Kiss me, I'm Greek!

[wiggin]

Do you think Jews have less connection to their country of origin because they're usually not ethnically from that country?

Hardly; for one, frequently the Jews were in the host country long enough to share many ethnic traits with each other through some combination of adaptation, conversion, intermarriage, infidelity, and rape. For another, many people who identify with a national identity aren't originally from the country, or have a similar ethnicity to the prevailing majority - just look at second generation immigrants in many (though not all) Western countries.

I think the difference for a national identity is enfranchisement. Obviously, citizenship and equal rights are part of this, but I take an even broader view - if the individuals/group in question feel an integral and equal part of society where they are involved in building and directing the future of said society, they're a whole lot more likely to adopt the same national identity than if they're set apart intentionally from social, political, and legal perspectives.

[oldmunchkin]

I think, in the end, we are all pretty much "mutts"! There are very few people on this forum who are this or that or whatever purebred.

On my "Dad's" side, we know that his great-grandfather changed his name when he got to Ellis Island, so we really can't trace that side. We do know he was English, Irish, Welsh, and Dane! His Mom was first-generation American of pure Irish descent.

On "Mom's" side, her Dad was sent out West on one of the Orphan trains in the late 1800's-early 1900's. He knew his last name was Ward, but that's pretty generic. Her Mom's side was better documented. Go look into New York State's history and find the first woman to settle in upstate New York...that would be my great-great Grandmother.

Now, wanna get complicated? My biological parents were English, Irish, German, and Native American!

Guess what, I am an All-American Girl who is proud to be American. I don't care about the "roots" and all that, as far as it goes. Yes, I get the ethnic pride and all that, but c'mon. I am NOT English-American, or Native-American, or Irish-American, or whatthehellever...when the soap is all rinsed out of the laundry...I AM AN AMERICAN!

[']['ear]

Awesome argument, tear, and in letting you know it's a strawman I've uncovered some implicit racism in me. I wasn't talking about how black people call themselves African-American, I was talking about how white people overdo it. Of course in saying "people" and meaning "white people" I've clearly got other problems going on...

I hate how people call black people here African-American. I always insist that I be called German-Russian-English-American when someone insists on saying AA. They're black, I'm white, we're both Americans, on with the discussion. It's so absurdly overused (AA I mean) that I've heard people refer to full-blooded Africans living in Africa as African-Americans. THEY'RE BLACK. THEY'RE AFRICAN.

I see that you're correct. My apologies for misreading your post. I will note that those people calling blacks "African Americans," me included, are doing so because we've been led to understand that it is the respectful thing to do. Some blacks will say yes to that, others will say no. I thought you were criticizing those who claimed AA as their title of choice. My bad.

Hardly; for one, frequently the Jews were in the host country long enough to share many ethnic traits with each other through some combination of adaptation, conversion, intermarriage, infidelity, and rape. For another, many people who identify with a national identity aren't originally from the country, or have a similar ethnicity to the prevailing majority - just look at second generation immigrants in many (though not all) Western countries.

I think the difference for a national identity is enfranchisement. Obviously, citizenship and equal rights are part of this, but I take an even broader view - if the individuals/group in question feel an integral and equal part of society where they are involved in building and directing the future of said society, they're a whole lot more likely to adopt the same national identity than if they're set apart intentionally from social, political, and legal perspectives.

I was just curious. Did the long history of persecution lead Jews to be more suspicious of their country? They are, after all, a very unusual group.

I've heard my Jewish step mother-in-law say multiple times that as a Jew you keep some wealth in jewelry so you have portable wealth when you need to flee a country. Didn't know whether to chalk this up to real sentiment (she had several relatives who died in the Holocaust, and others who successfully fled) or a tendency to over-dramatize. Or perhaps she's just rationalizing the truly gaudy crap she has (she is sweet, but given to tackiness). Given my limited N, how would I know?

[GGT]

I think.....as our world becomes more integrated, mobile, ethnically and genetically mixed or blended.....we may very well hang onto Old World traditions. Looking for that special element in a world of blurring normalcy. Whether it's a language or a physical trait or a type of food. Plenty of people like to experience cultural and ethnic diversity, even as outsiders. In fact, we seek that out. We want pride parades and ethnic restaurants. We like diversity and new things in everything from fashion to foods to music. It's more than entertainment, even though it looks that way on the surface.

[']['ear]

I'm not sure I agree. Yes, people like novelty in entertainment, but I suspect that it is hard-wired in humans to dislike and distrust the "other." Most people don't want to see different people in their lives, unless they are traveling. They don't want anything to do with those weirdos. "Others" are inferior. You know what I mean?

What struck me about rural Nebraska was the enclaves. German town here. Polish town there. Towns were either Catholic or Protestant (often Lutheran, which is funny since its less different than Catholic than others, but apparently was sufficient to lead to segregation). Of course, the roots of that are 100+ years old. But you really think the majority of people welcome newcomers who are very different?

[GGT]

Hmm. I don't know. There was a segment on CNN, interviewing Nebraskan voters about immigration. Their state has super low unemployment, but also not much ethnic diversity. Seems Latinos coming to their state, bringing Spanish and new foods, wasn't very welcomed. Suspicions aplenty about legal status. The same sort of thing happens in all non-border states, whether MN or Iowa or NJ, Hmong or Vietnamese.

Established urban cities are adept at using their enclaves as positives. China Town in San Fran, Little Italy in Chicago, Polish or Jewish enclaves in Philly or NYC....even my small PA town has Irish and German enclaves that draw others in. Almost every small butt fuck town has a Chinese restaurant. Korean nail salons are everywhere. Hispanic or Latino food has gone way beyond Taco Bell. People now seek Indian and Afghani and Japanese restaurants.

Being legal or illegal is what the fearful use as an excuse to keep different people out. Once a culture has been tasted (in food or dance or art) it's pretty hard to maintain that argument.

[wiggin]

I've heard my Jewish step mother-in-law say multiple times that as a Jew you keep some wealth in jewelry so you have portable wealth when you need to flee a country. Didn't know whether to chalk this up to real sentiment (she had several relatives who died in the Holocaust, and others who successfully fled) or a tendency to over-dramatize. Or perhaps she's just rationalizing the truly gaudy crap she has (she is sweet, but given to tackiness). Given my limited N, how would I know?

There is some truth to this; certainly the generation of any emigration where they flee persecution (there have been very many of those) is likely to have some of their assets in small, easily hidden items - in addition, I know of some who insisted their children and grandchildren maintain multiple citizenships and passports at all times in the event they needed to leave somewhere quickly. However, I think that after the generation in question, such behavior become much more rare.

I've seen this to some extent - Jews leaving a variety of countries were stripped of their assets (bank accounts, property, etc.) and pretty much could only take what fit in their bags or on them. In recent history, this was common for Iranian Jews fleeing after the revolution (many, though wealthy in Iran, came to the Western world penniless and had to rely on the charity of their coreligionists) as well as Jews who fled the Soviet Union.

But for someone living in a fairly free and tolerant country several generations removed from such experiences? I find it unlikely that's a common practice.