How would you order the Civ 5 civilizations in their historical importance order?
- Thread starter Genghis Khaiser
- Start date
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
I edited my post, please re-adjust your quote to my last edit ok ??? And sorry for editing after posting, but I have a strange habit of posting and then editing several times adding more text or correcting some mistakes if there were any. 
Edit:
Ok, it seems that I've finished editing before you quoted, anyway. Lucky me!
Can you please show me a quotation, where he claims that by nationality he is a German ???
I think that you are confusing ethnicity with genetic background - these are not the same things.
He calls himself Polish - here and now - he not only writes about his Polish ancestors, but also calls himself Polish.
However, he was ethnic German because he did not even speak Polish language (I suppose so at least).
Ethnicity is all about native language (aka first language aka mother tongue).
So he was ethnic German-speaker, but his nationality was Polish. He claimed both Polish nationality, and Polish ancestry.
Actually - "Polnisch", not Polish - since all of his texts were written in German language.
Edit:
Ok, it seems that I've finished editing before you quoted, anyway. Lucky me!
Can you please show me a quotation, where he claims that by nationality he is a German ???
I think that you are confusing ethnicity with genetic background - these are not the same things.
He calls himself Polish - here and now - he not only writes about his Polish ancestors, but also calls himself Polish.
However, he was ethnic German because he did not even speak Polish language (I suppose so at least).
Ethnicity is all about native language (aka first language aka mother tongue).
So he was ethnic German-speaker, but his nationality was Polish. He claimed both Polish nationality, and Polish ancestry.
Actually - "Polnisch", not Polish - since all of his texts were written in German language.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Well, there is culture and music "made in Germany".
By my point was, that German culture and German music is part of European culture.
So what was my point is that there is no exclusively German culture or exclusively German music.
There is also no such thing like "exclusively German" architecture, for example.
Actually, all major historical styles in European architecture (Romanesque, Gothic, Renaissance, etc.) originated either in Italy or in France.
But it does not mean, that there were no regional variations.
So while Gothic architecture originated in France, we can talk about "German versions" of Gothic. Etc., etc. But when some Germans claim, that Gothic arhitecture in Poland is "all German", they are wrong. Gothic style in architecture emerged in France - so even Gothic arhitecture in Germany itself is not "German", but French.
And actually Polish Gothic - as well as Pomeranian Gothic - had some specific elements, which were not present in any region of Germany.
H4run
Deity
It's alright Domen, I'm working on my paper now but sometime I recheck CFC forum just for reading (bad habit because not in the right time) and post here as curiosity (another bad habit), so I will just let it like that. well if you using that definition: separating ethnicity with genetic, maybe I'm the one who confuse myself here. Because as commonly known, and it doesn't mean the commonly known is a legit definition, ethnicity mean sharing the same or closer genetic background, quite absurd though if you see genetic map for example anatolian Turkish who are heavily mix with many other gen, and talking about genetic, the deeper you talk about it the more funnier and sillier to those peoples who divided themselves and other by genetic, because regarding genetic we share lots of similarity.
But it quite strange and new definition for me, I never knew if ethnicity is been define by language, it can quite problematic though using this definition take for example the Chinese in Indonesia or Korean in Japan, they speak the natives languages of that particular nationality, in Indonesia case even the Chinese already forgot/don't use the Chinese language, they use Indonesian and it become their mother tongue. However ethnically they consider to be Chinese not Indonesian both by the Indonesian and by themselves. Also the same apply to Korean in Japan, or to Japanese in Brazil for example.
But it quite strange and new definition for me, I never knew if ethnicity is been define by language, it can quite problematic though using this definition take for example the Chinese in Indonesia or Korean in Japan, they speak the natives languages of that particular nationality, in Indonesia case even the Chinese already forgot/don't use the Chinese language, they use Indonesian and it become their mother tongue. However ethnically they consider to be Chinese not Indonesian both by the Indonesian and by themselves. Also the same apply to Korean in Japan, or to Japanese in Brazil for example.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
IMO, the definition which confuses ethnicity with genetics is modern, American (developed in the US to replace the word "race") and - above all - wrong.
In the USA they understand ethnicity as something related to genetics, because they replaced the "bad" word race with a "good" word ethnicity.
So they are using a politically correct word, to denote a politically incorrect idea. In American understanding, ethnicity = race. Which is wrong.
As far as I know, ethnicity should be understood as a combination of language and culture.
Language being the decisive factor - especially in Europe, where similarities in culture between various linguistic groups are great.
======================================
Ancestry is also not the same as ethnicity. Especially, that virtually every person has mixed ancestors.
It is obvious, that not 100% of Nietzsche's ancestors were Polish. But find me a Polish person, who has 100% of Polish ancestors...
======================================
Nationality, on the other hand, is more about one's personal beliefs - about one's personal identity (and it is to some extent political).
Citizenship is also another thing. But surely more related to nationality, than to ethnicity.
H4run
Deity
well that's a totally new thing for me
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Well if we stick to genetic definition of ethnicity, then we can as well throw "ethnicity" into a dust bin.
There is no such thing like "being genetically German" or "being genetically Polish".
Many Poles have Ruthenian, Lithuanian, German, Scandinavian and other ancestors. Many Germans have Slavic or Baltic ancestors as well.
Virtually anyone in Europe, has ancestors from every place in Europe - at least when we gather all ancestors from the last, say, 500 years.
Already 5 generations ago, everyone had 64 great-great-great-great grandparents - and that was just 150 years ago.
Of course most ancestors were from the same region, but there will always be some ancestors from distant regions among the whole group.
Exactly! I totally agree with everything you wrote above. This would be absurd. Then why such definition still exists?
People in America claim to be Irish-Americans because - for example - they know that 2 of their great-grandparents were Irish. It sometimes happen that they don't know anything about the remaining 6 great-grandparents, but only about those 2 - and basing on this limited knowledge, they claim to be Irish.
America is a nation with exclusively immigrant background (except for those "ancient" Americans who don't even remember when their ancestors came).
So in America, such definition of ethnicity - based on ancestry, or rather this part of ancestry which is known to a person - can be valid.
But in Europe such definition of ethnicity simply cannot work.
By European standards, all Americans are simply ethnic Americans. No "Irish-Americans", "German-Americans", "English-Americans", etc.
We don't even understand, why Americans haven't integrated into one ethnicity, but prefer to divide themselves along the lines of ancestry!
It seems, that the American nation is simply too young to integrate in such a way.
And strong "European-style" nationalism does not exist there, which has also contributed to lack of such integration.
European nationalism NEVER divided people along the lines of ancestry or genetics. It divided them along the lines of culture / language / religion. This is inevitably true, even if some nationalists don't understand it and claim that all members of each nation are genetically related / share common ancestors.
There is no such thing like "being genetically German" or "being genetically Polish".
Many Poles have Ruthenian, Lithuanian, German, Scandinavian and other ancestors. Many Germans have Slavic or Baltic ancestors as well.
Virtually anyone in Europe, has ancestors from every place in Europe - at least when we gather all ancestors from the last, say, 500 years.
Already 5 generations ago, everyone had 64 great-great-great-great grandparents - and that was just 150 years ago.
Of course most ancestors were from the same region, but there will always be some ancestors from distant regions among the whole group.
Exactly! I totally agree with everything you wrote above. This would be absurd. Then why such definition still exists?
People in America claim to be Irish-Americans because - for example - they know that 2 of their great-grandparents were Irish. It sometimes happen that they don't know anything about the remaining 6 great-grandparents, but only about those 2 - and basing on this limited knowledge, they claim to be Irish.
America is a nation with exclusively immigrant background (except for those "ancient" Americans who don't even remember when their ancestors came).
So in America, such definition of ethnicity - based on ancestry, or rather this part of ancestry which is known to a person - can be valid.
But in Europe such definition of ethnicity simply cannot work.
By European standards, all Americans are simply ethnic Americans. No "Irish-Americans", "German-Americans", "English-Americans", etc.
We don't even understand, why Americans haven't integrated into one ethnicity, but prefer to divide themselves along the lines of ancestry!
It seems, that the American nation is simply too young to integrate in such a way.
And strong "European-style" nationalism does not exist there, which has also contributed to lack of such integration.
European nationalism NEVER divided people along the lines of ancestry or genetics. It divided them along the lines of culture / language / religion. This is inevitably true, even if some nationalists don't understand it and claim that all members of each nation are genetically related / share common ancestors.
H4run
Deity
I agree with you, because I myself couldn't careless as I'm against all those things. But the question is what keeping the Chinese Indonesian that live for hundreds years with the natives, and already adopted their languages and their culture for not being an Indonesian? My answer will be because they are racially a Chinese, been distinguish by the family they were born (genealogy) and their physical appearance. No matter how Indonesian is Soe Hok Gie he will forever consider to be a Chinese Indonesian, because of his ethnicity, in the sense not that not because he don't speak Indonesian language he speak it like the Indonesian, he even unable to speak Chinese, or not in the sense that he don't adopt Indonesian custom, he totally adopted their custom. But it is in the sense that he appear to be chinese physically.
And what make a Korean in Japan a Korean also? As they also already adopted their culture, their language, I think it is all about their genealogy, and again peoples related it with genetic later ethnicity. And talking about ethnicity I think it is also connected with talking about tribes, and talking about tribes is about family, backthen peoples doesn't know advances biology and they don't understand there is such things called gen exist. But they distinguish one another through genealogy, skin tones, body structure, etc. From here they differentiate themselves with the other. And according to wikipedia ethnicity also included similarity of physical appearances as one of its aspect, which mean race also included as one of the aspect for ethnicity.
And what make a Korean in Japan a Korean also? As they also already adopted their culture, their language, I think it is all about their genealogy, and again peoples related it with genetic later ethnicity. And talking about ethnicity I think it is also connected with talking about tribes, and talking about tribes is about family, backthen peoples doesn't know advances biology and they don't understand there is such things called gen exist. But they distinguish one another through genealogy, skin tones, body structure, etc. From here they differentiate themselves with the other. And according to wikipedia ethnicity also included similarity of physical appearances as one of its aspect, which mean race also included as one of the aspect for ethnicity.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
I don't know the case of Chinese Indonesians. Maybe there is something distinct about their religion?
What kept the Jews distinct from others, even if those Jews were already atheists ???
European Jews look just like other Europeans. You can find Jews with all hair colours, even if one of them dominates.
Jews did not even speak one language (and still don't speak one language). Except for their religious language - Hebrew.
For how many generations Koreans in Japan remain Koreans?
If you was born Korean, you will generally consider yourself Korean throughout entire life.
Their children will perhaps consider themselves Korean as well. But their grandchildren - Japanese with Korean ancestry.
And when you come to great-great grandchildren - they will perhaps not even remember, that their ancestors originally came from Korea.
This can be different. For example if in Japan there are regions with Korean majority, Koreans in these regions will not assimilate easily.
If Koreans have something specific about their traditions and culture that they try hard to preserve - they will also not assimilate so easily.
What kept the Jews distinct from others, even if those Jews were already atheists ???
European Jews look just like other Europeans. You can find Jews with all hair colours, even if one of them dominates.
Jews did not even speak one language (and still don't speak one language). Except for their religious language - Hebrew.
For how many generations Koreans in Japan remain Koreans?
If you was born Korean, you will generally consider yourself Korean throughout entire life.
Their children will perhaps consider themselves Korean as well. But their grandchildren - Japanese with Korean ancestry.
And when you come to great-great grandchildren - they will perhaps not even remember, that their ancestors originally came from Korea.
This can be different. For example if in Japan there are regions with Korean majority, Koreans in these regions will not assimilate easily.
If Koreans have something specific about their traditions and culture that they try hard to preserve - they will also not assimilate so easily.
H4run
Deity
Not quite true also, Indonesia is multi-religion, there are lots of natives Indonesian peoples who share the same religion with the Chinese, name Christian or Buddhist, like in North Sumatera, however they also been separate from the natives. The Korean in Japan also share similar religion with the Japanese. Very interesting topic and thanks for the insight. At least I have an alternative view on defining ethnicity, I think most Turkish also regard Ethnicity as a culture and language at least post attaturk to force assimilate other culture and language for their nation integrity. But now I need to get back to my paper, I need to submit it in 21 january and I just write 1 and half page so far.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
And it seems, that "Indonesian" is also not an ethnic group.
Indonesia is a multi-ethnic state (like historically the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Roman Empire, or the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Indonesia
The dominant ethnic group of Indonesia are the Javanese - but they are still not even 42% of the total population.
With whom should the Chinese in Indonesia assimilate? With the Javanese?
There are over 700 languages in use in Indonesia (sic!) - with such a huge variety, there is probably no language which clearly dominates:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Indonesia
Which language should the Chinese in Indonesia choose?
Maybe these are the reasons, why they are not assimilating. There is no pressure to assimilate, since Indonesia is a multi-ethnic cluster anyway.
Do they persecute minorities? Do the Javanese-speakers have more rights than other ethno-linguistic groups? If no, then there is no pressure to assimilate.
In the Roman Empire, there was a pressure to assimilate because Latin-speaking Roman citizens had much better situation than subjects of the Empire.
This is why in the end majority of population of the Empire became Latin-speaking. Only in the Eastern part of the Empire Greek prevailed.
But Greek language was also favoured by the Roman Empire - almost as much favoured as Latin.
What is your paper about? Maybe we can help you in some way.
I hope so. Otherwise, Turks would need to admit that they are not the original Turks at all. They do not look like Mongoloid Asians.
As far as I know, the original Turkish tribes were Mongoloid when it comes to their appearance. Today, they all look like other White Europeans.
This is the result of a smaller group of Mongoloid conquerors, assimilating the much larger group of local White Caucasoid inhabitants - I suppose.
H4run
Deity
You are right about Indonesia but surprisingly the Chinese also able to speak the natives languages, in Medan they can speak batak languages, in Java they can speak javanese with a very good accent even. In Minangkabau also like that. But I know the answer is, because the Hokian Chinese been used and separated by the dutch as an elite groups for a very long time separated from the natives. This separation cause resentment between both groups and the natives feel betrayed by the Chinese that appear as the right hand of the Dutch (VOC). And this resentment continue and always been renew each time it get calm like in the time of Soekarno, later Soeharto again burn the resentment and genocide the Chinese, also in the time of reformation, Chinese use as a blackgoat and again been genocided by the native. The discrimination happen until today, but today things get better though.
I regard someone that orbiting around CFC forum have quite amazing information for almost anything, of course they can help
honestly I already use this forum so much to work on my paper including private messaging some member to answer my questions So I already benefit so much from this forum.
My paper is about Libertarianism, but I'm doing fine Domen thanks for asking I used this Havard lecturer Micheal Sandel in his lecture about Justice also his book.
I regard someone that orbiting around CFC forum have quite amazing information for almost anything, of course they can help
honestly I already use this forum so much to work on my paper including private messaging some member to answer my questions So I already benefit so much from this forum. My paper is about Libertarianism, but I'm doing fine Domen thanks for asking
I used this Havard lecturer Micheal Sandel in his lecture about Justice also his book.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
So I don't know why the Chinese people in Indonesia are not assimilating, but there has to be some reason.
We can reject the "higher culture vs. lower culture" idea - in my opinion, this is BS.
In Poland thousands of supposedly "higher culture" Germans did assimilate into the supposedly "lower culture" Poles.
Only in territories which were politically not controlled by Poland, Germans had "problems" with assimilation into more numerous Poles around them. But in the Austrian-controlled region of Galicia, many Germans became Polonized - which caused frustration of Ukrainian nationalists, who complaint about Germans becoming Polonized rather than Ukrainized (it was working in favour of Polish ethnicity when it comes to Polish vs. Ukrainian ratio among the population).
Poles, on the other hand, assimilated into the Germans in regions such as Lower Silesia or Western Pomerania. In general much of the process took place along religious lines - since the Counter-Reformation, Lutheran Poles were much more likely to be Germanized than Catholic Poles. But for example in Warsaw, local Lutheran Germans became Polonized - which later resulted in a large number of German-sounding surnames among Polish people from that area.
Customs and traditions were often more long-lasting and less variable than ethno-linguistic identity.
For example in Lesser Poland / Galicia the so called Taubdeutsche / Walddeutsche - one of groups of German immigrants - were already Polish-speaking in the 19th century, but preserved many customs (including their traditional dressing styles) typical for their original homelands in Saxony and in Holland.
Of course those peasants were not even aware of the fact, that their dressing styles (as well as their ancestors) came from Saxony and Holland.
Warsaw had a large community of Polish-speaking Lutherans, who considered themselves Polish people. Many of them had German surnames. When it comes to Medieval immigration of Germans into Poland - so called "Ostsiedlung" - in most regions those Germans were entirely Polonized. Only in regions where colonists were more numerous than locals, or in regions over which the Kingdom of Poland lost its political control, the reverse process took place.
For example German-speaking minority which existed in 19th century Galicia (Lesser Poland), was the result of recent, 18th century immigration, not of older Medieval immigration. And we know from sources that those Medieval colonists were quite numerous in the region of Lesser Poland. Cracow alone at some point had 30% of German-speaking population. Nobody exterminated or expelled them, yet German language disappeared from the streets of Cracow - as the result of Polonization. The same was the case with hundreds of other towns and hundreds of villages, into which Germans came during the Middle Ages.
Many Poles from the city of Lviv are also descendants of Polonized people of various linguistic groups - Armenians, Ruthenians, Tatars, Germans, etc.
In Danzig - on the other hand - thousands of Poles were Germanized throughout centuries. We know from old documents that Danzig was experiencing a constant natural population decline (i.e. more deaths than births). The only reason why its population was increasing or stable rather than declining, was immigration from outside. Old documents say what was the main source of that immigration - the main source of that immigration were peasants from the region of Pomerelia, most of them from villages located within 50 km from the city. Those peasants were Slavic-speaking (Kashubians and Poles). So how is it possible, that Danzig remained German-speaking throughout centuries? Thanks to gradual assimilation of immigrants who settled in that mostly German-speaking city (it was mostly German-speaking since the 14th century and remained mostly German-speaking after it came back under Polish rule in the 1450s).
Many Ukrainians are descendants of Polish peasant immigrants, who at first converted from Catholicism to Orthodoxy, and later became Ukrainian-speaking.
=======================================
There is no one single rule. Look how Slavs or Arabs during their respective expansions assimilated "more advanced societies".
Most of modern inhabitants of Egypt are - genetically - descendants of Ancient Egyptians, even though they are Muslim Arabs.
The claim of modern FYROM-ians, that they are descendants of Ancient Macedonians is - in purely genetic terms - not really false.
Most of Balkan Slavs, are descendants of local pre-Slavic populations who became Slavicized by Slavic tribes migrating into Balkans.
Slavic people who migrated into Balkans, were less numerous than Balkan populations who lived there by the time of Slavic arrival.
=======================================
Nice video about the history of English language - this shows how modern "English" ethnicity is a mix of many different influences:
Did you know, that more than half of modern English vocabulary has either French or Latin origins? Original Anglo-Saxon words are in minority:
http://historum.com/european-histor...rthern-europeans-germanics-3.html#post1692517
Link to video.
We can reject the "higher culture vs. lower culture" idea - in my opinion, this is BS.
In Poland thousands of supposedly "higher culture" Germans did assimilate into the supposedly "lower culture" Poles.
Only in territories which were politically not controlled by Poland, Germans had "problems" with assimilation into more numerous Poles around them. But in the Austrian-controlled region of Galicia, many Germans became Polonized - which caused frustration of Ukrainian nationalists, who complaint about Germans becoming Polonized rather than Ukrainized (it was working in favour of Polish ethnicity when it comes to Polish vs. Ukrainian ratio among the population).
Poles, on the other hand, assimilated into the Germans in regions such as Lower Silesia or Western Pomerania. In general much of the process took place along religious lines - since the Counter-Reformation, Lutheran Poles were much more likely to be Germanized than Catholic Poles. But for example in Warsaw, local Lutheran Germans became Polonized - which later resulted in a large number of German-sounding surnames among Polish people from that area.
Customs and traditions were often more long-lasting and less variable than ethno-linguistic identity.
For example in Lesser Poland / Galicia the so called Taubdeutsche / Walddeutsche - one of groups of German immigrants - were already Polish-speaking in the 19th century, but preserved many customs (including their traditional dressing styles) typical for their original homelands in Saxony and in Holland.
Of course those peasants were not even aware of the fact, that their dressing styles (as well as their ancestors) came from Saxony and Holland.
Warsaw had a large community of Polish-speaking Lutherans, who considered themselves Polish people. Many of them had German surnames. When it comes to Medieval immigration of Germans into Poland - so called "Ostsiedlung" - in most regions those Germans were entirely Polonized. Only in regions where colonists were more numerous than locals, or in regions over which the Kingdom of Poland lost its political control, the reverse process took place.
For example German-speaking minority which existed in 19th century Galicia (Lesser Poland), was the result of recent, 18th century immigration, not of older Medieval immigration. And we know from sources that those Medieval colonists were quite numerous in the region of Lesser Poland. Cracow alone at some point had 30% of German-speaking population. Nobody exterminated or expelled them, yet German language disappeared from the streets of Cracow - as the result of Polonization. The same was the case with hundreds of other towns and hundreds of villages, into which Germans came during the Middle Ages.
Many Poles from the city of Lviv are also descendants of Polonized people of various linguistic groups - Armenians, Ruthenians, Tatars, Germans, etc.
In Danzig - on the other hand - thousands of Poles were Germanized throughout centuries. We know from old documents that Danzig was experiencing a constant natural population decline (i.e. more deaths than births). The only reason why its population was increasing or stable rather than declining, was immigration from outside. Old documents say what was the main source of that immigration - the main source of that immigration were peasants from the region of Pomerelia, most of them from villages located within 50 km from the city. Those peasants were Slavic-speaking (Kashubians and Poles). So how is it possible, that Danzig remained German-speaking throughout centuries? Thanks to gradual assimilation of immigrants who settled in that mostly German-speaking city (it was mostly German-speaking since the 14th century and remained mostly German-speaking after it came back under Polish rule in the 1450s).
Many Ukrainians are descendants of Polish peasant immigrants, who at first converted from Catholicism to Orthodoxy, and later became Ukrainian-speaking.
=======================================
There is no one single rule. Look how Slavs or Arabs during their respective expansions assimilated "more advanced societies".
Most of modern inhabitants of Egypt are - genetically - descendants of Ancient Egyptians, even though they are Muslim Arabs.
The claim of modern FYROM-ians, that they are descendants of Ancient Macedonians is - in purely genetic terms - not really false.
Most of Balkan Slavs, are descendants of local pre-Slavic populations who became Slavicized by Slavic tribes migrating into Balkans.
Slavic people who migrated into Balkans, were less numerous than Balkan populations who lived there by the time of Slavic arrival.
=======================================
Nice video about the history of English language - this shows how modern "English" ethnicity is a mix of many different influences:
Did you know, that more than half of modern English vocabulary has either French or Latin origins? Original Anglo-Saxon words are in minority:
http://historum.com/european-histor...rthern-europeans-germanics-3.html#post1692517
Linschoten said:
Link to video.
Yes it is.Domen said:
It's like none of those states because there is a distinct and very strong sense of being Indonesian common to most people living in the country.Domen said:
Domen said:
That's rather high and ignores the fact that "Javanese" is not a particularly useful label.
Domen said:
Yes, there is. See: Indonesian. Pretty much everyone can speak it fluently.
haroon said:
This is a non-issue form where I'm sitting. The big story of the 20th century was the collapse of a distinct peranakan culture. In the big cities they tended to become more like the totok population which out-grew them while in more rural and remote areas they tended to become indistinguishable from their surrounding Indonesian neighbors in large part through conversion to Islam. Chinese-ness in the DEI being largely defined by their not being Muslims.
haroon said:
I think it's rather more complicated than that. Nobody thinks of Ernest Douwes Dekker as a Eurasian-Indonesia. People usually think of him as an Indonesian. So while it might be a problem now, I can see the attitude towards Chinese-Indonesians, or Indonesians of Chinese descent, changing in the future. I mean, hell, it's already changed a lot with blatant Sinophobia disappearing and being replaced with more subtle forms of race baiting.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
PCH'S OFFICIAL CIVILIZATION POWER RANKING
GOD TIER
Korea
Iroquois
#1 TIER
USA
USA
USA
GREAT TIER
Japan
Ottoman
Ethiopia
GOOD TIER
China
Zulu
Mongolia
Polynesia
Celts
DON'T CARE TIER
Germany
Arabia
India
Russia
Spain
Portugal
Netherlands
Persia
Babylon
Assyria
Inca
Maya
Indonesia
Too many other boring civilizations to name
CAN'T SAY THAT ON CIVFANATICS TIER
Rome
Austria
Sweden
France
ONLY GOOD FOR TROLLING TIER
Poland
Byzantium
Brazil
ENGLAND TIER
England
GOD TIER
Korea
Iroquois
#1 TIER
USA
USA
USA
GREAT TIER
Japan
Ottoman
Ethiopia
GOOD TIER
China
Zulu
Mongolia
Polynesia
Celts
DON'T CARE TIER
Germany
Arabia
India
Russia
Spain
Portugal
Netherlands
Persia
Babylon
Assyria
Inca
Maya
Indonesia
Too many other boring civilizations to name
CAN'T SAY THAT ON CIVFANATICS TIER
Rome
Austria
Sweden
France
ONLY GOOD FOR TROLLING TIER
Poland
Byzantium
Brazil
ENGLAND TIER
England
This has been the official PCH Civilization Power Ranking. It is the only God Tier Power Ranking on Civfanatics. Do not accept unofficial PCH Civilization Power Rankings.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Sometimes ethnic identity divides families - as this hilarious conversation between members of the same family from a post-Kolkhoz village of Dubince (near Navahrudak, today North-Western Belarus) in post-Soviet Belarus, which took place around year 1993, proves:
[Wife]: "Our region is mixed, but only 7 villages are Lithuanian, others are Poles, Belarussians."
[Husband]: "No honey, there are no any Belarussians here."
[Aunt]: "Well, actually there are only Belarussians here and no any Poles."
[Wife]: "What do you say?! Radun Parish is entirely inhabited by Polish people."
[Aunt]: "Oh dear, no - Radun Parish are Belarussian..."
[Husband]: "This is not a place like Hawary, Belarussians don't live here. Belarussians are only there, in areas closer to Grodno".
==========================
Source:
"Etnograf wobec stereotypu Polaka z Kresów" ("An ethnographer facing the stereotype of a Kresy Pole") by habilitated doctor Anna Engelking.
Excerpts from this publication by Anna Engelking (in Polish) are quoted in this thread:
http://www.historycy.org/index.php?showtopic=14280
==========================
Engelking - as the result of countless interviews - distinguished 3 main "types" of Polish people in post-Soviet, North-Western Belarus of the 1990s.
They can be described roughly like this: 1) "Catholics-Poles", 2) "Hard Poles", 3) "Brainwashed / Sovietized Poles".
Group 1) think that the very central part of their "Polishness" is about being Catholic ("Polish faith") rather than Orthodox (who are "Belarussians").
Group 2) have the most well-developed national conscioussness - they are usually better educated people than group 1), they speak more fluent Polish.
Group 3) - also more educated than group 1), but believed their Soviet teachers, who told them that they are not "real Poles" but Polonized Belarussians.
Engelking also noted that Polish-speaking Poles from Belarus often called those Poles who couldn't speak Polish - "drewniane Polaki" ("wooden Poles").
[Wife]: "Our region is mixed, but only 7 villages are Lithuanian, others are Poles, Belarussians."
[Husband]: "No honey, there are no any Belarussians here."
[Aunt]: "Well, actually there are only Belarussians here and no any Poles."
[Wife]: "What do you say?! Radun Parish is entirely inhabited by Polish people."
[Aunt]: "Oh dear, no - Radun Parish are Belarussian..."
[Husband]: "This is not a place like Hawary, Belarussians don't live here. Belarussians are only there, in areas closer to Grodno".
==========================
Source:
"Etnograf wobec stereotypu Polaka z Kresów" ("An ethnographer facing the stereotype of a Kresy Pole") by habilitated doctor Anna Engelking.
Excerpts from this publication by Anna Engelking (in Polish) are quoted in this thread:
http://www.historycy.org/index.php?showtopic=14280
==========================
Engelking - as the result of countless interviews - distinguished 3 main "types" of Polish people in post-Soviet, North-Western Belarus of the 1990s.
They can be described roughly like this: 1) "Catholics-Poles", 2) "Hard Poles", 3) "Brainwashed / Sovietized Poles".
Group 1) think that the very central part of their "Polishness" is about being Catholic ("Polish faith") rather than Orthodox (who are "Belarussians").
Group 2) have the most well-developed national conscioussness - they are usually better educated people than group 1), they speak more fluent Polish.
Group 3) - also more educated than group 1), but believed their Soviet teachers, who told them that they are not "real Poles" but Polonized Belarussians.
Engelking also noted that Polish-speaking Poles from Belarus often called those Poles who couldn't speak Polish - "drewniane Polaki" ("wooden Poles").
H4run
Deity
I just finished my paper.
How can I forget about Multatuli? Very sharp example. However I don't know if Indonesia sufferred somekind of Khaldunian inferiority complex as they completely fell in love with their ex occupiers like Dutch or Japanese, as many Indonesian like the Japanese in post world war 2, admire the culture of Dutch and Japanese and regard them as a high culture civilization.
That mean they are proud if they able to married their son with Dutch. Sutan Sjahrir have a very positive point of view regarding Dutch and marry a Dutch woman while Soekarno wasting most of his biography talking and boasting up about how he able to charm Dutch women and date them. Also Soekarno and Hatta, especially Soekarno show a very positive attitude toward Japanese occupation they regard them as their asian brother who try to help Indonesia to raise up against the Western imperialist (Inconsistency attitude that Tan Malaka really sick off, Sjahrir in his apologetic attitude toward the Dutch and Soekarno in his apologetic attitude toward Japanese, he later on try to educate the confuse Indonesian masses regarding what is imperialism, and what should they do with it, and they shouldn't be mbalelo or doesn't have any clear stance regarding it).
So that mean Indonesian are willingly even proudly assimilated and accepted Dutch or Japanese as part of their society or even in other case contrary, they proud to be assimilated to their culture. While the Chinese Unlike the Dutch and Japanese, the Chinese always seen as the traitors, opportunist, cunning and not honest. Indonesian mostly avoid to marry his son or daughter to the Chinese especially their daughter, even after religious conversion.
Ironic! While these things not happen before the Dutch arrival in Indonesia. In south sumatera there are region called Palembang, you probably know that region, before the Dutch arrive that region is known to be the most populated Chinese population region in south east asia, you can see the effected even today, as most of the Palembang sometime look and misunderstand with Chinese peoples, many of them relatively white comparing the other Indonesian and have smaller eyes. Also there lots of Chinese Muslims (Hui) trader that settle in North Java, even some historian suggest that they were the one who introduce Islam in Java before the Arabs traders when the most predominantly religion in Java at that time was Hindu, Bhairawa (mixture of Hindu and Budha) or Budha. And they were totally assimilated with the Indonesian.
I thought colonialism created the tension between this two race, and Dutch intentionally invite the Chinese to come to Indonesia as a second class citizen to take over trade under the supervisor of the Dutch, and they are made to be dependent to the Dutch to make sure their loyality (not until later on they created their own trade organization and able to build up power and gain bargaining position over the Dutch, and the Muslims build the same years later which we know as the SI or Syarikat Islam).
How can I forget about Multatuli? Very sharp example. However I don't know if Indonesia sufferred somekind of Khaldunian inferiority complex as they completely fell in love with their ex occupiers like Dutch or Japanese, as many Indonesian like the Japanese in post world war 2, admire the culture of Dutch and Japanese and regard them as a high culture civilization.
That mean they are proud if they able to married their son with Dutch. Sutan Sjahrir have a very positive point of view regarding Dutch and marry a Dutch woman while Soekarno wasting most of his biography talking and boasting up about how he able to charm Dutch women and date them. Also Soekarno and Hatta, especially Soekarno show a very positive attitude toward Japanese occupation they regard them as their asian brother who try to help Indonesia to raise up against the Western imperialist (Inconsistency attitude that Tan Malaka really sick off, Sjahrir in his apologetic attitude toward the Dutch and Soekarno in his apologetic attitude toward Japanese, he later on try to educate the confuse Indonesian masses regarding what is imperialism, and what should they do with it, and they shouldn't be mbalelo or doesn't have any clear stance regarding it).
So that mean Indonesian are willingly even proudly assimilated and accepted Dutch or Japanese as part of their society or even in other case contrary, they proud to be assimilated to their culture. While the Chinese Unlike the Dutch and Japanese, the Chinese always seen as the traitors, opportunist, cunning and not honest. Indonesian mostly avoid to marry his son or daughter to the Chinese especially their daughter, even after religious conversion.
Ironic! While these things not happen before the Dutch arrival in Indonesia. In south sumatera there are region called Palembang, you probably know that region, before the Dutch arrive that region is known to be the most populated Chinese population region in south east asia, you can see the effected even today, as most of the Palembang sometime look and misunderstand with Chinese peoples, many of them relatively white comparing the other Indonesian and have smaller eyes. Also there lots of Chinese Muslims (Hui) trader that settle in North Java, even some historian suggest that they were the one who introduce Islam in Java before the Arabs traders when the most predominantly religion in Java at that time was Hindu, Bhairawa (mixture of Hindu and Budha) or Budha. And they were totally assimilated with the Indonesian.
I thought colonialism created the tension between this two race, and Dutch intentionally invite the Chinese to come to Indonesia as a second class citizen to take over trade under the supervisor of the Dutch, and they are made to be dependent to the Dutch to make sure their loyality (not until later on they created their own trade organization and able to build up power and gain bargaining position over the Dutch, and the Muslims build the same years later which we know as the SI or Syarikat Islam).
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Some interesting fragments from interviews of Engelking with local Poles from North-Western Belarus:
Some excerpts from statements of those interviewed locals:
1) Interviews with "Catholics-Poles":
Engelking - "Can a Belarussian be a Catholic?"
"If he or she wants to go to Church, to serve God, to pray, he or she will become a Pole. My brother himself is a Pole, but he married an Orthodox girl."
Engelking: "And is she now Catholic?"
"Yes, she is now Catholic, she goes to Church. And she is now Polish. Before that she was Rusyn, but she converted to Polish faith, she married, and now she is Polish."
"Lithuanians are Poles, the only difference is that they speak Lithuanian. However, they go to Church and do everything what Poles also do, they only speak differently."
"A Jew became a Catholic in our village. A young Jew, he fell in love with a Catholic girl, he went with her to Church, they married and he changed into a Pole. He is now Polish."
"Gypsies, but baptised in Church. They are also Poles."
"That one goes to Catholic Church, so he counts as a Pole."
"Who go to Catholic Church, count themselves as Poles. Who go to Orthodox Church, count themselves as Belarussians."
2) "Hard Poles":
"When the Soviets came in 1939 - I can still remember - they changed the boundaries of counties and they nick-named our region Grodno Region. But in reality, we are Wilno Region, because we are culturally closer to Wilno than to Grodno. I used to be able to draw a map of Poland with closed eyes in the past - such a long neck in the north-east, our Wileńszczyzna, and there in the south-east, such a horn in Ukraine."
"At the moment, we have Belarus here. Who smuggled it here? - Russia, Russia smuggled Belarus to this part of Poland. Before that, there were Poles here - the Kresy, we can say - that means, the Wilno Region and such things. And these guys came and started to claim, that here is Belarus! They tried to Russify this region, using various methods. They were deporting Polish people from this area. They were doing many bad things here."
"I think, that Poland will return here and that it should return here. All people like me and my neighbour - you know, what would we do? We would go and drive away all these who came here from Russia, who Russified everything here. We should expell them, and there will be order established again, at last. However, in our times we can't do such things anymore, you know - there is democracy. So various nations must be allowed to live together. But, anyway, I'm convinced that Poland will return here one day. This day will come."
Engelking: "Do you think, that Kresy will be incorporated to Poland again?"
"Maybe, but only if the power of the East collapses."
Engelking: "How do people here call their homeland?"
"Poland. Nobody calls it Belarus, everyone says Poland. Even in this region, even though nowadays it seems as distinct from Poland as Africa. But we would like to have some autonomy. How can I say, that Russia or Belarus is my homeland? Of course I was born here, in this country. But we don't want to think like this, because our hearts were born in Poland."
Engelking: "Don't you feel sad, that you are Polish but you will die in Belarussian land?"
Local: "No, we are in our own land! How is this land Belarussian?! This is our land. We are natives here. But they came, like occupants, they occupied our land, we live here for centuries. Our grandfathers lived here. This is Polish soil. Nobody will expell us."
"Nowadays Polishness is declining in Belarus. I even told my priest Pacyna, that if he is going to continue to preach in Belarussian language, then I won't enter his Church anymore."
3) Brainwashed / Sovietized Poles:
"We used to speak Polish at home when I was a child. And I always counted myself as a Polish girl. But everything seems to be so confused about history. At Soviet school they taught us, that there were never any Poles here, that Polish magnates came and only fooled local people that they are Poles too. I still count myself Polish, but I sometimes wonder what kind of Poles are we? When I analyze history, then I say, that we can't be Polish. If we analyze carefully, it seems that we are probably Polonized Belarussians. I must say, that I actually like this Belarussian language, I really like it. Let me continue in Belarussian, ok? It will be easier for me. So, Belarussians live here for many generations. The language spoken here was Belarussian already since the era of the Grand Duchy of Litva. And only later Polish language came, and everyone became Polish-speaking here and we lost our Belarussianness."
"The real Poles are in Warsaw or in Poznań. We are locals, but our faith is non-Rusyn - Catholic. We are simple Poles. Technically we are not real Poles, but we are very Polish."
"We live here for a long time with these people called Rusyns. Now they are called Belarussians. We already have a Catholic faith, so we are Polish. But everyone here was Rusyn, only later Catholicization started and many of those Rusyns converted to Polish faith. And since that time, there are a lot of Poles here."
Engelking - "What is the difference between Poles who live here and Poles who live in Poland?"
Mr Michał from village Lebioda - "A visible one. Because a Pole who was born in Poland is absolutely convinced that he or she is Polish. While here, we don't really know, whether we are Poles or Belarussians or Russians. There Poland is and will be, so people feel Polish there. But here we don't really know."
Some excerpts from statements of those interviewed locals:
1) Interviews with "Catholics-Poles":
Engelking - "Can a Belarussian be a Catholic?"
"If he or she wants to go to Church, to serve God, to pray, he or she will become a Pole. My brother himself is a Pole, but he married an Orthodox girl."
Engelking: "And is she now Catholic?"
"Yes, she is now Catholic, she goes to Church. And she is now Polish. Before that she was Rusyn, but she converted to Polish faith, she married, and now she is Polish."
"Lithuanians are Poles, the only difference is that they speak Lithuanian. However, they go to Church and do everything what Poles also do, they only speak differently."
"A Jew became a Catholic in our village. A young Jew, he fell in love with a Catholic girl, he went with her to Church, they married and he changed into a Pole. He is now Polish."
"Gypsies, but baptised in Church. They are also Poles."
"That one goes to Catholic Church, so he counts as a Pole."
"Who go to Catholic Church, count themselves as Poles. Who go to Orthodox Church, count themselves as Belarussians."
2) "Hard Poles":
"When the Soviets came in 1939 - I can still remember - they changed the boundaries of counties and they nick-named our region Grodno Region. But in reality, we are Wilno Region, because we are culturally closer to Wilno than to Grodno. I used to be able to draw a map of Poland with closed eyes in the past - such a long neck in the north-east, our Wileńszczyzna, and there in the south-east, such a horn in Ukraine."
"At the moment, we have Belarus here. Who smuggled it here? - Russia, Russia smuggled Belarus to this part of Poland. Before that, there were Poles here - the Kresy, we can say - that means, the Wilno Region and such things. And these guys came and started to claim, that here is Belarus! They tried to Russify this region, using various methods. They were deporting Polish people from this area. They were doing many bad things here."
"I think, that Poland will return here and that it should return here. All people like me and my neighbour - you know, what would we do? We would go and drive away all these who came here from Russia, who Russified everything here. We should expell them, and there will be order established again, at last. However, in our times we can't do such things anymore, you know - there is democracy. So various nations must be allowed to live together. But, anyway, I'm convinced that Poland will return here one day. This day will come."
Engelking: "Do you think, that Kresy will be incorporated to Poland again?"
"Maybe, but only if the power of the East collapses."
Engelking: "How do people here call their homeland?"
"Poland. Nobody calls it Belarus, everyone says Poland. Even in this region, even though nowadays it seems as distinct from Poland as Africa. But we would like to have some autonomy. How can I say, that Russia or Belarus is my homeland? Of course I was born here, in this country. But we don't want to think like this, because our hearts were born in Poland."
Engelking: "Don't you feel sad, that you are Polish but you will die in Belarussian land?"
Local: "No, we are in our own land! How is this land Belarussian?! This is our land. We are natives here. But they came, like occupants, they occupied our land, we live here for centuries. Our grandfathers lived here. This is Polish soil. Nobody will expell us."
"Nowadays Polishness is declining in Belarus. I even told my priest Pacyna, that if he is going to continue to preach in Belarussian language, then I won't enter his Church anymore."
3) Brainwashed / Sovietized Poles:
"We used to speak Polish at home when I was a child. And I always counted myself as a Polish girl. But everything seems to be so confused about history. At Soviet school they taught us, that there were never any Poles here, that Polish magnates came and only fooled local people that they are Poles too. I still count myself Polish, but I sometimes wonder what kind of Poles are we? When I analyze history, then I say, that we can't be Polish. If we analyze carefully, it seems that we are probably Polonized Belarussians. I must say, that I actually like this Belarussian language, I really like it. Let me continue in Belarussian, ok? It will be easier for me. So, Belarussians live here for many generations. The language spoken here was Belarussian already since the era of the Grand Duchy of Litva. And only later Polish language came, and everyone became Polish-speaking here and we lost our Belarussianness."
"The real Poles are in Warsaw or in Poznań. We are locals, but our faith is non-Rusyn - Catholic. We are simple Poles. Technically we are not real Poles, but we are very Polish."
"We live here for a long time with these people called Rusyns. Now they are called Belarussians. We already have a Catholic faith, so we are Polish. But everyone here was Rusyn, only later Catholicization started and many of those Rusyns converted to Polish faith. And since that time, there are a lot of Poles here."
Engelking - "What is the difference between Poles who live here and Poles who live in Poland?"
Mr Michał from village Lebioda - "A visible one. Because a Pole who was born in Poland is absolutely convinced that he or she is Polish. While here, we don't really know, whether we are Poles or Belarussians or Russians. There Poland is and will be, so people feel Polish there. But here we don't really know."
