Scandinavian Thread

[HVC]

Yup, it's naive to think if people were burning bibles in the states some snake handler wouldn't be out there shooting people up.

[viper37]

Since this is the Scandinavian thread, I came up on this:



There's still a Sweden-Denmark rivalry?  Someone is still pissed off at the end of the Kalmar Union?  Kinda strange that they include the lands discovered by a Norwegian descendant, but I've seen stranger things I suppose.

Should the Baltic Republic also reinforce their navies, on top of their borders with Russia?

[Razgovory]

Yup, it's naive to think if people were burning bibles in the states some snake handler wouldn't be out there shooting people up.

That already happens, no violence.

[Syt]

There's still a Sweden-Denmark rivalry?

[Jacob]

100% there's a Danish-Swedish rivalry

It's basically just very persistent trash talk, and is put aside in face of serious issues. Basically it's like two brothers who fight and put each other down, but who will work closely together when the situation calls for it.

In any Danish forum, mention anything about Sweden in any context at all and you're bound to get comments about Swedish inferiority. Any kind of international ranking, no matter how awful the placing is for Denmark will elicit some level of satisfaction as long as we outrank Sweden. Most people don't really care, and it's almost purely reflexive, but there is definitely consistent trash talk thrown at Sweden.

From my occasional visits to Swedish forums - and from examples this map - it's pretty clearly reciprocated.

But on real issues Sweden and Denmark collaborate and support each other. Should Russia somehow fuck with Sweden, Denmark would 100% be there to support them and vice versa.

[Threviel]

We rarely mention the Danes. The Nowegians are our competitors and the Finns our friends. The Danes are mostly drunk hobos.

[viper37]

But on real issues Sweden and Denmark collaborate and support each other. Should Russia somehow fuck with Sweden, Denmark would 100% be there to support them and vice versa.

I had no doubt it about it.

I just found the map amusing with the inclusion of Iceland, Greenland, Vinland and Markland, given they were not discovered by Swedes or descendants of Swedish colonists who emigrated to Iceland.


Norwegian and Danish seems pretty close as language, but Swedish is farther from these two, right?  Which of the 3 has the lowest tax rates so I can pick wisely my new overlords?

[viper37]

The Danes are mostly drunk hobos.

They have King Christian IV, you have Carolus Rex.
Though call.  I'd vote for the one with the cool song.

[Barrister]

I'm not going around the city tearing down turbans and crosses from people. I just don't feel the need to have any sort of accommodation related to demands based on religion.

Like the famous Mountie turban guy. I found it profoundly stupid that rules had to be bent for him. You start down this path and you'll get a mountie with a pasta strainer on his head, because why not?

I feel like your cultural references are like 30 years old.

I know a whole bunch of police officers/sheriffs who wear turbans.  They typically wear black/blue turbans with a shield in the front - it looks really sharp.

You know there are all kind of interesting conversations to be had about wearing a turban while on a construction site, or while riding a motorcycle (instead of wearing protective headwear).  But when it is purely symbolic - what the fuck is the harm is someone wears a turban?

You mention a pasta strainer.  I think there is no problem is saying that before a religious accommodation is made it needs to be a "seriously held" religious belief.  And again while I think there might be some discussions around the edges, I don't think a belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster would ever count as a serious religious belief.

But more generally - human history is replete with hundreds if not thousands of years of religious violence - followers of one religion fighting followers of another.  It was finally in the 17th-19th century where we, as a human society, decided to follow a belief of "live and let live" - that people of different religious beliefs should just accept people of other beliefs.

So I just  have a real problem with this "new atheist" movement who wants to ignore all of that human history, and ignore all those millions/billions of people who believe in religion, and think those beliefs should just be tossed into the dustbin of history and given no accommodation whatsoever.

Like I said earlier - I don't know about banning the burning of Holy Books. I can see the pros and cons of both sides.  But I just can't understand how one can be so dismissive of the entire idea of respecting any of the millions/billions of people who believe in religion.

[Solmyr]

We rarely mention the Danes. The Nowegians are our competitors and the Finns our friends. The Danes are mostly drunk hobos.

The Finns dunk on Swedes plenty.

[Zoupa]

You mention a pasta strainer.  I think there is no problem is saying that before a religious accommodation is made it needs to be a "seriously held" religious belief.  And again while I think there might be some discussions around the edges, I don't think a belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster would ever count as a serious religious belief.

How do you determine if a belief is seriously held? There is a fundamental unseriousness to these accommodation demands.

Also I believe this reading of history is wrong:

It was finally in the 17th-19th century where we, as a human society, decided to follow a belief of "live and let live" - that people of different religious beliefs should just accept people of other beliefs.

The West decided during the Enlightenment to separate church and state, and more generally for organized religions to have less and less say in public policies. It was not a kumbaya moment where folks in Florence decided to accept muslims as they are, it was a recognition that religion hampers progress and should have no weight in stately matters.

Religion is a private matter. We should not be carving out exceptions.

[Josquius]

Thinking about the religion and football analogy... Is that not being looked at the wrong way? Less an attempt to disprove religiosity motivated hate and more evidence that football related hate counts too - it is afterall a perfectly innocent part of who someone is they'd be attacked for.

Norwegian and Danish seems pretty close as language, but Swedish is farther from these two, right?  Which of the 3 has the lowest tax rates so I can pick wisely my new overlords?

Spoken Swedish and spoken Norwegian are most similar, with Danish getting a lot of shit on that front for being less clear.

Written Norwegian and written Danish on the other hand are very similar - I always find it funny multilingual packaging will often just have the one entry for Swedish and Danish.

[Threviel]

But on real issues Sweden and Denmark collaborate and support each other. Should Russia somehow fuck with Sweden, Denmark would 100% be there to support them and vice versa.

I had no doubt it about it.

I just found the map amusing with the inclusion of Iceland, Greenland, Vinland and Markland, given they were not discovered by Swedes or descendants of Swedish colonists who emigrated to Iceland.


Norwegian and Danish seems pretty close as language, but Swedish is farther from these two, right?  Which of the 3 has the lowest tax rates so I can pick wisely my new overlords?

The different nordic countries may seem very similar and they are very similar, but they do have some personality.

The Danes are like the uncle living a happy life, having done some really cool stuff and seen a lot, in a somewhat run down house. They have a wholly different business culture to the others and cannot in any way shape or form be trusted in money affairs.

The Swedes are the boring big brother with a bit of Asperger, always ready to point out the faults in others and to look down on them. Trustworthy and responsible, but uninteresting. Takes ourselves far too seriously.

The Finns are the silent middle brother. Trudging along without making much of a fuss of anything. Very similar to Sweden in most ways, except they don't have the superiority complex.

The Norwegians are the slightly retarded cousins from the countryside that have won the lottery. Weirdly religious.

We like each other and when abroad we gather together and can talk to each other. In international affairs we have mostly the same outlook and we support one another. Not to the point that we would go to war for the others (before Nato that is), but still.

We like to make fun of the Danes, mostly over the guttural sounds they call Danish or their drinking habits, but we make even more fun of the Norwegians. It's never serious and we have no real dislike of any of them.

Language wise Norwegian is easy to understand, they have dialects close to Swedish and dialects closer to Danish. Danish can be understood with difficulty. We had a job meeting the other day with some Danes involved and we spoke English, that wouldn't happen with Norwegians. Icelandic is unintelligible for everyone.

[viper37]

Language wise Norwegian is easy to understand, they have dialects close to Swedish and dialects closer to Danish. Danish can be understood with difficulty. We had a job meeting the other day with some Danes involved and we spoke English, that wouldn't happen with Norwegians. Icelandic is unintelligible for everyone.

So, the Icelanders are like the Quebecers, they kept the purer language form?  
(Duque, are you reading this? )


Icelandic is closer to older Norse than modern Scandinavian languages, isn't it?  I guess they had less cultural exchange due to being farther from mainland Europe, they were less involved in the affairs over there.

[Jacob]

I think we were discussing the topic the ethnic composition of vikings in the UK thread, but I think it fits better in this thread

Some evidence of the foreign composition

Who was in Harold Bluetooth's army? Strontium isotope investigation of the cemetery at the Viking Age fortress at Trelleborg, Denmark

The circular fortress of Trelleborg on Zealand in Denmark is well known as a military camp with a key role in the formation of the Danish state under Harald Bluetooth in the tenth century AD. Taking a sample of 48 burials from the fort, strontium isotope analysis once again demonstrates its ability to eavesdrop on a community: at Trelleborg, the young men in its cemetery were largely recruited from outside Denmark, perhaps from Norway or the Slavic regions. Even persons buried together proved to have different origins, and the three females sampled were all from overseas, including a wealthy woman with a silver casket. Trelleborg, home of Harald Bluetooth's army, was a fortress of foreigners with vivid implications for the nature of his political mission.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/who-was-in-harold-bluetooths-army-strontium-isotope-investigation-of-the-cemetery-at-the-viking-age-fortress-at-trelleborg-denmark/EC869F4BE5A4B8C6F5125A1071687549