@Chhatrapati
See below. Sounds pretty aggressive to me. What would you like to infer here, that your ancestors willingly gave themselves into slavery? That the dalits were happy to be dalitised? That the British or the mughals were to blame maybe for giving these dalits an idea that there is an alternative way? Maybe everyone was happy before they arrived in their roles on the caste tree?
"Much of this Steppe ancestry is male, the research shows. This means that Steppe migrants “were more successful at
competing for local mates than men from the local groups” – which tells us something about the aggressive nature of Indo-Aryan migration into India. The
Science paper concludes that there was an “asymmetric social interaction between descendants of Steppe pastoralists and peoples of the Indus Periphery Cline [Indus Valley Civilisation]”. "
"This male bias is standard for Indo-European migration. In fact, when these Steppe pastoralists reached Europe, Reich’s research found an even larger proportion of male Steppe genes. In large parts of Western Europe, Steppe migrants almost completely displaced local males in a short time span, leading to one Danish archeologist postulating that the coming of these Indo-European speakers “
must have been a kind of genocide”."
The following extracts illustrate the perpetual inferiority complex that hindutva suffers with, glimpses of which are evident in your own denial of history:
"David Reich recounted how politics played a part in his work. Given the significant Steppe ancestry in the Ancestral North Indian component, Reich had originally termed this group “West Eurasians” – a move that received violent pushback from Reich’s Indian collaborators, who controlled the access to genetic material. Reich recounts these discussions as the “tensest 24 hours of my scientific career”.
“At the time I felt that we were being prevented by political considerations from revealing what we had found,” he complained."
Eventually, a nomenclatural solution was found. Names were chosen for the two ancestral groups that seemed to suggest to the layman that they had solidly subcontinental origins: the earlier discussed Ancestral North Indians and Ancestral South Indians. “The ANI are related to Europeans, central Asians, Near Easterners and people of the Caucasus,” wrote Reich, but with those 100% subcontinental names, “we made no claim about the location of their homeland or any migrations”.
...
"While all people are interested in their origins, why do feelings in India run especially deep? Reich, in an
interview to Scroll.in in February, put forward a cultural argument, noting that in contrast to India, its Muslim-majority 1947 twin Pakistan doesn’t seem to care very much about the ancient past. It is similar to the situation in much of the West, Reich noted: “In Europe, there’s almost no emotionality at all about the ancient farmers or Bronze Age people or hunter-gatherers. There’s in fact, no emotion about the dead.”
To Reich’s cultural argument, there is also a political layer. India is today dominated by the politics of Hindutva or Hindu nationalism, an ideology which is fiercely nativist. Vinayak Savarkar, the founder of Hindutva and a foundational thinker for the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, based his nationalism on nativism arguing that for a true Indian, India had to be both his pitribhumi (ancestral land) and punyabhumi (the land of his religion)."
Idols don't have a race, a vast majority of them are made of Shaligram in Vaishnavite tradition which is a kind of black stone, or idols are made of metals, gold, silver etc.. by casting. The few white marble stone idols are showpiece that is rarely found inside temples.
