Comments by "Lynott Parris" (@DenUitvreter) on "Feli from Germany" channel.

If I might add, the Nederdiets/Niederdeutsch/Netherdutch had already become a nation state in the 16th century. "De Republiek der Zeven Vereenigde Nederlanden" was a bit too much to ask from the linguistically challenged Brits so they translated that to "the Dutch Republic" making 'Dutch' originating from that country, while there were no other entities with Dutch or Deutsch in the name as they were monarchies or duchies. They also had to deal with those a lot more since those Dutch had a hundred times more ships. Even when the British would come across a German, he was most likely from a Dutch ship. So the British are somewhat excused in this, it's not that they didn't differentiate at all.
3
No, it doesn't mean that.
2
Basically it's all down to the Anglo-Saxons not knowing what they are talking about throughout the centuries.
1
Typical American to make race the thing a picture is for.
1
The constitution only prohibits the state and all it's institutions, it's not for citizens to obey the constitution because it doesn't adress them. That's what criminal law is for. You also can't just pull percentages out of your ass. The experiment with nameless job application was cancelled because it led to less migration backgrounders being hired instead of more, and another experiment 'proving' discrimination had to be changed to include accents. Regional accents are not fully accepted in the Netherlands either.
1
@DougWinfield Still? That was recently imported.
1
@petercollingwood522 1983's change of the constitution. Don't know the previous text. The constitution of course adresses the government and all institutions of the state, not the citizens. The citizens have been adressed by the criminal code regarding discrimination. Constitutional changes are quite time consuming and often more of an expression of how strong representatives feel about it than well thought through law with practical consequences, espcially because Dutch judges are not allowed to judge formal laws by the constitution.
1
@wcg19891 It had a lot to do with a culture of conformism, obedience, militarism, typical 'land thinking', size related too. Let's not forget that Germany and the USA were the odd ones out in this race stuff.
1
@464nescio6 Thank you for that flattering comment.
1
I'm from the same kind of backgroun in NL and a different skin colour was just an individual thing for the kids in class, not a group thing. One would be Indonesian or Surinamese, or Indonesian-Surinamese and the other one would have been adopted by white parents. It was just a non issue, as a country we were past that and it was something for backward countries like the USA and Germany. Today's issue, with immigrant groups and immigrant kids grouping togehter in schools and sports clubs, sharing a culture and language, is a whole different matter with a whole differen dynamic and also has little to do with race.
1