[Poll] India or Pakistan?

[FinalFlash]

India. More potential and friendlier nation imo. Pakistan is a state sponsor of terrorism(a label erroneously attributed to Iran). Plus Pakistan is the only nation on Earth that doesnt recognize Armenia as an independent nation. Absolutely mental

[Borealis]

The only thing India has over Pakistan is its nature and wildlife. Yes, seriously. Neither nation has much to brag about.

[Ice]

Pakistan

[JMack]

All Amerindians (excluding Arctic ones) have ancestry from the Clovis culture. They have a relatively recent common origin distinct from Western European colonialists that came after the Middle Ages ended.

Well my argument isn't racial, if you look again to my messages I wasn't saying Amerindians from the Amazon or Canada or California or anywhere aren't related racially. I said they are not culturally related. No sane person would defend groups like native Tupis and Macro-Jê (the ones who've been wiped out in most of Southeast Brazil), Aztecs, Apaches, Sioux, Mohicans, Eskimos and Mapuches have the same culture or any kind of cultural continuity. They are as distinct from one another as Belarussians from the Portuguese.

There's no genetic continuity between Biharis/Punjabis and some extinct group who only had some vague cultural ties to them.

Indeed, but I never claimed there is any kind of genetic/racial continuity. I said there is continuity between Brahmanism and modern ''Hinduism'' (which is a very innacurate name for the miriad of religions who claim to follow Sanatana Dharma). Many Brahmins from other regions descend from Brahmins expelled by Muslims from these northern regions. Even if there is no genetic continuity, there is cultural continuity. Hindus and Pagans have been subjected by oppression from Muslims and Christians for centuries, they're not going to forget it. In the same way, I'd certainly support the destruction of any religious community which can only thrive through destruction of others.

The biggest mistakes Hindus from modern Northern India, Pakistan and Afghanistan commited in the past was not seizing the Muslims back to their sand/desert territories in the Middle East when they won the first battles. You can't live peacefully with someone who wants your destruction.

I admit that as someone who followed and studied Kashmir Shaivism for some years, I'm biased in the subject. What Muslims did there was tremendously disgusting.

The biggest mass murder in history was the Muslim conquest of South-Central Asia and Northern South Asia.

It's not a good comparison since the shared paternal ancestry between Pashtuns and Punjabis dates back to the Steppe long before either modern ethnic groups existed.

Most modern ethnic groups have been defined quite recently. I'm not expert in modern South Asia but I'm aware that many Punjabis are Punjabized Pashtuns and vice-versa.
In the same way, the paternal ancestry between Colonial Whites and Pardos dates back to Iberia, long before there was even a place called Brazil.

Tajiks themselves aren't pure Iranics. They're basically Iranics that mixed with Turks instead of Indians. Their lower Australoid and higher Mongoloid is why they are not genetically identical to us. There are outlier Pashtun samples from Pakistan that plot with Pamiris. How would you explain that if Pashtuns were never similar to them from the beginning? Pamiris are basically Tajikistani Persians with less Central Asian Turkish blood. And Tajiks/Persians from East/South Afg plot with Pashtuns rather than with other Tajiks. I don't see how it makes sense for you to use a population with heavy Turkic admixture as a proxy for what the original Iranians were like.

BTW, all Iranic people (even Yaghnobis) have some Australoid.

Well, I'm not arguing about genetics or race, really. I don't know why you came up with this. I said Tajiks are culturally Persian and have always claimed to be Persian, I didn't said they are the same as modern Persian Iranians from an autosomal POV. The ''Tajik'' ethnicity itself is quite recent. Language, culture and religion aren't always based on autosomal resemblance.

Middle class Catholic Mestizos from Honduras are culturally and linguistically more similar to Southern Italians than Orthodox Greeks from the Islands and Peloponnese, being autosomally similar doesn't mean belonging to the same cultural or linguistic sphere.

If there wasn't a big gap between early Iranics and Indo-Aryans, then what makes you say we aren't genetically close to early Iranics but to early IAs?

Most Pashtuns belong to the R1a-Z93 clade of M12280 whereas most Indo-Aryans are Y6 (this also exists among Pashtuns and some lands that had no historic Indic presence) but in less amounts). If we were Indo-Aryans that underwent a language shift, then we should be predominantly Y6.



Also, you don't know what the Gandharis were like genetically. There are some western Dards who plot with Khatris and Sindhis when you average them. Not to mention Kashmiris who are get least 30%+ South Indian on calcs. It's not possible for them to northern Pashtuns to not have absorbed multiple large scale migration waves from southern Pashtuns (whose land was never Indic in recorded history) and not been genetically affected.

I wasn't talking about genetics though, I think it was quite clear. Look at my comments above. When I said Pashtuns could have been former Indo-Aryans who shifted language I didn't said they weren't similar to Iranics to begin with.

Modern Indo-Aryans, with exception of Nuristanis (if you consider them IA) and other isolate groups are mostly mixed-race groups when compared to early Indo-Aryans. Early Indo-Aryans likely weren't much different from Iranics, Chitralis and Kalasha from an autosomal POV.

I repeat: I never said Pashtuns are or ever been autosomally similar to Biharis, Rajasthanis or even Punjabis (even if there's overlap between some Pashthuns and some Punjabis).

I'll ask again, should this happen to all Muslims?

No. I think Muslim (and Judeo-Christian as well) influence in the world should diminish. Cultural programs like the reconversion to Hinduism proposed by some sectors of Hindu Nationalists or sponsoring of Buddhism, Zoroastrism and Pagan Iranic religions would work just fine for finishing off Muslim influence in the Pashtun area gradually.

Says the guy who whines about how Jews are trying to destroy Europeans. If we deserve to have our language, culture, and identity destroyed; then so do Southwest Europeans.

Never said that, unless you think Pashtun culture is intrinsically tied with Islam.

Something tells me that you'd support our extinction even if we weren't Muslim since you're only applying this kind of thinking to Pashtuns and have mentioned this topic in the past.

No way, I actually like Pashtun aesthetics and this region cultural achievements. One of my favourite ancient civilizations is Bactrian Greek civilization and I think Pashtuns would be much better today following a mix of Hellenism, Hinduism and Buddhism like their ancestors probably were at some point.

These regions around the Hindu Kush, Karakoram and Himalayas are probably the most beautiful in the world. Also the cultures originated there.

BTW, I'd prefer if Pashtuns left Islam as well

We agree in the basics then.

You claimed that Biharis, Punjabis, etc. should substitute us despite the fact they have zero ties to our land.

No, I just said that there is strong cultural continuity between ancient Gandharans and modern Hindus.

[Borealis]

Being competent in that stuff is irrelevant here, especially if you don't know Pashtun history. Pashtuns have tribal lineages that record descent going back generations and there were multiple migration waves from southern Pashtunistan to northern Pashtunistan. You can't expect that not to have had a significant impact. Besides, the Pre-Iranic language and identity that existed among the Indic people that used to inhabit the land is gone. The land is Pashtun now and Pashtuns have been living here for several centuries now. Amerindians have a much greater right to Brazil than anything you mentioned.

If so, why are many northern Pashtuns very similar to "punjabis" or whatever?

[Ice]

China will support pakistan..

[The Lawspeaker]

[Nazarene]

India, irrespective of my personal experiences with the diaspora.

[Mingle]

If so, why are many northern Pashtuns very similar to "punjabis" or whatever?

There's some similarity only to a few specific groups since those Punjabis are less mixed with Australoids than most other Indians are. It doesn't mean they're descended from one another.

[Stefanos.tasidis]

lol This.
Neither side.