What are some historically distinct peoples that deserve an independent state/ more territory?

What are some historically distinct peoples that deserve an independent state/ more territory?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Hebrew
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

The Basque

Assyrians.

Abkhazians

The Assyrians.

They are the last northwest Semetic speakers (Hebrew and Phoenician is dead)

Mosul (Nineveh) should be thier capital. Especially given how both Kurds and Arabs claim it

What is the more modern history of them like? Just looking at them in the ancient period makes it seem like they were one of the few peoples who genuinley should have been genocided

...

Whoopsy daisy

China is literally oversized

Only because of T*betans and U*ghurs. Once they're gone, Great Harmony will come to China and there will be pork in every pot, rice in every bowl.

I'm pretty sure the 1000 and 2010 maps are slightly inaccurate. But it's an interesting map.

It's better to say "speak the last NW Semitic language" than "last NW Semitic speakers".

They (or 'we') should have greater autonomy and be allowed to return to territories lost due to persecution and genocide, some of which are historic.

Their traditional, and currently the most common, names for themselves are "Sooraayaa" and "Sooryoyo", that is, a Syrian Christian, especially an ethnic 'Assyrian' of the corresponding -a or -o dialect.

Their modern history is marked by ethnic cleansing, urbanization, Western and Catholic influence, and reclusiveness. One pivotal event is the Assyrian Genocide of WWI.

kys

Saddam Hussein attempted to use Assyrian history, as well as Babylonian, to define Iraqi nationalism.

Both are cucked by Cuckstianity, the first step towards a national revival is to give up the Teachings of Jesus "Turn the other cheek" Christ

...

What about Manchuria?

...

>mandarin is dominant with 70%
>Southern chinese don't want to be independent
>the rest is like 1%
>unsf unsf china should be fragments

>trabzon
>armenian

fpbp

Korea always gets ass fucked.

>t. euphoric funposter

i'm assyrian. I don't want independence. I just want Iraq to be a secular country again with equal rights for everyone. We don't special rights, we jsut want to be treated equally and not persecuted for our religion.

This was done good under Saddam and Assad.

Personally I think Assyrians are Arabs anyway.

Germans

...

>Hebrew
>dead

What are you on?

>Balkanizing Canada
>Republican provinces
We're literally ten distinct personal unions with some extra bits tacked on up north.

>Saskatchewan partnering with Ontario and not Alberta

Kek

the Arabs

>le modern Hebrew isn't real hebrew

Tatars

To be a native speaker of a language, the language itself has to be native; something that developed naturally and has very deep roots. Modern Hebrew is not a native language so it has no native speakers.

>Personally I think Assyrians are Arabs anyway.

Because of a century (from this very year) that they've been Arabized? Were they Turks before that?

Uralic peoples.
Most notably, Karelians, Komi, and Mordvins.

Surprised no ones posted the obvious yet

This is autistic. Every Jewish scholar spoke Hebrew. Modern Hebrew doesn't even use Ashkenazi pronunciation, it uses the pronunciation of the native Jews. It's actually much closer to Biblical Hebrew than English is to Old English. Since it was considered a sacred language, it kind of froze as a language. Because of this, it's actually much closer to it's ancient form than most modern languages are. If anything, Hebrew is one of the most authentic languages of the day. The few syntaxes from diasporic languages just add on to how authentic it is considering it reflects the historical situation of the Jewish people.

As shit as the Israeli state is, their revitalization of Hebrew is great, I wish the example was used for dying languages all over the world.

trabzon is greek
make pontus a country again

>Personally I think Assyrians are Arabs anyway.
More like Iraqi are Assyrians and Mesopotamian. Arabs outside of Arabian peninsula are arabized, not Arabs.

Don't sound like any that i know

>This is autistic.
And right off the bat, memes.

>Every Jewish scholar spoke Hebrew.
Every Western scholar spoke Latin.

>Modern Hebrew doesn't even use Ashkenazi pronunciation, it uses the pronunciation of the native Jews.
So a conscious effort to "fix" the pronunciation.

>It's actually much closer to Biblical Hebrew than English is to Old English.
Are you saying that makes English unnatural or inauthentic?

>Since it was considered a sacred language, it kind of froze as a language.
Yes, like several other languages, spoken and un-spoken.

>Because of this, it's actually much closer to it's ancient form than most modern languages are.
That has nothing to do with whether or not it's a native language, unless you believe English is artificial for being more different from its earlier forms.

>If anything, Hebrew is one of the most authentic languages of the day. The few syntaxes from diasporic languages just add on to how authentic it is considering it reflects the historical situation of the Jewish people.
But you just said it's more natural for using the Biblical pronunciation.

Everything you said would be true of revived Neo-Latin and in fact applies to Aramaic, which in addition to all that has been spoken by thousands of people of every background in the same area while Hebrew was fluently spoken (not just understood) by maybe 1000 people who learned it from books a continent-span away from Israel.

I wasn't talking about authenticity per set anyway. I was talking about how you can't say you've "kept" something because you made a facsimile before trading it. And then inherited that facsimile.

>To be a native speaker of a language, the language itself has to be native
Hebrew is. It has millions of native speakers, people who think in Hebrew.
>something that developed naturally and has very deep roots
Hebrew did develop naturally, it's an extension of Canaanite languages and the only surviving Canaanite language. It has the Canaanite vowel shift, a very distinct linguistic feature very present in Hebrew but completely absent in Arabic.

>To be a native speaker of a language, the language itself has to be native
>Hebrew is. It has millions of native speakers, people who think in Hebrew.

Please re-read that.

>Every Western scholar spoke Latin
It wasn't their native language though. Hebrew is the native language of the Jews.

>So a conscious effort to "fix" the pronunciation.
No, an effort to use the most accurate pronunciation without the diasporic influxes.

>Are you saying that makes English unnatural or inauthentic?
Nope, which is exactly my point. Neither is Hebrew.

>Yes, like several other languages, spoken and un-spoken.
None of those were used like Hebrew was though. Phoenician is dead, but who still prays in Phoenician and has for thousands of years?

>That has nothing to do with whether or not it's a native language, unless you believe English is artificial for being more different from its earlier forms.
I don't, which is why your argument is ridiculous.

>But you just said it's more natural for using the Biblical pronunciation.
It is, I was just pointing out that the influence from Yiddish/other Jewish languages doesn't take away from the authenticity.

>Everything you said would be true of revived Neo-Latin and in fact applies to Aramaic
Exactly though. I think the Aramean attempt to revive Western Aramaic is completely legitimate. They prayed in Western Aramaic every Sunday.

That's actually some really cool propaganda.

Hebrew died away. For centuries all that remained were the ritualised sayings during religious ceremonies. As a result of the zionism movement in the 20th century a couple of linguists 'recreated' it as best they could. Ofc, this new language isn't identical to the old extinct one.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Hebrew

>hurrdurr we pushed everyone else out to the shitty desert regions why do we have so many people

kys smelly Han

>Ofc, this new language isn't identical to the old extinct one.
The main idioms and phrases are pretty identical to the ancient versions.

No one argues that it isn't a recreation. Calling it the same language is a bit of stretch though.
It's like an inverted ship of Theseus with modern paint.

>Calling it the same language is a bit of stretch though.
How? If a modern Hebrew speaker could understand an ancient speaker with some of the most basic idioms, how are they not the same language? Is Modern Hebrew not a Canaanite language under the Central Semitic branch?

>Is Modern Hebrew not a Canaanite language under the Central Semitic branch?

No. It belongs to the Esperanto language family with maximum borrowings from Canaanite.

Because it's a reconstruction. Even a perfect copy would arguable still not be the same language.
Saying that it's the same language because some basics idioms would be understood by the speakers of the original tongue doesn't get you anywhere.
As a speaker of swedish I can hold whole conversations with speakers of danish or norwegian.

>Because it's a reconstruction. Even a perfect copy would arguable still not be the same language.
Revival =/= Reconsturction. "Linguistic reconstruction" is the description of languages which were either never recorded (proto-languages) or had scant records before their extinction, through the use of the comparative method and other methods such as loanword analysis. This is very different from language revival, which is bringing a language that no longer has native speakers back to a state where it does have native speakers. Reconstruction was not involved in the revival of Hebrew, because there were always written records and at no point was knowledge of Hebrew grammar lost. This is basic linguistics.

>Because it's a reconstruction. Even a perfect copy would arguable still not be the same language.
Revival =/= Reconstruction. Reconstruction is the attempt to describe languages which were either never recorded (proto-languages) or had scant records before their extinction, through the use of the comparative method and other methods such as loanword analysis. This is VERY different from language revival, which is taking a language that has no native speakers back to where it does have native speakers. Reconstruction was not involved in the revival of Hebrew, since there has always been written records and at no point was knowledge of Hebrew grammar lost.

China is still undersized compared to it's historical dominion. They don't have nearly the vice over their neighbors they used to.

I just want to see Turkey get cut up into pieces.

>Arabs outside of Arabian peninsula are arabized, not Arabs.

Bullshit. Most of us trace our roots to Arab clans who immigrated to wherever we live. My mother is an Iraqi Arab, and my father is Lebanese, both trace their roots to Arab clans from Yemen. This is the same for most Arabs, except North African ones. Most Levantine Arabs claiming pre-7th century roots are straight up LARPing.

>North African
They are Arabs too as Arab tribes (bedouins) moved there

Palestinians should adopt a Samaritan identity and create Samaria

K*rds are Median migrants.

I fixed it for ya

Sad!

Iranian tribes, after Islamic invasion many Iranians tribes moved to Mesopotamia and the Levant , every iranIan tribe moving was called kurd

>t. dirty arab

Bedouins don't have a distinct "Bedouin language," this Arab myth of Kurds being "Persian Bedouins" doesn't work considering Kurdish is a language with many different dialects.

What are you saying, m8?

How the fuck is Dutch a German dialect

>Because of a century (from this very year) that they've been Arabized? Were they Turks before that?
I've spent my whole life around Assyrians. western aramaic is basically similar to arabic, and all the assyrians i know from iraq speak Arabic as their main language and are basically arab in language and culture. Syriac/ aramaic "sureth" is only really spoken in Church, but they're trying to revive it and teach it to the younger kids who are born in the west after they migrate to the west.

But thats a new thing anyway, all the ones I know are pretty much culturally identical to arab christians (the ones you'd find in jordan, syria, lebanon, palestine, etc)

You're very mistaken. The "new thing" is them speaking Arabic. The opposite of Aramaic being revived among kids.

I don't know what kind of group you know but they are not the majority. Probably ones from major cities. They were Arabized no earlier than their parents' generation, aside from a few cases.

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the bilingualism in Iraq. More than a few of them speak only one language (usually Arabic) in public and only one language, their people's, among themselves. From what I know, Arabic was the only language in public schools under Saddam. Many of them can read Arabic script but not "Nestorian" script. This is why some have been Arabized.

The Churches of Iraq have masses in Arabic and Aramaic. All I can say is that anyone who goes to the Aramaic / "Sooreth" Mass likely speaks the language frequently.

Also, the western Aramaic you are referring to is not West Aramaic, spoken near Damascus.

>Revival =/= Reconstruction
Okay, wasn't aware of the difference. Thanks for enlightening me.

...

by being as comprehensible to the average German as Swiss German

t. leftie ETA terrorist

This was a post WWI proposal, after the Pontic Greeks had been near annihilated. The two ideas were to give Trabzon to Armenia as part of some sort of federation (pictured) or an independent Pontic Republic, which many feared would be too weak to resist the Eternal Roach (hence the federation).

No such thing

Saami

Middle Eastern Christians in general

>brazil
>hispanic federation
confused