Portuguese State-Nationalism vs Spanish Ethno-Nationalism

[Lusitan]

Hi! I'm new here. I decided to join because I find this forum interesting, and because of its ethno-nationalist orientation, I hope to have some nice discussions here.

I want to start by saying that I find it a bit odd that many people here that self-identify as ethnic nationalists suport the existence of states such as Spain in wich there is no comon ethnic identity.
I would understand if someone self-identified as a "spanish nationalist" and defended the union of a group of ethnicities that formed a circle of kinship, such as portuguese/galicians + castelhans + asturians. But when one talks about an "hispanic ethnic identity" that includes for exemple the basques... then i can't see any meaning in it.

The basques are linguistically and maybe culturally one of the most distinct ethnic groups of the White Race (maybe you preffer Europid because it doesn't sound much american ), even genetically they are different from the neighboring ethnicities. If one wants to include the basques and for exemple asturians in the same circle of kinship or meta-ethnicity that group would the the White Race.

Here is a quote about the genetic identity of the basques from wikipedia:

Basque people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Before the development of modern Genetics based on DNA sequencing, Basques were noted as having the highest global apportion of Rh- blood type (35% phenotypically, 60% genetically). Additionally Basques also have virtually no B blood type (nor the related AB group). These differences are thought to reflect their long history of isolation, along with times when the population size of the Basques was small, allowing gene frequencies to drift over time. The history of isolation reflected in gene frequencies has presumably been key to the Basque people retaining their distinctive language, while more recently arrived Indo-European languages swamped other indigenous languages that were previously spoken in western Europe. In fact, in accordance with other genetic studies, a recent genetic piece of research from 2007 claims: "The Spanish and Basque groups are the furthest away from other continental groups (with more diversity within the same genetic groups) which is consistent with the suggestions that the Iberian peninsula holds the most ancient West European genetic ancestry."

[Menydh]

Hello and welcome.

First off, let me start by saying that any alleged "portuguese-galician" or "luso-galician" identity is false. Within the framework of Spain (or Hispania/Iberia), the Galicians have some especial relation to the Northern Portuguese. But they have no especial relation whatsoever with the people farther south of the Dorum (Douro, Duero) river.

Which takes me to reverse your question: the self-called "Portuguese nationalists" defend a people as ethnicacally diverse as are the Northern Portuguese (formerly known as Galaecia Braccarensis and Condado Portucalensis) from the Central and Southern Portuguese, and call it a nation... isn't that ironic?

Further to this, the basis for this so-called "nation" is in fact the dominions of a king, which were ceded to his ancestor as a county by the Imperator Totius Hispaniae (the King of Leon).. or, in other words, the basis so this so-called "nation" is no less than... a state!

The pre-origins of this state are in the division of the Spanish nation (Spania) which achieved its ethnogenesis from the Lusitania to the Tarraconensis and from the Salto Vascorum to the Betica in the reigns of Leovigildo and his son Recaredo, through the judicial, territorial and ethno-racial union of Leovigildo which crystalized with the religious union of Recaredo.

The origins of this state are clearly in the chaos derived from the Muslim invasion.

And yet all of this, you would call such state.. a nation? Let me quote the Castillian poem of El Cid:

Cosas veredes que faran fablar las piedras

[Lusitan]

A long time ago there was an ethnicity or meta-ethnicity that included three groups, these were the lusitanians, galicians, and vettons and the territory at the south of Tejo (souther Portugal was not inhabited by any of these groups). Nowadays there is a diffrent reality, there are no longer galicians, lusitanians, or vettons in the same way there was before (ethnically). The vettons were assimilated to create the castelhan ethnicity; the lusitanians, part of the galicians, and also the non "lusitanic" (lets call it this way) peoples that lived in southern Portugal (like the conians and celtiberians) merged to give origin to what is now called the portuguese ethnicity. The spanish galicians wich are sub-group of the portuguese (or a related ethnicity) are very related to northern portuguese although they speak a diffrent dialect. Very few things distinguish a castelhan from a portuguese, but the main diffrence is language wich is the same (or a extremly related one) to the one that is spoken in the spanish galiza. One can say there is a cultural-linguistic continuity from La Curunha to Faro and the portuguese (including the galicians) are a different ethnicity, that is separated mostly by the different language.

Anyway don't say Spain is a nation, because it's not even an ethnicity (nation and ethnicity are different things). An ethnicity can become a nation when it has a Myth or colective consciousness (awareness of the group, of a common past and destiny). It is the desire of a true ethno-nationalist that the people/ethnicity gains the unifying Myth. Portugal and Galiza are the same ethnicity (or meta-ethnicity) but don't yet have a very developed common Myth, thus one might consider them diffrent nations nowadays. The proff that Spain is not an ethnicity is that, for example the portuguese are more related to the occitanians then they are to the basques. The peoples from the iberian peninsula don'tform a circle of kinship, the only thing they have in common (and excludes the other white ethnicities) is their geographical location.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Lusitan

A long time ago there was an ethnicity or meta-ethnicity that included three groups

Actually, that long time ago there were tribes, not ethnicities and much less meta-ethnicities.

I mean, if we start by calling things for their right names I'm sure that the discussion will be the all more qualitative.

these were the lusitanians, galicians, and vettons and the territory at the south of Tejo (souther Portugal was not inhabited by any of these groups).

You make it sound as if there was any kind of unity between all of those groups. Quite unrealistic.

Nowadays there is a diffrent reality

Yes, nowadays the reality is that the territory of Portugal is overrun by Brazilians and Mozambicans and Angolans. And, you are going to tell me that because it is a "new reality" you are willing to accept it as good?

there are no longer galicians, lusitanians, or vettons in the same way there was before (ethnically).

As I said above, you are confusing a primitive concept which is tribe, with ethnicity which is an evolution up from the tribe.

The vettons were assimilated to create the castelhan ethnicity;

No, the Vettones were not "assimilated" in a Castilian ethnicity. Unless you consider Leon to be Castille.

the lusitanians, part of the galicians, and also the non "lusitanic" (lets call it this way)

Why should we call them for what they are not?

peoples that lived in southern Portugal (like the conians and celtiberians) merged to give origin to what is now called the portuguese ethnicity.

There was in times of the proto-history tribes which were identified as Galaici (not Galicians). As they evolved through history, they became closer to an ethnic group of Galicians but of which not all the tribes would be Galaici. This Galician identity or ethnicity is preserved in the bosom of the mother nation, Spain.

That in the state known as Portugal the identity and ethnicity of the Galicians is denied to create the impresion of a homogeneity, is a disgrace. It is for the preservation of our identities in the future that we are fighting in the present. As someone who sees my identity threatened and endangered, I cannot feel any sympathy for the ultra-jacobine methods employed to destroy the identity of the Braccarensis Galicians.

The spanish galicians wich are sub-group of the portuguese (or a related ethnicity) are very related to northern portuguese

As I said, let us call things by their name. They are related to the Galicians who live under the state of Portugal.

If you mean to imply that because they are Northern Portuguese then the relation extends to the rest of the Portuguese, then you are trying to confuse people.

although they speak a diffrent dialect.

They speak a language, not any dialect.

Very few things distinguish a castelhan from a portuguese, but the main diffrence is language wich is the same (or a extremly related one) to the one that is spoken in the spanish galiza. One can say there is a cultural-linguistic continuity from La Curunha to Faro and the portuguese (including the galicians) are a different ethnicity, that is separated mostly by the different language.

A language can or cannot be a common element of an ethnic nation. Language does not make a nation. But you are free to believe that you and any Brazilian mulatto belong to the same nation, because there is a more than strong cultural-linguistic link between Portugal and Brazil.

Anyway don't say Spain is a nation, because it's not even an ethnicity (nation and ethnicity are different things).

Not only I say it, but I have also pointed you to the point when the ethnogenesis (necessary for a nation to exist) occured.

An ethnicity can become a nation when it has a Myth or colective consciousness (awareness of the group, of a common past and destiny). It is the desire of a true ethno-nationalist that the people/ethnicity gains the unifying Myth.

Then you will find plenty of them in Spain, but few if any in Portugal.

Portugal and Galiza are the same ethnicity (or meta-ethnicity) but don't yet have a very developed common Myth

That Galicia is not of a same ethnicity as Portugal has been proved with evidence here beyond doubt. You should go beg somewhere else.. why not try Brazil? After all, your idea of nation through cultural-linguistic similarities makes Brazil a much better (in fact, perfect) candidate.

thus one might consider them diffrent nations nowadays. The proff that Spain is not an ethnicity is that, for example the portuguese are more related to the occitanians then they are to the basques.

You really should leave this for someone better prepared than you. I want to see you telling a Gascon (Occitan) in the face that you, a Portuguese, are more related to him than a Basque.

The peoples from the iberian peninsula don'tform a circle of kinship, the only thing they have in common (and excludes the other white ethnicities) is their geographical location.

If you say so. But I warn you that it is not other Spanish (not even the Galicians) who go calling the Portuguese "irmãos" (in Portuguese, brothers).

[Menydh]

By the way, I'll give you more than a Myth of Spain, long before Portugal even existed.

It was called, in Latin, Recuperatio Hispaniae. Or the Reconquest of The Spains. It appears first in the early years of the Reconquista, and the new kingdoms emerge through this idea.

In other words, if the "Myth" of the Reconquest of the nation had not been there, there would have never been a Kingdom of Leon and, in consequence, there would have never been a Country of Portucalis and later a Kingdom of Portugal.

Those States (kingdoms) were created because of the ideal to recover the Nation (Spain).

[Ferran]

Originally Posted by Lusitan

The spanish galicians wich are sub-group of the portuguese (or a related ethnicity)

"Galicians a sub-group of the Portuguese"? I thought that Galicia was a much older concept than Portugal, therefore not qualificable to be a branch of a "Portuguese identity". But never mind, we can also say that Occitans are actually a sub-group of the Valencian people (or ehm, nation), while we show serious faces.

[Lusitan]

I don't see much diffrence between the concepts of tribe, meta-ethnicity or ethncity, its all relative, for example if one calls several related groups from the Iberian peninsula an ethnicity then each of this groups will be a tribe, but if one calls it an meta-ethnicity then there groups will be ethnicities. It depend on what brunch of the huge tree you are looking at.

Now I dont understand why you talk about Brasil and mulatos, because they are bio-culturally very different from europeans. Anyway, I'm not sure but I think that about 35 million brasilians might be considered portuguese or at least assimilable because they are of portuguese descent and white.

About the example I gave about occitanians, ok, not the best example, but you get my point.

Regarding the portuguese ethnicity, what is after all an ethnicity? I beleive it's a group of people with a common indentity, a group of people bounded by their similarities, that are more related within themselves that with external people. Various factors enter in the defenition of this similarity, they are of a bio-cultural character, and I use this term because part of the culture of the people derives from biology. The biological diffrences between iberian ethnic groups (excluding basques) are extremely small, even the biological differences between all europeans are not very important, and a person from Braga might be biologically more related to someone in Moskow that with another person from Braga. Thus the cultural differences between white people have almost absolutelly no biological roots. So the Identification of ethnicities must be based in differences such as language, also, considering that each ethnicity as the destiny of becoming more distinct as time evolves and eventually in the distant future there will be biological differences, common descent is also important. This is why I consider Portugal and Galiza an ethnicity (divided if different tribes).

Could you please explain what is common in the ethnicities from the Iberian Peninsula that make them a meta-ethnicity? Tribes and ethnicity if you will...

[Lusitan]

Originally Posted by Ferran

"Galicians a sub-group of the Portuguese"? I thought that Galicia was a much older concept than Portugal, therefore not qualificable to be a branch of a "Portuguese identity". But never mind, we can also say that Occitans are actually a sub-group of the Valencian people (or ehm, nation), while we show serious faces.

Maybe "galicians are a subgroup of portugalicians" as occitanians are a subgroup of Occitano-Romance.

[Lusitan]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

By the way, I'll give you more than a Myth of Spain, long before Portugal even existed.

It was called, in Latin, Recuperatio Hispaniae. Or the Reconquest of The Spains. It appears first in the early years of the Reconquista, and the new kingdoms emerge through this idea.

In other words, if the "Myth" of the Reconquest of the nation had not been there, there would have never been a Kingdom of Leon and, in consequence, there would have never been a Country of Portucalis and later a Kingdom of Portugal.

Those States (kingdoms) were created because of the ideal to recover the Nation (Spain).

A Myth (although in this case is not strong) is not eneugh. Islam has a very strong myth but an ethno-nationalist does not consider it a nation in the same sense, not will he support the existence of such myth.

[Galaico]

As a Galician, I really can't understand the obssession of some Portuguese in claiming Galicia as a Portuguese land, and the Galicians as a "sub-group of the portuguese".

First of all, Galicia has had its own identity since the Romans unified all the NW Celtic speaking tribes under the administrative region of Gallaecia, in the province of Hispania. So, since then we've been Gallaecians (Lucenses in our case) and Hispanians/Spanish.

Therefore, the existance of Galicia is not possible without the existance of Spain. As Galicians, we should have a special bond with the Southern Galicians, our Bracarensis brothers, but that is mostly limited to History textbooks.

You speak about Spain having no ethnic unity, something quite ridiculous if you look back to our history or just check the languages we speak.

Even during the Visigothic invasion, the Hispano-Roman people could differ between those of Hispanic ethnicity and the invaders. This is probably the first sign of ethnic awareness among the Spaniards since Spain became independent after the fall of the Empire.

As Mynydd said before, the Reconquest is the fight for the reconstitution of Hispania. All Christians considered themselves Spanish with independence of the Christian kingdom were they had been born.

About the language topic, all the languages spoken in Spain (with the exception of Basque) are Ibero-Romance, and are closer to each other than for example the High German and the Low German dialects, so according to you, Germany must be a multiethnic nation aswell...

As for the Basque, it is the only Iberian language that resisted romanification, probably the original tongue of the first Paleolithic hunters and gatherers to settle in Iberia. But the Basques and the Basque language have played an important role in the made up of Spain.

It were the Basques the ones who re-colonised Old Castile after this was reconquered to the Muslims.

It was the Basques the ones who made up Castilian/Spanish with their rough Romance dialects spoken in Álava and La Rioja. That's why the Castilian/Spanish pronunciation is so different from that of the other Ibero-Romance languages (such as Portuguese, Catalan and Occitan), because the rough Spanish pronunciation is the same as the Basque one.

The loss of the initial Latin F- and substituion by the initial H- in Spanish and Occitan is not something trivial, it is the consequence of theinexistance of words in Basque language starting with F-, the Basques were not used to pronounce the initial F-.

There are hundreds of Basque loan words in the Ibero-Romace languages, and not only due to closeness, but to the fact that the Basques introduced these words when they spoke Castilian, Aragonese, etc.

About the Rhesus factor negative and the blood group, let me tell you that I'm O Rh-, and I'm not Basque. Rh- is quite high in all the Iberian peninsula, but it is higher among the Basques because the had less foreign influence, therefore they are the purest Spaniards.

As you can see, in every single way (Historic, linguistic, genetic, etc.), Spain conforms a single homogeneous ethnicity.

[Menydh]

Before we can move forward, you have to make up your mind and decide if ethnicity and nation are a cultural-linguistic concept (which is the idea that got you started), or if it is something else (now you've just derived to "bio-cultural", which you should explain).

I can't get your point, whichever it may be, when your example is not only not the best but in reality it is the worse that I've seen in a long time. I mean, you haven't made any point with it, other than the point of being wrong.. sorry to say.

As for the rest, Galicians are as related to the Central and Southern Portuguese as the Central or Southern Portuguese are related to Murcians. As for the relation of Galicians with the Northern Portuguese, this has diminished and will surely diminish more in the future while the Portuguese state denies them their identity and they eventually lose it.


p.s. actually, the relation of Central Portuguese with Murcians could be biologically closer, if the Alans left any print in both since they settled for a time in both ends of the Peninsula.

[Lusitan]

Galico I ask again, if Spain is an ethnicity what are the similarities that bind it (if you include basques I dont find them)? (for Portugal I've gave language, wich is the most important)

I consider all germans, including alsatians, swiss germans, southern tirolese, luxenbouguese and germans from germany as the same ethnicity and in the case of Germany and Austria germans the same nation.

[Lusitan]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Before we can move forward, you have to make up your mind and decide if ethnicity and nation are a cultural-linguistic concept (which is the idea that got you started), or if it is something else (now you've just derived to "bio-cultural", which you should explain).

I can't get your point, whichever it may be, when your example is not only not the best but in reality it is the worse that I've seen in a long time. I mean, you haven't made any point with it, other than the point of being wrong.. sorry to say.

As for the rest, Galicians are as related to the Central and Southern Portuguese as the Central or Southern Portuguese are related to Murcians. As for the relation of Galicians with the Northern Portuguese, this has diminished and will surely diminish more in the future while the Portuguese state denies them their identity and they eventually lose it.


p.s. actually, the relation of Central Portuguese with Murcians could be biologically closer, if the Alans left any print in both since they settled for a time in both ends of the Peninsula.

I explained that very well in the other post, within the white race use cultural-linguistic criteria because we are biologically very similar, if you read carefully the other post you will understand my explanation and reasons.

I can give you another example, the portuguese and italians are more similar than portuguese and basques, is that good eneugh for you or do you disagree?

[Galaico]

Originally Posted by Lusitan

Galico I ask again, if Spain is an ethnicity what are the similarities that bind it (if you include basques I dont find them)? (for Portugal I've gave language, wich is the most important)

I told you in my previous post: Historical, linguistic, genetic, and racial reasons.

Do you consider Portugal as a nation, only because all Portuguese share the same linguistic variety of Western Ibero-Romace? There must be other things, otherwise, Brazilians and Moçambiquenhos could join your nation

I consider all germans, including alsatians, swiss germans, southern tirolese, luxenbouguese and germans from germany as the same ethnicity and in the case of Germany and Austria germans the same nation.

Please, tell me what are your reasons to consider all Germans a single nation and not all Spaniards. And please don't say that they share the same language and the Spaniards don't, because an Alemannic speaker from Southern Germany or Switzerland will find it harder to understand a Low Saxon speaker from Bremen, than a Catalan speaker from Girona to understand a Castilian speaker from Palencia, or a Galician speaker from Carballiño.