Can New World nations be considered "ethnic groups" in the same way European and Asian nations are?

[Tooting Carmen]

Imo no. Having debated in recent days specifically whether either Americans or Mexicans can be considered "ethnic groups", I have argued that, as well as adhering to particular languages and cultures, ethnic groups should also (within a range) have identifiable physiological traits. In this respect most New World nations - not just the US or Mexico - do not qualify as ethnic groups, given the sheer variety of races, phenotypes and origins there are in those countries.

[Dna8]

You never got a chance to respond in the other thread.. but my post is relevant here too:

Thanks.

The problem as I see it, as concerns your line of thinking, is determining how exactly genetics (I'm assuming this is fundamental to your interpretation of ethnicity) are to be evaluated for their adherence or lack thereof, to a particular ethnos..

Do we privilege Y-DNA or MtDNA, this haplogroup or that, one admixture or another, combination xyz or combination qrs, etc?

[Tooting Carmen]

You never got a chance to respond in the other thread.. but my post is relevant here too:

To be honest I am not that interested in genetics - at least in the sense of studying haplogroups etc. However, it is a flagrant nonsense to argue that e.g. Hillary Clinton and Condoleeza Rice are part of the same "ethnic group" - though they are certainly part of the same nationality.

[Erronkari]

I'd say that it depends how diverse =/= homogeneous is that nation.
In the case of diverse one it will be very difficult to considero it also an ethnic group.

[Tooting Carmen]

I'd say that it depends how diverse =/= homogeneous is that nation.
In the case of diverse one it will be very difficult to considero it also an ethnic group.

Even Argentina, which superficially is one of the less racially diverse countries in the Americas, still has quite a few Mestizos and even Amerindians, not to mention the diverse European and Middle Eastern origins of the White population itself. Therefore, I don't consider Argentinians to be an ethnic group either.

[Dna8]

To be honest I am not that interested in genetics - at least in the sense of studying haplogroups etc. However, it is a flagrant nonsense to argue that e.g. Hillary Clinton and Condoleeza Rice are part of the same "ethnic group" - though they are certainly part of the same nationality.

Would you elaborate as to why it's a flagrant nonsense?

They both partake of the same metaculture; they both partake of the same socio-cultural symbolisms/associations and linguistic meanings/subtleties; they both partake of the same historical antecedents..

[Argentano]

I'd say that it depends how diverse =/= homogeneous is that nation.
In the case of diverse one it will be very difficult to considero it also an ethnic group.

this

some NW nations are very heterogeneous. Others not so much.

[Tooting Carmen]

Would you elaborate as to why it's a flagrant nonsense?

They both partake of the same metaculture; they both partake of the same socio-cultural symbolisms/associations and linguistic meanings/subtleties; they both partake of the same historical antecedents..

Because their recent origins and ancestries are very clearly different; moreover, Rice herself has talked about how her experiences as an African-American growing up in the Deep South have formed her politics and outlook on life.

[Dna8]

It is in our human nature to associate ethnicity with physiology.. but surely an even moderately closer examination yields the idea that physiology contributes only scantily towards giving the term 'ethnicity', any substance..

If ethnicity and physiology are so intimately related, why do we even have notions of ethnicity?

I'd argue physiology is only a moderately lengthy chapter in the hypothetical 'Book of Ethnicity'..

[Tooting Carmen]

It is in our human nature to associate ethnicity with physiology.. but surely an even moderately closer examination yields the idea that physiology contributes only scantily towards giving the term 'ethnicity', any substance..

If ethnicity and physiology are so intimately related, why do we even have notions of ethnicity?

I'd argue physiology is only a moderately lengthy chapter in the hypothetical 'Book of Ethnicity'..

It is physiology + language + culture.