- 10 Jan 2012 12:42
#13869105
Yes, there is a mix of liberal and traditional factors pretty much everywhere in the world. And that includes hierarchies. But, in the Old World, ethnic-based traditional human relations predominate.
And all peoples are mixed, by the way. There is no such thing as a "pure" ethnic group. But the difference is the age of the ethnic groups that compose the mainstream. For example, it is true that there are lots of Spanish, Indian, Chinese and Japanese blood flowing on Filipino veins. But those contributions were assimilated. They didn't add to each other on a melting pot, so the old ethnic groups, who were thousands of years old, remained existing. The same is valid, for example, for Russians. Russians were originally Slavs, but lots of Turkic, Baltic, Uralic and Caucasian peoples were assimilated into the Russian culture, contributing to it. But the Russian culture itself is the same, it simply suffered additions.
If you take Mexico, the US, Brazil, Australia, Jamaica etc, that is not the case. All those peoples were formed by the interaction (a melting pot) of several different cultures. They are roughly 500 years old. some are even younger than that. So, as there is no Brazilian or American ethnic group yet, social relations here (in the New World) are not really ethnic-based.
See this map, for instance:
I would certainly change the colors of Paraguay, Madagascar, South Africa, Mauritania, the UK and India. But other than that, it is a good example of what I mean. The concept of a nation in the Old World is ethnic-based. In the New World, there is a more liberal view that the nation is formed by groups of people who have chosen to become part of it. So immigration is normally not a problem in the Americas, but, in the Old World, it normally generates lots of ethnic tension between the main national ethnic group and those immigrant minorities.
PoFo ethnic party statistics: http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8&p=14042520#p14042520
CounterChaos wrote:This is true for the Philippines as well. So, I think what we have here is a mixture of both - on both sides of the world. It is very rare to find a "pure" Filipino. Chinese/Indians/Americans/Spanish/Japanese it is all mixed here. Chinese culture is very influential here as well as Spanish culture all wrapped up in American culture........ Yet traditional Filipino style hierarchy still exists among them all. Great respect is given to elders.
Yes, there is a mix of liberal and traditional factors pretty much everywhere in the world. And that includes hierarchies. But, in the Old World, ethnic-based traditional human relations predominate.
And all peoples are mixed, by the way. There is no such thing as a "pure" ethnic group. But the difference is the age of the ethnic groups that compose the mainstream. For example, it is true that there are lots of Spanish, Indian, Chinese and Japanese blood flowing on Filipino veins. But those contributions were assimilated. They didn't add to each other on a melting pot, so the old ethnic groups, who were thousands of years old, remained existing. The same is valid, for example, for Russians. Russians were originally Slavs, but lots of Turkic, Baltic, Uralic and Caucasian peoples were assimilated into the Russian culture, contributing to it. But the Russian culture itself is the same, it simply suffered additions.
If you take Mexico, the US, Brazil, Australia, Jamaica etc, that is not the case. All those peoples were formed by the interaction (a melting pot) of several different cultures. They are roughly 500 years old. some are even younger than that. So, as there is no Brazilian or American ethnic group yet, social relations here (in the New World) are not really ethnic-based.
See this map, for instance:
I would certainly change the colors of Paraguay, Madagascar, South Africa, Mauritania, the UK and India. But other than that, it is a good example of what I mean. The concept of a nation in the Old World is ethnic-based. In the New World, there is a more liberal view that the nation is formed by groups of people who have chosen to become part of it. So immigration is normally not a problem in the Americas, but, in the Old World, it normally generates lots of ethnic tension between the main national ethnic group and those immigrant minorities.
PoFo ethnic party statistics: http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8&p=14042520#p14042520