Historical annoyances.

True, their faces are not powdered...

You all mean "white" as in Nordic European, not just European, right?

No, where i live, white is all European, and a few others too (like Turkey etc). Institutionaly that is, forms, census etc.

I always thought of Semites as "white," so if they aren't white, neither are Europeans of the "Mediterranean" type (Spaniards, Portuguese, Italians and Greeks).

Its intresting to note that amoungst the first people in the colonial era to define themselves as 'white' in opposition to the 'blacks' of Africa where the Spanish and Portugese. Strange then, or even ironic, that some people today should decide that they are not 'white'.


Edited by Cywr

True. Kiev is capital of Ukraine and not Russia.

The word "white" in itself is stupid. Northern Europeans have skin colours that are no lighter than that of Asians, and sometimes even a lot darker/redder, especially in recent times with that moronic tan rage.

Edited by Evildoer

Originally posted by Berosus The ancient Egyptians had the right attitude on race.  They didn't care much about what you looked like; if you accepted the culture of the Nile valley you were good enough for them.  The Turkish members of this forum can correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't modern Turkey the same way, inasmuch as it is also a multi-racial society?  A lot of countries could learn from these examples.

Very good observation.it is the result of the Ottoman nation system..

For example,when the Seferad Jews(the jews of spain) was either forced to be a christian or leave Iber peninsula,it was the Ottoman Empire where became a home for those jews in 1400s.they were placed in Istanbul and Selanik(thessaloniki)..Today The seferad jews have  still been living in Turkey for centuries..

Originally posted by TheDiplomat Originally posted by Berosus The ancient Egyptians had the right attitude on race.  They didn't care much about what you looked like; if you accepted the culture of the Nile valley you were good enough for them.  The Turkish members of this forum can correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't modern Turkey the same way, inasmuch as it is also a multi-racial society?  A lot of countries could learn from these examples. Very good observation.it is the result of the Ottoman nation system.. For example,when the Seferad Jews(the jews of spain) was either forced to be a christian or leave Iber peninsula,it was the Ottoman Empire where became a home for those jews in 1400s.they were placed in Istanbul and Selanik(thessaloniki)..Today The seferad jews have  still been living in Turkey for centuries..

Jews are not a"race", they are a "nation", and not even that, a religious group as there are the Falashas, the North African Jews, and the Karaites, Turkic Jews. The Africans in the Ottoman Empire were more often than not slaves, serving as eunuchs most of the time. There are a few descendants of Africans who lived during the Ottoman Empire in modern Turkey but I wouldn't call Turkey a "multi-racial" society, as it is not. Multi-ethnic, yes. Multi-racial, not really. A few examples doesn't change the whole picture, the inhabitants of Turkey are more than 99% Caucasoid. Just remember how the people were reacting when the first wave of African immigrants came from countries such as Nigeria in the 1990s. A girl from my previous school was dating an exchange Nigerian student who happened to be the brother of a footballer playing in Turkey at the time and her whole family had gone amuck. It's still pretty much taboo for many people.

As for the "nation" system in the Ottoman Empire, it was based on religion, so again, non-Muslim inhabitants in the Empire were subject to extra taxes and to certain limitations.

Originally posted by TheDiplomat As you said,a few example doesnt change the subject..so your friend's family can not draw s whole picture you named taboo.

I am not talking about "just one friend's family". Are you telling me that the majority of the families in Turkey would be okay with their sons and/or daughters marrying "blacks"? It is still pretty much a social taboo. Heck, Sunnis marrying Alevis is still a big problem, as well as Muslims marrying non-Muslims. Do you really expect me to believe that Turkey has become this uber-liberal paradise in the last, what, three years?

African footballers playing in Turkish teams is one thing, Turkish people accepting them as equal citizens is another. Have you missed the whole hype about Elvan Abeylegesse, the Ethiopian born Turkish national athlete? Not to mention the reaction of some people towards her being "black" (to quote: "how can a black girl be Turkish!") she was even blamed by some to have aided her "actual" country, Ethiopia, in the race, by "letting the Ethiopian athlete pass by".

Originally posted by TheDiplomat You can not make everything depend on marriage issues..,Colchis.. if you do,europe would be the racist place on the earth..Marriage is a very different dimension.. its social psychology ...

Racism is a social phenomenon, Diplomat. If it isn't observed in social context, where else would it be observed? Have you not read the part where Elvan Abeylegesse is mentioned, am I talking about a marriage in that one? I am talking about an African athlete representing Turkey and some people's reactions to it. Now, that also is social psychology, of course but human is the social animal,  you cannot observe people and nations without social theory.

Pls just look at my signature,and ask yourself that why even the second meeting of different worlds being organized in Turkiye for once again.Think once.Think again.

Because geographically it's right in the middle? Not exactly a million dollar question is it? Of course if I were debating with your style I could ask you why the first meeting wasn't held in Turkey.

Nice info but it's too late. I needed to fill an application form for a British institution recently, and it asked my ethnicity. The categories were white (european), and asian (bangladeshi, indian, chinese) and such. I hadn't known what to do, since in Turkey and Germany, my ethnicity is simply Turkish, and they don't ask if you are European or Asian. In the end I chose 'other' and wrote 'I am Turkish, I don't know if it counts as European or Asian' next to it.

, just put white down when your not sure, it's bound to have more advantages .

Originally posted by Kubrat Nice info but it's too late. I needed to fill an application form for a British institution recently, and it asked my ethnicity. The categories were white (european), and asian (bangladeshi, indian, chinese) and such. I hadn't known what to do, since in Turkey and Germany, my ethnicity is simply Turkish, and they don't ask if you are European or Asian. In the end I chose 'other' and wrote 'I am Turkish, I don't know if it counts as European or Asian' next to it. , just put white down when your not sure, it's bound to have more advantages .

not really, if you have something like affirmitive action going on. (which will not be debated here, if anyone wants to talk about that start a new thread)

 

All American slaves were caught by white slavers. (No, manywere sold by Africans, who owned them, to new owners)

Colchis is partly right on the issue but I never heard anyone complaining about Abeylegesse (anyone I talked to liked her)

Other historical inaccurasies I hate are these:

1) The Turks founded a state in Mongolia in the 6th century, disappeared, re-appeared in the Middle East to serve the caliphs and later founded Turkey. The only Turkic states were the Seljuks, Ottomans and the Republic of Turkey.

2) Modern Macedonians were the same with the Ancient Macedon people.

3) Modern Bulgarians were the same with the Bulgars. Huns were Bulgars, Bulgars were Huns.

4) All the Turkic states and empires in history were founded by the Turks of Turkey (yeah, everyone in Turkey has this mentality)