Why is the US’s ethnic and racial diversity downplayed? (most dangerous, safer)
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.
“Holy crap”, and you proceed to respond to nothing.
American culture isn’t Canadian culture. Canadian culture is American derived too. So give up all our social media, music, literature, film, fashion and designs, please. If you’re so dismissive of them, stop consuming them.
How many accounts do you have? You change identities quicker than your own shadow.
Reading several Americans here I have concluded that:
1. AMERICANS HAVE AN INFERIORITY COMPLEX TOWARDS EUROPE: A lot of them often seem to believe anything European is more sophisticated and superior over any other thing that is not European.
This makes many "white" Americans look up and down their family trees trying to find Europeans somewhere in their families to latch onto those origins in order to claim some of that Europeaness that is in their heads and so that they can distance themselves from their fellow Americans of colour.
2. LIKE INDIA, BRAZIL AND SOUTH AFRICA, AMERICANS ALSO SUFFER FROM POST COLONIAL COLORISM: Americans are the typical post colony with a skin colour trauma, only people in countries that were brutally colonized by Europe like Brazil, India, South Africa, people tend to be so overly centered around people's complexions.
3. AMERICANS HAVE AN IDENTITY CRISIS AND ARE SECRETLY JEALOUS OF PEOPLE WITH "REAL CULTURES": Hence the need to gate keep stereotypes of the cultures of their ancestors (IE: I have freckles because I am 1/16 Irish! -- or I know how to cook because I am Italian from Boston!!) there is need to continuously emphasize how Italian, Irish, Mexican, Asian whatever they are while at the same time being defensive with foreigners to the point they believe that everything is American!!
I think the US should make learning a second language and traveling the world mandatory, that will solve a lot of the racism and problems Americans have!
Reading several Americans here I have concluded that:
1. AMERICANS HAVE AN INFERIORITY COMPLEX TOWARDS EUROPE: A lot of them often seem to believe anything European is more sophisticated and superior over any other thing that is not European.
This makes many "white" Americans look up and down their family trees trying to find Europeans somewhere in their families to latch onto those origins in order to claim some of that Europeaness that is in their heads and so that they can distance themselves from their fellow Americans of colour.
2. LIKE INDIA, BRAZIL AND SOUTH AFRICA, AMERICANS ALSO SUFFER FROM POST COLONIAL COLORISM: Americans are the typical post colony with a skin colour trauma, only people in countries that were brutally colonized by Europe like Brazil, India, South Africa, people tend to be so overly centered around people's complexions.
3. AMERICANS HAVE AN IDENTITY CRISIS AND ARE SECRETLY JEALOUS OF PEOPLE WITH "REAL CULTURES": Hence the need to gate keep stereotypes of the cultures of their ancestors (IE: I have freckles because I am 1/16 Irish! -- or I know how to cook because I am Italian from Boston!!) there is need to continuously emphasize how Italian, Irish, Mexican, Asian whatever they are while at the same time being defensive with foreigners to the point they believe that everything is American!!
I think the US should make learning a second language and traveling the world mandatory, that will solve a lot of the racism and problems Americans have!
Yeah but then when Americans travel, like myself who has been to Europe 21 times, Asia twice, Australia, Africa and South America countless times…. We want to move to Europe more. So the more Americans travel, the more #1 becomes true
Yeah but then when Americans travel, like myself who has been to Europe 21 times, Asia twice, Australia, Africa and South America countless times…. We want to move to Europe more. So the more Americans travel, the more #1 becomes true
That is not necessarily true.
Because of my work (21 years) I have worked with tons of Americans living in Europe (I have also lived around several countries in Europe due to my job and always met Americans)
A lot of them either overrate Europe, or complain continuously about how Europe is not like back in the US.
Last year during COVID I had to work with a woman from USA who continuously complained about Europe and Europeans.
After six years here, not only she failed to integrate, never bothered to learn the language, but often came across as aggressive and highly competitive, plus very loud to the point the Europeans in the team found her very intense.
I often find the ones who idealize Europe to be people who come here and spend vapid vacations but never really interacted with Europeans on a deeper level.
But Americans are hardly the only ones. Europeans also fetishize other places. (Thailand and south America) seem to be favorites, they imagine themselves living this exotic lives, buy flags from those countries (In Germany fetishizing Cuba and Brazil seems to be big), or try to act like stereotypes of exotic people so they can stand out. (This is common in Austria)
Towards the US is different. Europeans look at the US with a sense of interest (foreign land so far away - they have seen tons of movies about it with NYC and Miami etc)
but at the same time there is a certain superiority complex (They are so backwards and violent, unlike us who are so sophisticated -- which is not always true) but Europeans at times feel they are above others especially Americans.
I ve met plenty of Americans with much more global and cosmopolitan mindsets than a lot of Europeans who never left their villages.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 5 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,189 posts, read 13,477,157 times
Reputation: 19519
Quote:
Originally Posted by karl77
2. LIKE INDIA, BRAZIL AND SOUTH AFRICA, AMERICANS ALSO SUFFER FROM POST COLONIAL COLORISM: Americans are the typical post colony with a skin colour trauma, only people in countries that were brutally colonized by Europe like Brazil, India, South Africa, people tend to be so overly centered around people's complexions.
Britain didn't brutally colonise India, indeed the country was better under British rule than it was before, and the Indians were actually complicit with British rule.
There were 400 million people in India and Britain never kept more than 70,000 troops in the country, so they could have overthrown British rule any time they wanted, and the same applies to many other parts of Empire.
Britain kept a small Army and was a naval power, it relied on local troops and local police in relation to much of the Empire, which was based on trade.
Here's the view of an actual Indian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Britain has no need to make an apology to India for Empire... - Nirpal Dhaliwal
Despite the country's vast population, there were never more than 70,000 British troops in India; the running of the country required an enormous infrastructure of native troops, police and bureaucrats. As Hitler observed, Indians merely had to spit all at once and every Briton in India would have drowned.
Indians assisted with Empire because it brought them unprecedented order and civility. Indians were no strangers to outside rulers; for eight centuries before the Raj, the sub-continent had been subjected to the plunder and depravity of the Mughals - Muslim rulers who came from as far west as Turkey.
Delhi was razed eight times in that period and great pyramids were constructed with the skulls of its inhabitants.
Because Islam permits the enslavement of non-Muslims, Indians were sold across the Islamic world in such quantities that the international price of slaves collapsed. The Afghan mountain range of the Hindu Khush (which translates as the 'Hindu Slaughter') is named after the huge numbers who died there while being marched to the markets of Arabia and Central Asia.
For all the artistic refinement and opulence of India's past rulers - and their poetry, music, and the magnificence of the Taj Mahal are testament to that - they oversaw a period of general barbarism in which the ordinary Indian was no more than a starving chattel.
The rebellions which eventually arose against the Mughals - such as the Sikhs in Punjab and the Marathas in the south - fractured the rulers' power, and enabled the British to get their own foot in the door.
At this point, it's important to remember that the British did not arrive in an idyllic sub-continent full of happy, contented Indians, but in one in extreme turmoil.
And, though primarily motivated by profit, they sought to apply humane values - even if at gunpoint.
In 1846, the British commissioner, John Lawrence, told the local elite that Punjabis could no longer burn their widows, commit female infanticide, nor bury their lepers alive.
When they protested, saying that he had promised there would be no interference in their religious customs, Lawrence steadfastly replied that it was British religious custom to hang anyone who did such things.
In addition to combating these barbaric practices, the British also outlawed slavery in 1843 at a time when an estimated 10 million Indians were slaves - up to 15 per cent of the population in some regions.
Yes, British rule was exploitative and took away more than it provided, but compared to what Indians had known previously, there was much to be thankful for.
This gratitude expressed itself in 1939 when, at the height of the independence movement led by Jawaharlal Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi, two million Indians nonetheless enlisted in the fight against fascism - the largest volunteer army in history.
It's no overstatement to say that, without the British, Indians would not even know what it is to be Indian.
After 800 years of Mughal rule, Hindu culture was in terminal decline and it was the likes of Warren Hastings and William Jones, the founders of the Asiatic Society, who began the collection and renewed study of India's ancient texts, educating Indians about their own rich and unique past.
And it was a Briton, Allan Octavian Hume, who helped found the Indian national Congress - the political party that would eventually lead the country to independence.
Thousands of Indians died building the railways of the Raj, but countless more died building the Taj Mahal and other useless baubles for their earlier rulers.
For all they extracted from India, the British left behind a practical network of transportation, governance and values without which India would not be the dynamic democracy it is today.
It is a mark of India's quiet appreciation as well as its great self-confidence that it asks for no apology for the past.
Out of respect, no Briton should be condescending enough to offer one.
Britain didn't brutally colonise India, indeed the country was better under British rule than it was before, and the Indians were actually complicit with British rule.
Let us not exercise Imperial Amnesia, shall we?
Britain did commit a lot of undesirable acts in India.
- The partition of the country.
- Several famines. The one caused in Bengal was brutal.
- Creating profound divisions based on religion in order to divide and conquer.
- Emphasizing the toxic caste system.
- The historic Amritsar massacre. Up to this day England pretends it kinda never happened.
By far one of the most damaging aspects of British imperialism was creating the idea that whiteness equals superiority. Up to this day lands colonized by the UK are still dealing with such toxic belief. (The US being an example)
Britain was the master of 19th century pseudo-scientific racism against Indians, Africans, Irish and it often applied the concept of whiteness means exclusively English upper class, and everyone else is below it and at the service of the white Anglo!
No one is saying modern Brits are to be blamed, but let us not pretend Britain was all love!
Ironically Spain's empire was replaced by the black legend, as the UK continues to lose world importance its own black legend is sort of being born, especially now that its old colonial lands are catching up to the UK in development.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 5 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,189 posts, read 13,477,157 times
Reputation: 19519
Quote:
Originally Posted by karl77
Let us not exercise Imperial Amnesia, shall we?
Britain did commit a lot of undesirable acts in India.
- The partition of the country.
- Several famines. The one caused in Bengal was brutal.
- Creating profound divisions based on religion in order to divide and conquer.
- Emphasizing the toxic caste system.
- The historic Amritsar massacre. Up to this day England pretends it kinda never happened.
By far one of the most damaging aspects of British imperialism was creating the idea that whiteness equals superiority. Up to this day lands colonized by the UK are still dealing with such toxic belief. (The US being an example)
Britain was the master of 19th century pseudo-scientific racism against Indians, Africans, Irish and it often applied the concept of whiteness means exclusively English upper class, and everyone else is below it and at the service of the white Anglo!
No one is saying modern Brits are to be blamed, but let us not pretend Britain was all love!
Ironically Spain's empire was replaced by the black legend, as the UK continues to lose world importance its own black legend is sort of being born, especially now that its old colonial lands are catching up to the UK in development.
Lets also not over play colonialism, as appalling acts and famine occurred to a greater extent before British involvement, and Britain tried to put an end to disgusting practices such as burying lepers a life or burning widows on funeral pyres or the caste system.
Furthermore India was largely run by the local princes, the the Maharajah's who had their own armies and India basically defended and policed itself.
The British built railways, improved land irrigation to help stop famine and created modern ports and international trade.
To suggest an Army of less than 70,000 was ever going to have tight control of a country of 400 million is laughable, and the same applies to many other parts of the Empire.
As for whitemess equals superiority, India had a Hindu caste system, and that was how they denoted superiority, whilst they also has Indian rulers, the Maharaja, with the British only being tolerated because they were making the Indian ruling class wealthy, and were investing in infrastructure, and most notably they were much better than the Muslim Mughals, who they hated, so lets not pretend Britain was that hated either, and lets not forget that millions of Indians volunteered to fight alongside the British during two world wars.
The caste system main four categories - Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and the Shudras, the latter being the outcasts or untouchables.
The White man was never that important, and was never part of the Hindu religion or worthy of status given to a member of a high caste of the local Maharaja Princes that ruled each region.
As for the Hindu's they make up the vast majority of the population of India, and they had strained relations with the Muslims before Britain ever had an Empire, as for the Sikh's and Buddhist there population was much smaller.
In terms of partition, it was a plan that was accepted and implemented by the Indian political leaders.
It could not deal with the question of the princely states, which were not British possessions, they were advised them against remaining independent and urged them to join one of the two new Dominions.
The plan allowed for the creation of Pakistan, a Muslim homeland, and this was implemented by the rulers of India on independence from Britain, indeed the British only made recommendations and it was up the new Indian government as to how they proceeded in terms of partition, so to blame Britain is a bit rich, indeed Britain had been lobbied by the Pakistan movement for decades.
The problem in the main was that the Muslim minority had protected status as part of Empire, however they lost this on independence, and many of the people concerned were very deeply attached not just to religious identity, but to territory, and Britain was reluctant to use its troops to maintain law and order. The situation was especially dangerous in Punjab, where weapons and demobilised soldiers were abundant.
The British were however not responsible for the religious hatred between Hindu's and Muslims, which still exists to this day and can be seen in Indian relations with Pakistan.
Because of my work (21 years) I have worked with tons of Americans living in Europe (I have also lived around several countries in Europe due to my job and always met Americans)
A lot of them either overrate Europe, or complain continuously about how Europe is not like back in the US.
Last year during COVID I had to work with a woman from USA who continuously complained about Europe and Europeans.
After six years here, not only she failed to integrate, never bothered to learn the language, but often came across as aggressive and highly competitive, plus very loud to the point the Europeans in the team found her very intense.
I often find the ones who idealize Europe to be people who come here and spend vapid vacations but never really interacted with Europeans on a deeper level.
But Americans are hardly the only ones. Europeans also fetishize other places. (Thailand and south America) seem to be favorites, they imagine themselves living this exotic lives, buy flags from those countries (In Germany fetishizing Cuba and Brazil seems to be big), or try to act like stereotypes of exotic people so they can stand out. (This is common in Austria)
Towards the US is different. Europeans look at the US with a sense of interest (foreign land so far away - they have seen tons of movies about it with NYC and Miami etc)
but at the same time there is a certain superiority complex (They are so backwards and violent, unlike us who are so sophisticated -- which is not always true) but Europeans at times feel they are above others especially Americans.
I ve met plenty of Americans with much more global and cosmopolitan mindsets than a lot of Europeans who never left their villages.
Americans prefer Europe even if they are not white not if if racism, but because it’s easy to move from first world country to another country.
And Americans who struggle with non English European languages and certainly not going to learn Asian languages.
Outside Europe, the only places I can see most Americans living in large numbers are places like Australia, Canada, New Zealand,etc.
Americans are going to want to move or spend time ij other rich countries where feel safe, have access to healthcare, etc.
Yes, and many Americans dress with sweatshirts that have names of universities in big letters across the chest, the women often have their hair tied up and tucked under a ballcap, and of course the big white sneakers with white socks...
Hey, many Canadians even dress the same (in some cases even with US university gear - sometimes they've never even been to the place!) and then they get all pissed off when innocent Europeans ask them what part of the US they are from.
Europeans, nearly always assume a white Canadian is an American, regardless of what clothing the Canadian is wearing.
I've never heard of anyone getting pissed off about it. I know the many, many times it has happened to me, I just answer the question. I get mistaken for all sorts of nationalities, before I open my mouth. German, French, and Scandinavian.
What might irritate a Canadian, is someone just dismissing they're Canadian, but that has only happened to me couple of times. Still, they didn't know I was irritated.
As for logos on shirts, I don't think it a prerequisite to have been to the place, or university, to wear it. It is just a form of fashion. How many have worn shirts emblazoned with NYC or PARIS etc and have never been?
Last edited by Natnasci; 08-21-2021 at 02:23 PM..
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.
