6 ms·

The Ottoman empire caused tons of Muslim migrants to enter its core provinces. Empires always managed and reshaped migration. The Romans resettled conquered peo

The Ottoman empire caused tons of Muslim migrants to enter its core provinces. Empires always managed and reshaped migration. The Romans resettled conquered peoples across their empire to strengthen borders and repopulate cities. The Habsburgs moved ethnic groups into borderlands against the Ottomans. The Russian Empire orchestrated mass movements of Tatars, Circassians, and others. In all these cases, imperial expansion created migration streams that later fed into demographic and political conflicts.

like_any_other 1y ago
> Empires always managed and reshaped migration Nice moving of goalposts. Meanwhile despite the Russian and Japanese empires, Moscow and Tokyo are 90% [1] and 95.4% [2] native, respectively, and despite the Ottoman Empire, 93.2% of Turkey is either populations native to the region (Turks, Kurds, and Yoruks) or from immediately adjacent regions (Tatars and Azerbaijanis). 95% if we count "Arabs" as adjacent, or even more, depending on what "other" is [3]. That's equivalent to if the UK was 95% English, Welsh, Scottish, Irish, with some French, Germans, Danes, and Swedes. But we're supposed to pretend India and Pakistan moving into England is the same as population exchange with neighbors. And that's still not "direct causation". But you ignore that, because you want to make it seem inevitable, when it is anything but. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow#Demographics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow#Demographics [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Tokyo#Multiculturalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Tokyo#Multicul... [3] https://www.britannica.com/place/Turkey/The-central-massif https://www.britannica.com/place/Turkey/The-central-massif
- mmgeorgi 1y ago
  Those percentages are shaky (especially Tokyo and Turkey), and even if roughly true, they don’t negate the fact that empires like the Ottoman, Roman, and Russian actively engineered huge population movements. High present-day homogeneity doesn’t mean migration wasn’t empire-driven.

like_any_other 1y ago

> Empires always managed and reshaped migration Nice moving of goalposts. Meanwhile despite the Russian and Japanese empires, Moscow and Tokyo are 90% [1] and 95.4% [2] native, respectively, and despite the Ottoman Empire, 93.2% of Turkey is either populations native to the region (Turks, Kurds, and Yoruks) or from immediately adjacent regions (Tatars and Azerbaijanis). 95% if we count "Arabs" as adjacent, or even more, depending on what "other" is [3]. That's equivalent to if the UK was 95% English, Welsh, Scottish, Irish, with some French, Germans, Danes, and Swedes. But we're supposed to pretend India and Pakistan moving into England is the same as population exchange with neighbors. And that's still not "direct causation". But you ignore that, because you want to make it seem inevitable, when it is anything but. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow#Demographics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow#Demographics [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Tokyo#Multiculturalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Tokyo#Multicul... [3] https://www.britannica.com/place/Turkey/The-central-massif https://www.britannica.com/place/Turkey/The-central-massif

mmgeorgi 1y ago
Those percentages are shaky (especially Tokyo and Turkey), and even if roughly true, they don’t negate the fact that empires like the Ottoman, Roman, and Russian actively engineered huge population movements. High present-day homogeneity doesn’t mean migration wasn’t empire-driven.