I'd imagine so. It speaks to history and kinship. All English-speaking countries have a certain sense of togetherness that you really can't say for others. I'd imagine that, with the exception of divided countries (like Korea) this is mostly true
Even then, Koreans recognize that the north and south are both Korean.
>>709911
I WAS BORN IN A SMALL VILLAGE.
>>709921
What the fuck.
>>709911
Latins tend to be pretty easier to relate between themselves, culturally, imo.
>>709933
That's rather similar across most, as near as I can see.
>>709911
Yeah, I'd even argue that language is the solid foundation on what culture is built upon. Without language you cannot share:
>religion
>folklore
>trade
>nationality
>ideas
Sure being part of the same race makes it easier for people to approach eachother but communication is the key to sharing and forming a group.
>>709911
Makes sense:
Germanics:
Cucks.
Slavs:
alcoholic
Latins:
lazy shitskins
combinations also work for example - Romanians: Drunken lazy shitskins, French - lazy shitskin cucks.
>>709965
What makes Langues de oil so bad?
>>709911
Slavs hate each other
t. Slav
>>709988
That's because you fucks are very dysfunctional.
Even then, it hasn't stopped things like pan-Slavism and Slavic nationalism from happening.
>>709993
>pan-Slavism
It was a good meme.
>>709993
>pan-Slavism
nice meme, nobody except rusophiles gives a shit about it
>Slavic nationalism
what the fuck is that
>>710001
It was worth a shot
>>710016
Greater X is my favorite slavic nationalism.
>>710016
where is this "Slavic nationalism"? i don't think it's listed there
>>709931
>he hasn't gone nuclear yet
>>709911
As a non-essentialist that thinks that culture and nationality are meaningless concepts, I think that language is indeed the most objective and legitimate criteria to justify frontiers.
>>709911
>>>709911 (OP)
>Makes sense:
>Germanics:
>Cucks.
>Slavs:
>alcoholic
>Latins:
>lazy shitskins
No, it's a useful indicator but culture is a far better indicator for culture. For example French and English speaking Caribbeans are closer to each other than to england or france, and Finns are closer to Swedes than they are to Mari.
To use an extreme example a basque and a spaniard will get along better than a Spaniard and a bengali.
>>709921
skull face...
U>>709988
I think pretty much no one besides white nationalist half brained morons like Slavs
>>710022
Really m8?
>>710058
really, i can see that there is nationalism for several nations, but there is no single "Slavic nationalism" because there are no people who identify themselves as Slavs without defining themselves into nations
>>710064
>Pan-Slavism
>>709921
"One does not inhabit a country; one inhabits a language. That is our country, our fatherland -- and no other."
>>710070
Pan-Slavism is not a Slavic nationalism, it's pan-nationalist movement
>>710074
-Emil Cioran
Given his exile status, that says a lot.
>>710084
But it is. It's under Slavic-Nationalism.
>>710096
please m9-1, learn the difference between nationalism and pan-nationalism
>>710096
How can you define a nation so loosely?
The Slavic nations have their own individual national identities which trumps what aspects of their identity they have in common
Pan Slavism is really just an aspect of Russian ultra nationalism
>>710099
Ethnic nationalism wouldn't fall under one country. Look at Nazi Germany, they had ambitions for Austrians, Scandinavians, and they even had a boner for the English pre-war.
>>710096
>>710218
no, pan slavism was instrumentalised by russians and serbs and such but realy the idea was that all the disjointed slavic nations like czechs polaks, ex-yu's etc... should unite into some megastructure to counter germanic and other european imperialism, which would include being stronger against russian imperialism etc... but it was never realy a functional ideology so much, it was more like a imagined project that people used to justify shit and it all failed
its not realy such a bad idea tho, imagine if we were all united, eu would have to kiss our ass and russia couldnt push people around just like that
>>710264
slavbro pls, you're speaking like a far-right ruski right now
>>710099
Ethnic nationalism wouldn't fall under one country. Look at Nazi Germany, they had ambitions for Austrians, Scandinavians, and they even had a boner for the English pre-war.
>>710282
i don't really get what you're trying to say
>>710287
That nationalism can span nations.
>>710300
again, pan-nationalism is not nationalism
>>709911
No, because increasingly these days language is not tied to an ethnic identity or culture.
Nearly all children in the West are taught a second language at school.
Consider the case of a runaway slave in 1700s America, who was easily caught as he was a monolingual Gaelic speaker, like his master.
No. Because of language shift.
Latin America is completely seperate from European cultures.
Soon Africa will start being a major French and English speaking continent.
Civilizations, states, religions, regions, and mutually intelligible languages are the best way to categorize cultures.
Language families are only useful for categorizing some uncivilized cultures, and even then they become less useful the more widespread that language family becomes. Once you introduce civilization it becomes mostly useless, because society comes to be shaped by stronger forces than ethnicity.
The Hungarians have more in common with Poles than they do with the Saami and Poles have more in common with Hungarians than they do with Russians. Indo-Aryans have more in common with Dravidians than with Iranians. The Chinese have more in common with Koreans than they do with the Burmese.
>>710264
Its a romantic fantasy, some sort of Slavic council I'd agree with but never a union of any kind especially not with Russia
>>710423
>not wanting to be part of the Greater Russia
Come on.
>>709921
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLoytewvn0g
>>710336
"Pan-nationalism is a form of nationalism distinguished by being associated with a claimed national territory which does not correspond to existing political boundaries. It often defines the nation as a ''cluster'' of closely related ethnic or cultural groups."
A simple Google search
>>710381
Latin America is very western really. They're Latin for a reason.
>>709911
>Is Language the best way to categorize cultures and people?
No, language is at best a cosmetic factor in "culture" and it certainly does not always correspond to genetics in regards to people.
>>709911
There is nothing that can separate two humans, two countries, than language.
Different religions, cultures, etc. can debate and talk between each other, sharing viewpoints and info.
Different languages? Any debate is over at start because you can't even understand the other person. There cant be no dialogue, no debate, no info sharing, no negotiation, no plea for mercy even...
>>711449
Your post ignores multilingual individuals and is therefore redundant.
>>711936
But prior to the late 20th century bilingualism was pretty uncommon in the general population, meaning that a seperation by language was always present
Language, Genetics, and Culture is the best way.
>>709911
Not in today's globalized world.
Race is better.
>>711952
WRONG
everyone in early yurob in the mediterannean had to speak at least a few languages like aramaic, greek, latin, etc to get around/trade with anyone unless you were a peasant and then you're just basically a robot for your overlord waiting to die
>>711952
Multilingualism is actually the norm worldwide, and I don't see any reason why this wouldn't have been the case in the past as well.
>>709921
>>709911
This only really works in the West. I can't imagine a Kurd and a Bangladeshi sharing any commonality, or a Czech and a Russian.
>>709911
Why is England red?
>>712874
because it's germanic
>>712896
>because
French "par cause"
>it's
Latin "id"
>germanic
Latin "germanicus"
>>712911
>language acquired some italic vocabulary quite recently
>therefore it is not germanic
>>712911
hold kjæften, for helvette!
>>712911
It has more to do with grammar and syntax than vocab.
'Ænglisce' might have* been Germanic, but it's seriously watered down by filthy Latin, by now*
*Germanic
>>712920
>some
>>715093
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_English
Does this look like a Romance language to you?
Modern English may have had heavier Latin influence than other Germanic languages, but in terms of grammar, syntax, and inflection, it's still without a doubt a Germanic language.
>>709988
As a Slav I disagree.
