[Political Interest]

Often I am very confused about 'whiteness' as it is understood by most Westerners. When I was young I was only aware of what is white and what is not when people would mention to me that I am a white or when someone mentioned race. My attachment to this idea was only by coincidence that I have coloured hair and pale skin. Other than this into what group would I go? To me anyone with blonde, red or brown hair with pale skin and a European appearance was a 'white'. As I grew older I saw that there was some debate about certain groups who would not be considered 'white' even if to me they looked like they were. For example some liked to say that Russians are not 'whites'. Also among some typical non-white groups like Turks I could see red heads.

So then what is it to be white? If having a light complexion and blonde, brown or red hair is not enough to be 'white' then what is the qualification? To me it is only a certain phenotype but then there are many problems caused by the Western conception of it.

I think it is better to identify oneself by ethnicity rather than phenotype.

[Political Interest]

To me this is a fascinating subject because it is discussing the definitions of these terms.

My understanding had always been that white was only just an external appearance and associated with geography. Therefore anyone who looked white in complexion and appearance was white.

However it appears it is more complicated than this. According to the actual theories it seems that whiteness as it is understood in the United States and now internationally is based on these things:

Appearance: If the person has the 'white' Nordic look, then depending on the degree to which they possess Nordic characteristics they will be considered to have a white appearance.

Culture: The cultural element is also important. If the people do not have the culture which is considered 'white' then despite their appearance they will not be accepted as whites. Many will argue that Bosnians and Albanians cannot be whites due to their Islamic culture. Even southern Europeans and eastern Europeans may not be regarded as whites due to cultural reasons. Many will not accept white looking Iranians or South Asians due to their Asiatic cultures and their religious beliefs.

Genetics: Genetics are also important in determining who is considered white. For example, I have seen many US white supremacists be confused at why Russians do not regard Caucasus peoples as whites. They look at the phenotype of many people from the Caucasus including Chechens and Ingush which can sometimes have blonde or red hair and pale skin. When they look to the genetics and see that they have a different genetic make up to Europeans they will change their opinion.

Perspective: It depends who is making these viewpoints. Most certainly it has historically been developed among Western Europeans. I have seen some Slavic nationalists regard Western Europeans as being less white than them. Also despite the fact that some may regard the Latin nationalities in Europe as less white or even not white these people considered themselves white in their colonial empires.

So can we say that the idea of whiteness is not much use to describe a culture or civilisation but is more a description of phenotype? As far as I know, Asians do not call themselves after a colour.

[Paradigm]

Whiteness is essentially a set of privileges afforded to those ethnicities that get assimilated into it at the cost of their traditional culture. This can be seen in the example of those who have more recently been assimilated, such as Italians, Poles, and the Irish. As other minorities expand their numbers in America, other ethnicities will likely be assimilated in order to maintain white privilege.

[JRS1]

Is whiteness an american thing?

I dont actually believe in such a thing as whiteness, and dont understand the concept. I recognise white people just by looking at them and thats about it. But then I'm not from the US.

[jaycola]

If you watch me attempt to dance to Hip Hop music, you will see the definition of "Whiteness".

[Suska]

Whiteness is essentially a set of privileges afforded to those ethnicities that get assimilated into it at the cost of their traditional culture. This can be seen in the example of those who have more recently been assimilated, such as Italians, Poles, and the Irish. As other minorities expand their numbers in America, other ethnicities will likely be assimilated in order to maintain white privilege.

Indeed, when I want to really screw with people I don't like I just turn on my white skin, and if they're cool I let them turn on their white skin too.

wtf happened to you man?

[TruePolitics]

The term "white" probably didn't have much of a use (I could be wrong, if so tell me) before Europeans discovered brown skinned islanders, black negros, reddish native americans, and other peoples with yellow, bronze, or pigmented skin.

White people have the least pigment in their skin. (except of course for albinos)

[Political Interest]

Whiteness is essentially a set of privileges afforded to those ethnicities that get assimilated into it at the cost of their traditional culture. This can be seen in the example of those who have more recently been assimilated, such as Italians, Poles, and the Irish. As other minorities expand their numbers in America, other ethnicities will likely be assimilated in order to maintain white privilege.

I agree with you. To be honest 'whiteness' as it is understood in the modern sense is an anti-cultural force. True ethnicities such as English, German, Russian, Polish, Serbian, French, Spanish, Italian and others are diluted into a generic 'white' culture. So English American people instead of reading Beowulf and having festivals wearing traditional Anglo-Saxon dress are instead just drinking bear, having barbecues and watching NASCAR or whatever other 'white' American stereotypes there are. They take these things as definitive of their culture. The 'white' culture is based on a modernist identity and has no root in traditions or heritage. I remember being at my school and the different ethnic groups were to come in wearing their national clothes. The Asians such as Japanese, Koreans, Chinese and others all had their beautiful costumes. The 'white' New Zealanders just had rugby shirts. In essence everyone has their national clothes but the 'white' people only have a T-shirt and jeans as their folk dress. So in becoming 'white' you just join a big melting pot which really is nothing at all. How many Asians identify themselves by their colour? Instead we just have 'white' and 'black', which are not ethnic groups, just descriptions of a phenotype. In Russia they do not have 'white' or 'black' as official designations but instead they have nationalities' like 'Russian', 'Chuvash', 'Mordvin' etc. These are real cultural groups.

It is interesting that when I talk to white nationalists and tell them this they become extremely annoyed and seem to suggest that I believe 'whites' have no culture, history or identity. They are too blind to understand what I am trying to say and do not see that calling themselves 'whites' is not in their interest. However if they prefer a baseless 'white' identity which has no more than a few hundred years to it over their ethnic identity which has thousands of years attached, it is their choice.

Is whiteness an american thing?

It began to be formed in Europe but was taken to extremes in New World colonial situations.

I dont actually believe in such a thing as whiteness, and dont understand the concept. I recognise white people just by looking at them and thats about it. But then I'm not from the US.

Well to me it is only a physical description, nothing more. By some strict definitions of 'white' only Nordics will be included. So Southern Europeans would not be accepted as 'white' by those terms. Even among some supposedly completely Nordic ethnic groups you will find dark people. In England I have seen many who do not even look 'white' but are still full blooded English. So to me it is a phenotype and not a ethnicity or nationality.

If you watch me attempt to dance to Hip Hop music, you will see the definition of "Whiteness".

It has become something like a sign of shame. Why? Because I hear from Americans, even 'white' Americans ideas such as 'white men can't jump', 'white people can't sing', 'white people can't dance', 'white men are effeminate', 'white people have no soul', 'white people are privileged and have an easy life'. All of these stereotypes created by Americans are shameful and dishonorable. Even your statement above shows that 'whites' are silly and useless at dancing and cultural developments. So the generic 'white' culture does not bring us honour. Lets abandon it for English, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Russian etc cultures, real cultures, instead. I used to have some self-esteem problems after hearing those stereotypes from America but then I realise that they are just associated with a fake modernist identity. White Americans and other New Worlders should rediscover their real ethnic identities and cultures. They should abandon this 'white' identity which developed as a status symbol for the upper class. People can still be white by appearance but in my view this should only be a description of appearance as it was in the pre-modern times.

[Paradigm]

The term "white" probably didn't have much of a use (I could be wrong, if so tell me) before Europeans discovered brown skinned islanders, black negros, reddish native americans, and other peoples with yellow, bronze, or pigmented skin.

White people have the least pigment in their skin. (except of course for albinos)

There are many olive-skinned Italians who are nonetheless considered white. Arabs, meanwhile, tend to be treated as an outside group, but it is easy to see how they could be assimilated as whites.

[JRS1]

Well to me it is only a physical description, nothing more. By some strict definitions of 'white' only Nordics will be included. So Southern Europeans would not be accepted as 'white' by those terms. Even among some supposedly completely Nordic ethnic groups you will find dark people. In England I have seen many who do not even look 'white' but are still full blooded English. So to me it is a phenotype and not a ethnicity or nationality.

They probably have a bit of black, gypsy or irish in them. Its not unusual.

I find a lot of Germans to be quite swarthy looking. Same with the french.

[Social_Critic]

I'd like to ramble some about comments by Political Interest

True ethnicities such as English, German, Russian, Polish, Serbian, French, Spanish, Italian and others are diluted into a generic 'white' culture. So English American people instead of reading Beowulf and having festivals wearing traditional Anglo-Saxon dress are instead just drinking bear, having barbecues and watching NASCAR or whatever other 'white' American stereotypes there are.

I don't think Spaniards, French, Italians and Russians are "true ethnicities". Let's take Spain (I happen to live in Spain, so I'm more familiar with it than most people who post here). Spain is a mixture of different peoples, they can not be considered an ethnic group. My family happens to be Celt, from northern spain (I had my DNA typed, so consider this a fact). This made me delve quite a bit into the migration of celts into Europe, and the preceding and subsequent invasions of other genotypes (not ethnic groups). I have also been studying the historical record (we have high quality written records extending back to the foundation of phoenecian and carthaginian settlements, as well as later accounts of roman, miscellaneous barbarians, and muslim invasions, as well as the subsequent Reconquista and expulsion of muslims and jews in the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries.

So in conclusion, I know for a fact that Spaniards are no more an ethnic group than the New York Giants football team is an ethnic group. And I'm pretty sure the same applies to almost all other European nations, except for a few such as Iceland which did remain isolated - although Icelanders are known to be viking descended and closely related to today's danes and norwegians.

An interesting tidbit - the original population of the Canary Islands, which today are part of spain, was known as Guanche. The Guanches have been typed to be berber - and the closest relatives to berbers are the sami in Sweden. Both Sami and Berbers are descended of a group which penetrated Europe coming in from Central Asia. And it seems most Europeans came the same way - as it turns out most Europeans are from Afghanistan

[Soulflytribe]

I think “whiteness” today is deeply related to where someone was born and if this place is developed or not.
So, “whiteness” nowadays is not so much about race (genotype-phenotype/eugenics) anymore, but solely about geographic position and economic development. What is really good, because xenophobia and social prejudice are less harmful than racism. Xenophobia can be fought through assimilation (would anyone say that Colin Powell is not an American?) and social prejudice can be fought through economic development ("making everyone rich").
However, it’s harder to fight racism simply because apart from vitiligo there are not so many things which can change people's color. A black person will die as a black person, nothing can be done to change that. Well, at least not in 2012.

And the economic development is very necessary for a country to be considered “white”. South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Greece and other Western Mediterranean countries were only accepted in the “White club” after they’ve become developed countries.

Chile will be the first developed country in South America by 2015/16, and we can already see people saying that Chile is the “whiter” South American country, the most “western” country in the region etc. And we will see this same pattern happening in Peru, Argentina, Brazil, Ukraine, Romania, Albania (and even in African countries) when these countries reach “developed” status.
One thing I'm particularly interested is to know if Greece will stop being a "white country" if this country reaches third world status in the future.


Let’s see:

Dilma Rousseff

Has Bulgarian parents, born in Brazil
What she is: hispanic/latina/black
If she was born in Bulgaria: it would depend on the economic development of Bulgaria. White if Bulgaria has a nominal per capita above $20000, non-white if not.


Robert Scheidt

Has Swedish/German parents, born in Brazil
What he is: hispanic/latino/black
If he was born in Sweden/Germany: White

Hala Gorani

Has Syrian parents, born in the US
What she is: White
If she was born in Syria: Arab/non-white

Arwa Damon

Has a Syrian mother, born in the US
What she is: White
If she was born in Syria: Arab/non-white

David Nalbandian

Has Italian/Armenian parents, born in Argentina
What he is: hispanic/latino/black
If he was born in Italy: White
If he was born in Armenia: Non-White
If he was born in the US: White

Hugo Hoyama:

Japanese parents, born in Brazil
What he is: hispanic/latino/black
If he was born in Japan: White
If he was born in Vietnam: Non-White
If he was born in Africa: Non-White

Susan Rice

Born in the US
What she is: Western woman fighting for Western interests around the world or ...“White”.

_________________
And this is actually good.
Because it completely destroys racism around the world. Xenophobia and social prejudice are easier to be fought than racism.

[Political Interest]

There are many olive-skinned Italians who are nonetheless considered white. Arabs, meanwhile, tend to be treated as an outside group, but it is easy to see how they could be assimilated as whites.

Yes, some Arabs even have a white appearance. I read one writer of the 17th century described Latins as 'dirty whites' because of their darker complexion.

They probably have a bit of black, gypsy or irish in them. Its not unusual.

I find a lot of Germans to be quite swarthy looking. Same with the french.

It is possible but there do exist many dark complexioned English people without any admixture from the outside. So if the English are a 'white' people but these full blooded Englishmen are dark complexioned then does it mean some English are 'white' while others are not?

Yes many Germans are swarthy along with the French. There is even among some a dispute that such peoples are as 'white' as the English.

I don't think Spaniards, French, Italians and Russians are "true ethnicities". Let's take Spain (I happen to live in Spain, so I'm more familiar with it than most people who post here). Spain is a mixture of different peoples, they can not be considered an ethnic group. My family happens to be Celt, from northern spain (I had my DNA typed, so consider this a fact). This made me delve quite a bit into the migration of celts into Europe, and the preceding and subsequent invasions of other genotypes (not ethnic groups). I have also been studying the historical record (we have high quality written records extending back to the foundation of phoenecian and carthaginian settlements, as well as later accounts of roman, miscellaneous barbarians, and muslim invasions, as well as the subsequent Reconquista and expulsion of muslims and jews in the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries.

It is true, countries such as Spain and the United Kingdom are a collection of nationalities into one state. Within Spain you have Catalans, Basques etc. In the UK you have as far as I know, Scots, Englishmen, Welsh, Irish, Manx and even Cornish. They are not homogeneous lands.

So in conclusion, I know for a fact that Spaniards are no more an ethnic group than the New York Giants football team is an ethnic group. And I'm pretty sure the same applies to almost all other European nations, except for a few such as Iceland which did remain isolated - although Icelanders are known to be viking descended and closely related to today's danes and norwegians.

I suppose so. However in smaller countries you do find ethnic homogeneity. In Denmark they are all Danish as far as I know. In Lithuania everyone is a Lithuanian except for some Slavic ethnic minorities and Tatars.

An interesting tidbit - the original population of the Canary Islands, which today are part of spain, was known as Guanche. The Guanches have been typed to be berber - and the closest relatives to berbers are the sami in Sweden. Both Sami and Berbers are descended of a group which penetrated Europe coming in from Central Asia. And it seems most Europeans came the same way - as it turns out most Europeans are from Afghanistan

There are many debates about the origins of Europeans. It is not beyond belief that two populations in two separate places could have a similar origin.

I think “whiteness” today is deeply related to where someone was born and if this place is developed or not.
So, “whiteness” nowadays is not so much about race (genotype-phenotype/eugenics) anymore, but solely about geographic position and economic development. What is really good, because xenophobia and social prejudice are less harmful than racism. Xenophobia can be fought through assimilation (would anyone say that Colin Powell is not an American?) and social prejudice can be fought through economic development ("making everyone rich").
However, it’s harder to fight racism simply because apart from vitiligo there are not so many things which can change people's color. A black person will die as a black person, nothing can be done to change that. Well, at least not in 2012.

Yes I agree it has become something close to economic development. It is associated with status.

And the economic development is very necessary for a country to be considered “white”. South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Greece and other Western Mediterranean countries were only accepted in the “White club” after they’ve become developed countries.

Such countries become respected after they have reached first world status. They are viewed by Westerners are respectable, some are even admired.

Chile will be the first developed country in South America by 2015/16, and we can already see people saying that Chile is the “whiter” South American country, the most “western” country in the region etc. And we will see this same pattern happening in Peru, Argentina, Brazil, Ukraine, Romania, Albania (and even in African countries) when these countries reach “developed” status.
One thing I'm particularly interested is to know if Greece will stop being a "white country" if this country reaches third world status in the future.

This is especially true when the origins of a group of people are said to be 'non-white'. For example the Finnish were regarded as Asians because their country was poor. Now that they are developed and have first world living conditions as well as Western culture this opinion is now less common. Greece is seen by many as not being 'white'. Even though it is in Europe its poverty levels and the darker complexion of Greeks causes many to say they are not whites. Albania is something similar. People still say countries like Ukraine are secretly Mongols because they are poor and due to their very different culture from that of the generic 'white' one.

Hala Gorani

Has Syrian parents, born in the US
What she is: White
If she was born in Syria: Arab/non-white

When I first saw her on television I did not think she was Syrian.

Hugo Hoyama:

Japanese parents, born in Brazil
What he is: hispanic/latino/black
If he was born in Japan: White
If he was born in Vietnam: Non-White
If he was born in Africa: Non-White

Despite being Japanese and indisputably not 'white' by race many Westerners are Japanophiles and see Japan as an equal country, even superior in some cases.

And this is actually good.
Because it completely destroys racism around the world. Xenophobia and social prejudice are easier to be fought than racism.

Maybe, but why should we all have to integrate into a lousy anti-cultural 'white' identity which destroys all the cultures, even the culture from which it developed?

[TruePolitics]

David Nalbandian

Has Italian/Armenian parents, born in Argentina
What he is: hispanic/latino/black

Why is he hispanic/latino/black?

Arwa Damon

Has a Syrian mother, born in the US
What she is: White
If she was born in Syria: Arab/non-white

So, you're telling me that the people from Syria would be unable to tell that she's not fully Syrian?

[SE23]

Whiteness is essentially a set of privileges afforded to those ethnicities that get assimilated into it at the cost of their traditional culture. This can be seen in the example of those who have more recently been assimilated, such as Italians, Poles, and the Irish. As other minorities expand their numbers in America, other ethnicities will likely be assimilated in order to maintain white privilege.

Surely this is evident all around the world depending on the ethnic origin of those who created the society, i.e. Han privilege in China.
White privilege is a American centric idea, and is a dividing tool, which i can only wonder is used by the left to destabilise Western Societies. It goes against the reasons why i "joined" the left when i was younger, because i believed in equal oppourtunities, but branding everyone who is white as being privileged is an idea that can only come from either rich white people or poor black people.
Go to many parts of Eastern Europe, and you will see white poverty, same applies for East Glasgow and many parts of Northern England.

[Soulflytribe]

Why is he hispanic/latino/black?

Well, you tell me!

"The United States Census uses the ethnonym Hispanic or Latino to refer to "persons who trace their origin or descent to Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Spanish speaking Central and South America countries, and other Spanish cultures.""

And according to our fellow user "rik", Latinos and Hispanics are not white and are easily grouped together with Blacks and other minorities.
Thus, David Nalbandian in the US would be considered "hispanic/latino/black".

This is stupid, no doubt. But this is how Americans see the world.

So, you're telling me that the people from Syria would be unable to tell that she's not fully Syrian?

Can you use one more line to express your point of view? I'm really not that quick-witted to understand what you mean. Sorry.

[Suska]

wtf? This thread just got super-stupid. Thank you for the pictures soulfly, but your conclusions are ludicrous.

Who is making these claims about whiteness (apart from people here in this thread)? There is no white registry. Who are these people you claim are making claims about who is white and who is not?

White is a color, not a social status.

[Social_Critic]

If you think "Whiteness" is associated with success and/or development, then you must have some sort of racism built in, I suppose. I don't even see whiteness at all, I see DNA types (but then I'm into DNA studies). I also happen to have a slightlyt longer view, and remember quite well when "whites" were barbarians and agriculture was carried out in the Middle East, Papua New Guinea, the Americas and the Far East by what you guys consider "backwards' brown people", or whatever. Whiteness smacks of the 19th century, this is the 21st, and today we really do know better.

[Soulflytribe]

If you think "Whiteness" is associated with success and/or development, then you must have some sort of racism built in, I suppose. I don't even see whiteness at all, I see DNA types (but then I'm into DNA studies).

Hey, Social_ Critic, I don't know if you are talking to me, but I will assume that you are.
What I've written is not really how I see the world, but a satire about how I think Americans see the world.

I also happen to have a slightlyt longer view, and remember quite well when "whites" were barbarians and agriculture was carried out in the Middle East, Papua New Guinea, the Americas and the Far East by what you guys consider "backwards' brown people", or whatever.

You don't really need to go that far to find peoples who are portrayed as "white" today being called subhuman, barbarian or inferior. The Irish, Japanese and Italians used to be seen as animals in the US just a few decades ago. And the French used to do the same thing with the Portuguese immigrants not long ago either. But those peoples were automatically "accepted" when their countries reached first world status. It was really simultaneous. It's not that I want things to be this way, this is how things had unfolded.

[SE23]

This is why i come to the conclusion that critical race theory is merely an attempt to undermine capitalists societies and destroy culture, to make the masses more acceptable to Marxist ideas. Its divisive, the notion of white privlege used by these so called left wingers, is even racist to black people and other ethnicities, as it portrays white people as being the only real adults able to take responsbility for their actions, and instigating all the causes, with the latter always being the passive reciptent.
As i said previously the people pushing the notion of white privlege, are privileged themselves, and lack life experience.

It is an American Centric construct, if anything, as European's were living in absolute poverty in the first half of the 20th century, and only recieved "privileges" by fighting in wars, strikes, hard work and rising up to the challenge, nothing was "handed over" to them, and other ethnicities were only introduced to the country in the 1950's and 60's. I still don't understand how someone who truly calls themselves left wing, can advocate affirmative discrimination and make broad generalisations about a race of people.