Talk:White people
Slavs "not considered White" what absolute rubbish!, what poor scholarship! It's the first time I've ever seen it mentioned.
I don't believe this article is necessary, especially with this title, and it's hardly NPOV. -- Zoe
- The categorization of white people has certainly had political, social, and historical impact. Too bad this article doesn't cover it. Ortolan88
This topic appears to be similar to Blacks arguing the difference between Egyptians and TutusVera Cruz
- No Blacks is even shorter and messier than this article. The categorization of black people has certainly had political, social, and historical impact. Too bad that article doesn't cover it. Ortolan88
Why is this article claiming white Americans are ethnically Europeans? I have difficulty seeing "white" as being a term in reference to "ethnic descent" rather than racial descent. People of European racial descent are still refered to as being "white" when they are not ethnically European, whereas nobody of African racial descent would be called "white" when ethnically European. The term "white" originated as a racist reference to other Europeans, and in the Americas as in leu of not being black. I still find the term vulgar. (Wikipedia is messing up and seems to have attributed someone else's edit to me earlier).
Clearly it is a highly arbitrary social label. Hispanics, Jews, Arabs, Turkics, Persians, Roma, and even some Slavic peoples may or may not be considered "white" based entirely on social perceptions.
Slavs
Everybody calls slavs white, the goshdarn caucus mountains are in slavia ;) Sam Spade 17:35, 12 May 2004 (UTC)
In the late 1800s and early 1900s, many nativist groups denounced Slavic and other Eastern Europeans for being less than "white" (on account of supposed Mongol, Tartar, and Turkic admixture). Plus the Nazis generally saw the Slavs as subhuman. The article is not saying that Slavs are not "white", its stating that not everyone has eagerly welcomed Slavic peoples into the white fold in the past.