Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Are you proud of this? Your great-grandfathers fought for the right to have land. You give your land to people of a different culture. Do you have an experience of assimilating a million people?
Yes, I am proud of the fact that I don't discriminate against people based on their religion or country of origin. And yes, I believe nations can do with their land what they want irrespective of what their ancestors have done. Also, I believe you are grossly misrepresenting the magnitude of the issue.
Quote:
Ramzan Kadyrov lives in his native land, which is part of the Russian Federation.
So your issue here isn't with Islam? Duly noted. Could have fooled me.
Quote:
And Russia has the experience of assimilating other nations.
Yes, and there is an issue as well- that is liberalism, or to be more precise - the consequences of (overdose of) it. Sweden is a liberal country, Russia is a conservative country. I am not any racist at all but i tend to think "europeanness" is better kept in Kostroma than in Malmö for instance.
That all depends on what your definition of "Europeanness" is.
It's difficult to find photos of the more non-European type of (contemporary) Saami on the internet. They're rare. Here's a photo of two young people from one of the most traditional villages, one that was able to resist "Norwegianization". But they still don't look quite like the people I saw, when I was there a long time ago. Wikipedia must be talking about a now-disappeared historical type. They're not "yellow". And below that, is a Mordvin, from a Uralo-Finnic tribe in the east of Western Russia, near the Urals. No sign of Mongoloid features. You have to go to the other side of the Urals to find "mongoloid" features, and even then, you have to look to the far north, among the Nenets and Nganasans. Even some of the Khanty and Mansi don't look noticeably Asiatic/Mongoloid.
So what that they are not yellow ? Many japanese are pale , it does not change the fact that they have asiatic features . You really must be mixing full mongoloid look with just mongoloid admixture . Both of these women that you have posted clearly have mongoloids admixture to them , especially the first one . I cannot believe that you can't see that . This is so obvious . If you don't see that , then compare them to some norwegian women , who live in the same country as them , then you'll see the obvious difference .
You seem to divide people on only mongoloids and aryan . Tribes did mix . There are various phenotypes . Some of them do have mongoloid admixture like east baltids and turanids .
As for Putin, i am not good at identifying Mongoloid traits in Putin's face. Looks like a north-Slavic face to me.
Slavic is lingustic group not a race . People who speak slavic languages consist of many phenotypes . East baltid , west baltid , nordic , pontid , noth-pontid , dinarid , some look turanid etc . Putin is east baltid , he is europoid with mongoloid admixture to him .
I usually keep away from these pseudoscientific classifications, as they are mostly BS and reeks like racism, but a few examples as a reference point.
This lady was recently voted as Sami of the Year in Finland:
She was the 2016 Norwegian Sami of the Year:
It only is racist if someone claims that one race or phenotype is superior to others , which I never have claimed . Anyway , I think this is a time to finish this discussion , because what is the point of keeping it ? At the end of the day , it really does not matter . By the way the first lady is really beautiful .
In WW2 ...the German Whermacht were shocked when the Red Army called up
reserves from Siberia for a winter counter offensive in early 1942.
Winter cold meant nothing to them and they looked very Asian to the Germans.
Yeah, right, and Germans looked very animalistic and barbaric to Russians after burning village after village together with children and elderly.
No, the "layout" is completely different from American cities.
What makes it look common with American cities is amount of space available - i.e. wide roads and big squares. So Russian cities have European layout, but they are much bigger, since Russia is a much bigger country than any of European countries, and has more space and people - like the US.
Have to add an important detail here ;
Since I am not familiar with Kostroma and Yaroslavl's history, I'll just take Moscow as an example.
Truth to be told, ORIGINALLY Moscow was no different from Berlin or Paris I'd think, when it comes to the size of its streets.
The major changes, all this grandiosity and increase in size, came only with Stalin's era of the 30ies. ( His ideas were to compete with American cities, and thus to build a capital worthy of the USSR.)
This is what Moscow looked originally, during the times of the Russian Empire; ( you can get an idea of the size of the streets here ;
And here they show part of Stalin's reconstruction, where the buildings ( that were marked for preservation) were literally MOVED, in order to widen the streets in the center of the city, to comply with Stalin's vision of the future city.
P.S. Since the rest of old Russian cities were greatly destroyed during the WWII, I would guess they lost their original proportions as well, and were rebuilt already in the 50ies, with Moscow's blueprint in mind.
The newer huge cities in the Eastern part of the country were already following the same trend. However their layout remained European.
BEFORE THE INVASIONS of the Huns, Turks, and Mongols. there were probably few if any proper Mongoloids in Eastern Europe. But the country on both sides of the Urals was inhabited by peoples whom the Russians anthropologists designated as the Ural type or subrace. This subrace still survives in the Ostyaks and Voguls as well as among Finno-Ugrian-speaking peoples of the Volga-Kama region. According to M.G. Levin, all these people tend to have straight soft hair, comparatively light skin, a high percentage of light and mixed eye color, few if any epicanthic eye folds, moderately thick beards, a mean stature of about 160 centimeters (5 feet 3 inches) for adult males, comparatively short and moderately wide faces, concave or turned-up noses, thin lips, and mesocephalic heads with a mean index of 79 to 80. Levin considered these peoples to represent a chain of intermediate Mongoloid-Europoid populations dating to the time of the first settlement of the western Siberian forest belt, but they are more nearly European than East Asian in both morphologically and in blood-group frequencies. This Uralic component undoubtedly played in the formation of the present-day Hungarians, Esths, and Finns, all of whom absorbed other populations as they moved westward.
I looked into the Russian definition of "Uralic race" ( and "racial classifications" in general while I was at that,) - they listed 15 different versions in Wiki, and none of these theories makes much sense to me quiet honestly. It looks like people who create these theories seem to base them on a thought that this "unified look" ( in this case of "Uralic race") is a "basic look across the line" of some "race."
But when I look at the picture of the (supposedly representative) of the "Uralic race," and see other pictures representative of this race, I see nothing in common between them. From the word "nothing."
Overall, the variety of types in certain groups, (particularly when both "Oriental" and "European" looks included in the same group,) makes me think that such group ( or "race") came as the result of mixture of the *original tribes* with the newcomers.
Central Asia is particularly indicative of it for example, with its variety of types, which are well-explained after the look into the history of this region. I'm sure all these different "races" and "subraces" from different theories came as the result of something similar. That is not to say that there is no such thing as "race" to begin with, but its definition is probably much more restrictive than what all these theories imply.
Another thing I wanted to mention is that there is no such thing as "white Russian" ( vs what? "Black Russian?" as mentioned in the picture you've posted. In Russia, this definition is reserved exclusively for Belorussians - that's all to it.
The rest are foreign inventions, because Russians have their own unspoken rules whom to consider "Russian" and whom not to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And below that, is a Mordvin, from a Uralo-Finnic tribe in the east of Western Russia, near the Urals. No sign of Mongoloid features. You have to go to the other side of the Urals to find "mongoloid" features, and even then, you have to look to the far north, among the Nenets and Nganasans. Even some of the Khanty and Mansi don't look noticeably Asiatic/Mongoloid.
Looks like a north-Slavic face to me.
as mentioned in the picture you've posted. In Russia, this definition is reserved exclusively for Belorussians - that's all to it. 
