| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 96499 | 2009-01-12 08:41:00 | Ethnic Origin | andrew93 (249) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 738026 | 2009-01-13 07:25:00 | Just found this. (www.maorinews.com) Not sure if it's relevant. |
bob_doe_nz (92) | ||
| 738027 | 2009-01-13 08:41:00 | Apologies in advance for the long post..... judging from the discussion, there is confusion between ethnicity and national identity. Its really one for an anthropologist Like I mentioned earlier, who appoints these people to make these calls? I understand they have done their time with studies and so forth, and good on them, but if I choose to classify myself a certain way, on what basis can someone else (including anthropologists) dispute that? I agree there may be some confusion, but the definition of an ethnic group is a group of human beings who identify with eachother on the basis of a characteristic such as heritage, culture, linguistics, religion, beliefs or behaviours etc whether that basis is real or imagined. If look at my ancestry I have mixed blood just like everyone else, but if asked about my ethnic origins I would be expected to say European or more latterly New Zealand European. But what does European mean? That I identify with Europeans? I don't know many Europeans (who live in Europe) and those I do know, I don't really identify with. Let's take NZ European. Does this mean I identify more with people with fair skin than not? On a relative basis I may hang out with more people with fair skin purely because the majority of my siblings, their spouses and children happen to have the same colour skin as what we might consider a traditional 'European'. But I don't identify myself any less with people with any other skin colour or genetic make-up. Irrespective of any differences, I identify with other Kiwis (as Metla has stated in much fewer words). Take for instance the example given of Aussies: I suspect a number would also be expected to call themselves 'Europeans' which would supposedly put me in the same ethnic group as them. I don't identify with Australians at all! In general I find them rude, brash, racist and bad sports. I don't want to identify myself with a group of people like that. My view of the average Aussie is in stark contrast to the average 'Kiwi' - Kiwis vote with their feet quietly, Aussies vote with their mouths. Ethnicity stems from ancient tribal groups way way back in pre-history. Separated by mountain ranges etc groups of humans developed differently. Agreed but in modern society, as you have pointed out, these barriers are disappearing and as such the original basis now has no relevance. So if ethnic origin continues to be used to classify people (which I don't think it should) then other factors should now be taken into account to reflect these changes. For instance, some might say you cannot claim ethnicity on the basis of religious affiliation, because that's your religion, not your ethnicity. However I'm sure a number of Jews and Hindis etc. would disagree. Why then do we allow ethnicity on the basis of religion and not country of residence? Especially when such country of residence gives rise to distinct linguistics, local traditions and a new blended culture? I'm sure Joe might find some of the things we do here odd/cute/unusual/etc and vice versa. It seems to me you can pick a country as your ethnic origin other than the one you currently reside in (e.g. Turkish, Chinese, Samoan), especially so if this is the country where you, your siblings, parents, and ancestors were born and lived for the past x generations. Historically I might have been expected to declare my ethnicity as Scottish/Irish. But if I was in Ireland, I would be expected to put something else. But why? To me it doesn't make sense. If we ended up with the majority of people identifying themselves as Kiwis/New Zealanders then I think that might go some way to resolving a few issues. I'm not talking about the elimination of any cultural groups, because we already embrace a variety of cultural traditions. We can celebrate our genetic / historic / cultural differences but we stand united as an ethnic group of Kiwis. In hindsight New Zealander is a bad choice of word for an ethnic group - maybe it should be 'Kiwi'. In classifying myself as a Kiwi I am choosing to identify with others who also choose to classify themselves as Kiwi. That's not such a bad thing! :) For a specific ethnic group to emerge today you'd have to wait, at a guess, 300 years. That's how long it would take to develop unique cultural and biological attributes to be slightly different (just a tiny bit) from other groups of humans. I'm not so sure. I could question the '300' but that's unfair - why pick any number? And how would you determine the original starting point of a new ethnicity of none if the original people are still alive at the time it is classified as a new ethnicity? In a world where we can travel and intermix so easily, ethnicity is disappearing, not growing. Understood and hence the need to either abolish this arcane practice of trying to classify people, or it is time to create some new ethnicities based on how we identify ourselves. The only modern one I can think of is the Pennsylvania Dutch who have remained separate from the mainstream for nearly 300 years. Some might call that reclusive or weird! :) Cheers Andrew |
andrew93 (249) | ||
| 738028 | 2009-01-13 08:46:00 | Apologies in advance for the long post..... :) Cheers Andrew You could have just used mine..... |
Metla (12) | ||
| 738029 | 2009-01-13 09:56:00 | Ok! I'm a Kiwi and proud of it! :) |
andrew93 (249) | ||
| 738030 | 2009-01-13 10:15:00 | I'm an utter nutter peanut butter, from Sanitarium | bob_doe_nz (92) | ||
| 738031 | 2009-01-13 20:55:00 | You call someone from America American, China Chinese, Australia Astralian etc New Zealand - Pakeha? i don't think so. Now Pakeha means non-maori, sweet as, but imagine if the whities started calling maori non-whites, there would be hell of a pc case :lol: Sux living here sometimes. |
rob_on_guitar (4196) | ||
| 738032 | 2009-01-13 21:14:00 | Absolutely the done thing in USA for yanks to refer to themselves as Italian,Irish etc. What they are saying and quite happy to say,is I am an American with strong ties to Italy. No good denying ones origins. |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 738033 | 2009-01-13 21:54:00 | You call someone from America American, China Chinese, Australia Astralian etc New Zealand - Pakeha? i don't think so . Now Pakeha means non-maori, sweet as, but imagine if the whities started calling maori non-whites, there would be hell of a pc case :lol: Sux living here sometimes . You are either confusing nationality with ethnic origin, or you are ignorant of reality . To be charitable, I will assume the former . For example, in China, your nationality would be Chinese (in English) as you say, but your ethnic origin could be one of many . Here is an extract from Wikipedia: The People's Republic of China (PRC) officially recognises 56 distinct ethnic groups, the largest of which are Han Chinese, which constitutes about 91 . 9% of the total population . The 55 other ethnic groups are officially recognised as ethnic minority groups . The large ethnic minority groups in terms of population include the Zhuang at 16 million, the Manchu at 10 million, the Hui at 9 million, the Miao at 8 million, the Uyghur at 7 million, the Yi at 7 million, the Tujia at 5 . 75 million, the Mongols at 5 million, the Tibetans at 5 million, the Buyei at 3 million, and the Koreans at 2 million . And in Australia, what were the beach wars about a couple of years ago? As far as your comments about Pākehā are concerned, the less said the better, but just one comment would be that logic is not your strong suit . . . |
John H (8) | ||
| 738034 | 2009-01-13 22:04:00 | You are either confusing nationality with ethnic origin, or you are ignorant of reality. To be charitable, I will assume the former. For example, in China, your nationality would be Chinese (in English) as you say, but your ethnic origin could be one of many. Here is an extract from Wikipedia: The People's Republic of China (PRC) officially recognises 56 distinct ethnic groups, the largest of which are Han Chinese, which constitutes about 91.9% of the total population. The 55 other ethnic groups are officially recognised as ethnic minority groups. The large ethnic minority groups in terms of population include the Zhuang at 16 million, the Manchu at 10 million, the Hui at 9 million, the Miao at 8 million, the Uyghur at 7 million, the Yi at 7 million, the Tujia at 5.75 million, the Mongols at 5 million, the Tibetans at 5 million, the Buyei at 3 million, and the Koreans at 2 million. And in Australia, what were the beach wars about a couple of years ago? As far as your comments about Pākehā are concerned, the less said the better, but just one comment would be that logic is not your strong suit... Sunny up there on your perch? You obviously missed the point. And as for the Pakeha comment, get real. I can say what ever the hell I want. Its called an opinion. The more said the better, people tend to roll over too much here. |
rob_on_guitar (4196) | ||
| 738035 | 2009-01-13 22:11:00 | Yes, I did miss the point (?was there one?) - I should have recognised another troll. | John H (8) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | |||||