• mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    lol , no it is because in Maharashtra and in South India there was a anti vedic movement (Periyar , Ambedkar , Ligyayat , Joytiba Phule ) where religious reforms were carried out but I won’t give these states free pass . Maha is ruled by Sena type extremists and TN has considerable casteism. Its a whitewash to say south India doesn’t have religious problem.

    • sooper_dooper_roofer [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Sure, but just anecdotally speaking, every Indian I’ve talked to online (so a few dozen) who had takes like the OP tweet ended up being northern. Very often Gangetic, Nepali Bahuns, some Assamese, a few from Uttar Pradesh, a few Bengalis. Not as many Punjabis as you’d think given their obvious ancestry differences.

      a decent number of them have a weird combination of reactionary punching down + sucking up to white nationalists + defeatism

      All of these people were english-fluent enough that I could understand them perfectly, so I’d imagine direct material conditions are not the problem, and that it has more to do with the previous history of the gangetic region and the cultural quirks that materialized from it

                • sooper_dooper_roofer [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  That’s irrelevant. Being influenced by Sanskrit is no more noteworthy than China being influenced by English.

                  Southern Brahmins are not Southern people who were influenced by Sanskrit. They are Northern people who live in the South.

                  Southern Brahmins have elevated Steppe ancestry and R1a fractions, just like Northern Brahmins.

                  To the casual observer this just sounds like “calipers” but the real significance is that these people, regardless of when they got here, have against all numerical odds, managed to keep themselves “genetically pure” for a very long time, and such an act can only be achieved via active caste-based discrimination. If they began arriving at 200 BC like you say, rather than later, that just makes it worse–imagine keeping yourself ethnically separate from the 95% of the population around you for over 2000 years lmao.

                  These brahmins drove the sanskritization. This sanskritizing/brahminizing influence was more complete in Maharashtra and Odisha, and was totally complete in the Gangetic Plain.

                  Speaking a Dravidian language with Sanskrit influence is very different from being completely culturally captive to a Brahmin elite and all their whims–which is likely where the dysfunction of the Gangetic region comes from.

                  • mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    Southern Brahmins are not Southern people who were influenced by Sanskrit. They are Northern people who live in the South. - that’s a ridiculous statement and a very racist one.

                    “these people, regardless of when they got here, have against all numerical odds, managed to keep themselves “genetically pure” for a very long time, and such an act can only be achieved via active caste-based discrimination” again a very racist statement , you can’t say they managed keep their race pure . its unhistorical and unscientific statement similarly to Nazi racism.

                    The Brahmins of South India had mixed with ancestral South Indians and brahmins alone didn’t drove the agenda , the state religion of Tamil was Hinduism in 200 BC. You know nothing of Indian history and have a sectarian view of Southern and Northern people. And people shouldn’t follow Periyar and Ambedkar blindly . They drew their conclusions based on flawed colonial era theory that Aryans were solely north Indians , its not. The commies of India don’t hate brahmins or southern/Northern people , we hate the inherent caste structure based on land ownership and economic inequality , whatever Periyar and Ambedkar has said they failed to grasp the main problem behind the caste , which is zamindari system and vast land ownership by upper caste , even Ambedkar has mentioned Northern kshatriyas are more powerful than Brahmins , why ? Because of land ownership .

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pa3BV50PcLw&t=253s , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQX5LlJ7YXg You can search various research papers mentioned in the video. regarding Brahmins or not , A population living from 200 BC cannot be considered outsider by any logic.

                    These brahmins drove the sanskritization. This sanskritizing/brahminizing influence was more complete in Maharashtra and Odisha, and was totally complete in the Gangetic Plain This theory is utter BS , There is no indo Gangetic plain problem , Kabir , Meera , Chaitanya , Nanak came from North only. And a whole branch of CPIM originated from North.