This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
A very well done write up.
I only say that judging by what I've heard, the Finns and Sami have had historically amicable relations and the imposition of brain-rot anti-colonialist narratives has created a granularity of identity which previously did not exist. (How many Finns went off into the wilderness over the centuries? How many Sami settled and became identical to their neighbors over the generations?)
Isn't this a fairer, more egalitarian way of things? Bothering with blood quantums, with ancient lists? Why impose a progressive view on race where the historical arrangement was of no controversy whatsover? Are we supposed to enforce a strict separation of ethnicities, that people cannot pass from one group to another by marriage and blood? Is that not racist?
They are neighbors of linguistically similar language isolates: they have literally been kissing cousins for thousands - if not tens of thousands - of years. The Sami are not Amerindians! It's stupid. It's very stupid.
Even then, it would be a nomad/farmer relationship, which has generally tended to mean the farmers expanding their territories and the nomads losing them, which has indeed happened in great stretches of Northern and Eastern Finland. (Apparently the Sámi call this "Lapland retreats, the Land gets thicker" - 'the Land' ('lanta' in Finnish, this also (coincidentally?) means 'manure' in Finnish) being a term for non-Sámi in Sápmi in general.)
But the land that was in dispute (and correct me if I am wrong) can be described to be 'cold as balls'. Finns were not moving en masse into the north, so the relative population densities were low enough for coexistence to be a possibility.
The Amerindians were OK with Europeans for a while until they realized they wouldn't stop coming. Grumbling about those damn farmers encircling another bit of prime pasture is one thing, but massacring and scalping is another.
Although doing a bit of research into the overall situation, it does look like they did go through the whole residential school and discrimination of language phase - but Wikipedia doesn't mention anything about Finnish policies to such effect: only Norway and Sweden. Since you're our resident Finnposter, could you look into it? Were there any particular programs to intentionally displace them in the 18th and 19th centuries?
Finnish policy towards the Sámi was highly assimilatory until the 1970s and boarding schools were used, as mentioned here, for example.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link