-dead-
You are pointless again.
Quite so. When was arguing with you anything else?
By your reasonoing there are no "native" populations anywhere, only in a small patch of east Africa by the great rift valley where a small batch of humans first evolved.
Ding! We have a winner! Show him what he's won, Bob.... Yes he's won a copy of "How to win friends and influence people".
As for how to distinguish between ethnic groups, well thats stupid.
If ethnic groups do truly exist then one should be able to define who's in them. Otherwise it begins to sound suspiciously like ethnic groups are fictious or mere semantics or something.
Human races are like dog breeds and there are physical differemces between the races based on evolutionary adaptations to evolution. Or do you think it's just a coincidence that some people have dark skin compared to light skin, or that some people store fat in different parts of the body more efficiently, or that some people tend to be taller than others. Or that asians have "double" eyelids, if you even know what that is?
So how do you tell these "races" apart? - every individual human is different in some respects, even twins. Where do you draw the line? - Red hair, Blonde hair, Brown hair, Black hair - different races? Green eyes, blue eyes, grey eyes - different races? Seems like a lot of different races live in your unified "Europe". Dog breeds are defined and created by people, and purity is judged often according to fashion, especially subjective views of judges at dog shows. But there are many more mongrels than pedigrees, despite humans artificially keeping a "breed" going. Indeed dogs, left to their own devices, don't seem to care at all what breed they, their pack, or their mates are.
What areas of land are Europe?
I find this insulting! All you who ask for attacks on Europe just read -dead's- babling here. Europe starts from the mdeiteraninan in the south, atlantic in the west , arctic in the north and raches far into russia in the east. At some point russia becomes part of asia, which has iots own borders, just like every continent.
If you're not sure which bits are "Europe" or where it ends, just say so. Don't be embarrassed: I don't know either - that's why I asked you.
If it's any comfort there appear to be no nice lines on any maps indicating which bits are "Europe" either, so it appears this question has the cartographers stumped too.
What does intecultural trade of goods and ideas have to do with my distate towards ridiculosly genereous imigration policies that only invite abuse. I see no douality in my idea that Europe should remain european and that it can get ideas from other parts of the world.
I fear I may have been confused by some of your invective:
"As for immigration diluting European culture thats a touchy subject for sure. My fear is more on the basis of the newcomers disrespecting Europes culture, not learning the languages, then also demanding Europeans change and suppress aspects of their cultures because the immigrants don't like it. This is where Europe (and the whole world) differs from America the most. They have specifically defined cultural ideas tied to ethnicity and a national/cultural/group/tribal identity." And this:
"As for my stance on Europe and why I care, I care because more European people better begin to care. Our history identity and ethnicity has been so oppressed and attacked from within and out while all the worlds other groups have pushed for more and nationalism and self-determination. I think those of European descent should begin to see the light and do the same."Having read this I started pondering on how "non-European", cultural factors like Christianity affected, perhaps even defined "European" culture and history. And then I wondered at what point "intecultural [sic] trade of goods and ideas" becomes an 'oppression and attack on "Europe's" history identity and ethnicity'? Perhaps you can enlighten me.
I just dont want a Europe to become like the USA with no really unifying history any more.
What unifying history? There is no unifying history... it's all a big mix of several different cultures, some of them non European... Have you ever actually studied European history? It's a vast roller coaster ride of fights, fights and more fights. Fights over religion, fights over land, fights over "races", fights over "nations". And loads of invasions. Very unifying.
"For my part: I posit that there are no original, true Europeans, and there is no solely European culture."
Again I find this insulting and offensive.
By that rational Europe does not exist, why do you hate europe so much as to deny its existance?
Now how could I hate something if I don't think it exists? However:
I merely deny that there is a set of people who "are" original Europeans or that there is a solely "European" culture. You have yet to offer me any proof of either of these existing... indeed you even appear vague as to where "Europe" is.
To rephrase and perhaps clarify it for you: soil is real, people are real. Europe is a social fiction.
Oh I see you live in Hong Kong are you Chinese? Well you know what there are no real Chinese you are all really Europeans who were once Africans who have no real culture and no history. So is it ok if the British colonize again and take over rest of China. And surely the Japanese must come back too, since you had such a fine old time with them in past.......
Hehe you gonna show this bit to your "Chinese" friend?
But seriously - who are the "real Chinese"? There are 56 "ethnically" different groups in China, and China's history again is one of invasion by "foreigners" - Mongols, Manchus and Tibetans to name a few.
If the British, Americans, French, Japanese, Germans or indeed the Mongols want to colonize China again they only have to bring bigger guns, same as last time. Same as every invasion everywhere. Not sure I see the point of that bit, though. I presume you merely hope I shall find this insulting and offensive - I apologize for disappointing you.
So to recap:
You're not sure which bits of land are "Europe". You won't say which people are "Europeans". You can't tell me how many generations living in "Europe" will make you a "European". You can't offer useful criteria for telling who's a member of what "race". You won't tell me which "races" are "European". We're not sure how long back in history we're going, in order to define who is a native of "Europe" and who is not. Adopting some bits of other cultures is OK, but adopting other bits isn't, although the criteria for defining which bits are OK to be adopted and which bits are chipping away at "European" culture remain a mystery.
So there's this indistinct land full of undefined people who, by dint of having lived there for an unspecified period of time, are considered to be "native". This place is in grave danger from undefined people from other (presumably) indistinct land masses turning up and destroying an unified and defined culture (that you can't seem to define, and appears to be far from unified), which is in part already from other indistinct land masses. And you seriously want people to worry about this?
