Hypothetically if I’m born in India would I be Indian

[eRobin]

I’m a bit nervous asking about this subject incase it’s taken the wrong way. I was speaking with a not-quite friend (an acquaintance as I don’t know them very well but we’re friendly) from Bangladesh. I am Celtic. I asked him hypothetically if I was born in Bangladesh, India, or Africa, would be considered Indian or British or both because of my ethnicity/skin colour. He said I wouldn’t be considered Bengali because I wouldn’t be part of their culture/religion, and other places like India or Africa would feel the same. But when I asked him why he considers himself to be British despite being born here if I couldn’t be classed as Bengali if I was born over there, a woman from Dubai who was also present said that my comment was racist - but I felt that what the person from Bengali had said was racist. Do celtic people not have a culture?

I don't think nationality/cultural identity can ever be purely self-identity or you'll have mickey-takers like Rachel Dolezal.

But there's obviously an important place for it : I'd hazard a guess that Lumley & Orwell wouldn't have felt Indian since they left it as babies (though Orwell did go back as recounted in the great anti-colonial work Burmese Days), while Kipling's identity was probably more complex, in that he was patriotically English but deeply connected to India

@Carla786 Well I actually used Japan because my husband is Japanese and so I know more about that culture and their attitudes, it was no deeper than that. But yes as a Scot I wouldn't be considered Italian or Czech or Russian either.

My main point was really that Britishness and perhaps Americanness or being Australian is kind of unique in global terms.

In which case someone else gets to decide who is drowned and who is saved.

The past 50 years have been a massive exercise in trying to avoid that, as it inevitably leads to Nuremberg.

Imagine a world where your answer to a DEI form gets you prosecuted ?

I can see your point : it's indisputable that Japan's racial views were never as extreme as Hitler's plans for Germany or any similar evil plans.

Otoh, did they really only believe that the Yamato were civilizationally, not ethnically, superior? The sources I've read don't seem to fully support that.

I accept that Western scientific racism was never as prominent in Japan, and as stated here, was 'hotly debated', but I think it's false to say it had no influence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamato_people#:~:text=Scientific%20racism%20was%20a%20Western,%2C%20discriminatory%20practices%2C%20and%20ethnocentrism.

I see what you mean....in your example of a Scot in Japan or Italy or wherever though, doesn't it make some difference culturally if that Scottish kid is immersed in Japanese/Italian/whatever culture from birth (as opposed to going to international schools & living in an expat bubble). Imo it does, culturally at least, to some extent.

An adult Scot moving to Italy or Japan etc would be different. Adult immigration is a different kettle of fish from a child/baby born there, or even a teen.

ethnici and nationality are not the same thing, you can be white and Indian but not Bengali because that’s an ethnicity, a culture distinct from other parts of India plus crosses national boundaries. You can be British and Bengali too of course

@Carla786 So for what it's worth, I'm a scot, living in Scotland and if someone has a scottish accent was born and raised here I consider them Scottish regardless of background. I think Japan is kind of different, even if you are half Japanese, born in Japan, speak perfect Japanese and understand the intricacies of the culture your still aren't really considered Japanese. That might just be Japan. I do have a friend who is married to a Czech and has two kids living in Brno and while the are fully integrated there is still a distinction, not really a negative one but all the same.

It is possibly a question with no one definitive answer because their are so many layers to it. For example mothers mother was Jewish, so in one regard I'm Jewish and so are my children but in another I'm not Jewish at all because I'm a catholic of largely Irish and Scottish descent.

Well, Japan has its own way of looking at things often...a lot of 'hafu' people are unhappy that to so many, even half-Japanese people are not considered Japanese. It doesn't seem fair to me, I hope it will change.

As I've said, I do think the longstanding Yamato rhetoric and the terrible heights it reached in WW2 do have something to do with this exclusivity- obviously these concepts are not used in that way today but such a recent legacy in historical terms must linger to some extent. I'm not saying it's used in a consciously/intentionally racist way, I guess I'm thinking more of the deeper underpinnings.

Your friend with half-Czech kids living and raised in Brno : of course they'll have an extra ethnic/cultural identity element than if they had 2 Czech parents. But surely they're seen as culturally and half-ethnically Czech, at least to some extent?

I do think being half something can be influenced by whether it's the maternal or paternal half, as well as which country you live in. My mother's father was a Polish WW2 refugee & while Polish culture is important to her (and me), she's definitely predominantly English culturally, which I attribute to the fact that her English mother's influence was much stronger, plus she was living in England. Whereas my godmother, who had 2 Polish refugee parents, (a lot came to our area!) is much more Polish culturally. Obviously this isn't always the case, but often the mother is more influential in her children's cultural identity, since women often do more of the childraising.

Re being Jewish : I understand it has ethnic, cultural and religious elements? Would you say you feel connected aside from ancestry? Sorry, I get if you'd rather not answer identity questions- I'm just curious. I'm studying History right now & enjoy finding out about different national/cultural groups.

Just wanted to correct a mis-statement - Residence is based on number of days in the country. Domicile is not.

An individual automatically acquires their father's domicile at birth. If you wish to change your domicile you need to take very definitive steps to do so and it is not easy. It is different to citizenship although gaining citizenship in another country would be considered as making an active decision to change your domicile. So for most people, domicile follows the family tree.

The tax changes (capital taxes) are moving away from domicile to being based purely on residence (number of days in the UK) and ordinary residence (number of days over a number of years).

'Universalist' - I see what you mean.. Though hard to see how a 'universalist' ideology to make everyone Japanese would condone mass murder, rape, forced labour & forced scientific experiments like vivisection.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731