Are there Turkish people like me?

[reboun]

I couldn't decide whether I should start this topic in genetics, ethno-cultural, or Türkiye sub-forum because it will be related to all three.
I ethnically identify as Turkish although my genetics, most probably, would show that I am in the Bosnian cluster. Are there any people in Turkey who are Turkish citizens, identify as ethnically Turkish but genetically cluster very far from any Turkic group? For example clustering with Bosnians, Arabians etc.

[Kyp]

I couldn't decide whether I should start this topic in genetics, ethno-cultural, or Türkiye sub-forum because it will be related to all three.
I ethnically identify as Turkish although my genetics, most probably, would show that I am in the Bosnian cluster. Are there any people in Turkey who are Turkish citizens, identify as ethnically Turkish but genetically cluster very far from any Turkic group? For example clustering with Bosnians, Arabians etc.

Northeasterners with Armenians and Pontic Greeks.

Balkan Turks cluster closer to their Balkan neighbours despite turkic admix.

[gixajo]

I couldn't decide whether I should start this topic in genetics, ethno-cultural, or Türkiye sub-forum because it will be related to all three.
I ethnically identify as Turkish although my genetics, most probably, would show that I am in the Bosnian cluster. Are there any people in Turkey who are Turkish citizens, identify as ethnically Turkish but genetically cluster very far from any Turkic group? For example clustering with Bosnians, Arabians etc.

Turkey is quite diverse, so probably yes, some Turk citizens do.

[Chris596]

I couldn't decide whether I should start this topic in genetics, ethno-cultural, or Türkiye sub-forum because it will be related to all three.
I ethnically identify as Turkish although my genetics, most probably, would show that I am in the Bosnian cluster. Are there any people in Turkey who are Turkish citizens, identify as ethnically Turkish but genetically cluster very far from any Turkic group? For example clustering with Bosnians, Arabians etc.

Don't worry my friend, ethnically I'm Hungarian and I cluster with Balkan people, Serbs, Bosnians and because of my small Türkic ancestry with Balkan Turks too a little bit. I don't think you can find another Hungarian here like me, truly Käräböğä

Even my Y-DNA haplogroup (paternal line) is uncommon among Hungarians.

[itilvolga]

Türk hissediyorsan ve kendini Türk olarak tanımlıyorsan Türksündür.

[Kivan]

Yes. There are people with Bosniak and half Bosniak/half Turkish ancestry who identify themselves as Turkish.

[Varda]

Bosniensis, is that you?

[reboun]

Bosniensis, is that you?

That guy? https://www.theapricity.com/forum/me...321-Bosniensis
I am not him.

[Varda]

That guy? https://www.theapricity.com/forum/me...321-Bosniensis
I am not him.

Yea, I thought of him.
He is a Muslim/Bosniak from Bihać in western Bosnia, and he is not even pro-Turkish but very pro-Ottoman.

[RogueState]

The question you raise goes beyond the scope of your own case, but is a more general anthropological-philosophical-political issue, and in fact, raises thousand of questions that are not only relevant here, but are fundamental issues in our post-modern globalized world where mass migration, diaspora-isation, multi-ethnic and multi-cultural societies are becoming the norm, where people from all four corners of the world are mixing and are completely blurring the traditional modern boundaries of Ethnicity, Nationality, Kinship.


How do we define ethnicity ? How do we judge the feeling of belonging to a group ? What defines a national group ? Are there objective conditions or is it purely subjective ?

We tend to distinguish the nationality-based countries to the ethnicity-based ones. In short, the nationality-based countries were the New World countries, where belonging to a country was more a recent cultural-administrative fact (citizenship, having an ID/passeport), because the populations are since their inception, made of different races (European colons, Native Amerindians, enslaved SSA). In this context, with no historical depth and directly confronted to a multiracial society, these countries didn't develop an ethnicity-based identity. They relied rather on common culture developed out of this mixing of races, with predominance of the colonial motherland (in North America, British Isles, in Latin America, Spain and Portugal).

Ethnicity in its deep original meaning : people sharing common ancestors, thus in more scientific words : sharing common genetics

The ethnicity-based countries are traditionally associated with the Old World, where populations didn't move extensively and produced a stabilized blend (with low and slow foreign admixture across centuries) that could differ from their neighbors. This has been build over centuries, this historical depth created the conditions of differentied language, culture, even religion/spirituality than their neighbors. These combinations of relatively specific genetic profile + language + culture + religion/spirituality, gives Old World ethnicities their solidity

BUT since at least World War II (and even before in the case of France), Old World countries are experiencing mass movements of population, thanks to globalization and economic development, combined with a rise of hyperindividualism, and the Critical Theory of postmodernity, where all social identities are crushed and are becoming "liquid" (see Zygmunt Bauman), the equality nationality=ethnicity is not true anymore. Even the very notion of ethnicity is losing its meaning. Inclusiveness is the new buzzword to describe this process.

Nowadays, you have 3rd generations of so-called immigrants in the West (we can even ask ourselves, are there still "immigrants" if they were born and raised here since 2 generations), that are either mixed or not, that are on the path or totally assimilated. And administratively speaking, they are already belonging to the nationality of their "host" country. So are Carribeans or Pakistanis in London British ? Are Algerians in Paris French ? Are Turks in Berlin German ? Are Somali in Stockholm Swede ? Are Surinamese in Amsterdam Dutch ? Some will say "No, obviously no because it's just administrative, on paper, but they are not "really" from there, not "real" Brits, French, Germans". "A pig born in a stable is not a horse"

OK but when do you acquire the essence of belonging to an ethnicity ? How many generations and centuries will they must wait in order to be recognized as real members of the ethnic group ? Never ? How much mixing and max "foreign" admixture is tolerated in order to join the club ? Let's a kid born in 2010 in London, is 1/2 White British, 1/4 Indian, 1/4 Black Carribean; he speaks only English, he got not religious upbringing. Where does this kid belong ? Isn't he at the end of the day, just a Brit ? A "New" Brit ?

You have in the Old World, a process of Americanization, where the very notion of ethnicity is imploding, and they are becoming just nationality-based countries. And insisting on differentiating ethnicity and nationality is seen as latent racism and outdated in the 21st century. This is a global movement of accelerated redefinition of ethnicities and nations identities, that is only at its beginning.

In the case of Turkey, despite being an Old World country, it has like some other ancient Imperial and crossroad countries (Russia, Iran), always been a mix of ethnic and religious groups, where identity has always been inclusive.