Is Indian one race?

submitted by ayotollahsinIran from self.debatealtright

Similar to how Slavs and Anglo Saxons are European, Is Indian a single race of people made up of different ethnicity?

all 16 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Airbus320 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

No, you have dravidians, Indo-Europeans and oceanic people

[–]PeddaKondappa 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

No, you have dravidians, Indo-Europeans and oceanic people

Those are not races. Dravidian and Indo-European are both linguistic categories, not racial categories. A Norwegian and a Bengali are both Indo-European, but they do not belong to the same race (though they have more racial similarity than, say, a Norwegian and an Ugandan). I'm not sure what you mean by "Oceanic people". Do you mean Australoids?

[–]Airbus320 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yep Australaoids

[–]PeddaKondappa 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

What we now call "India" is a totally artificial country that was created by a British multinational corporation in the 19th century. It includes hundreds of different groups who for most of recorded history were never ruled by the same government. With that being said, most Indians are indeed racially and culturally similar, analogous to how all Europeans from Portugal to Russia share racial and cultural similarities (as well as significant differences). The real outliers in the Indian context are peoples on the periphery of the subcontinent. For example, the people in the far northeast of India are mostly Mongoloids who are much more similar to Tibetans and Burmese than to your typical Indian. Those people often face racial discrimination from "mainland" Indians.

[–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's largely an admixture of Aryans, the Indus Valley Civilization, and Australoids, along with some influence from Tibeto-Burmans. The types of admixture varies depending on location and social standing, generally higher social standing castes will be more Aryan and less Australoid. The amount of Aryan blood is often heavily exaggerated. Aryans never fully displaced natives in India as in Europe, they just became a ruling aristocracy.

[–][deleted]  (5 children)

[deleted]

    [–]ayotollahsinIran[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

    Is India an example of a multicultural society working then?

    [–]cisheteroscumWhite Nationalist 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    You think India works?

    [–]ayotollahsinIran[S] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

    Yes.

    [–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    It hasn't worked in millennia lmao

    [–]SoylentCapitalist 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

    Many multicultural societies are "working" as the US for instance is still the greatest military power on Earth.

    [–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

    It's complicated. Indians are Caucasoid but not all Caucasoids are white. White means European Caucasoid. Europeans are mostly r1a and r1b haplogroup and Indians are are variety of other haplogroups. You can see a good map of Indian haplogroups at the 8:00 time marker of this video.

    https://youtu.be/-QdtwRJdVsM?t=482

    I say it's complicated because at some point in the past a group of proto Europeans called indo Europeans (also called Aryans) dominated most of the globe and most likely spread their genetic markers. Northern India, China and Japan all show markers from this ancient Aryan conquest/governorship.

    This gets infinity more complicated when you consider humans have probably gone through mass extinction events resulting from mini nova events from the sun. Everyone on earth today are decedents of very very small groups that survived the last extinction event (most likely a flood about 11k years ago). The clear distinctions between racial groups most likely results from how different groups of humans survived the flood (some on accident some on purpose). It's also very likely that these previous human populations were just as tech savvy and ubiquitous as humans are today (most likely MORE advanced and larger in size as well).

    Our technocratic oligarchs working with intelligence services and the occult sit on top of this knowledge today and keep it from spreading to the masses. Knowledge is power and keeping the masses ignorant of their past makes them easier to control.

    [–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    I say it's complicated because at some point in the past a group of proto Europeans called indo Europeans (also called Aryans) dominated most of the globe and most likely spread their genetic markers. Northern India, China and Japan all show markers from this ancient Aryan conquest/governorship.

    The Hyperborean theories are nice and all but Chinese and Japanese Aryan markers are likely from contact with Steppe peoples like the Scythians and Tocharians. With India we all know how that happened.

    [–]TheJamesRocket 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    Indians are most certainly NOT a single race. There is a very obvious difference between north and south Indians. The south Indians have much darker skin, and different facial structure: They are the 'untouchables' who live in poverty and squalor.

    [–]PeddaKondappa 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    South India is significantly richer and more developed than North India, as a whole. Only the Delhi capital region and the areas around it are at a comparable level of development to South India. Here is a map showing the distribution of GDP per capita by state: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/NSDP_Per_Capita_of_Indian_States_and_UT%27s%2C_2018-19.png

    Even dark-skinned Tamils are significantly richer than North Indians and Pakistanis.

    [–]TheJamesRocket 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Question: Do you consider Mumbai to be part of south India, or north India?

    [–]PeddaKondappa 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    In modern history, the city of Mumbai is much more similar to North India, due to heavy immigration from North India and the use of Hindi as the predominant spoken language in the city. But Maharashtra as a whole is culturally more similar to South Indian states like Karnataka and Telangana than to North India.