REMINDER that Slavs are not a race but a language group and if we were to go by actual race then Slavs will go...

REMINDER that Slavs are not a race but a language group and if we were to go by actual race then Slavs will go something like

>South Slavs
Turks, Bulgars, Albanians

>West Slavs
Germans, Anglos, Nordics

>East Slavs
Norcics, Finno-Ugrics, Mongolians

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_average_human_height_worldwide
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#Latin_influence
britannica.com/topic/Slav
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Errors_in_the_Encyclopædia_Britannica_that_have_been_corrected_in_Wikipedia
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

You forgot Ibero-Slavs
Spaniards, Portuguese

Med Slavs
Greek, Italians

Anglo Slavs
Kiwis, burgers, strayas

Slavs were once a tight-knit ethnic group who spoke a sole language (Proto-Slavic), but during the Late Antiquity period they began splitting and settling different parts of Central and Eastern Europe, mixing with the local populations wherever they went (Celts, Illyrians, Germanics, Daco-Thracians, Finno-Ugrics, etc).

Just like the fact that Spaniards or Romanians aren't genetically Central Italian folk doesn't mean that ancient Italic/Latin speakers were not an ethnic group.

...

West Slavs are the Slaviest.

...

Albanians are not Slavs nor they are native to the land they occupy now.

Albanians are not Slavs, but South "Slavs" are Albanians.

>let me arbitrarily pick one gene and call it the "slav" gene

Now arbitrarily pick another, which is concentrated mostly in Romania, for example. Its as valid a claim.

Albanians are hardcore turk'd slavs.
Also, [spoiler]serbs[/spoiler] are (were) slavs.

Albanians are more native than all their neigbhours spare maybe Greeks

Haplogroup I2 which is concentrated in the Balkans is certainly not Slavic. It is associated with Dinarics who are a tall, big nosed, dark haired and dark eyed people with long faces. They look completely alien to East/West Slavs who have short potato heads, potato nose, shorter height and high rates of blondism.

>It is associated with Dinarics who are a tall, big nosed, dark haired and dark eyed people with long faces.

Nigga people on the Balkans are shorter than average, not taller.
Your pseudo-science is retarded. Learn genetic clustering.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_average_human_height_worldwide

>Dinaric Alps
>185.6 cm (6 ft 1 in)
>Serbia
>182.0 cm (5 ft 11 1⁄2 in)
>Russia
>177.2 cm (5 ft 10 in)
>Poland
>178.7 cm (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in)

>no romania
>no bulgaria
>no macedonia
>no greece
>no albania

Nice job excluding more than half the countries in the Balkans during your "balkan gene" research, but including Poland and Russia.

>throughout history slavs were described as looking diferent from western europeans and asians
>their phisical features are common among slav countries despite language barriers
>guis, ain't no such thing as a slavic ethnicity guis it's made by the illuminati guis

I made this for you.

What physical features?

Thats nice, but would you mind making an argument instead?

>History

>&

>Humanities

...

& Humanities

They're both shit at this point, mate.

>soccer players

wowee you sure showed me
"[They have] small slanted eyes, long mouths and narrow brows. Their noses are short but not stub and have fine nostrils...they are Bohemians i think."

-Goethe on the Habsburg forces stationed where he lived

And all this without mentioning that if you've never actually seen phisical differences in slavs to others then you've never seen slavs.

It's true that Albanians are native, but not native to that part, but to Kavkaz region, where they came from

>this is his scientific proof

top
fucking
kek

right, prove it wrong then...

>prove a negative, because i quoted a guy being racist

...

so you're still wrong, good to hear!

At this point you are giving out signs that you are aware you can't defend your views, and are choosing to act retarded instead. I hope this is proof of awareness and reconsideration, and not of childishness.

no i honestly want to know more about the slavic ethnicity "not existing" only aparently you have nothing to say or add and so the status quo is kept and slavs are still an ethnicity

how do you explain this then

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language#Latin_influence

That status quo is that the following ethnicities are part of a slavic language group: Russians, Poles, Ukrainians, Serbs, Czechs, Bulgarians, Belarusians, Croats, Bosniaks, Slovenes, Macedonians, Montenegrins, Silesians, Moravians, Kashuvians.
There is no slavic ethnic group.

britannica.com/topic/Slav

how does it feel to be wrong?

>www.britannica.com

Literally a worse Wikipedia, as if quoting Wikipedia wasn't bad enough.
Also this is just a claim, that isn't sourced, or even expanded on. You are linking me to a total of one word.

So if the Encyclopedia Britannica, one of the most respected reference guides in the world, is simply wrong because you say so what's your citation backing you?

>your source is not a valid source
>i have no source to claim you are wrong and that your source is not a valid source

>one of the most respected reference guides in the world

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Errors_in_the_Encyclopædia_Britannica_that_have_been_corrected_in_Wikipedia

Nigga... there is a reason it went out of print.

Your source doesn't do anything but make a claim.
It doesn't explain or quote anything.

If you linked to an Encyclopedia Britannica article saying "Rome fell because of led in the water." without any explanation, citations, arguments, would that be enough?

So I ask again, what's your source?

>there is a reason it went out of print.

Yes, the fact people don't buy massive bulky encyclopedias anymore.

>So I ask again, what's your source?

Genetic theory is my source. Slavs are not the same people. They are a language group.

All those people speak similar languages AND to outsiders who have eyeballs they all have similar looking faces. That's enough similarities and commonalities to call an ethnic group.

What else do you need? Do they all have to sing the same exact freaking folk song and wear the same exact color Adidas track suit?

Slav are people. They are not one people but they are a group of people between Asians and West Europeans. Good lord the mental quantum physics involved to not see the obvious.

>AND to outsiders who have eyeballs they all have similar looking faces

They really don't. Also genetics, nigga. There are at least three distinct clusters in that group, and each of those clusters has non-slavic language people in it.

Go on.

If you have some genetic studies done on the different Slavic populations that backs what you are saying I'm prepared to listen.

nigga did you read what i sent?

Even those shitty haplogroups maps, despite their shallowness, show three groups of "slavs" - the european ones, the russian ones, and the balkan ones. Protip: all of those clusters include non-slavs in them.

But there is still an over arching regional grouping of Slavic languages and peoples. Yes there are people in that region who are different. Doesn't take away from vast commonalities across large geographical area. Ethnicity is not pure genetics. Lots of people can be part of a larger cultural grouping who bring in outside or even indigenous blood to an ethnic makeup.

Slav peoples are diverse and disparate amd have several genetic sources and influences over vast time scales and movements of peoples but they are still a larger grouping of peoples with more similarities than not.and enough differences to stand out as distinct.

Why does the concept bother you so much?

I'll take that as a "no I don't"

Just google it, you nigger. Here is an outdated aggregate one, at best you want different maps to compare.
The division is obvious.

>people not realizing that most of the debates on ethnicity in pre-modern times is archeological conjecture and more or less overhauled
>people not realizing that DNA evidence is just another form of source to be examined and not the same as final proof
>wiki warriors
Wanna know how I know you never set foot in a history department?

As a slav myself, I will explain you:
1) Language is very close and understandable between all slav countries.
2) There are customs and food that is shared between all slav countries.
3) However, appearance vary - west slavs are more nordic and alpine looking, east slavs are more eastern nordic and baltid, south slavs are dinarid and pontic
4) Genetically the west and east slavs cluster together, and we see continuity with germanics
5) The south slavs cluster with themselves and there is continuity with other Mediterraneans.

So, if there was a slavic migration to spread the language and culture is long absorbed in the southern population. I tested my DNA and I am from a south slav country. I am closer to bloody Spain and France, than Ukraine or Polandia.

The migration of slavs during 6-7th century cannot explain this shit. So I believe the language and culture were shared long before it. People don't just vanish and replaced completely, its a continuity.

>btfo
thanks Bratya

Slavic culture homogeneity comes from the USSR.
Earlier the Ukrainians were straight up Asian nomadic types, the Polish were proto-Germans, and the Croats were Hungarians in disguise.
Fuck it, Byzantine writers talk about the Bulgarian king coming to see their emperor wearing the silks, slippers, earrings and jewels in the hair expected of a Byzantine lord. Not very slavic.

>Slavic culture homogeneity comes from the USSR

that sounds absolutely autistic but i'd like to read where you got this from

Every white man must take up arms to destroy the Bolsheviks.

Why "white man"?

Look up the Russian-Ottoman war, see how the bulgarian soldiers looked, and how the russian soldiers looked. Also compare them to the turkish soldiers.
You may find bulgarians were more like the turkish, because culturally they were closer to them than to russians.
Similar with Poland and Germany vs Russia, similar with Slovenia-Austria vs Russia, etc.

because saving the world is the white man's burden

But Bolsheviks were white too..?

...

Russians suck for not forcing cyrillic on the Poles when they had them under their control.

Polish looks so much nicer in cyrillic, much less ugly cszc bullshit going on.

Cyrilic is retarded, they should've adopted diacritic from their more advanced neighbors.

They did force it on mongols though.

Cyrillic is a good way of writing down the slavic language and sounds.

Even if they did force it, Poles would just go back to using the Latin alphabet when they gained independence.

Poland always wanted to associate itself with the west, that's why they chose Roman Catholicism over Eastern Orthodoxy.

Although the western 'allies' ended up killing more of them than Russians or easterners. Poland should've just allied with Muslims/Islam in 1683 at Vienna or when they had the upper hand during the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth.

glagolica is where it's @

>greek for slavs

lol

>gene
These are haplotypic markers which are explicitly not under selection and do not undergo recombination, so yes, they are a perfect for tracing the various distinct founder groups which make up a population and their relative "purity". The haplogroups are not arbitrarily chosen, people.

And so it happens that most important ancestral group shared among Slavs is the purest in West Slavs.

>>West Slavs
>Germans, Anglos, Nordics

We are Celtic nigger

Serbs aren't Slavic at all if you look at their genetics. They are genetically closer to Albanians than they are to Czechs or Russians and I'm not even memeing.

Actually Polish would look horrible in every alphabet, because the language itself sounds like static noise. And Russian would be great in Latin.

As a balkannigger I have to say there is definitely a vague Slavic look in every Slavic country you go to in varying degrees, the idea that Slavs as a whole do no shares a lot of blood is silly.

Then tell me how come when I as a Czech went to Macedonia they all looked like a bunch of gypsies and not Slavs to me.

Because you're just a German in denial and you're in need of a good Anschlussing

There are a lot of Albanians in Macedonia for starters.

Czechs are more Slavic than ANYONE in the Balkans and that's a fact.

>tfw Germany is more Slavic then Yugoslavia

>Greek for Slavs
...you're aware that Cyrillic is a Greek invention - based on the Greek alphabet - GIVEN to the Russians by St. Cyril (Cyril? Cyrillic? Get it?) and St. Basil of the Eastern Rite, right?

This is autism. Bulgars are the only slavic group you listed.
REMEMBER TO SAGE THIS SHIT THREAD

Bolshevism is basically a white ideology/problem.

>given to Russians
>Russians
Best be trolling nigger. Russians were still pagan when Cyril died, he brought his alphabet to Great Moravians.

>Cyrillic is a Greek invention - based on the Greek alphabet - GIVEN to the Russians by St. Cyril
I'm pretty sure I've never read a sentence more wrong on Veeky Forums before. If bait then it's 10/10.

Problem is the Russians are still clinging to their old pan-Slavic propaganda that they should rule every Slavic country because they're the same. Also some of the Russian cucks among the Slavic nation who want the same.

Everyone with a non-double digit IQ knows the Slavs are just a linguistic group.

Even though they're just a language group there is no reason why they shouldn't be friends with one another.

>As a balkannigger I have to say there is definitely a vague Slavic look in every Slavic country you go to in varying degrees, the idea that Slavs as a whole do no shares a lot of blood is silly.
You saw white people and assumed the similarities are because they're Slavs. If you go to a Western country you'll notice the same similarities if you weren't a biased idiot.

I'm educate you for free today.

The Cyrillic is named after Cyril but he didn't create it. It was done by his students in Bulgaria.

>Even though they're just a language group there is no reason why they shouldn't be friends with one another.
Sure, I just despise the argument the Russians use "But we're Slavs, we're brothers, be under our control". This is dumb shit for dumb peasants.

That's wrong though. Maybe you should reread my post. Not to mention there is a big distinction between white Slavs and non Slavs in of itself.

>there is a big distinction between white Slavs and non Slavs in of itself.
No, there isn't. The Hungarians and the Romanians look like their neighbours.

Yeah but that has nothing to do with Russia. Russia was one of the last countries to adopt cyrilic actually.

That too is wrong. But there IS a Slavic strain in many Hungarians and Romanians too (Hungarians more)

Um, Ivan, but you actually tried. Guess what, it didn't work.

You're a moron.

Hungarians literally look like Slovaks and vice versa.

>Albania
>Slavic
These are the guys you argue on a daily basis here

OK you are out of arguments. Probably a Croat denying his Slav roots and larping as an Iranian.

Albania isn't slavic.

The Albanian-looking people residing in Kosovo, Serbia and Macedonia are though.

I'm pretty sure OP meant to say that modern day "Slavs" actually contain a ton of non-Slavic ancestry. Your reading comprehension is shit.

>Slav roots