In Victoria 3, Turks do not have a common root culture feature.

[YoungWolf]

Hello good day. First of all, there is an issue that I insistently demand to be corrected. Ottoman Turks and Central Asian Turks come from the same root. Please add at least one root culture feature now. Because we can establish the Turkestan state in the states here, but it is a big mistake that we are not related to these states. Therefore, I suggest that Turks, Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Uyghurs, Turkmens and Azeris should be organized within the Turanian cultural group. You can also add the Turan state that could be established with the Ottomans, which is an idea that was strengthened in these periods of Ottoman history.

[Midas]

They came from the same root, but through the centurys cultural differences have been established, like turks and alcohol. Even today you have the "turks" and the "anatolians" which are cultural like the "bavarians and prussians" yes they share roots, but have many differences. Or catholic irish people and protestant irish people

[kgkong]

Due to a lot of diverse cultural integrations with a variety of cultures across Europe, Altai and Ural regions, the Turkic group of cultures is diverse. Over the centuries of the original Turkic group interacting with other cultures, they've developed into distinctive groups. Anatolian Turkic is notably different from Kazakhs, notably different than Uyghurs and so on. Uyghurs have a closer cultural root to Tibetan and east Asian. Kazakhs have a north Central root, and Anatolian's have a Greek-Persian root. These other cultural influences into the Turkic groups has created distinctive unique sub groups within here that doesn't really make sense to be like "Anatolian and Uyghur Turk are so much the same" as they're a lot more unique from each other than say British English and American English cultures.

[totalwar360]

im turk bymyself and i tell you turks of turkey and italians have more in common than turks and central asians central asian turks are turcified mongols and after that russified , when i meet them i always got an ick because they have no relation to turkism or islam they live like infidels mostly uzbeks and turkmens ,azeris are more like us but the rest you can throw away

[YoungWolf]

ok but the problem is that the game doesn't even have root culture feature. Therefore, it has a situation similar to the relationship between an Anatolian Turk and an Englishman. You should not make your assessments according to the 21st century, because before the Russian imperialism, there was still a widely used language among the elite of the Central Asian Turks and the Anatolian Turks, and the cultures among the peoples were not as differentiated as they are today.

[kgkong]

Originally posted by YoungWolf:

ok but the problem is that the game doesn't even have root culture feature. Therefore, it has a situation similar to the relationship between an Anatolian Turk and an Englishman. You should not make your assessments according to the 21st century, because before the Russian imperialism, there was still a widely used language among the elite of the Central Asian Turks and the Anatolian Turks, and the cultures among the peoples were not as differentiated as they are today.

They were a lot more diverse and what not. The end of colonialism just went and screwed that up even more leading to what we have today.
But prior to this, you have a lot of European integration in the Turkic cultures due to the Crusades against the muslims and Ottoman Empire. Each segment of Europe got their hands on their own portions of the Middle East and the varying Turkic regions. Anatolian Turks lost a lot of their connections to their Greek roots in favor of the introduced dominance of the Central and Eastern European powers that got that region. France got their hands in around modern Syria, Lebanon, and regions of Turkey that border there. It's a lot more convoluted and complex than general history makes it out to be. Turkic cultures are so far spreadout that they have lots of roots connected to all kinds of regions. Some Turkic culture roots go back to Scythians, some go back to the early proto-Mongolians, some go back to the eastern Danube river region, some to inner China, some to Arabia and Persia. They're one of the longest existing nomadic cultural groups in history and as a result there is going to be a lot of muddied and difficult to figure out histories behind the sub cultural groups that are rooted in the Turkic group.

[Azzurra Iris Lea Monde]

Originally posted by Midas:

They came from the same root, but through the centurys cultural differences have been established, like turks and alcohol. Even today you have the "turks" and the "anatolians" which are cultural like the "bavarians and prussians" yes they share roots, but have many differences. Or catholic irish people and protestant irish people

protestant irish people are scottish planters colonists brought by the english like in the pale the english did something similar with english people.. history is more complicated than what paradox what to do without dlcs..

also i can reach 1936 with a ibm portable computer from 1982 with cp/m or unix system 1 or whatever meme inside tun tin tun tun *intel sound.speaker* (akshually an amd clone on compaq clone 100% compliant machines like my compaq deskpro 286n from 1984 lol)

[Midas]

Originally posted by YoungWolf:

ok but the problem is that the game doesn't even have root culture feature. Therefore, it has a situation similar to the relationship between an Anatolian Turk and an Englishman. You should not make your assessments according to the 21st century, because before the Russian imperialism, there was still a widely used language among the elite of the Central Asian Turks and the Anatolian Turks, and the cultures among the peoples were not as differentiated as they are today.

It has, every culture has some atributes, that can be "shared" with other culture groups. Look at the culture tab ;)

[YoungWolf]

You're talking about things that have nothing to do with what I said. There is no common primary trait that I am talking about. because in the game, I'm talking about putting Anatolian Turks in the same group with Tuva Turks, not Turkmens from the Oghuz tribe who speak the same dialect.Or, for example, what kind of logic does it make sense for Kazakh Turks and Kurds to be in the same cultural group? Can you tell me there are more similarities between Kurds and Kazakhs?

[kgkong]

It matters because the Turkic cultural group is diverse and very far spreadout, and different sub cultural groups have integrated with other cultures.

Why do we have French-Native cultural groups (Metis) and no English-Native? Because of how cultures met and interacted.

Cultural exchange and evolution is complex and diverse.

[YoungWolf]

I repeat again and again, do you think that the similarity between a Kurd and an Uzbek is more than the similarity between an Anatolian Turk and an Uzbek?

[kgkong]

Kurds are displaced and have a broader cultural root range but are predominantly found in what is modern Iraq but not limited to that region.
Uzbek have a broader cultural root located to Central Asia but are not limited to Uzbekistan region.
Anatolian Turks have diverse cultural roots that range from all kinds of different non-Turkic groups but do have strong recent roots to Anatolia (modern Turkey).

I think you're just getting a little upset over this topic when it's not actually something that is as straight forward to cover and you're misunderstanding the complexity behind this. The Turkic group is the most diverse and culturally spread out culture with the longest history of existence. Ultimately, all Turkic groups come from the same root, however, due to this spread and range and cultural exchange that all Turkic groups have undergone, understanding how sub Turkic culture groups relate to each other is not as simple as any other cultural group and just because the oldest root is the same does not mean the sub Turkic group shares the same values and roots as other sub-cultural groups.

[kgkong]

Your initial complaint too is you want two distinctively unique religious sub cultures of Turkic people to be rooted together when those sub cultural groups do not share ideological or cultural heritage, even though they share a culture root. Central Asiatic Turks have a starkly different religious ideology enough from Anatolian, and same to the Kurds.

I suggest you actually learn more about the culture group more. Something I'm always up to doing as I have Turkic roots myself so I'm always up to learn more about how my ancestors cultures have changed over the years.

[Arson]

Originally posted by YoungWolf:

Hello good day. First of all, there is an issue that I insistently demand to be corrected. Ottoman Turks and Central Asian Turks come from the same root. Please add at least one root culture feature now. Because we can establish the Turkestan state in the states here, but it is a big mistake that we are not related to these states. Therefore, I suggest that Turks, Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Uyghurs, Turkmens and Azeris should be organized within the Turanian cultural group. You can also add the Turan state that could be established with the Ottomans, which is an idea that was strengthened in these periods of Ottoman history.

You seem to be conflating ethnic groups with what the game defines as cultures. Look at the definition of culture (in-game and in the real world) and it becomes easier to see why the categories are the way they are.

[YoungWolf]

Look, there is a computer game set in the period before Russian imperialism landed in Central Asia. Even years after the Russian occupation, many Turkish intellectuals of Central Asian origin (ie Uzbek Kazakh etc.) can communicate with Anatolian Turks through their literary language. Because if you compare a villager living in Central Asia and an Anatolian villager, you will see that their traditions and lifestyles are very similar to each other. I know that there is a metamorphosis between these cultures, I cannot explain well enough as English is not my mother tongue. But you are interpreting the 1800s with today's conditions and conditions. You cannot understand why the Tuvan Turks are in the same cultural group as the Anatolian Turks and the others do not have a common ground. Tuva Turks are already a super identity formed due to the Kyrgyz and Uyghur Turks living in a different geography.From a religious point of view, there is also more than one sect in Islam. Even the Sunni sects differ greatly from each other. Anatolian Turks and Central Asian Turks belong to the Hanafi branch of the Sunni sect. In other words, their religious understanding is the same, that they completely differ from Persians and Arabs at this point. I do not even come to the language issue, although it is a work of the 20th century, the metamorphosis, although it is difficult for both groups to get along with each other. I have observed these in the lessons I have taken from very valuable academics who have participated in academic studies both in Central Asia and Turkey. The books I've read, on the other hand, say that the approach you advocate should not be justified.As a result, even after the 1800s, Enver Pasha, who was a balkan folk song in 1921, went to Central Asia and was able to assume the leadership of some of the Turkish peoples there. This shows that there is no difference between these cultures and they can embrace each other easily. In addition, while the Central Asian states are now choosing to name themselves as Turks and taking steps to remove the cultural debris left by the Russians, we should also respect this situation. We should also stop separating Central Asian Turks from Anatolian Turks based on the final judgment of history, and we must rationally position them.

[Arson]

Originally posted by YoungWolf:

We should also stop separating Central Asian Turks from Anatolian Turks based on the final judgment of history, and we must rationally position them.

This is what you're still misunderstanding. At that time their cultures were different. Several still are. Different nations, different cultures, different practices, even if some of them were the similar in some aspects. Their similar ethnic roots aren't a part of the equation for the definition of culture. Ironically, you are the one applying contemporary wishes to historical perspective. It's a growing trend on this topic in particular. Turkey may desire to rebrand itself. History doesn't work that way.

Good luck with your demand.