PDA

View Full Version : Great commentary by Steve Sailer on Middle Eastern chutzpah vs. Nordic shyness


Petr
02-09-2006, 09:35 AM
As a Finn, I can tell that Nordic people in general are very shy people, reluctant to show their emotions openly and seeking communal harmony at almost any cost.

For more on the pernicious "religion of civility" that this trait has spawned, see Yggdrasil's writings:

http://home.ddc.net/ygg/ms/ms-53.htm



http://www.isteve.com/


The In-Your-Face to Feel-Your-Pain Gradient


-- The Dane-Muslim cartoon controversy illuminates one of the less understood dynamics in the modern world, which I call the In-Your-Face to Feel-Your-Pain Gradient.

All over the world, peoples differ in terms of how in-your-face they tend to be. The ultra-polite Japanese, for example, who might be the most sensitive people on earth to other people's emotional discomfort, are deeply distressed by the kind of brusque assertiveness that's common in South China. Thus the Japanese developed elaborate forms of business entertaining, while the South Chinese businessmen love to bargain aggressively when stone sober.

But the particular gradient that's most relevant to us is the one that runs between the Middle East and Northwestern Europe. Northwestern Europe and its overseas offshoots are probably second only to Japan as being Feel-Your-Pain cultures where people don't like social friction and don't like to see others upset. In contrast, the Middle East is perhaps the most in-your-face place on Earth.

Here's P.J. O'Rourke's memorable description in The Atlantic of a Red Cross attempt at food distribution during the 2003 Iraq Attaq:


I was outside Safwan [in Iraq] on March 28, on the roof of a Kuwait Red Crescent tractor-trailer full of food donations. Below, a couple of hundred shoving, shouldering, kneeing, kicking Iraqi men and boys were grabbing at boxes of food.

Red Crescent volunteers provided the boxes, gingerly, to the mob. Each white carton would be grasped by three or four or five belligerents and pulled in three or four or five directions—tug-of-Congolese-civil-war.

Every person in the mob seemed to be arguing with every other person. Giving in to impulses to push themselves forward and push others away, shouting Iraqis were propelled in circles. A short, plump, bald man sank in the roil. A small boy, red-faced and crying, was crushed between two bellowing fat men. An old man was trampled trying to join the fray.

The Iraqis were snatching the food as if they were starving, but they couldn't have been starving or they wouldn't have been able to snatch so well. Most looked fully fed. Some were too fit and active. Everyone behind the trailer was expending a lot of calories at noon on a 90° day.

Looking out, I saw irrigated patches in the desert, at about the same density as the patches on the uniform of a mildly diligent Boy Scout. The tomatoes were ripe. Nannies, billies, and kids browsed between garden plots. Goat bolognese was on offer, at least for some locals.

There was no reason for people to clobber one another. Even assuming that each man in the riot—and each boy—was the head of a family, and assuming the family was huge, there was enough food in the truck. Mohammed al-Kandari, a doctor from the Kuwait Red Crescent Society, had explained this to the Iraqis when the trailer arrived. Al-Kandari was a forceful explainer. He resembled a beneficent version of Bluto in the Popeye comics, or Bluto in Animal House.

Al-Kandari had persuaded the Iraqis to form ranks. They looked patient and grateful, the way we privately imagine the recipients of food donations looking when we're writing checks to charities. Then the trailer was opened, and everything went to hell.

Al-Kandari marched through the donnybrook and slammed the trailer doors shut. He harangued the Iraqis. They lined up again. The trailer was opened, and everything went to hell.

Al-Kandari waded in and closed the trailer doors again. He swung his large arms in parallel arcs at the Iraqis. "Line up!" he boomed; "Queue!" he thundered—the Arabic-speaking doctor speaking to Arabic-speakers in English, as if no Arabic word existed for the action.

Al-Kandari took a pad of Post-it notes and a marker pen from his lab-coat pocket. "Numbers!" he said, still speaking English. "I will give you all numbers!" A couple of hundred shouldering, shoving Iraqi men and boys grabbed at the Post-it notes.

The doctor gave up and opened the trailer doors. I climbed the ladder behind the truck cab to get a better view.

Aid-seekers in England would queue automatically by needs, disabled war vets and nursing mothers first. Americans would bring lawn chairs and sleeping bags, camp out the night before, and sell their places to the highest bidders. Japanese would text-message one another, creating virtual formations, getting in line to get in line. Germans would await commands from a local official, such as the undersupervisor of the town clock. Even Italians know how to line up, albeit in an ebullient wedge. The happier parts of the world have capacities for self-organization so fundamental and obvious that they appear to be the pillars of civilization. But here—on the road to Ur, in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley, where civilization has obtained for 5,000 years longer than it has, for example, at a Libertarian Party confab in Phoenix—nothing was supporting the roof.

What I saw, however, wasn't anarchy... The Iraqis didn't try to climb into the tractor-trailer or break through its side doors. Red Crescent volunteers, coming and going from the back of the truck, were unmolested. Once an aid box was fully in an Iraqi's control and had been pulled free from the commotion, no one tried to take it. I saw four boxes being guarded by a young boy.

I watched a confident gray-haired man push toward the trailer gate. He had wire-rimmed glasses on the end of his nose and a cigarette in the corner of his mouth. He dove for a box, his glasses flying, cigarette embers burning various gutras and dishdashahs. He disappeared for the better part of a minute. Then he came out on the other side of the throng, box under one arm and glasses somehow back on his face (but minus the cigarette). The gray-haired man looked around and delivered an open-handed whack to someone who, I guess, had indulged in a late hit.

I stared at the rampage for an hour. Now and then I'd be noticed on the trailer roof. Whenever I caught someone's eye, I was greeted with a big, happy smile. The Iraqis were having fun.


Now, this is not solely the fault of Islam. Non-Muslims in the Middle East are also quite brusque. For example, I used to work at a marketing research firm where the most brilliant executive was a Lebanese Christian immigrant, who was constantly upsetting lesser employees by pointing out their mistakes in no uncertain terms. I had to counsel employees that you had to grade Magid on the curve -- that I'd known a half dozen Lebanese (all of them Christians, I believe) and he was the most considerate one of the six, so by the standards of his Levantine upbringing, he was practically David Niven for grace and good manners. Similarly, Israeli Jews are remarkably in-your-face, so Islam isn't totally to blame for why Middle Easterners are the way they are. (It may play a role, though -- the Hindus of Bali are said to be a lot nicer on average than the Muslims in the rest of Indonesia.)

In a culture like Iraq's where everyone is constantly asserting his and his family's rights at the top of his lungs, it's hard for anyone to have rights if anything is to get done. In a culture like England's where each individual is reticent about asserting his rights or the rights of his family or clan, it's much easier for everyone to have rights.

You can see the problem that then develops when people from the in-your-face end of the gradient immigrate to the feel-your-pain countries. When immigrants bring their Middle Eastern hostility and assertiveness, the natives in the northwest are reluctant to vocally protest right back at them, because, well, it's just not done. They just give them That Look that causes their fellow Northwest Europeans to feel guilty that they've caused their neighbors discomfort. But it doesn't work on the Middle Easterners. They just see the failure of the natives to do anything substantial as proof of their bland white bread inferiority.

But the truly catastrophic problem for the Northwesterners is that their empathy and politeness makes it very difficult for them to publicly discuss the problems that immigration of Middle Easterners causes for them. To say out loud, "Maybe we shouldn't let in more of these people," is seen as being rude toward the people we've already let in. The ones that are already there will get angry and cause a scene, which we just can't bear, so we'd better just not talk about immigration policy at all.

Of course, that means the problem just keeps getting worse.

Now, the Japanese get around this problem by not letting in immigrants at all, not even perfectly pleasant Filipinos. Instead, they build robots and program them to act like Japanese, which is a lot easier on the Japanese and their fragile emotions.

***

il ragno
02-09-2006, 10:09 AM
Well, technically this is a PJ O'Rourke article with Sailer sidebar commentary.

I enjoyed this line, though: "I'd known a half dozen Lebanese and he was the most considerate one of the six, so by the standards of his Levantine upbringing, he was practically David Niven..."

Petr
02-09-2006, 12:33 PM
Well, technically this is a PJ O'Rourke article with Sailer sidebar commentary.
I disagree, to me Sailer's commentary is much more relevant, O'Rourke's stuff being almost a distraction.


Anyways, it would seem that the southern (and southeastern) Europeans who are more used to furious debating culture, and who have had more direct historical contact with non-European invaders, are somewhat more immune to the "religion of civility" than naive Nordics...


Petr

Petr
02-09-2006, 04:56 PM
I wonder where this "cult of civility" that so paralyzes us really originates from?

I don't think that it came from Christianity, for as Sailer says, even today most Levantine Christians hardly subscribe to it. Besides, many early promoters of systematic tolerance in Europe condemned religion precisely for arousing different sorts of hatreds.

Indeed, at the very beginning of Christianity we can clearly see from many New Testament passages (like Matthew 23) that like a true agonistic Levantine He was, Jesus Christ did not hesitate to engage in fierce argumentation!

(As Yggdrasil also notes: http://home.ddc.net/ygg/rj/rj-18.htm )


Even many purely theological Christian apologists today feel that the Western Christendom has been contaminated by this modern idea that being offensive is somehow inherently un-Christian, turning believers into vulnerable milquetoasts:


http://www.tektonics.org/lp/madmad.html

"Many ancient societies (and we shall see below, certain modern social groups) engage in a process known as challenge-riposte. The scene of such processes is public venues in which two persons or groups have competing honor claims: "...the game of challenge-riposte is a central phenomenon, and one that must be played out in public." [42] The purpose is for each party to try to undermine the honor, or social status, of the other in an exchange that "answers in equal measures or ups the ante (and thereby challenges in return)." In the Gospels, Jesus "evidences considerable skill at riposte and thereby reveals himself to be an honorable and authoritative prophet." "


This is also resembles the rhetorical competitions that Socrates waged with Sophists...


Petr

Dan Dare
02-09-2006, 05:32 PM
I don't believe that people of Northern European ancestry need to apologise for what you call the 'cult' of civility. Being able to rub along with your neighbours is one of the cornerstones of civilisation as we know it. It is a facet of our culture that has its roots in the early medieval period and which we are probably genetically programmed to observe.

Here (VDARE.COM - http://vdare.com/misc/050926_fraser.htm) is a relevant essay that explains better what I talking about. It is in the context of defending the White Australia Policy but the point is strongly drawn that our soceities are successful because only they are:

...characterized by the "non-kinship based forms of reciprocity" associated with Protestant Christianity, monogamy and companionate marriage, nuclear families, a marked de-emphasis on extended kinship relations, and a strong tendency towards individualism [and so they are uniquely able to] succeed in creating such a "society of strangers."

I see nothing to be ashamed or apologetic about here. Those who should apologise are those who have facilitated the admission of unassimilable aliens who take advantage of our good nature.

Petyr Baelish
02-09-2006, 08:15 PM
[I]As a Finn, I can tell that Nordic people in general are very shy people, reluctant to show their emotions openly and seeking communal harmony at almost any cost.

Only when Finns (and I am referring to Finns only, not Scandinavians) can cower behind the perceived anonymity of the internet does their inherently loathsome nature become evident.

Petr
02-10-2006, 07:05 AM
Only when Finns (and I am referring to Finns only, not Scandinavians) can cower behind the perceived anonymity of the internet does their inherently loathsome nature become evident.
What's your own nationality, junkie?


Petr

Anima Eternae
02-10-2006, 07:26 AM
My mom is an uber bargainer.

Petr
02-10-2006, 07:27 AM
My mom is an uber bargainer.
Where is she from?

As "Yggdrasil" says in that essay I link to:

"It seems readily apparent that a certain focused rudeness is essential for survival in a multicultural society."


Petr

Anima Eternae
02-10-2006, 07:28 AM
not even perfectly pleasant Filipinos

LOL

No commentary needed.

Anima Eternae
02-10-2006, 07:28 AM
Where is she from?

Northern Vietnam.

Petr
02-10-2006, 07:30 AM
Northern Vietnam.
Close to the area of South China that Sailer mentions...


Petr

Anima Eternae
02-10-2006, 07:34 AM
Yeah, I was agreeing with Sailer.

The Vietnamese people (Vietnamese: người Việt or người Kinh) are an ethnic group originating from what is now northern Vietnam and southern China. They are the majority ethnic group of Vietnam, comprising 86% of the population as of the 1999 census, and are officially known as Kinh to distinguish them from other ethnic groups in Vietnam.

In the People's Republic of China, they are among the recognized minority groups based especially in or around Guangxi Province and are known in Mandarin through their derivative name Jing/Gin (京) or "Jingzu"/"Ginzu" (京族).

Although geographically and linguistically labelled "Southeast Asians", long periods of Chinese domination and influence has placed them culturally closer to East Asians, or more specifically their immediate northern neighbours, the Southern Chinese and other tribes within the proximity of South China.


In fact, "Viet Nam" means "south extension", referring to it as the southern part of the Chinese empire. Of course, the Chinese are the reason Vietnam is now a patriarchical society instead of a matriarchical.

Petr
02-10-2006, 07:38 AM
"It seems readily apparent that a certain focused rudeness is essential for survival in a multicultural society."
As "War Nerd" comments on Balkanoids:

http://www.exile.ru/174/174052003.html

"But the fact is, Albanians are not peaceful, they're not nice guys, any more than the Serbs are. All the "nice" tribes in the Balkans are in the graveyards. Everybody still in the game there is a stone killer."


Petr

Petr
02-10-2006, 07:39 AM
In fact, "Viet Nam" means "south extension", referring to it as the southern part of the Chinese empire. Of course, the Chinese are the reason Vietnam is now a patriarchical society instead of a matriarchical.
Tell us more about Vietnamese matriarchalism!


Petr

Petr
02-10-2006, 08:19 AM
The leader of the American Nazi Party, George Lincoln Rockwell, still clearly recalled his first encounter with the Jewish culture of rudeness in his autobiography This Time The World:

http://www.skrewdriver.org.uk/tttw3.html


"My father's friends were also the source of much instruction. Fred Allen, Benny Goodman, Walter Winchell, Groucho Marx and a host of others all had their turns as guests and I found each most interesting. Allen was pure joy to be near and when my Pop and Allen got to punning and tilting at each other with stories and sidesplitting anecdotes, it was one of those precious and rare times when life is 100% positive fun, unalloyed with the petty or large annoyances which so often spoil even the best times we have.

But Allen's wife, Portland, gave me the shock of my fourteen or fifteen years when she was the first woman I ever heard say a filthy word -- and in our living room, at that. She used the Anglo-Saxon word for body waste to express her distaste for some idea or other -- and I will never forget the experience. Never, in all those young years, had I heard a female say such a word and I thought of her immediately as an object of unbelievable disgust. In discussing the matter later, with my father, I learned that she was Jewish. I asked him if Jewishness had anything to do with it and he said they were very "sophisticated people" who meant no harm by it. But he also told me of Henry Ford's accusations against the Jews and how they forced him to apologize, and said there was no getting away from the power of the Jews, "They're too smart.""


Petr

Petyr Baelish
02-10-2006, 07:56 PM
What's your own nationality, junkie?


Petr

I am not a "junkie", fanatic.

As for my nationality, I am American by citizenship and Belarussian by ethnicity.

Crowley
02-10-2006, 08:23 PM
An anti-semitic article if ever there was one. :cool:

Petr
02-10-2006, 08:30 PM
An anti-semitic article if ever there was one. :cool:
How so? Sailer clearly recognizes the superiority of Semitic rudeness in the sense of evolutionary survival skills. :p


Petr

Crowley
02-10-2006, 09:01 PM
How so? Sailer clearly recognizes the superiority of Semitic rudeness in the sense of evolutionary survival skills. :p


Petr

Basically Sailor calls Semites pirana to our gold fish so we should keep them the hell out of our pond. Of course, he fails to mention that Semites are themselves well-mannered compared to negroes, although he implies it when he points out that once the man gets the package, he's allowed to keep it. Whereas blacks would hack into the whole crowd with machetes.:rolleyes:

Jimbo Gomez
02-10-2006, 09:02 PM
Yet another attack on the dignity of us norsemen.

If introversion is so bad how come the introverted people are the most advanced and intelligent?

Crowley
02-10-2006, 09:24 PM
But for how much longer? Without a healthy doctrine of separatism intelligent and advanced societies with their superior economies degenerate to the norm of third world territories. Japan, its intelligence, and its robots have a future.

Petr
02-12-2006, 09:22 AM
But we all know that once you put these peaceful Nordics into a uniform, they turn into some of the most efficient warriors the world has known.

Today's Nordics should learn how to behave tough out of uniform! Their love for bureaucratic order betrays them, making "civilian" rampage look inherently unacceptable in their eyes - they have a deeply statist mentality, thinking that it's OK to kill as a representative of the state, but not as an individual...

They are like Superman/Batman kind of superheroes who can't perform their feats unless they're in a right suit! :rolleyes:

As this rude writer puts it:

http://www.exile.ru/2002-August-23/war_nerd.html


"One interesting thing about Colombian killing is they do it both ways: solo and in groups. There are some countries that turn into psycho killers once they put on a uniform, but wouldn't even run a yellow light once they're in civvies again. Two classic examples: the Japanese and Germans. The Japanese did things in China that just don't bear thinkin' about...beheading contests, sword practice on pregnant Chinese prisoners, baby-bayoneting volleyball -- but those same soldiers went home and turned into shy little salary-men who wouldn't jaywalk, never mind hurt anybody. Same with the Germans: let'em loose in a gray helmet and they think up stuff that'd make Saddam ashamed -- but back home in Dusseldorf they'd die before they'd drop a popsicle stick on the sidewalk.

Then there are the countries that kill real good in private life but won't fight in uniform -- Italians, say. Mean ****ers on the street, in the alley, but put one in a uniform and he can't wait to throw away his rifle and find a nice cozy cellar to hide out in.

Colombians are a coach's dream: the switch-hitters of killing. They kill in uniform or out, home or away, on the street or the battlefield."



Petr

Petr
03-01-2006, 12:59 PM
"Then there are the countries that kill real good in private life but won't fight in uniform -- Italians, say. Mean ****ers on the street, in the alley, but put one in a uniform and he can't wait to throw away his rifle and find a nice cozy cellar to hide out in."
Steve Sailer seems to agree with War Nerd's analysis on this tough-civilian, tough-soldier nations paradigm:

http://isteve.blogspot.com/2006/03/fukuyama-real-problem-with-muslims-in.html


"And, perhaps, the less disastrous German experience has more to do with its Muslim immigrants being mostly stolid Turks rather than excitable Arabs. As I've often pointed out there's a negative correlation between a people's propensity for disorganized violence (street crime, rioting, and the simpler forms of terrorism) and how good they are at organized violence (war). While the Arabs have been awful at war over the last century, the Turks showed themselves to be first rate soldiers at Gallipoli, in Anatolia fighting the British and French after WWI, and helping America out in Korea."


Petr

Pablo Escobar
03-01-2006, 01:16 PM
Some introverted people posess a genial mind, they invent things which advance the civilization.

The vast majority of introverted people are just nerds who can't deal with reality.

Kodos
03-01-2006, 01:19 PM
Some introverted people posess a genial mind, they invent things which advance the civilization.

The vast majority of introverted people are just nerds who can't deal with reality.

Your basis for saying this( ie that in most cases being introverted has no positive effect whatsoever)?

Petr
03-01-2006, 01:21 PM
Some introverted people posess a genial mind, they invent things which advance the civilization.
And it is often just these nerds that invent things like nuclear weapons that make it possible to slaughter people on grander scale than ever before... Dr. Strangelove syndrome.


Petr

Pablo Escobar
03-01-2006, 01:36 PM
( ie that in most cases being introverted has no positive effect whatsoever)?

Yep.

Besides, I see that among the members of 'some' boards,
introversion is viewed as some positive genetic trait, about as desirable
as being completely depigmented and/or Scandinavian.

Kodos
03-01-2006, 01:39 PM
Whats your basis, in my experience more introverted people tend to have either a better analytical mind or more artistic talent then extroverts( though in American society at least this is not ussually as important for success in life as what you lose).

Pablo Escobar
03-01-2006, 01:44 PM
Whats your basis, in my experience more introverted people tend to have either a better analytical mind or more artistic talent then extroverts( though in American society at least this is not ussually as important for success in life as what you lose).

That's true. Most of the exceptional individuals were/are introverts,
but that doesn't mean most introverts are exceptional individuals. :)

Slavic Enforcer
03-01-2006, 01:49 PM
I am very introverted, and still I am a nobody (at least in real life, in the Internet I am a kind of God).

Columnist
06-20-2010, 01:39 PM
up........

Felix the Cat
06-20-2010, 05:33 PM
You are supposed to be "polite" to people you fear. Everyone else should be treated like scum. To show politeness to someone who is not significantly more powerful than you is a sign of cowardice, and will arouse contempt rather than friendliness.

Niccolo and Donkey
06-20-2010, 05:44 PM
Anima and Prodigal Son...ghosts from Phora's past.

Petr
06-20-2010, 06:12 PM
You are supposed to be "polite" to people you fear. Everyone else should be treated like scum. To show politeness to someone who is not significantly more powerful than you is a sign of cowardice, and will arouse contempt rather than friendliness.
As a Christian, I cannot accept such cynical notions. One can show proper sort of condescending politeness even to one's inferiors.

It is typical barbarian attitude to be servile towards superiors and insolent towards underlings.


Petr

Basil Fawlty
06-20-2010, 06:32 PM
You are supposed to be "polite" to people you fear. Everyone else should be treated like scum. To show politeness to someone who is not significantly more powerful than you is a sign of cowardice, and will arouse contempt rather than friendliness.In the Philippines it is customary to address beggars as 'sir' so as to compensate their low status and afford them some dignity. I think this attitude is very civilised and humane. Mistreating and demeaning people in a servile or lower social situation is a sign of low character.

Errigal
06-20-2010, 06:58 PM
The article in the opening post is quite interesting and talks about something I often think about. Steve Sailer writes consistently interesting stuff despite being much more interested in IQ and genetic differences than I am myself.

Anyway, the clash of cultures between groups with high levels of trust and cooperation and those with low or non-existent trust is one of the big stories of our time. The most extreme clashes are now happening where the matriarchal and sheltered low-church Protestant types take in plane-loads of scamming Somalis. This is happening mostly in the Nordic countries and the Prairie/Midwest regions of North America.

Felix the Cat
06-21-2010, 01:47 AM
You are supposed to be "polite" to people you fear. Everyone else should be treated like scum. To show politeness to someone who is not significantly more powerful than you is a sign of cowardice, and will arouse contempt rather than friendliness. I should clarify that I wasn't advocating adoption of this attitude, but rather describing a mentality common in many parts of the world.

As a Christian, I cannot accept such cynical notions. One can show proper sort of condescending politeness even to one's inferiors.In the Philippines it is customary to address beggars as 'sir' so as to compensate their low status and afford them some dignity. I think this attitude is very civilised and humane. Mistreating and demeaning people in a servile or lower social situation is a sign of low character.
We're probably dealing here with a mentality peculiar to christians. The celebration of weakness and poverty intrinsic to the religion probably affects social relations and human psychology, and causes people to feel guilty about abusing social inferiors.

Basil Fawlty
06-21-2010, 09:15 AM
We're probably dealing here with a mentality peculiar to christians. The celebration of weakness and poverty intrinsic to the religion probably affects social relations and human psychology, and causes people to feel guilty about abusing social inferiors.Not really. Aristotle, who was not a Christian, lists magnanimity (megalapsuche lit. "big soul") as one of the virtues. I think it's pretty obvious that abusing those who are weaker is cowardly and mean, a sure sign of viciousness.

Angler
06-21-2010, 09:42 AM
You are supposed to be "polite" to people you fear. Everyone else should be treated like scum. To show politeness to someone who is not significantly more powerful than you is a sign of cowardice, and will arouse contempt rather than friendliness.
I should clarify that I wasn't advocating adoption of this attitude, but rather describing a mentality common in many parts of the world.I hope it's not as common as you say, since it's an extremely contemptible mentality.

Magnanimity toward the lowly is a sign of strength, not cowardice. It reveals one to be a man who is secure enough in his own skin to have no need to cheaply boost his own ego at the expense of others. The true cowards are those who kiss up to those deemed powerful while tearing down those viewed as weak or helpless. It's just like a man who runs from a fight with an able-bodied man but then goes home and beats his wife and child.

Columnist
06-21-2010, 10:00 AM
The article in the opening post is quite interesting and talks about something I often think about. Steve Sailer writes consistently interesting stuff despite being much more interested in IQ and genetic differences than I am myself.

Anyway, the clash of cultures between groups with high levels of trust and cooperation and those with low or non-existent trust is one of the big stories of our time. The most extreme clashes are now happening where the matriarchal and sheltered low-church Protestant types take in plane-loads of scamming Somalis. This is happening mostly in the Nordic countries and the Prairie/Midwest regions of North America.
The same we see with Ashkenazi vs. Sephardi/Mizrahi vs. Arabs.

Basil Fawlty
06-21-2010, 11:16 AM
I think Nordics can be quite rude. They call it "sincerity" though.

Errigal
06-21-2010, 12:22 PM
The same we see with Ashkenazi vs. Sephardi/Mizrahi vs. Arabs.

In Israel you mean? I wonder how that all works out?

I've read at several different sites that Jews visiting Israel from elsewhere find the local Jews to be abrasive and rude.

I think Nordics can be quite rude. They call it "sincerity" though.

Yes they feel they are being more "real" and therefore morally better.

Basil Fawlty
06-21-2010, 12:50 PM
Yes they feel they are being more "real" and therefore morally better.I once met a Swede who asked me how much I earned within five minutes of meeting and then proceeded, out of the blue, to attack Ireland's anti-abortion stance as if abortion is the default position of any righteous society. Insolent and self-righteous.
This kind of experience is by no means uncommon when meeting Nordic persons.

Errigal
06-21-2010, 01:08 PM
I once met a Swede who asked me how much I earned within five minutes of meeting and then proceeded, out of the blue, to attack Ireland's anti-abortion stance as if abortion is the default position of any righteous society. Insolent and self-righteous.
This kind of experience is by no means uncommon when meeting Nordic persons.

They might not develop more diplomatic social skills because they are used to all worthwhile people thinking exactly as they themselves do. He or she likely thought that you looked like a reasonable person and so you must agree with him on abortion and all the rest. Anglo Canada has a very strong streak of this.

Kodos
06-21-2010, 03:37 PM
to attack Ireland's anti-abortion stance as if abortion is the default position of any righteous society.

Im pro abortion but never talk about it unless brought up, you aren't changing anyone's mind on the subject.

Basil Fawlty
06-21-2010, 03:57 PM
Im pro abortion but never talk about it unless brought up, you aren't changing anyone's mind on the subject.With these people they don't accept that a difference of opinion might be legitimate. Their self-righteousness is deeply ingrained. It partly comes from being told all their lives that they live in a perfect society.

Felix the Cat
06-21-2010, 04:00 PM
I think it's pretty obvious that abusing those who are weaker is cowardly and mean, a sure sign of viciousness.Magnanimity toward the lowly is a sign of strength, not cowardice. It reveals one to be a man who is secure enough in his own skin to have no need to cheaply boost his own ego at the expense of others.You may be overestimating the intelligence of certain population groups. These things which are "obvious" to us are not necessarily so to the rest of the world.

Basil Fawlty
06-21-2010, 04:02 PM
You may be overestimating the intelligence of certain population groups. These things which are "obvious" to us are not necessarily so to the rest of the world.It's obvious to the Phililpinos. I think you will find this idea is not uncommon across cultures. The presence of bullies and boors is also not uncommon across cultures.

Burrhus
06-21-2010, 04:33 PM
I've read at several different sites that Jews visiting Israel from elsewhere find the local Jews to be abrasive and rude.

A classic case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Errigal
06-21-2010, 05:37 PM
A classic case of the pot calling the kettle black.

And also they are meeting long lost cousins in a way. The Israelis are Jews who haven't been surrounded by more polite Gentiles and forced to dial down their abrasiveness.

La Cosa Blanca
06-21-2010, 05:40 PM
Yes, wogs are more outgoing and nordics are more inward and reserved, what else is there to know?

Felix the Cat
06-21-2010, 05:50 PM
This reminds me of a joke I heard somewhere: a Norwegian, a Dane, a Swede, and a Finn are shipwrecked and find themselves on a desert island.

The Finn promptly cuts down several trees, the Norwegian builds a boat, and the Dane sets up a shipping company.

Meanwhile the Swede waits to be introduced.

Errigal
06-21-2010, 05:56 PM
This reminds me of a joke I heard somewhere: a Norwegian, a Dane, a Swede, and a Finn are shipwrecked and find themselves on a desert island.

The Finn promptly cuts down several trees, the Norwegian builds a boat, and the Dane sets up a shipping company.

Meanwhile the Swede waits to be introduced.

Yes and the Danes, Swedes and Norwegians at least are pretty much genetically identical. I think much of the national characteristics discussed in the opening post have to do with relatively recent cultural differences than with genetic differences.

Dreadnought
06-21-2010, 06:10 PM
A classic case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Not really, Jews the world over are known as tending to be untrustworthy traders, and a servile sneaking demeanour is common among such types. At least, when there's something to be gained.

Burrhus
06-21-2010, 07:19 PM
And also they are meeting long lost cousins in a way. The Israelis are Jews who haven't been surrounded by more polite Gentiles and forced to dial down their abrasiveness.

If the jews in America have dialed down their abrasiveness, it beggars the imagination to contemplate what a vacation in israel would be like for a gentile such as yours truly. :)

Brett
07-06-2010, 04:04 AM
With these people they don't accept that a difference of opinion might be legitimate. Their self-righteousness is deeply ingrained. It partly comes from being told all their lives that they live in a perfect society.

Yes - and boy do they have some surprises waiting for them.