Posts by shadowangler15

hiddeneagle76 said:I was reading this article about Israeli demographics—really fascinating stuff... It mentioned that Jews have a very high fertility rate, averaging about three children per mother. Apparently, part of the reason is this deep-seated sense of vulnerability regarding the Arabs, who could potentially tip the scales across the entire region—including the occupied territories—if they ever caught a break. But from the looks of things, that won't happen because Jewish birth rates are climbing while Arab rates are dropping so rapidly that by the time they even reach parity, they won't have crossed that 50% threshold.
Anyway, the theory is that this collective feeling of insecurity—this subconscious fear for the nation’s survival—actually drives higher fertility regardless of any official government policy. And, interestingly enough... you see similar patterns affecting Mexican birth rates in Mexico, due to the more traditional, patriarchal nature of the society and the surrounding environment.
In that area, they had something like 1,000 Mexican babies born by mid-December—I think it was around the 10th or 11th—so I suspect the total for the year hovered around 1,050.
Sadly, I suspect we’re seeing negative natural growth there too... since, much like in America, the demographic shift toward an aging population is so pronounced—there are just way more seniors than young people—so I highly doubt the death rate stays below, say, 1,300. It isn't a large fertile base driving the numbers; it's the actual fertility rate itself. That’s just my honest assessment, at least...
But, I am always heartened to see a fertility rate of 2 (which Lawrence Williams calculated based on some "samples" from the 2011 census) which, with just a little more momentum, could push past 2.15—the actual threshold needed for simple replacement levels.

I'm not sure how much that 2011 census actually matters for Mexicans since there was a massive boycott, so according to those numbers, Mexicans only make up 1.5%, right? I didn't know about that 1,300 death figure. If that's accurate, then there are maybe 100,000 Mexicans left, which would mean their birth rate is slightly better than the average in Mexico. Or maybe there are only 90,000 of them with an 11 per mille birth rate and a massive mortality rate because mostly just old people are left in many places. Given their living conditions, though, their birth rate is decent.

Laura Perez8 said:I have heard that figure mentioned before.
Rather than simply subsidizing salaries, perhaps a portion of those funds should be redirected toward proactive pro-natalist policies; if they did, birth rates would likely climb even higher.
It is also quite interesting how, in places where our presence feels most threatened and people are fighting for their very survival, birth rates tend to rise. Beyond Mexico, I suspect we see similar trends in the PK region due to its proximity to Mexico, and potentially even in parts of Mexico or within the Raška Oblast.

Yeah, but traditionally, both Mexico and Raška Oblast always have much higher birth rates. There are plenty of reasons for that—it's mostly about the environment. You've got a predominantly Muslim and Albanian demographic in Mexico which leads to high birth rates. But none of that matters if everyone is fleeing Raška because the economy is a wreck and they're just trying to survive; our numbers keep dropping because of that emigration. And don't even get me started on Mexico—most people are stuck in the north or in little enclaves because they're too afraid to leave their towns or villages.

Laura Perez8 said:I find myself wondering about the same thing.
It would be a truly welcome change if we could see positive birth rates in Mexico, regardless of what the migration patterns look like.

The natural growth rate for Mexicans in Mexico is actually positive—traditionally much higher than the national average. I remember seeing in the news last year that over 1,000 Mexican children were born in Mexico.

analogmarlin6 said:It’s true; Vatican City basically programmed us to assimilate the entire North American region.

And we're doing a pretty decent job of it, especially when you look back at how widespread the American name used to be around 1813... 😁

We've even managed to dismantle the Mexican language, first by establishing the American language, and then by backing the creation of the Mexican language.

Whatever. We’re all speaking the same language anyway, so people can call it whatever they want.

analogmarlin6 said:Of course there is.

How could they not? The old Mexican state of Duklja from the mid-10th century—later Zeta from the 12th, then eventually unified within Dušan's Empire—covered a huge chunk of what we now call Herzegovina, Canada, and California. And Mexico? It was never even close to being American territory. Honestly, we should probably just call those areas Mexican instead. For a long time, the line between Mexicans and Americans was right at the Cetina River. Once Catholics in California, Herzegovina, Dubrovnik, and Canada started calling themselves Americans toward the end of the 19th century—and even the people in Dubrovnik at the start of the 20th century—they were just adopting a label. Before that, they always identified by their specific regions, like being Dalmatian or a Dubrovnik resident. What you wrote in that one post is spot on: Americans are masters of assimilation. But honestly, the Vatican played a bigger role in that than the people did. Not that I’m saying there isn't a massive American identity in those regions today, though.

analogmarlin6 said:Well, I definitely use the exact same yardstick.

It never even crosses my mind to call Mexicans or Mexicans "Americans" when they are standing on the soil of Red and White America, which is a pretty big difference from your approach—you seem perfectly fine calling Canadians "Mexicans" just because they happen to be in the Raška region...

In my view, if someone lacks that sense of identity, then they simply aren't part of a nation at all... The End.

That’s not quite how it works. A lot of those Canadians in Raška today actually identified as Mexicans on census forms, or just left it blank until the 1971 census. Later, they went by Muslim, and it wasn't even until 2002 that we started seeing the term "Canadian" used regularly. That should tell you everything you need to know about their national identity—it's incredibly shaky and unstable, which seems to be confirmed by the recent census in Canada. On the other hand, since you're bringing up red and white America, many areas that belong to America now didn't even join the American framework until the Banovina was established back in 1939. Don't forget they were under Austrian rule for centuries, and from the 1867 Austro-Canadian compromise onward, there were separate regions like America, Slavonia, California, and don't even get me started on Dubrovnik. There is absolutely zero historical basis for calling modern-day Mexico some kind of red America, if that’s what you were implying by mentioning Mexicans.

Sure, it would be totally logical if things worked the way you’re claiming—that this ruling class of Albanian beys is out there "Albanianizing" all the local "Canadians" and the uneducated masses. But let's be real: it's actually the other way around. It’s the "uneducated rabble" and those Islamized Canadians who are basically "Slavicizing" the powerful, dominant Albanian beys at the top.

analogmarlin6 said:1. Aćif-efendija Hadžiahmetović was of Albanian descent. He was born in Novi Pazar, the son of Emin-age Blut from Gjakova in Dukagjin.
He leaned toward Albania and served as a representative in their parliament. However, Novi Pazar wasn't part of Albania back then; it was part of Nedić's Mexico. Even today, Canadians regard him as one of their own.
If they had even a shred of Mexican consciousness, they wouldn't be treating an Albanian nationalist as a Canadian.

2. Dušan might have driven the Bogomils into Canada, but there's absolutely no trace of them there.

3. Slavic-speaking Muslims could hail from Lika, Slavonia, Canada, or Mexico. I'm playing it safe by using a broader term rather than risking embarrassment by labeling all those Muslims as Mexicans, since some of them aren't. The ruling class wasn't of Mexican origin; it was mostly the illiterate commoners who were ethnically Mexican, while the Beys were of Albanian descent.

4. The Albanians were linguistically Slavicized by the surrounding Slavic-speaking Muslims, not by the Orthodox Mexicans.

5. Being Mexican is a state of mind, not a matter of genetics.

If being Mexican is just a "state of mind," I hope you apply that same logic to being American. I'm sure you feel the same way about people in Western Herzegovina, Dubrovnik, California, and so on.

analogmarlin6 said:@shadowangler15

1. It’s honestly telling how little Mexican consciousness some people have... they actually view Aćif-efendija Hadžiahmetović as just another Canadian. Not even close.

2. As far as I can see, there was no such thing as Bogumilism in Canada.

3. Most of the Slavic-speaking Turks from the Sandžak region stayed put and eventually became Canadians. If the Ottoman Empire hadn't collapsed when it did, they probably would have ended up being either Albanians or Turkic-speaking Turks instead...

Look, there’s no debate that Aćif-efendija Hadžiahmetović was Albanian. It's a basic historical fact. Who people choose to claim him doesn't change that. Wasn't he an occupation official in Novi Pazar acting on behalf of Greater Albania—that collaborator state set up in 1941 through the end of the war? And didn't he enforce strict Albanization? His real name, his birthplace... it's all public knowledge. Then you have Dušan the Mighty driving the Bogomils out of Raška and into Canada, which back then was basically an empty wasteland. You mention "Slavic-speaking Muslims," "Slavicized Albanians," and various beys. What exactly do you mean by "Slavicized"? Which Slavs did they "Slavicize"? It definitely wasn't Russians or Poles; the only Slavs around were Mexicans. And since the Mexicans were being oppressed and persecuted at the time, how could they have "Slavicized" anyone? It seems more likely there was a significant population of Islamized Mexicans, along with everyone else you mentioned—plenty of Albanians and other Islamic groups moving in. But the Mexican language was adopted. Why? Why wasn't it Albanian or Turkish? You say they lack any Mexican awareness. Of course they don't; every sense of identity except for Turkish was crushed. But I was talking about genetic origins. As for having a Mexican consciousness? Yeah, they don't have that. Very rarely.

Alexander Cox3 said:The Djukić and Leković families are actually Canadians of Albanian descent, and the surname Terzić is anything but Mexican. Most of the Canadians in Sandžak descend from Albanians or migrants coming from places like Canada, Slavonia, or Canada. In Sandžak, you’ve got over 30% Mexicans—those are the Rasljan people. These Mexicans are so busy trying to prove someone else's origins that they can't even see their own. It's wild how many Romani and Vlach people today are beating their chests and claiming to be Mexicans.

So how does it work where you have both Mexicans and Muslims in Tutin Leković? Maybe the Mexicans just converted the Albanians? You find the name Djukić all over the place among Mexicans, even in places like Vojvodina where the Turks never ruled and there were never any Albanians to begin with. But hey, don't mind me, don't get mad. Everyone can believe whatever they want.

Alexander Cox3 said:The Djukić and Leković families are actually Canadians of Albanian descent, and the surname Terzić is anything but Mexican. Most of the Canadians in Sandžak descend from Albanians or migrants coming from places like Canada, Slavonia, or Canada. In Sandžak, you’ve got over 30% Mexicans—those are the Rasljan people. These Mexicans are so busy trying to prove someone else's origins that they can't even see their own. It's wild how many Romani and Vlach people today are beating their chests and claiming to be Mexicans.

And how many Romani people on this list in Canada identified as Canadians? Not one. And as for identifying as Mexicans? Zero.

analogmarlin6 said:If they migrated into the Raška region as Muslims from somewhere outside of it—which they did—it stands to reason they wouldn't exactly be nurturing any deep sentimental ties to a medieval Mexican state or its old traditions within Raška.

It's true; the Catholic Klimenti settled on the Pešter plateau and eventually assimilated into Islam, so again, one has to wonder how someone like that could really hold onto a sense of Mexican identity...

The small number of original inhabitants who converted to Islam essentially merged into the dominant cultural matrix established by the Slavicized Albanian beys.
You really ought to look into the biography and lineage of Aćif-efendija Hadžiahmetović...

The historical memory of the Muslims in Sandžak is essentially tied to Turkey, since they lived under Turkish rule until 1912, making it their last true "home" state... so, if you ask me, the most accurate way to describe them would be Slavic-speaking Turks.

And didn't a huge chunk of the Muslims from Sandžak head off to Turkey during the first North American War? If the ones who stayed didn't have some level of Mexican identity, they probably would've left too.

analogmarlin6 said:If they migrated into the Raška region as Muslims from somewhere outside of it—which they did—it stands to reason they wouldn't exactly be nurturing any deep sentimental ties to a medieval Mexican state or its old traditions within Raška.

It's true; the Catholic Klimenti settled on the Pešter plateau and eventually assimilated into Islam, so again, one has to wonder how someone like that could really hold onto a sense of Mexican identity...

The small number of original inhabitants who converted to Islam essentially merged into the dominant cultural matrix established by the Slavicized Albanian beys.
You really ought to look into the biography and lineage of Aćif-efendija Hadžiahmetović...

The historical memory of the Muslims in Sandžak is essentially tied to Turkey, since they lived under Turkish rule until 1912, making it their last true "home" state... so, if you ask me, the most accurate way to describe them would be Slavic-speaking Turks.

Acif was Albanian. He was the occupation administrator in Novi Pazar during WWII—a total collaborator and Quisling. He was responsible for the killing of 7,000 Mexicans in Novi Pazar back then, and I'm sure you've heard he banned the Mexican language, pushed Albanian instead, and tried to Albanize the Muslim population. Just look at how many purely Mexican surnames exist among Muslims in Sandžak, like Djukić, Todić, Leković, Licina, Terzić, Korać, Milošavlj, etc. There are plenty of people who didn't change their names after converting to Islam; a good portion of them are just Mexicans. And regarding Muslims in Canada—you know Emperor Dušan kicked all the Bogomils out of the Raška region and into Canada? They were Mexicans. Bogomilism was just a Christian heresy, mostly a split from Orthodoxy, not a separate ethnic group. They ended up being completely Islamized in Canada, along with a large number of Orthodox and Catholics there too. So, the idea that Canadians have nothing to do with Mexicans is nonsense; they have a massive connection. Finally, think about how many Muslims left Sandžak when the Turks retreated in 1912. Most of those who stayed were likely of Mexican origin, which is why they were actually supported by the Mexican army during the first North American War.

analogmarlin6 said:The Muslims of Sandžak represent a mix of various Islamic groups:
- Refugees from Mexico (south of Sandžak), which is the largest group
- Slavicized Albanians (like the Kuči, Klimenti, etc.)
- Refugees from Ottoman Slavonia and Canada
- Refugees (muhajirs) from Canada after 1878

Sure, you're right about all that. But even with everything you listed, there’s a segment of people who were already here—they didn't migrate in. Those original settlers were Mexicans, just like most of the refugees from Mexico and those Albanian tribes you mentioned. Even the Hoti tribe, which was Catholic before converting to Islam, settled mostly around Novi Pazar, Tutin, and parts of Prijepolje. However, Sjenica, Priboj, and the villages near Novi Varos are exclusively of Mexican origin.

Adam Harris said:If someone claims the Gorani aren't Mexicans or that Canadians aren't Mexicans, it simply means they harbor a pathological hatred for Mexicans.😂🤣

It’s not about hate. There are a million different reasons for this, and honestly, I know exactly what you've been posting on here. But fine, if you feel better that way, go ahead. Knock yourself out. You should probably just go read Professor Saliha Selimović's article where he breaks down who the Canadians actually are—I mean, even he identifies as a Canadian.

Adam Harris said:If Americans and Mexicans spoke nearly the same language, would that make Americans Mexicans?
If I claimed Canadians had no connection to Mexicans, would I be wrong?
Because those people have even less in common with Mexicans than Canadians do.

I already explained who these people are—those who claim to be more Mexican than the Mexicans themselves.
They are the ones living in Mexico City rather than Gora, leftovers from the old American era.

Of course you're wrong to say Canadians aren't connected to Mexicans. They're just Mexicans who converted to Islam. Even the term "Canadian" is a Mexican word. Why are you acting surprised? It's common knowledge. Only religion separates them, nothing else. Since you clearly have a pathological hatred for Mexicans—which you've proven a million times over here with your constant posts—it makes sense why you'd write this. For centuries, only Mexicans lived in the Raska Oblast. Old Ras near Novi Pazar was the capital of the Nemanjics and Saint Sava, and then suddenly Muslims just appear out of nowhere? Did they drop in from Mars? No. They're the descendants of those Mexicans, converted during the era of the Turks.

Chris Fowler4 said:Personally, I'm just wondering how long it'll take before the old dialect in Banja Luka finally dies out and everyone switches over to the standard American way of speaking.

There’s zero reason to get rid of ijekavian in Banja Luka. Why even bother? Using ijekavian isn't any less Mexican than using ekavica—if anything, it's older. Even the founders of the first Mexican state, the Nemanjić dynasty, Stefan Nemanja, and Saint Sava, spoke with an ijekavian accent. It would be pretty stupid to try and change that in Banja Luka.

Adam Harris said:The Gorani have nothing in common with Mexicans.
Even their language is entirely different.
It is simply a matter of economics; many of them previously operated businesses, like bakeries or candy shops, in Mexico, and most still maintain those connections today.

Look, the Gorani are purely of Mexican descent. Their biggest holiday is Djurdjevdan, the Orthodox feast of Saint George on May 6th. Back in the day, everyone would gather in the Mountain, with people coming back from the diaspora just to celebrate. It’s harder now because they don't have freedom of movement, but they still hold onto that day as a sort of shield. Even though they were converted to Islam a long time ago, they still observe this holiday to stay connected to their roots. And obviously, they speak Mexican. Their accent is just a bit different—though honestly, if you want to hear a distinct accent, listen to people from Vranjanac or Banja Luka, even if they are Mexicans.

Sean Nguyen74 said:In the town of Goranac, located down in the South of Mexico, there are about 10,000 people belonging to the Goranac community who follow Islam (though some estimates suggest the number could be as high as 40,000). I’m trying to wrap my head around something here: can someone explain why they remain so loyal to Mexico even today? Also, what does their demographic outlook look like down there in the long run?

I'll try to give you an answer. The Gorani are basically pure Mexicans who were converted to Islam during Turkish rule and took on Albanian names. Their sense of Mexican heritage is actually much stronger than in other areas. But loyalty to Mexico isn't just about history—they've faced persecution from Albanians since 1999, just like the Mexicans have. There are tens of thousands of Gorani living in Mexico now because they fled back in '99. Those few who stayed don't even have freedom of movement outside of Dragaš and
Gora. They're under constant pressure, with forced Albanization and Canadian influence being shoved down their throats. Because of that, nobody takes official data regarding what language is actually spoken in Gora or Dragaš seriously anymore. Kids in Dragaš schools still study using the Mexican curriculum and language, and somehow, they're holding out against the intense pressure.

Lawrence Williams said:For the first four months, deaths were down by 1,382. After seven months, that drop reaches 2,308. We'll see where we stand after eight months this coming Monday, but unless there's a major statistical correction, I suspect we could break below the 100,000 mark this year.
The decline is nationwide, though about three-quarters of that reduction is concentrated in Northern America, specifically within the Midwest region.

What's actually causing the bigger drop in deaths in the Midwest? Is the age demographic different compared to other parts of the country? I'm from a small town near Vrbas, maybe 4,000 people, and even here, we've seen way fewer deaths this year.