Feeds:
Posts
Comments

The map of white people

the-map-of-white-people

The map of white people was not on the Internet, so I made one. Conversely, it is a map of people of colour.

The map (click on it to enlarge) uses four colours:

  • dark blue: 75% to 100% white
  • medium blue: 50% to 75% white
  • light blue: 25% to 50% white
  • grey: 0% to 25% white

So:

  • majority POC: grey and light blue
  • majority white: medium and dark blue
  • multiracial: light and medium blue

But who is white? For this map two kinds of people are:

  1. Those who self-identify as white, like in a census.
  2. Those who belong to an ethnic group that is historically Christian or Jewish, with roots in West Eurasia.

That means white Hispanics, Armenians and Lebanese Christians are in, most Africans and Muslims, even Albanians, are out.

In the case of self-identification, note that someone who is considered white in one country might not be considered white in another.

I tried different definitions. This one is clean, easy to use and a good, general approximation.

Notes on each region:

north-america

North America: While the rest of the map is based on data from 2006 to 2011, Mexico is based on the last census that asked about race: in 1921! For the US, Hispanics who identify as white are counted as white. Doing otherwise led to paradoxes outside the US. Notice that Canada is not as lily-white as many imagine.

south-america

South America: Argentina, the pope’s home country, is extremely white. Its most “diverse” province, Chubut, is close to 90% white.

Most whites in South America, like in North America, live outside the tropics, which run from Havana to Rio. Worldwide most whites live in the temperate zone, 23.5 to 66.5 degrees from the equator:

temperate-zone

europe

Europe, North Africa and West Asia: Albania and Kosovo are mostly Muslim so they do not count as white, even though they are in Europe. I did not use “Europe” or “European” in my definition of white because then I would have to define Europe too! Not a battle I wanted or needed to fight.

siberia

Siberia: The people in the dark blue region are mainly ethnic Russians. Russia and Kazakhstan keep very good records on ethnicity.

black-africa

The rest of Africa: The surprise here is South Africa. I thought at least the Cape would be light blue. Whites are less than 25% in every single province. The way they complained you would think they were like a third of the country. It is galling to see this.

asia

 

The rest of Asia: The dark blue at the top is the tail end of Russia.

oceania

Oceania: The North Island of New Zealand is more multiracial than Australia, mostly because of the Maori.

Because Australia, Siberia, Canada and Argentina are large but thinly settled, the map makes it seem like there are more white people than there are.

To correct that, let’s scale each region according to its total population and put the map back together:

scaled

 

Notice that whites are not the main part of the world, but only a sixth of it.

Sources: Mainly the English and Russian Wikipedias (2014), the census of Argentina (2010) and New Zealand (2006) and the graphic that inspired this post (2011).

See also:

 

498 Responses

  1. This is awesome. I really appreciated the time it took to make this.
    I see one glaring problem:
    You wrote that you couldn’t count Albanians as white because they were Muslim. This doesn’t make any sense.
    There are plenty of white Muslims!
    Albanians are of Illyrian background, pre-Indo-European. Bosnians, Chechens, and even some Turks are pretty white looking people. Just curious why you’d erroneously link religion to race.
    Otherwise, enjoyable piece.

    Liked by 2 people


  2. Thank you so much for taking the time to do this. So dang informative, especially the part where you put everything to scale at the end.

    Like


  3. Notice that Canada is not as lily-white as many imagine.

    Who on earth imagines that? I suppose the same people who thought “American” meant “white”?

    Also, I noticed that quite a few people in Argentina were likely mestizo, but identified as “white”. In any case, Buenos Aires looked a lot more white and European to me than any large city I have ever been to in North America.

    Like


  4. Fascinating.

    As a side note, I suspect the reason why most people thought Canada was “lily-white” is due to media images. Most of time. white Canadians are in front of the camera, not much of anyone else.

    Like


  5. Costa Rica is an interesting exception – the only country in the tropical zone that is majority white. But of course, so is Northern Australia.

    Like


  6. Very weird definition of white. How can you link race to religion? Have you seen albanians? They are white as shit, just like bosniak and lots of Chechen, blond hair with often blue eyes.

    Here’s a picture of’em. they are very white. they are whiter than Greeks and Romanians who have a majority of dark hair, darker skin than these guys and I’ve seen algerians who could be taken for white or european. If I go to France or England, there is a big possibility of being called gypsy thieves (as it happened), but these people, especially Bosnian and Albanians are taken for white. Also I have met really dark skin Lebanese christian. This white thing I think it refers to Westerners, that is Anglo Saxon, Scandinavian, Finnish, french, Spanish (Catalan) because easterners and westerners look really different at least for me. and of course the ashkenazi in Israel, the very light skin, blue eyes type are not really jewish by blood.

    Liked by 1 person


  7. Abagond,

    A question.

    Would there even be a map of “white” people, or diverse racial classifications if Africans were not forcibly removed from their native lands, tied up in chains and made to produce free labor elsewhere in many parts of the western world??

    Another question.

    If Africans are no longer being made to work for free by “whites,” why on Earth are they (especially in the USA) still categorizing themselves as “white?”

    Last question.

    What real purpose does being “white” serve in today’s current world?

    Like


  8. That Map also highlights that white settler colonies only “worked” outside of the “old world” (except for Israel). The attemps to populate South Africa, Namibia and Algeria with white people failed.

    Like


  9. This map is great! Definitely points out their narcissism. South Africa has little representation and yet they own most everything regarding political/economic power-SMH

    Like


  10. @ Teodor Constantin B

    Very weird definition of white. How can you link race to religion? Have you seen albanians? They are white as sh-t, just like bosniak and lots of Chechen, blond hair with often blue eyes.

    Here’s a picture of’em. they are very white. they are whiter than Greeks and Romanians who have a majority of dark hair, darker skin than these guys and I’ve seen algerians who could be taken for white or european.

    There ARE some Albanians who look like the children in your link, some Balkan people are pale and blond, but with that one, random photo, you seem to be suggesting that that appearance is “representative”of what Albanians really look like.
    But it’s not really the whole picture is it? Some, or many, are very blond, true, but some are unmistakably “dark”. I am amazed you didn’t notice that, too, only their whiteness.
    Why would you do that?

    I wonder whether YOUR definition could be weirder than Abagond’s!

    Over many, many generations, didn’t some Albanians intermarry with darker Balkan neighsbours, like Serbs, and Greeks? Or is that a fallacy?
    What about the Turks in Albania?
    Also, I heard that the (Ottoman) Turks had African men in their military, and African women as concubines in their homes, and this could explain why some (*cough*) supposedly “white” people in South East Europe don’t look all that white