Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Pawnee, Cherokee, and Seminole arent any different from each other. They are genetically the same Asians that came over to the americas. India as a country may not have been around until 1947 but that has nothing to do with what I said about that area being a nation long before whites gave you rules about how you were to define your history and culture.Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.The difference being that there is no recorded history of the Native Americans having forcibly and violently extirpated the previous inhabitants of the western hemisphere.
Where is the evidence that Indians killed adivasis and who are the "indians" etc. Actually I read that some adivasis are new comers from southeast asia http://joais.org/papers/vol2no1/2. N.K.Das 11-34.pdf
there are austro-asiatic tribes (linked to southeast asia) there are dravidians and there are proto-australoids (austrics) there are tibeto-burmese people etc. who is the original inhabitant of india?
1) Archaelogical findings are slowly starting to complement the religious literature of Hinduism which speaks of the invasions of the subcontinent from Central Asia and the subsequent destruction of the Indus Valley Civilization etc.....and moving far beyond that, one only needs to see the oppression of Adivasis by the Indian state today. A recurring theme pertaining to all indigenous peoples, sadly.....
2) There is no such "original inhabitant" of India because India never existed as a singular national polity prior to 1947. It is the most racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse country in that regard....
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.1) Archaelogical findings are slowly starting to complement the religious literature of Hinduism which speaks of the invasions of the subcontinent from Central Asia and the subsequent destruction of the Indus Valley Civilization etc.....and moving far beyond that, one only needs to see the oppression of Adivasis by the Indian state today. A recurring theme pertaining to all indigenous peoples, sadly.....
2) There is no such "original inhabitant" of India because India never existed as a singular national polity prior to 1947. It is the most racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse country in that regard....
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
Man that was ten thousand years ago. Its a social construct, the whole caste system is a social construct. Indians cluster closer to eatch other as they cluster to any other race. There are some internal differences but they are genetically all on a cline and cluster together before they cluster with europeans or asians or blacks. You should inform yourself.
A social construct with strong racial and classist undertones.....contrary to your flawed notions of a region of the world you are not familiar with, there was never any large-scale mixing even prior to the establishment of caste precepts.
I don't cluster together with other Indians any more than I do Blacks, Asians, Whites, Juden, etc. Culture>Race.
Some white people disagree with you.
Haq's Musings: Harvard Genetics Study Finds Most Indians Are Not Indigenous
""Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India" confirms that North Indians ancestors started migrating to India from outside thousands of years before the advent of Islam. ANIs and ASIs routinely intermarried between 4,200 and 1,900 years ago until the imposition of strict segregation by the Hindu caste system, according to the study.
Its just a label. It stems from the term "Indo". "Indus" etc.
they divide themselfes i know upper castes think they are aryans and white, and that the others are black. but its far from true, they are bunch of mixed raced browns. all of them.
Your hearsay doesn't count as a valid position, homie. I am upper-caste and I have never thought of myself as "white" lmao......neither do 10s of millions of light-skinned people in/from India.
And no, not all people in the country are mixed-race. There are communities which have practiced ethnic and caste endogamy for thousands upon thousands of years.
Sorry man. I dont want to insult indians, I like them but you looked to be one of those upper castes, who thinks you are akin to whites etc. Why do you attacked "blacks ashkenazi jews and white liberals". I dont know about mixed race but all castes derrive ancestry from diverse populations the mixing probably occured before the establishment of the caste system.
When have I claimed to be akin to "Whites"??
I attack Afrocentrist Blacks and Liberals because of their silly, parochial viewpoints.
I attack Jews because they are tantamount to human parasites.
What do you think of Roma, do you think they are parasites too? Romani people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Of course it was a nation. Repeating white propaganda doesnt do much for me. I didnt determine they were the same. Genetics did that. No i dont take offense when someone says all Black people are genetically the same. Only people that want to be white like you get offended by such things.Pawnee, Cherokee, and Seminole arent any different from each other. They are genetically the same Asians that came over to the americas. India as a country may not have been around until 1947 but that has nothing to do with what I said about that area being a nation long before whites gave you rules about how you were to define your history and culture.Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.Where is the evidence that Indians killed adivasis and who are the "indians" etc. Actually I read that some adivasis are new comers from southeast asia http://joais.org/papers/vol2no1/2. N.K.Das 11-34.pdf
there are austro-asiatic tribes (linked to southeast asia) there are dravidians and there are proto-australoids (austrics) there are tibeto-burmese people etc. who is the original inhabitant of india?
1) Archaelogical findings are slowly starting to complement the religious literature of Hinduism which speaks of the invasions of the subcontinent from Central Asia and the subsequent destruction of the Indus Valley Civilization etc.....and moving far beyond that, one only needs to see the oppression of Adivasis by the Indian state today. A recurring theme pertaining to all indigenous peoples, sadly.....
2) There is no such "original inhabitant" of India because India never existed as a singular national polity prior to 1947. It is the most racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse country in that regard....
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
India was never a nation. In fact prior to the English subjugation, most of the Indian subcontinent was under the rule of ethnic Marathis who were seen as foreigners in other parts of the land as much as White people.
Typical hyprocite Afrocentrist loon talk LMAO. So an African-American can determine that the Pawnee and Seminole are the same, but you take offense (and rightfully so) when non-Blacks essentialize Black people???
Of course it was a nation. Repeating white propaganda doesnt do much for me. I didnt determine they were the same. Genetics did that. No i dont take offense when someone says all Black people are genetically the same. Only people that want to be white like you get offended by such things.Pawnee, Cherokee, and Seminole arent any different from each other. They are genetically the same Asians that came over to the americas. India as a country may not have been around until 1947 but that has nothing to do with what I said about that area being a nation long before whites gave you rules about how you were to define your history and culture.Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.1) Archaelogical findings are slowly starting to complement the religious literature of Hinduism which speaks of the invasions of the subcontinent from Central Asia and the subsequent destruction of the Indus Valley Civilization etc.....and moving far beyond that, one only needs to see the oppression of Adivasis by the Indian state today. A recurring theme pertaining to all indigenous peoples, sadly.....
2) There is no such "original inhabitant" of India because India never existed as a singular national polity prior to 1947. It is the most racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse country in that regard....
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
India was never a nation. In fact prior to the English subjugation, most of the Indian subcontinent was under the rule of ethnic Marathis who were seen as foreigners in other parts of the land as much as White people.
Typical hyprocite Afrocentrist loon talk LMAO. So an African-American can determine that the Pawnee and Seminole are the same, but you take offense (and rightfully so) when non-Blacks essentialize Black people???
Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.1) Archaelogical findings are slowly starting to complement the religious literature of Hinduism which speaks of the invasions of the subcontinent from Central Asia and the subsequent destruction of the Indus Valley Civilization etc.....and moving far beyond that, one only needs to see the oppression of Adivasis by the Indian state today. A recurring theme pertaining to all indigenous peoples, sadly.....
2) There is no such "original inhabitant" of India because India never existed as a singular national polity prior to 1947. It is the most racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse country in that regard....
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
Man that was ten thousand years ago. Its a social construct, the whole caste system is a social construct. Indians cluster closer to eatch other as they cluster to any other race. There are some internal differences but they are genetically all on a cline and cluster together before they cluster with europeans or asians or blacks. You should inform yourself.
A social construct with strong racial and classist undertones.....contrary to your flawed notions of a region of the world you are not familiar with, there was never any large-scale mixing even prior to the establishment of caste precepts.
I don't cluster together with other Indians any more than I do Blacks, Asians, Whites, Juden, etc. Culture>Race.
Some white people disagree with you.
Haq's Musings: Harvard Genetics Study Finds Most Indians Are Not Indigenous
""Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India" confirms that North Indians ancestors started migrating to India from outside thousands of years before the advent of Islam. ANIs and ASIs routinely intermarried between 4,200 and 1,900 years ago until the imposition of strict segregation by the Hindu caste system, according to the study.
We were talking about the Seminoles, Cherokees etc regarding genetics. Indians are basically a mixed population now.Of course it was a nation. Repeating white propaganda doesnt do much for me. I didnt determine they were the same. Genetics did that. No i dont take offense when someone says all Black people are genetically the same. Only people that want to be white like you get offended by such things.Pawnee, Cherokee, and Seminole arent any different from each other. They are genetically the same Asians that came over to the americas. India as a country may not have been around until 1947 but that has nothing to do with what I said about that area being a nation long before whites gave you rules about how you were to define your history and culture.Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
India was never a nation. In fact prior to the English subjugation, most of the Indian subcontinent was under the rule of ethnic Marathis who were seen as foreigners in other parts of the land as much as White people.
Typical hyprocite Afrocentrist loon talk LMAO. So an African-American can determine that the Pawnee and Seminole are the same, but you take offense (and rightfully so) when non-Blacks essentialize Black people???
They are not genetically the same, upper castes and northern indians are a little bit closer to europeans, but if you compare them to low castes vs. europeans they are still closer to low castes, there is something called PCA plot and southasians build a cluster, all southasian genetic groups. Maybe there are some outliers lilke the negritos and tibeto-burmese but 99% of indians are genetically similar. India was a cultural nation, they didnt had one empire rule but it was like greek city states, it was dominated by the same culture.
Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
Man that was ten thousand years ago. Its a social construct, the whole caste system is a social construct. Indians cluster closer to eatch other as they cluster to any other race. There are some internal differences but they are genetically all on a cline and cluster together before they cluster with europeans or asians or blacks. You should inform yourself.
A social construct with strong racial and classist undertones.....contrary to your flawed notions of a region of the world you are not familiar with, there was never any large-scale mixing even prior to the establishment of caste precepts.
I don't cluster together with other Indians any more than I do Blacks, Asians, Whites, Juden, etc. Culture>Race.
Some white people disagree with you.
Haq's Musings: Harvard Genetics Study Finds Most Indians Are Not Indigenous
""Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India" confirms that North Indians ancestors started migrating to India from outside thousands of years before the advent of Islam. ANIs and ASIs routinely intermarried between 4,200 and 1,900 years ago until the imposition of strict segregation by the Hindu caste system, according to the study.
Neither ANIs nor ASIs are identified as Adivasis. Show me, for example, proof of the invaders of the IVC copulating with the native inhabitants.
Yes ASI and Adivasis are both considered part of the Dravidian.Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
Man that was ten thousand years ago. Its a social construct, the whole caste system is a social construct. Indians cluster closer to eatch other as they cluster to any other race. There are some internal differences but they are genetically all on a cline and cluster together before they cluster with europeans or asians or blacks. You should inform yourself.
A social construct with strong racial and classist undertones.....contrary to your flawed notions of a region of the world you are not familiar with, there was never any large-scale mixing even prior to the establishment of caste precepts.
I don't cluster together with other Indians any more than I do Blacks, Asians, Whites, Juden, etc. Culture>Race.
Some white people disagree with you.
Haq's Musings: Harvard Genetics Study Finds Most Indians Are Not Indigenous
""Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India" confirms that North Indians ancestors started migrating to India from outside thousands of years before the advent of Islam. ANIs and ASIs routinely intermarried between 4,200 and 1,900 years ago until the imposition of strict segregation by the Hindu caste system, according to the study.
Neither ANIs nor ASIs are identified as Adivasis. Show me, for example, proof of the invaders of the IVC copulating with the native inhabitants.
We were talking about the Seminoles, Cherokees etc regarding genetics. Indians are basically a mixed population now.Of course it was a nation. Repeating white propaganda doesnt do much for me. I didnt determine they were the same. Genetics did that. No i dont take offense when someone says all Black people are genetically the same. Only people that want to be white like you get offended by such things.Pawnee, Cherokee, and Seminole arent any different from each other. They are genetically the same Asians that came over to the americas. India as a country may not have been around until 1947 but that has nothing to do with what I said about that area being a nation long before whites gave you rules about how you were to define your history and culture.No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
India was never a nation. In fact prior to the English subjugation, most of the Indian subcontinent was under the rule of ethnic Marathis who were seen as foreigners in other parts of the land as much as White people.
Typical hyprocite Afrocentrist loon talk LMAO. So an African-American can determine that the Pawnee and Seminole are the same, but you take offense (and rightfully so) when non-Blacks essentialize Black people???
They are not genetically the same, upper castes and northern indians are a little bit closer to europeans, but if you compare them to low castes vs. europeans they are still closer to low castes, there is something called PCA plot and southasians build a cluster, all southasian genetic groups. Maybe there are some outliers lilke the negritos and tibeto-burmese but 99% of indians are genetically similar. India was a cultural nation, they didnt had one empire rule but it was like greek city states, it was dominated by the same culture.
Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
Man that was ten thousand years ago. Its a social construct, the whole caste system is a social construct. Indians cluster closer to eatch other as they cluster to any other race. There are some internal differences but they are genetically all on a cline and cluster together before they cluster with europeans or asians or blacks. You should inform yourself.
A social construct with strong racial and classist undertones.....contrary to your flawed notions of a region of the world you are not familiar with, there was never any large-scale mixing even prior to the establishment of caste precepts.
I don't cluster together with other Indians any more than I do Blacks, Asians, Whites, Juden, etc. Culture>Race.
Some white people disagree with you.
Haq's Musings: Harvard Genetics Study Finds Most Indians Are Not Indigenous
""Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India" confirms that North Indians ancestors started migrating to India from outside thousands of years before the advent of Islam. ANIs and ASIs routinely intermarried between 4,200 and 1,900 years ago until the imposition of strict segregation by the Hindu caste system, according to the study.
Why they are all brown etc.
Upper Castes (Brahmins) they are not white like the invaders
Lots of them do. You just dont hear about it. There are lots of Africans in India. Not only the indigenous ones but also the ones that came over later.We were talking about the Seminoles, Cherokees etc regarding genetics. Indians are basically a mixed population now.Of course it was a nation. Repeating white propaganda doesnt do much for me. I didnt determine they were the same. Genetics did that. No i dont take offense when someone says all Black people are genetically the same. Only people that want to be white like you get offended by such things.Pawnee, Cherokee, and Seminole arent any different from each other. They are genetically the same Asians that came over to the americas. India as a country may not have been around until 1947 but that has nothing to do with what I said about that area being a nation long before whites gave you rules about how you were to define your history and culture.
India was never a nation. In fact prior to the English subjugation, most of the Indian subcontinent was under the rule of ethnic Marathis who were seen as foreigners in other parts of the land as much as White people.
Typical hyprocite Afrocentrist loon talk LMAO. So an African-American can determine that the Pawnee and Seminole are the same, but you take offense (and rightfully so) when non-Blacks essentialize Black people???
They are not genetically the same, upper castes and northern indians are a little bit closer to europeans, but if you compare them to low castes vs. europeans they are still closer to low castes, there is something called PCA plot and southasians build a cluster, all southasian genetic groups. Maybe there are some outliers lilke the negritos and tibeto-burmese but 99% of indians are genetically similar. India was a cultural nation, they didnt had one empire rule but it was like greek city states, it was dominated by the same culture.
Indians should acknowledge their african roots and chocolate colour.
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
Man that was ten thousand years ago. Its a social construct, the whole caste system is a social construct. Indians cluster closer to eatch other as they cluster to any other race. There are some internal differences but they are genetically all on a cline and cluster together before they cluster with europeans or asians or blacks. You should inform yourself.
A social construct with strong racial and classist undertones.....contrary to your flawed notions of a region of the world you are not familiar with, there was never any large-scale mixing even prior to the establishment of caste precepts.
I don't cluster together with other Indians any more than I do Blacks, Asians, Whites, Juden, etc. Culture>Race.
Some white people disagree with you.
Haq's Musings: Harvard Genetics Study Finds Most Indians Are Not Indigenous
""Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India" confirms that North Indians ancestors started migrating to India from outside thousands of years before the advent of Islam. ANIs and ASIs routinely intermarried between 4,200 and 1,900 years ago until the imposition of strict segregation by the Hindu caste system, according to the study.
Why they are all brown etc.
Upper Castes (Brahmins) they are not white like the invaders
Please compare that exact, infinitesimal sample size (3) of Tamil Brahmins (pictured above) with Konkani Chitpavan Brahmins (google it if u wish) and please tell me they look the same. Lolz.
Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.1) Archaelogical findings are slowly starting to complement the religious literature of Hinduism which speaks of the invasions of the subcontinent from Central Asia and the subsequent destruction of the Indus Valley Civilization etc.....and moving far beyond that, one only needs to see the oppression of Adivasis by the Indian state today. A recurring theme pertaining to all indigenous peoples, sadly.....
2) There is no such "original inhabitant" of India because India never existed as a singular national polity prior to 1947. It is the most racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse country in that regard....
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
Man that was ten thousand years ago. Its a social construct, the whole caste system is a social construct. Indians cluster closer to eatch other as they cluster to any other race. There are some internal differences but they are genetically all on a cline and cluster together before they cluster with europeans or asians or blacks. You should inform yourself.
A social construct with strong racial and classist undertones.....contrary to your flawed notions of a region of the world you are not familiar with, there was never any large-scale mixing even prior to the establishment of caste precepts.
I don't cluster together with other Indians any more than I do Blacks, Asians, Whites, Juden, etc. Culture>Race.
You probably never did a genetic test, and dont know it. I know a little bit about genetics. Well Indians are more or less all mixed race. What race do you think you are?
Lots of them do. You just dont hear about it. There are lots of Africans in India. Not only the indigenous ones but also the ones that came over later.We were talking about the Seminoles, Cherokees etc regarding genetics. Indians are basically a mixed population now.Of course it was a nation. Repeating white propaganda doesnt do much for me. I didnt determine they were the same. Genetics did that. No i dont take offense when someone says all Black people are genetically the same. Only people that want to be white like you get offended by such things.India was never a nation. In fact prior to the English subjugation, most of the Indian subcontinent was under the rule of ethnic Marathis who were seen as foreigners in other parts of the land as much as White people.
Typical hyprocite Afrocentrist loon talk LMAO. So an African-American can determine that the Pawnee and Seminole are the same, but you take offense (and rightfully so) when non-Blacks essentialize Black people???
They are not genetically the same, upper castes and northern indians are a little bit closer to europeans, but if you compare them to low castes vs. europeans they are still closer to low castes, there is something called PCA plot and southasians build a cluster, all southasian genetic groups. Maybe there are some outliers lilke the negritos and tibeto-burmese but 99% of indians are genetically similar. India was a cultural nation, they didnt had one empire rule but it was like greek city states, it was dominated by the same culture.
Indians should acknowledge their african roots and chocolate colour.
Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
Man that was ten thousand years ago. Its a social construct, the whole caste system is a social construct. Indians cluster closer to eatch other as they cluster to any other race. There are some internal differences but they are genetically all on a cline and cluster together before they cluster with europeans or asians or blacks. You should inform yourself.
A social construct with strong racial and classist undertones.....contrary to your flawed notions of a region of the world you are not familiar with, there was never any large-scale mixing even prior to the establishment of caste precepts.
I don't cluster together with other Indians any more than I do Blacks, Asians, Whites, Juden, etc. Culture>Race.
You probably never did a genetic test, and dont know it. I know a little bit about genetics. Well Indians are more or less all mixed race. What race do you think you are?
Nah, I just don't obsess over stupid shit like racial markers. Only people who feel an intrinsic lack of self-worth/belonging do so.
Man that was ten thousand years ago. Its a social construct, the whole caste system is a social construct. Indians cluster closer to eatch other as they cluster to any other race. There are some internal differences but they are genetically all on a cline and cluster together before they cluster with europeans or asians or blacks. You should inform yourself.
A social construct with strong racial and classist undertones.....contrary to your flawed notions of a region of the world you are not familiar with, there was never any large-scale mixing even prior to the establishment of caste precepts.
I don't cluster together with other Indians any more than I do Blacks, Asians, Whites, Juden, etc. Culture>Race.
Some white people disagree with you.
Haq's Musings: Harvard Genetics Study Finds Most Indians Are Not Indigenous
""Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India" confirms that North Indians ancestors started migrating to India from outside thousands of years before the advent of Islam. ANIs and ASIs routinely intermarried between 4,200 and 1,900 years ago until the imposition of strict segregation by the Hindu caste system, according to the study.
Why they are all brown etc.
Upper Castes (Brahmins) they are not white like the invaders
Please compare that exact, infinitesimal sample size (3) of Tamil Brahmins (pictured above) with Konkani Chitpavan Brahmins (google it if u wish) and please tell me they look the same. Lolz.
Dude all indians are brown dont fool anyone pakistanis who are more white then indians are dark brown too. I worked with a pakistani and he was dark brown. If pakistanis are dark brown then indians are even more. Or you claim there are mystical white indians? Only in bollywood after skin bleaching and heavy cinematographic editing
Of course it was a nation. Repeating white propaganda doesnt do much for me. I didnt determine they were the same. Genetics did that. No i dont take offense when someone says all Black people are genetically the same. Only people that want to be white like you get offended by such things.Pawnee, Cherokee, and Seminole arent any different from each other. They are genetically the same Asians that came over to the americas. India as a country may not have been around until 1947 but that has nothing to do with what I said about that area being a nation long before whites gave you rules about how you were to define your history and culture.Of course there were original inhabitants of india. White beliefs on what constitutes a nation is not even part of the discussion here.1) Archaelogical findings are slowly starting to complement the religious literature of Hinduism which speaks of the invasions of the subcontinent from Central Asia and the subsequent destruction of the Indus Valley Civilization etc.....and moving far beyond that, one only needs to see the oppression of Adivasis by the Indian state today. A recurring theme pertaining to all indigenous peoples, sadly.....
2) There is no such "original inhabitant" of India because India never existed as a singular national polity prior to 1947. It is the most racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse country in that regard....
No there were not.....there were/are original inhabitants of Gujarat, Bengal, Assam, Orissa, etc.....who are as different from one another are Pawnee are from Cherokee are from Seminole....
India as a country never existed before 1947.
India was never a nation. In fact prior to the English subjugation, most of the Indian subcontinent was under the rule of ethnic Marathis who were seen as foreigners in other parts of the land as much as White people.
Typical hyprocite Afrocentrist loon talk LMAO. So an African-American can determine that the Pawnee and Seminole are the same, but you take offense (and rightfully so) when non-Blacks essentialize Black people???
