North Europe vs South Europe; Who is more European and successful?

[Anglojew]

I was talking to another member here about my recent Jews vs Spaniards whiteness thread and he, as a Southern European, objected to my supposed implication that Northern Europeans were superior to Southern Europeans (which wasn't my intention).

It did get me thinking about who is more successful and who is more European. I don't think it's as simple as saying Germany and Britain are richer than Greece and Spain, and therefore more successful, because I think without Southern European culture there could be no modern Northern European culture. Southern Europeans have a flair for art and design and cuisine the Northerners lack, or is this due to climate? Northern Europeans are more practical and harder working though? It could also be argued that Southern Europeans, who were part of the Roman Empire, are somehow MORE European than Northerners, who were then considered barbarians. It could, though, be argued that non-European admixture in Southern Europeans, not found in Northern Europeans, means they're not really as European as their Northern cousins?

Southern and Northern definitions differ but I think this map is accurate about defining Southern Europe with geographically problematic France being divided into two but all other countries remaining either in the South or the North;

http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/310/3/a/cities_of_southern_europe_by_nederbird-d329wdm.png

Obviously all other European Countries are Northern. I'm only dividing Europe into two not into Central or Eastern Europe also. Germany is North as is Russia.

So the questions are;

1. Which region (North or South) is more successful? (This can be in financial or cultural terms, or anything else, eg although Norway might be richer no one could say they've contributed as much as Italians to European culture).

2. Who region (North or South) is more European? (Do we need to rule out Southern Europe because of SSA admixture? Would we then rule out North-Eastern Europe because of East Asian admixture? Do Southern Europeans have more of a legacy from classical Greece and Rome than the Northerners? Are Slavs latecomers so not as European as the English for example?

[Twistedmind]

Lol.

Southern Europe (As any other) is prett strechable term:
Most minimalistic definition:

http://www.dirafrost.com/modulefiles/branches/southern-europe-spain-portugal-italy-greece_1300714623.jpg

Greatest etent of term:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ab/SouthernEurope-DarkBlue.png/571px-SouthernEurope-DarkBlue.png

Concerning SSA admixture, lol.
Also on Slavs, Slavs arrived in Europe together with Germanics (Englishmen), and much before Jews.

[Teyrn]

Jews originated in the south- and outside of Europe. ;P

[Anglojew]

Jews originated in the south- and outside of Europe. ;P

What do Jews have to do with this thread?

[Teyrn]

More seriously the archaic Hebrews were part of the same Eastern Mediterranean meta-culture that fed archaic Minoan, Greek, etc. civilization. The conduit that carried this Eastern Mediterranean meta-culture into the Western Mediterranean were the Phoenicians- who founded colonies in many Southern European countries. The Phoenicians were also neighbors of the Hebrews (and one of the first people to convert to Christianity).

[Teyrn]

What do Jews have to do with this thread?

;)

[Twistedmind]

What do Jews have to do with this thread?

Starting it?

[Anglojew]

More seriously the archaic Hebrews were part of the same Eastern Mediterranean meta-culture that fed archaic Minoan, Greek, etc. civilization. The conduit that carried this Eastern Mediterranean meta-culture into the Western Mediterranean were the Phoenicians- who founded colonies in many Southern European countries. The Phoenicians were also neighbors of the Hebrews (and one of the first people to convert to Christianity).

True, European Nationalists think simplistically about the past but previously European Civilisation was basically only surrounding Mediterrenean and Black Seas.

http://www.yourchildlearns.com/online-atlas/continent/images/mediterranean.gif

Syrians (and Levantines) and Libyans (Berbers) were the white people in the ancient would with very few people living in the northern european forests.

http://www.catchpenny.org/images/seti1a.gif

[Lemon Kush]

I think in recent years Norther Europe has been more successful than Southern Europe, but you can't deny that Southern Europe once had powerful civilizations such as the Roman Empire and the ancient Greeks.

[Twistedmind]

Hm, to be technically correct, Europe as concept we know today did not exist before Charlemagne. Nobody was European back then.

[Teyrn]

True, European Nationalists think simplistically about the past but previously European Civilisation was basically only surrounding Mediterrenean and Black Seas.

http://www.yourchildlearns.com/online-atlas/continent/images/mediterranean.gif

Syrians (and Levantines) and Libyans (Berbers) were the white people in the ancient would with very few people living in the northern european forests.

http://www.catchpenny.org/images/seti1a.gif

Agriculture, for example, was already very well-established in Central and Northern Europe in early historical times, however it took the rise of Rome to introduce urbanization beyond the village- or town-level to the tribal peoples there. The earliest contacts between Celts and Germanics and their Greek and Roman neighbors was a bit pivotal- the Mediterraneans saw them as ruddy, fierce, and savage and the northerners saw them in return as soft and decadent. When the Celts sacked the temple of Apollo at Delphi the Celtic war-leader Brennus saw the statues of the Greek gods and laughed at how absurd it was to portray the divine as human. ;) Culture-clash.

I think the ancient stereotypes still hold true to an extent.

[Útrám]

Translation: Let me throw you some troll bait.

[Anglojew]

Does Europe actually end in Europe? eg No one says Arabs are limited to Arabia because Arab culture and people migrated. So why do people reduce Europe to that Eurasian peninsula?

I think Europe (or Indo-Europe) is larger. Isn't this really Europe today?

http://www.ikindalikelanguages.com/images/europeanlanguages.png

Might be a new thread topic?

[Alenka]

Do you feed on sh*tstorms? :)

[Anglojew]

Do you feed on sh*tstorms? :)

I like debate. I think debate leads to truth and harmony.

[Lemon Kush]

Does Europe actually end in Europe? eg No one says Arabs are limited to Arabia because Arab culture and people migrated. So why do people reduce Europe to that Eurasian peninsula?

I think Europe (or Indo-Europe) is larger. Isn't this really Europe today?

http://www.ikindalikelanguages.com/images/europeanlanguages.png

Might be a new thread topic?

Yeah in recent years many Europeans spread their language, religion, and culture through colonization.

[Teyrn]

I think Europe (or Indo-Europe) is larger. Isn't this really Europe today?

Europe proper is the mother-continent and holds a special place in my heart. <3 Like Numenor to the Gondorians. ;P

[Anglojew]

Europe proper is the mother-continent and holds a special place in my heart. <3 Like Numenor to the Gondorians. ;P

I think Numenor was Atlantis.

[Teyrn]

I think Numenor was Atlantis.

That was the inspiration in Tolkien's mind it seems- one of the Elven names in either Quenya or Sindarin for Numenor was something akin to Atlantis.

[kabeiros]

When the Celts sacked the temple of Apollo at Delphi the Celtic war-leader Brennus saw the statues of the Greek gods and laughed at how absurd it was to portray the divine as human. ;) Culture-clash.This is the shortest definition of Greek culture but it explains all of it...


I think the ancient stereotypes still hold true to an extent.Definitely

[Andreas]

May I ask what does the map you posted show ? I mean southern Europe is shown divided on what basis ? Cultural , linguistic , administrative ?

[Peyrol]

This thread is obviously a provocation and there is a serious risk will become a trollfest.

Closed.


PS. there are about 100,000 discussions with the ''north VS south'' topic, just use the ''search''.

[Loki]

Reopened for discussion.

The subject is complex.

During ancient times, the Mediterranean was the centre (and the start) of European civilization. It started off with the Greeks, and the Romans inherited it and expanded civilization throughout most of Europe during their empire times.

Then the rise of the Franks and the Frankish empire began to make things more equal. The Franks were the most powerful Germanic tribe, and the East Frankish domain under Louis the German later developed into the strong Holy Roman Empire.

Thereafter the rise of France made France the most powerful country in Europe.

During the Renaissance, Italy was the centre of European revival and civilization.

Later on, the industrial revolution - which started in England and spread mostly to Germany - finally tipped the scale in favour of Northern Europe.

[archangel]

both are nothing compared to North Euroasians:cool:

[Humanophage]

1. Southern Europe until the Reformation, then roughly equal, then Northwestern Europe once the Enlightenment kicked off. From then on until the 1980s, Southern Europe was in a rather unimpressive state, being about as rich as Poland (or even much poorer, as in Portugal's case). Italy retained some cultural influence throughout this period of decline, but not quite the scale of leading Northern countries.

2. Northwestern Europe is more European due to being isolated from any non-European territories, except through naval routes. Southeastern Europe especially is at the cross-roads of civilizations. This will increasingly come into question due to Northwestern Europe's immigration policies, but the cores of these cultures have about no direct extra-European influences or connections.

[Anglojew]

1. Southern Europe until the Reformation, then roughly equal, then Northwestern Europe once the Enlightenment kicked off. From then on until the 1980s, Southern Europe was in a rather unimpressive state, being about as rich as Poland (or even much poorer, as in Portugal's case). Italy retained some cultural influence throughout this period of decline, but not quite the scale of leading Northern countries.

2. Northwestern Europe is more European due to being isolated from any non-European territories, except through naval routes. Southeastern Europe especially is at the cross-roads of civilizations. This will increasingly come into question due to Northwestern Europe's immigration policies, but the cores of these cultures have about no direct extra-European influences or connections.

I think you nailed it!

Except I'd argue they British and other NW Euro's has massive non-euro influence through trade. This was often exhibited at the "Great Exibitions" and heavily influenced art and design for instance Japanese artistic influence on the Impressionists.

[Loki]

I think you nailed it!

Except I'd argue they British and other NW Euro's has massive non-euro influence through trade. This was often exhibited at the "Great Exibitions" and heavily influenced art and design for instance Japanese artistic influence on the Impressionists.

This doesn't really have to do with non-euro influences or not, but with the core identities and civilization.

[Anglojew]

Reopened for discussion.

The subject is complex.

During ancient times, the Mediterranean was the centre (and the start) of European civilization. It started off with the Greeks, and the Romans inherited it and expanded civilization throughout most of Europe during their empire times.

Then the rise of the Franks and the Frankish empire began to make things more equal. The Franks were the most powerful Germanic tribe, and the East Frankish domain under Louis the German later developed into the strong Holy Roman Empire.

Thereafter the rise of France made France the most powerful country in Europe.

During the Renaissance, Italy was the centre of European revival and civilization.

Later on, the industrial revolution - which started in England and spread mostly to Germany - finally tipped the scale in favour of Northern Europe.

Thanks for re-opening this I wasn't trolling. I think it's an interesting topic and am glad to discuss it more in-depth.

To what extent do you think climate effected cultural development? Did Southern Europe initially develop more rapidly because of better weather? Was it only after electricity that Northern Europe could evercome this impediment to development?

[Mortimer]

you are a mentally insane jew.

[Loki]

To what extent do you think climate effected cultural development? Did Southern Europe initially develop more rapidly because of better weather? Was it only after electricity that Northern Europe could evercome this impediment to development?

Yes of course. For thousands of years northern Europe was too cold and permanently under ice for effective cultivation of crops and settlements. Hence, civilization began in the Fertile Crescent of Mesopotamia, and then spread to Greece. For many centuries human civilization in this part of the world was centred along the area from Greece to Persia.

[kabeiros]

Yes, I agree that climate was an important factor, especially if we consider the fact that agriculture was essential for human development.

[Queen B]

More European : South
More successful: Past - South, Present - North

[Twistedmind]

Reopened for discussion.

The subject is complex.

During ancient times, the Mediterranean was the centre (and the start) of European civilization. It started off with the Greeks, and the Romans inherited it and expanded civilization throughout most of Europe during their empire times.

Then the rise of the Franks and the Frankish empire began to make things more equal. The Franks were the most powerful Germanic tribe, and the East Frankish domain under Louis the German later developed into the strong Holy Roman Empire.

Thereafter the rise of France made France the most powerful country in Europe.

During the Renaissance, Italy was the centre of European revival and civilization.

Later on, the industrial revolution - which started in England and spread mostly to Germany - finally tipped the scale in favour of Northern Europe.

Loki I am not really sure Frankish Empire and Germany in any time of existance, could be considered Northern European.

[Rouxinol]

1. Southern Europe until the Reformation, then roughly equal, then Northwestern Europe once the Enlightenment kicked off. From then on until the 1980s, Southern Europe was in a rather unimpressive state, being about as rich as Poland (or even much poorer, as in Portugal's case). Italy retained some cultural influence throughout this period of decline, but not quite the scale of leading Northern countries.

So much non-sense thrown out in a paragraph is sickening. Portugal is at about the same level that Poland is in all indicators. In some it comes first and Poland as a close second, in others its the other way around.

Worldbank, GDP (PPP) per capita (2005-11):
38 Portugal 25,372 2011
45 Poland 21,261 2011

IMF, GDP (PPP) per capita (2010-11):
42 Portugal 23,363 2011
45 Poland 20,184 2011

Before writing wild fantasies, check the facts.

[finþaų]

North Europeans seem to have much more paleo-European blood (blood in the figurative sense) than South Europeans, whilst South European groups laid the foundations for the modern-day cultural concept of Europe.

Are we talking "more European" in the "racial" or in the "cultural" sense? I think it is a very, very difficult question to answer properly, and I don't think answering it is really worth it in the end.

[Twistedmind]

I think thi was in Geo-Political/Cultural sense. But both terms are pretty divers they have broader, and reduced meaning.
In most reduced terms, Northern Europe is Scandinavia + Finland, and Southern: Iberia, Italy and Greece.

[Anglojew]

Yes of course. For thousands of years northern Europe was too cold and permanently under ice for effective cultivation of crops and settlements. Hence, civilization began in the Fertile Crescent of Mesopotamia, and then spread to Greece. For many centuries human civilization in this part of the world was centred along the area from Greece to Persia.

This is why I think many Nationalists get too hung up on some notion than the only legitimate Europeans are of only pure Indo-European (excluding the Indo part even) backgrounds. Many precursors to Western European culture were in the Near East. I see Europe as the refuge for a culture that developed in Sumeria and Egypt (or even possibly an unknown pre-Ice Age civilisation as is alluded to in ancient writings) and moved gradually Westward (and only found refuge and continuity in Europe as it is somewhat geographically isolated) due to external pressures from the East. There's an undercurrent of uninformed, illegitimate and unrequired racial chauvinism that ignores half of European heritage in my opinion.

[Rouxinol]

I still maintain that what boosted NW Europe impressively was the European Recovery Program and the subsequent "economic miracles" of the 1950s up to the end of 1980s in countries such as France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Italy - yes, Italy, which is one of the world's biggest economies and most developed countries, in par with so-called Northern Europe.

[Anglojew]

Loki I am not really sure Frankish Empire and Germany in any time of existance, could be considered Northern European.

Of course the Franks and Germans are Northern Europeans as they began in the north and outside of Rome.

[Anglojew]

So much non-sense thrown out in a paragraph is sickening. Portugal is at about the same level that Poland is in all indicators. In some it comes first and Poland as a close second, in others its the other way around.

Worldbank, GDP (PPP) per capita (2005-11):
38 Portugal 25,372 2011
45 Poland 21,261 2011

IMF, GDP (PPP) per capita (2010-11):
42 Portugal 23,363 2011
45 Poland 20,184 2011

Before writing wild fantasies, check the facts.


He's taking about the 80s I think

[Twistedmind]

With such definition of North, everything except Greece, Italy, Portzgal and Spain is North.
Germany is Central Europe. France Western. They culturaly have much more common things with Italy, and Spain than with Scandinavia. So please spare me from such exagerated Nordicism.

[Anglojew]

I still maintain that what boosted NW Europe impressively was the European Recovery Program and the subsequent "economic miracles" of the 1950s up to the end of 1980s in countries such as France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Italy - yes, Italy, which is one of the world's biggest economies and most developed countries, in par with so-called Northern Europe.

Like the Marshall plan? So America saved Europe (twice)?

[Anglojew]

With such definition of North, everything except Greece, Italy, Portzgal and Spain is North.
Germany is Central Europe. France Western. They culturaly have much more common things with Italy, and Spain than with Scandinavia. So please spare me from such exagerated Nordicism.

I posted a map of the threads definition of South.

[Rouxinol]

Like the Marshall plan? So America saved Europe (twice)?

Yes. What would be Europe like today without it would be interesting to see.

[Loki]

With such definition of North, everything except Greece, Italy, Portzgal and Spain is North.
Germany is Central Europe. France Western. They culturaly have much more common things with Italy, and Spain than with Scandinavia. So please spare me from such exagerated Nordicism.

It's got nothing to do with Nordicism. We were talking about historical contexts. The Franks were a Germanic tribe who had their origins in northern Europe. In essence, the Franks were a bunch of Dutchmen who spread southward and expanded their domain and power.

[kabeiros]

In essence, the Franks were a bunch of Dutchmen who spread southward and expanded their domain and power.
over Celtic tribes who make the majority of French ancestry, right? What do you think about Celts, were they northern or southern Europeans?

[Twistedmind]

It's got nothing to do with Nordicism. We were talking about historical contexts. The Franks were a Germanic tribe who had their origins in northern Europe. In essence, the Franks were a bunch of Dutchmen who spread southward and expanded their domain and power.

I was not refering that to you. Yes, Franks were bunch of Duthchmen, but problem is culture of Frankish empire was not. :) It was continuation of Roman Culture of their Romanized Gaulish subjects. First definiton of Europe coined in that court was definign Europe as few Latin Christian Kingdoms (Frankish Empire, Nrthern Italy, Northern Spain and Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms). Also Empire was not Frankish speaking, you might allredy know that when Eastern and Western Frankish army gathered, one were speaking in Proto-French other in Proto-German.
And like I said, by criteria of Northern Descent, anything but 5 countries (just for Malta1066) could be considered as Northern Europe. :)

[Loki]

over Celtic tribes who make the majority of French ancestry, right? What do you think about Celts, were they northern or southern Europeans?

The Franks were a Germanic tribe who asserted their power and influence over France. They settled mostly in northern France.

The Celts were a central European people who had their origins in the area around modern Austria and surrounds. La Tene, Hallstatt etc. They then spread over most of central Europe, into Iberia, Britain and Anatolia.

[Anglojew]

I was not refering that to you. Yes, Franks were bunch of Duthchmen, but problem is culture of Frankish empire was not. :) It was continuation of Roman Culture of their Romanized Gaulish subjects. First definiton of Europe coined in that court was definign Europe as few Latin Christian Kingdoms (Frankish Empire, Nrthern Italy, Northern Spain and Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms). Also Empire was not Frankish speaking, you might allredy know that when Eastern and Western Frankish army gathered, one were speaking in Proto-French other in Proto-German.
And like I said, by criteria of Northern Descent, anything but 5 countries (just for Malta1066) could be considered as Northern Europe. :)

So it could be described as a merging of Germanic and Roman cultures.

[Twistedmind]

So it could be described as a merging of Germanic and Roman cultures.

No. It could be said for all modern Germanc countries.
French (and Frankish Empire) is Romance culture with touch of Germanic.

[Loki]

I was not refering that to you. Yes, Franks were bunch of Duthchmen, but problem is culture of Frankish empire was not. :)

The Frankish empire was Germanic in essence - ruled by Germanic kings and nobility. And the East Frankish empire (modern Germany) was even more Germanic since they encompassed numerous Germanic tribes who settled there throughout history.

When we talk about "Northern Europe", we are essentially talking about the Germanic tribes who had their origins in the north, and then spread southward. Yes, the further south you go, the more they assimilated the mostly Celtic aboriginal populations.

[Twistedmind]

The Frankish empire was Germanic in essence - ruled by Germanic kings and nobility.

Without any doubt. But they were practicisng Romance culture which they encountered there :) Germanics were drop in sea, and since their culture was on lower stage of develipment they got assimilated. What they left to french is Salic law.



And the East Frankish empire (modern Germany) was even more Germanic since they encompassed numerous Germanic tribes who settled there throughout history.
I agree on this, but culturaly they absorbed enrmous Southern influence, and most of Germany was Germanic for millenias. They simply remained there.




When we talk about "Northern Europe", we are essentially talking about the Germanic tribes who had their origins in the north, and then spread southward. Yes, the further south you go, the more they assimilated the mostly Celtic aboriginal populations.

I think route was Westward as well as Southward. Dont get me wrong, I am also Northern arrival on South, I am just trying to present what is more or less consensus among modern historians.

[Anglojew]

No. It could be said for all modern Germanc countries.
French (and Frankish Empire) is Romance culture with touch of Germanic.

So you're essentially saying that even the ultimately more successfully Northern European Nations are really just a Roman continuum (therefore Southern) under a new guise (language)?

Very interesting premise. Many of Northern Europe's institutions and practices are undoubtedly Roman.

The next step is to say that Rome was a continuum of Greece.

So the EU is literally the New Rome?

[Loki]

Without any doubt. But they were practicisng Romance culture which they encountered there :) Germanics were drop in sea, and since their culture was on lower stage of develipment they got assimilated. What they left to french is Salic law.



I think you are underestimating Germanic influence. "Drop in the sea" ... I don't think so, and neither do historians.

[Twistedmind]

So you're essentially saying that even the ultimately more successfully Northern European Nations are really just a Roman continuum (therefore Southern) under a new guise (language)?

No. I am saying all have cultural influence from Roman Empire.




The next step is to say that Rome was a continuum of Greece.

Ancient Greek heritage is stronger in Eastern European Orthodox countires, but Western European Protestant and Roman Catholic have strong Ancient Greek influence, same as Easetrn have Roman.

[Twistedmind]

I think you are underestimating Germanic influence. "Drop in the sea" ... I don't think so, and neither do historians.

Hm, what is exactly Germanic influence on France? Mostly in legal parctices derived from Germanic common law.

Drop in the sea was refferenc on their numbers.
PS
I am historian also. Tough this is not my speciality, I have some knowledge on topic of great migration.

[Anglojew]

Hm, what is exactly Germanic influence on France? Mostly in legal parctices derived from Germanic common law.

Drop in the sea was refferenc on their numbers.
PS
I am historian also. Tough this is not my speciality, I have some knowledge on topic of great migration.

"The equal division of land among all living male heirs in opposition to primogeniture." Is an obvious one.

[Twistedmind]

"The equal division of land among all living male heirs in opposition to primogeniture." Is an obvious one.
Salic law. Applied in Germany, France, Netherlands (until late XIX cnetury) Louxemburg untill recently.

One of reasons for Hundred years war. Frenchmen chosed king's patrileineal second cousin over his nephew trough femal line (English king).

[Sisak]

.

http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/310/3/a/cities_of_southern_europe_by_nederbird-d329wdm.png

?

Romania also belong to southern Europe.

[Loki]

Hm, what is exactly Germanic influence on France? Mostly in legal parctices derived from Germanic common law.

Drop in the sea was refferenc on their numbers.
PS
I am historian also. Tough this is not my speciality, I have some knowledge on topic of great migration.

Hmm I think you are mistaken. Germanic influence on France was huge. Primarily through the Franks, but also considerably through Burgundians, Suebi, Marcomanni, Normans, Vandals and Visigoths.

In recent genetic analyses, many Frenchmen score as much Northern European genetic input as Germans (!), sometimes even more. In fact, French and Germans are so similar genetically that 23andme cannot separate them - they label the markers as "French and German".

Franks settled massively in France. The Franks later adopted the mostly Romance language. Even in the crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem alone, 120 000 Franks ruled there over the Muslims in 1099.

[Žołnir]

I would say south Europe for the sheer fact Slovenia is in it on this map but now that i was deemd German looking i will say north Europe! :D

[Twistedmind]

Hmm I think you are mistaken. Germanic influence on France was huge. Primarily through the Franks, but also considerably through Burgundians, Suebi, Marcomanni, Normans, Vandals and Visigoths.

In recent genetic analyses, many Frenchmen score as much Northern European genetic input as Germans (!), sometimes even more. In fact, French and Germans are so similar genetically that 23andme cannot separate them - they label the markers as "French and German".

Franks settled massively in France. The Franks later adopted the mostly Romance language. Even in the crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem alone, 120 000 Franks ruled there over the Muslims in 1099.
I was speaking primarily about Cultural influences not about gennetical. Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia are mostly listed as Southern European, altough we cluster much more with Austirans and Hungarians than to Greeks, even Ukrainians are genneticaly closer. I think that consensus is that France is Western, and Germany Central European countrey. And that was my point from start of discussion. When we compare Southern vs Northern Europe, we compare:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ab/SouthernEurope-DarkBlue.png/571px-SouthernEurope-DarkBlue.png
and this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b6/Northern-Europe-map.svg/680px-Northern-Europe-map.svg.png

Of course both maps are debated.

[Graus]

Obvious answer is obvious.

[Aunt Hilda]

both are european, none of them can be more european then the other

but when it comes to contemporary success I think northern Europe gets to have the title, for now.

[Rouxinol]

There aren't Europeans who are more or less European than others. There are more successful ones - at different points in time, though. Of course one can define as "European" whatever one wants, but the most correct definition in my opinion is: all peoples with their ethnogenesis in Europe. Thus, all modern European peoples. Hence, they are all equally European. Not really much to argue about.

Europe:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Europe_polar_stereographic_Caucasus_Urals_boundary .svg/700px-Europe_polar_stereographic_Caucasus_Urals_boundary .svg.png

Jews and gypsies, despite having lived in Europe for centuries, didn't have their ethnogenesis in the continent.

[Lemon Kush]

All European countries have had their "Golden Age" period.

[ioan assen]

South and North are equally European.
South Europe was more successful in the past and the very basis of European culture were created in Southern Europe (Greece, Italy, Spain till the victory of Englans over the Armada).
Presently Northern Europe is more successful: now the centre of Europe is Germany and France. The most successful countries in the sense that they have build very successful societies in my view are Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark. England is also successful but I think they are a little bit preocuppied to not be taken as wholly European... I wouldnt say they are the motor as Europe in the same sense Germany and France are...

[Jackson]

Yes, I agree that climate was an important factor, especially if we consider the fact that agriculture was essential for human development.

Not in a European context perhaps, but the Jomon proved that they could develop as much without farming as other's could with farming. So I think it is more the change to sedentism that gave the best conditions for dedicated plant agriculture, so eventually we all followed suite. This may have been a big part of the change within Europe, but it is not as clear cut as in Japan.

[Anglojew]

I was speaking primarily about Cultural influences not about gennetical. Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia are mostly listed as Southern European, altough we cluster much more with Austirans and Hungarians than to Greeks, even Ukrainians are genneticaly closer. I think that consensus is that France is Western, and Germany Central European countrey. And that was my point from start of discussion. When we compare Southern vs Northern Europe, we compare:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ab/SouthernEurope-DarkBlue.png/571px-SouthernEurope-DarkBlue.png
and this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b6/Northern-Europe-map.svg/680px-Northern-Europe-map.svg.png

Of course both maps are debated.

For the sake of the thread I only divided Europe into 2; North and South, not East and West and central.

[Twistedmind]

I dont think anybody ever made such division. There is East West division (religious and cultural). Anyway, since I know where this is heading, Ashkenazim lived in SOuthern Europe also.

PS
Italy and Spain were 8th and 9th worlds economy. (Probably the are still).

[Damião de Góis]

Southern and Northern definitions differ but I think this map is accurate about defining Southern Europe with geographically problematic France being divided into two but all other countries remaining either in the South or the North;

http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/310/3/a/cities_of_southern_europe_by_nederbird-d329wdm.png

Obviously all other European Countries are Northern.

I know you are from Australia, but if you want to split Europe in two, you should take a satellite picture, measure it from Crete to Northern Finland and draw and horizontal line in its midpoint:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Europe_NASA_satellite.jpg

Several locations claim to be that midpoint:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/72/Centre_of_Europe.jpg/674px-Centre_of_Europe.jpg

[Anglojew]

I know you are from Australia, but if you want to split Europe in two, you should take a satellite picture, measure it from Crete to Northern Finland and draw and horizontal line in its midpoint:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Europe_NASA_satellite.jpg

Several locations claim to be that midpoint:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/72/Centre_of_Europe.jpg/674px-Centre_of_Europe.jpg

I'm European born. I'm splitting Europe culturally not geographically.

[Bobby Six Killer]

Well every southern european country at some point ruled an empire.

Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal.

[Twistedmind]

I'm European born. I'm splitting Europe culturally not geographically.

:picard1:

Than you are doing it in verry wrong way. There is no great cultural conncetion between Bulgaria and Portugal. On other hand, there is between Bulgaria and Russia and between Portugal and England.

[Damião de Góis]

I'm European born. I'm splitting Europe culturally not geographically.

You are european born and think there are two cultures in Europe?

[Just90]

Barbarians was never an insult or a bad word

It was just a word for foreigners

[Teyrn]

Barbarians was never an insult or a bad word

It was just a word for foreigners

The English word barbarian comes from the ancient Greek word barbaroi, i.e. someone who didn't speak Greek, act Greek, etc. It implied an uncivilized savage. And to Greek-speakers of the time, yes, it was a derogatory term. The Greeks initially thought of the Romans as barbaroi for example.

[Twistedmind]

Acctually there was no established use of term. Greeks used it denote all foreigners, even those on high level of cultural development, like Egyptians and Phoenicians. Sometimes it could be used derogatory for other Greeks.

[SkyBurn]

Can't they be equally successful? :confused:

[Lithium]

There is no such thing as "more European". I consider all European countries to be equal on this matter.

[Absinthe]

"European" is a neologism and a misnomer if you ask me.

What does it mean? Asides from a geographical definition it doesn't say much. The tribes and nations in the continent are so different from each other and successful in their own fields.

Anyway this kind of discussions "my grandfather is better than yours" do not make much sense to me. I'm all for the holistic approach. The continent of Europe is a dynamic entity where some people are good in one thing, others in another, they all complement each other and make the world interesting.

Northern Europe is certainly more industrious and effective, they have better infrastructure and produce things, they have learned how to survive harsh weather conditions and how to get things done in an instant. They stick to the rules and are disciplined because a nation who doesn't cannot survive in adverse conditions.

Southern Europe on the other hand has had better climate and fertile lands, they need not bother about essential survival so much so they let out their creativity from an early time (that also explains why in the ancient times Southerners were more advanced; Northerners were still struggling with cold and survival). Southerners are generally more laid back, optimistic and all over the place, hence they are oriented towards aesthetics and art and philosophy but for the most part they cannot get anything else done.

I think Europe would be a boring place without the South but it should get some lessons of collectivism and productivity from the North as well.

[Insuperable]

It is quite obvious that Northern European in general is more successful.

There are some exceptions (like Ashkenazi and Greeks, some Italians, but I think that Southern Europe is less successful because of higher Neolithic ancestry:D

[Prince Carlo]

The path of civilizations follow this route:

Neolitich revolution -> Renaissance -> Industrial revolution -> Information revolution.

Italy and Greece -> Italy and France -> Germany and Great Britain -> US, Japan and China.

[Foxy]

I disagree that S. Europe at the moment is less successful, just consider all what Italy is facing:

1. it has to guarantee a 1st world standard of life to 60 millions ppl on a land that is smaller that Sweden that has only 8 millions ppl;
2. the highest rate of immigration in terms of percentage together with Spain;
3. the oldest population in Europe and one of the oldest in the world;
4. mafia;
5. corruption;
6. economical crisis;
7. industrial competition with megapowers like China and India;
8. lack of row materials...

Neverthless... it is the 10th biggest economy (http://www.aneki.com/richest.html) in the world. I bet that very few countries would stay at the same level of Italy if they had its same problems.

This is VERY successful IMO.

[Rouxinol]

I'm European born. I'm splitting Europe culturally not geographically.

Then you would have to split it in more than two parts, pal.

[Anglojew]

I disagree that S. Europe at the moment is less successful, just consider all what Italy is facing:

1. it has to guarantee a 1st world standard of life to 60 millions ppl on a land that is smaller that Sweden that has only 8 millions ppl;
2. the highest rate of immigration in terms of percentage together with Spain;
3. the oldest population in Europe and one of the oldest in the world;
4. mafia;
5. corruption;
6. economical crisis;
7. industrial competition with megapowers like China and India;
8. lack of row materials...

Neverthless... it is the 10th biggest economy (http://www.aneki.com/richest.html) in the world. I bet that very few countries would stay at the same level of Italy if they had its same problems.

This is VERY successful IMO.

Italy is a global success story

[Anglojew]

Then you would have to split it in more than two parts, pal.

Not for this exercise

[Foxy]

Italy is a global success story

I think this all depends on the fact that people know in any moment what to do.
After the heartquake in Abruzzo, in Emilia-Romagna and after the flood in Veneto, factories have been closed for less than a week in all the 3 cases. Then ppl, also those without home, went to work the same.
But yes, we Italians are lazy. :D

[Anglojew]

I think this all depends on the fact that people know in any moment what to do.
After the heartquake in Abruzzo, in Emilia-Romagna and after the flood in Veneto, factories have been closed for less than a week in all the 3 cases. Then ppl, also those without home, went to work the same.
But yes, we Italians are lazy. :D

I think Italians have a great life-work ratio

[Humanophage]

So much non-sense thrown out in a paragraph is sickening. Portugal is at about the same level that Poland is in all indicators. In some it comes first and Poland as a close second, in others its the other way around.

Worldbank, GDP (PPP) per capita (2005-11):
38 Portugal 25,372 2011
45 Poland 21,261 2011

IMF, GDP (PPP) per capita (2010-11):
42 Portugal 23,363 2011
45 Poland 20,184 2011

Before writing wild fantasies, check the facts.
Please re-read the post; I am referring to the period between the Enlightenment and the 1980s.

Here is the relative average GDP (PPP) per capita in selected East European and South European countries, with data taken from Gapminder (http://www.gapminder.org/world/#$majorMode=chart$is;shi=t;ly=2003;lb=f;il=t;fs=11 ;al=30;stl=t;st=f;nsl=t;se=t$wst;tts=C$ts;sp=5.592 90322580644;ti=1910$zpv;v=0$inc_x;mmid=XCOORDS;iid =phAwcNAVuyj1jiMAkmq1iMg;by=ind$inc_y;mmid=YCOORDS ;iid=phAwcNAVuyj2tPLxKvvnNPA;by=ind$inc_s;uniValue =8.21;iid=phAwcNAVuyj0XOoBL_n5tAQ;by=ind$inc_c;uni Value=255;gid=CATID0;by=grp$map_x;scale=log;dataMi n=283;dataMax=110808$map_y;scale=lin;dataMin=18;da taMax=87$map_s;sma=49;smi=2.65$cd;bd=0$inds=i178_r ,,,,,,;i57_r,,,,,,;i128_r,,,,,,;i179_r,,,,,,;i108_ r,,,,,,;i211_r,,,,,,;i100_r,,,,,,;i183_r,,,,,,;mod ified=75) (earlier dates would seem a bit too speculative, and anything before 1900 is fairly uncertain). As you can see, in the 1970s South Europe made a leap relative to Eastern Europe, and we arrived at the current situation in the 1980s.
http://i49.tinypic.com/f36yw3.jpg

[Just90]

The English word barbarian comes from the ancient Greek word barbaroi, i.e. someone who didn't speak Greek, act Greek, etc. It implied an uncivilized savage. And to Greek-speakers of the time, yes, it was a derogatory term. The Greeks initially thought of the Romans as barbaroi for example.

Well I'm talking about the Romans
And for them it was just foreigner

Anyone who was a foreigner to the Roman Empire , was a barbarian

[Teyrn]

Well I'm talking about the Romans
And for them it was just foreigner

Anyone who was a foreigner to the Roman Empire , was a barbarian

The Romans wouldn't have had the concept of a barbarian if not for the influence of the Greeks.

[Leon_C]

The South contributed more to civiliasation as a whole.

[Riki]

Like the Marshall plan? So America saved Europe (twice)?

http://cdn2.spiegel.de/images/image-226855-panoV9free-uzds.jpg
Former German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer (left) during a meeting with the High Commission of the Allies in 1951: Eschewing of reparations demands "a life-saving gesture"

"Think Greece's current economic malaise is the worst ever experienced in Europe? Think again. Germany, economic historian Albrecht Ritschl argues in a SPIEGEL ONLINE interview, has been the worst debtor nation of the past century. He warns the country should take a more chaste approach in the euro crisis or it could face renewed demands for World War II reparations.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Mr. Ritschl, Germany is coming across like a know-it-all in the debate over aid for Greece. Berlin is intransigent and is demanding obedience from Athens. Is this attitude justified?

Ritschl: No, there is no basis for it.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Most Germans would likely disagree.

Ritschl: That may be, but during the 20th century, Germany was responsible for what were the biggest national bankruptcies in recent history. It is only thanks to the United States, which sacrificed vast amounts of money after both World War I and World War II, that Germany is financially stable today and holds the status of Europe's headmaster. That fact, unfortunately, often seems to be forgotten.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: What happened back then exactly?

Ritschl: From 1924 to 1929, the Weimar Republic lived on credit and even borrowed the money it needed for its World War I reparations payments from America. This credit pyramid collapsed during the economic crisis of 1931. The money was gone, the damage to the United States enormous, the effect on the global economy devastating.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: The situation after World War II was similar.

Ritschl: But right afterwards, America immediately took steps to ensure there wouldn't be a repeat of high reparations demands made on Germany. With only a few exceptions, all such demands were put on the backburner until Germany's future reunification. For Germany, that was a life-saving gesture, and it was the actual financial basis of the Wirtschaftswunder, or economic miracle (that began in the 1950s). But it also meant that the victims of the German occupation in Europe also had to forgo reparations, including the Greeks.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: In the current crisis, Greece was initially pledged €110 billion from the euro-zone and the International Monetary Fund. Now a further rescue package of similar dimensions has become necessary. How big were Germany's previous defaults?

Ritschl: Measured in each case against the economic performance of the USA, the German debt default in the 1930s alone was as significant as the costs of the 2008 financial crisis. Compared to that default, today's Greek payment problems are actually insignificant.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: If there was a list of the worst global bankruptcies in history, where would Germany rank?

Ritschl: Germany is king when it comes to debt. Calculated based on the amount of losses compared to economic performance, Germany was the biggest debt transgressor of the 20th century.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Greece can't compare?

Ritschl: No, the country has played a minor role. It is only the contagion danger for other euro-zone countries that is the problem.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: The Germany of today is considered the embodiment of stability. How many times has Germany become insolvent in the past?

Ritschl: That depends on how you do the math. During the past century alone, though, at least three times. After the first default during the 1930s, the US gave Germany a "haircut" in 1953, reducing its debt problem to practically nothing. Germany has been in a very good position ever since, even as other Europeans were forced to endure the burdens of World War II and the consequences of the German occupation. Germany even had a period of non-payment in 1990.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Really? A default?

Ritschl: Yes, then-Chancellor Helmut Kohl refused at the time to implement changes to the London Agreement on German External Debts of 1953. Under the terms of the agreement, in the event of a reunification, the issue of German reparations payments from World War II would be newly regulated. The only demand made was that a small remaining sum be paid, but we're talking about minimal sums here. With the exception of compensation paid out to forced laborers, Germany did not pay any reparations after 1990 -- and neither did it pay off the loans and occupation costs it pressed out of the countries it had occupied during World War II. Not to the Greeks, either.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Unlike in 1953, the current debate in Germany over the rescue of Greece is concerned not so much with a "haircut", but rather an extension of the maturities of government bonds, i.e. a "soft debt restructuring." Can one therefore even speak of an impending bankruptcy?

Ritschl: Absolutely. Even if a country is not 100 percent out of money, it could still be broke. Just like in the case of Germany in the 1950s, it is illusory to think that Greeks would ever pay off their debts alone. Those who are unable to do that are considered to be flat broke. It is now necessary to determine how high the failure rate of government bonds is, and how much money the country's creditors must sacrifice. It's above all a matter of finding the paymaster.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: The biggest paymaster would surely be Germany.

Ritschl: That's what it looks like, but we were also extremely reckless -- and our export industry has thrived on orders. The anti-Greek sentiment that is widespread in many German media outlets is highly dangerous. And we are sitting in a glass house: Germany's resurgence has only been possible through waiving extensive debt payments and stopping reparations to its World War II victims.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: You're saying that Germany should back down?

Ritschl: In the 20th century, Germany started two world wars, the second of which was conducted as a war of annihilation and extermination, and subsequently its enemies waived its reparations payments completely or to a considerable extent. No one in Greece has forgotten that Germany owes its economic prosperity to the grace of other nations.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: What do you mean by that?

Ritschl: The Greeks are very well aware of the antagonistic articles in the German media. If the mood in the country turns, old claims for reparations could be raised, from other European nations as well. And if Germany ever had to honor them, we would all be taken the cleaners. Compared with that, we can be grateful that Greece is being indulgently reorganized at our expense. If we follow public opinion here with its cheap propaganda and not wanting to pay, then eventually the old bills will be presented again.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Looking at history, what would be the best solution for Greece -- and for Germany?

Ritschl: The German bankruptcies in the last century show that the sensible thing to do now would be to have a real reduction of the debt. Anyone who has lent money to Greece would then have to give up a considerable part of what they were owed. Some banks would not be able to cope with that, so there would have to be new aid programs. For Germany, this could be expensive, but we will have to pay either way. At least Greece would then have the chance to start over.

[shaliza]

1. Which region (North or South) is more successful?

It depends on the age; until the Industrial Revolution it was Southern Europe, after it, it has been Northern Europe.


2. Who region (North or South) is more European?

Europeanness isn't something which you can measure accurately, like height or weight, hence all peoples native to Europe are equally European.


Are Slavs latecomers so not as European as the English for example?

Slavs aren't newcomers; their birthplace was Eastern Europe.

[Anglojew]

It depends on the age; until the Industrial Revolution it was Southern Europe, after it, it has been Northern Europe.



Europeanness isn't something which you can measure accurately, like height or weight, hence all peoples native to Europe are equally European.



Slavs aren't newcomers; their birthplace was Eastern Europe.

What I meant by that is they weren't part of the Roman Empire until Byzantine times.

[Gospodine]

I like debate. I think debate leads to truth and harmony.

Your debates are useless mental masturbation exercises on issues which you yourself have no authority on and always revolve around the most abstract of topics that you derive from your personal anecdotes which are probably made up (E.g. I think so and so is better than so and so; please discuss).

You start them because you like to see Europeans and/or Muslims fighting amongst one another; it wets your Zionist appetite for sowing discord amongst the gentiles.

[Gospodine]

So America saved Europe (twice)?

:picard1:

You haven't slept in a while have you?

http://0-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/vg/image/1335/94/1335949731793.jpg

[snowbird]

Northern Europe as in Scandinavia, or are you talking about north of the alps?

[Anglojew]

Your debates are useless mental masturbation exercises on issues which you yourself have no authority on and always revolve around the most abstract of topics that you derive from your personal anecdotes which are probably made up (E.g. I think so and so is better than so and so; please discuss).

You start them because you like to see Europeans and/or Muslims fighting amongst one another; it wets your Zionist appetite for sowing discord amongst the gentiles.

I have 3 degrees related to the topic. How many do you have?

Only an idiot would define every none Jew by one word. The world is a complex place. I've made no secret of my politics not my dislikes; Orthodox Sunni Muslim elites, Spanish elites, Norwegian elites, Neo-Nazis etc.

I don't see you even posting threads. You're a typical hater; contributing nothing except negativity.

[Furnace]

I have 3 degrees related to the topic. How many do you have?

Only an idiot would define every none Jew by one word. The world is a complex place. I've made no secret of my politics not my dislikes; Orthodox Sunni Muslim elites, Spanish elites, Norwegian elites, Neo-Nazis etc.

I don't see you even posting threads. You're a typical hater; contributing nothing except negativity.

You hater :(

[Anglojew]

Northern Europe as in Scandinavia, or are you talking about north of the alps?

I'm using the former Roman Empire (in Europe, but without Britain and North France). The north is obviously larger today but historically was smaller so although it looks a little lopsided today I think in historical context it balances out as in ancient times the "south" probably had 5 times the population as the "North".

[Damião de Góis]

You hater :(

Don't worry, he only starts threads about the spanish.

[Anglojew]

You hater :(

I'm reacting to Norwegian Elite's Judeophobia and Anti-Americanism but I make no claims to be all-forgiving or something but unlike true haters I recognize most Norwegians are either ignornant if they support their elites or have no say in policy so can't be held accountable for Norways treachery towards America and the West and love affair with Jihadists.

[Anglojew]

Don't worry, he only starts threads about the spanish.

No I don't. Look dude I'm sorry if the Portugese are too unimportant to even bother starting a thread about and you feel left out or something.

[Damião de Góis]

No I don't. Look dude I'm sorry if the Portugese are too unimportant to even bother starting a thread about and you feel left out or something.

Oi?

I meant you never started threads about how much you hated Norway, despite saying you equally hate Spain and Norway.

[Furnace]

I'm reacting to Norwegian Elite's Judeophobia and Anti-Americanism but I make no claims to be all-forgiving or something but unlike true haters I recognize most Norwegians are either ignornant if they support their elites or have no say in policy so can't be held accountable for Norways treachery towards America and the West and love affair with Jihadists.

The thing is, most / if not all leftist governments are pro-palestinian, thus it's rather silly to hate on a single country's elites.

[Anglojew]

Oi?

I meant you never started threads about how much you hated Norway, despite saying you equally hate Spain and Norway.

Sorry too much coffee this morning I'm on edge!

I did actually but they both got quickly deleted. Seems like Jews on here are expected to put up with 20 hater threads a day but post anything criticizing Norwegians and they have very thin skins. I honestly think from their reactions they had never been criticised before.

*obviously Portugal was historically important eg Knights of St John. For some reason I don't consider you guys as hostile as the Spanish (who seem to have Stockholm syndrome for their former Muslim occupiers.)

I've actually had Jewish members on here Message me saying dont criticize anyone because that makes people hate us. I said that he hasn't criticised anyone but people still hate him for being Jewish so asked how his policy is working out for him? Point is I'm going to call a spade a spade. Europeans are letting their countries turn in to Eurabia because they're too busy hating Jews because they're stuck in the 19th century and still think they're powerful when I fact they're surrounded by billions of hostiles who make no secret in the fact their jihadist ideology says they want a Muslim flag over the Vatican just like over Constantaple (and Jerusalem with the continued help of the Eurodimmis)

[Anglojew]

The thing is, most / if not all leftist governments are pro-palestinian, thus it's rather silly to hate on a single country's elites.

I guess that's true but most of Europe voted in leftist governments continuously.

[Vasa]

Hm, to be technically correct, Europe as concept we know today did not exist before Charlemagne. Nobody was European back then.

And still aint. Im Swedish, Nordic and Scandinavian. The rest i cannot identify with, i have nothing in common with southern euros etc. Therefor im still just Swedish, Nordic and then Scandinavian.

[Anglojew]

And still aint. Im Swedish, Nordic and Scandinavian. The rest i cannot identify with, i have nothing in common with southern euros etc. Therefor im still just Swedish, Nordic and then Scandinavian.

This is ironically the exact attitude that seems common in Scandinavia. I guess it's true in some ways.

[Twistedmind]

And still aint. Im Swedish, Nordic and Scandinavian. The rest i cannot identify with, i have nothing in common with southern euros etc. Therefor im still just Swedish, Nordic and then Scandinavian.

Verry interesting, but again it is your personal opinion, and completly unimportnant for what we are discussing here. PS Europe is more category, than point of selfidentification.
I could say I care just for Slavic and Orthodox peoples, but again, I am much closer to Austrians, than lets say than to Magrebians for example, culturally, religiously, gennetically, lignuistically... in every way.

Anyway, I started discussin here just to say, Southern Europe is just geographical. There is not some common cultural, political, gennetical, lingusiitcal connection which would encompass all as single category in European terms, countrary to Northern Europe.

[Anglojew]

I just had a quick look at the population stats for Norway and Sweden; really insignificant and looks like they are fading fast. Rough tally for example there are more people living in Banagalore[ India's 3rd largest city] than native Swedes. More Jews in Israel than native Norwegians. Even if you combine all the Swedes and Norwegians, they would roughly equal India's city of Mumbai, in population.

They are an endangered species

[Gospodine]

Europeans are letting their countries turn in to Eurabia because they're too busy hating Jews because they're stuck in the 19th century and still think they're powerful

The reason why we have multiculturalism as an indisputable fact of political policy in Western countries is thanks to Jews. Cultural Marxists (many of them Jews) brought this upon Europe.

Anytime there is an upswing in anti-Semitism (such as the Global Financial Crisis and all the Jews who brought that upon the world) it is countered by a concerted focusing on Islam/Immigration by the mainstream media to distract people from the bigger fish out there.

[Vasconcelos]

Silly question, both are equally European. Historically South was more successful, currently North is.

End of thread.

[EagleAtHeart]

This is a stupid thread intended to be divisive by getting different Europeans to argue. Divide and conquer.

[Damião de Góis]

*obviously Portugal was historically important eg Knights of St John.

I had no idea of who the Knights of St John were, but after i check them i think you confused us with Malta? Well, check again..

http://img1.findthebest.com/sites/default/files/701/media/images/Portuguese_Empire.png

[Comte Arnau]

Anyway, I started discussin here just to say, Southern Europe is just geographical. There is not some common cultural, political, gennetical, lingusiitcal connection which would encompass all as single category in European terms, countrary to Northern Europe.

That is right. There is a certain degree of metaethnic connection between the Romance peoples, the South-West. But then, whether an Iberian will consider himself closer to a Greek or an Irish guy will pretty much depend on his life experience. I can only talk for myself and I feel Catalan first, then Iberian, then Western European (including here both the Romance and the Celto-Germanic corners). This is due to my life experience, my beliefs, my likes and my personal relationships.

[Anglojew]

The reason why we have multiculturalism as an indisputable fact of political policy in Western countries is thanks to Jews. Cultural Marxists (many of them Jews) brought this upon Europe.

Anytime there is an upswing in anti-Semitism (such as the Global Financial Crisis and all the Jews who brought that upon the world) it is countered by a concerted focusing on Islam/Immigration by the mainstream media to distract people from the bigger fish out there.

Says the Muslim.

[Anglojew]

I had no idea of who the Knights of St John were, but after i check them i think you confused us with Malta? Well, check again..

http://img1.findthebest.com/sites/default/files/701/media/images/Portuguese_Empire.png

Yeah I mean St.James.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_Christ_(Portugal)

[Comte Arnau]

Silly question, both are equally European. Historically South was more successful, currently North is.

End of thread.

Come on, the thread is good for discussion, methinks. The pity is it is biased from the start, but I'd say a few posts were good.

I see that some Southerners like you or Absinthe admit the North is more successful, saying it was the past for us Southerners. Well, you see, I disagree. Or at least, I don't think it is that clear. Probably because I don't link success with just capitalist efficiency. There is much more to life than that. :)

[Anglojew]

Come on, the thread is good for discussion, methinks. The pity is it is biased from the start, but I'd say a few posts were good.

I see that some Southerners like you or Absinthe admit the North is more successful, saying it was the past for us Southerners. Well, you see, I disagree. Or at least, I don't think it is that clear. Probably because I don't link success with just capitalist efficiency. There is much more to life than that. :)

I'd say the South has a better lifestyle which is why many people retire there from the North.

[EagleAtHeart]

Come on, the thread is good for discussion, methinks. The pity is it is biased from the start, but I'd say a few posts were good.

I see that some Southerners like you or Absinthe admit the North is more successful, saying it was the past for us Southerners. Well, you see, I disagree. Or at least, I don't think it is that clear. Probably because I don't link success with just capitalist efficiency. There is much more to life than that. :)

Italy has one of the largest GDP's in Europe, just below Germany and England, even though the aforementioned have millions more people. Also, most of the driving force of Italy's GDP is from the north. A relatively small population and parcel of land. How is the north more successful?

Anywho, this thread is designed to cause an argument between different Europeans, so my comment was just to correct your assertion that the North is more advanced, which it isn't, especially compared to Italy.

[Anglojew]

Italy has one of the largest GDP's in Europe, just below Germany and England, even though the aforementioned have millions more people. Also, most of the driving force of Italy's GDP is from the north. A relatively small population and parcel of land. How is the north more successful?

Anywho, this thread is designed to cause an argument between different Europeans, so my comment was just to correct your assertion that the North is more advanced, which it isn't, especially compared to Italy.

Italy has more people than England but I agree. Italy is a slice of heaven.

[catgurlars]

Southern Europeans were successful with things like food, art, and philosophy in the ancient world, but in the modern world, Northern Europeans have been more successful then Southern Europeans.

[Duke]

I would always chose to be born as south, rather then north European

[el22]

We, southerns, control the north. This is a big conspiracy ofc, that was almost spoiled out by a movie (matrix).
You see, there was a time when northers were happy, but not productive (as in matrix). We realized that we had to do something about this. So once in a while, some brave souls among us have to sacrifice themselves and go and live in the north shitty weather.

This has two main effects: It stresses northers outdoors to the point that they have to lock themselves inside, trying to think about something else to distract themselves, and therefore being productive. Our presence there also gives them the illusion that the way they live their life's is the best one (that's why we go there, they think), so they keep trying harder.

But, we don't really envy their life style and, as they have already observed, we don't put any effort to imitate them even while there.

[Twistedmind]

That is right. There is a certain degree of metaethnic connection between the Romance peoples, the South-West. But then, whether an Iberian will consider himself closer to a Greek or an Irish guy will pretty much depend on his life experience. I can only talk for myself and I feel Catalan first, then Iberian, then Western European (including here both the Romance and the Celto-Germanic corners). This is due to my life experience, my beliefs, my likes and my personal relationships.

Yep. I agree. :) Shame OP does not want to see something that obvious.

[Cristiano viejo]

FINAL Spain 35 Denmark 19
Spain Champion of World in Handball

sEc7j8QW-9M

http://estatico.vozpopuli.com/imagenes/Noticias/BC0B4BE6-D7E2-E50C-4EC2-AB02C99F50F9.jpg/resizeCut/879-0-1500/0-144-921/imagen.jpg

[chocolatcandy]

North europeans are ofcourse the best of all.

[Albion]

Does Europe actually end in Europe? eg No one says Arabs are limited to Arabia because Arab culture and people migrated. So why do people reduce Europe to that Eurasian peninsula?

I think Europe (or Indo-Europe) is larger. Isn't this really Europe today?

http://www.ikindalikelanguages.com/images/europeanlanguages.png

Might be a new thread topic?

I'd take out most of Latin America except the Southern cone from that map. Latin America blends European culture with indigenous elements and their own inventions, but extensions of Europe must be where the people are actually largely of European descent.

Labrador, I know you deleted the post but you made a good argument, but some of it I disagree with so I hope you don't mind me quoting it:


After World War II, most of the non-Soviet aligned and warworn nations of Europe received a lot of aid from the United States (European Recovery Program a.k.a. Marshall Plan) and aligned themselves with American-like capitalism, whilst Eastern Europe was absorbed by communist/Soviet influence stemming from Moscow. This alone explains the difference in development between Western Europe and Eastern Europe. The United Kingdom, France, West Germany (present-day Germany), Italy and the Netherlands were the biggest beneficiaries of such aid packages, which in turn stands to reason with their present-day positions as world and economical powers.

I don't think so. Britain for example was an economic wreck throughout much of the Cold War and American aid could not sustain Western Europe for ever. This is a myth.
American loans just helped Western Europe re-establish its pre-war economies, although empires falling had an effect, especially on Portugal.


Interestingly, all these countries went through astonishing "economical miracles" during the 1960s and 1970s, which was coincident with the absorption of foreign workforce as immigrants from Southern Europe (in the case of Italy, Northern Italy received probably as much migrants from its southern regions as Northwestern Europe - mainly France and Germany - did).

This is probably just from post war rebuilding rather than anything else. Some attribute it to Keynesianism at work, but then that went a bit awry with the OPEC standoff.
A lot of declining regions in Northern Europe have Southern minorities, Wallonia with its Italians is an example. Not that they were the cause, but I doubt they caused any economic miracle.


Still, economically it has been stripped of much of its sovereignty in order to comply to European Union demands. Such demands stripped the country of a great part of its fishery (European Union's Common Fisheries Policy), agricultural (European Union's Common Agricultural Policy) and industrial network in order to make room for mainly German and French corporations to come in or reduce Portuguese capacity in fisheries and agriculture in order to benefit the EU's most powerful members. Instead of making the country self-sufficient, all the EU has done was make it economically dependent on others.

Yes, our fisheries have been depleted by foreign fleets as well. Spain benefits a lot from the common fisheries and some Scottish nationalists are afraid it will veto an independent Scotland joining the EU if Scotland tries to have an opt-out of common fisheries.
As for agriculture, Britain produces more staple crops like grain now, but the diversity of things being grown is much less. We don't grow nearly as much fruit or veg as we used to. Before we joined the EU we grew a diverse range of foods and imported them from our kin in the southern hemisphere (Australia + NZ) during our off seasons (winter+spring when not much is ready to harvest).


I am not going back further in time to explain why did England surpassed Portugal in world exploration, it's self-evident that a country of 1 million couldn't compete with Dutch, English, French and Spanish all at the same time striving for world dominance - still, impressively, it managed to retain a lot of its empire.

Well Portugal didn't have a massive population boom like NW Europe, I think this is the reason. Portugal never did really replace Brazil, whereas England managed to colonize Australia, NZ and the rest of Canada almost immediately after the loss of its colonies in America. It also had part of India at the time too, so the loss wasn't such a blow as people make out (although it wasn't exactly a good thing either).
By the time Portugal lost Brazil there was only really Africa left to be colonized.

[Albion]

(Greece, Italy, Spain till the victory of England's over the Armada).


I don't see why this is such an important event outside of England, Spain wasn't broken from it and England immediately after was still weaker than Spain for a good while.



I disagree that S. Europe at the moment is less successful, just consider all what Italy is facing:

1. it has to guarantee a 1st world standard of life to 60 millions ppl on a land that is smaller that Sweden that has only 8 millions ppl;
2. the highest rate of immigration in terms of percentage together with Spain;
3. the oldest population in Europe and one of the oldest in the world;
4. mafia;
5. corruption;
6. economical crisis;
7. industrial competition with megapowers like China and India;
8. lack of row materials...

Neverthless... it is the 10th biggest economy (http://www.aneki.com/richest.html) in the world. I bet that very few countries would stay at the same level of Italy if they had its same problems.

This is VERY successful IMO.



How is Italy to Sweden even close to a fair comparison? :confused: That's like comparing Germany to Portugal.
If you want to make a comparison then compare it to the UK which has a similar sized population, or to France.

[Rouxinol]

Hi Albion. I was afraid to stir up the thread so I deleted it, but anyway, no problem in quoting it. If you are able to put up the post back there's no problem, since you quoted it. Thank you for posting your arguments - always nice to get to know others' points of view. It's unfortunate to know though that Britain has been affected by the fisheries/agricultural common policies as well. Damn EU!

[Albion]

Hi Albion. I was afraid to stir up the thread so I deleted it, but anyway, no problem in quoting it. If you are able to put up the post back there's no problem, since you quoted it. Thank you for posting your arguments - always nice to get to know others' points of view. It's unfortunate to know though that Britain has been affected by the fisheries/agricultural common policies as well. Damn EU!

English waters in the North Sea are basically empty now apart from on the Atlantic, Scotland has done better because it has a large area of territorial waters in the Atlantic.

[RussiaPrussia]

southern europe is culturally more european than the north.
but not ethnically.
The north is obviously more successful throughout history even eastern european nations were richer in the past than the south.

[Xárszászát]

southern europe is culturally more european than the north.
but not ethnically.
The north is obviously more successful throughout history even eastern european nations were richer in the past than the south.

?
Since when "throughout history" is 1870-present?
And for Scandinavian countries it should 1960- present.
I would like to know when Eastern countries were richer than Italy just to know and to know what "Northerners" achieved more than Southernes, just to regresh my poor and ignorant mind.

[RussiaPrussia]

?
Since when "throughout history" is 1870-present?
And for Scandinavian countries it should 1960- present.
I would like to know when Eastern countries were richer than Italy just to know and to know what "Northerners" achieved more than Southernes, just to regresh my poor and ignorant mind.

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=725&pictureid=5513

as you can in this old west german school book that i own which was released in 70s

eastern eruope used to be as rich as ireland, japan, italy and austria and richer than all other southern european countries in 1965. And north european inventions and explorations are obvious :picard1:

[Comte Arnau]

so my comment was just to correct your assertion that the North is more advanced, which it isn't, especially compared to Italy.

Where did I say that the North is more advanced?


southern europe is culturally more european than the north.
but not ethnically.

What Southern European ethnicity is less European?

[RussiaPrussia]

well they look more like what people define europe with.

[Xárszászát]

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=725&pictureid=5513

as you can in this old west german school book that i own which was released in 70s

eastern eruope used to be as rich as ireland, japan, italy and austria and richer than all other southern european countries in 1965. And north european inventions and explorations are obvious :picard1:

What an amazingly unbiased source, my compliment moreover, ONE source that is 40 years old.
Secondly, Do you know that Italian PIL is above Russian one?
Do you know that Italy till '600 was the economic centre of Europe?
Do you know anything about Italian economic miracle?
Furthermore, it would be kind to define what you mean as "richer".
Thirdly, Nordic Exploration?
I.e. Vikings?
Wow.
Such an amazing achievement that nobody apart them knew the existence of a New World till 1492.
And, do those achievements even match what Southern Europe achieved?
Do some explorations outclass Renaissance,Rome, technological discoveries, most of art and culture till XVIII Century (when German culture started flourishing)?
Do they?
I mean, when Vikings were something akin to animals wearing furs, in Italy there were Venice, Genoa, there were Gothic and Romanic, there were Crusades and amanuensi.
Moreover, "less ethnically" European?
But if it was Southerners who founded Europe!
When there was Rome "Germanic tribes" were just a bunch of primitives who were hardly capable of building anything higher than an hut!
What did they leave to us? Lootings? Killings?
Northerners might be more economic successful (even here depending on what you mean), but they will be ever hardly to match what Southern Europe has given to Europe.
When in Rome there were Pantheon, there were roads and walls, when Greeks invented Democracy, their alphabet, in Germany there were barbarians living in hut made with mud!
And all these things without talking about what Egyptians and Sumerians achieved, all peoples who were hardly "Nordic".

[HardStepFutureForce]

Greece showed the world what is laws, art, organization and superiority, rulling most of the known world at the time.
Rome also was very ahead of its time, just like greece, and had one of the strongest empires that this world will ever see.
Portugal has the longest empire in europe, and with the iberian brothers, discovered, shared, conquered and dominated big part of the known world.

Only England maybe can match the power, history and sucess of these southern folks, but looking in a bigger picture, the southern europe did much more than the northen.

[InTouch]

All these threads, north vs south Europe, are brown eyed people less white etc, they are designed to divide and cause conflict between Europeans. And they are mostly started by the Jewish and other non European members I've noticed.

Stop falling for it people. Step back and realise you are being goaded into arguments.

[arcticwolf]

All these threads, north vs south Europe, are brown eyed people less white etc, they are designed to divide and cause conflict between Europeans. And they are mostly started by the Jewish and other non European members I've noticed.

Stop falling for it people. Step back and realise you are being goaded into arguments.

The funniest thing is that some people profess the interest in preserving European civilization, but their topics are divisive. As I am really not a conspiracy theorist, and don't subscribe to any of them I tend to give people a benefit of a doubt. I think it's more of a persons own prejudices and grudges, historical or what have you than a design, or a malicious intent. But regardless of the motivation, these topics do nothing constructive, and a lot of Southerners fall for it unfortunately.

Here is a disclaimer, no half witted, semi intelligent Northern European, with even boarder level awareness thinks or considers Southern Europeans anything else than Europeans. It does not matter that most Southern Europeans have brown hair or brown eyes, who the fuck cares!

It's your mind and culture that makes you European not your fucking hair color ( it goes for all Europeans not just Southerners! ;) )

Fuck, wise up people! WTF! You don't wanna upset a bad wolf! LOL

I agree with you, enough is enough, those doing it, stop and get your shit together you ain't helping. Set your animosities aside and be constructive!

I'm done. Fuck, Don't you ever upset me like that again! :laugh:

[EagleAtHeart]

All these threads, north vs south Europe, are brown eyed people less white etc, they are designed to divide and cause conflict between Europeans. And they are mostly started by the Jewish and other non European members I've noticed.

Stop falling for it people. Step back and realise you are being goaded into arguments.

!!!

[Cristiano viejo]

All these threads, north vs south Europe, are brown eyed people less white etc, they are designed to divide and cause conflict between Europeans. And they are mostly started by the Jewish and other non European members I've noticed.

Stop falling for it people. Step back and realise you are being goaded into arguments.

MY GOD... EVERYBODY MUST GIVE REPUTATION TO THIS GUY!!!!!!! :thumb001:
+ INFINITY

[DUX MEA LUX]

All these threads, north vs south Europe, are brown eyed people less white etc, they are designed to divide and cause conflict between Europeans. And they are mostly started by the Jewish and other non European members I've noticed.

Stop falling for it people. Step back and realise you are being goaded into arguments.

^ What he said.

[Slycooper]

South for both.

[1stLightHorse]

Northerners IMO are just as smart as southerners but they're larger people, more physically impressive, less civil by nature (i say this as a good thing), more violent, maybe as a result of higher % of paleo hunter-gatherer DNA.

There is a very ancient indo-european warrior tradition of the berserker found in germanic, celtic and italic peoples, who would "shapeshift" in combat and then try to smash everything in their midst, pounding skulls into dust. To me, this appreciable level of violence is the essence of the northern spirit. To become a companion of uncomfortablity and just grit your teeth and cave everyone's face in. Of course, the contemporary manifestation of this is having incomparable military technology that far exceeds even the second best, so that when you need to you may wipe your enemies from existence at a moments notice.

[Neon Knight]

Poland is right in the middle of Europe, so maybe Poles are the most European. Different regions have been successful at different times in history. The wheel is always turning.

[Anglojew]

All these threads, north vs south Europe, are brown eyed people less white etc, they are designed to divide and cause conflict between Europeans. And they are mostly started by the Jewish and other non European members I've noticed.

Stop falling for it people. Step back and realise you are being goaded into arguments.

The divisions of Europe already exist be it Orthodox/Catholic/Protestant or East/West or North, South.

It's funny that you're blaming Jews for dividing Europe while others blame us for uniting it (at the expense of individual nations) through the EU.

[Anglojew]

Northerners IMO are just as smart as southerners but they're larger people, more physically impressive, less civil by nature (i say this as a good thing), more violent, maybe as a result of higher % of paleo hunter-gatherer DNA.

There is a very ancient indo-european warrior tradition of the berserker found in germanic, celtic and italic peoples, who would "shapeshift" in combat and then try to smash everything in their midst, pounding skulls into dust. To me, this appreciable level of violence is the essence of the northern spirit. To become a companion of uncomfortablity and just grit your teeth and cave everyone's face in. Of course, the contemporary manifestation of this is having incomparable military technology that far exceeds even the second best, so that when you need to you may wipe your enemies from existence at a moments notice.


There were warrior traditions, like Sparta, in Southern Europe. Some, like the Conquistadors, conquered much of the world.

[MarkyMark]

Definitely Southern Europe. Northern Europeans couldn't get past their barbaric ages until after the crusades...until after they established connections with the middle east and gained abundance to trade and thus more foods and more technology. The success of Southern Europe on the other hand rose independently. Any World Historian who takes his job seriously would acknowledge this.

[Cristiano viejo]

The divisions of Europe already exist be it Orthodox/Catholic/Protestant or East/West or North, South.

It's funny that you're blaming Jews for dividing Europe while others blame us for uniting it (at the expense of individual nations) through the EU.
Do you think seriously that the EU is uniting Europe??:picard1:

[Albion]

Northerners IMO are just as smart as southerners but they're larger people, more physically impressive, less civil by nature (i say this as a good thing), more violent, maybe as a result of higher % of paleo hunter-gatherer DNA.

All peoples ultimately descend from Paleolithic hunter gatherers from somewhere originally. Paleolithic hunter gatherers in Scandinavia, Iberia, Balkans, Siberia, Central Asia or Anatolia would all have had to have been tough and adaptable in harsh conditions.

[Wadaad]

yes Anglo jew make Ha-Shem proud, keep sowing discord among the goy...good good

[Comte Arnau]

There are times when one would like to be a Central neutral boring Swiss.

[Baluarte]

Definitely Southern Europe. Northern Europeans couldn't get past their barbaric ages until after the crusades...until after they established connections with the middle east and gained abundance to trade and thus more foods and more technology. The success of Southern Europe on the other hand rose independently. Any World Historian who takes his job seriously would acknowledge this.

Not to mention that a fair share of their wealth was the product of sheer piracy and banditism.

There is a reason for which "pirate" was another way to refer to an Englishman in the XVIth and XVIIth Century.

Well said Marky

[The Lawspeaker]

Do you feed on sh*tstorms? :)
He is just trying to divide us and turn us against each other. It's a Jewish thing. ;)

[Anglojew]

Do you think seriously that the EU is uniting Europe??:picard1:

No. I wrote what others blame Jews about.

I hate the EU in practice (as it's a Marxist institution) but I do like the fact that only a combine Europe will ensure Europe's position in the world due to the rapid growth of other powers.

[Albion]

Not to mention that a fair share of their wealth was the product of sheer piracy and banditism.

There is a reason for which "pirate" was another way to refer to an Englishman in the XVIth and XVIIth Century.

Well said Marky

Call it reparations for the Spanish and French attempting invasions on multiple times and constantly harrassing our merchants.


No. I wrote what others blame Jews about.

I hate the EU in practice (as it's a Marxist institution) but I do like the fact that only a combine Europe will ensure Europe's position in the world due to the rapid growth of other powers.

Yes, I'am of a similar opinion. As a concept, a organisation for the co-operation of European states is not a bad idea (some say it was originally a British idea, Churchill's idea, although he didn't see Britain as part of it and Napoleon and Hitler had arguably thought of it first in their own sort of way...).
A loose organisation without the negative attributes of the EU would be welcome. The EU is so far gone though, that I think only its abolishion and restarting from scratch would work. The EU is too stuck in its ways to reform, it opposes even the smallest suggestion of change.

[SKYNET]

I love European south and European north.

[Peyrol]

''Southern Europe'' is a paninclusive and almost a senseless term.

[Dombra]

Until about 500 years ago south was supreme. Since then it has been equal

[Anglojew]

Until about 500 years ago south was supreme. Since then it has been equal

True. Italy is probably the exception.

[Peyrol]

True. Italy is probably the exception.

Italy exist only since 1861.

[archangel]

both of them feared to death North Euroasian barbarians such as Sarmatians,Alans,Huns etc....:cool:

[The Lawspeaker]

both of them feared to death North Euroasian barbarians such as Sarmatians,Alans,Huns etc....:cool:
Yes.. those were no laughing matter. Although I think that today a single Dutch mechanised infantry regiment, maybe with some artillery support could send the Hunnic army to hell.

[Damião de Góis]

both of them feared to death North Euroasian barbarians such as Sarmatians,Alans,Huns etc....:cool:

Alans were quickly dealt with here by the Visigoths. The others never got here.

[archangel]

well Huns plundered all way to france and baltic,Alans even invaded north africa from iberia,arent they?

[Peyrol]

both of them feared to death North Euroasian barbarians such as Sarmatians,Alans,Huns etc....:cool:

No one of the peope you mentione reached th Alpes.

[Damião de Góis]

well Huns plundered all way to france and baltic,Alans even invaded north africa from iberia,arent they?

Yes, Alans certainly got here:

http://geocurrents.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Alan_Migrations_Map.jpg

[Vasconcelos]

well Huns plundered all way to france and baltic,Alans even invaded north africa from iberia,arent they?

Alans invaded NA from Iberia because they were kicked out by both Suebians and Visigoths.

[Arend]

well Huns plundered all way to france and baltic,Alans even invaded north africa from iberia,arent they?Vandal king Gunderic took the Alan and most of them went with the Vandals to North Africa. Apparently they couldnt do it on their own. All of the people you mentioned eventually vanished

[Szegedist]

No one of the peope you mentione reached th Alpes.

Do Magyars count
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Kalandozasok.jpg

"A sagittis Hungarorum libera nos, Domine!"

[Peyrol]

Do Magyars count
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Kalandozasok.jpg

"De sagittis hungarorum libera nos Domine"

There is a story/legend here about a magyar horda who decided to settle a little village here, in south-western Piemonte, with the permission of House Savoie...

[Szegedist]

There is a story/legend here about a magyar horda who decided to settle a little village here, in south-western Piemonte, with the permission of House Savoie...

Do you have any more information about this? This also happened in Switzerland, Val d'Anniviers.

[Twistedmind]

both of them feared to death North Euroasian barbarians such as Sarmatians,Alans,Huns etc....:cool:
:picard1:
Alans were Sarmatian tribe, and Sarmatians were both Europeans and Indo-Europeans, never having base in Asia.

[archangel]

trolol Sarmatians,Alans were northeuroasian barbars they apperead in ural region my friend,their language is a bit in shadows,personally i would not buy that they were iranic lol,they were Türkic and their heirs are Volga Tatars now

[Twistedmind]

trolol Sarmatians,Alans were northeuroasian barbars they apperead in ural region my friend,
Buy yourself map.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Scythia-Parthia_100_BC.png



their language is a bit in shadows,personally i would not buy that they were iranic lol,they were Türkic and their heirs are Volga Tatars now
All linguists consider them Iranians. :D BTW Turanics were not even separated by Mongols in that timeframe :D

[archangel]

lol i am sure they didnt look like these south asian looking iranians such as ahmedinejad lol,they apperared in ural region the birthplace of Türks,iranians are south asians mostly and live in iran,pakistan,india etc...

[Twistedmind]

they apperared in ural region the birthplace of Türks
Nah, they never lived in Ural, genius, how horse nomads could live in mountains :D

Besides, craddle of Turks is Altay :D You are bad Pan-Türk :D

[archangel]

lol the name is Ural is Türkic lol you are a slav how can you know such these things you baltoid:cool:

[Twistedmind]

lol the name is Ural is Türkic lol you are a slav how can you know such these things you baltoid:cool:

N00b Türk.

[Empecinado]

Yes, Alans certainly got here:

http://geocurrents.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Alan_Migrations_Map.jpg

The only legacy they left here was the Alano dog:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Alano-espanol-0003.jpg

[Damião de Góis]

The only legacy they left here was the Alano dog:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Alano-espanol-0003.jpg

Yes, also there are some curious stories like the coat of arms of Coimbra:

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2776/2988/1600/CBR.gif

It symbolizes the fight between the Alans (golden lion) and the Suebi (green serpent) for the city. Apparently peace was achieved with a marriage between the seuvic princess, pictured, and the Alan king.

http://historiasesabores.blogspot.pt/2006/06/estrias-curiosas-o-braso-de-coimbra.html

[Empecinado]

Yes, also there are some curious stories like the coat of arms of Coimbra:

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2776/2988/1600/CBR.gif

It symbolizes the fight between the Alans (golden lion) and the Suebi (green serpent) for the city. Apparently peace was achieved with a marriage between the seuvic princess, pictured, and the Alan king.

http://historiasesabores.blogspot.pt/2006/06/estrias-curiosas-o-braso-de-coimbra.html

I knew it, but I thought that represented the symbols of the (alleged) Suebi flag:

http://www.bandeiragalega.com/img/bgalliciense.gif

[Damião de Góis]

I knew it, but I thought that represented the symbols of the (alleged) Suebi flag:

http://www.bandeiragalega.com/img/bgalliciense.gif

I don't know for sure, but according to the text from that blog, that theory was that the Suebi symbol was a green serpent or (dragon?) and the Alan symbol was a lion. That was written by a 15th century historian:

http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernardo_de_Brito

But it's just a theory, and like i said i'm not sure.

[Baluarte]

Call it reparations for the Spanish and French attempting invasions on multiple times and constantly harrassing our merchants.


Reparations from what?
The Brits and Dutch simply raided Spanish and Portuguese trade routes for greed and envy. All the wars were always related to either illegal naval blockades, systematic banditism or simply stealing ports and islands that had been previously settled, like Jamaica for example.

The fact the British emerged victorious from the Imperial race and get to write the history books, like the supposed idea that the Spanish Armada was defeated by Drake ( xD) doesn't change the fact England owes its wealth to simple stealing, consorting with criminals and pirates, financial aid from Protestants and Jews and simple brutality and illegal annexations.
Even the Dutch, who had for the most part been a loyal pet and ally ended up losing South Africa like that.

[Albion]

Reparations from what?

This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Armada) and this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighty_Years'_War), and more if you want.


The fact the British emerged victorious from the Imperial race and get to write the history books, like the supposed idea that the Spanish Armada was defeated by Drake ( xD) doesn't change the fact England owes its wealth to simple stealing, consorting with criminals and pirates, financial aid from Protestants and Jews and simple brutality and illegal annexations.
Even the Dutch, who had for the most part been a loyal pet and ally ended up losing South Africa like that.

Britain emerged victorious because it had large settler colonies all over the place. Pirates and slave trade were features of all European empires in their early days, whilst "aid from protestants" is a mystery since no one knows what you're on about there. Britain actually aided other Protestant nations during the Napoleonic wars by providing aid to those nations against Napoleon.
Dutch as the loyal pet, are you totally ignorant of history? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo_dutch_wars)

[Baluarte]

Spain and Britain went to war, therefore the Brits had the eternal right to raid merchant convoys even on time of peace.
Perfect reasoning of pirate scum.

[ABest]

AngloJew if we were to rule Southern Europeans out of Europe because of their supposed "African" ancestry, you would be the first to be ruled out.

[Albion]

Spain and Britain went to war, therefore the Brits had the eternal right to raid merchant convoys even on time of peace.
Perfect reasoning of pirate scum.

Spain harassed England and latter Britain repeatedly which is why I don't particularly feel sorry for them suffering at the hands of privateers. Peace? That is a relatively new concept, peace in the past was not much more than a temporary respite between wars, the world wasn't as pacifist as it is now.

[Incal]

Well the concept of Europe originated in the southern region. Another factor that makes me suspicious of the north is the ease they have to receive so many foreigners and the fact Jews love North Europe, anything the jews like make me instantly suspicious. Lastly, life is way better in the south.

[Jackson]

Well the concept of Europe originated in the southern region. Another factor that makes me suspicious of the north is the ease they have to receive so many foreigners and the fact Jews love North Europe, anything the jews like make me instantly suspicious. Lastly, life is way better in the south.

But why is it better? It's too hot, too dry and people are too forward and aggressive, at least that is the impression i get. Sounds pretty bad to me.

[Cristiano viejo]

Spain harassed England and latter Britain repeatedly which is why I don't particularly feel sorry for them suffering at the hands of privateers.

You can save your sorrys, who needs it?

It is true that there were Spanish sacks on the English coasts, but the emporium of the piracy is almost exclusively English property.

[Ouistreham]

Britain actually aided other Protestant nations during the Napoleonic wars by providing aid to those nations against Napoleon.

I didn't know so far that Austria, Russia and Spain were Protestant nations.

Thanks for the info. :)

And Copenhagen was burnt down in 1807 by a cowardly British agression because Denmark is a Catholic nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Copenhagen_(1807)

It all makes sense.

[Anglojew]

AngloJew if we were to rule Southern Europeans out of Europe because of their supposed "African" ancestry, you would be the first to be ruled out.

I would? Last time I checked I wasn't black. Maybe I'm an albino Ethiopian?

[Anglojew]

Well the concept of Europe originated in the southern region. Another factor that makes me suspicious of the north is the ease they have to receive so many foreigners and the fact Jews love North Europe, anything the jews like make me instantly suspicious. Lastly, life is way better in the south.

If I say I like you will your brain explode?

[Cristiano viejo]

But why is it better? It's too hot, too dry and people are too forward and aggressive, at least that is the impression i get. Sounds pretty bad to me.

Aggresive????????? tell me that you are joking, man... :picard1:
In my country you British are famous for to come to get drunk, fights, from time to time some British is arrested for murder. Do you know how many British pedophiles are arrested each year in Spain? damn, I am not sure, but too many.
How many Spaniards do the same in England, man?

[Jackson]

Aggresive????????? tell me that you are joking, man... :picard1:
In my country you British are famous for to come to get drunk, fights, from time to time some British is arrested for murder. Do you know how many British pedophiles are arrested each year in Spain? damn, I am not sure, but too many.
How many Spaniards do the same in England, man?

Well you illustrated my point quite well in your response, which is in a very aggressive tone, and it didn't take much for you to speak like that. That's basically what i mean, not violent-aggressive or anything like that.

Yeah i know we have a bad reputation abroad, but the majority of them behave differently over here, although there's always a large minority of crazy people. :)
It seems that British people + heat + booze = stupid things. And it's unfortunate that you get the bad end of it.

[Atlantic Islander]

There's no justification for Piracy/Privateering, doesn't matter what country they were from - they were all terrible.

[Jackson]

There's no justification for Pirates/Privateers, doesn't matter what country they were from - they were all terrible.

The way i see it is there is official criminality and unofficial criminality, and most of everything that happens that matters in a wider context fits into one of these categories. Official criminals using unofficial criminals seems to have been and to be pretty common. Doesn't make it right by any means, but i guess it's just safer to side with the official criminals.

Tax is basically a protection racket, for example. We pay them money so that we can stay where we are and not come to harm. They are kind enough to spend some of it for our benefit, of course.

[Albion]

I didn't know so far that Austria, Russia and Spain were Protestant nations.

But Prussia was. :picard1:


Thanks for the info. :)

And Copenhagen was burnt down in 1807 by a cowardly British agression because Denmark is a Catholic nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Copenhagen_(1807)

It all makes sense.

The French would have captured the fleet and used it to attack Britain. You've disproved nothing.


Aggresive????????? tell me that you are joking, man... :picard1:
In my country you British are famous for to come to get drunk, fights, from time to time some British is arrested for murder. Do you know how many British pedophiles are arrested each year in Spain? damn, I am not sure, but too many.
How many Spaniards do the same in England, man?

Spanish don't go on holiday en mass to England and Brits do to Iberia, how can one make comparisons then?

[Atlantic Islander]

Top 10 Infamous Pirates. (http://listverse.com/2007/09/04/top-10-infamous-pirates/)

[Cristiano viejo]

Spanish don't go on holiday en mass to England and Brits do to Iberia, how can one make comparisons then?
What has that to do?
There are a lot of Spaniards working in England... but that is not the point. The point is the behaviour of ones and others, diametrically opposed, when they travel to England or Spain.

[Incal]

But why is it better? It's too hot, too dry and people are too forward and aggressive, at least that is the impression i get. Sounds pretty bad to me.

I think you meant happy.




If I say I like you will your brain explode?

Not at all. I'm a charismatic guy after all.

[ABest]

I would? Last time I checked I wasn't black. Maybe I'm an albino Ethiopian?

Go to Dodecad Ancestry Project. Thank me later.

[Anglojew]

Go to Dodecad Ancestry Project. Thank me later.

Greeks have way higher SSA admixture than Ashkenazi Jews (or English) so it's pretty safe to assume you're more African than me.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Y_Haplogroup_E.PNG

[Peyrol]

Senseless discussion by Anglojew is senseless.

[Baluarte]

There's no justification for Piracy/Privateering, doesn't matter what country they were from - they were all terrible.

Spanish raids were always conducted upfront by the Navy, often in the context of war.

Corsairs and pirates were for the most part related to the Brits, the Dutch and to a minor extent, the French.

Worth remembering it.

[Wolf]

1. Which region (North or South) is more successful? (This can be in financial or cultural terms, or anything else, eg although Norway might be richer no one could say they've contributed as much as Italians to European culture).

That depends on the period. Nowadays, Northern Europe is economically and culturally more advanced than Southern Europe, esp. their North American descendants are dominating Europe today. The economic decline of Southern Europe began with the decline of the Spanish Empire, and the cultural decline started when the cultural leadership changed over to France from Italy in the late 17th century.



2. Who region (North or South) is more European? (Do we need to rule out Southern Europe because of SSA admixture? Would we then rule out North-Eastern Europe because of East Asian admixture? Do Southern Europeans have more of a legacy from classical Greece and Rome than the Northerners? Are Slavs latecomers so not as European as the English for example?

That's a difficult question, on the one hand the European civilization has its origins in Southern Europe, but on the other the European peoples are all the same age. Therefore, I have no satisfying answer.

[Damião de Góis]

That depends on the period. Nowadays, Northern Europe is economically and culturally more advanced than Southern Europe, esp. their North American descendants are dominating Europe today. The economic decline of Southern Europe began with the decline of the Spanish Empire, and the cultural decline started when the cultural leadership changed over to France from Italy in the late 17th century.


Culturally superior? In what way is a culture superior to another? How is this measured?

[Peyrol]

Economically some zones of the so called ''southern Europe'' are wealthy...Catalonia, Navarra, Provence and Northern Italy, for example...

http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/images/newshome/gpd_2008_big.png

[Wolf]

Culturally superior? In what way is a culture superior to another? How is this measured?

Well, you can switch on the radio and listen to American music, or you can go the cinema and watch American movies. Maybe you're just hungry, so you can go to McDonald's and eat a greasy hamburger. And so forth ...

[Lábaru]

Well, you can switch on the radio and listen to American music, or you can go the cinema and watch American movies. Maybe you're just hungry, so you can go to McDonald's and eat a greasy hamburger. And so forth ...

Great culture :) niggerap, twilight and junk food.

[Damião de Góis]

Well, you can switch on the radio and listen to American music, or you can go the cinema and watch American movies. Maybe you're just hungry, so you can go to McDonald's and eat a greasy hamburger. And so forth ...

Ah yeah, that's greatly superior to what we have here... you forgot KFC btw.

[Wolf]

Great culture :) niggerap, twilight and junk food.

You needn't to like it, but it's a matter of fact that Europe's culture today is heavily influenced by the US.



Ah yeah, that's greatly superior to what we have here... you forgot KFC btw.

Allonge wigs are also not very superior and useful, but they were regarded as sophisticated during their time.

http://www.metzler.com/metzler/zeitstrahl/images/welt/1673_leibniz.jpg

[Damião de Góis]

So the thing that makes Northern European culture superior to Southern European culture is its American influence? :mmmm:

[ABest]

Greeks have way higher SSA admixture than Ashkenazi Jews (or English) so it's pretty safe to assume you're more African than me.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Y_Haplogroup_E.PNG

Ashkenazi sample #1: Neo African = 0.1 East African = 1.1 Northwest African = 2.7 Paleo African = 0 Total African = 3.9%
Ashkenazi sample #2: Neo African = 0.2 East African = 1.2 Northwest African = 3 Paleo African = 0 Total African = 4.4%

Sephardic sample: Neo African = 0.6 East African = 1 Northwest African = 4.2 Paleo African = 0.1 Total African = 5.9%

Greek sample: Neo African = 0 East African = 0.1 Northwest African = 0.5 Paleo African = 0 Total African = 0.6%

Source: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadDUyeEtjNnBmY09EbnowN3M3UWRyN nc&authkey=COCa89AJ&hl=en_US&authkey=COCa89AJ#gid=0

Another study concerning Greeks.

http://oi34.tinypic.com/ekm6h1.jpg
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1852743/

Here, they show no admixture at all. 0%. Generally, Greeks, like other people from the Balkans show minute African "admixture", similar to that of the French, actually. Ashkenazis and Sephardics are known to show high African "admixture", which would make sense as they share common ancestry with North African and African populations. Don't forget Israel's position and it's undeniable geographical relatedness to Africa.

Also, your maps show haplogroups, which are IRRELEVANT for admixture. Added to that, E1b1b1 is a European branch of a haplogroup of African origin. Therefore, it is a caucasian marker.

But if you wanna play the haplogroup game, please know that Ashkenazis have their very own sub-saharan marker, MTDNA L2a1. ;)

Also, Ahskenazi and Sephardic Jews (both of which are part of your ancestry) are known to have the highest "African ancestry" among Jews worldwide, if you except Middle Eastern/MENA ones. Georgian and Azerbaijani Jews (among others) show much less.

Also, let me just state that I like all Jews on the Apricity so far. It's just AngloJew who is annoying as f*** and gives every Jew here a bad name imo.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/eaa51b98a40e25c3e9e03b843defca87/tumblr_mm9ex5L2iJ1rlbvwso1_400.gif

[Wolf]

So the thing that makes Northern European culture superior to Southern European culture is its American influence? :mmmm:

Nowadays, the leading culture of the European/Western civilization is the US culture, which is predomiantly derived from Northern Europe.

As I said, the cultural leadership of Europe changed over to France (North) from Italy (South) in the late 17th century.

[Damião de Góis]

Nowadays, the leading culture of the European/Western civilization is the US culture, which is predomiantly derived from Northern Europe.

As I said, the cultural leadership of Europe changed over to France (North) from Italy (South) in the late 17th century.

In that case i'm glad our culture is "inferior". You can keep your cheeseburgers.

[Xárszászát]

The nice thing is to make him notice that a lots of actors and actresses are Italian-American.
Plus, economically superior?
Yes, Germany, but Iceland and Ireland went bankrupt worse than Italy and speaking of GDP Northern Countries are far lower than Italy and Spain.
Then, you might say "they are too little, too scarcely populated etc", then you can't compare economically them in terms of wages (where Nordic countries win).
As for culture, aside from Germany (whose contribute was and is great), I fail to see what "Nordic Europe" has ever given to Europe.
Anyway, I would say Sweden deserves credit for having a great leadership and an outstanding organization (as Germany), but it must not be forgotten that Sweden has a population of 9 mln of people and it's far from immigration.

[Windischer]

obviously, northern european countries are more successful and more civilized.

however, the whole "whos more european" contest is quite absurd, the concept of being "european" is a very ambiguous one and can be applied to individuals but not countries as a whole.

[Wolf]

As for culture, aside from Germany (whose contribute was and is great), I fail to see what "Nordic Europe" has ever given to Europe.

The fact that this conversation is held in English, for example.

[Peyrol]

The fact that this conversation is held in English, for example.

...which is 50% romance in the vocabulary....:lol:

[Peyrol]

And btw again....lol @ al the slavs germanic wannabe :lol:

[Turkophagos]

...

[Wolf]

...which is 50% romance in the vocabulary....:lol:

And Romance languages are mostly Vulgar Latin, what's the point?

[Ivan Kramskoï]

He wanted to say that the nglish language comes in a great part from roman vocabulary and this is true thanks to the french immigrant in the middle age who transformed english

[Anglojew]

He wanted to say that the nglish language comes in a great part from roman vocabulary and this is true thanks to the french immigrant in the middle age who transformed english

It needs to be noted that the Normans were essentially Danes who had assumed a French dialect after intermarrying with Normandy women.

[Xárszászát]

The fact that this conversation is held in English, for example.

Always considered England (like France) a unique country, though I admit it has more "Nordic" parts, for what Nordic might mean (as a Bavarian is totally different from an Icelandic).

[Prince Carlo]

Jews rule Northern Europe.
Jews don't rule Southern Europe.
Nuff Said.

[Stanley]

Jews rule Northern Europe.
Jews don't rule Southern Europe.
Nuff Said.

No, you're wrong.

Jews rule the galaxy.

[Baluarte]

Jews rule Northern Europe.
Jews don't rule Southern Europe.
Nuff Said.

That was true prior to World War II (North Europe, and specially perfidious Albion have been whoring themselves to Jewry for a long time). However, since the Allies destroyed the Kingdom of Italy, and replaced the government of Metaxas with yet another mediocre democracy (read idiocracy) it's been slowly changing. The last step happened when Franco died and his successor kissed the feet of the Atlantic bloc, in order to get acceptance into the EU/NATO club.

It's true however, that South European societies are far less Judaized. Starts from the fact Protestantism is small or inexistant, capitalism is less savage and political correctness is not a sacred mantra. No wonder why feminization, loser mentality and selfishness become more and more present the more you head North.

[Ibericus]

This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Armada) and this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighty_Years'_War), and more if you want.

Britain emerged victorious because it had large settler colonies all over the place. Pirates and slave trade were features of all European empires in their early days, whilst "aid from protestants" is a mystery since no one knows what you're on about there. Britain actually aided other Protestant nations during the Napoleonic wars by providing aid to those nations against Napoleon.
Dutch as the loyal pet, are you totally ignorant of history? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo_dutch_wars)
Spain didn't have pirates because we didn't need them. We were always ahead of England. The english power is mostly due to stealing and robbing other's discoveries. Simple as that.
One example, is that half of the USA was stolen from Mexico in the American-Mexican war.

On a side note, I would say that today Southern-Europe is more european culturally than Germanic countries, because the latter are much more americanized, and have lost a lot of their essence. Not as much in Southern Europe.

[Empecinado]

The last step happened when Franco died and his successor kissed the feet of the Atlantic bloc, in order to get acceptance into the EU/NATO club.


His succesor, Adolfo Suarez, continued the foreign policy of his predecessor, so was a non-aligned anti-NATO and anti-Israel. The political campaign to discredit him and remove him from power was directed by a Jewish businessman named Max Mazin.

[Baluarte]

Spain didn't have pirates because we didn't need them. We were always ahead of England. The english power is mostly due to stealing and robbing other's discoveries. Simple as that.
One example, is that half of the USA was stolen from Mexico in the American-Mexican war.

On a side note, I would say that today Southern-Europe is more european culturally than Germanic countries, because the latter are much more americanized, and have lost a lot of their essence. Not as much in Southern Europe.

Nothing but the truth.
It's always less known since the Anglos get to dictate the official history, whether it's the Brits or the dumb version, the Americans.

[Baluarte]

His succesor, Adolfo Suarez, continued the foreign policy of his predecessor, so was a non-aligned anti-NATO and anti-Israel. The political campaign to discredit him and remove him from power was directed by a Jewish businessman named Max Mazin.

Sorry, I meant Juan Carlos. I guess I should have said it differently

[Jackson]

...which is 50% romance in the vocabulary....:lol:

True overall, although we can still speak (and do) regularly without using any Romance derived words. And most of the lexical borrowings are extras rather than required words, like we might have multiple words for the same thing. English is basically a north German dialect with a big chunk of Romance lexical borrowing. Which is pretty cool i think. :)

[Jackson]

Spain didn't have pirates because we didn't need them. We were always ahead of England. The english power is mostly due to stealing and robbing other's discoveries. Simple as that.
One example, is that half of the USA was stolen from Mexico in the American-Mexican war.

On a side note, I would say that today Southern-Europe is more european culturally than Germanic countries, because the latter are much more americanized, and have lost a lot of their essence. Not as much in Southern Europe.

Well. To be honest it's more logical to wait for other people to do things for you and then take it when you want it, i guess. :D

(I jest)

[Incal]

Nowadays, the leading culture of the European/Western civilization is the US culture, which is predomiantly derived from Northern Europe.


US culture is predominantly derived from Judaism these days, and anybody following that model is heading into a cultural suicide. I don't have the slightest doubt than in some 50 or 100 years portuguese, spanish and italian culture as we know it will still exist. I'm not so sure about the countries up north.

[Wolf]

US culture is predominantly derived from Judaism these days, and anybody following that model is heading into a cultural suicide.

The fact that a lot of American artists is Jewish, is not contradictory to the fact that they work in European/Western patterns.

For example, music made by Jewish composers is predominantly not connected with the Jewish culture.



I don't have the slightest doubt than in some 50 or 100 years portuguese, spanish and italian culture as we know it will still exist. I'm not so sure about the countries up north.

Well, they are nearer to North Africa than we are.

[Peyrol]

Well, they are nearer to North Africa than we are.

What this is supposed to mean?

The hordes of maghrebi illegals who come here usually don't rest there (or, at least, a very few number of them) but they spread around all the EU...our problem is just a problem of birthrate...as your (we both have 1,5 children/woman as national average...).

[Baluarte]

The fact that a lot of American artists is Jewish, is not contradictory to the fact that they work in European/Western patterns.

For example, music made by Jewish composers is predominantly not connected with the Jewish culture.




Well, they are nearer to North Africa than we are.

What countries have the highest % of immigrant contribution to total population?
What countries have the most feminized, liberal-libertarian social views?
What countries have accepted more willingly the individual selfishness of capitalism, abandoning the old family/guild system?

That is what matters

[Wolf]

The hordes of maghrebi illegals who come here usually don't rest there (or, at least, a very few number of them) but they spread around all the EU...our problem is just a problem of birthrate...as your (we both have 1,5 children/woman as national average...).

It seems rather implausible that Southern Europe will remain stable, if they're bordered by an Islamized Northern Europe and a Muslim North Africa in several decades.

So, gloating is out of place.



What countries have the highest % of immigrant contribution to total population?
What countries have the most feminized, liberal-libertarian social views?
What countries have accepted more willingly the individual selfishness of capitalism, abandoning the old family/guild system?

Maybe Afghanistan should be our ideal: no immigrants, no feminists, no liberals, no capitalism and a flourishing tribal system.

[Peyrol]

It seems rather implausible, that Southern Europe will remain stable, if they're bordered by an islamized Northern Europe and a Muslim North Africa in several decades.

So, gloating is out of place.

Let me doubt about this point...

[Baluarte]

Maybe Afghanistan should be our ideal: no immigrants, no feminists, no liberals, no capitalism and a flourishing tribal system.

Neh, Europe was fine before the Enlightenment. No need to exaggerate.

[Wolf]

Let me doubt about this point...

You are an optimist.

[Damião de Góis]

Well, they are nearer to North Africa than we are.

Yes, as far as i know there hasn't been any continent drift recently so we were always closer to north Africa. On the other hand while northern europe are choking themselves on greasy american cheeseburgers and building mosques for their new arab immigrants, we have been able to preserve our culture.

[Incal]

It seems rather implausible that Southern Europe will remain stable, if they're bordered by an Islamized Northern Europe and a Muslim North Africa in several decades.


They've already done it for centuries. North Europe started with the muslims just 50 years ago and they can't seem to cope.