|
Post by Pugnox on Dec 5, 2003 18:53:26 GMT -5
In another thread Hindi asked me why I studied Sanskrit when it appears that I hate Indians so much. On the surface, this is a valid question.
My undergraduate degrees were in Latin, Greek, and Ancient History and I specialized in Rome. My conclusion as to the major cause of Rome's decline was the importation of hundreds of thousands of Semitic slaves into the Empire. The racial make-up of Rome had simply changed. So, I wanted to study another completely different civilization and see if I might reach the same conclusion. With a knowledge of Latin and Greek, Sanskrit is a bit less difficult to learn. So, I enrolled in a Ph.D. program in Hindi and Sanskrit.
The literature written in the Sanskrit language is enormous, much larger than the combined existent literature in Latin and Greek combined. There is nothing that Greece, Rome, or even the modern West, for that matter, has ever thought that wasn't first thought by the ancient Aryans and recorded in the Sanskrit language.
I can't attempt here to discribe exactly how I reached an even more extreme conclusion than I did with regard to racial mixing and civilization's downfall in Rome, as this would require discussing much of Sanskrit literature. The short answer is- I did. Aryan civilization in 2000 B.C., was, in terms of its ability to maintain its course, and to understand what social forces cause the decline of civilizations and protect itself against them, far beyond anything that has ever existed before or since. The modern Germans with their love of technological solutions to problems are a distant second. I can be nothing but pessimistic with regard to the future of my people as a result of three years of study in the Sanskrit language.
So, my conclusion that racial mixing of Aryans with Dravidians who are biologically incapable of maintaining any social structure beyond that of a primitive farming culture led me to a slow and gradually rising hatred of the modern "humans of mixed race" (since the moderators here don't seem to like my other words for them) that currently inhabit India. Modern Indians, none of whom have contributed anything to Sanskrit literature by the way, are the biological units that have destroyed the most beautiful civilization that ever existed.
Lastly, I can devote an entire thread to their disgusting personal habits alone, most of which I've witnessed first hand. Just give me the go-ahead and I'll let the cannons fly...
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Dec 5, 2003 20:08:58 GMT -5
You can tell us all about your opinions on how race-mixing influenced ancient civilizations, but follow these guidelines when you do. 1. Don't insult any nation or race, or you will be banned. 2. Don't falsify historical sources. ( god knows Kemp likes to do that ) 3. Don't use references from pseudo-science and pseudo-history. 4. Draw as many parallels to modern society as you want, but stay on topic ( and no insults ). 5. Try to answer the posters who are bound to try to rip your 'article' and refute your opinions. We can make this a fruitful discussion after all. I myself do not believe that race-mixing destroyed any civilization, at least not on the DNA level. I believe that where it happened it had more of a cultural impact.
|
|
|
Post by Pugnox on Dec 5, 2003 20:46:22 GMT -5
You can tell us all about your opinions on how race-mixing influenced ancient civilizations, but follow these guidelines when you do. 1. Don't insult any nation or race, or you will be banned. 2. Don't falsify historical sources. ( god knows Kemp likes to do that ) 3. Don't use references from pseudo-science and pseudo-history. 4. Draw as many parallels to modern society as you want, but stay on topic ( and no insults ). 5. Try to answer the posters who are bound to try to rip your 'article' and refute your opinions. AWAR- I believe that I can follow these guidelines with the exceptions of #1, and #3. With respect to #1, it seems as if when I only speak factually about Indians and accurately point out their habits and customs, you and other moderators find that "insulting" to Indians. I will do my best, however, and not be so graphic. With respect to #3, any source that you or others don't like will probably be termed "pseudo-science" or "pseudo-history".
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Dec 5, 2003 21:21:07 GMT -5
I believe that I can follow these guidelines with the exceptions of #1, and #3. With respect to #1, it seems as if when I only speak factually about Indians and accurately point out their habits and customs, you and other moderators find that "insulting" to Indians. I will do my best, however, and not be so graphic. With respect to #3, any source that you or others don't like will probably be termed "pseudo-science" or "pseudo-history". You have to respect #1 because anything you can say about any nation or culture can be done with style, in a non-offensive manner. If you support your claims with hard evidence, no one can dispute you, but if you do it in an insultive manner, or in a vividly biased manner, your post will be ridiculed. Some things that we find disgusting are a common practise in India. Other things that they find disgusting are common in Europe. Try to distance yourself from making flamed statements about 'others'. For example: I'm from Serbia, most of the times, when I talk to western Europeans, I have to convince them that I won't slit their throat in a fit of nationalist anger ;D The way Westerners perceive us Serbs and Montenegrins is very skewed by their Media. They don't know what we think or feel like, they judge us only by what they can perceive from a great distance. I bet there are annoying stereotypes about Germans ( you're a German, right?) that you find utterly ridiculous. Just try to avoid telling to others what you would perceive as an insult yourself, that ain't too hard.
|
|
|
Post by Pugnox on Dec 5, 2003 21:52:42 GMT -5
AWAR-
What you really seem to saying here, if I can read between the lines a bit, is that it is simply a matter of "tone". So, I will attempt to keep a respectful "tone" in all my responses, AWAR.
But I'd like some parameters set about this that I will attempt to deduce from the following example: "In India it is common practice for women to make cakes from fresh cow shit every morning so that they have something to use for fuel for cooking. Nor do they wash their hands between touching the cow shit and touching the food." Is this, I hope, stated in a respectful tone?
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Dec 5, 2003 21:58:30 GMT -5
AWAR- What you really seem to saying here, if I can read between the lines a bit, is that it is simply a matter of "tone". So, I will attempt to keep a respectful "tone" in all my responses, AWAR. But I'd like some parameters set about this that I will attempt to deduce from the following example: "In India it is common practice for women to make cakes from fresh cowsh*tevery morning so that they have something to use for fuel for cooking. Nor do they wash their hands between touching the cowsh*tand touching the food." Is this, I hope, stated in a respectful tone? Try dung In any case the tone is ok by me, if this is truly 'common practice' I'll leave for other members to investigate. Also, I'd like to add that there are many diseases which plague the western hemisphere because of overt hygiene, or should I say sterile living conditions. And, also I'd add that 1850's London ( for example ) was a much worse place than modern Calcutta
|
|
|
Post by Artemidoros on Dec 6, 2003 10:16:43 GMT -5
Awar wrote: "For example: I'm from Serbia, most of the times, when I talk to western Europeans, I have to convince them that I won't slit their throat in a fit of nationalist anger " And you are telling us now? I am supposed to be going to the Serb cultural centre in Acton tonight for a Greek-Cypriot do! I think I will give it a miss.
|
|
|
Post by Artemidoros on Dec 6, 2003 10:29:53 GMT -5
In another thread Hindi asked me why I studied Sanskrit when it appears that I hate Indians so much. On the surface, this is a valid question. My undergraduate degrees were in Latin, Greek, and Ancient History and I specialized in Rome. My conclusion as to the major cause of Rome's decline was the importation of hundreds of thousands of Semitic slaves into the Empire. The racial make-up of Rome had simply changed. So, I wanted to study another completely different civilization and see if I might reach the same conclusion. With a knowledge of Latin and Greek, Sanskrit is a bit less difficult to learn. So, I enrolled in a Ph.D. program in Hindi and Sanskrit. The literature written in the Sanskrit language is enormous, much larger than the combined existent literature in Latin and Greek combined. There is nothing that Greece, Rome, or even the modern West, for that matter, has ever thought that wasn't first thought by the ancient Aryans and recorded in the Sanskrit language. I can't attempt here to discribe exactly how I reached an even more extreme conclusion than I did with regard to racial mixing and civilization's downfall in Rome, as this would require discussing much of Sanskrit literature. The short answer is- I did. Aryan civilization in 2000 B.C., was, in terms of its ability to maintain its course, and to understand what social forces cause the decline of civilizations and protect itself against them, far beyond anything that has ever existed before or since. The modern Germans with their love of technological solutions to problems are a distant second. I can be nothing but pessimistic with regard to the future of my people as a result of three years of study in the Sanskrit language. So, my conclusion that racial mixing of Aryans with Dravidians who are biologically incapable of maintaining any social structure beyond that of a primitive farming culture led me to a slow and gradually rising hatred of the modern "humans of mixed race" (since the moderators here don't seem to like my other words for them) that currently inhabit India. Modern Indians, none of whom have contributed anything to Sanskrit literature by the way, are the biological units that have destroyed the most beautiful civilization that ever existed. Lastly, I can devote an entire thread to their disgusting personal habits alone, most of which I've witnessed first hand. Just give me the go-ahead and I'll let the cannons fly... Wow, your life's work then, heh? I suppose you will be defending it tooth and nail. Since I have Ph.D. in being a pain in the backside, I will take advantage of having an expert in the company and ask lots of questions (not all at once). If I may start, when do you believe the Aryans arrived and became established overlords of part of the sub-continent? Do you accept the Harappan civilization was pre-Aryan? When do you think racial mixing started and when did its effects start to bite? Is there a threshold beyond which decline is inevitable? Can you demonstrate that the Sanscrit literature is the product of unmixed Aryans, since it has been transmitted orally for much longer that has been written down? Thank you for your patience.
|
|
|
Post by Artemidoros on Dec 6, 2003 10:36:13 GMT -5
AWAR- What you really seem to saying here, if I can read between the lines a bit, is that it is simply a matter of "tone". So, I will attempt to keep a respectful "tone" in all my responses, AWAR. But I'd like some parameters set about this that I will attempt to deduce from the following example: "In India it is common practice for women to make cakes from fresh cowsh*tevery morning so that they have something to use for fuel for cooking. Nor do they wash their hands between touching the cowsh*tand touching the food." Is this, I hope, stated in a respectful tone? An easy question this time: Do you ever have a drink in bars and if so do you help yourself to peanuts from the bowl? From what I have read, sensible Americans do not, for obvious reasons. Now that is in civilised USA, with constant water supply conveniently nearby. Or should we blame the Blacks and other non-Whites for the problem?
|
|
|
Post by Artemidoros on Dec 6, 2003 10:40:09 GMT -5
Try dung In any case the tone is ok by me, if this is truly 'common practice' I'll leave for other members to investigate. Also, I'd like to add that there are many diseases which plague the western hemisphere because of overt hygiene, or should I say sterile living conditions. And, also I'd add that 1850's London ( for example ) was a much worse place than modern Calcutta I read in the papers that a recent study found children whose parents own pets have a much more efficient immunity system than the other children. Since Pugnox is a family man I think he might find it interesting.
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Dec 6, 2003 11:38:19 GMT -5
Awar wrote: "For example: I'm from Serbia, most of the times, when I talk to western Europeans, I have to convince them that I won't slit their throat in a fit of nationalist anger " And you are telling us now? I am supposed to be going to the Serb cultural centre in Acton tonight for a Greek-Cypriot do! I think I will give it a miss. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Artemidoros on Dec 6, 2003 19:26:44 GMT -5
Just got back. No bloodthirsty Serb is going to scare me. They actually served lamb, not human flesh! Also I got it wrong, it is Holland Park next to St. Sava's church.
|
|
|
Post by ProdigalSon on Dec 6, 2003 19:39:34 GMT -5
I would be very interested in hearing your observations, Pugnox.
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Dec 6, 2003 19:44:06 GMT -5
Just got back. No bloodthirsty Serb is going to scare me. They actually served lamb, not human flesh! Also I got it wrong, it is Holland Park next to St. Sava's church. Serbs don't serve human flesh! That's only a half-truth ;D
|
|
|
Post by Pugnox on Dec 6, 2003 22:25:34 GMT -5
Had I known before, Artemidoros, that you are an American, I wouldn't have wasted a single moment of my time suggesting that you see a psychiatrist for your anger issues as Americans, from their earliest moments are weened on Jewish television, and no amount of rational discussion with them will have any chance of weening them from their addiction any more than discussing the bad effects of heroin would with a drug addict. With that being said, I will answer the questions you have written for the benefit of other readers here and to move this conversation along as all the questions below are very reasonable:
Wow, your life's work then, heh?
No, not at all but only the way I spent much of my time between 1991-1994 getting a M.A. in South Asian Languages.
I suppose you will be defending it tooth and nail. Since I have Ph.D. in being a pain in the backside, I will take advantage of having an expert in the company and ask lots of questions (not all at once).
And I will in turn ask questions of you to prove certain points as well...
If I may start, when do you believe the Aryans arrived and became established overlords of part of the sub-continent?
Experts in the field are very much divided about this question with Indians giving earlier dates (and usually saying that the Aryans weren't even white) and most Western historians saying c. 1500 B.C. Let's assume that I agree with the later, for the sake of this discussion as it seems the best educated guess we have at this time.
Do you accept the Harappan civilization was pre-Aryan?
Yes, of course, but there is no clear evidence saying that it was founded by Dravidians either. Most Western historians believe that this civilization had fallen by the time the Aryans came into India c. 1500. We do, however, know that the Dravidians were present in India before the arrival of the Aryans which leads me at least to belive that the Dravidians may be responsible for the decline of more than just Aryan civilzation.
The founder of this website just last week made an interesting post on Skadi in which he says that there is genetic evidence to suggest that Indo-Europeans had been in India and left and returned with the Aryan invasion. I'd be very interesting in his elaboration of this point.
That the Dravidians, however, are incapable of producing or even sustaining a civilization has been proved for at least the past 2500 years during which time they have done little more than build mud huts. The Dravidians are no more responsible for the presense of civilization in India before the Aryans than Bantus are responsible for the mysterious well-built walls in Southern Africa. You simply have to admit that there are many unanswered questions relating to the ancient movement of peoples. If, however, The Great One would have won the Second World War, the organization that he created to answer these questions would have answered many of them by now. Instead, the Jews say to it that members of the Anenerbe (sp? Anyone know the correct spelling off-hand?) murdered all the top scientists who would have been able to produce results that the Jews don't want known.
When do you think racial mixing started and when did its effects start to bite?
It had to have been almost immediately as the caste or "varna" (which means "color" in Sanskrit- did you know that by the way?) was created to preserve the racial purity of the Aryan race after its entry into India and its encounters with the Dravidians.
....
|
|