Unmasking AIT

10-30-2006, 10:53 PM

There is some truth in what you say maruti. In this Macaulay and the english were completely successful in dividing India.They knew the Brhamana would take like duck to water to their system of education, because of his great adaptability, while some of the population, especially the harijans would have difficulty ,since they did not have the tradition of scholarship and would be left behind. And then they could turn around and say to the harijan , look you are being exploited and being left behind.

As for wanting to look white and liking white skin, this is fairly universal throughout the world and not restricted to india. witness the situation in Mexico ,where most presidents have been light skinned and there is a definite class consciousness based on color

QUOTE(maruti @ Oct 30 2006, 01:42 AM)Even though I don't subscribe to AIT, I've always wondered why it's easy to distinguish between brahmins, Dalits and the rest. I am not talking skin color here. Even a dark-skinned Brahmin has certain features which distinguish him from a fair-skinned dalit. Irrespective of color, certain features do characterize brahmins, dalits and others. Perhaps, husky and others who're into this can throw some light on this.

IMO, however, AIT is popular for one reason and one reason only. Indians love AIT, because it gives them a chance to identify themselves with westerners. That's why most Indians try to keep it alive, and it's not due to western scholarship and the rest. Those things may be true but Indians are willingly accepting their research, why? It's because deep down, as Francois Gautier suggests, Indians want to be white; hence the success of AIT even though it's got no evidence.
[right][snapback]60039[/snapback][/right]

10-30-2006, 11:00 PM

QUOTE(acharya @ Jul 26 2006, 07:16 PM)Known among professionals for his pioneering mathematical research (his formula for chromosome distance occupies a central place in classical genetics), Damodar Dharmanand Kosambi had developed serious interests in Indology, history, archaeology, anthropology and several other disciplines rather early in his life. He also had an amazing skill in languages. A polyglot, he knew well more than a dozen languages, both Indian and foreign, modern and classical. He died rather young, not quite 60. It is a measure of his intellectual impact that three commemorative volumes were issued within 10 years of his death.
[right][snapback]54667[/snapback][/right]


Kosambi , I believe was a statistician by training
Here is a wiki on him

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damodar_Dharmanand_Kosambi
Veryinteresting Father was a buddhist.

**acharya** · (This post was last modified: 10-31-2006, 12:02 AM by acharya.)

Father

http://www.kamat.com/kalranga/itihas/kosambi.htm

Acharya Kosambi

All the books of Kosambi

http://www.geocities.com/dialecticalmethod/index.html

http://www.geocities.com/dialecticalmeth...ihari.html
http://www.geocities.com/dialecticalmeth...rates.html
http://www.geocities.com/dialecticalmeth...dhism.html
http://www.geocities.com/dialecticalmethod/china.html
http://www.geocities.com/dialecticalmeth...rship.html
http://www.geocities.com/dialecticalmethod/basham.html
http://www.geocities.com/dialecticalmethod/dale.html
http://www.geocities.com/dialecticalmethod/science.html

QUOTE

BOOKS AND ARTICLES BY D. D. KOSAMBI

(Based on his notes )

I. Books

1. An Introduction to the Study of Indian History (Popular Book Depot, Bombay, 1956).
2. Exasperating Essays: Exercise in the Dialectical Method (People's Book House, Poona, 1957) .
3. Myth and Reality: Studies in the Formation of Indian Culture (Popular Prakashail, Bombay, 1962).
4. The Culture and Civilisation of Ancient India in Historical Outline (Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1965) .

II. Edited Works

1. The Satakatrayam of Bhartrhari with the Comm. of Ramarsi, edited in collaboration with Pt. K. V. Krishnamoorthi Sharma (Anandasrama Sanskrit Series, No.127, Poona, 1945), pp. 2+140+6+1.
2. The Southern Archetype of Epigrams Ascribed to Bhartrhari (Bharatiya Vidya Series 9, Bombay, 1946), pp. 176+ 13+8. (First critical edition of a Bhartrhari recension.)
3. The Epigrams Attributed to Bhartrhari (Singhi Jain Series 23, Bombay, 1948), pp. viii+82+240. (Comprehensive edition of the poet's work remarkable for rigorous standards of text criticism.)
4. The Subhasitaratnakosa of Vidyakara, edited in collaboration with V.V. Gokhale (Harvard Oriental Series 42, 1957)
5. The Cintamani-saranika of Dasabala; Supplement to Journal of Oriental Research, xix, pt, II (Madras, 1952) . viii+15, (A Sanskrit astronomical work which shows that King Bhoja of Dhara died in 1055-56.)

10-30-2006, 11:54 PM

More excerpts from Aryan Idols..

QUOTE"For over two hundred years, a series of historians, linguists,
folklorists, and archaeologists have tried to re-create a lost
culture. Using ancient texts, medieval records, philological
observations, and archaeological remains they have described a world,
a religion, and a people older than the Sumerians, with whom all
history is said to have begun. Those who maintained this culture have
been called "Indo-Europeans" and "Proto-Indo-Europeans," "Aryans," and
"Ancient Aryans," "Japhetites," and "wiros," among many other terms.
These people have not left behind any texts, no objects can
definitely be tied to them, nor do we know any "Indo-European" by
name. In spite of that, scholars have stubbornly tried to reach back
to the ancient "Indo-Europeans," with the help of bold historical,
linguistic, and archaeological reconstructions, in the hopes of
finding the foundation of their own culture and religion there.

The fundamental thesis of this study is that these prehistoric peoples
have preoccupied people in modern times primarily because they were,
to use the word of Claude Levi-Strauss, "good to think with," rather
than because they were meaningful historical actors. The interest in
the "Indo-Europeans," "Aryans" and their "others" (who have varied
through history from Jews to savages, Orientals, aristocrats, priests,
matriarchal peasants, warlike nomads, French liberals, and German
nationalists), stemmed-and still stems-from a will to create
alternatives to those identities that have been provided by tradition.
The scholarship about the Indo-Europeans, their culture, and their
religion has been an attempt to create new categories of thought, new
identities, and thereby a future different from the one that seemed to
be prescribed (Arvidsson 2006, p. xi)."

"On a more general level, the debate is about whether there is
something in the nature of research about Indo-Europeans that makes it
especially prone to ideological abuse-perhaps something related to the
fact that for the past two centuries, the majority of scholars who
have done research on the Indo-Europeans have considered themselves
descendants of this mythical race (Arvidsson 2006, p.3)."

"Formulated in accordance with R. G. Collingwood's thought, the same
question would be "To what "ideological" problem were the
Indo-Europeans the solution?" More recently, Quentin Skinner has
pointed to the philological rule that a text can be understood only if
one also understands why it exists in the first place; understanding
is about understanding not only WHAT is in the text but WHY it is
there. The aim of this book is, in other words, to examine what
ideological motives causes an array of scholars during the nineteenth
and the twentieth centuries to become interested in Indo-European
religion and culture and made them prioritize certain historical areas
and sources, choose certain perspectives and hypotheses instead of
others, and make certain kinds of associations or use a certain
rhetoric (Arvidsson 2006, p.5, emphasis in the original)."

"However the main reason why scholarship about the Indo-Europeans has
tended to produce myths is that so many who have written (and read)
about it have interpreted it as concerning THEIR OWN ORIGIN: "We all
have a need to understand," writes, for example Danish scholar of
Iranian studies, Jes P. Asmussen, "What our Indo-European" forefathers
felt and thought." The research on the Indo-Europeans has created a
"web of scientific myths," to use Vernant's phrase, because it has
dealt with "our origins" and hence, about the way "we" should do
things. However, as we shall see later on, there have been many
scholars who have resisted presenting the Indo-Europeans as "our true
ancestor"âsome (scholars of Jewish ancestry) because the
Indo-Europeans could not possibly have been their forefathers, and
others because they disproved of the mythologization for various
reasons, even though they themselves might have been defined as
"Indo-Europeans," (Arvidsson 2006, p.8, emphasis in the original)."

"The idealization of India was not, of course, about contemporary
India, but rather an India that was given the epithet "classical,"
borrowed from classical antiquityâan India that could be glimpsed
among ruins, old statues, Sanskrit manuscripts, and Brahmanic
teachings. Jones is very clear on this point: "Nor can we reasonably
doubt, how degenerate and abased so ever the Hindus may now appear,
that in some early age they were splendid in arts and arms, happy in
government, wise in legislation, and eminent in various knowledge."
The ancient Indians appeared to Jones to be people related to the
Greeks and Romans, who had been idealized by humanists since the
Renaissance (Arvidsson 2006, p.23)."

"The hypothesis that somewhere, sometime, an Indo-European race has
existed has always been anchored in linguistic observations. But
during the nineteenth century, racial anthropologist also began to
discuss the Indo-Europeans, which came to mean that the proprietorship
of philologists in Indo-European research was questioned (Arvidsson
2006, p.41)."

"The theory about India as the original home of the Indo-Europeans,
and the Indians as a kind of model Aryans, lost supporters during the
nineteenth century, and other homelands and other model Aryans took
their place instead (Arvidsson 2006, p.52)."

"The emergence of the discipline of folklore is intimately connected
to nationalism. This is especially clear with the founders of the
discipline, the brothers Wilhelm (1786-1859) and Jacob (author of the
Grimm's Law of comparative Indo-European linguistics) Grimm
(1785-1863). The purpose of their famed project of collecting
folktales from the German peasant population was primarily to (re-)
create a strong German culture that could free itself from dependence
on "foreign" cultures. One step in this project was to show that
there existed a rich "German" mythology that could successfully
compete with classical Judeo-Christian traditions. The fact that the
brothers Grimm had to look for mythical histories among the
contemporary peasantry was connected to the state of the source
material: there were almost no texts about an ancient "German"
mythology ((Arvidsson 2006, pp.131-132, second parenthesis added)."

"Since this discipline (folklore) arose in what became Germany in
1871, this change (the rising importance of folklore rather than
philology) meant that the Indo-Europeans began to look less and less
like the Indians and the Iranians, and more and more like Germans.
This meant, in turn, that they became less civilized and more
primitive and barbaric. The image of the Indo-Europeans as a
primitive tribe received an additional boost from the discipline of
the Indo-Europeans of prehistoric archaeology. When archaeologists
became involved in the debate about the Indo-Europeans, the Germanic's
position was further strengthened within the comparative work, and the
original home of the Indo-Europeans was moved from the noble and
exotic Asia to the rustic European homeland (Arvidsson 2006, pp.
141-142, parentheses added)."

"There were many reasons for this shift (of homeland from Asia to
Europe). First of all, the hypothesis of a European homeland accorded
with the folklore's focus on Germanic material. A second, closely
related reason was that the idea of a northern European homeland was
in line with the strong German nationalism that bloomed after the
Franco-Prussian War and Germany's unification. One's native land now
became more valuable than any dreamed-of colonizable, but foreign
lands. Thirdly, the ideas of racial anthropology gained more and more
credibility, and according to them, Europe was the origin of the e
white Aryan race ((Arvidsson 2006, p.142, parenthesis added)."

"It was thus from this area (which Germany had recently annexed) that
the greatest of all cultural peoples, the blue-eyed, long-skulled,
Indo-Germanic race, had emigrated to civilize the world. According to
Kossina, the Indo-Germanic race had attended its cultural-hero status
purely because of racial-biological factors. On their migrations,
southwards, the racially pure Indo-Germans had nonetheless become
contaminated and this was why their cultural-heroic exploits in
Greece, Rome and India had not become enduring (Arvidsson 2006, p.144)."

"The "primitivization" of the Indo-Europeans was also stimulated by
the fact that the Indo-Europeans were decreasingly linked to
high-cultural India.. It is revealing that Hermann Hirt, probably the
foremost philologist of the turn of the century, claimed that "many
Indo-Iranian concepts should rather be traced to Babylon than to the
Indo-Germans." Instead the Indo-Europeans were now increasingly
associated with Germanic barbarians (Arvidsson 2006, p.176)."

"For Hofler and Wikander, it was inconceivable that the "light" and
noble Indo-Europeans that the nature mythologists and order
ideologists had reconstructed had been able to conquer most of
Eurasia. In order to carry out such a deed, they reasoned, the
Indo-Europeans would mainly need not a high-standing culture, but a
barbaric primal force, a force like the one the Germans had had during
the Great Migration. As a commentary to Wikander's book about the
Iranian male-fellowship god Vayu, Hofler writes that "the
Indo-European expansion toward Asia has the same form of political
structure as the later Germanic expansion, the Germanic kingdom of
Wodan bears similar strengths as the first heroic age of the
Indo-Europeans." According to Hofller it is only in light of the
research on male fellowships and the "the discovery of the
ur-Indo-German social structure" that the expansion can be understood.
In Der arische Mannerbund, Wikander writes something similar: "The
Maruts reflect the warrior aspect, which the male fellowships of the
Aryan tribes had developed preferentially during the age of migration
and conquest." Hofler and Wikander argues that the model of conquest
that had been developed to explain the fact that the Indo-European
languages were spread across Europe and Asia at the dawn of history
required the Indo-Europeans to be exceptionally dynamic and
uninhibited warriors (Arvidsson 2006, p. 222)."

"During the postwar (post 1945 CE) period, these two theories (Father
Wilhelm Schmidt and Father Wilhelm Kopper's theory of primal cultures,
and Georges Dumezil's theory of Indo-European mythology) have
completely dominated research about Indo0-European religion and
cultureâin spite of the fact that they arose in an ideological
atmosphere that did not differ much from the Nazi one (Arvidsson 2006,
p. 239, parentheses added)."

"Hehn argued that, it was risky, in the attempts to reconstruct a
Proto-Indo-European culture, to depend too much on linguistic
paleontology, whose methodological accuracy he doubted. How can we be
sure, for example, that the Proto-Indo-Europeans owned tame horses
simply because we can reconstruct the word for horse (*h1ekuos)? Did
they perhaps only know about the animal, without having domesticated
it? Or how do we know that *h3evis denoted "goat" and not some other
similar animal, and that it has not acquired the meaning "goat" later?
(Arvidsson 2006, p. 255)."

"In Gimbutas's case I (Arvidsson) think that many readers of her work
have sensed that there is another agenda behind her theoretical
constructions, in addition to the clearly feminist agenda. This
subtext probably is related to the fact that she was forced into exile
by the Bolshevik troops who invaded her homeland, Lithuania, in
1944-45, moving across the Baltic and eastern Europe. There is
something very "Cold War" about her theories and about the maps she
draws of Indo-European invasions of eastern Europe and the Balkan
peninsula. In any case, a connection can be observed between not
idealizing, or even disapproving of, Indo-Europeans, and placing their
homeland on Slavic ground (Arvidsson 2006, p.293)."

"For those who have approached the question of the origin of the
Indo-European peoples and languages from the angle of philology, the
great problem has been that there are no texts about migrations, much
less about military invasionsâ¦ From the Rigveda, people have taken
passages that tell about the Aryans' attacks on cities and concluded
that they then must have been a foreign, warlike, nomadic people. Nor
does Roman, Hittite, Slavic, Celtic, or Germanic, written material
mention migrations or conquests from the time when the Indo-Europeans
supposedly emigrated from their original home. The philologists have,
however, been able to pint to certain loanwords, especially
topographic and hydrographic names, as evidence of migration. But the
cornerstone of philologists' work has been linguistic paleontology,
which tried to re-create, through comparisons, a vocabulary that
indicates knowledge about certain objects and phenomena
(Arvidsson 2006, p.295)."

"Renfrew bases his critique of linguistic paleontology particularly on
an article by J. Fraser from 1926, but it is also in line with the
criticism that Victor Hehn expressed. Several linguists, as well,
have remained skeptical about the possibilities and axioms of
linguistic paleontology. Most debated is the Russian structuralist
Prince Niklaj Trubestkoj (1890-1938), who argues in the famous article
"Gedanken uber das Indogermanenproblem" (1936) although it is possible
that the similarities between the Indo-European languages are due to a
common origin, this hypothesis is not necessary. He found that notion
of an original language (the family tree model) more romantic than
scientific and imagined that the genetic classification might be
replaced with a structuralist one (Arvidsson 2006, p.296)."

"The historian of religions Ulf Drobin clarifies Trubetskoy's point:
"all classification must stem from criteria. The followers of the
language tree theory avoid definite criteria and replace them with a
concept of language that is BOTH changeable (in time) and constant
(Indo-European). In the final analysis they end up in paradoxes and
mysticism. Ur-Indo-European must either lack prehistory, or it must
have a non-Indo-European prehistory. The latter, however, cannot be
explained with out some form of criteria" (Arvidsson 2006, p.297,
emphasis and parentheses in the original)."

"The sometimes interwoven traditions that have dominated the postwar
period-personified by Dumezil and Gimbutasâhave generally been
considered to represent an objective, scientific body of research that
contrasts sharply with the Nazis' misuse of the Indo-Europeans. But
as we have seen in this chapter, there is no reason to stop critically
analyzing the ideology of Indo-European scholarship. If Dumezil and
Gimbutas have each represented a constructive research tradition,
Bruce Lincoln can represent the tradition of ideological critique
among scholars of Indo-European heritage (Arvidsson 2006, pp. 301-302)."

"According to Lincoln, then, Indo-European research misses what is
instructive about studying myths and religious texts in the first
place, since it demand that the researchers leave the historically and
socially determined place in which they were used in order to reach
the imagined Ancient Arya., "the never-never land east of the
asterisk," to use the expression of Lincoln's colleague Wendy Doniger
(Arvidsson 2006, p. 303)."

Arvidsson, Stefan (2006), Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as
Ideology and Science, translated by Sonia Wichmann, Chicago and
London: The University of Chicago Press.

**acharya** · (This post was last modified: 11-02-2006, 11:04 PM by acharya.)

Is there a link to this post above

Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as
Ideology and Science

Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as Ideology and Science
By Stefan Arvidsson
Translated by Sonia Wichmann
The University of Chicago Press

Judged on merit, various Aryan theories rank among the weakest examples of scholarship, riddled with scientific contradictions and weighed down by political and racial prejudices. But in influence and longevity, especially in politics, they compare with the theories of Einstein and Darwin. The 'Aryan nation' became the mantra of German unification, while in colonial India, Aryans became the common ancestors of the Indians and the British. Neither Relativity nor the Theory of Evolution can match this.
While the scientific, racial and political aspects of the Aryan theories have been debated threadbare, a basic question remains: what drove the Europeans, Germans in particular, to a land and a people so far removed from them in space and time to define themselves? This question is effectively answered by Swedish scholar Stefan Arvidsson in his new book Aryan Idols. In the process, he has also shed light on European cultural currents leading to the persistence of these theories in western academia and their proneness to ideological abuse.
A useful point that Arvidsson makes is that the goal of this discipline, now called Indo-European studies, was not so much to understand Indian origins as to "show that there existed a rich 'German' mythology that could successfully compete with classical Judeo-Christian traditions". It is hardly surprising that anti-Semitism was tied up with it.
A little known aspect of Aryan theories, at least in India, is the major contribution of German folklore. Wilhem and Jacob Grimm, who compiled German folk tales, were also philologists. "For over two hundred years, a series of historians, linguists, folklorists, and archaeologists have tried to recreate a lost culture. Using ancient texts, medieval records, philological observations, and archaeological remains they have described a world, a religion, and a people older than the Sumerians, with whom all history is said to have begun."
There are, of course, no Indo-European texts. "No objects can definitely be tied to them, nor do we know any 'Indo-European' by name. In spite of that, scholars have stubbornly tried to reach back to the ancient 'Indo-Europeans', with the help of bold historical, linguistic, and archaeological reconstructions, in the hope of finding the foundation of their own culture and religion there."
This helps answer the question why some western academics react viscerally whenever their theories are thrown in doubt by new findings in archaeology, natural history or genetics. As Arvidsson notes: "There is something in the nature of research about Indo-Europeans that makes it especially prone to ideological abuse, perhaps something related to the fact that for the past two centuries, the majority of scholars who have done research on the Indo-Europeans have considered themselves descendants of this mythical race." This 'ideological abuse' reached its culmination in the Nazi regime. More recently, it raised its head when California education authorities tried to change the syllabus in elementary schools, replacing theories like the Aryan invasion with more recent findings.
Speaking of Indology, the book observes: "The theory about India as the original home of the Indo-Europeans, and the Indians as a kind of model Aryans, lost supporters during the nineteenth century, and other homelands and other model Aryans took their place instead." The Aryans (or Indo-Europeans) and their homeland were gradually moved westward until they were made to settle in Eurasia and even Germany. In the hands of German scholars, Aryans became "Indo-Germanische".

In summary, "the main reason why scholarship about the Indo-Europeans has tended to produce myths is that so many who have written [and read] about it have interpreted it as concerning THEIR OWN ORIGIN". While this accounts for the European attachment to the Aryan myth, it fails to explain why many Indian scholars continue to cling to it. The answer will have to come from an Indian scholar. WHY?

**acharya** · 10-31-2006, 12:26 AM

QUOTE(Bodhi @ Jul 26 2006, 05:15 AM)I have been reading posts on this forum, and I feel inputs like posted here are some of the most far reaching contributions behind busting the AIT, and especially in correcting public knowledge about it. Please don't stop untill the last nail is stuck in the coffin of the falsehood. Good luck!

Acharya Ji, Husky Ji, and others,

I am interested in reading / researching about the background and authentic history of AIT theory. Can you kindly help me/re-direct me reg where to start, and what are some of the key resources, dwelling light on:

- milestones of AIT theory over last 2 centuries
- how it got developed,
- who contributed to it and what were vested motives, if any?
- As of today, what are its unchallenged points?
- What is the most viable alternative theory(ies) to AIT? How matured?
- Who are the Key Indologists who have accepted/propogated this alternative theory, and who are the onese still supporting AIT?
- Why is Indian leftists so much stuck on this?

Please feel free to send me a personal message, if that would be more appropriate.

Thanks
[right][snapback]54639[/snapback][/right]


Looks like the book which was published in Sept 2006 has been done just to answer your question


Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as Ideology and Science

<img src='http://images.bestwebbuys.com/muze/bookmed/07/0226028607.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

This is another book which is related to this topic

A Race Against Time: Racial Heresies for the 21st Century (Paperback)
by Jared Taylor, George McDaniel (Editor) "Everyone knows that during the last 50 years or so there have been fundamental changes in the ways Americans think about raceQUOTEI cannot say enough about how good this book is. THIS is why printing presses were invented. A real revolution is shaping up in these pages--one like the Copernican revolution, but MUCH more important on a grand scale to our future on this planet.

This book destroys prejudice in the true sense of the word--by relentlessly pursuing facts and truth beyond the emotional conditioning we have grown up with in our modern Jew-influenced and twisted culture. This book talks clearly about the vast differences between the races. On page 208, the book elucidates how Blacks are much more present-oriented than whites, and shows how they are less motivated by knowledge-seeking, even with the same SAT scores. We get the idea clearly by the end of this book that the world looks very different to other races and that they will also therefore create one that is very different from ours as their power and numbers grow.

This is the extinction of the white race we are facing--clearly and unequivocally. The writers had the courage of Bruno the philosopher who was burned at the stake during the dark ages for his views on Heliocentrism. The people who condemned him refused to look through telescopes. They were PREJUDICED to the extreme. HERE is a telecope of vastly greater importance to our future. Justice demands that we all look through this telescope.

RACE is a real issue--probably the most important issue that ever existed in the intellectual world. You cannot think clearly without facts, and this book presents them clearly to show the problems we are up against. Many modern issues are dealt with--from the failures of school integration to the 70-80% inheritance of IQ. Blacks have 20 points lower IQ's than whites. Additionally, they show how the numbers are distorted by our interpretations of them and that inheritance is actually even greater than that astounding (by PC standards) number. Additionally, they factor in the mind-expanding ideas that the environment itself is built by people in the modern world--which means that high IQ people create a stimulating and enriching environment. You need to inherit AND live among those motivated by knowledge.

In other areas, they show how police are not biased at all in their arrest patterns--when we factor in the wildly different rates of criminal activity between the various races. We find that there are many myths and urban legends which we have been conditioned to believe emotionally, but are simply not true. Not true at all in fact. When we believe something, we tend to think there is a kernel of truth somewhere. In this case, astoundingly, there is not. All you have to do is to logically and objectively gather the facts and let them speak for themselves. This book is the destruction of prejudice.

The only weak point is the books reluctance to deal with the Jewish-influence behind the scenes in creating our misperceptions about race and heredity. This is a central issue, because they have a very different world view also, in spite of their intellect. Their intellect makes them especially dangerous to the future of truth. For example, the Jew Franz Boas created a whole new area of study to replace physical anthropology called cultural anthropology--crippling the study of racial and biological influences in culture. There are many such systematic examples of their fundamental differences from white Europeans. There is a reason they were kicked out of every country of Europe at one time or another--they were once banished from England for 400 years.

This may not be so bad. The Jewish issue may simply have been too big to possibly include here. There are many good books out there on the Jewish worldview and patterns of influence in culture--Kevin MacDonald, a professor at Californis State University has written several excellent books on the topic. That is the major failing of this book. This should have at least been mentioned or explained. Jews attempt to get on top of any intellectual movement to control and direct it away from scrutiny on them--in this book, a jew writes about the intellectual superiority of the Jews and how they therefore should naturally control things, along with parroting the growing white view of the differences between blacks and whites (for example). It is never mentioned that the Jews have patterns incompatible with western ideals as well--in fundamental ways which will eventually destroy us and all we hold most dear if we continue on our present path. That is a pretty big omission. They were historically the primary influence and funding behind our current prejudices and deceptions about all-important racial issues for example. Why doesn't this book talk about these fundamental issues? This is certainly the best book I have read on these issues other than that.I recommend it deeply with this one reservation.

Husky · (This post was last modified: 11-01-2006, 11:32 AM by Husky.)

Post 127,
That reviewer is one of the typical WASPy people who, thanks to their ingrained anti-semitism, like to blame everything on Jews - including the dangerous ideas generated by Christianity and Eurocentrists. There are many such people who are members of amazon and start seeing every event and every bad idea as somehow the fault of the Jews. They like to trace everything back to the Jews, because it makes themselves feel innocent and their ideologies less to blame for their actions.

There is something we need to be aware of. In the Old Testament, the mentions of Japhetic, Hamitic and Semitic were merely the ways in which the Hebrew-speaking population tried to explain the differences in their world: 'why are there people darker than ourselves? Maybe they were cursed'
The Jewish people might have had severe quarrels or competition with a neighbouring African tribe at one time and wrongly associated dark skin with something negative. Or else they could have tried to justify the conquest of neighbouring lands and ensuing slavery by arguing that any darker people they had conquered were born into slavery because of Ham. It would have served the purpose for a set time and set place and meant no more. (In Christianity this became a central doctrine, instead of a footnote on the side.)

The Christos from Europe, however, taking Christianity as the final word on all matters and taking the OT literally, used this to subjugate, enslave and destroy entire populations. The Hamitic-Semitic-Japhetic trichotomy thus went from a narrow area of effect (the Jewish people from long ago were only ever really intimate with their own surroundings and the peoples they encountered there) to being applied on a world-wide scale.

Jews are not at the centre of every plot against the rest of mankind (or any verifiable plot AFAIK), however much Christos love to project them as such.
Though the Pentateuch (Jewish religious literature) advocates harsh measures against 'goys', these were merely written by angry and jealous scribes shaking their fists against more prosperous neighbouring Egypt, Greece and other nations. They wanted to instill a sense of superiority in their people for the comparably bad situation they were going through at the time. More along the lines of: 'One day we'll be at the top and we'll see who laughs at whom then'. The reasons for their enmity have long since vanished. Ancient Greece and Egypt are no more, other peoples mentioned in the Bible no longer exist. 'Goy' merely means non-Jewish today and serves as a rule to prevent marriages out of the faith.
Today, only Orthodox Jews (and possibly not all of them) take their scripture literally - any number among them that might be harbouring plans to take over the world pale into insignificance compared to the very real and very influential ChristoIslamic plans to do the same.

The concept of 'Chosen People', too, only gained its significance on a global level after Christianity. Before that, even Jewish people believed their God was the deity of their tribe of Jews (a local deity for one particular ethnic or religious community: the Jews - hence the talk of their covenant), and eventually that he was only one among many - the others were considered false gods. They were the 'Chosen People' of their deity, a local phenomenon. A cursory glance through the OT (I think Deuteronomy) should make this clear.
The creators of the early mainstream Christian sects, however, had plans for all of the known world. Theirs was to be a 'catholic' religion (catholic literally means 'universal') or it would serve no purpose - they had no need for a tribal deity that only had a covenant with people who followed his laws. Christos mixed up the world saviour of the Persians with the messiah of the Jews (who was to free Jews from Roman oppression) to create jesus and his god: the world saving-messiah and his 'catholic' deity, the one true gawd.
Once again, as an accidental side-affect, Christians turned the 'Chosen people of local, tribal God of followers of Judaism' into 'Chosen People of universal gawd'. Then, yet again, throughout history, Christians would resent Jews for a concept that Christianity itself had created.

The reviewer you cited is utterly unreliable. His typically Christo-influenced, nazi-inspired anti-semitic vitriol is mere wishful thinking, as he's hoping and trying to shift the blame from what his stupid ideologies have caused to the usual scapegoat of the Christo-racists.
And as the reviewer himself states, the authors of the book he is 'reviewing' made no such connection between racism and Jews themselves. Not because they 'dared not to' in this PC world, but probably because they are not bigots unlike the reviewer himself.

Actually, all of the troubles that WASPYs like to attribute to 'the Jews' can be traced back directly to Christoism and its twisting of Judaic beliefs and scripture. Judaism never knew it was going to be a world religion - it was a mere accident of history that some people invented Christianity; and because the OT was based on the Pentateuch, it immediately brought Judaism into the limelight (through no real intention of Christianity). Because Judaism itself is the proof of Christoism's lie, Christoism hated Judaism since the beginning and blamed it for everything + more since then.
These WASPYs believe that the Jews are 'degenerating' 'White Christo Oryan culture' and destroying the 'White Christo Oryan race and civilisation'. It's the same arguments the Christo nazis and Hitler always made. So the real racists are obvious.

Unless we want to become ChristoIslamics ourselves, we should not be towing their line (indirectly) by referring to Christo-influenced anti-semites. There are serious conspiracies afoot. But they are ChristoIslamic ones, not Jewish ones.
Racist Christos (like that reviewer) are the last people we should rely on for factual information. They're after all the ones who've lied to the entire world by inventing IEs and the AIT.

**acharya** · (This post was last modified: 10-31-2006, 05:42 AM by acharya.)

The review was posted just to get the idea. It was not to disect it.
Once Indians are aware of the source funding to all the indic studies in the west for the last 100 years then it would be apparent what is going on. AIT suits lot of people, nations and superpowers. It could continue as long as Indians take it as truth and continue calling themselves as 'intellectuals'.

There are lots of myths created in the western society during the period of modernism
and positivism in the last 150 years. These myths are being shattered and intially there will be blame on lots of communities historically who have taken the blame.

**acharya** · (This post was last modified: 10-31-2006, 08:43 AM by acharya.)

http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol6no1/61-Jones.pdf

The Geography of Thought
Reviewed by Richard Jones, Jr.
Richard Jones highlights the pros and cons of Professor Richard E. Nisbettâs explanations for why Asians think differently than Westerners.

http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/

http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol5...-wch-script.pdf

Script and cognition - western and eastern thought patterns

Race, Reason, and Reality
Race:
The Reality of Human Differences
http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol5...rich-miele.html
Vincent Sarich and Frank Miele
Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2004
$27.50 cloth

http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol4...erstandIII.html
Understanding Jewish Influence III:
Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement

Kevin MacDonald

**acharya** · 10-31-2006, 08:17 AM

http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol1...sf-russell.html
The Christian Question

The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity:
A Sociohistorical Approach to Religious
Transformation

James C. Russell
New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.
$19.95 US

**acharya** · (This post was last modified: 11-01-2006, 03:28 AM by acharya.)

http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol4...bioculture.html

The United States, it would seem, is the primary seat of worldwide Jewish power, and U.S. cultural, economic, and military power is the fulcrum by which the Jewish extended phenotype leverages itself against gentileâparticularly European gentileâinterests. In addition, in other Western areas, even those not so conducive to Jewish dominance, historical developments enabled the Jewish extended phenotype to reach new levels of power. In a Western world without Jews, the development of more materialistic worldviews, including "rationalism" and "humanism," may have just been a phase through which the European peoples passed without any threat to Western survival. These may have been eventually replaced with other worldviews. However, the Jewish extended phenotype eagerly seized upon the opportunities presented by a more materialistic and "rational, humanistic" Europe, with the Jewish development of Marxism being the epitome of Jewish exploitation of these developments. The "end of the Cold War" has not ended the threat of Marxism; paradoxically, as the Marxist Soviet states of Eastern Europe collapsed, alternative "softer" forms of Marxist totalitarianism, in the form of "political correctness" and "racial sensitivity" (that is, sensitivity to the needs of all peoples except Europeans) spread throughout the West, usually with Jewish assistance.

11-01-2006, 01:39 AM

QUOTE(acharya @ Oct 30 2006, 02:56 PM)Looks like the book which was published in Sept 2006 has been done just to answer your question


Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as Ideology and Science
[right][snapback]60073[/snapback][/right]


Acharyaji, thank you very much. I will get that book.

ramana · 11-01-2006, 01:54 AM

One more link to add to the mix

Link: http://everything2.com/?node_id=1730065

Indo-European Myths

11-01-2006, 02:54 AM

Has anybody read the following essay ?

http://janus.lib.cam.ac.uk/db/node.xsp?id=...2FERL%2F1%2F313

Kak has a review here..

http://www.omilosmeleton.gr/english/skak.html

How can i find this essay ?

**acharya** · 11-01-2006, 03:26 AM

QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Oct 31 2006, 09:24 AM)Â
Kak has a review here..

http://www.omilosmeleton.gr/english/skak.html

How can i find this essay ?
[right][snapback]60155[/snapback][/right]


Academic study on ancient India will remain ``like a patient etherized upon a table'' unless it finds a proper center and fresh energy. This center will be located only as a result of critiques like that of Leach. But what about energy? Will it be provided by the financial support of Indians in the West, who have made enormous fortunes in the electronic and computer industry? I don't think so, at least not in the near future. The racism at the basis of Indic studies, which Indians have experienced in their own education and of which they continue to hear from their children in college, has made them reluctant to support academic programs.

11-02-2006, 04:04 PM

while reading the out of india theory in weiki i caame across this ebook, i invite your opinion on this book, sorry if link is already given on this site
http://voi.org/books/rig/

**acharya** · (This post was last modified: 11-03-2006, 02:23 AM by acharya.)

Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as
Ideology and ScienceQUOTE
Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as Ideology and Science
By Stefan Arvidsson
Translated by Sonia Wichmann
The University of Chicago Press

Judged on merit, various Aryan theories rank among the weakest examples of scholarship, riddled with scientific contradictions and weighed down by political and racial prejudices. But in influence and longevity, especially in politics, they compare with the theories of Einstein and Darwin. The 'Aryan nation' became the mantra of German unification, while in colonial India, Aryans became the common ancestors of the Indians and the British. Neither Relativity nor the Theory of Evolution can match this.
While the scientific, racial and political aspects of the Aryan theories have been debated threadbare, a basic question remains: what drove the Europeans, Germans in particular, to a land and a people so far removed from them in space and time to define themselves? This question is effectively answered by Swedish scholar Stefan Arvidsson in his new book Aryan Idols. In the process, he has also shed light on European cultural currents leading to the persistence of these theories in western academia and their proneness to ideological abuse.
A useful point that Arvidsson makes is that the goal of this discipline, now called Indo-European studies, was not so much to understand Indian origins as to "show that there existed a rich 'German' mythology that could successfully compete with classical Judeo-Christian traditions". It is hardly surprising that anti-Semitism was tied up with it.
A little known aspect of Aryan theories, at least in India, is the major contribution of German folklore. Wilhem and Jacob Grimm, who compiled German folk tales, were also philologists. "For over two hundred years, a series of historians, linguists, folklorists, and archaeologists have tried to recreate a lost culture. Using ancient texts, medieval records, philological observations, and archaeological remains they have described a world, a religion, and a people older than the Sumerians, with whom all history is said to have begun."
There are, of course, no Indo-European texts. "No objects can definitely be tied to them, nor do we know any 'Indo-European' by name. In spite of that, scholars have stubbornly tried to reach back to the ancient 'Indo-Europeans', with the help of bold historical, linguistic, and archaeological reconstructions, in the hope of finding the foundation of their own culture and religion there."
This helps answer the question why some western academics react viscerally whenever their theories are thrown in doubt by new findings in archaeology, natural history or genetics. As Arvidsson notes: "There is something in the nature of research about Indo-Europeans that makes it especially prone to ideological abuse, perhaps something related to the fact that for the past two centuries, the majority of scholars who have done research on the Indo-Europeans have considered themselves descendants of this mythical race." This 'ideological abuse' reached its culmination in the Nazi regime. More recently, it raised its head when California education authorities tried to change the syllabus in elementary schools, replacing theories like the Aryan invasion with more recent findings.
Speaking of Indology, the book observes: "The theory about India as the original home of the Indo-Europeans, and the Indians as a kind of model Aryans, lost supporters during the nineteenth century, and other homelands and other model Aryans took their place instead." The Aryans (or Indo-Europeans) and their homeland were gradually moved westward until they were made to settle in Eurasia and even Germany. In the hands of German scholars, Aryans became "Indo-Germanische".

In summary, "the main reason why scholarship about the Indo-Europeans has tended to produce myths is that so many who have written [and read] about it have interpreted it as concerning THEIR OWN ORIGIN". While this accounts for the European attachment to the Aryan myth, it fails to explain why many Indian scholars continue to cling to it. The answer will have to come from an Indian scholar.Â WHY?



The question why can be answered by this review

"For over two hundred years, a series of historians, linguists, folklorists, and archaeologists have tried to recreate a lost culture. Using ancient texts, medieval records, philological observations, and archaeological remains they have described a world, a religion, and a people older than the Sumerians, with whom all history is said to have begun."

There are, of course, no Indo-European texts. "No objects can definitely be tied to them, nor do we know any 'Indo-European' by name.

In spite of that, scholars have stubbornly tried to reach back to the ancient 'Indo-Europeans', with the help of bold historical, linguistic, and archaeological reconstructions, in the hope of finding the foundation of their own culture and religion there."

This helps answer the question why some western academics react viscerally whenever their theories are thrown in doubt by new findings in archaeology, natural history or genetics.

So many who have written [and read] about these 'history' have interpreted it as concerning THEIR OWN ORIGIN"



Indian scholar's reason for following the myth may be indoctrination and long colonization. It gives them access to the western universities if they follow the same line as their western sponsors.

ramana · 11-03-2006, 12:46 AM

So at the root the AIT is about the non-Semetic (code Judeo-Christian) origins of the European people and the struggle with Western Christianity. AIT will be dumped only if there is an alternate theory or a higher intellectual evolution of the European mind beyond Western Christianity.

11-03-2006, 12:48 AM

QUOTE(acharya @ Nov 2 2006, 11:08 PM)Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as
Ideology and Science
Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as Ideology and Science
By Stefan Arvidsson
Translated by Sonia Wichmann
The University of Chicago Press


Synopsis of this book on Amazon.co.uk LINK

Critically examining the discourse of Indo-European scholarship over the past two hundred years, "Aryan Idols" demonstrates how the interconnected concepts of "Indo-European" and "Aryan" as ethnic categories have been shaped by, and used for, various ideologies. Stefan Arvidsson traces the evolution of the Aryan idea through the nineteenth century - from its roots in Bible-based classifications and William Jones's discovery of commonalities among Sanskrit, Latin, and Greek to its use by scholars in fields such as archaeology, anthropology, folklore, comparative religion, and history. Along the way, Arvidsson maps out the changing ways in which Aryans were imagined and relates such shifts to social, historical, and political processes. Considering the developments of the twentieth century, Arvidsson focuses on the adoption of Indo-European scholarship (or pseudoscholarship) by the Nazis and by Fascist Catholics. A wide-ranging discussion of the intellectual history of the past two centuries, "Aryan Idols" links the pervasive idea of the Indo-European people to major scientific, philosophical, and political developments of the times, while raising important questions about the nature of scholarship as well.

ramana · 11-03-2006, 01:03 AM

What I get is that Europeans needed the AIT to emerge from the strait jacket of Judeo-Christain traditions that they adopted in order to gain world dominance. The problem was that Western Christianity along the way adopted certain myths that forced this AIT iconoclasm. The path set by French Revolution, Positivism, Modernism, Marxism, and post Modernism could not have been traversed but for the AIT. Hence Europe needed the AIT much more than India. This how the movie 2001 applies to the AIT issue.

India was and is a victim of collateral damage.

Login




Remember me Lost Password?