3 ms·
Why would there be anything wrong with it? This is the way cultures and people have changed since time immemorial.
by Veraticus 3y ago
Why would there be anything wrong with it? This is the way cultures and people have changed since time immemorial.
- matheusmoreira 3y ago> This is the way cultures and people have changed since time immemorial. Yeah, because some empire came and killed your people off and conquered your lands and enslaved your survivors and erased your culture so they could replace it their own. Not because people wiped themselves off the map because they wouldn't have children.
- Veraticus 3y agoCultures are and always have been constantly shifting and changing; conquest is one method of that happening, as you point out, but is far from the only one. Immigration, emigration, catastrophe, technological progress, climate change... all result in the movement of people and the shifting of national and cultural boundaries. No culture is "erased" as a result of this. Even if Japan fails to have children, Japanese culture and the Japanese nation will continue. It will look different, certainly. But there's nothing magical or better about the way things used to be simply because they used to be that way. Change is inevitable, and more than that, it is good.
- matheusmoreira 3y ago> Even if Japan fails to have children, Japanese culture and the Japanese nation will continue. No. Nations are a collection of people with shared ethnicity, land, culture, language, history. If the japanese people disappear, the nation will also disappear. It's not going to magically continue just because the country of Japan is still there. Can't have a nation without its people.
- Veraticus 3y agoNo. Nations are lines drawn on a map. The people inside need have nothing in common other than geographic proximity. Japan will exist as long as people live there and call it Japan. It has nothing to do with ethnicity, land, culture, or history.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoNonsense. > nation > A people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language There are nations without states. There are also nation states. The latter is more precise than country which does not imply any dominant ethnic group.
- Veraticus 3y agoIf you don’t have the intellectual capacity to continue that’s okay. I understand ethnostatists get easily confused by ambiguity and historical fact.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoI'm not confused at all. I have no reason to doubt my understanding of things at this time. First you redefined words and contradicted dictionary and encyclopedic definitions of simple concepts and terms. Now you're calling me a stupid, confused, mentally incapable "ethnostatist". This borders on gaslighting.
- JoeAltmaier 3y agoMore alarmist hyperbole. I know of several Japanese families in my hometown, come here to study, and they are doing fine.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoSo what? My hometown was literally built by the japanese. My parents worked with japanese their entire lives. Sometimes I go to a restaurant and I hear people speaking japanese nearby. They're all doing fine too. Doesn't change the fact birth rates in Japan are below replacement. Am I missing something here?
- JoeAltmaier 3y agoExtinction means more than 'below replacement'. Things change; culture changes. It's the lowering population figures that will require change that the octogenarians fear, not actual non-existence of a Japanese people. All the rest of this thread has been disingenuous hyperbole based on that.
- tarboreus 3y agoI saw a Javan Rhinos the other day. He seemed to be doing pretty good.