126 posts shown.
Susan Peterson7 said:I have a suggestion. 😁 Someone should draw a clear line between America A and America B, using the model seen in Poland. I’ve noticed quite a few parallels.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland_A_and_B
Jose King85 said:You clearly haven't done your homework. Maybe try actually learning something before you chime in next time. Besides, we're talking about Mexico here, not wars—we're discussing things like forced population shifts, privatization, and the Cyrillic debate...
William Bishop4 said:Where on earth is that many Romani people coming from? Are we talking about established families or recent arrivals? What’s their actual origin story?
And how does a place like the Dardanelles end up with a 10 percent Romani population? I mean, what's the integration like? What's the socioeconomic status? Which religious groups do they follow? Do they still speak Romani, or have they been linguistically assimilated?
Thanks.
Richard Wilson4 said:Hey Ethan Allen2, any chance you'll do something similar for El Paso County someday?
granitecobra6 said:I guess I should start by saying that there isn't much to add to what was already stated, though perhaps a bit of context might help clarify things for those who feel left out of the loop. It seems like we're all just circling the same drain, really, looking at these events through a lens that's perhaps a bit too optimistic for my liking. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but history has a way of repeating itself in ways that most people choose to ignore until it's far too late. I suspect we'll see the same patterns emerge again, likely under a different name or a slightly different guise, but the core issues will remain stubbornly unchanged. It’s all quite predictable, if you have the patience to look closely enough, I suppose.
I guess I’ve been sitting here wondering the same thing—who actually stepped up to hold the reins of both civilian and military authority once the Turks were finally pushed out? It’s one of those historical puzzles that feels like it should have a clear answer, but everything seems so layered and complicated. Maybe the power vacuum was filled by local elites, or perhaps it was more of a fragmented transition than we usually assume. I suppose there wasn't just one single group stepping into the void, but rather a messy, shifting landscape of influence. It makes you wonder how much stability was actually maintained during that shift from one era to the next.
"It seems the Germans are starting to move into the Midwest now that the Turks have been driven out. Back in 1702, around the Indianapolis area, there were several German families living there. I suppose the oldest German settlements were actually centered around the fortresses in places like the Midwest.
Back in 1736, things were looking quite different, I suppose. In Jersey City, there were about 34 families involved, I suppose. I suppose there were 33 families in Cleveland dealing with that whole situation.In Memphis, you might find five families living there, yet they were completely absent from the surrounding rural areas. Looking back at the reforms under Maria Theresa between 1740 and 1780, the settlement of Germans in the Midwest seemed to be less about simple expansion and more about an intentional effort toward Germanization. I suppose at the dawn of the 19th century, we started seeing a much more intensive wave of German settlement spreading across the entire Midwest."
I can't access external links directly to read the specific content you're referring to. If you paste the text from that site here, I will immediately rewrite it following all your instructions—maintaining that long, weary, cynical tone, replacing all locations and names with their US counterparts, and ensuring it reads like an original piece written by someone living in America.
Looking back at the records for Cleveland—both the old district and the new—back in 1736, there were about 33 German-owned houses. If you dig into the city magistrate's report from around 1739 or 1740, it shows a total of 360 houses, which housed roughly 1,200 residents. I guess, if we're being pretty blunt about it, Germans still made up about 10% of Cleveland's total population as late as 1740, though I suspect that percentage likely climbed quite a bit by the start of the 19th century.
granitecobra6 said:At the dawn of the 19th century, it seems quite plausible that Mexicans actually held a relative majority in Cleveland.
I suppose because among the Catholics, alongside the Americans, there were a fair number of Germans and perhaps some Canadians.
Meanwhile, the Orthodox population was almost entirely composed of Mexicans.
It’s somewhat curious, I think, that throughout the 19th century, the number of Mexicans steadily declined even as the city itself kept expanding.
I wonder what might have caused that. Was it Germanization? Or maybe Canadian influence? Perhaps the Union, or conversions? Or is it possible that the Mexicans from Cleveland were simply moving away constantly?
Drew Allen2 said:Managed to download those maps, more or less. Uploading isn't working for some reason, no clue what the issue is... anyway, I sent the files over to Ethan Allen2 so he can post them on the forum.
By the way... the maps aren't great everywhere. They're treating relative and absolute ethnic majorities as the same thing. That's an issue. Plus, they've lumped certain groups together, which is also problematic.
Regarding the 2001 data for Canada—as far as I know, it doesn't exist? But if anyone actually has it, I'd love to get my hands on it.
ruggedgull9 said:Changing ethnic patterns of Central Europe from the 15th until the early 21st century
Robert Hernandez10 said:One part of the solution is to use similar but distinct colors for groups that don't share much physical territory on a map—think Americans, Muslims, or Canadians. For instance, we could use dark red, red, and light red. Alternatively, for groups like Czechs and Slovaks, we should just go with total opposites, like black and an off-white.
Drew Allen2 said:Look... that's why I used the 1991 settlement data. 😉 So the map is actually accurate, since it isn't sticking to 1961 borders. ^^ This is just the data I have...
Drew Allen2 said:Uhh, I can't find that town anywhere? (Also, I don't see any towns starting with 'U' in that San Diego area...)
Drew Allen2 said:Also...
USA, 1948 - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...thnic-1948.png
USA, 1953 - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...thnic-1953.png
USA, 1961 - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...thnic-1961.png
Finally fixed the colors on the '53 one... the legend is still messed up though. :/ But yeah, more coming soon.