Top | Newest First | Oldest First
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
I would actually like to know if you:
- Were born in a country
- Grew up in a country
- Went to school in a country
As mentioned in (1:47), practically swimming in a dataset that largely [i](considering pop culture and the internet)[/i] belonged to what you might call a "national" dataset. That you become part of that nation?
If the argument is, that these people can be both... then again, how can the be both? If they never grew up in the dataset that forms your opinions and behaviors of the second dataset?
... When I listen to Trevor, I dare to say that the only part how they can and have to be both is by looking a skin color? Just like the examples that he give to people on the extreme right, that deny people their nationality because of the skin colour not being part of the "norm" in the past because of a racial [i](and/or traditional)[/i] interpretation of national identity. Which is, btw, also the argument that he himself ends with elevating that kind of behavior to the norm. Where a person that has a skin color is put into a collection of people just because of how they look, negating where they grew up and which culture they have formed their identity in.
This idea of a multi-national identity, by people that NEVER were attached to the identity that they are leeching on too because of roots, often leads to dissenchantment exactly because of that reason. If you read up on people that have Turkish or Moroccon roots which are 3th, and by now even 4th, generation immigrants are often heartbreaking. It's the group of people that Trevor criticizes in his last part AND that he agrees earlier that part of a far-right perception on identity earlier, that makes these people feel unwanted in the nation that they grow up in. Then they leech on to another identity, the one that they perceive themselves a part off because of their roots. But once they go to Morocco or Turkey, they quickly find out that they are just as much immigrants over there then that they feel inside the nation that they should be a part of because of their upbringing. Exactly because they don't share these cultural bonds.
So yeah... I don't know, I think the issue is more complex. And I personally think that people that never had a connection to a nation except for some background that is hidden 2, 3 or 4 generations ago, are lieing to themselves if they perceive themselves part of that group. That also counts for Americans celebrating Saint Patricks' day and "feel" Irish. But when we talk about identity, rationality leaves the room at the beginning of the conversation. I don't think that a lot of Irish would ever perceive an American that has grown up from an American family that has roots in Ireland 4-5-6 generations ago, as an "Irish" person.
- Were born in a country
- Grew up in a country
- Went to school in a country
As mentioned in (1:47), practically swimming in a dataset that largely [i](considering pop culture and the internet)[/i] belonged to what you might call a "national" dataset. That you become part of that nation?
If the argument is, that these people can be both... then again, how can the be both? If they never grew up in the dataset that forms your opinions and behaviors of the second dataset?
... When I listen to Trevor, I dare to say that the only part how they can and have to be both is by looking a skin color? Just like the examples that he give to people on the extreme right, that deny people their nationality because of the skin colour not being part of the "norm" in the past because of a racial [i](and/or traditional)[/i] interpretation of national identity. Which is, btw, also the argument that he himself ends with elevating that kind of behavior to the norm. Where a person that has a skin color is put into a collection of people just because of how they look, negating where they grew up and which culture they have formed their identity in.
This idea of a multi-national identity, by people that NEVER were attached to the identity that they are leeching on too because of roots, often leads to dissenchantment exactly because of that reason. If you read up on people that have Turkish or Moroccon roots which are 3th, and by now even 4th, generation immigrants are often heartbreaking. It's the group of people that Trevor criticizes in his last part AND that he agrees earlier that part of a far-right perception on identity earlier, that makes these people feel unwanted in the nation that they grow up in. Then they leech on to another identity, the one that they perceive themselves a part off because of their roots. But once they go to Morocco or Turkey, they quickly find out that they are just as much immigrants over there then that they feel inside the nation that they should be a part of because of their upbringing. Exactly because they don't share these cultural bonds.
So yeah... I don't know, I think the issue is more complex. And I personally think that people that never had a connection to a nation except for some background that is hidden 2, 3 or 4 generations ago, are lieing to themselves if they perceive themselves part of that group. That also counts for Americans celebrating Saint Patricks' day and "feel" Irish. But when we talk about identity, rationality leaves the room at the beginning of the conversation. I don't think that a lot of Irish would ever perceive an American that has grown up from an American family that has roots in Ireland 4-5-6 generations ago, as an "Irish" person.
View 26 more replies »
bijouxbroussard · F
@Ozymandiaz In the American South, for generations there were two groups of people culturally about as similar as could be: shared a common language, with virtually the same dialect, ate the same foods, worshipped the same deity, but lived separate (and unequal) lives by law, because one group was classified as inferior and “not quite American’. So the idea that trying to reclaim a sense of community, heritage and roots, prevents people from assimilating is bullsh*t if [b]the mainstream[/b] won’t accept them as part of their community [b]anyway[/b]. 😳
damselfly · 100+, F
Bijoux, i really do understand where youre coming from. Sometimes a 'host' nation (and i use that expression in its widest possible sense) has 'issues' which are (an execrable) part of its culture. But every nationality has a proportion of 'have nots' who get rattled when they see obvious 'foreigners' come in (even if its against their own will) and, from rock bottom, recognise opportunities, make cleverer choices and do better.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@damselfly Depends on how much you want that person to become "part" of the whole. If you grew up in a certain culture for 30-40 years, you just can't snap out of it. And I don't expect people to do so, a minimum of effort is enough for me. However, over time, the next generations need to become part of the nations background. These people live there, they will eventually more and more affected by the culture that they are living in. And locals that deny this process, well... That's the real issue. Because if you deny it, you'll get a reaction, ussually one that ain't really healthy for the assimilation process.
Ynotisay · M
I really like Trevor Noah. Smart with a crazy fast, funny mind. Sucks that he's leaving. But I'm not too on board with this one.
When you're born in a country, irrespective of ancestry, you're a citizen of that country. The person who wrote that letter was correct. Those players are a product of France. Not a country that their parents, grandparents or lineage farther back lived in. Now France has some issues around race. But it doesn't negate that that the team is made up of mostly French athletes. I think this take was purposefully intended to divide. He used that as a launching pad for a whole lot of things that had nothing to with those athletes.
When you're born in a country, irrespective of ancestry, you're a citizen of that country. The person who wrote that letter was correct. Those players are a product of France. Not a country that their parents, grandparents or lineage farther back lived in. Now France has some issues around race. But it doesn't negate that that the team is made up of mostly French athletes. I think this take was purposefully intended to divide. He used that as a launching pad for a whole lot of things that had nothing to with those athletes.
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
@Ynotisay [quote]When you're born in a country, irrespective of ancestry, you're a citizen of that country. [/quote]
Only in [i]jus soli[i] countries. The majority of countries have [i]jus sanguinis[/i], that is one or both of the parents must be citizens. Also several [i]jus soli[/i] countries have some restrictions on the right rather than it being unrestricted as in the US and other American countries.
See, for instance, https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-birthright-citizenship
Only in [i]jus soli[i] countries. The majority of countries have [i]jus sanguinis[/i], that is one or both of the parents must be citizens. Also several [i]jus soli[/i] countries have some restrictions on the right rather than it being unrestricted as in the US and other American countries.
See, for instance, https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-birthright-citizenship
Lol.... Trevor is great...
It might interest you that just today the beautiful French government (🤮) provided the honorably French citizenship to Mahsa Amini, an innocent woman killed while in the custody of Iranian police forces, and after which they (the French Government) announced their interest to continue their atomic negotiations with Iranian government during the nation's ralley against them....
To the very kind French government : [b]Thanks but no thanks.... Mahsa does not need your useless gift....[/b]
It might interest you that just today the beautiful French government (🤮) provided the honorably French citizenship to Mahsa Amini, an innocent woman killed while in the custody of Iranian police forces, and after which they (the French Government) announced their interest to continue their atomic negotiations with Iranian government during the nation's ralley against them....
To the very kind French government : [b]Thanks but no thanks.... Mahsa does not need your useless gift....[/b]
NerdyPotato · M
@bijouxbroussard This is actually something Trevor covered in the video. A lot of people claimed that the players were not really French but African.
Others pointed out that the team was a sign of the diversity of France.
Others pointed out that the team was a sign of the diversity of France.
bijouxbroussard · F
@Ozymandiaz Yes, I see what you’re saying. That’s why l'ambassadeur took offense.
@bijouxbroussard Yeah it is and I can see why they were upset by it, especially considering Frances overt embracing of the far right over the past couple of years.
The WC win was seen as a victory for diversity in France. So to hear Trevor saying it was a victory for Africa plays into the hands of Le Pen's supporters.
I dont disagree with anything Trevor says but sometimes timing is everything.
The WC win was seen as a victory for diversity in France. So to hear Trevor saying it was a victory for Africa plays into the hands of Le Pen's supporters.
I dont disagree with anything Trevor says but sometimes timing is everything.
bookerdana · M
bijouxbroussard · F
@bookerdana Yeah, where someone’s always trying to tell you what label you should be wearing—so [b]they[/b] know how to treat you. 😐
Grateful4you · M
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
bijouxbroussard · F
