Diaspora: Does it have a future?

[axel]

Re: Diaspora: Does it have a future?

All right, I'm stretching things a bit.

But France is a dead nation (one has to be french to realize that) so if they have assimilated, they have assimilated into nothing.
And frankly do you think most of them know much about the french language, culture, history...?

Anyone can learn the armenian language, culture and history btw
If this is required (which can be argued), does that suffice to make one armenian?

One has to agree armenian identity in the diaspora is confined to a sort of obsessive fixation with turks and a fight for AG recognition and against "denialism" (pushing for asinine laws...). Apart from that, it appears almost everyone shares and enjoys the same materialistic horizon and spiritually devoid hollywood-made xxxxty subculture (even those living in RA, it appears)

[Lucin]

Re: Diaspora: Does it have a future?

But France is a dead nation (one has to be french to realize that) so if they have assimilated, they have assimilated into nothing.

It is your assumption that France is a dead nation. Whether they have assimilated into “nothing”(as you mention) or into something, does that really make any difference?

Anyone can learn the armenian language, culture and history btw
If this is required (which can be argued), does that suffice to make one armenian?

When did I claim such a thing? Of course not. A Turk by doing all the above can’t become Armenian. An Armenian identity (as an inseparable part) is required as well,and the language gives a unique character to that identity.

By the way I don’t see the language, apart from the culture, and that’s what makes a group of people, as a distinct one.

[axel]

Re: Diaspora: Does it have a future?

It is your assumption that France is a dead nation.

It is more than an assumption.

Whether they have assimilated into “nothing”(as you mention) or into something, does that really make any difference?

No, there is difference. for (this may sound blasphemous to some ears, sorry) if they did assimilate into nothing, it must be that they were worth nothing.

When did I claim such a thing? Of course not.

Sorry, I was not trying to put words into your mouth.

I don’t see the language, apart from the culture, and that’s what makes a group of people, as a distinct one.

The language itself evolves. What fundamentally defines a culture is a spirit. The spirit may die and the language still exist (though altered).

[TomServo]

Re: Diaspora: Does it have a future?

This is not a matter of subjectivity.
Should I ask: What do you consider Armenian?

Then give me an objective answer.

What do you consider French?

Is Jacques Chirac French?

[Lucin]

Re: Diaspora: Does it have a future?

It is more than an assumption.

No, there is difference. for (this may sound blasphemous to some ears, sorry) if they did assimilate into nothing, it must be that they were worth nothing.

While I don’t agree with you that France is a dead nation, assimilation into “something” is not a better excuse. However, assimilation is an inevitable phenomenon, that only can be hindered.

What is your understanding of a French or an Armenian, that you claim the former is dead? Go a bit into specifics please.
According to you, it is not a matter of subjectivity, while by referring to France as a dead nation; you are not being objective either.

When you talk to a French, the pride of their identity or their language burns your eyes.

The language itself evolves. What fundamentally defines a culture is a spirit. The spirit may die and the language still exist (though altered).

The language is a part of that spirit. If the spirit dies, the language will not persist much longer.

[karoaper]

Re: Diaspora: Does it have a future?

When you talk to a French, the pride of their identity or their language burns your eyes.

I've mostly gotten pride of their quizine (sp?). I worked with a French guy a few years back. He loved making fun of Mexican and English quizine, and comparing it with the French. The language also seemed to be a sore spot. But overall, it seemed to me that he and, judging from France, the French society in general, is closer to the American melting-pot mentality, where it's not the ethnicity that makes you French, but assimilating and living the "French" dream so to speak.

[axel]

Re: Diaspora: Does it have a future?

you are not being objective either.

I am being fully objective for there is absolutely no sense of common destiny or national sentiment left. Everything has been completely and systematically eradicated. The spirit is exhausted, dead. France is an open-air museum so to speak, nothing more (a province of the judeo-western empire, "accessoirement")

The language is a part of that spirit. If the spirit dies, the language will not persist much longer

Very true. In fact, if you were a native speaker, you would have noticed how degraded the language has become. People no longer speak french but some sort of newspeak derived from it (this goes for the candidates to the presidency too). Probably the result of being continuously fed with debilitating dubbed american series, movies & shows (the latter are not dubbed, only the concept is reused) which contributes to complete spiritual leveling.

Even ethnically speaking, just walk around the streets in Paris, you don't get to see many french people, instead, some sort of a mix of all ethnicities. And most of these people do hold the french nationality (which is the only thing required to be "french" in addition to adhering to the principles of the "french" republic).

Some say a picture is worth a thousand words...
Do you know who's standing in the middle of the picture below?


Want to learn more about contemporary "France", where it is heading, whose hands its destiny lies inside?
Go to: http://www.crif.org

These are just a few aspects of the question, very roughly sketched.
Clearly one cannot address such a question in a few sentences on a public board and I am not willing to discuss this any further for you don't seem to know anything about the subject at hand.
Moreover, this has nothing to do with the original topic and I wouldn't want to be trialed for expressing my views on a topic of so little interest.

Karo is very much correct when he writes:

the French society in general, is closer to the American melting-pot mentality, where it's not the ethnicity that makes you French, but assimilating and living the "French" dream so to speak.

The "french" dream is that of the universal republic.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Diaspora: Does it have a future?

It seems that France is very much like Britain and America where identity, culture and race is sacrificed on the altar of egalitarianism and sameness in an effort to create a melange of brown people with a mass-produced culture that came off the MTV assembly line, factory direct.

By the way, isn't that the Hungarian Joo Sarkozy in that picture? Shows you who rules France.

[axel]

Re: Diaspora: Does it have a future?

Well summed up. As to your question, yes, it is.

Most presidential candidates in fact plan to attend the community's "meeting against the iranian menace" where they will receive their instructions for france's 2007 foreign policy. (http://www.crif.org/?page=articles_d...l/main&artyd=9)

[Sip]

Re: Diaspora: Does it have a future?

It seems that France is very much like Britain and America where identity, culture and race is sacrificed on the altar of egalitarianism and sameness in an effort to create a melange of brown people with a mass-produced culture that came off the MTV assembly line, factory direct.

Even when working with metal (or other raw materials), sometimes you just have to melt everything down into a pot and start building things from scratch. Yah when the stuff is melted and all colorless and gooey in the pot, it may seem like it was a "step back", but the end result might justify that backwards step.

With all these races and nationalities and "cultures" that are pretty much dead-locked on the globe, each trying to selfishly maximize its own utility, maybe doing a bit of mixing things up ain't such a bad thing for the long run?

Mathematically speaking, sometimes when trying to get to the global optimum of a function, you end up stuck at local optima ... doing a "backwards jump" to some other point in the funciton might allow one to get unstuck and make moves towards the global optimum.