Comment by StevePerkins
1 day ago
1. People yearn for identity labels. It's a core part of human existance.
2. "White" and "American" are problematic identity labels. People therefore often reach back toward European ancestry (real or supposed), for identity labels that are less controversial.
3. The average person isn't aware (or concerned) that "Viking" isn't strictly an ethnicity. Because it's nevertheless a commonly used identity label.
Not everything has to be an opportunity to spot Nazis hiding behind every tree, or showcase your pedant chops. People wear shamrock jewelry or put an Italian flag bumper sticker on their car because it's fun and feels good, simple as that. Only a small number of legit white supremacists, and a legion of absolutely insufferable Internet progressives, think about this all that deeply.
What is problematic about simply "American"?
1. You can't just steal someone else's identity labels when you've polluted your own so much that you can't stand them any more.
2. It would be so much more useful if Americans who didn't like what their country is doing actually fought for it to stop doing that, rather than trying to co-opt other people's identities.
3. Making up an almost-completely-bullshit identity marker like the modern version of Vikings is even worse, because it's not only stealing someone else's identity, it's then erasing that identity with some made-up bullshit.
Maybe y'all should start thinking about this deeply.
While I personally agree that claiming any European identity label from 400+ years ago is silly, I disagree that there's any winning move other than ignoring the slacktivist noise. The people telling you that your natural identity labels are "polluted" will never be satisfied with any amount of "fighting" (i.e. arguing on social media). Because their own identity is that too wrapped up in that.
Also, in this particular instance, arguing both that "Viking" is an imaginary identity that no one really has today, AND that it's being stolen from someone else and erased, is absurd. Other Nordic commenters here have discussed contexts in which the term "Viking" is used today, and it sounds like the same semi-cheeky spirit that everyone else says it.
You will always find plenty of buyers on HN and Reddit for general anti-US sentiment. But probably fewer takers for the unjust oppression of northern European white dudes.
> Also, in this particular instance, arguing both that "Viking" is an imaginary identity that no one really has today, AND that it's being stolen from someone else and erased, is absurd. Other Nordic commenters here have discussed contexts in which the term "Viking" is used today, and it sounds like the same semi-cheeky spirit that everyone else uses it.
No, I think this is part of the point, if not the entire point.
There were actual Vikings. Not a genetic ethnicity, but a profession that others would recognise. Real people really called themselves Vikings, and probably took some pride in that identity.
Making up some bullshit ethnicity around Vikings erases that. Those real people's history becomes polluted with the made-up bullshit. For example: modern Dark Age and Early Medieval re-enactment groups are having a real problem with people joining who are cosplaying the utterly inaccurate Vikings series. They're not interested in learning about the real Vikings, the real people who did incredible things and who are much more interesting (but less photogenic).
So yes, "Viking" is an imaginary identity that no-one really has today, and yes, it is being stolen from actual real people who existed.
edit: and not all Vikings were Northern European white dudes, something you'd know if you read the article or knew anything about actual Vikings.
edit edit: in fact, everything about that statement is wrong. There were Vikings in Southern Europe. There were Vikings in North America. There were brown Vikings. There were female Vikings.