Norden

[wilpuri]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Clearly a common roots and culture of the countries generally known as Scandinavian countries (Norway, Sweden and Denmark) as well as the related island countries or autonomous regions (Iceland, Åland and Faroe Islands).

Then there is a mutual feeling of belonging. The words of this Danish politician does not change that. As we speak, small flags of the Nordic countries decorate our christmas tree.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by wilpuri

Then there is a mutual feeling of belonging. The words of this Danish politician does not change that. As we speak, small flags of the Nordic countries decorate our christmas tree.

Duly notice that I purposedly refered to Scandinavian countries and people of Scandinavian extraction extraction (which I listed). Not to some geo-regional area.

Originally Posted by svin

Finland included, in my opinion. I remember Swedish posters from WWII era, that promote sending donations to help Finnish children. Something along these lines.

Hardly surprising when: (a) they are geographically neighbouring countries, and (b) there is an ethnic Swedish population in Finland.

[svin]

Yes, but I think that you're unjust to Finns. I think there is mutual belonging with Finns to some extent too. Yes, they are not Germanic, but they are closely related with other Scandinavians. Religion, history, values, way of life etc.

For example, orthodox Karelians are Finno-Ugric but they have common values, religion and way of life with northern Russians, that's why Russians feel that Karelians are almost ethnic Russians. Also they are close to northern Russians anthropologically. Something like that.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by svin

Yes, but I think that you're unjust to Finns. I think there is mutual belonging with Finns to some extent too. Yes, they are not Germanic, but they are closely related with other Scandinavians. Religion, history, values, way of life etc.

I'm not being just or unjust to Finns. Or to the Saami for that matter. I simply wasn't referring to them.

I clearly stated "roots" and "culture" as a common denominator and purposedly said "Scandinavia". I guess that I should have included ethnic Swedes from Finland too. But, is Finland Scandinavia and do Finno-Ugrians share "roots" and "culture" (e.g. language) with Scandinavians? No. So I don't understand what is the fuss about.

If I had wanted to know about the relation between Danes, Swedes, Norwegians, etc., with Finns, I would have asked mentioned Finland.

[wilpuri]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Duly notice that I purposedly refered to Scandinavian countries and people of Scandinavian extraction extraction (which I listed). Not to some geo-regional area.

This is hardly relevant to my point, unless you suggest that the feeling of "mutual belonging" disappears once you exclude Finland from the equation.

[Menydh]

What a hindrance..

[svin]

I clearly stated "roots" and "culture" as a common denominator and purposedly said "Scandinavia". I guess that I should have included ethnic Swedes from Finland too. But, is Finland Scandinavia and do Finno-Ugrians share "roots" and "culture" (e.g. language) with Scandinavians? No. So I don't understand what is the fuss about.

Well, I only wanted to say that this feeling (mutual belonging) also includes Finns. At least I think so.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by svin

Well, I only wanted to say that this feeling (mutual belonging) also includes Finns. At least I think so.

But you mean to a completely different mutual [whatever else].

If I had mentioned The Russias (ethnic Russians), would you have felt it alright that an Armenian attached himself to it?

[wilpuri]

Let's not get distracted folks.

We were supposed to explore the myth that is the common Scandinavian (+other territories, however excluding Finland, of course) meta-ethnicity.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by wilpuri

Let's not get distracted folks.

We were supposed to explore the myth that is

We weren't supposed to explore any myth, but some hard facts.

What would be that myth that you are talking about?

the common Scandinavian (+other territories, however excluding Finland, , of course)

Why "however" excluding Finland?

What is it that bothers you so much that we can discuss the Scandinavian identity without having to include the Fenno-Ugrian?

What would you propose? Umh.. you already made it clear that the ethnic Swedish identity of the Finland Swedes should be wiped out ("about time" you said, right?). What next? Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, ...?

[wilpuri]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

We weren't supposed to explore any myth, but some hard facts.

What would be that myth that you are talking about?

In your first post you suggested that there was no "feeling of mutual belonging" among the Scandinavian nations, with the statements made by this politician as proof. That would make the notion a myth.

What is it that bothers you so much that we can discuss the Scandinavian identity without having to include the Fenno-Ugrian?

It doesn't really. You, however, seem bothered by the fact that Finland is by culture inherently a Nordic country and not just part of some geo-political definition. Those posters Svin mentioned called us a Brother Nation (this a Norwegian poster). The reasons for such charity extend beyond the geographic factor. But of course we are getting off-topic again.

What would you propose? Umh.. you already made it clear that the ethnic Swedish identity of the Finland Swedes should be wiped out ("about time" you said, right?). What next? Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, ...?

This is more than cryptic, to be frank. You are lying blatantly. I never said about wiping Finland-Swedish identity (not the same as Swedish identity) from Finland. I am a Finland-Swede. I talked about Swedish as an official language, as opposed to a minority language.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by wilpuri

In your first post you suggested that there was no "feeling of mutual belonging" among the Scandinavian nations, with the statements made by this politician as proof. That would make the notion a myth.

Point your accusing finger somewhere else, because I did not suggest anything of what you are trying to make people see. Here is first post for everyone to read:

Originally Posted by Mynydd

I would have thought that there was a feeling of mutual belonging among all Scandinavian nations, but that's apparently not the case with the Danes at the Danish People's Party

"I would have thought" does not mean that I suggest that it doesn't exist, only that I am wondering if it does.

You are deceiving people into believing that because I said the Danish People's Party, I mean the whole population of all Scandinavian countries.

It doesn't really. You, however, seem bothered by the fact that Finland is by culture inherently a Nordic country and not just part of some geo-political definition.

I've been talking all along of the Scandinavian countries, not of "Nordic countries", or Finland or Fidji. So clearly it is you who is bothered with other countries having an identity of their own.

Those posters Svin mentioned called us a Brother Nation (this a Norwegian poster). The reasons for such charity extend beyond the geographic factor.

I don't know much about charities. I don't even understand why they bring African children in Europe, stripping them off of their roots.

But of course we are getting off-topic again.

Actually, you have gone off topic since your first post, trying to force feed everyone that Finland should be included as a Scandinavian country. No matter how unrealistic and bizarre it is.

You don't like it? Then take it up with Geographers, Ethnographers, and the such. Once you get the certification from all of them telling that Finland is a Scandinavian country, feel free to put a picture of it in your signature. But in the mean time, try to make some sense.

This is more than cryptic, to be frank. You are lying blatantly. I never said about wiping Finland-Swedish identity (not the same as Swedish identity) from Finland. I am a Finland-Swede. I talked about Swedish as an official language, as opposed to a minority language.

No, it is you who is being blatantly dishonest, and a hindrance.

You called it an "artificial bilinguism" and wished for the derogation of their language rights as Swedish speakers. Something that you know well that would slowly but inevitably force them to disappear as a distinct identity.

That, for your information, is a form of ethnocide. Not that you didn't know it.

Language tensions mount in bilingual Finland

[wilpuri]

"I would have thought" does not mean that I suggest that it doesn't exist, only that I am wondering if it does. You are deceiving people into believing that because I said the Danish People's Party, I mean the whole population of all Scandinavian countries.

If this is the case, then I am to blame for misinterpreting. No intention of deception.

I've been talking all along of the Scandinavian countries, not of "Nordic countries", or Finland or Fidji. So clearly it is you who is bothered with other countries having an identity of their own.

I am not bothered by it. But its not the first time you suggest Finland's connection to the rest of the Nordic region being somehow artificial or 'geo-political'. But again, not really my problem if you choose to see it that way, I simply want to point out that this is not how we, who actually live here, view the case.

I don't know much about charities. I don't even understand why they bring African children in Europe, stripping them off of their roots.

Well this was the case of a brother nation helping another in need, sending supplies and hundreds of volunteers to fight (hundreds of Danes & Norwegians and several thousands of Swedes fought for Finland).

Actually, you have gone off topic since your first post, trying to force feed everyone that Finland should be included as a Scandinavian country. No matter how unrealistic and bizarre it is.

I have never said it was, and I'm not trying to force anyone to believe something like that. Finland is not part of the geographic definition of Scandinavia, nor is it linguistically Scandinavian, which usually form the two main criterias, depending on the exact definition of Scandinavian.

No, it is you who is being blatantly dishonest, and a hindrance. You called it an "artificial bilinguism" and wished for the derogation of their language rights as Swedish speakers. Something that you know well that would slowly but inevitably force them to disappear as a distinct identity. That, for your information, is a form of ethnocide. Not that you didn't know it.

Dishonest? A hindrance? It is artificial bilingualism when people who never have the need to use the language are forced to learn it, when the minority that speaks it is no larger than 5-6%. I hope you realize that the Finnish system is unique, and by your definitions of ethnocide, we must be a shining example to rest of the world in how we treat our Swedish-speaking minority. Indeed, they must be one of the few minorities not being ethnocided at the moment. Of course, you probably know very little of realities concerning the situation, which would explain your bizzarre accusations. I advocate a more localized bilingualism, where it is official where it is actually needed. The nation-wide policy is a remnant of the power of the Finland-Swedish elite once weilded. Wilpuri, the ethnociding wanna-be Scandinavian exits this wonderful thread.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by wilpuri

But its not the first time you suggest Finland's connection to the rest of the Nordic region being somehow artificial or 'geo-political'.

Still beating at it? In this thread I was not suggesting any such thing. I was pointing to a particular reality that is called Scandinavia, which it has a particular [meta-ethnic] identity of its own.

But well, since yo insist there appears to be some ethnic connection between Finland and the Scandinavian countries, which is the so-called Finland Swedes. Unless that these Finland Swedes are just Finns who happen to speak the Swedish language. As one would logically derive from your arguments elsewhere, and as if this was the result of some accident. But others argue something different.

At the end of the day, who the North Germanic Scandinavians are related to and how, it does not affect me at all. But it is for the sake of accuracy and correctness (properness, if you prefer) that it would be ilogical to pretend that they are related to Fenno-Ugrians who --this should go without saying-- do not comprise the total of the Finnish population but only a part of it.

And, since the Northern Eurasian haplogroup subclade N3 comprises well over half of the male lineages of Finland, if there has been any meta-ethnic genesis between Uralic Fenno-Ugrians and North Germanic Scandinavians that I have missed, then I would humbly request you that you let me know about it, in as much detail as possible.

As for the rest, ditto.