Quote:
Originally Posted by Seekers
I'm sure you're confusing Germanic with German, German with national socialist and national socialist with white supremacist, in making such a gross generalisation.
The significant groups I can think of who identify themselves as Germanic, in my experience, are nationalists and patriots, including intellectuals who love their own culture. Even some people who are not patriotic readily recognize themselves as belonging to the Germanic meta-ethnicity, mind you, but they are rather exceptions to the rule.
|
Then you clearly didnt understand my post.
Nationalists and patriots? 95% of both people and nationalists in Denmark dont know the word "Germanic" for anything else than something very distant from everyday life: a classification of languages and old age cultures associated with them.
You are saying it is patriotic to recognize oneself as Germanic? Pff. That is such BS. It has nothing to do with anything of concern. No one use Germanic as an ethnic self-designation in the society of Denmark, and I can only speculate it is the same in Norway and Sweden and certain other "Germanic" countries. Its just not taken seriously in society. Surveys have shown that Danes are among the most pan-European in orientation, so that is the only meta-ethnicity people on a societal basis identify with. That is the only real identity, the only broader ethnicity we honor, except for "Danish".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aptrgangr
So a Germanic is everyone speaking a Germanic language?
The term "Germanic" is related to German [we ourselves call us Deutsche BTW], and Germans are bad people, so leading scientists are propagating Germanic is just a linguistic term. Have you ever thought about who is speaking Germanic languages, and why? |
I have not said that Germanic is everyone speaking a Germanic language. That surely depends on which context you use it in. One thing is certain though: Germanic is hardly a genealogical term. It represents an abstract classification of languages, based on similarities recognized between them, and the associated cultures in old ages. We can speculate the common proto-Indo-European origin of Germanic languages. It is not used by people as an ethnic self-designation. Most people dont know its full meaning, probably; and most people that do, know it as a linguistic term.
I dont have anything against Germany. Germany, in fact, along with other nations, is one of the nations I admire the most of any nation in the world. You talking as if all this stemmed from anti-Germanism implies the assumption that all Germanic-speakers are all genealogically the same, though, and the same as Germans. Which, of course, is entirely false. The genealogy of Europe and Germanic countries is complex, and surely cannot be reduced to a few linguistic sub-groups. Because inside those sub-groups, you will find groups of people that might as well be more related genealogically to someone outside of the specific linguistic group. Any population is diverse, and when groups such as PIEs split up, the diversity will most likely be preserved genealogically, even if one group from one bloodline ends up with a dialect different from most others in the same bloodline.
Your point that speaking a Germanic language is not a racial or ethnic determinant, is one that is impossible to deny, but it also has to be stressed on a larger scale. Many of the current "Germanic" (speaking) countries have componental non-Germanic-specific origins. Not that it matters - because again, Germanic is not a valid way to simplify genealogy in the first place, so the observations indication is a truism we would have to assert without it.