patrick.net

socal2 says

indc says

And then you say you are not racist?

Yeah - piss off with your racist charges.

India has made some great strides in recent years, but it still has massive problems - namely being one of the poorest places on earth. I think India is #2 behind Nigeria in number of people living in extreme poverty?

It is not racist or bigoted to point out that India's civilization has some work to do to catch up with the 1st world - if your civilization values the well being and economic health of its people.

If civilization was only based on race as you seem to contend, your country would absolutely be fucked....

Dude dont be mad. it is not a charge, I am just presenting a counter point to what you are saying which I consider as racist. India is poor because british looted it. it will get back its past glory give it few years. It has better govt now hope it gets better governance.
What you think is not going to affect 1.3billion people. I am just trying to help you have better clarity. Maybe your next generation have to serve Indian overlords(Muhahaha).

indc says

Are you "strategist"? I had same discussion with him. Just because you had 1 invention it does not mean you are superior. Yes you got lucky. India invented '0' and infinity and gave it to world that does not mean it is better "culture" than others.

Uh, steam combustion was more revolutionary than agriculture. Steam & Gas Combustion combined was beyond revolutionary.

Also work on Malaria, High Farming, Massive Scale Drainage, Canal Building, Computers (ditto), Refrigeration, Telegraph/Radio, Chemistry, Modern Medicine, etc. etc.

Any one of these were World shocking developments. That there were so many in one place at one time speaks volumes of the society that did it.

Everybody knows the "Zero" and Systemic Algebra were Indian inventions, but don't try to devalue the Amazing, Groundbreaking, and utterly Incredible inventions and discoveries of the British Society.

Here let me tell you a joke. There is a guy(india) walking on the street. Then a mugger(british) comes and asks the guy to give all his belongings. Even after taking everything from the guy the mugger doesn't leave he kicks the guy, passes stupid comments once his ego is satisfied then he leaves. What is the moral of the story?

HonkpilledMaster says

indc says

Are you "strategist"? I had same discussion with him. Just because you had 1 invention it does not mean you are superior. Yes you got lucky. India invented '0' and infinity and gave it to world that does not mean it is better "culture" than others.

Uh, steam combustion was more revolutionary than agriculture. Steam & Gas Combustion combined was beyond revolutionary.

Also work on Malaria, High Farming, Massive Scale Drainage, Canal Building, Computers (ditto), Refrigeration, Telegraph/Radio, Chemistry, Modern Medicine, etc. etc.

Any one of these were World shocking developments. That there were so many in one place at one time speaks volumes of the society that did it.

Everybody knows the "Zero" and Systemic Algebra were Indian inventions, but don't try to devalue the Amazing, Groundbreaking, and utterly Incredible inventions and discoveries of the British Society.

Again I am not denying that british did all this and much much more. But saying that India got everything from Briton is what I am asking you to re-think.
And that thinking is rac*** but you dont like me calling it. You dont know whole world and dont make conclusions based on few things your own people tell you.

indc says

India is poor because british looted it.

I'd say it is poor because governance system is poor and highly corrupt. British looted Hong Kong and Singapore as well. Germany was bombed into oblivion 70 yrs ago. All those countries are now very rich.

Nearly 70 yrs of independence should be enough to get house in order.

indc says

Then a mugger(british) comes and asks the guy to give all his belongings. Even after taking everything from the guy the mugger doesn't leave he kicks the guy

That sadly is human history in nutshell. British vs. Indians, Muslims vs. Indians, Germans vs. the rest of Europe and later the rest of Europe vs. Germans, and so on.

d6rB says

indc says

India is poor because british looted it.

I'd say it is poor because governance system is poor and highly corrupt. British looted Hong Kong and Singapore as well. Germany was bombed into oblivion 70 yrs ago. All those countries are now very rich.

Nearly 70 yrs of independence should be enough to get house in order.

Indc
I dont disagree there. Governance was a problem. People kicked out the party that was ruling for 70 yrs.
But your examples cant compare to India. HongKong singapore are city states. Germany had technology and know-all before the war and recover after war with US help. You can compare what happened to eastern germany.
British left with undefined borders and India is in state of war ever since which again doesn't help with development.


indc says

Then a mugger(british) comes and asks the guy to give all his belongings. Even after taking everything from the guy the mugger doesn't leave he kicks the guy

That sadly is human history in nutshell. British vs. Indians, Muslims vs. Indians, Germans vs. the rest of Europe and later the rest of Europe vs. Germans, and so on.

What is common in all these conflicts - Abrahamic expansionism maybe.

indc says

What is common in all these conflicts - Abrahamic expansionism maybe.

Probably in Muslim vs Indian, in other cases not so much. Adolf liked old Germanic religions AFAIK. In any case, religion always was an additional excuse for looting. Agree though that monotheistic religions typically are more aggressive.
WRT to development, see Japan, S. Korea - they are not city states and were devastated as well. S. Korea is in state of war even now.

d6rB says

indc says

What is common in all these conflicts - Abrahamic expansionism maybe.

Probably in Muslim vs Indian, in other cases not so much. Adolf liked old Germanic religions AFAIK. In any case, religion always was an additional excuse for looting. Agree though that monotheistic religions typically are more aggressive.
WRT to development, see Japan, S. Korea - they are not city states and were devastated as well. S. Korea is in state of war even now.

Again no denying any of that. India tried the socialist approach as it had to ride on Russia's coat tails. That was one of its major mistakes. Capitalist societies prosper which was what India was according to its civilizational ethos. When british left they called it transfer of power that means all the their idiotic laws and ideologies were transferred to new indian government.

It will all change now since the new government is trying to bring back the original Indian ethos.

How many troops did north send to south after DMZ was set. India has to face-off with pakistani troops crossing all the time. And china crossing line of control all the time.

YouTube employees will soon start organizing pride parades.

FortWayneIndiana says

YouTube employees will soon start organizing pride parades.

I think everyone should move to bitchute.

indc says

India tried the socialist approach as it had to ride on Russia's coat tails. That was one of its major mistakes.

That probably set India back another generation. That shitty economic system can screw up cultures and civilization.

Now you have American companies like the one I work for setting up shop in India employing software developers and doing some manufacturing.

Does that work for the original Indian ethos?

socal2 says

indc says

India tried the socialist approach as it had to ride on Russia's coat tails. That was one of its major mistakes.

That probably set India back another generation. That shitty economic system can screw up cultures and civilization.

Now you have American companies like the one I work for setting up shop in India employing software developers and doing some manufacturing.

Does that work for the original Indian ethos?

One of the ethos, make profit.

Steven Crowder was just demonetized.. Not because he broke any policies. Something about links to his T-shirts.

If it wasn't for the Brits we wouldn't have IPA!

just_dregalicious says

If it wasn't for the Brits we wouldn't have IPA!

Whatever british did its for betterment of its people. And I respect that. Nothing wrong in it.

But they dont need to lie that they brought "culture" to India. No need for white man's burden.

indc says

But they dont need to lie that they brought "culture" to India. No need for white man's burden.

So glad to hear the Indians re-invented the Railroad and Antibiotics, refusing to use those objects of British Imperialism.

HonkpilledMaster says

indc says

But they dont need to lie that they brought "culture" to India. No need for white man's burden.

So glad to hear the Indians re-invented the Railroad and Antibiotics, refusing to use those objects of British Imperialism.

really dude, you think railroads and antibiotics are culture? India gave vaccination to west are you going to stop using it?

Is selling wares same as giving culture. Then you should be grateful to china too.

Back to the OP

Youtube just demonetized one of my videos for no apparent reason. And I can't request a manual review because it doesn't have sufficient traffic. How convenient, since I assume they suppress non-monetized content. #StopBeingEvil pic.twitter.com/YipTf4Dx0W

— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) June 7, 2019

indc says

really dude, you think railroads and antibiotics are culture? India gave vaccination to west are you going to stop using it?

Yes, technology is downstream from culture. No doubt about it.

Ask the Sentinelese Islanders.

HonkpilledMaster says

indc says

really dude, you think railroads and antibiotics are culture? India gave vaccination to west are you going to stop using it?

Yes, technology is downstream from culture. No doubt about it.

No wonder west is doomed with that attitude. You can see how many people go berserk with their depression.

indc says

No wonder west is doomed with that attitude. You can see how many people go berserk with their depression.

Yes, doomed to heart transplants, reusable rockets, and the internet.

Nothing is white or black. Everything is a mix of positive and negative. Did British exploit/oppress India to their own benefit? Yes. Did they try to enforce their ideas on India? Yes. Was the latter good or bad? Probably some of both. Railroads, antibiotics=good for sure, as was start to abolish caste system and widow burning. Did, at some point in distant past, India contribute a lot to what we currently know as civilization? Yes. Does India contribute now? Not so much lately. Are the current problems in India result of British or Indians? I think 95+% caused by Indians.

First of all, what does the term, Indo-Aryan mean?

Let's break it down ...

Indo-Aryan is Indo-{ Ancient Persian } or Indianized-{ White Foreign Invader }.

Yes, India was not just ruled by Turkic Moghuls and the British Empire starting from the renaissance times but also, the Maurya & the Kushan "Persians" during ancient times,, nevermind the original Aryan invasion prior to 1200 BCE.

With this many whites screwing around in South Asia, to call out the British, is being hypocritical. India was always to some extent, a white man's bitch even if the earlier whites were Buddhists or Zoroastrians.

Lot of stories of poverty and horrible living conditions in England. British couldn't steal raw materials, gold, diamonds etc fast enough so they build railroads in India

Anything constructive work was done to help British empire. Look at temples from 2000 years ago, they were capable of lot.

European renaissance occurred after they robbed whole world of ideas, materials , technology... And with all that imagine how much they could have helped humanity, but instead they did 2 world wars and destroyed each other.

Only benefit was that they stopped Muslim conversion in india. Existing culture was one of the most peaceful , and provides best options for humanity.

KgK one says

European renaissance occurred after they robbed whole world of ideas, materials , technology... And with all that imagine how much they could have helped humanity, but instead they did 2 world wars and destroyed each other.

Absolutely incorrect. Mine pumping, vacuums, cannon, and of course the amazing attainments in navigation, shipbuilding, and rigging enabled the Europeans to get to India by circling Africa long before Clive. Steam Engines were already being used to pump mines in the 1700s, and of course huge scale canal building and mine railroads (powered by horse or human labor) before that.

European Industrial ingenuity was responsible for 98% of the Economic Power of European Countries. 1% from controlling the carry trade in Asia (ie between China/Japan or China/India), and maybe 1% from all other sources.

There is nothing in Ceylon Tea (which the British planted there by stealing it from China) or Calicos from Kozhikode that doubled European IQ or something.

The intellectual powers from consuming cinnamon (known to Romans anyway) had nothing to do with the 17-19th Industrial and Scientific booms in Europe which multiplied productivity many, many times over.

Also, if there was something special about Indian raw materials that allegedly caused a boom in European Technology, well the Indians were sitting on it for thousands of years and didn't develop the combustion engine or the Periodic Table of the Elements.

Rin says

First of all, what does the term, Indo-Aryan mean?

Let's break it down ...

Indo-Aryan is Indo-{ Ancient Persian } or Indianized-{ White Foreign Invader }.

Yes, India was not just ruled by Turkic Moghuls and the British Empire starting from the renaissance times but also, the Maurya & the Kushan "Persians" during ancient times,, nevermind the original Aryan invasion prior to 1200 BCE.

With this many whites screwing around in South Asia, to call out the British, is being hypocritical. India was always to some extent, a white man's bitch even if the earlier whites were Buddhists or Zoroastrians.

Persians and Indians are pretty much the same. In ancient times india and persia were always fighting with each other and conquering each other.
The term "arya" was first used in India and later started being used by persian kings.
Where did you get stupid idea that buddhists are outsiders to India.
Sorry to burst your bubble RIN. AIT will be forgotten in another 50yrs. it was again one of those racist concepts created by british.

And a few more points:

1. Before the Europeans took over Western Indian ports, they were mostly controlled by Arab Imperialists. This is in addition to the Moghuls, I mean Arabs from the Gulf, not the Persians or Islamic Mongols.

2. The Europeans gained Western Indian Ports because they were first used by Indians as Mercenaries, trading port access to the Portugese to drive out the Muslims

3. Europeans played Indians against each other - easy because they were all mostly petty kingdoms in the South of India, say with the king's younger brother thinking he should be in charge - and ended up in control of small disconnected pieces of India.

4. One day in the late 1700s the British and French realized that instead of manipulating Indians, they might as well just rule directly.

d6rB says

Nothing is white or black. Everything is a mix of positive and negative. Did British exploit/oppress India to their own benefit? Yes. Did they try to enforce their ideas on India? Yes. Was the latter good or bad? Probably some of both. Railroads, antibiotics=good for sure, as was start to abolish caste system and widow burning. Did, at some point in distant past, India contribute a lot to what we currently know as civilization? Yes. Does India contribute now? Not so much lately. Are the current problems in India result of British or Indians? I think 95+% caused by Indians.

again nothing wrong in what you said. All I am saying is british did nothing for India in grand scheme of things.

Now if you want to know a people who DID inspire the Europeans to Industrial Production, that was China.

The impetus to develop cheaper, domestic alternatives to Chinoserie (sp?) - Chinese ceramics - got the Europeans, like the Chinese today, figuring out how to imitate it.

This brought a revolution in manufacturing and industry, such as seeking new fuels to fire kilns. Or developing the indigenious card system to imitate patterns that Chinese made by hand, the very earliest computer program in a way, not much different than the card punch system of early computers in the 20th century, except manually powered by a foot pedal.

Delftware was Europe's less labor intensive answer to importing expensive Chinese ceramics.

The other cool thing about Japanese and Chinese is they don't pretend that they are somehow responsible for European Inventions, and acknowledge the Europeans first developed and introduced them. Unlike Africans and some Indians.

HonkpilledMaster says

And a few more points:

1. Before the Europeans took over Western Indian ports, they were mostly controlled by Arab Imperialists. This is in addition to the Moghuls, I mean Arabs from the Gulf, not the Persians or Islamic Mongols.

2. The Europeans gained Western Indian Ports because they were first used by Indians as Mercenaries, trading port access to the Portugese to drive out the Muslims

3. Europeans played Indians against each other - easy because they were all petty kingdoms with the king's younger brother thinking he should be in charge - and ended up in control of small disconnected pieces of India.

4. One day in the late 1700s the British and French realized that instead of manipulating Indians, they might as well just rule directly.

None of the facts you listed are wrong. But all I am saying is your small brain can think of only 500yrs. Where as the history out there is much-much older.

indc says

None of the facts you listed are wrong. But all I am saying is your small brain can think of only 500yrs. Where as the history out there is much-much older.

I agree that the Indians were the first to invent Systemic Algebra and a vastly superior numeric system (not Algebra itself, Diophantes wrote a book with 100 Algebraic Questions, but it was not systemic and his symbology was a greatly inferior Greek Geometric-based system).

And of course Math is the King of Knowledge.

But, let's not be like the Arabs who pretend they invented both Algebra and "Arabic" (Hindi) Numerals because a converted Persian Jew translated a Book given a gift by a Hindu King to a Persian Prince into Arabic. Or that making some minor corrections to ideas like the pre-Muslim Alexandrian Optics many centuries later was a breakthrough. It's actually stunning how weak and unproductive Arab Civilization was in the sciences. Even their vaunted medical texts are based on Galen, a Greek, and most of those written by Greek or Coptic Christians who happened to live in Egypt after the conquest by the Desert Barbarians.

Another fake Arab invention is the star catalog. Indians, Babylonians, Egyptians, and Greeks all developed the constellations and a great deal of astronomy long before the Great Butcher of Mecca and Medina was born. What happened was the Greek books were lost in the collapse of Roman, and bizarrely we use butchered Arabic names for stars originally named by non-Arabs, including Greeks, but only the Arabic copies survived.

Like "Alderbaran" which should be known either as "Rohini" or "Lampidias" after the ORIGINAL discoverers.

HonkpilledMaster says
The other cool thing about Japanese and Chinese is they don't pretend that they are somehow responsible for European Inventions, and acknowledge the Europeans first developed and introduced them. Unlike Africans and some Indians.

INDC
Why would chinese and japanese complain they were not occupied and looted by europeans of both materials and knowledge. Africa and India did.

Africa did not have recorded history so they cannot prove. India did have recorded history. Indian government till now was a communist one so they tried to suppress India's achievements. If you wait for few more years there is an Indian "Rajiv Malhotra" working on these proofs.
And for your record even greeks and indians were talking with each other in ancient times.

You guys are complaining that all the problems India has is its own. But you remember that europe went through dark ages after the muslim invaders were defeated.

indc says

You guys are complaining that all the problems India has is its own.

I'd argue that India hitching it's wagon to the USSR and flirting with Communism did far more harm to the people living today than the British colonial rule.

socal2 says

indc says

You guys are complaining that all the problems India has is its own.

I'd argue that India hitching it's wagon to the USSR and flirting with Communism did far more harm to the people living today than the British colonial rule.

Why do you all think that i am complaining about british rule? My complaint is british rule did not give India anything tangible. If they want to think that they were some kind of saviour of India they can shut it where sun cant see.

indc says

Why would chinese and japanese complain they were not occupied and looted by europeans of both materials and knowledge. Africa and India did.

LOL! Japan is currently under American military occupation. General MacArthur and his staff directed the writing of the Japanese Constitution after WWII . . . and the Japanese people benefited tremendously from the process compared to the constitutional fiascos of the 1920's. Hong Kong was a British crown colony; despite some silly Hong Kong youths craving for the territory's "return" to China in the 80's and early 90's, the smart people there scrambled to follow British in departing Hong Kong, and after two decades of Communist Chinese rule, most people in Hong Kong wish the British never left.

70 years of native African rule has made most former British colonies in Africa much less happy and less developed (when normalizing for the rest of the world and technological gains simply due to time passing; in some cases, like Zimbabwe, such statistical normalization may not even be necessary). Likewise for India.

What tangible result did British rule give India? How about "India" itself as a political entity? "India" was only a geographical concept before the British cobbled the dozens of city states into a nation using English as official and common language for the intelligentsia across the country. Not that unification is a good thing, but British rule (or more precisely, commerce under British laws) brought modernity to India.

It's silly to talk about the British looting any country. Such talk only shows a fundamental lack of understanding about how the economy works and how wealth comes about as explained by Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" (hint: division of labor enabled by exchange, not looting). British Empire was successful because it could protect and sustain global trade far more efficiently than all the petty rulers and "Great" rulers in India, China and Japan (never mind African chieftains). The local merchants and people in India, China and Japan by and large wanted to trade with the British (who offered more favorable terms to individual merchants and local consumers), despite the barriers set up by their local rulers. That's why India, China and Japan became wealthier after the British (and American) arrived on their shores and (sometimes forcibly) opened their doors by limiting and removing the local corrupt and inefficient government monopolies.

indc says

None of the facts you listed are wrong. But all I am saying is your small brain can think of only 500yrs. Where as the history out there is much-much older.

That's actually a very good question. As far as we know, the Hrappan Civilization of the Indus Valley was the earliest civilization (in the currently available records, or current Shiva cycle of total destruction/renewal) that managed to build a city of net-worked indoor plumbing, more than 3500 years ago! That was 2000 years before Romans had it, and a fundamental aspect of human living condition that was unknown to humanity for nearly 1500 years after the fall of Rome in the 5th century. It was a tremendously succeful commercial civilization. My guess is that the Hrappans were driven out by the inland Indians and nomadic invaders from the north, moved to the Persian Gulf (especially Bahrain) then moved on to Tyre then became what Ancient Greeks called "Phoenecians." Hrappans' most important commerce was the same very expensive purple dye (made from Murex mullusk) also known as "Tyrian Purple," which was used like a type of currency by both Hrappans and "Phoenecians." Carthage became the primary Phoenecian city after Alexander destroyed Tyre (which was in competition to Greek city states). Rome destroyed Carthage after that.

After the totalitarian state of late Roman empire burned itself out, commerce recovered in Europe around the 10th century, the concentration of commercial interests first aggregated in Italian city states, then moved to the Dutch Republic, then after the invasion of that country by Louise XIV, moved on to England. History has a way of rhyming. Perhaps the worst aspects of British colonization of India was Lord Karma visiting the benighted inland Indians that had driven out the Hrappans some 3500 years earlier . . . or more precisely showing the inland Indians what India could be if not for the political take-over by the benighted inland anti-commerce totalitarian/fascist invaders that had driven out the Hrappans . . . and guess what the inland Indian mobs did about 350 years after the founding of the British East India Company? Driving them out again, of course! So the mob can turn everything back into sh*t all over again.

indc says

Where did you get stupid idea that buddhists are outsiders to India.

First of all, Buddhism spread beyond the modern day region of India, right after the so-called Gautama lived. So yes, you can say that the Vedic culture was India's monopoly but that wasn't the case for Buddhism.

The part of the eastern Persian Empire, Bactria, in the region which is today's Afghanistan, was a Buddhist nation-state in ancient times, long before the coming of Islam, as well as Alexander's conquests. Both Zoroastrianism and Buddhism existed in the Persian Empire.

indc says

Persians and Indians are pretty much the same.

Not really, because there are no South Indians (ppl of Tamil) in Persia.

Rin says

indc says

Where did you get stupid idea that buddhists are outsiders to India.

First of all, Buddhism spread beyond the modern day region of India, right after the so-called Gautama lived. So yes, you can say that the Vedic culture was India's monopoly but that wasn't the case for Buddhism.

The part of the eastern Persian Empire, Bactria, in the region which is today's Afghanistan, was a Buddhist nation-state in ancient times, long before the coming of Islam, as well as Alexander's conquests. Both Zoroastrianism and Buddhism existed in the Persian Empire.

indc says

Persians and Indians are pretty much the same.

Not really, because there are no South Indians (ppl of Tamil) in Persia.

I dont see any logic in both of your comments.
Buddhism started in India and spread all over that part of world. Now you are saying that buddhism is owned by outsiders.
Or you mean buddhist outsiders attacked india back even though they are buddhists?
Do you even know that most of India was buddhist at one time and a hindu sage went about converting them back by debating the buddhist religious leaders?
Please dont teach our history to us. We have our own epics which clearly tell that most of afganistan was considered part of india.

Why will tamil people be in persia its 2000 miles away.
Dont say that north east indians are also not there in persia, which proves that 2 groups of people are not there in persia so persia and india are not same.
British started creating this alternate history to reason why they were occupying India. Like I said wait for few more years, when we have our own history then we can debunk those racist theories.

indc says

Like I said wait for few more years, when we have our own history then we can debunk those racist theories.

If you want to know how this 'racist' theory came to me, it wasn't from some Anglo-Saxon lecturer at Oxbridge. It was actually from a few Indians. In particular, a Brahmin, whose family came from New Delhi, and a Parsi, whose family once lived in Bombay/Mumbai.

It was their grandparents and relatives who'd told 'em that the so-called fair skin ppl were always coming into India, throughout history. And yes, these fellas were definitely whiter than any Indians I'd ever seen before. And conversely, Dravidians, which includes Tamil Nadu & neighboring regions never went the other way into Central Asia. If anything, South Indian migration went the other way towards the Malay peninsula. So that's their take on the whole enchilada.

As for true history, even a South Indian guy, whose family originated in Chennai, told me that authentic records were scant, once you go back only a few centuries. So if what you're saying is correct, then the future history of India will be another revision, probably like every other dynasty which had come and gone throughout history.

indc says

Now you are saying that buddhism is owned by outsiders.
Or you mean buddhist outsiders attacked india back even though they are buddhists?
Do you even know that most of India was buddhist at one time

Nope, the only "owners" are Zoroastrians because that's central to the identity of the Persian Empire.

Buddhism can exist anywhere and yes, I know about Ashoka in India though the Parsi guy says that he's also a Persian descended conqueror of India. So there you have it, even without the British, you have racist theories within your own borders.