No he doesn't :v That's crazy, why would you think that? Literally the complete opposite of the guy, he's all about "Anyone can take on any culture they feel a kinship with", that's why he can feel a kinship with the ancient Scottish-region cultures, even with no clear line of descent.
Literally the complete and total opposite.
Thank you very much, Descan. You've put it better than I could. As you've illustrated, it is important to note that I don't actually have a clear line of descent to the ancient Caledonians or Picts or anybody like that - my Brythonic ancestors could have moved North from Wales or England for all I know, yet I feel kinship with the Caledonians. I also feel kinship with the Gaels, despite the fact that my ancestors probably never spoke Gaelic, apart from maybe a brief century or two.
It's interesting though, if you google the definition of "ethnicity" you will receive this:
"the fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition."
You'll notice there's no mention of "bloodline" or even heritage in there. I know the definition is problematic, given that it leads to such novelties as "ethnic Americans/Canadians", but is that actually a problem? Maybe I am actually more "ethnically" focused than I realised. Maybe we all are. Even Helgoland's feelings of pan-Europeanness would be considered "ethnic", along with MSH's attitudes towards being American.
I don't know if Misko actually knew this when he talked about ethnicity a few times, and my indignation is at the suggestion that I am conflating blood with culture. If this was not the suggestion, my sincerest apologies for my indignation is misdirected.
EDIT: "7 posts have been already made" - piss.
Well, what else is politics but economy and culture?
Once again, this is very true. Even within countries, culture is intrinsically linked with politics; think back to the 1980s and people's feelings about Margaret Thatcher. That was at least 70% culture, with economics coming second.