Re: Poor "Jim Pennino" :-)

Am Freitag000009, 09.05.2025 um 11:06 schrieb Bertitaylor:

On Fri, 9 May 2025 6:34:56 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:
 

Am Mittwoch000007, 07.05.2025 um 14:14 schrieb Bertitaylor:
..

>

>
'Tribes' is among the most stupidst concepts for life you could
possibly
have.

>
None more stupid conceptwise than the Germanic and North European tribes
who are the most tribal going by their awesome Nazi racist theories and
practices. Which are lies for aggrandization. The price for such
tribalism has been heavy.

>
The inventor of 'scientific racism' was actually Charles Darwin and that
an Englishman.
>

>
Sure, there were tribes in ancient times, of course.

>
They still are.

>
But how would you define a tribe in modern terms?

>
A group composed of common atavistic tribal values relating to their
superiority.

>
There were 'tribe revivals' in the 20th century.
>
E.g. there have been 'Hippies', 'Mods' or 'Punks'.

>
Disoriented tribals. Real tribes relate to nationality. A nation is one
big tribe, or superset of tribes. The nation is thus the updated concept
of tribe.

>
No
>
At least I don't like this interpretation of the word 'nation'.

 Subjective.

>
It is in common use in anglo-american media, however, but still wrong.

 For you.

>
E.g. they call Apaches (for instance) 'first nation'.

 Because there were no other tribes in their areas.

>
That is racism and tribalism and by no means acceptable.

 Nothing racist about it. Racism is saying my tribe is better because of
...

>
>
Therefore 'nation' is another name for an independent state.

 An independent state could have a number of nations or tribes within it.

In Germany the smaller entities are called 'states' and the larger entity ('Germany') 'nation'.
And neither states nor the nation are composed from tribes.
Tribalism is a very odd concept in a modern society!
Possibly there were tribes in existence several hundred or thousand years ago.
But today we have nothing like that anymore in modern countries like e.g. Germany.
In Papua New Guinea this might be different or possibly in the Amazonas area.
But tribes in a modern city would be really strange.

To create a 'superset of tribes' as 'nation' and to identify this with
the population of a country is simply unacceptable.

 Subjective petulance noted.

>
In case of Germany this is also totally wrong, because the Germanic
tribes were mainly not living in the area which is today occupied by
Germany.

 Now those people who call themselves German form a superset of tribes
that have speaking German as a binding factor.

Sure, language is a 'bindig factor'.
But language does not follow ethnicity, because people speak what people speak in their environment.
So: if you were born in Germany, you would speak German (at least somehow), because you certainly like to communicate with the people around you.
So kids learn the language of their country, whether they are brown, yellow or pink.
TH

--