Talk:Dutch people: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Line 101:
:Rex Germanus, I don't think the description of the Dutch as "a Germanic people" is ideologically inspired, I just think it's dubious. When you claim to use it as a scientific term, you should provide sources for that. I don't consider a Teleac article (not annotated) as a very authoritative one. [[User:Iblardi|Iblardi]] 13:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
::The teleac article isn't used for the Germanic claim /fact, but the Frankish ancestry, and Teleac, may be expected to be the unbiased and educative of all Dutch broadcasters.[[User:Rex Germanus|Rex]] 13:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
:::Okay, I was mixing those two things up, but they certainly are related. I still think the claims of Frankish heritage, being Germanic etc. are rather vague and too much of a popular generalization. The fact that Teleac is an unbiased and educative broadcast company doesn't necessarily make it a scientifically accurate source. On the other hand, if you or someone else can demonstrate that both claims are supported by mainstream science, I am completely at peace with it. But I have some doubt on that. For instance, stating that the Dutch are predominantly of Frankish descent does not take into account the inhabitants of the northern and eastern parts of the Netherlands, which are conventionally called "Saxon" and where there will most likely have been a steady immigration from German lands. The great cities in the western part of the Netherlands, too, have seen continuous immigration from and intermixture with people from abroad, including French, Hungarians, and migrants from the former colonies. Yet all of their descendants identify themselves as "Dutch" today, even though there is only a weak Frankish of even Germanic connection. [[User:Iblardi|Iblardi]] 14:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)