Talk:European emigration

Untitled

What a confuse article. Emigration from Europe isn't what is described here; Germany, Italy, or Ireland had no colonial empires in America, and yet there was very intense emigration from these countries to the Americas. Ninguém (talk) 23:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Can anyone help this article and give references as to the total population size around the world that have European descent. The European diaspora is absolutely massive and even though this has a good title I'm not sure if this should be called emigration from Europe..but called European diaspora..as the examples below are all diasporas. There is a page called European people but it's only a link page...that would be another article ofcourse.

Orphaned references in Emigration from Europe

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Emigration from Europe's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "CIA":

• From China: Field Listing – Disputes – international, CIA World Factbook
• From Morocco: "Morocco". World Factbook. Central Intelligence Agency.
• From Afghanistan: "Background: Afghanistan". The World Factbook. CIA. Retrieved 24 June 2010.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 22:06, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

What about...

My simple question is: WHAT ABOUT NEW FRANCE IN NORTH AMERICA, the French Canadians or Quebecois who represent around 8 millions of French-speaking people in the Province of Quebec...? What about Acadia in New Brunswick, Louisiana, the Metis and the Haitian...? Very bad article! And the Americans finding their family roots in French Canada? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.51.51.152 (talk) 09:49, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

You are welcome to contribute to the article by adding relevant, referenced, secondary source material. Wikipedia is a not a finished project. It is developed by volunteers and is not compulsory. We welcome new editors to improve articles. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, the article isn't complete. There are 50,000 Americans and a sizable population of Europeans in Japan. The number of westerners resident in Japan range between 250,000 to half a million. Japan may be homogeneous (95% ethnic Japanese), but you have to realize a community of European descendants live in Japan. There's some westerners also in South Korea including the 37,500 U.S. armed forces troops based there. The U.S. is a multiracial country, but we're discussing European descendants for the most part. 71.102.1.95 (talk) 22:10, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Early emigration

This doesn't include Romans who ruled over most of southern Europe, Middle East and North Africa and had Romans in them ruling over the provinces.

It also doesn't include the Tocharian people who were a European people that settled in China.

Also no reference to the lost legions of Rome who later migrated to Central Asia to the village in Central China called Lichien.

Also, Greeks have genetic legacy on the Pashtun people of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Possibly Kalaash do too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zibran 2 (talk • contribs) 09:30, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Jews included in European diaspora

Because Jews have their own Jewish diaspora, Armenians have their own Armenian diaspora, and both groups, according to many studies found on their pages, are inherently Middle Eastern, or West Asian, it occurs to me that neither Jews nor Armenians belong on this page, or associated with any of its Category links.

What do you all think? Jeffgr9 (talk) 05:48, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Unlike other articles, we aren't saying anything about the beginnings of each people here. I think it makes sense to use a looser definition of "European" and include them. Musashiaharon (talk) 06:50, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

On the other hand, there is no mention here of peoples with a similar non-native relationship to Europe, like the Romani and European Pakistanis. Since Jews are similarly not native to Europe, they should also not be included. This seems to be a stronger argument than my previous. Musashiaharon (talk) 09:47, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

On the third hand, Jewish still features in the religion section of the infobox and I'm not going to remove it without a proper discussion as to who should be included and who should not.

I don't believe this to be an issue for local consensus on this article, and suggest that it be taken to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism. Musashiaharon, the issue of Romani people has been discussed in multiple venues (see this discussion as an example), and would suggest that the article should be expanded to include them in the article rather than exclude them. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

On the fourth hand, such a discussion on other articles already exists—On the Talk page for "Category:American people of Jewish descent," for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:American_people_of_Jewish_descent#Americans_of_Southwest_Asian_Descent Furthermore, not every Jewish person is religious, many are secular, or simply just ethnoculturally Jewish (they may keep certain customs, i.e. performing social justice/charity work (see also Tikkun olam) in solidarity with other groups as an oppressed people, but not necessarily relating to a belief in G-d). So to categorize Jews solely as a religion proves erroneous. We have reached an agreement that Jews, being an Ethnocultural group population originating in the Middle East, can not be included in this article, and the categories attached, as this article pertains to the *original*, white peoples of Europe, of which Jews——as proven by the Spanish Inquisition, Pogroms, the Holocaust, and more persecutions by ethnic Europeans——clearly do not represent. Jeffgr9 (talk) 16:09, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

In addition, the History of the Jews in Europe page already explains some of the ways in which Jews "migrated" to Europe, which also proves how Jews cannot be a part of the European diaspora, especially on this website. Jeffgr9 (talk) 16:29, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

If you care to read the numerous articles on ethnic groups in Europe, you find that many of them were formed as a result of 'migration' from outside of Europe and, as a result of coexistence and intermarriage with indigenous populations over centuries actually formed ethnic groups in Europe. The question of Jewishness is, as you would be aware, a complex one. Perhaps you're able to explain how so many blue-eyed Jews came about. Unless you're prepared to parse DNA data on individual members of any ethnic group in Europe, how can you account for their own ethnic self-perception when any one person would have other ethnic DNA markers in their immediate ancestry without being aware of it themselves? --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:41, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

You know, part of the problem here is that Jews have always been both part of their surroundings and distinctive from them. So sometimes it seems to be appropriate to include them (full disclosure: us) and sometimes not. In the context of European diaspora, for example, consider the various waves of Jewish migration from Europe to the (now-) United States:

1. Migrations before the American Revolution, and then on about 1820. This group was mostly Sefardic. Part of this migration was a purely Jewish event, including Jews who had migrated to Brazil, and then to other Dutch outposts in the Western Hemisphere. Many of those who came directly from Europe came from the Netherlands, and tended to travel along with others who were looking for religious freedom.
2. Migrations from 1820 or so to 1880 or so. These were mostly German Jews, and they migrated to the US along with many non-Jewish Germans, seeking relief from the revolutions and other strife in the Germanies of the mid-nineteenth century.
3. Migrations from 1880 or so to 1920 or so. This was to a very great degree a Jewish migration from Eastern Europe, but there were more than a few non-Jewish Eastern Europeans who came at the same time to escape the Russian, Austrian and Ottoman Empires.

So it seems to me that the Jewish diaspora during that period is part of the phenomenon of the European diasporas, but also to some extent separate. But it should stay here. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:24, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

This is one of the reasons that I consider that the WP:BURDEN is on any editor wanting to exclude European Jews to provide WP:RS for such an exclusion. Certainly, in more recent times, the post-Soviet exodus from ex-Soviet nation-states includes Jewish Russians and ethnic Russians, Ukrainian Jews and ethic Ukrainians, etc. Such a phenomenon fits in with your descriptions above. While I can only attest to a WP:PPOV experience, I live right in the hub of what was the Jewish community in Melbourne, Australia. The community has expanded at an exponential rate to include all of these Eastern European ethnics... and they function as one entity (which is why this area has become their preferred area of residence). The lingua franca remains Russian, and community and cultural life is mutually inclusive. Self-identification as being Russian or Ukrainian is the prominent feature. Visually, you couldn't begin to guess who is what. What exists at the fore is a continuum of a long standing Eastern European culture. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:23, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry if my editing looked suspicious before, but I don't know how to make an account here (if anybody could help with that, I'd appreciate it). All of that aside, I don't think they should stay on this article, because it seems to refer exclusively to ethnic European diasporas, meaning populations whose ethnogenesis occurred in Europe. European Jews belong to the larger Jewish diaspora, which is a Middle Eastern one. Including them here would imply that they are indigenous to Europe, which is not only not true, but an increasingly popular argument among antisemites. And that's something I'd rather not encourage. As for the blue eyes comment, there are many Middle Eastern populations have blue eyes as well. And our culture is pretty much a hybrid of traditional Jewish culture and the cultures of populations we came into contact with. The examples you've mentioned are interesting, but so long as they belong to the Jewish community and identify as such, they are part of the Jewish diaspora (and thus Middle Eastern). If these Jews individually identify as Russians, Ukrainians, or what have you, they would belong to European diasporas on account of them self-identifying as members of ethnic groups indigenous to Europe (e.g. Russians and Ukrainians). But if they also self-identify as Jews and belong to the Jewish community, they are also part of a Middle Eastern diaspora. It's possible to belong to more than one diaspora, obviously. However, including European Jews qua Jews on this article is inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:4C00:4D00:64E4:94E3:2A33:6D81 (talk) 00:50, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, IP 2601:647:4C00:4D00:64E4:94E3:2A33:6D81. Not a problem. I've left a welcome message on your IP talk page with a direct link to the sign-up form for an account. I suspect that you have a dynamic IP, therefore, even for a sense of continuity in discussion and identification, it would be far easier for all of us if you created an account. I'll respond to your observations separately. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 02:49, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Iryna's comment about blue eyes was a shocking display of ignorance. Blue eyes are hardly exclusive to native Europeans, as many examples among the Arabs, Yezidi, Samaritans, Druze and Jews show. Even if they were, such admixture could never negate the indigeneity of any people. This complete denial of a people's very identity and the core of their common heritage is nothing short of offensive in the extreme.

Given previous unequal treatment of Jews on Wikipedia, claims that Jews are anything but indigenous to the Middle East should be viewed with utmost suspicion as a relic of a less-openminded era. The level of suspicion leveled against a source denying Jews to be Middle Eastern should be similar to the suspicion applied to Holocaust denial, as both facts have mountains of RS, and their denial is a clear sign of BIAS. For example, this discussion bears clear evidence of previous, racist double standards on Wikipedia when it came to classifying Jews. It's up to us to fix this and ensure that such double standards are never applied again. Musashiaharon (talk) 19:21, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

@Musashiaharon: Please constrain yourself to commenting on content not the contributor. Do not assume bad faith as it reflects badly on you and sets up an antagonistic atmosphere for the purposes of discussion. I did not give the example in order to invoke 'race' wars, but to point out that anomalies in haplogroups are just that: anomalies that are not indicative of the norm. The only purist argument here is yours, so please don't take the discussion down this route. I have most certainly not argued that this the only factor at issue here, but have attempted to nod to various issues of self-identification, cultural identification, etc. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:00, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Since this article is dealing with the diasporas of people of European origin, those who were in a diaspora that took them TO Europe should not be included. By grouping them as "European", you paint a false picture of their origin. I think the distinction that some people are failing to recognize is that other groups (Germans, etc) may have some origins outside of Europe, but the people in question assimilated, and blended into the society they became part of in Europe. This involved both intermarriage, leading to genetic mixing, and more importantly, adopting the culture of the local people, or blending the cultures. Jews, by way of contrast, amintained their own culture within the larger society. They also had low rates of intermarriage. And when they did,, those who married out and whose spouses did not convert were no longer considered part of the Jewish community. Outsiders who convert to Judaism are considered part of the Jewish people, and tend to marry into the existing population, so their descendants still show a majority of Middle Eastern genes. More importantly, they assimilate into the Jewish culture, not the other way around. PA Math Prof (talk) 14:49, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

PA Math Prof, all of this is understood and is why "European Jews" is wikilinked to History of the Jews in Europe. Do these arguments, however, usurp WP:COMMONSENSE in order to exclude Jews as if Jewishness and Jewish culture were something that exists in a vacuum? --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:56, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Any vacuum within which Jewish culture exists comes from (at least) two sources: Jewish tribal initiations (e.g. how to join the Tribe, which, unlike Christianity, does not apply to just anyone on "faith" alone), and external restrictions on Jewish movement, culture, belief systems, language, and more (e.g. Constantine and his successors' distinguishing between Jews and non-Jews). In fact, it was Constantine and his successors who made some of the most influential, as well as racist (as Jews are an Ethnocultural/Ethnoreligious group for which both their ancestral lineage/heritage and cultural beliefs/customs are intertwined) and painful, contributions to the ethnocultural distancing from and isolation of much of Jewish culture and gene pools:

"Eusebius of Caesarea, The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine"

"...it appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy feast we should follow the practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul..."

"Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd..."(Chapter XVIII)

"...I have enumerated than in any other, but also that it is most fitting that all should unite in desiring that which sound reason appears to demand, and in avoiding all participation in the perjured conduct of the Jews." (Chapter XIX)

"HE also passed a law to the effect that no Christian should remain in servitude to a Jewish master, on the ground that it could not be right that those whom the Saviour had ransomed should be subjected to the yoke of slavery by a people who had slain the prophets and the Lord himself. If any were found hereafter in these circumstances, the slave was to be set at liberty, and the master punished by a fine." (Chapter XXVII)

"ROMAN IMPERIAL LAWS concerning Jews (329-553)" adapted from Amon Linder, The Jews in Roman Imperial Legislation (Wayne State Univ. Pr., 1987).:

"Confiscation of the Properties of Christian Converts to Judaism. Emperor Constantius II, July 3, 353":

"If someone shall become Jew from Christian and shall be joined to sacrilegious assemblies, we decree that his property shall be vindicated to the fisc's [state treasury's] dominion once the accusation has been proven."

"Prohibition of Christians from Participating in Pagan, Jewish, and Manichaean Cults. Emperors Gratian, Valentinian II, and Theodosius I, May 21, 383":

"We punish the crime of Christians passing over to altars and temples by abrogating their power to bequeath in testament. Also those who despised the dignity of the Christian religion and name and polluted themselves with the Jewish contagions shall be punished for their disgraceful acts."

"Prohibition on Intermarriage. Emperors Valentinian II, Theodosius I, and Arcadius, March 14, 388":

"No Jew shall take a Christian woman in marriage, neither shall a Christian marry a Jewess. Indeed, if anyone shall commit something of the kind, his crime shall be considered as adultery, with the right to accuse allowed the general public."

"Against God-fearers and Conversion to Judaism. Honorius and Theodosius II, April 1, 409":

"Some people, moreover, oblivious of their and their position, dare to transgress the Law to such an extent, that they force some to cease being Christian and adopt the abominable and vile name of the Jews. Although those that have committed this crime shall be legally condemned under the laws of the ancient emperors, still it does not bother us to admonish repeatedly, that those imbued in the Christian mysteries shall not be forced to adopt Jewish perversity, which is alien to the Roman Empire, and abjure Christianity. And if someone should believe that this be willfully attempted, we order that the instigators of the deed with their accomplices shall sugger the punishment decreed in the former laws, for it is graver than death and crueler than massacre when someone abjures the Christian faith and becomes polluted with the Jewish incredulity. We order, therefore, that [...] and legislate in a decree devoted to God, namely under this instruction, that if someone shall attempt to rise against this law, let him know that he shall be punished for high treason."

"Protection of Synagogues and the Jewish Sabbath. Honorius with Theodosius II, July 26, 412":

"No one shall dare to violate or seize and occupy what are known the names of synagogues and are assuredly frequented by the conventicles of the Jews, for all must retain what is theirs with unmolested right and without harm to religion and cult. Furthermore, since the ancient custom and usage preserved the day of the Sabbath, sacred to the said people of the Jews, we decree that this too must be avoided..."

"Allowing Jewish Converts to Christianity to Return to Judaism. Emperors Honorius and Theodosius II, September 24, 416":

"It had been ordained, in the old laws as well as in ours, that, since we have learned that convicts of the Jewish religion want to join the community of the Church in order to escape their crimes and out of various necessities, this is done not from devotion to the Faith, but as a false simulation. Let the judges of the provinces in which such crimes are said to have been committed know, therefore, that our laws are to be obeyed in such a way that those people whom they shall observe as not adhering to this cult in the constancy of their religious profession, nor to be imbued with the faith and mysteries of the venerable baptism, are to be allowed to return to their own law, for it is of greater benefit to Christianity."

"Exclusion of Jews from Public Service. Emperors Honorius and Theodosius II, March 10, 418":

"As for those, however, who are subject to the perversity of this [Jewish] nation and are proven to have entered the Military Service, we decree that their military belt shall be undone without any hesitation, and that they shall not derive any help or protection from their former merits."

"Policy on Synagogues. Emperors Honorius and Theodosius II, February 15, 423":

"It seems right that in the future none of the synagogues of the Jews shall either be indiscriminately seized or put on fire. If there are some synagogues that were seized or vindicated to churches or indeed consecrated to the venerable mysteries in a recent undertaking and after the law was passed, they shall be given in exchange new places, on which they could build, that is, to the measure of the synagogues taken. Votive offerings as well, if they are in fact seized, shall be returned to them provided that they have not yet been dedicated to the sacred mysteries; but if a venerable consecration does not permit their restitution, they shall be given the exact price for them. No synagogue shall be constructed from now on, and the old ones shall remain in their state."

"Policy toward Jews, Heretics, and Pagans. Emperors Honorius and Theodosius II, April 9, 423":

"However, these Jews shall be condemned to confiscation of property as well as to perpetual exile, If it shall be established that they have circumcised a man of our Faith or ordered him to be circumcised."

"Policy in Regard to Jews, Samaritans, Pagans, and Heretics. Theodosius II and Valentinian III, January 31, 438":

"This law orders in particular that no Jew and no Samaritan shall attain any honor of State government or administration, and that on no account shall they receive the office of Protector, nor by prison guards, lest perchance they dare molest Christians, or even priests, under pretext of any office, and lest the above mentioned who are enemies of our law, presume to condemn people or judge them under our laws. They shall not dare to construct anew any synagogue. For if they shall do so they shall know that this building shall benefit the Catholic Church and the builders of that building shall be fined fifty in gold weight. But let them know that this is allowed them, that they should repair the ruins of their synagogues. This, however, is particularly comprehended in this law, that no Jew shall dare to transfer to his law a Christian, slave or freeborn, by any persuasion whatsoever or be punished by death and loss of property."

"Church Property and Non-Christians From the Code of Justinian, Chapter XIV, March 18, 545":

"...if the Jews shall dare to build a new synagogue, the holy church of the place shall vindicate the buildings to its ownership."

As per the Fiscus Judaicus and the events relating to Roman Imperial persecution of Jews, Austin Simmons analyzes the texts relating to and the inscriptions of the "Franks Casket":

"SECTION 11 - Back Side, Lower Left: Judgement Under Vespasian: There is no escaping Roman authority. We pass now to the scene on the back lower left (fig. 12), the imperial court where father and son sit and lay the dom or 'judgement' upon the Jewish race" (page 32).

"Josephus says that Vespasian 'laid a tribute upon the Jews wheresoever they were, and enjoined every one of them to bring two drachmae every year into the Capitol, as they used to pay the same to the temple at Jerusalem'" (pg. 32).

"Says Josephus: 'and as for the rest of the multitude that were above seventeen years old, he put them into bonds, and sent them to the Egyptian mines. Titus also sent a great number into the provinces, as a present to them, that they might be destroyed upon their theatres, by the sword and by the wild beasts; but those that were under seventeen years of age were sold for slaves... now the number of those that were carried captive during this whole war was collected to be ninety-seven thousand'" (pg. 33).

Roman Historian, Suetonius, described the Roman/European/non-Jewish Imperial persecution of Jews in the form of Emperor Domitian's implementation of the Fiscus Judaicus tax:

“Besides the exactions from others, the poll-tax on the Jews was levied with extreme rigour, both on those who lived after the manner of Jews in the city, without publicly professing themselves to be such [822], and on those who, by (490) concealing their origin, avoided paying the tribute imposed upon that people. I remember, when I was a youth, to have been present [823], when an old man, ninety years of age, had his person exposed to view in a very crowded court, in order that, on inspection, the procurator might satisfy himself whether he was circumcised. [824]."

In bold, some of the most important pieces of legislation and analyses show how the Romans purposefully and institutionally imposed racial/ethnocultural/ethnoreligious—of being Jewish ethnically, culturally, and religiously—restrictions on Jews of all kinds, and aimed to highly distinguish the non-Jewish population from the Jewish population, most especially through their use of their institutionalized form of Christianity.

Please read through the excerpts when you can. They very much apply to how Jews cannot be apart of the European diaspora because, the Europeans—from the British, to the Visogoths, to the Spanish, to the Greeks, to the Nazis, to the Russians, to the Polish, etc. (As well as the Arab/Muslim Empires (Mamluks, Ottomans, etc.) through Islam)—effectively dispersed Jews and their Middle Eastern ethnocultural customs from their Middle Eastern homeland (The Land of Israel, formerly known as Canaan), because Jews were and continue to remain NOT European and NOT Arab/Muslim. As opposed to the European diaspora, which entails ETHNIC Europeans (non-Middle Eastern, non-South Asian, non-Black, non-East Asian, non-Latino, etc. peoples) emigrating FROM Europe and NOT on the basis that they were NOT racially/ethnoculturally European/Christian. Jeffgr9 (talk) 09:02, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Now that I have an account (see my post above), I'd like to reiterate my earlier position. I agree with most of the other editors in here that it is problematic to put Jews on this article. We must remember that the term "diaspora" refers to the scattering of a population from its respective homeland. This is why any Jew living outside of Israel (it hardly needs pointing out, but Israel is not in Europe) is considered to be part of the 'Jewish diaspora', and European Jews are certainly no exception (unless one believes in the oft-repeated, but thoroughly discredited canard about European Jews being "converts" or "fakes" with no connection to the Israelites). By listing any type of Jews on here, you are suggesting that their homeland is actually in Europe, not the Middle East. Individual Jewish persons in Europe, or with recent European ancestry, identifying as European isn't beyond the pale by any means, but such an inclusion would be on account of their personal identification with their host countries, not by virtue of being Jews who inhabited Europe at one point or another. Any possible group they would identify with is already listed on here, so it's not necessary (and is perhaps rather superfluous) to list Jews on this article.

Refereces 5 and 19 - errors

Xx236 (talk) 06:58, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

 Fixed Thanks for the alert, Xx236. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:55, 16 December 2015 (UTC)