---

They are caucasian.  

---

Turks aren't, but Persians certainly are. As Persians have always called themselves the Iranians, or "Aryans," the infamous racial term we all know and love, since the dawn of their civilization. Indeed, if you meet any real Iranians, they don't really look like they're from the Middle East. They look more like they're southern Europeans in an entirely different cultural setting if you ask me.

Turks, though, are from the Central Asian steppes and in no way related to anybody European or caucasian, either culturally (in regards to their original culture), linguistically, or racially.

Personally, I don't see how the definition of being "white" could ever extend to the Turks.  I can see it being extended to the Iranians, but even then that's a little iffy.  Personally, I think white is more of a term synonymous with peoples whose ancestors of the last 1000 years have an origin in Europe.

Post edited at 10:53 pm on April 3, 2008 by Bud2400

---

Quote: from GoloSLB at 10:44 pm on April 3, 2008

---

They are caucasian.  

---

 
Turks aren't, but Persians certainly are.  As Persians have always called themselves the Iranians, or "Aryans," the infamous racial term we all know and love, since the dawn of their civilization.  Indeed, if you meet any real Iranians, they don't really look like they're from the Middle East.  They look more like they're southern Europeans in an entirely different cultural setting if you ask me.

Turks, though, are from the Central Asian steppes and in no way related to anybody European or caucasian, either culturally (in regards to their original culture), linguistically, or racially.

Personally, I don't see how the definition of being "white" could ever extend to the Turks.  I can see it being extended to the Iranians, but even then that's a little iffy.  Personally, I think white is more of a term synonymous with peoples whose ancestors of the last 1000 years have an origin in Europe.

---

---

So the Finnish...

---

Many of the Finns as well as Hungarians have mixed in with the indigineous populations of Europe to the point where they appear very white but with a Uralic language.  The same thing happened as the Indo-Europeans conquered and intermixed with the indigenous populations of India.

Remember, nobody is 100% "pure."

---

Quote: from GoloSLB at 10:21 pm on April 4, 2008

---

 So the Finnish...

---

 
Many of the Finns as well as Hungarians have mixed in with the indigineous populations of Europe to the point where they appear very white but with a Uralic language.  The same thing happened as the Indo-Europeans conquered and intermixed with the indigenous populations of India.

Remember, nobody is 100% "pure."

---

---

Are they considered white? because if you look at them they look white, though you can usually tell they are turkish and persian by their face.

---

firstable,i wanna correct one idea : Persians & turks are not Arabs..i know that many ppl ignore that..anyway,i can't tell you if they are white or Caucasian..hard to point on a population and say these are XXX...RACE, you know it's a complicated stuff..we can't classify them bcs these countries esteem different mixture ppl from different races  came there and settled down into.

-------
my heart,is so soft to take between your hands,
open it,it's nothing just few ash !

---

The Finns are White. And to say someone is 100% pure is just ignorant. However, as long as one is at least 95% European, they are White.

---

The original Finns weren't white.  They were originally a tribe from the Urals, not unlike many of the other native Siberian tribes of today.

The Finns of today certainly are white as I'd agree that as the majority of their ancestory is from indigenous European populations, giving them their white appearance (hence why they appear completely European).  Over thousands of years, the dominant (or most numerous) ethnic group tends to dominate racially (so long as they don't get wiped out by disease like the Native Americans did, although despite that, Native American ancestory mixed almost equally with white ancestory is a very common feature of the people of Latin America today - but don't be fooled as there's still a lot of "pure" whites and "pure" Native Americans, especially in countries that didn't have a policy of intermixing with the natives like Mexico did).

Post edited at 10:22 pm on April 5, 2008 by Bud2400

---

Turks and Persians are not caucasian my people should not be considered caucasian. And my people are the Iranians if youwanted to know. They should just be Arabian and the turks I also think they should be classified as Arabian.

---

Except that they don't speak Arabic (or any semitic language), they don't come from the Arabian peninsula, and have not historically resided there. Pan-arabism is fine, but should not generally be extended to non-arabian peoples.

-------
فُک جحُوى

---

The original Finns weren't white. They were originally a tribe from the Urals, not unlike many of the other native Siberian tribes of today.

---

---

Quote: from Bud2400 at 1:20 am on April 6, 2008

---

The original Finns weren't white. They were originally a tribe from the Urals, not unlike many of the other native Siberian tribes of today.

---

 
Did you know that the world was a lot different back then? To call them not white is saying most Europeans aren't white. Like the Slavics.

---

Considering that the Slavs have languages in the Indo-European language family and the Finns have a language in the Uralic language family, I'd say you'd be hard pressed to say that the original Finns looked anything like the Slavs or other Europeans.

Remember, linguistic evidence is key to a racial group's origins. As the Finns have a language related to other native Siberian tribes, it's reasonable to say that they were once one language thousands of years ago, and thus as one group of people. As they diverge, their languages change seperately becoming two different languages, and as the Finns moved to where they currently are and intermix with the more populous indigineous population (yet still retained power over them, as evidenced by the fact that Finnish is still the dominant language by this group of people), they become more Europeanized in culture and appearance, which is why we consider the Finns of today to be white.

BTW, on an interesting sidenote about the Slavs, though they appear fairly white today, they are more related to the Persian and Indian languages than they are to the Germanic and Celtic languages. In the Indo-European language family tree, there's a major break up toward the beginning of it, with Persian, Indian, and Slavic languages on one side and Germanic and Celtic languages on the other (along with many others, of course), indicating that the Slavs, Persians, and Indians were one group of people more recently that as one group of people with the Germans and Celts. This is one major argument used in why some people don't believe the Slavs to be "white" (though I'd counter that by noting the Slavs' much closer proximity with the Germans and peoples of Europe, thus creating more cultural trade between the two and intermarriages between the two races).

Post edited at 7:27 pm on April 6, 2008 by Bud2400