how much more? Surely there's some limit; virtually nobody thinks, for example, that Americans should be allowed to hunt Mexicans for sport. So, exactly how much are you willing to hurt a foreigner to help an American? Is a foreigner's well-being worth three-quarters as much as an American's, or half as much, or one-quarter as much?

(I'm grateful to the anonymous proprietor of the YouNotSneaky blog for raising this question, though my analysis is not the same as his.)

Let's do the math: When we admit an unskilled Mexican immigrant, his wage typically rises from about $2 an hour to $9 an hour—call it a $7-per-hour gain. To justify keeping him out, we'll have to weigh that gain against the harm he does to Americans.

Right away, our calculation runs into a problem, because on balance immigrants don't harm Americans; virtually all economists agree that immigration makes us richer, not poorer. Every immigrant is a potential trading partner, a potential employee, and a potential customer. He bids down wages, but that's a two-edged sword: It's bad for his fellow workers, but it's good for employers and good for consumers.

In the very short run, most of the gains go to employers, and a substantial fraction of those gains probably go to people named Walton. In the somewhat longer run, all that excess profit gets competed away and shows up in the form of lower prices for consumer goods. At that point, even the workers who took pay cuts can come out ahead: If your wage falls by 10 percent while prices fall by 20 percent, you're a winner.

But let's ignore all that. In order to make the best possible anti-immigrant case, let's ignore all the benefits of immigration and focus strictly on the costs to American workers, i.e., falling wages.

Since we're talking about a single immigrant, wages fall infinitesimally—but you've got to multiply that infinitesimal drop by millions of American workers. A high- end estimate is that 100 million Americans experience wage drops of about $.00000003 per hour. Multiply that out and you have a $3 per hour loss. (Note to econ-geeks: I assumed a wage rate of $10 an hour and an elasticity of wages with respect to labor of 0.3.) This estimate comes from the labor-economics literature, and it really applies only in the very short run, because in the long run, falling wages attract new businesses, which partly bid wages right back up again. But let's ignore all that, too, and assume a worst-case scenario, where the short-run effects are somehow never ameliorated.

Bottom line: When the immigrant crosses the border, Americans lose $3, and the immigrant gains $7. To oppose that, you'd have to count an immigrant as less than three-sevenths of an American.

But wait! It's worse than that. The $7 gain went to a $2-an-hour immigrant. The $3 loss came from $10-an-hour Americans. And we usually think of a dollar as more valuable in the hands of the desperately poor. The most conservative standard assumption is that the value of an extra dollar is inversely proportional to your income, so an extra dollar is worth five times as much to a $2-an-hour Mexican as it is to a $10-an-hour American. The immigrant's second dollar is worth a little less, and the third a little less than that.

Accounting for all that, it turns out that the immigrant's $7 gain is worth about five times the American's $3 loss. In other words, to justify keeping the immigrant out, you'd have to say he's worth less than one-fifth of an American citizen.

By contrast, there was a time when the U.S. Constitution counted a black slave as three-fifths of a full-fledged citizen. Alabama Gov. Bob Riley has recently apologized for the ravages of slavery. How long till politicians apologize for the ravages of our restrictive immigration policies?

http://www.slate.com/id/2168060/fr/rss/

[Macedonia]

Why he was banned ?

[Psychonaut]

Why he was banned ?

He wasn't who he said he was. (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showpost.php?p=72704&postcount=173)

[Macedonia]

He wasn't who he said he was. (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showpost.php?p=72704&postcount=173)

Why to have multi-accounts ?

[Psychonaut]

Why to have multi-accounts ?

Whatever his reason, it was a violation of the rules (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/misc.php?do=cfrules).

[Solwyn]

But that's my point. Canada's cultural complexion is NOT that cut and dried anymore. And to some degree I'm not so sure it ever was once it ceased being New France. Thereafter, the floodgates were open: Not only did the English come but so did the Scots, the Irish, and later the Germans, and the Ukrainians.... Still among the oldtimer French Canadians, the only true Canadians are those of French descent. The rest are all called "les anglais". :shrug:

I wish Canadian history would get taught in Canadian schools, LOL.....the history that existed before WWII:D

[Svarogstan]

Who is truly European?

I guess it is the people who's MRCA was born in Europe ie. the first male who developed an SNP that defines their haplogroup to be born in Europe.

In that case anyone who belongs to Y-DNA haplogroup " I " is essentially an indigenous European since it is speculated that this is the only y-DNA haplogroup to have originated in Europe.

[lei.talk]

...I'm just waiting, in some decades, for the Maghreb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maghreb) to be part of Europe ;) :Dis this a reference to the pending islamification of europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmitude)
or to the genetic relationship with europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berber_people#Physical_anthropology)?