Pakistan Middle Class Bigger & Wealthier Than Indian Middle Class

[Shamain]

@Paksanity @farhan_9909 @Shamain

What I can't understand is that most Indians live on the Ganges basin. Their capital is on the Ganges Basin. Their holy river is Ganges. Just look at the map below of Ganga India.

All Indian members here from Utter Pradesh, Bihar, East Rajasthan, Bengal, Assam, some Orrisa, some Madya Pradesh which covers most Indian's are from this region. They worship Ganges as below





I won't even bother with the Dravid Indian's. They are stuck way in the South. These people then when it comes to history suddenly pretend to be "children of Indus" and drop Holy Ganges like something that looks and smells foul. The reason is simple folks. The answer lies in the map by Paksanity - Please refer below.

These maps makes it clearly evident that when our ancestors in the Indus region of Pakistan were basking in high civilization and laying foundations of Harrapa etc what were forefathers of Ganga Indian's upto? Look at map please. All of UP, Bihar, Assam, Bengal Madya Pradesh or the Ganga Indian ancestors were running around as "Forest Hunter gatherers". Not very edifying is it?

Solution ? Jump on our backs in the west and claim Indus basin.

What about those members who come from Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnatka, Jharkhand, Marathrastra, Andra Pradesh etc or Dravid Indians ancestors doing 5,000 years ago? Please refer to map above again. They were "Stone Age farmers" and "Hunter gatherer peoples". Again damn embrassing.

Solution? Jump on our backs far away in the north west and claim Indus Basin.


This explains why Indian's go in paroxyms the moment we mention it. It is like they have copyright over it. This is nothing but simple copyright theft and an attempt at covering up with their own land's singular lack of history. Thus pray to Ganga, live on Ganga, declare Holy Ganga, bathe in Ganga but when talking about history suddenly claim Indus ancestry.

Maybe we ought to enamoured that they want to deny their own forefathers and instead want to be children of our forefathers.

this last line from ur post packs it all.
"Maybe we ought to enamoured that they want to deny their own forefathers and instead want to be children of our forefathers"

its just that ivc ,gandhara, taxilla all these civiliazations were 'civilized', advanced and very modern by their times. Hnece, the deception was weaved by them as they had nothing to boast abt.
imean i always thought how dravadians coming from another part of world cud call themselves ivc scions??

its that they are so ashmed of their history that they are ready to drop their connection with their own forefathers, History they never had, ancestory they themselves removed..... Thats some very sad state of mind.
tthose who can deny their links with their own ancestors and steal others history.... one cud expect whatnot from them. Some lessons on morality wud help or maybe not.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

this last line from ur post packs it all.
"Maybe we ought to enamoured that they want to deny their own forefathers and instead want to be children of our forefathers"

its just that ivc ,gandhara, taxilla all these civiliazations were 'civilized', advanced and very modern by their times. Hnece, the deception was weaved by them as they had nothing to boast abt.
imean i always thought how dravadians coming from another part of world cud call themselves ivc scions??

its that they are so ashmed of their history that they are ready to drop their connection with their own forefathers, History they never had, ancestory they themselves removed..... Thats some very sad state of mind.
tthose who can deny their links with their own ancestors and steal others history.... one cud expect whatnot from them. Some lessons on morality wud help or maybe not.

I have had lots of discussion with Indians over this. From the dumb ones who say "Yeh they were Hindu". To the stupid who say "Yeh there was no Pakistan. To the very, very bright and highly educated Indian's who weave incredible and inventive tale but the bottom line is same, Copyright theft and desperate attempt to cover up their lands primitive jungle hunter gatherer ancestors by claiming our land - Indus basin as their forefathers.

Never buy into that rubbish "Pakistan came into being in 1947". Pakistan is a label. Just a name. History is of people. I know before 1947 my grandad was alive and I am sure yours was as well. We did not drop from the sky in 1947 or get teleported from Mars. Your father, his father going back to distant times have a connect with that land irrespective of what name you give. If I change my name today that does not mean I never existed before today or that I never had a childhood etc.

 

[Shamain]

India is named after a river that has 93% of its entire course in Pakistan.

The Reason are

*The history of India start in what is Pakistan/IVC
*Majority of the indians are the descendant of Pakistanis
*Majority of the indian follow Rig veda,which was composed by ancient Pakistanis
*Many of the indian language are developed from our language sanskrit

Yes true so thats all is with Pakistan. so what does india have?

@Atanz some while back iused to feel awkward when iwud read indians on internet claiming its their history and all because ididnt know..i had figured out some lies before ijoined the forum ... but learnt more indetail accounts later on. u remember i had supported the setup history forum suggestion. that was the reason and also because prior to that uhad made posts on indus valley ina thread...and iwas shocked that someone on this forum will also talk abt what iwas looking to know more abt. Indians seriously mock u and talk to u condescendingly by telling u indus is ours and all that gibberish ,to make u feel inferior abt urself.

 

[Paksanity]

Guess what, Mesopotomia civilization no longer belongs to Iraq, now ISIS can claim it.




First of all, the name Hindu came much later, what consisted before was the sanatan dharma. The Persians named the people Hindus and that's what followed thereafter.

There is nothing like Hindu in its current form or older form. Its just a name. We were all followers of sanatan dharma and we continue to do so.

And regarding the concept of 'the civilization which is established later will take something from the earlier civilization' I 100% agree, So, what's your so called Pakistani civilization has in common?

And don't name India and Pakistan in the same breathe when you are talking about civilization, I agree Pakistan is a British creation , but India, including its name existed long before that. As I mentioned Christopher Columbus was searching for sea route to India (Indies as the Spanish called it) and not Pakistan. West Indies derived its name because there existed a civilization called India.

It's not the name of a state, it's the people of a region which can claim succession to a civilization. Only way India can lay claim to Indus valley civilization is if

1) present day India was not inhabited and people of Indus valley moved into that area

2) Ganges and Indus civilizations exist at the same time and were physically connected

3) IVC sites are found all across present day India and not just areas close to Pakistan

4) Genetic make up of modern day India is identical to modern day Pakistan

None of the above is true. Only people of south Gujrat and East Punjab can request us to relate them as IVC relatives. We can consider that. For rest of India, please refer to Vedic period which came after IVC and be proud of it. Don't try to relate with people of Indus and its littoral regions. It doesn't reflect well on you.

 

[Shamain]

I have had lots of discussion with Indians over this. From the dumb ones who say "Yeh they were Hindu". To the stupid who say "Yeh there was no Pakistan. To the very, very bright and highly educated Indian's who weave incredible and inventive tale but the bottom line is same, Copyright theft and desperate attempt to cover up their lands primitive jungle hunter gatherer ancestors by claiming our land - Indus basin as their forefathers.

Never buy into that rubbish "Pakistan came into being in 1947". Pakistan is a label. Just a name. History is of people. I know before 1947 my grandad was alive and I am sure yours was as well. We did not drop from the sky in 1947 or get teleported from Mars. Your father, his father going back to distant times have a connect with that land irrespective of what name you give. If I change my name today that does not mean I never existed before today or that I never had a childhood etc.

oh for gods sake this last para , it is so funny how indians bring this 47 logic... they act as if every single thing human, place was born then. obviously these places had inhabitants, real ppl,of indus , who sought to part ways from india and had their own nation created. there are so many times im compelled to ask does independence in 47 means there existed no humans and history there?

 

[Indus Pakistan]

It's not the name of a state, it's the people of a region which can claim succession to a civilization. Only way India can lay claim to Indus valley civilization is if

1) present day India was not inhabited and people of Indus valley moved into that area

2) Ganges and Indus civilizations exist at the same time and were physically connected

3) IVC sites are found all across present day India and not just areas close to Pakistan

4) Genetic make up of modern day India is identical to modern day Pakistan

None of the above is true. Only people of south Gujrat and East Punjab can request us to relate them as IVC relatives. We can consider that. For rest of India, please refer to Vedic period which came after IVC and be proud of it. Don't try to relate with people of Indus and its littoral regions. It doesn't reflect well on you.

True. For me this map says it all. Every Pakistan should look at this and feel sense of warm pride. Just look at it. When the entire world including the uppity Europeans were running around naked with spears in their hands and ancestors of Indian's were hanging of branches of trees naked in thick jungles of Ganga India a few chosen people on earth began the quest for civilization. We ladies and gentleman, our forefathers were one of the few - Yes what country todays sits on the Indus River Region - Harrapa? Pakistan. Yes sir, Pakistan. The others are Mesopotamia - Iraq, Nile - Egypt, Hunang Ho River region - China and Mexico etc

This fact needs to be taught to every Pakistani child so that they can look in the eye of any people in the world. Yes, we might be underdeveloped now but we along with few gave humanity civilization and damn it we will rise again. @Shamain @farhan_9909

 

[Shamain]

It's not the name of a state, it's the people of a region which can claim succession to a civilization. Only way India can lay claim to Indus valley civilization is if

1) present day India was not inhabited and people of Indus valley moved into that area

2) Ganges and Indus civilizations exist at the same time and were physically connected

3) IVC sites are found all across present day India and not just areas close to Pakistan

4) Genetic make up of modern day India is identical to modern day Pakistan

None of the above is true. Only people of south Gujrat and East Punjab can request us to relate them as IVC relatives. We can consider that. For rest of India, please refer to Vedic period which came after IVC and be proud of it. Don't try to relate with people of Indus and its littoral regions. It doesn't reflect well on you.

im not sure hindusim was there in mohenjodaro or not but they try to lay claim that lord shiva was hindus god so it means hindus no matter from what part of india hail can lay claim on ivc. ithink thats their logic.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

im not sure hindusim was there in mohenjodaro or not but they try to lay claim that lord shiva was hindus god so it means hindus no matter from what part of india hail can lay claim on ivc. ithink thats their logic.

They were not however even if they were what does that change. If my great grandmother had been Hindu and my great grandfather had been Buddhist, hell they would still be my great grandparents and ancestors. What, would a Tibetan Buddhist have claim or a Nepali Hindu on my great grandparents? That is simple pathetic reasoning. As I said if my son became a Rastarfar I would still be his father and he still would be my son.

Ancient Egyptians - Not Muslim
Ancient Greeks - Not Christians
Ancient Persians - Not Muslim
Ancient Indus [Pakistan] - Not Muslim

Does that equate to those people losing their ancestory?

 

[Sipahi]

Name even a single person In the world living or dead who even knew about the place called pakistan even 80 years ago forget about 5000 years...

The Indus Valley Civilization was an ancient civilization located in what is Pakistan and northwest India today.

Roooona maaat abbbb achaaaa ... Google IVC... There was no place called India .... It was Hindustan you b!tch

 

[Shamain]

They were not however even if they were what does that change. If my great grandafather was Hindu and my great grandfather was Buddhist hell they are still my forefathers and ancestors. What does a Tibetan Buddhist have claim or a Nepali Hindu on my great grandparents? That simple pathetic reasoning. As I said if my son became a Rastarfar I would still be his father and he still would be my son.

Ancient Egyptians - Not Muslim
Ancient Greeks - Not Christians
Ancient Persians - Not Muslim

Does that equate to those people losing their ancestory?

cmon its like ,lets say a dravadian or assamese wont become a sindhi .just because some sindhi and dravadian follow same religion. Now expand that to ivc and ganges civilization. now the ethnic groups from thse civilizations are distinct , how can one claim to be of another ethnicity when you are NOT from it.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

cmon its like ,lets say a dravadian or assamese wont become a sindhi .just because some sindhi and dravadian follow same religion. Now expand that to ivc and ganges civilization. now the ethnic groups from thse civilizations are distinct , how can one claim to be of another ethnicity when you are NOT from it.

Excellent point. Fact is 5,000 years ago no country existed. So it does not prove anything by saying Pakistan came in 1947. What is fact that people living on our land did remarkable things 5,000 years ago. Since then lot has evolved but that applies everywhere including to modern Greeks who despite being Orthodix Christians have primary right to Parthenon. We are the natural inheritors of this land and it's history. That we call ourselves today Pakistani or Takistani next year is besides the point. It is the history of the various ethnic groups that constitute this country.

It is perverse to see Tamils or Assamese claming Indus. This would be like us start claming Ancient Greece and Parthenon because some Greeks moved to our land and we were part of Alexanders Empire. Right now. Today you can go to Harrapa village and see simple people ploughing the fields. It is these people that are the natural inheritors notwithstanding 5,000 years of evolution. Click below on Google Maps of Harrapa and see the fields and house of the decendants of those who built IVC.

Google Maps

 

[Styx]

from some days ago:

after the ceremony I was waving and smiling to this old man with a big beard for a while, nice vibes.. before a bsf lady trooper came and angrily told me to gtfo lol

despite all the jingoism both sides and loud cries of alluhu akbar and bharat mata ki jai (and I was loud too lol), felt 0 hate, only affection.

we should stop fighting

/liberal geralt out

@jackhammer @jamahir @vsdoc @ranjeet @levina @Imran Khan @fakhre mirpur @Shamain and all the hundreds I cant all tag

 

[my2cents]

Frankly this cheap refrain from Indian's had it's time. It won't work anymore. This crap is their standard retort. Oh Pakistan did not exist. Friggin retards. P-A-K-S-T-A-N is just a label for a people.

I can tell you my dad was born before 1947 and his dad was born before that and his dad even before that and so forth. Names don't make history. People do.

If I changed my handle from "Atanz" to "Manz" and came back would I be another entity? No of course not. The name is just a label for something else. In this the people. The people of Indus have been evolving since time began and the sum product of that evolution is what you see today > us.

If my name changed to "Mirza Jatt" I would not become Mirza Jatt or vice versa. And the origins are like all peoples of the world complex and varied. If some of our ancestors were Buddhist or Hindu it make no differance. At some stage we were animists.This is same for everybody.



Bingo. This is what this is all about. When you have nothing but jungles as history your left to "pinch" other lands as your history. Typical fraud.

I for one do not consider the present day borders as defining our cultural bonds. You just cannot claim exclusivity to IVC culture just because you own the land. That is a lame argument and In my opinion what shapes ones perceptions about our antiquity is that sense of belonging and a connection to our present world view.

If you want to embrace the IVC culture as your own and stamp it on rock and your history books then I cannot stop you. Just present a logical and compelling narrative to present your case. I will respect that but you have failed in that department.

Just one question, do you have any idea how the name India came into being and what was considered as India by ancient explorers?


And if you really say IVC was your own, then start worshipping Shiva from now on, because idols of Shiva were found from IVC sites.

Jeez, just imagine Columbus in search of sea route to Pakistan, reaches America and the place is later named as West Pakis

Since we beat them to name our country India-- they had the option to rename their country "India West" but they choose "Pakistan". Even in naming their country they ignored their ancient history.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

I for one do not consider the present day borders as defining our cultural bonds. You just cannot claim exclusivity to IVC culture just because you own the land. That is a lame argument and In my opinion what shapes ones perceptions about our antiquity is that sense of belonging and a connection to our present world view.

If you want to embrace the IVC culture as your own and stamp it on rock and your history books then I cannot stop you. Just present a logical and compelling narrative to present your case. I will respect that but you have failed in that department.

Are you telling us about the history of our land. and what and how we shape it? Are you suffering from some grand delusion?

Nobody is asking you to define anything. The borders are already defined in law and guards. They are a reality whether you wish them or not. The fact is major ethnic groups ( whose land this is ) have little to no spilover into India. Only Punjabi's are found across the border but in India that group is tiny. The vast majority of the ethnic groups are confined within each country.

You would struggle to find Tamil, Keralite, Assamese etc in Pakistan. If you did they would be anomalies like finding Arab in Russia or Black in Sweden.

And we only need to embrace what was on our land. No big deal in that. Every country does that. Rarely do you get one country constructing it's historical narrative on another countries land. Don't ever forget when we are taking about our history we mean in the main the history of those provinces and peoples that voted to constitute Pakistan in 1947.

When you talk about history of United Kingdom you actually mean the history of English, Welsh, Scot and Northern Irish. You should know the federating provinces of Pakistan. It is their history.

In the history of Punjabi, Pashtun, Baloch, Sindhi and Kashmiri* there is no place given for Assamese, Tamil, Orrissan, Maratha, Telengana, Malaylam all of whom I am sure have their own proud history to be woven into the Indian rug.

* These are the dominant and resident peoples of the Indus Basin.

http://www.worldgeodatasets.com/files/Huffman-Indian_Subcontinent_Langs-wlms32-100dpi.pdf

And population spillover across borders. Note only Punjabi spills over into 3% of India. There is also spillover into Iran and Afghanistan.

 

[my2cents]

Are you telling us about the history of our land. and what and how we shape it? Are you suffering from some grand delusion?

Nobody is asking you to define anything. The borders are already defined in law and guards. They are a reality whether you wish them or not. The fact is major ethnic groups ( whose land this is ) have little to no spilover into India. Only Punjabi's are found across the border but in India that group is tiny. The vast majority of the ethnic groups are confined within each country.

You would struggle to find Tamil, Keralite, Assamese etc in Pakistan. If you did they would be anomalies like finding Arab in Russia or Black in Sweden.

And we only need to embrace what was on our land. No big deal in that. Every country does that. Rarely do you get one country constructing it's historical narrative on another countries land. Don't ever forget when we are taking about our history we mean in the main the history of those provinces and peoples that voted to constitute Pakistan in 1947.

When you talk about history of United Kingdom you actually mean the history of English, Welsh, Scot and Northern Irish. You should know the federating provinces of Pakistan. It is their history.

In the history of Punjabi, Pashtun, Baloch, Sindhi and Kashmiri* there is no place given for Assamese, Tamil, Orrissan, Maratha, Telengana, Malaylam all of whom I am sure have their own proud history to be woven into the Indian rug.

* These are the dominant and resident peoples of the Indus Basin.

By confining an IVC culture to present day Pakistan, you are the one in delusion. Rig veda mentions about the migration of people from north west frontier, so I would assume that IVC predates rig veda period. Now the question is people who wrote the rig veda, are they the same people who migrated from these places?? Our contention is that we are the same people.

How do know that their was little or no spillover into India? You have already mentioned Punjab but their are lots of urdu speaking pashtuns in India. I don't know much about Baloch but their are lots of Sindhis who migrated during partition.