01-18-2006, 04:29 PM
Dhu and Hauma, thanks for the replies. I'll have to digest some of that.
I have come across Afrocentrism. Although I do understand where Africans are coming from (having had everything taken away from them and their very real achievements denied and appropriated by others, much like our own Indian ones have been), I don't agree with some African-oriented sites linking to dalitstan as proof that the "North Indian Europeans" oppressed the "African South Indians" a la Race Segregation in the US. They're assuming the AIT is true. Everyone in the world who's heard of the AIT, has assumed it to be true. The fact is, Africans ought to realise that if they want to claim any Indians, they better claim all of us or none of us. They need to do more research, instead of trusting the same divisive racist notions spread about Indians that were perpetrated on Africans themselves.
As regards dalitstan, an internet security site (which even the US army and intelligence find reliable enough to refer to w.r.t. known terrorist organisations) has listed it as a Pakistani Terrorist organisation. See http://www.cromwell-intl.com/security/netusers.html - look for the word "mughalstan" in the left column, then on the page that loads to the right, scroll down to the occurrence of "mughalstan". One of the sites listed under this is - you guessed it - dalitstan. Eek.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"Racism" as a construct has it roots not in AIT or so much in skin color but in Christianity's exclusivist doctrine.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes. I had come to the same conclusion from what I've learnt about that religion and its history.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Chinese who state that they feel more comfortable with South Indians than with "Aryan North Indians" (theasf.net). <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't think that's fair, considering that the AIT bases itself on skin-colour and not facial features (proof: if the latter were true it would have effectively grouped North and South Indians together). Since the 'Caucasian' look is almost completely determined by skin-colour, I think every Chinese person should realise they've been fed propaganda and disregard the AIT. Besides, Chinese people tend to be of very light colour (naturally more so in their North). Especially when compared to Indians. They could have just as easily had an AIT foisted on them to explain their skin-colour. The missionaries are well capable of that, except linguistically they might have found barriers to creating such a theory for China.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I do not think we can generalize about SE Asians or Europeans being more trustworthy.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> I didn't mean to make my statement come off as an empirical observation. I was referring to my immediate emotional response whenever I meet someone from the SE Asian region. I tend to instantly warm to them, probably because they remind me very much of India, of thereabouts <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Basically, we are seeing the after-effects of 200 years of AIT brainwashing wherein north indians are falsely equated as European-type colonialists and racists in the eyes of the world.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> I realise that even if we ever live to see the AIT utterly disproven, the problems that have resulted from it won't have been undone. People today assume Indians of the North were a great evil causing millennia of oppression for Indians in the South. There's no real proof for it, other than fancies of the colonial and missionary past and their inheritors today. Oddly enough, the 100% factual Christian racism of America causing slavery, and Europe's genocide of the Americas is barely discussed.
We've had a kind of "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" played on us. The "Protocols" was an entirely concocted, malicious, anti-Semitic work, falsely attributed to Jewish people, which turns out (no surprise) was a complete fraud. Perpetrated by, who else? It was used in the past to incite pogroms and to commit genocide. Even today many people continue to think it's true.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I must say we need not be too enthusiatic about the genetic evidence in relation to testing the AIT. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> I was just grateful that there was something other than the mindgames involved in constructing PIE as done through linguistics. And the continuous inventive "interpretations" of our scriptures, passed off as "legitimate".
I appreciate that although the data gathered in genetics is quite precise in what it says about the sample observed, interpretation is a different matter altogether. Sample size, representative sampling, dating of markers, identifying markers, interpretating and the most influential of all: imposing a story on the data, are obviously going to greatly affect the results. To the extent that the same data can be taken to support any theory. I hope they discover more accurate dating techniques (i.e. "this genetic marker was introduced around 2000 and 1800 years ago, not before or after" instead of "Holocene" or "Pleistocene"). Together with a complete DNA databank of everyone in the world, it would make findings more reliable and leave little to imagination. At least where genetic make-up and ancestry is concerned.
If and when Remote Viewing (if that actually works) becomes wholly reliable and available to the public, lies can be exposed. Until then, Indians will just have to keep rolling with the punches, I guess.
I have come across Afrocentrism. Although I do understand where Africans are coming from (having had everything taken away from them and their very real achievements denied and appropriated by others, much like our own Indian ones have been), I don't agree with some African-oriented sites linking to dalitstan as proof that the "North Indian Europeans" oppressed the "African South Indians" a la Race Segregation in the US. They're assuming the AIT is true. Everyone in the world who's heard of the AIT, has assumed it to be true. The fact is, Africans ought to realise that if they want to claim any Indians, they better claim all of us or none of us. They need to do more research, instead of trusting the same divisive racist notions spread about Indians that were perpetrated on Africans themselves.
As regards dalitstan, an internet security site (which even the US army and intelligence find reliable enough to refer to w.r.t. known terrorist organisations) has listed it as a Pakistani Terrorist organisation. See http://www.cromwell-intl.com/security/netusers.html - look for the word "mughalstan" in the left column, then on the page that loads to the right, scroll down to the occurrence of "mughalstan". One of the sites listed under this is - you guessed it - dalitstan. Eek.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"Racism" as a construct has it roots not in AIT or so much in skin color but in Christianity's exclusivist doctrine.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes. I had come to the same conclusion from what I've learnt about that religion and its history.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Chinese who state that they feel more comfortable with South Indians than with "Aryan North Indians" (theasf.net). <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't think that's fair, considering that the AIT bases itself on skin-colour and not facial features (proof: if the latter were true it would have effectively grouped North and South Indians together). Since the 'Caucasian' look is almost completely determined by skin-colour, I think every Chinese person should realise they've been fed propaganda and disregard the AIT. Besides, Chinese people tend to be of very light colour (naturally more so in their North). Especially when compared to Indians. They could have just as easily had an AIT foisted on them to explain their skin-colour. The missionaries are well capable of that, except linguistically they might have found barriers to creating such a theory for China.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I do not think we can generalize about SE Asians or Europeans being more trustworthy.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> I didn't mean to make my statement come off as an empirical observation. I was referring to my immediate emotional response whenever I meet someone from the SE Asian region. I tend to instantly warm to them, probably because they remind me very much of India, of thereabouts <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Basically, we are seeing the after-effects of 200 years of AIT brainwashing wherein north indians are falsely equated as European-type colonialists and racists in the eyes of the world.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> I realise that even if we ever live to see the AIT utterly disproven, the problems that have resulted from it won't have been undone. People today assume Indians of the North were a great evil causing millennia of oppression for Indians in the South. There's no real proof for it, other than fancies of the colonial and missionary past and their inheritors today. Oddly enough, the 100% factual Christian racism of America causing slavery, and Europe's genocide of the Americas is barely discussed.
We've had a kind of "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" played on us. The "Protocols" was an entirely concocted, malicious, anti-Semitic work, falsely attributed to Jewish people, which turns out (no surprise) was a complete fraud. Perpetrated by, who else? It was used in the past to incite pogroms and to commit genocide. Even today many people continue to think it's true.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I must say we need not be too enthusiatic about the genetic evidence in relation to testing the AIT. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> I was just grateful that there was something other than the mindgames involved in constructing PIE as done through linguistics. And the continuous inventive "interpretations" of our scriptures, passed off as "legitimate".
I appreciate that although the data gathered in genetics is quite precise in what it says about the sample observed, interpretation is a different matter altogether. Sample size, representative sampling, dating of markers, identifying markers, interpretating and the most influential of all: imposing a story on the data, are obviously going to greatly affect the results. To the extent that the same data can be taken to support any theory. I hope they discover more accurate dating techniques (i.e. "this genetic marker was introduced around 2000 and 1800 years ago, not before or after" instead of "Holocene" or "Pleistocene"). Together with a complete DNA databank of everyone in the world, it would make findings more reliable and leave little to imagination. At least where genetic make-up and ancestry is concerned.
If and when Remote Viewing (if that actually works) becomes wholly reliable and available to the public, lies can be exposed. Until then, Indians will just have to keep rolling with the punches, I guess.