I don’t mind Modi, he’s a kewl guy, but he doesn’t seem any more conservative than guys in the west. As far as I know, he is not a “caste affirmer” and doesn’t campaign heavily on reducing India’s extensive system of affirmative action. Many Indian conservatives have resorted to denying caste as an “Anglo Imperial construct” despite genetic evidence demonstrating that Caste has existed and been taken very seriously since at least the Gupta Empire, and probably existed in some capacity since the Aryans arrived (another thing Hindutva types like to claim is a British lie, despite being very well-backed).
His attitude towards Islam is good and all, but it is not worthy of him being hailed as Kalki himself (I have seen some actually do this)
Okay these opinions are at best a decade or two too stale if not just wrong and prejudiced.
I haven’t heard any Hindu nationalists claim that the Jati and Varna system was brought in by the British because the genetic evidence clearly shows small cohort clustering based on both categories. What the genetic evidence also shows is that until very recently there was plenty of mobility across different Varnas, because you see the same Jati, which tracks one’s family lineage, being part of completely different Varnas, which is defined by one’s occupation and lifestyle.
What the British did clearly attempt to do was to try and crystallize these fluid categories and associate phenotypes with them when no such correlation actually exists. The fact that this caste system was imposed on Indian people is very well documented- there are actual letters of British demographers explaining to their superiors all the issues they were having with categorizing people by their caste and the response was to assign people a caste based on irrelevant criteria (like the size of their nose). During British rule it was a systematic policy to try and categorize people into rigid identities so that a wider narrative may be applied- that is what the Hindu nationalists are referring to.
As for the “Aryans arriving”, there is no one recognized migration into India that you could characterize as an identifiable event in Indian history as such. The “Aryans” are only a story that tickles some people’s fancy at this point and there is absolutely no basis for any claims that the central Asian migrations brought civilization into India, or whatever you are implying here. In fact, the R1a and R1b haplogroups are both very likely have actually originated in India, according to the latest genetic research, which would mean that in fact the peoples that the myth of “the Aryans” is usually projected on actually originated in India and migrated outward. The relatively recent migrations into India would then actually be reverse-migrations.
> What the genetic evidence also shows is that until very recently there was plenty of mobility across different Varnas, because you see the same Jati, which tracks one’s family lineage, being part of completely different Varnas, which is defined by one’s occupation and lifestyle.
Castes have remained pretty much endogamous towards each other since the Gupta period. If Jati were changing in caste, it wasn’t particularly common.
> What the British did clearly attempt to do was to try and crystallize these fluid categories and associate phenotypes with them when no such correlation actually exists. The fact that this caste system was imposed on Indian people is very well documented- there are actual letters of British demographers explaining to their superiors all the issues they were having with categorizing people by their caste and the response was to assign people a caste based on irrelevant criteria (like the size of their nose)
There is certainly a correlation, whether or not it was wise to call shots over nose size is neither here nor there but caste and phenotype certainly correspond. Ex: higher castes tend to have lighter skin on average (compared to others in the area)
> As for the “Aryans arriving”, there is no one recognized migration into India that you could characterize as an identifiable event in Indian history as such. The “Aryans” are only a story that tickles some people’s fancy at this point and there is absolutely no basis for any claims that the central Asian migrations brought civilization into India, or whatever you are implying here. In fact, the R1a and R1b haplogroups are both very likely have actually originated in India, according to the latest genetic research, which would mean that in fact the peoples that the myth of “the Aryans” is usually projected on actually originated in India and migrated outward. The relatively recent migrations into India would then actually be reverse-migrations.
The entire world outside of India recognizes that the Andronovo Culture was the Proto-Indo-Iranian culture and that people descended from it brought the Indo-Aryan languages to India. R1a and R1b probably originate in Siberia, and the variants which are common in India pretty much certainly come from the Andronovo Culture which comes from the Sintashta Culture and before them the Corded Ware Culture in Northern Europe. Meanwhile, there is absolutely zero genetic or archaeological evidence that anyone from the subcontinent migrated into Europe. The idea that R1a and R1b come from India are from extremely outdated tenuous studies. Our earliest samples for both are in Europe and Russia.
Do you understand the difference between being “pretty much” endogamous by real genetic selection pressures and having a census assigned permanent caste identity? There are plenty of families of common genetic origin that end up in one Varna in one part of the country and in another in another part while keeping their endogamous identity intact. How do you explain that if there wasn’t mobility between the Varnas? Just as the endogamous practices are culturally enforced, there are many examples in the Hindu Mythos of characters changing their Varnas, and so this kind of mobility was culturally accepted until it was crystallized in time by the British.
That’s shifting goalposts. Correlations in phenotype and Varnas, which I haven’t denied, are no excuse for, again, a census assigned *permanent* caste identity. That is my entire point, which is “neither here nor there” according to you.
Just because a lot of people believe it doesn’t make a lie true. There is clearly a common language origin for the PIE languages but that doesn’t prove it’s European origin. Sanskrut texts are the oldest available PIE derived language texts, and Vedas are the oldest Sanskrut texts. If the language was spoken by people who saw themselves as European then why do the Vedas mention so much Indian geography in such detail but not even once mention any European geography? or even any instance of inward migration into the Indian subcontinent?
You clearly just threw in some words into the search engine to find the two studies you’ve linked, can you repeat the process and actually read the latest theory about the origins of R1a and R1b? There is plenty of evidence of migrations outward from India- you can even track them in domesticated animal populations. And unlike the Aryan invasion myth, many Sanskrut texts actually mention the tribes of peoples that either left or were exiled from India after significant semi-historical events.
>Do you understand the difference between being “pretty much” endogamous by real genetic selection pressures and having a census assigned permanent caste identity? [...] Just as the endogamous practices are culturally enforced, there are many examples in the Hindu Mythos of characters changing their Varnas, and so this kind of mobility was culturally accepted until it was crystallized in time by the British. [...] That’s shifting goalposts. Correlations in phenotype and Varnas, which I haven’t denied, are no excuse for, again, a census assigned *permanent* caste identity.
This is true for pretty much every ethnic category. Governments work by the rule, not the exception, and the rule is that caste is something you are born with and your children inherit. Yes, some exceptional people will be "spiritually of another caste" but this is the exception and if it wasn't then we wouldn't see that transition to endogamy during late antiquity. Old Hindu stories often take place well before full-on caste endogamy was the standard.
>Sanskrut texts are the oldest available PIE derived language texts, and Vedas are the oldest Sanskrut texts. If the language was spoken by people who saw themselves as European then why do the Vedas mention so much Indian geography in such detail but not even once mention any European geography? or even any instance of inward migration into the Indian subcontinent?
No, Mycenaean Greek and Hittite, as well as other Anatolian languages, are recorded before Sanskrit. Well, if you count the Mitanni Hurrian as "Sanskrit" because it has some influence from Sanskrit, then I suppose you could say Sanskrit is written before everything other than Hittite. I think even Iranic peoples might have been writing stuff down before Indians were writing down Sanskrit. The Vedas were an oral tradition for a long time.
>If the language was spoken by people who saw themselves as European then why do the Vedas mention so much Indian geography in such detail but not even once mention any European geography? or even any instance of inward migration into the Indian subcontinent?
They didn't see themselves as European and probably were only vaguely familiar with Europe. By the time the Rigveda was composed they had already migrated into South-Central Asia. Before that, they had been in Central Asia for centuries. The reason they do not mention their foreign origins in the Rig Veda is probably because it is irrelevant to the Rig Veda, as it is a religious book of hymns and not a people's history. On the other hand, Iranic peoples (who considered the Indo-Aryans to be distantly related to themselves) clearly recognize the origin of their people in the wintry land of Airyanem Vaejah, as opposed to something more subtropical like the Indus Valley.
>You clearly just threw in some words into the search engine to find the two studies you’ve linked, can you repeat the process and actually read the latest theory about the origins of R1a and R1b?
The latest theory? You mean, the one that you have not cited from any scientific study and have failed to provide any evidence of? No serious academics outside of India think that the R1a which is so common in India today is indigenous to India, it is clearly from the Steppe.
>There is plenty of evidence of migrations outward from India- you can even track them in domesticated animal populations. And unlike the Aryan invasion myth, many Sanskrut texts actually mention the tribes of peoples that either left or were exiled from India after significant semi-historical events.
Oh really? What great and powerful evidence do you have of this aside from the fact that some tribes in India were exiled to somewhere else. This is just as tenuous as the people who say the British are a lost tribe of Israel.
Priestly and celibate are actually two completely unrelated things in Indian culture. Priests have always been allowed and even encouraged to marry in Hindu societies. And celibacy is one of the lifelong vows that anyone, from any background, can take in service to a specific deity or cause. There are actually a dozen or more local leaders in the BJP that have taken such vows. I am inclined to believe that they do actually follow this lifestyle because if they didn’t the opposition party would be screaming about it from the rooftops. A vow of celibacy is of course a very simple and highly effective way to lend credence to your political agenda but that’s not enough of a reason to doubt the sincerity of it.
One thing that I don’t see enough people talk about is how genuinely progressive the BJP has been in its approach. Their leaders, even the geriatric ones, don’t hesitate to use and integrate the latest technology in any way they can. They have come up with some of the most effective tools for money transfer and online portals for all kinds of administration, and recently they are rolling out AI tools for real time audio translation and softwares for self-directed learning. They have heavily subsidized internet access and mobile connectivity in the past and now they are promoting startup ecosystems. One of the most refreshing things is when the party leaders and parliamentarians can get onto podcasts and openly discuss politics and their work for several hours at a time- it clearly shows the level of intelligence and competence of any politician to see them be spontaneous and engaged. They seem to be embracing all change while the opposition is stuck in the past, and even the most apolitical, simple-minded and disengaged person can clearly see the difference.
I don’t mind Modi, he’s a kewl guy, but he doesn’t seem any more conservative than guys in the west. As far as I know, he is not a “caste affirmer” and doesn’t campaign heavily on reducing India’s extensive system of affirmative action. Many Indian conservatives have resorted to denying caste as an “Anglo Imperial construct” despite genetic evidence demonstrating that Caste has existed and been taken very seriously since at least the Gupta Empire, and probably existed in some capacity since the Aryans arrived (another thing Hindutva types like to claim is a British lie, despite being very well-backed).
His attitude towards Islam is good and all, but it is not worthy of him being hailed as Kalki himself (I have seen some actually do this)
Okay these opinions are at best a decade or two too stale if not just wrong and prejudiced.
I haven’t heard any Hindu nationalists claim that the Jati and Varna system was brought in by the British because the genetic evidence clearly shows small cohort clustering based on both categories. What the genetic evidence also shows is that until very recently there was plenty of mobility across different Varnas, because you see the same Jati, which tracks one’s family lineage, being part of completely different Varnas, which is defined by one’s occupation and lifestyle.
What the British did clearly attempt to do was to try and crystallize these fluid categories and associate phenotypes with them when no such correlation actually exists. The fact that this caste system was imposed on Indian people is very well documented- there are actual letters of British demographers explaining to their superiors all the issues they were having with categorizing people by their caste and the response was to assign people a caste based on irrelevant criteria (like the size of their nose). During British rule it was a systematic policy to try and categorize people into rigid identities so that a wider narrative may be applied- that is what the Hindu nationalists are referring to.
As for the “Aryans arriving”, there is no one recognized migration into India that you could characterize as an identifiable event in Indian history as such. The “Aryans” are only a story that tickles some people’s fancy at this point and there is absolutely no basis for any claims that the central Asian migrations brought civilization into India, or whatever you are implying here. In fact, the R1a and R1b haplogroups are both very likely have actually originated in India, according to the latest genetic research, which would mean that in fact the peoples that the myth of “the Aryans” is usually projected on actually originated in India and migrated outward. The relatively recent migrations into India would then actually be reverse-migrations.
> What the genetic evidence also shows is that until very recently there was plenty of mobility across different Varnas, because you see the same Jati, which tracks one’s family lineage, being part of completely different Varnas, which is defined by one’s occupation and lifestyle.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26811443/
Castes have remained pretty much endogamous towards each other since the Gupta period. If Jati were changing in caste, it wasn’t particularly common.
> What the British did clearly attempt to do was to try and crystallize these fluid categories and associate phenotypes with them when no such correlation actually exists. The fact that this caste system was imposed on Indian people is very well documented- there are actual letters of British demographers explaining to their superiors all the issues they were having with categorizing people by their caste and the response was to assign people a caste based on irrelevant criteria (like the size of their nose)
There is certainly a correlation, whether or not it was wise to call shots over nose size is neither here nor there but caste and phenotype certainly correspond. Ex: higher castes tend to have lighter skin on average (compared to others in the area)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022202X16326483
> As for the “Aryans arriving”, there is no one recognized migration into India that you could characterize as an identifiable event in Indian history as such. The “Aryans” are only a story that tickles some people’s fancy at this point and there is absolutely no basis for any claims that the central Asian migrations brought civilization into India, or whatever you are implying here. In fact, the R1a and R1b haplogroups are both very likely have actually originated in India, according to the latest genetic research, which would mean that in fact the peoples that the myth of “the Aryans” is usually projected on actually originated in India and migrated outward. The relatively recent migrations into India would then actually be reverse-migrations.
The entire world outside of India recognizes that the Andronovo Culture was the Proto-Indo-Iranian culture and that people descended from it brought the Indo-Aryan languages to India. R1a and R1b probably originate in Siberia, and the variants which are common in India pretty much certainly come from the Andronovo Culture which comes from the Sintashta Culture and before them the Corded Ware Culture in Northern Europe. Meanwhile, there is absolutely zero genetic or archaeological evidence that anyone from the subcontinent migrated into Europe. The idea that R1a and R1b come from India are from extremely outdated tenuous studies. Our earliest samples for both are in Europe and Russia.
Do you understand the difference between being “pretty much” endogamous by real genetic selection pressures and having a census assigned permanent caste identity? There are plenty of families of common genetic origin that end up in one Varna in one part of the country and in another in another part while keeping their endogamous identity intact. How do you explain that if there wasn’t mobility between the Varnas? Just as the endogamous practices are culturally enforced, there are many examples in the Hindu Mythos of characters changing their Varnas, and so this kind of mobility was culturally accepted until it was crystallized in time by the British.
That’s shifting goalposts. Correlations in phenotype and Varnas, which I haven’t denied, are no excuse for, again, a census assigned *permanent* caste identity. That is my entire point, which is “neither here nor there” according to you.
Just because a lot of people believe it doesn’t make a lie true. There is clearly a common language origin for the PIE languages but that doesn’t prove it’s European origin. Sanskrut texts are the oldest available PIE derived language texts, and Vedas are the oldest Sanskrut texts. If the language was spoken by people who saw themselves as European then why do the Vedas mention so much Indian geography in such detail but not even once mention any European geography? or even any instance of inward migration into the Indian subcontinent?
You clearly just threw in some words into the search engine to find the two studies you’ve linked, can you repeat the process and actually read the latest theory about the origins of R1a and R1b? There is plenty of evidence of migrations outward from India- you can even track them in domesticated animal populations. And unlike the Aryan invasion myth, many Sanskrut texts actually mention the tribes of peoples that either left or were exiled from India after significant semi-historical events.
>Do you understand the difference between being “pretty much” endogamous by real genetic selection pressures and having a census assigned permanent caste identity? [...] Just as the endogamous practices are culturally enforced, there are many examples in the Hindu Mythos of characters changing their Varnas, and so this kind of mobility was culturally accepted until it was crystallized in time by the British. [...] That’s shifting goalposts. Correlations in phenotype and Varnas, which I haven’t denied, are no excuse for, again, a census assigned *permanent* caste identity.
This is true for pretty much every ethnic category. Governments work by the rule, not the exception, and the rule is that caste is something you are born with and your children inherit. Yes, some exceptional people will be "spiritually of another caste" but this is the exception and if it wasn't then we wouldn't see that transition to endogamy during late antiquity. Old Hindu stories often take place well before full-on caste endogamy was the standard.
>Sanskrut texts are the oldest available PIE derived language texts, and Vedas are the oldest Sanskrut texts. If the language was spoken by people who saw themselves as European then why do the Vedas mention so much Indian geography in such detail but not even once mention any European geography? or even any instance of inward migration into the Indian subcontinent?
No, Mycenaean Greek and Hittite, as well as other Anatolian languages, are recorded before Sanskrit. Well, if you count the Mitanni Hurrian as "Sanskrit" because it has some influence from Sanskrit, then I suppose you could say Sanskrit is written before everything other than Hittite. I think even Iranic peoples might have been writing stuff down before Indians were writing down Sanskrit. The Vedas were an oral tradition for a long time.
>If the language was spoken by people who saw themselves as European then why do the Vedas mention so much Indian geography in such detail but not even once mention any European geography? or even any instance of inward migration into the Indian subcontinent?
They didn't see themselves as European and probably were only vaguely familiar with Europe. By the time the Rigveda was composed they had already migrated into South-Central Asia. Before that, they had been in Central Asia for centuries. The reason they do not mention their foreign origins in the Rig Veda is probably because it is irrelevant to the Rig Veda, as it is a religious book of hymns and not a people's history. On the other hand, Iranic peoples (who considered the Indo-Aryans to be distantly related to themselves) clearly recognize the origin of their people in the wintry land of Airyanem Vaejah, as opposed to something more subtropical like the Indus Valley.
>You clearly just threw in some words into the search engine to find the two studies you’ve linked, can you repeat the process and actually read the latest theory about the origins of R1a and R1b?
The latest theory? You mean, the one that you have not cited from any scientific study and have failed to provide any evidence of? No serious academics outside of India think that the R1a which is so common in India today is indigenous to India, it is clearly from the Steppe.
>There is plenty of evidence of migrations outward from India- you can even track them in domesticated animal populations. And unlike the Aryan invasion myth, many Sanskrut texts actually mention the tribes of peoples that either left or were exiled from India after significant semi-historical events.
Oh really? What great and powerful evidence do you have of this aside from the fact that some tribes in India were exiled to somewhere else. This is just as tenuous as the people who say the British are a lost tribe of Israel.
Priestly and celibate are actually two completely unrelated things in Indian culture. Priests have always been allowed and even encouraged to marry in Hindu societies. And celibacy is one of the lifelong vows that anyone, from any background, can take in service to a specific deity or cause. There are actually a dozen or more local leaders in the BJP that have taken such vows. I am inclined to believe that they do actually follow this lifestyle because if they didn’t the opposition party would be screaming about it from the rooftops. A vow of celibacy is of course a very simple and highly effective way to lend credence to your political agenda but that’s not enough of a reason to doubt the sincerity of it.
One thing that I don’t see enough people talk about is how genuinely progressive the BJP has been in its approach. Their leaders, even the geriatric ones, don’t hesitate to use and integrate the latest technology in any way they can. They have come up with some of the most effective tools for money transfer and online portals for all kinds of administration, and recently they are rolling out AI tools for real time audio translation and softwares for self-directed learning. They have heavily subsidized internet access and mobile connectivity in the past and now they are promoting startup ecosystems. One of the most refreshing things is when the party leaders and parliamentarians can get onto podcasts and openly discuss politics and their work for several hours at a time- it clearly shows the level of intelligence and competence of any politician to see them be spontaneous and engaged. They seem to be embracing all change while the opposition is stuck in the past, and even the most apolitical, simple-minded and disengaged person can clearly see the difference.
Interesting about the celibacy. And yeah the BJP's campaigning seems very effective. The holograms are a bit gimmicky but I think pretty cool too.