Arising_uk wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2017 8:37 pm
All it says is that at sometime in the past a lot of people spoke a common language. If you go further back you'll find that they also spoke another one.
Since race, language, culture and spiritual tradition tend to be bundled, we can track any one if we wish to be able to identify our kin peoples. We could look for racial qualities like facial phenotypes and complexion, or we could look at cultural items like eating with a fork, or we could look at a true shibboleth like the Indo-European sound laws: just as essentially all Oriental peoples cannot make either th sound, certain sounds such as the consonant blends like /st/or /ks/essentially only occur in Indo-European languages. Another example would be grammatical gender which only appears in the languages of Caucasian peoples.
That's all? So what stronger correlation could you possibly ask for than that dispersals of populations and distributions of languages go together?
But no causation eh! As all that is being said is that people move around and language spreads, well duh!
So what? LOL. You probably don't even remember why you've been trying to hoist this strawman for months.
Or, to identify your own people if you are a Westerner, an amazing culture even if it has flaws, you could use a marker like use of the fork ...
So why don't you use the fork then?
Probably because its a relatively trivial thing compared with the depth and awesomeness of language, race and spirituality.
the simple fact is 3rd World people do not have conditioning that is required to do what it takes to make a modern state happen, ...
'3rd world people' and there was me thinking you'd actually read Spengler. They don't have to make a modern state happen over here, just sign-up to it.
I honestly haven't read much Spengler. Be that as it may, 3rd world people iterate 3rd would countries due to the lack of integrated schema that support modern states. If you get enough 3rd Worlders in your country you will get of course a 3rd World country.
we all love our identities and don't want to give them up, not in a million years -- almost literally, so if you let a gajillion Africans and Asians into your country, then pretty soon you're not gonna have a nice modern country anymore, you're gonna have a 3rd World garbage dump county. That's not racism, that's simple fact. ...
Good job we're not letting a gajillion in then but given the effects of climate change the human race is going to be moving about in very large numbers pretty soon so my take for my country is to have a system that can deal with such issues.
Nice red herring with the climate change.
You can pivot all day long but the fact is: 3rd world people iterate 3rd would countries due to the lack of integrated schema that support modern states. If you get enough 3rd Worlders in your country you will get of course a 3rd World country. Psychologies are highly resistant to change, only great pain and great amounts of time can effect it.
She's saying that there are Anglo-Saxon laws and housing styles and psychological structures found: and also Anglo-Saxon genetic markers. Because genetics and culture are tightly correlated. ...
There is no causation so far discovered to link genetics to such things.
So what? Who ever in all these months of discussion said it was. You're strawmanning.
What psychological structures? You mean Christianity that bonded the Angle and the Saxon in the face of the Dane?
Closely related Germanic families of Indo-European peoples.
Another interesting point to note is: Why did the English accept the culture of the Anglo-Saxon invaders, but the Iberians never accepted the culture of the Moslem invaders. ...
But they didn't did they, they were driven to the highlands.
No. That's the old and wrong view.
Modern linguistics, archeology and genetics demonstrate that the people of England were already Germanic, so the Anglo-Saxon invasion was like a welcome home party, not a hostile invasion:
"Contrary to narratives suggesting large-scale displacement of the Britons by Anglo-Saxon invaders..."
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35344663
"The other myth I was taught at school, one which persists to this day, is that the English are almost all descended from 5th-century invaders, the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, from the Danish peninsula, who wiped out the indigenous Celtic population of England. ... The tribes of England south of the Thames and along the south coast during Caesar’s time all had Belgic names or affiliations. Caesar tells us that these large intrusive settlements had replaced an earlier British population..."
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... t-its-dna/
And let's not get distracted from the point which is that Iberia vomited out the Muslim invaders because they were foreign bodies, unlike pre-Roman Germanic peoples of England who integrated with the Anglo-Saxons who were of similar language, culture and spiritual tradition. Which is who Greeks, Irish and Germans could all integrate in the Americas: they are closely related peoples, where as, Africans and Turks are not integrating after generations.
A likely reason is difference, modern thinking is that the pre-Roman English were not Celts but Germanic people who had migrated in from around the area of what is today Belgium. ...
Well only likely by white-supremacist revisionists.
You're simply wrong and lost in an ideological delusion.
Modern linguistics, archeology and genetics demonstrate that the people of England were already Germanic, so the Anglo-Saxon invasion was like a welcome home party, not a hostile invasion:
"Contrary to narratives suggesting large-scale displacement of the Britons by Anglo-Saxon invaders..."
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35344663
"The other myth I was taught at school, one which persists to this day, is that the English are almost all descended from 5th-century invaders, the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, from the Danish peninsula, who wiped out the indigenous Celtic population of England. ... The tribes of England south of the Thames and along the south coast during Caesar’s time all had Belgic names or affiliations. Caesar tells us that these large intrusive settlements had replaced an earlier British population..."
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... t-its-dna/
And let's not get distracted from the point which is that Iberia vomited out the Muslim invaders because they were foreign bodies, unlike pre-Roman Germanic peoples of England who integrated with the Anglo-Saxons who were of similar language, culture and spiritual tradition. Which is who Greeks, Irish and Germans could all integrate in the Americas: they are closely related peoples, where as, Africans and Turks are not integrating after generations.
Hence they had little trouble with their brother and sister Germanic peoples migrating into the island. ...
You really have no idea about the history of these isles do you.
It is you who is ignorant.
Modern linguistics, archeology and genetics demonstrate that the people of England were already Germanic, so the Anglo-Saxon invasion was like a welcome home party, not a hostile invasion:
"Contrary to narratives suggesting large-scale displacement of the Britons by Anglo-Saxon invaders..."
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35344663
"The other myth I was taught at school, one which persists to this day, is that the English are almost all descended from 5th-century invaders, the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, from the Danish peninsula, who wiped out the indigenous Celtic population of England. ... The tribes of England south of the Thames and along the south coast during Caesar’s time all had Belgic names or affiliations. Caesar tells us that these large intrusive settlements had replaced an earlier British population..."
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... t-its-dna/
And let's not get distracted from the point which is that Iberia vomited out the Muslim invaders because they were foreign bodies, unlike pre-Roman Germanic peoples of England who integrated with the Anglo-Saxons who were of similar language, culture and spiritual tradition. Which is who Greeks, Irish and Germans could all integrate in the Americas: they are closely related peoples, where as, Africans and Turks are not integrating after generations.
I didn't have to click on the link to know it was
Gangs of NewYork, those of us who identify as European, and not British like you, don't have the same internecine prejudice against Irish and easily accept the Irish as our European brothers and sisters. Get over it you bigot. Happy St.Patrick's Day!
No. Smoke doesn't cause fire, it correlates, but obviously you wouldn't just toss something smoking into your house and say 'oh well, no risk of staring a fire, it's only smoking, there's no cause, just correlation....'
But there is a causation between some smoke and some fire whereas there is, so far, no causation between genetics and language.
So what? For the literally one-hundredth time in this discussion: So what? What point do you believe you are making. It's never been insisted in months of discussion that race causes language. What do you believe your strawman is demonstrating or defending? Frankly I have no clue.