So, what is it? My guess is Korea…
Japan or Iceland
North Korea is not a bad guess, although there are probably a decent number of Chinese there, so it depends on how you define “race”.
Not Iceland. At least 20’000 immigrants out of a population of 310’000 make a decent percentage.
Yeah, it does. And I don’t know exactly how it’s defined. How would different possible definitions of race change the answer to this question?
Japan? The reason I picked Korea is because it seems that Japan gets far more immigrants than Korea…
The term “race” can get fuzzy.
Korea, for instance, has mixed a little with the Chinese. I agree that culturally, it’s pretty homogeneous. I guess countries like Korea that generally frown upon interracial marriage are more homogeneous.
I bet you can find some island nation in the South Pacific which is more homogeneous–maybe one of the Samoas.
I would think it’s probably one of the microstates in Europe, like San Marino or Lichtenstein.
I doubt it. There, even one or two immigrants would make a huge difference, percentage-wise.
Well, if you group all black Africans as one “race” (as you might from a US perspective), that’s going to give you a different answer for many African countries than if you distinguish major groups among them. In addition, those people might distinguish each other by language or religion, rather than by race, just as Hispanics are distinguished by language in the US, but often called a “race”.
You’re getting to the core of my question. I’m trying to figure out what is the most culturally and racially homogeneous society (as defined by its borders) in the world.
I was thinking the same thing… unfortunately, the CIA factbook really uses a microfine definition of ethnicity. Observe their entry for the Federated States of Micronesia:
Here is a factbook list of ethnic makeup for all countries:
Even in Korea, a country whose people are ethnicly homogenous, there is a division between people from the Gyeongsang region in the east and the people in Jeolla region in the west.
According to that list, the Koreas are the most homogenous.
Those being the only countries that are listed as homogenous. There are some other countries with one race/culture making up for more than 99% of the population though.
I don’t know how the data for this in the CIA Factbook is collected. I imagine it is dependent on self reporting by the other countries. If the country doesn’t track that data, does the CIA “guess”?
What, you mean the HumInt sources at the CIA don’t walk about counting people?
I imagine they “guess”, considering how the setup of some of the countries is explained (eg Spain).
I don’t know how they collect it, but they’re still UScentric enough to list one “National Holiday” for Spain (October 12, which is actually a multinational holiday) and to have information on… our independence (which by the way and if you call it our unification instead is still off by over 300 years). Oh, and Felipe is our heir - apparent? Gosh, I’m sure the Casa Real would be surprised about that one. He’s “apparent” only inasmuch as his Pa still holds the job. In Spanish law, “heredero aparente” means one that hasn’t been confirmed as heir, not one who is waiting for the inheritance to come his way.
Sorry, but seeing information like that means that if someone from the CIA walks in drenched and complains about the rain, I will verify his data by looking out the window.
Hmm. Sure doesn’t inspire much confidence in their other data… sigh. Our Tax Dollars At Work.
What about Scotland?
If you bothered to look up the term, you’d see that “independence” is defined as :
And Granada was indeed conquered in 1492, wasn’t it? The quote refers to Muslim occupation from the 8th Century, and continues with “…the small Christian redoubts of the north began the reconquest almost immediately, culminating in the seizure of Granada in 1492;”. Arguably Spain did exist prior to this but it sets that date as the endpoint of the process - It’s more detail than the two phrases France gets.
Which is why they didn’t call him the ‘heredero aperente’. In English, “heir apparent” means someone who will accede to the throne as long as they don’t die or the monarchy fails. The distinction is between that and “heir presumptive”, which is someone who would succeed as monarch if it were to happen at this instant, but another heir could be born who would be in line in front of them.
I’m not sure exactly what is meant by the Spanish term — is it someone whose bloodline is in question, or is there a specific confirmation process to ensure that they can or will become the monarch?