Wannabe Nordics

What a coincidence. I was thinking along the same lines this past week, although my "version" is a bit more general. In the US, there seems to be a tendancy for any particular ethnic group to identify itself with the "whitest" group possible. In your post, you gave an example of many caucasions trying to be "Nordic" when they obviously were not. Your observation is just the tip of the iceberg, and it pales (no pun intended) in comparison to the silliness I witness everyday.

Ironically, it's the non-whites who are the most "Wannabe Nordic." Many Mexicans that I know never acknowledge their American Indian and African ancestry, preferring to liken themselves to whites of Med. decent (Italians being to most popular). In reality, many of them are indistinguishable from Phillipinos.

Then there are the Mid. Easterners, a few of whom I've caught impersonating Greek people! Again, many play down the non-white part of of their heritage in favor of the white one. "we're like Armenians, Greeks, Turks, ..." is what I overheard an Iranian man say the other day. Not that I'm a nazi or anything, but I found that remark insulting, since, quite frankly, I see little resemblance between Greeks and Persians. Right by my house, there is a "Greek" restaurant with all the trimmings: souvlaki, spanakopita, gyros, tiropita, etc. Notis Sphakianakis, along with other Greek singers, is constantly playing in the background; yet, the owners are obviously not Greek, and don't seem to mind being mistaken as such. Maybe I'm just overeacting, but it's rather annoying.

This obsession even affects people who could never pass for caucasian in any way, shape, or form. On numerous occasions, I've seen classy, successful, Asian women together with the scummiest white trash. On seeing this, I can't help but wonder, "would she ever go out with an Asian man who lived in a trailor park?" Probably not, unless of course, he had blond hair and blue eyes.

Oslonor:
Yes. Iranian Turks are not in anyway related to Greeks.

An Aryan Azeri

Who do you think are?
I know all people are from one origin, and adopted with enviornment, I don't how white race borned, I think actually we have not races we have just people in different looking and colour in some groups, for example germans are different from italian, we can't say german are pure and italian mixed there is no pure meaning , we have two different group, and just there characters show which is whiter or more pleasent, people can mix and generate even some more beautiful race (group of people in a moment), and change over time, its the way aryan borned, they were
sometimes like monkeys like all other people and then each grouped changed, and this story still continued,

But if you speak about history of nations, it has no relation to their current or past race, cause race is dynamic and history too, but till people keep a tradition they counted belonging two a ancient group, this posture of European is rediculose if they think they are an specefic or pure people, do they know where is their origin,also they can't claim they all have anythink superior or even beautiful, its dynamic and define in moments, also the history and envirnment effects people life and have no relation to race,

For example a mixed people of aryan and mungols (Turks) can be even more beautiful or talented, you can't isolate yourself, you borned from these peoples and every moment new races are borned, your white colour is the result of Europe condition and in such conditions it can be continued, and have no relation to you, even nobody can say fair white is an interesting colour than black, I am white but not much fair and a little golden,

I think this colour is more interesting, I am Iranian, you can think Iranian pure aryan or mixed people, but if you know Iranian, they have one of the most beautiful people that you can't find anywhere, for another example swedish are beautiful people, Italian too, you think they are pure? not , maybe you don't know Aryan, they can be mix of Aryan and other people , call them nordic, but again good

Iranian

Dear Dienekes

I have read a lot of material out there suggesting that blonde-haired blue-eyed aryans (indo-iranians) suddenly dropped down from northern Europe or central Asia to settle Iran and India. Later they mixed with Semitic peoples and that is why Iranians today have a dark cmplexion. This is partially based on Hitler and De Gobineau's racist philosophy and I find no evidence for this. Even though, linguistically Iranians share a few words with European language this is not necessarilly indictive of a common lineage (Arabs in Lebanon speak Arabic but are genetically different from Saudi Arabians). It is known that in the early 1900's the British took over the oil industry in Iran, stealing oil and introducing some new words (in Farsi the words for energy and bad are the same as the English words). It should also be noted that the word Aryan was first found in Iran. First in the Zoroastrian Avesta and later on a inscription made by Darius. Climotolgy points to a gradual warming of the world, not cooling, about 15-10 thousand years ago. This would have made it more likely for the Aryans to have developed in a southern area and migrated north as before the warming central Asia was covered by ice. Increased rainfall in Iran also meant that the central salt deserts were once lakes. Here is and interesting excerpt from Zoroastrian mythology pointing to this "...In the second phase of the creation of the world, Ahura Mazda created the waters, and the waters flowed towards Farakhekrat Sea which covers one third of the world from the southern outskirts of Alborz." This could have been where the Aryan/ IndoIranian peoples first started and later migrated out as the lake dried up. Let us not forget that in the city of Susa up to 12 thousand years ago, while Central Asia was covered by ice, we have discovered pottery with advanced paintings. Now it is highly unlikely that a group of blonde-haired, blue-eyed peoples suddenly invaded and destroyed the local culture. Even if they did they would have been sunburnt bad and would have to rapidly adapt from cold to hot climates. In reality it is more likely that the aryans where tan skinned and dark eyed/haired (without any relation to Hitlers "supreme" race). I myself have green eyes and this already freaks a lot of people out considering I'm 100% Iranian. But in short the IndoIranian Aryans emerged from central Iran and migrated either across the Iranian plateau or into India where they mixed with Dravidians.

Posted by: Iranian at May 3, 2004 06:07 PM

Seizure vs Oslonor

The Arayan citizens are Persians, Kurds, Lurs, Bakhtiaris, Gilaki, Mazandranis etc. Iran points to a country but not a race. There is no Iranian race. There are different ethnic groups that live in Iran. All citizens of Iran are Iranians. Persians are an ethnic minority in Iran. Persia is the name of a country and a race too. Persia refers to the Aryan citizens of Persia or Iran. Persians is also used as a general category for all Aryans in Iran.

Are you implying the "Aryan" Kurds and Persians are essentially the same? That seems to be what you're saying. I would agree, but you claim otherwise in other places.

No. There are three phenotypes. Medes, Persians and Parthians.

Persians and Azeris: Officially Persians ar %50 of the population and Azeris are %25 of the population of Iran with 70 million people. But the reality is Azeris are %40-%50 of Iran and Turco-Persians who have both Persian and Turkish Azeri heritage are %%20 of Iran. Together Azeris and Turco-Persians are %60 of Iran's population. These two groups control the government and represent a majority of the population in Tehran. More than %50 of Tehran are Azeris. Persians are %30 of Iran. So clearly Persians are a minority in Iran. This fact clearly deviates from the standard conceptions about Iran.

Do you have any sources to back any of this up? I'm sure the CIA World Factbook numbers are far from accurate, but you yourself are not a good source. You're just some guy with a privately owned weblog.

Some sources in Washington related to US government state that.

But there some features related to Azeri appearance that looks Asian and semitic that is used by Hollywood to depict the Persians as Afro-Arabs.

Please define "Asian" and "Semitic". As far as Turkic-speakers go, akin to Anatolian Turks, Azeri Turks show little mongoloid admixture.

No. Not all Turks are related to mongols.

Persians do not have these features. One of these features are the Azeris hooked noses that they often show.

The "hooked" nose you're talking about is not a "semitic" feature exclusively.

It is very prominent wit Jews.

Persians do not have hooked noses as I will show you.

You show people who do not show concave noses, yes, but they by no means prove other Persians do not have such noses, nor that most Persians do not have concave noses.

Yes. It does. We are talking about phenotypes. Not people from different ethnic backgrounds.

But this fact is clerverly hidden by Hollywood and Persians are completely ignored. Instead Hollywood always employs actors with non-Persian features and presents them to the public as Persians. They also have created a race called Irano-Afghan group.

Who does "they" refer to in that last sentence? Hollywood didn't invent the Irano-Afghan subtype, Coon did.

Yes. That is correct. Coon did that.

The main feature of this so called race is that it is a hooked nose race.

It's not the main feature. It's one of several.

Well that is what hollywood is concerned with.

They add Persians, Afghans and Azeris and
Turco-Persians to this race.

No, "they" don't. It's one phenotype that all of those groups have within their variety of different phenotypes. It's more common than the rest, and this is what was recorded by Coon, but it does not at all imply that all of those people are Irano-Afghans. Most subtypes exist only partially anyway. Few people are fully text-book anything.

That was not a response to my text.

These are very different ethnic groups and this race can not explain the wide ranging physical appearances of these people.

It doesn't attempt to. That's your misunderstanding.

No. That is your misunderstanding.

This blog tries to clear that misconception.

One's things for sure: Coon knows Persians better than you do.

Do not be so sure about that. I have studied them for a long time.

Hollywood and Racism: Hollywood always mixes up Persians with Iranians assuming that these are the same people. That is not correct. An Iranian can be a Persian but it is not necessarily a Persian. An Iranian could be a non-Persian. Hollywood always uses Iranian as a synonym for a Persian. Iranians could be Azeris or Turco-Persian or Persians. These techniques of Hollywood on how Persians are portrayed in films is a part of the bigger problem how some people with positions of power are trying to use racism to promote their own agenda in US. Persians have no problems with Azeris. And Persians are not responsible for how Azeris look like. But Persians have to explain why Hollywood is bypassing the Persians and present Azeris as the real Persians. Persians are an extremely Non-Racist people. Persians are exactly the ideals that Hollywood claims to promote. But Hollywood by depicting Azeris as Persians in their films is promoting racism against all Iranians.

Rouz

Quote from: rouz on Today at 12:19:44 PM
Rouz:
Iranian leadership is, like many other nations, based on money (power), connections and ones adaptability to the politicall arena. Unfortunately I fail to see the Azeri connection that you are claiming and what it has to do with the topics in your blogs and forum where you present fantasies about diffrent races.

Oslonor:
What do you mean by "present fantasies about different race". It is very clear that you mean the Azeri race is an "Iranian race" and there are no other nationalities in Iran besides your "Iranian race". It seems that you imagine that all Iranians have been turned into turks by now. This is exactly the reason for my blog. Azeris are turks. They are racially different from other ethnic groups in Iran. And they do not originate from Medes or Persians. Azeris originate from Seljuk turks. There is no "Iranian Race" that you claim you are a member of this race.

Anonymous

Azeris are not Iranians they are Turks. Yes they were once Iranic people but due to asimilation process they are now what they are. The same is let's say for iother ethnicities: most of arabs in norts africa a decendants of berbers but they concider themselves arabs not berbers, most germans in eastern germany are decendants of slavs but they concider themselves germans.

Nowadays for most of Iranians who fear that they state might collapse because of Azerbaijanis willingness to rebuild historical justice and to create independent state, iranians create lots of myts claiming that azeris feel themselves iranians.

So what? Let they think in the same way if they feel so confident :D The truth will never be perished!

Comments by Sayed

Salaams. Please join my egrouyps. Merci.Its called ARYANSEMITEPRIDE:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ARYANSEMITEPRIDE/
Greetings. Salaams. As Chapter 17 of WESTERN CIVILIZATION THROUGH MUSLIM EYES by Sayid Mujtaba Rukni Musawi Lari:"The theory of Apartheid,based on the utterances of some innovating thinker ("Philosopher") denies racial equality. Its promoters want "the superior race" to run the World while, "weaker inferior races" serve them....No pure race exists. No scientific evidence proves the race theory definately. An "Aryan" race is a myth. History does not relate the actuality of a race which called itself "ARYAN".The "Aryan" family of languages is a fact (see History of religion page 219). National Socialism's rise was part cause of World War II. Hitler's Germany's ideology was "One race shall rule"-of course the "German Nordics"_who were to be found a strong centre (sic, center) of Government in mid-Europe. Its brief brutal regime, by means of Congresses at Nuremberg and elsewhere , and fanatic racial propaganda, drew the loyalty of German nationals who made great, if illusory, profit from their dominance of the neighboring lands." Men have oppressed men since the beginning of time, women have been oppressed by a male dominated world for far too long, now whilke seeking justice, women have sought to be feminsists who seek to wipe out the need for men and promote lesbianism, males who are left to marry late in life and without a companion seek the Gay route-this is our society today. No one is interested in addressing the nation's number one pollutant: racism. No one seems to be interested in addressing Patroitic blindness for the excessive abuse of the law and human rights by the CIA and US government. The US government hunts Aryan Groups who ar not racist but seek pride in itself and its heritage. Imam Khomeini(RA) even said that "nothing is wrong with patroitism" and pride in one's heritage but racism and oppressing ort manipulating the laws, lies about weapons of mass deception, abusing the Geneva Convention by persecuting POWs is wrong Mr. BUSH and Mr. Tony puddle...

Comments by Anonymous

azeris are of course not persian, infact they are of turanid-turkic descent and have distinctively different features when compared to persians- farsi descended populations. for example most of the kurds and persians have real dark skin resulting 11 and more in luschan scale and mostly are dolicocephalic. turkic populations in contrary mostly have dark hair-eyes accompanied with occasional light skin & bracycephaly (a progressive trait). irano afghan race infact is subrace under mediterranean-caucasoid category. the same subrace(w/o dravidic elements unlike in iran) overrun by alpine populations have resulted in the hyper bracycephalic light skinned hook nosed armenoid type common among some armenians, minor in eastern anatolian turks(planoccupitalism never occurs in these cases) and mostly among ashkenazi jews. the irano-afghan type itself is very common among sepharadic jews and unmixed arabs of yemen and whole saudi peninsula. there are theories that nordic populations have also descended from these dark caucasians(irano-afghan) of iranian plateau and got depigmented along the migrations northwards but this can be refuted by the scientific fact the whole trans-iranian plateua could never support such a stream of population. what we can easily detect is that the whole iranian plateau which was once populated by mediterranean populations were first invaded by small numbers of nordic invaders originationg from transoxania whom imposed their warrior-aryan legacy and language over the native populations(a good percentage of mixtures have occured as can be seen from the pictures of the exotic indo european speakers such with extreme dark skin, long faces and light eyes (ie farsi, mzandarani, lori, gilaki, northern indians, kashmiris, kurds, gypsies etc) iran then was subsequently overrun by turkic populations in the north and a strong dravidic influence among all iranian populations except azeris(oghuz turks) and northern farsis whom intermixed with turkic or caucasian(alan, sarmatian etc) populations.

persians along with all other middle easterners and southwest asians have a small amount of nordic admixture(so do the gypsies, kashmiris, bengalis, arabs etc). shame on you trying to portray your own people as of european stock instead of cherishing your rich heritage, trying to be whites and insulting turanic people for it. a clear demonstration of inferiority complex.

--
Posted by Anonymous to Persians and Hollywood at 11/03/2005 04:56:25 PM

I think you misunderstand what Nordic means. You should read my blog on Nordic. Nordic does not mean blond hair. It only defines the dimensions of the skull. According to that, then Persians are nordic. And the history you are describing is mostly imaginary history. But I agree with you that Azeris originate from Turanid-Turks. And they have different racial characteristics from Persians. Persians want to be portrayed as Persians and not as Turks or Arabs. That is what this blog is about. Otherwise Persians have very good relation with all central Asian and Anatolian Turks and Azeri Turks. Here is the definition of Nordic-Iranian:

The Nordic-Iranian type D1 lies between Anglo-Saxon and Keltic area norms, and D2 is the earlier pre-Bronze Age Corded form which Coon identifies. Type D3, lighter and more hawk-nosed, is transitional to the Mediterranean type B4 and to type D4 (Iranian), which is the Proto-Iranian of Vallois, Irano-Afghan of others, and Proto-Nordic of Krogman, and which is more linear and more rugged than D3 and has a more tilted chewing plane, more nasal convexity, and deeper occiput. Type D5 approximates Coon's Danubian-Halstatt and successor Central European forms.