Discussion in 'Religion & Culture' started by KS, Feb 2, 2013.
â€˜Indian history was distorted by the Britishâ€™ - Hindustan Times
He mentioned nothing new. And if casteism didn't exist in "Mahabharata period" (I assume he means early India in general?) where exactly did it come from? Why did the Sramanic sects emerge as explicitly anti-Brahmanic schools of thought?
Your post (I know it was authored by someone else), claims that history was distorted by, . . . , whoever. Well, history is subjective, and everyone is entitled to that claim. So, whosoever writes a historical narrative, is subject to scrutiny. I am not taking away any credit from the author.
Caste system was very likely to have been solidifying in society. It must have been in the nascent state. This is my belief, and not something I can substantially back up. You might want to consider the questionnaire at the Magical Lake where Yudhishtir answers Yama, in order to revive his half-brothers. I suppose one question on "Brahman" came up because there was already a confusion about the correct interpretation of the word.
Though he explained nothing new but it should be spoken in each and every forum so that it reaches people like karunanidhi and all. People need to be made aware of this and replaced from school syllabus
whenever you all talk about the British pigs, you all would get to know the very first facts about them as below. from where they came to India and how exactly they were in UK, before coming to India..................
I have read many articles about Western Superiority and it is regarded for the 200 years only, mainly since early to mid 19th centuries.just google and you will get any references in this regard. while i also keep a standard post to state the life style of West till 18th century, to first brain wash of those who only know what western media tells them, as below:
- just see how these pigs were rated in this world even till 18th century, as below. do you know, the biggest earing of British government in India in 19th century was through the drugs smuggling into China??????, would you like to be having this type of background, check as below:
see the criterion of measuring 'richness' of these pigs even till 17th/18th century as below: (based on the number of days they could eat properly )
=> in fact it isn't fair to compare Britain with India even till the end of 18th century. we find its more fair to compare India with whole Western Europe till the end of 18th century, by start of 19th century, as below:
even if we have a close look on the data's then we find that even by 1820, GDP of India was around $111,417mil, as compare to total GDP of Western Europe at $159,851mil as below. it may also because of the fact that Marathas lost heavy wealth during the 15 years of war with British till 1818................
List of regions by past GDP (PPP) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(this GDP estimate is based on the prices at 1820. here the "Total Western Europe" include the current 17 Eurozone nations, +Britain+Norway+Swedan etc)
Yes, history is subjective but genetics and other such developments have helped quash some of the ideological BS and subjectivity. For eg., AIT definitely does not hold true.
we have few basic facts about India till 18th century as below. Below is the government website of India :ranger:
=> the same can be read on the Indian Government's website in Hindi as below:
How can you be so definite? Many things make no sense without AIT/AMT.
All the world's misfortune in general and India in particular is the white pigs fault. If only the Nawab of Bengal had won the Battle of Plassey and with the help of France conquered England and the rest of Europe the world would have been a paradise
To call a people pigs, is low.
I am definite on this case because of the genetic findings that the Indian population share the same DNA. This very finding hits at the basic premises of AIT, unless ofcourse if someone comes and proves that these genetic studies are fraud.
Earlier without this kind of scientific inquiry, any phenomenon could be attributed to anything and support of one's theory completely depended on political power.
Pigs is a strong word indeed. OTOH going by what one reads on the Net British people consider British rule to be the civilising force for barbaric India. Fact is British invaded India and enslaved us - dont expect the invaded to love the invaders!
Well, I have debated that in the AIT thread. The genetic findings prove nothing, but I won't debate that here. Perhaps we could discuss it in the AIT thread. Genetic studies are not fraud, they are just statistically insufficient, and therefore inconclusive. You are good with economics, you know about similarity tests and their weaknesses.
The British version of Indian history more or less has become the acceptable
version all over the world, whether it is true or not or factual can be debated but
it stil would not change the past and the divisions and hatred and nations created
by the breakup of the subcontinent by the British.
Caste system was certainly present during Mahabharat times. If one remembers the Eklavya episode, where a tribal (Bheel?) Eklavya was refused military education by Dronacharya on account of him not being born of a warrior caste, a Kshatriya.
And evolution makes no sense to a creatard
What you are saying is argument made from ignorance
Some aryans are butt hurt about AIT proven false because it severest any link they had with the great brits and German tribes while dravidians are butt hurt because they no longer own the IVC alone.- this is the reason for resistance to accepting the fact that AIT is crap. Add to it the fact that leftard govt crap history in the schools
Also genetics have proven beyond doubt the crappiness of the AIT btw. The mapping with genetics show that Indians(aryans, dravidians and whatever non existent race May be) are residents of India for the past 45000years. Also according the latest research in genetics, migration happened from indo-Iran plain to Europe and not from there to here. This is absolute contradiction for AIT/AMT because according to it, migration/invasion happened only during the 4000-5000BC . I still can't understand why we are even considering this crap theory AIT/AMT to be right
About castes, I think author is wrong. I believe the castes existed from vedas itself.
He kind of has a point you know. We had 65 yrs of freedom. What did we do with it?. And it is not like British created an artificial caste/religious divide is it?? Most of Indian problems are home grown
Read the book "Land of Seven rivers" by Sanjeev Sanyal. It kind of gives the whole picture on the AIT from the lens of modern genetics. Obviously I am no expert on genetics and their can be testability issues particularly related to sample size or other statistical errors etc( @pmaitra), but it is still better than harping on other weak evidences promoted by AIT lovers. Also given the fact that genetic anthropology is done by people trained in biology and medicine, there is very little reason to doubt that they would be careless in statistical testing given the rich tradition of testing that these sciences have. No surprise that most support for AIT comes from the old historians untrained to undertake or even understand genetic studies!! The new historians are in much better position in that sense.
Also, caste might have existed in the Vedas but I highly doubt that it was based on birth. Some readings for you:
Vedas condemn birth-based caste discrimination â€” Self-Help | Motivation | Spiritualism | Rationalism | Vedas | Hinduism | Anti-Casteism | Women Rights - Agniveer
There is no caste-system in Vedas â€” Self-Help | Motivation | Spiritualism | Rationalism | Vedas | Hinduism | Anti-Casteism | Women Rights - Agniveer
Your entire argument is hinged on an unsupported premise that those genetic biologists you agree with are "trained," while those that you disagree with are "untrained."
What is the statistical evidence provided in that book you mentioned?
No, I did not say that. What I said was that biology and medicine(and it is people from here that move into genetics) has a rich tradition for empirical testing and so chances are less that there are gaps in their findings or big statistical errors. Also, genetic anthropology research generally debunks AIT.
There are many references given. Some of them:
Reconstructing Indian Population History
The point is that most of them are published in good peer reviewed journals. So, empirical testing requirement would be quite stringent. And definitely, the people trained in history would in general be non-experts in genetics(I tried to be not harsh, but that does not change the fact). @Mad Indian what do you say about these articles?
Not to forget the fact that whatever genetics say is testable in the near future through their medicinal use while other methods used by historians cannot be tested. So, a strong genetics based argument is sufficient to kill AIT.
Separate names with a comma.