The Guardian: "Time to challenge Argentina’s white European self-image, black history experts say"

QuilmesSlo

Registered
What exactly is the point you're trying to make here? When I was young I knew an English guy with terrible personal hygiene, a German bloke with no table manners...Had they all been raised in the woods? Maybe!
Just sharing an anecdote among friends. Perhaps it's meaningless.
 

Tres Picos

Registered
Might consider also that Argentina is small population wise on a continent that's mostly not white. People are clinging to their heritage and hopeful that they can keep it in the face of being swamped by other cultures. We hear a lot about what it's like to be a minority in the U.S. Spend time in Mexico and you get a sense of what that's like if you are white. Other ethnicities and races are celebrated in the U.S. and elsewhere but celebrating your own white heritage is seen as celebrating white supremacy which is disparaged. I celebrate my Cherokee heritage. Am proud of my Scots-Irish heritage too. And don't want anyone in my face telling me I should be ashamed of either. Shit happened and it happened everywhere and wasn't committed by just whites. Deal with it. The premise of the original post seems to suggest that claiming whiteness is wrong if you have some other DNA in you. Most Argentinians are descended from Europeans. This isn't complicated.
The article is not serious; if it were, they would look at the percentage admixture among those with some African ancestry and from that they could get overall admixture. But that would undermine their polemic and only a few nerds of anthropology, history, and genetics like myself would read it. The purpose of this UK propaganda outlet is to undermine the identity of Argentinians.

Genetic Ancestry
You could show through genetic analysis that the Turkish are not really Turks. There are large components of Kurdish, Arabic, Greek, and Slavic admixture. But of course the Guardian would not do that.
You could challenge the identity of Guatemalans as a Mayan people by showing the large Spanish admixture.
You could say the Haitians are not really and African people because of French admixture.
You could say the Aboriginals of Australia have gone extinct because it’s so difficult to find a pure one and the ones remaining are not true Aboriginal Australians.
You could do this for virtually every ethnic group on earth and you would be correct. But a nation’s identity is idealized and mythologized. It's an important part of the human experience.

Heritage Pride
Then you have those that may grant that Argentina ancestry and culture is largely derivative of Spanish/Italian heritage, but that they shouldn’t be too proud about it. Well, every healthy nation is proud of their heritage to varying degrees, and Argentina hardly oversteps normal bounds.
The Chinese consider China to be the Middle Kingdom; the center of the earth, everything revolves around them.
The Jewish say they are God’s Chosen People.
The French say nobody else knows how to dress, eat, and speak except them.
Again, we could go on for virtually every ethnic group. Virtually every nation, tribe throughout history positions themselves centrally and differentiates between “us” and the “rest.”

The Guardian's article is an attack on Argentina’s identity and is part of the broader anti-European campaign you see in much of the Western world as you have identified. Though these kinds of attacks are also mounting against non-European peoples such as the Japanese. The primary force behind it is probably global capitalism, which pushes for unrestricted movement of capital and labor. Other resentful and opportunistic groups/people join; you can call these the useful idiots of globalcap.

Having lived in many countries, such as India and Singapore, I’ve discovered that a substantial proportion of expats hate the country they have migrated to. You will find a disproportionate number of them in online forums. Curiously, they don’t leave. Some may have put down ties that make it difficult to do so, but I think the better explanation is that they are deeply unhappy people that were unable to find fulfillment in their own country; that probably had something to do with their decision to relocate; they carry their toxic psychological traits to the new country. Unable to assign fault to themselves, they blame their new home, never feel at home, but neither can they go home. We can only hope these unhappy people, these lost souls, someday find peace.
 
Last edited:

Tres Picos

Registered
Many are. I went out with this beautiful brazilian girl once, when I was a young man, and I've never seen anyone eat like that. Truly, it was like she had emerged from the jungle both in her beauty and her table manners. I share this to be candid.
I've found people from jungle cultures to be quite clean in their eating habits. Also, not prone to gluttony. Does this describe her eating habits?
As for her appearance, I hope you are aware that people living in jungle environments have a certain kind of look. For example, they are usually of short stature, dark, and have curly hair. We know this because the Pygmies and the various Negritos people of Southeast Asia have these traits even though they are genetically very distant. It is a case of convergent evolution. Sure you might say the Yanomama have straight hair but note that they have been continually intermixing with non-jungle peoples such as the Andean cultures. If they were isolated long enough, they would probably come to resemble the typical jungle phenotype. So unless this girl resembled the type described above, I think your anecdote, while interesting, is misleading.
 

QuilmesSlo

Registered
I've found people from jungle cultures to be quite clean in their eating habits. Also, not prone to gluttony. Does this describe her eating habits?
As for her appearance, I hope you are aware that people living in jungle environments have a certain kind of look. For example, they are usually of short stature, dark, and have curly hair. We know this because the Pygmies and the various Negritos people of Southeast Asia have these traits even though they are genetically very distant. It is a case of convergent evolution. Sure you might say the Yanomama have straight hair but note that they have been continually intermixing with non-jungle peoples such as the Andean cultures. If they were isolated long enough, they would probably come to resemble the typical jungle phenotype. So unless this girl resembled the type described above, I think your anecdote, while interesting, is misleading.
She was tall, statuesque and beautiful and so not at all as you describe. But she did not very distinct facial features which I took to be Indian in part. Not prone to gluttony, yet she ate by encircling her plate from the distant edge, as you might imagine a mammal protecting its food. It was quite strange and I immediately discerned that no matter how beautiful there could be no future with a woman I couldn't take a meal with w/out being revolted.
 

Renzi

Registered

"Gigantes como el Obelisco,
campeones de fútbol,
boxeo y hockey.
Locatti, Barreda,
Monzón y Cordera
también, matan por amor.
Tanos, gallegos, judíos,
criollos, polacos, indios, negros,
cabecitas... pero con pedigree francés
somos de un lugar
santo y profano a la vez,
mixtura de alta combustión."
 

Alfred_Arnold

Registered
Perhaps we should use the term "offshoot" rather than "outpost."

I'd say that all the European offshoots diverged and came up with comparable cultural innovations. For example, the Australians have vegemite, the Quebuecois have their hatred of the Anglo-Canadians, and the Americans their hatred of monarchies.

By ancestry, clearly Argentina during the 1750s to 2000 (let's say this is the period you're looking at as a condensed Spenglerian cycle) was predominately European. Certainly the elite classes were.
Culture, is less cut and dried, but if you look at the ideas people talk about, the books they read, the music they listen to, the architecture, etc., Argentina culture seemed to have been European in nature. An Argentinian would often travel to Spain and feel at home and a Spaniard vice-versa.

The Spenglerian decline of Argentina seems to have begun at about the same time as that of other Western societies. Spengler writing in the 1910s believed European civ was already in its Winter, no? You have others, such as Burnham, writing in the 1950s about decline as well. Do you think Spengler and Burnham would have viewed Argentina as part of European civilisation? Travelers like Darwin seemed to.
I agree with this. Offshoot would be term, and I agree with your description of the offshoots. And yes, i think Spengler (and I suppose Burnham, never read his "Suicide" or other works) would have viewed this 1750s to 2000 period as Western/European/Faustian civilization, though with particular homegrown attributions that still fit under the umbrella sharing a common reverence to the preceding seasons in the cycle. I see Argentina as having had it's own "micro-climate" sub-seasons let's say. A quick late spring/summer where its highest individuality was formed (lets say 1810 to 1940) being independent to the west as a whole, but ultimately one slap away from the "Caesarism" bell at the top of the rope a bit earlier (or maybe the so-called "infectadura" was the initial chime of this bell).

Your seemingly favorable reference to the Georgia Guidestones in a later reply is slightly unnerving, but have a great day!
 
Top