I think that we do not disagree in most points.
My argument is in line with ‘the invention of tradition’ of Eric Hobsbawn and ‘imagined communities’ by Benedict Anderson in that most ‘national identity and tradition’ is an actively put forward construct that is really not as ancient as it purports.
The ownership of national dishes is what I argue against, the one in this thread that elicited my response was that of mashed potatoes being an Irish dish. If you read correctly it’s my interlocutor that made the point about the British repression forcing the potato on the Irish, and the argument of that being the National dish is even more silly to me.
So no disagreement in that matter, I would say.
The Aztec argument is about what is fundamentally Mexican and the tragedy of that civilization being wiped out. This is another example that traditionalism about culture is a rather silly position to hold in an argument.
But if you re read the thread I think you’ll find that










Yes it’s quite novel. Most national identities and stereotypes are from the latter half of the nineteenth century. Read Eric Hobsbawns ‘the invention of tradition’’ for example.
The Italian cuisine and it’s staples are very much a construction from the post war period, look at the history of the spaghetti carbonara, which was wiped up by an American army cook, but was later elevated to an supposedly ‘ancient’ recipe.
But before the era of nationalism most people didn’t think in terms of nations and national stereotypes.