I appreciate your well-worded response. I 100% agree that there were many migrations into India, but the ones that we’re willing to take credit for are migrations from the north and/or west. I’m not doubting the Aryan migrations, unlike a lot of others here, and I’m not doubting the migrations of others such as the British, Afghanis, Iranian groups, Central Asian Turks, etc. Many Indians want to claim that they are part of these “good races.”

However, are you aware that India has always had a very large Dravidian population living all over the north west of India, in present day Punjab, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Pakistan, parts of Afghanistan? Also, India has had Australoids living there for over 30,000 years. Finally, we’ve had many migrations of “bad races” such as Siddis/Habshis from Eastern Africa during the 1700s, South Eastern Chinese migrated to North Eastern India, and to this day, they speak the same language family in NE India as they do in Vietnam. However, no Indians want to lay claim to these “bad races.”

I personally believe, and please don’t take offense to this, that when you feel that you vaguely look Greek, Italian, or Iranian that, perhaps, you want to look for these traits, and that what you want to see is somewhat arbitrary. However, if you wanted to see Ethiopian, Indonesian, or Thai, you could more easily see these features in you as well, however you should want to see those features. But we prefer that we resemble Europeans, even though India has had far more migrations and influence with Indonesia and Thailand.

I wish Razib the geneticist would respond to this thread.

I actually thought that there really wasn’t much migrations that made a huge impact into India for 1,000s of years. And Dravidians don’t have any racial difference from the north indians…and most of the mgirations that did happen into India came from up North and not really anywhere else. I think some Indians are deluding themselves into thinking that their migrations are most closely linked to up north, but I’m sure some indians do have a close link (closer that is than the rest of india).

Where is it shown that we have had far more migrations from SE asia?

AWESOME!

RahulD : Given your military experience, how difficult would it be for the Indian army to train and equip commando teams made up of resident Indian diaspora.

These teams would know the local language and customs, the local terrain, and be able to inflict swift retribution on their “ethnic” persecutors. In addition, this would give the Indian govt. “deniability” if something went horribly wrong.

<

blockquote>114 · boston_mahesh said

when you feel that you vaguely look Greek, Italian, or Iranian that, perhaps, you *want* to look for these traits, and that what you want to see is somewhat arbitrary. However, if you wanted to see Ethiopian, Indonesian, or Thai, you could more easily see these features in you as well, however you should *want* to see those features. But we *prefer* that we resemble Europeans, even though India has had far more migrations and influence with Indonesia and Thailand.

This is so true. I always wondered why American blacks do not claim European heritage when so many of them show so many European phenotypes. It is to their credit they want to call themselves African Americans.

Hello DC_Desi,

The European heritage of most blacks represents a shameful and unfortunate past, namely miscegenation and rape. Moreover, they have a lot of Black Pride, and the analog is very much lacking in India. I’d love to see “Mahogany Magazine” in India or a “chocolate color” option on Indian matrimonials.

Here’s something to think about: Who was the “grEEEAAATTTest” Celtic Muslim athlete of all time? ANSWER.

If the African-Americans adopted the “1 drop of foreigners = foreigners” attitude, than the African-Americans in the USA would all claim to be Scots-Irish, British, and/or Scottish, even though they don’t look alike at all now, speak alike, etc. A typical entry in Wikipedia for the ficticious scenario for a “clan/caste of African-Americans with the surname of ‘Jackson’ would read: “The ancestors for the Jackson family settled in Mississippi, and their ancestors came from Scotland. This is why they speak English, which is a white language. They also had a component that came from Norway and France. In 300 AD, clergy from Palestine came to convert them to Christianity, hence the Jackson Clan is also part Arabic. Because of all this, the Jackson clan is the oldest and purest white clan in all the USA.”

“mixed race” is a relatively new choice for African-Americans. A drop of black blood makes you black in the US. Which makes it hilarious that many conservative whites take Obama to task for not acknowledging his Euro ancestry enough.

People talk about Tata’s founding a hotel because he was barred entry into a hotel. Implicit in this story, but never brought up, was that Tata knew full well that the hotel was off limits to the “natives” but was expecting to be treated as a white man as he had been in other Brit establishments. But he, as were Armenians & Baghdadis,was “grey” (i.e. rather than White or Black) and how he was treated really depended on the whim of the local colonials.

Good point, worth remembering. It is also relevant and interesting to mention here that parsi hotels used to practice a similar apartheid against non-parsi indians during british colonial rule. Ambedkar the leader of India’s untouchables, who was light-skinned for a hindu, was once forcibly ejected from a parsi hotel after they found out that he was a hindu not a parsi. Of course being an untouchable he was barred from hindu establishments as well.

I think most of that is correct but the Parsis however were already privileged before the British arrived in India. The Mughals held the Parsis in special favor and Akbar even kept a Parsi representative in his court.

Hogwash. Akbar kept representatives of all religions in his court including hindus and christians. By your absurd reasoning hindus and christians must have also been as “privileged” as parsis. As a british colonial who knew the parsis intimately some 200 years ago, James Mackintosh, Recorder of Bombay from 1804 to 1811, wrote: ” the Parsees are a small remnant of one of the mightiest nations of the ancient world, who, flying from persecution into India, were for many ages lost in obscurity and poverty, till at length they met a just government under which they speedily rose to be one of the most popular mercantile bodies in Asia” (Loc. cit. Darukhanawala & Jeejeebhoy 1938, p. 33).

Of course he is congratulating himself when claiming it was the “just” british colonial rule that elevated the status of parsis above the native hindus. Unless you agree that it is “just” to rank people based on skin color and race. Note that the black jews of Cochin did not attain the status and privilege that the Baghdadi jews did under british rule. Neither did the native christians. Why do you think that was? Obviously it was not religion that motivated the british to pick parsi zoroastrians over the natives. Face it: the British played the color game to the hilt. The Aryan Invasion Theory was concocted as part of their overall strategy to divide and rule, with whites on the top.

Many of the posts imply that the British sought out the Parsis for special treatment. I think it was the Parsis who made the effort to ingratiate themselves with the British.

More bakwas. Practically everyone in India was trying to ingratiate themselves with the british.

when you feel that you vaguely look Greek, Italian, or Iranian that, perhaps, you *want* to look for these traits, and that what you want to see is somewhat arbitrary. However, if you wanted to see Ethiopian, Indonesian, or Thai, you could more easily see these features in you as well, however you should *want* to see those features. But we *prefer* that we resemble Europeans, even though India has had far more migrations and influence with Indonesia and Thailand.

This is so true. I always wondered why American blacks do not claim European heritage when so many of them show so many European phenotypes. It is to their credit they want to call themselves African Americans.

Did I write that the Indians were kicked out because of their racism?

boston_mahesh, let me ask you this…if you were an Indian who looked sort of vaguely Greek or Southern Italian or Iranian…wouldn’t you want to think about why you looked different from the masses of India? Couldn’t it be due to ancient migrations into the subcontinent? I agree that the wikipedia pages you guys are referring to are ridiculous, I looked up the entry pertaining to my ‘caste’ and I found it delusional and hilarious….BUT…on the other hand…I don’t think that means that all Indians share the same ancestry to the same degree…the phenotypic differences have to have some basis in ancestry and genetics (I don’t think they’re merely the natural variation that exists within a population…Indians display far more phenotypic variety than say Japanese or Swedes or Nigerians display within themselves).

Hi Amitabh,

I appreciate your well-worded response. I 100% agree that there were many migrations into India, but the ones that we’re willing to take credit for are migrations from the north and/or west. I’m not doubting the Aryan migrations, unlike a lot of others here, and I’m not doubting the migrations of others such as the British, Afghanis, Iranian groups, Central Asian Turks, etc. Many Indians want to claim that they are part of these “good races.”

However, are you aware that India has always had a very large Dravidian population living all over the north west of India, in present day Punjab, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Pakistan, parts of Afghanistan? Also, India has had Australoids living there for over 30,000 years. Finally, we’ve had many migrations of “bad races” such as Siddis/Habshis from Eastern Africa during the 1700s, South Eastern Chinese migrated to North Eastern India, and to this day, they speak the same language family in NE India as they do in Vietnam. However, no Indians want to lay claim to these “bad races.”

I personally believe, and please don’t take offense to this, that when you feel that you vaguely look Greek, Italian, or Iranian that, perhaps, you want to look for these traits, and that what you want to see is somewhat arbitrary. However, if you wanted to see Ethiopian, Indonesian, or Thai, you could more easily see these features in you as well, however you should want to see those features. But we prefer that we resemble Europeans, even though India has had far more migrations and influence with Indonesia and Thailand.

If Ethiopia were a white country instead of an Afro-Black country, then I would think that South Indians would claim that South Indian culture also came from Ethiopia due to them eating dosais.