What's new

Is India one people?

When a guy like you argue without using the brain as usual, he forgets that that is applicable to a multi ethnicity country like pakistan as well. How Pakistan is an Ummah with multi ethnicity diaspora?
When tha illiterate phraand like you argue with tha guy like me...you forget that the true nationalists among us don't care about our ethnicities beyond preserving the positive cultural attributes they bring to our melting pot, and moreover, we also are comfortable with being a multiethnic nation, assimilating migrants and natives alike under a staunchly nationalised narrative. India - with its relentless "us vs them" summary dismissal of Muslims as "foreign" - can never understand this.
 
When tha illiterate phraand like you argue with tha guy like me...you forget that the true nationalists among us don't care about our ethnicities beyond preserving the positive cultural attributes they bring to our melting pot, and moreover, we also are comfortable with being a multiethnic nation, assimilating migrants and natives alike under a staunchly nationalised narrative. India - with its relentless "us vs them" summary dismissal of Muslims as "foreign" - can never understand this.

Loads of BS.
And what made you think that we care anout ethnicity of our fellow citizens? India is the true nation where nobody cares onout the ethnicity of our fellow citizen as we have so much of diversity that doing that is not possible for any Indian. India is the country where people has a lots of freedom to explore and rise beyond our physicality. We have the freedom to create our own daity. India was never defined by ethnicity. Infact, a multicultural, multilingwistic, multiracial country can never be defined based on ethnicity. Those who tried to do that has failed miserabally.
 
Loads of BS.
And what made you think that we care anout ethnicity of our fellow citizens? India is the true nation where nobody cares onout the ethnicity of our fellow citizen as we have so much of diversity that doing that is not possible for any Indian. India is the country where people has a lots of freedom to explore and rise beyond our physicality. We have the freedom to create our own daity. India was never defined by ethnicity. Infact, a multicultural, multilingwistic, multiracial country can never be defined based on ethnicity. Those who tried to do that has failed miserabally.
Yes of course you don't.

You favour one foreign ideology over another foreign ideology. You declare Aryan ideology as "native" but Mughal ideology as "foreign", and this remains a justification for favouring one over the other.

You're in far too deep to reverse this course now, or to even recognise it as arbitrary discrimination.
 
Yes of course you don't.

You favour one foreign ideology over another foreign ideology. You declare Aryan ideology as "native" but Mughal ideology as "foreign", and this remains a justification for favouring one over the other.

You're in far too deep to reverse this course now, or to even recognise it as arbitrary discrimination.

Aryan are native to this nation unlke your ancestor Mughal.
 
Most Pakistanis and folks like you have no clue on the topic relating to India and pretend to be all-knowing on the subject, then make Himalayan blunders, which people who wanted to debate will have to take too much time repealing. And yet they keep coming with new theories that come out of their fallacies.
The Hindutva or Hinduism definition doesn't involve genetics to begin with, rather traditions and customs. That's how you can find Brahmins as dark as an African or a Dalit as light and blue-eyed as European. They are still Dalit, having light skin doesn't change their caste so is a dark Brahmin.

In short, nobody gives a damn about mixed genetic origins, but are more into the caste - class construct. This whole thread is about genetic similarity which matters less in the Indian context.

Stop this nonsense talk from early 2000. Time to accept the fact that brahmins are foreigners and dalits are oppressed indigenous people because genetics proves that. Brahmins are quite proud of the fact that they tend to be shade lighter then dalits.
 
In the past people in online forums could argue for hours and days based on nothing but personal opinions and very subjective observation of phenotypes, but with recent advances in dna tests and analysis over the last couple of years, we can now measure genetic distance between different groups of people and put an end to this debate.

There's an online tool called Vahaduo which is used very commonly by both the academic and amateur genetics enthusiasts. Publicly available dna result data can be entered into this tool to calculate genetic distance between two different ethnicities.

I have used the data available here to find the distances posted below.

Here's just one example why Indians cannot be seen as one people and no amount of argument can change hard scientific data and results.

Here is the distance between an Englishman and a Dutch, below. This means nothing by itself, but compare this number with the comparison further below, between an UP Brahmin and an average person from UP.

View attachment 727977


Distance between UP Brahmin and average UP person:

View attachment 727980



So basically an average guy in UP (India) is 6 times further away from a Brahmin living just next to him, compared to genetic distance between Englishman and Dutch.


So it's really absurd when Indians talk about Akhand Bharat including Pakistan, Tibet and Malaysia, when India itself is really not a single race but a continent containing extremely genetically diverse people!
Pakistan is similarly caste-segregated genetics-wise.
Punjabi genetic variation in 1000 Genomes: Hindu caste in the Land of the Pure? – Gene Expression (gnxp.com)
Coming to your data, it's inaccurate. I don't know how they modelled it, but there are quite large discrepancies in it when it comes to differentiating between a normal UP person or UP Brahmin or other castes classes you can compare to.
It is actually quite accurate.
I don't know
Yes you don't.
 
Back
Top Bottom