Immigration Percentage of population of European descent in Western countries

Maciamo

Maciamo

Veteran member
Admin
Messages
10,194
Reaction score
3,611
Points
113
Location
Lothier
Ethnic group
Italo-celto-germanic
We have recently discussed what it means for a country to be 'Western', and and whether Latin American countries should be considered Western or not. To answer that second question, it is useful to compare the ethnic make-up of unequivocally Western countries, like Western European countries, Canada, the USA, Australia and New Zealand, with Latin American countries. I have made a quick summary of the broad ethnic make-up by percentage of European, West Asian, South Asia, East Asian, Amerindian and African ancestry in a few selected countries.

[TABLE="class: outer_border, width: 900"]
[TR]
[TD]Countries/Ethnicities[/TD]
[TD]European[/TD]
[TD]Middle East
& N. Africa[/TD]
[TD]South Asian[/TD]
[TD]East Asian[/TD]
[TD]Amerindian[/TD]
[TD]SS African[/TD]
[TD]Other/mixed[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Sweden[/TD]
[TD]96.5%[/TD]
[TD]0.4%[/TD]
[TD]0.4%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1.2%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Netherlands[/TD]
[TD]91%[/TD]
[TD]6%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[TD]0.8%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1.2%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Belgium[/TD]
[TD]91%[/TD]
[TD]6.5%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Germany[/TD]
[TD]92%[/TD]
[TD]4.2%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[TD]2%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]France[/TD]
[TD]89%[/TD]
[TD]7%[/TD]
[TD]0.2%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1.8%[/TD]
[TD]1.5%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Italy[/TD]
[TD]95%[/TD]
[TD]1.2%[/TD]
[TD]0.8%[/TD]
[TD]0.7%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[TD]1.8%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Spain[/TD]
[TD]94%[/TD]
[TD]1.8%[/TD]
[TD]0.2%[/TD]
[TD]0.4%[/TD]
[TD]?[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[TD]3%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]United Kingdom[/TD]
[TD]87%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[TD]5%[/TD]
[TD]1.5%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]3%[/TD]
[TD]3%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Canada[/TD]
[TD]77%[/TD]
[TD]2%[/TD]
[TD]3.5%[/TD]
[TD]8.5%[/TD]
[TD]4.5%[/TD]
[TD]3%[/TD]
[TD]1.5%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]United States[/TD]
[TD]72.5%[/TD]
[TD]0.3%[/TD]
[TD]1.1%[/TD]
[TD]3.3%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]12.5%[/TD]
[TD]9.3%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mexico[/TD]
[TD]8%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]28%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]62%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Haiti[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]95%[/TD]
[TD]5%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Peru[/TD]
[TD]15%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]15%[/TD]
[TD]45%[/TD]
[TD]2%[/TD]
[TD]37%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Brazil[/TD]
[TD]45%[/TD]
[TD]3%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]0.5%[/TD]
[TD]7.5%[/TD]
[TD]43%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Argentina[/TD]
[TD]88.5%[/TD]
[TD]6.2%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0.4%[/TD]
[TD]1.5%[/TD]
[TD]0.4%[/TD]
[TD]3%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Chile[/TD]
[TD]85%[/TD]
[TD]4.5%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]0.2%[/TD]
[TD]10%[/TD]
[TD]?[/TD]
[TD]?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Australia[/TD]
[TD]82%[/TD]
[TD]2.5%[/TD]
[TD]2%[/TD]
[TD]7%[/TD]
[TD]0%[/TD]
[TD]1.5%[/TD]
[TD]5%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Considering that Latin American countries are culturally Western, being speakers of Spanish, Portuguese or French, the determinant factor in their Westernness is ethnicity. There is no doubt that countries like Chile, Argentina or Uruguay are just as Western as the USA, Canada or Australia. In contrast, Haiti, which has 0% of unmixed European ancestry cannot possible be considered Western.

In Peru and Mexico people of unmixed European descent are a small minority, but if we could mestizos with partial European ancestry we get respectively 52% and 70%. Brazil is more clearly European, but still with 43% of mixed ancestry. Personally I am not sure I would consider Mexico, Bolivia and Peru Western. Brazil is borderline but would almost certainly be considered Western by lots of people, including most Brazilians themselves.
 
You have cleared up 2 issues which has resulted in arguements.

1 - Italians have more East-asian in Europe apart form BIsles ...............I thought they where equal to Netherlands though

2 - Italians have less NAfrica/MEast than Spain
 
It seems that Maciamo is talking about relatively modern immigrants.
 
Hmm I never considered western to be based purely on ethnicity, but I would still consider Latin American countries western. First off their culture is largely western, meaning they speak European languages, their culture is based pretty heavily on christianity like Europe and they are for the most part capitalistic societies. Even ethnically they are all heavily descendants of European people's just not completely. They just aren't first world countries , or at least most aren't. I still would consider them western.
 
Sile said:
You have cleared up 2 issues which has resulted in arguements.

1 - Italians have more East-asian in Europe apart form BIsles ...............I thought they where equal to Netherlands though

2 - Italians have less NAfrica/MEast than Spain
Click to expand...

I am speechless... How can you not notice this is the percentage of recent immigrants (or self-reported ancestry for the Americas) and not the genetic composition? The thread is even in the Immigration & Islam in Europe subsection, not in genetics.
 
srdceleva said:
Hmm I never considered western to be based purely on ethnicity, but I would still consider Latin American countries western. First off their culture is largely western, meaning they speak European languages, their culture is based pretty heavily on christianity like Europe and they are for the most part capitalistic societies. Even ethnically they are all heavily descendants of European people's just not completely. They just aren't first world countries , or at least most aren't. I still would consider them western.
Click to expand...

Economic development or wealth is largely irrelevant to Westernness, as the concept of Westerness emerged from the Middle Ages and really developed from the Renaissance onward, when Europeans were poorer, less literate and less healthy than modern Africans.

Culture and language are important, but when we say that someone is a Westerner we also mean someone who comes from a country of predominantly European ancestry. Congolese speak French and 85% of people in Sierra Leone speak English, but nobody would consider them Western just on the basis of the language they speak, even if their political and educational systems were imposed by/copied on the West.
 
@maciamo:
When I first saw your table, I was like 'what the f...' - Mexicans have 62% of non-European, non-Asian, non-African, non-Amerindian population? Since Antarctica has not really much aboriginal 'material' to offer other than seal and penguins, the only remaining population would be australo-oceanic aboriginees. Just then I read your next paragraph that made me think that your column 'ohers' list more or less mixed ethnicities which made some data understandable, but not completely so...

I was in Chile, so I could take a look on the inhabitants there, and I can tell you, without testing their genetics and therefore unproved, nobody will believe that they are 85% European, who ever visited this great country. Just a check on the wikipedia page in the section demographics made it clear - the source of your data did not present the demographics properly:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile said:
Mexican professor Francisco Lizcano, of the National Autonomous University of Mexico, estimated that 52.7% of Chileans were white, 39.3% were mestizo, and 8% were Amerindian.

The most recent study in the Candela Project establishes that the genetic composition of Chile is 52% of European origin, with 44% of the genome coming from Native Americans (Amerindians), and 4% coming from Africa, making Chile a primarily mestizo country with traces of African descent present in half of the population. Another genetic study conducted by the University of Brasilia in several American countries shows a similar genetic composition for Chile, with a European contribution of 51.6%, an Amerindian (Native) contribution of 42.1%, and an African contribution of 6.3%.

A public health booklet from the University of Chile states that 30% of the population is of Caucasian origin; "predominantly White" Mestizos are estimated to amount a total of 65%, while Native Americans (Amerindians) comprise the remaining 5%.

Despite the genetic considerations, many Chileans, if asked, would self-identify as White. The 2011 Latinobarómetro survey asked respondents in Chile what race they considered themselves to belong to. Most answered "White" (59%), while 25% said "Mestizo" and 8% self-classified as "indigenous". A 2002 national poll revealed that a majority of Chileans believed they possessed some (43.4%) or much (8.3%) "indigenous blood", while 40.3% responded that they had none.
Click to expand...
Original quote of wiki as of today, just deleting the references. I guess that Argentina is similar regarding mestizo population, but with a greater percentage of Europeans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentina said:
A study conducted on 218 individuals in 2010 by the Argentine geneticist Daniel Corach, has established that the genetic map of Argentina is composed by 79% from different European ethnicities (mainly Spanish and Italian ethnicities), 18% of different indigenous ethnicities, and 4.3% of African ethnic groups, in which 63.6% of the tested group had at least one ancestor who was Indigenous.
Click to expand...
This would bring them demographically closer to Mesoamerican countries than European, in my view at least.
 
Yes I agree that African countries are not western , but Latin Americans aren't like Africans in the fact that; they speak European languages (at least the vast majority) as a first language. Latin Americans speak Spanish and Portuguese as their first language , unlike Africans who use European languages like French and and English as a lingua franca but keep their own native languages. I mean I get that they are a bit different with their amount of native American influence and that affects the entire culture, but this is also the case to a lesser extent in the united States. I was in Columbia for four days and though many things were radically different, they still seemed western. They speak European languages natively, their religion and culture is based on christianity , and their institutions are based on Spanish and Portuguese systems. I don't know how they could not be considered a part of the Western world
 
However the data is being presented for the US, there are more Hispanics than Blacks now. This is tricky because in some statistics Hispanic is counted as white and in some they are not. Sometimes they are counted as White but of Hispanic origin.

Hispanics in most of the USA are mostly from Mexico and other central American countries like El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras (not Brazil, Argentina, and other SA countries). I think they are more mixed with indigenous peoples than most South Americans. The exception are Cubans (mainly in Florida) and Puerto Ricans (NYC).
 
Angela said:
You might find this paper interesting:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4289685/

It is discussed by us here:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...aplogroups?highlight=Genetic+ancestry+Latinos
Click to expand...

Post #6 by Tomenable with the colored chart displays what I was referencing. The "red slice" of central/south/carribean is larger than the slice of Africans.

In the more southern states in the last 20 years the hispanic percentage has skyrocketed. I have done some census comparisons of Arkansas and some specific counties.

In 2000 there were 2.051m whites, .419m blacks, .087m hispanics
In 2010 there were 2.059m whites, .450m blacks, .186m hispanics, an increase of 114% hispanics, from 3.4% to 6.9% of the population.

I don't know how often non-citizens comply with the Census as well. I have the opinion that from 2010 to present that the increase was even more, based on anecdotal evidence and elementary enrollment figures (not scientifically sampled or anything).

Thank you for posting the paper! It looks like I was on the right track:

On average, we estimate that Latinos in the US carry 18.0% Native American ancestry, 65.1% European ancestry, and 6.2% African ancestry. We find the highest levels of estimated Native American ancestry in self-reported Latinos from states in the Southwest, especially those bordering Mexico (Figure 2C). We find the highest mean levels of African ancestry in Latinos living in or born in states in the South, especially Louisiana, the Midwest, and Atlantic (Figure 2A). Further stratification of individuals by their self-reported population affiliation (e.g., “Mexican,” “Puerto Rican,” or “Dominican”) reveals a diversity in genetic ancestry, consistent with previous work studying these populations (see Figure S5 and Table S5).10,20,24,25,68,69 We find that Latinos who, besides reporting as “Hispanic,” also self-report as Mexican or Central American, carry more Native American ancestry than Latinos overall; those also who self-report as black, Puerto Rican, or Dominican have higher levels of African ancestry; and those who additionally self-report as white, Cuban, or South American have on average higher levels of European ancestry.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top