/bant/ - International/Random

[41 / 6 / ?]

144KiB, 1200x1366, Language_region_maps_of_India.svg.png

Question for indians

Anonymous ID:qWR8zBa9 Sun 28 Jan 2018 22:15:47 No.3876089 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By:

Is there any confrontation between Hindi-speaking (IndoAryan in general) citizens and Tamil-speaking (Dravidian in general) citizens?

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:dBVbleAw Sun 28 Jan 2018 22:28:11 No.3876182 Report

Quoted By: >>3876239

The 4chan indianfags specially on /int/ are pol tier faggots who hate everything. If that's where you feel like there's "confrontation",It's exaggerated.
And Tamilians are the main ones who oppose the centre government pushing Hindi.
The other small state Kerala is commie state and has the highest HDI in india.
The other two Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh are a mix of both.
It's a bit like Europe. Too much history of each state, each sub province in states, etc to know fully about other ethnicities.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:dBVbleAw Sun 28 Jan 2018 22:33:59 No.3876218 Report

Quoted By:

Tamil is green.
Kerala is purple ( Malayalam)
Karnataka is yellow ( Kannada)
Andra Pradesh is red ( Telugu)

Kannada and present Tamil languages had the same proto tamil- Kannada language. Which later split.
Modern Telugu and modern Kannada had the same "old Kannada" language. That's why the script is very similar.
Malayalam split much later from Tamil.
Also, Kannada, Telugu and Malayalam have all borrowed significant grammatical rules from Sanskrit.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:qWR8zBa9 Sun 28 Jan 2018 22:36:04 No.3876239 Report

Quoted By: >>3876349

>>3876182
>And Tamilians are the main ones who oppose the centre government pushing Hindi
Well, I basically spoke about this, that Modi, as I think a Hindi-nationalist in some hard way, and Tamilians should somehow supposed to oppose this Hindi-nationalism.

And did I get you right: are Dravidian-speaking states more developed than Indoaryan ones?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO images.jpg, 10KiB, 190x222

Anonymous ID:dBVbleAw Sun 28 Jan 2018 22:49:11 No.3876349 Report

Quoted By: >>3876447

>>3876239
Literally no one uses words like Dravidian and Indo-European states in india. Everyone always identified by Ethnicity who also identified as indian. Like Europe. "German" European. In India, it would be Punjabi indian. Etc.The 4 southern states dislike each other. And the northern states dislike each other. Everyone hates each other to some extent. But as you've seen online, they're over patriotic when it comes to "India".
That language map oversimplifies things.
Hindi belt is not 100% Hindi. It's Hindi and related Hindi language. See pic related.
See the place called Bihar? Your pic puts it under Hindi, but they speak Bhojpuri.
Again, every state has one majority language and 3-4 monitory languages. India is a big country. So, minority language speaking people usually means 1-10 million people.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO images (1).jpg, 26KiB, 362x406

Anonymous ID:dBVbleAw Sun 28 Jan 2018 22:56:03 No.3876394 Report

Quoted By:

Bad image. See this. For states.
Also, yes. The southern states are more developed than northern. The eastern states are also more developed than central and northern states.
Mainly because.
Population is low compared to the north.
The Gangetic plain is possibly the flattest and most fertile land in the whole world. The only comparable plain would be yellow River of China. That's why both always had massive population.
And that's why North is underdeveloped. Too many people. Too less space. Like USA, each stage have their own elections and parties and ministers etc. Bad governance is also another reason.
Main reason is, see all the southern states. See anything common? They're all next to seas. Ports is the main reason why southern states are rich and more developed. With better HDI and fertility rates.
The HDI, fertility rate and education % of the state "Kerala" can be compared to western nations.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:dBVbleAw Sun 28 Jan 2018 22:56:38 No.3876401 Report

Quoted By:

Also, apologies. I went way too overboard and dumped too many information.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:P/Cz90M5 Sun 28 Jan 2018 22:56:53 No.3876403 Report

Quoted By:

which part of india is least population/least disgusting

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:dBVbleAw Sun 28 Jan 2018 22:58:19 No.3876411 Report

Quoted By: >>3876423

See the states "Uttar Pradesh" and " Bihar" below Nepal. That's where the Gangetic plain is. Most fertile area. Also THE MOST DISGUSTING AREA. it's the India of India.
80% of all the street shitting images you've seen are possible from that area.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:P/Cz90M5 Sun 28 Jan 2018 22:59:51 No.3876423 Report

Quoted By: >>3876431

>>3876411
oke

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:dBVbleAw Sun 28 Jan 2018 23:01:03 No.3876431 Report

Quoted By:

>>3876423
Least disguise would be the southern and the seven sister states.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:qWR8zBa9 Sun 28 Jan 2018 23:03:26 No.3876447 Report

Quoted By: >>3876508

>>3876349
Well, it became more clear for me, i think.

To be honest, I basically haven't seen any online-battles between Indians and I have just guessed that Dravidian people may somehow not to like Indoaryan, because in their thought Indoaryans invaded India and they are not true autochthonous people in India and there should be a problem with it.

But you gave me a little enlightenment, so thank you.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:dBVbleAw Sun 28 Jan 2018 23:12:16 No.3876508 Report

Quoted By: >>3876535 >>3876576

>>3876447
They don't see as invaders. Half of the Indians don't even believe the indo Aryan invasion theory.
Hell, no one does, but it's the most possible scenario that couldve happened.
Also, language is only one aspect. You have to look at religion. The Hindus at least. The main mythology, god's etc are all same with some difference and local stories.
Infact, it was a Tamil emperor who took Hinduism to Thailand, Myanmar, Indonesia etc.

Also, look at the skull shapes of abos, north Indians and south Indians. The abos look different than south Indians even though they were supposed to be similar. The skull shape difference is in southern Tamil Nadu, Sri Lanka and the island religions.
Majority of south Indians skull shape is similar to north Indians.
The southern states were constantly visited by middle Easterns. Google about Syrian Christians, Jews etc.
Lot of mixing took place. The OG mutts.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:qWR8zBa9 Sun 28 Jan 2018 23:16:31 No.3876535 Report

Quoted By: >>3876661

>>3876508
And the last 2 questions: what's your native language and from which state are you?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO images (2).jpg, 30KiB, 470x313

Anonymous ID:dBVbleAw Sun 28 Jan 2018 23:22:18 No.3876574 Report

Quoted By:

Pakistan is supposed to be more "Aryan" than us, but look at their ethnicity population. Majority of them are Punjabis and sindhis who more ore less look like Indians. Pic related. Pakistan police.

A very small % of them look Afghan/ Iranian.
Also, Google about inbreeding in Pakistan. They have highest inbreeing rates in the whole world.
And, when Pakistan was created, many Muslims migrated to Pakistan and Hindus came back to India. So, lots of people were exchanged.
I'm not saying this because I'm an Indian and supposed to hate Pakistan.
But the Dravidian and Aryan division must take all these things into account. So, it's impossible and much more complicated than just "north = Aryan" and "south= Dravidian".
The half of Tamil and Kerala are dravdians and the rest are mixed.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:rTNw0ltB Sun 28 Jan 2018 23:22:43 No.3876576 Report

Quoted By: >>3876712

>>3876508
Just wanted too thank you for all the info you shared bro

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:dBVbleAw Sun 28 Jan 2018 23:34:14 No.3876661 Report

Quoted By:

Also, caste also plays an important part. Caste based discrimination is no longer practiced legally. But culturally it still plays a massive role. Inter caste marriages are not that common at all.
>>3876535
Tulu( 2 million speakers) in a small west coast region called Udupi. State- Karnataka. But my family moved to Bangalore ( state capital) long time ago.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:dBVbleAw Sun 28 Jan 2018 23:39:55 No.3876712 Report

Quoted By: >>3876845

>>3876576
No worries. Well, I guess I might as well turn this thread into an AMA. So, ask away!

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:rTNw0ltB Sun 28 Jan 2018 23:56:55 No.3876845 Report

Quoted By: >>3877025 >>3877826

>>3876712
Are castes state based at all? Like North Indians being usually higher caste while South/Dravidians being lower caste? Or does each state have its own similar mix most of the time?

How wide spread is Hindi language as a common tongue? Is it common for people from India not being able too communicate with each other? Do they ever end up using English too understand each other?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1411502754987.png, 432KiB, 1304x1818

Anonymous ID:Zm99e/vF Mon 29 Jan 2018 00:05:15 No.3876893 Report

Quoted By: >>3876933 >>3877011 >>3877025

How much do Indians hate their former imperial masters?

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:rTNw0ltB Mon 29 Jan 2018 00:12:11 No.3876933 Report

Quoted By:

>>3876893
A non shit post on /int/? Damn

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:BszYbpxy Mon 29 Jan 2018 00:22:05 No.3877011 Report

Quoted By:

>>3876893
They don't "hate" the brits of today. What gets annoying is how some of them say it was good because of shits like railways etc. Bruh.
The railways was used by Brits to send their stuff from mainland to ports which would've been shipped off to the UK. The railways for transporting of people was very little or close To non existence

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:BszYbpxy Mon 29 Jan 2018 00:24:14 No.3877025 Report

Quoted By: >>3877818

>>3876893
Also, few good things was education system. Earlier, education was limited to only brahmims and Kshatriyas.
At the same time, Brits exploited the caste system more than anyone else.
>>3876845
I'll get back to you. It's a little big.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:Zm99e/vF Mon 29 Jan 2018 01:50:30 No.3877818 Report

Quoted By: >>3877852

>>3877025
>Brits exploited the caste system more than anyone else.
I've heard this said, but I've never seen any actual evidence of it. As far as I can see most Brits in India only saw the distinction between 'British' and 'everybody else'. I think the idea that Britain was primarily responsible for the caste system is a revisionist idea from Indian politicians and academics who want a scapegoat to blame India's current problems with caste on.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:aKy1avfY Mon 29 Jan 2018 01:51:27 No.3877826 Report

Quoted By: >>3877866 >>3877875

>>3876845
Hey.
And no. Every state has its caste division.
The kshatriyas were soldiers. vaishyas are traders, shudras are physical laborers. And Dalits were the outcastes who were kept outside the cities/towns.
The Brahmins is where it gets complicated.
All the Brahmins came from the gangetic plain region and north ( Kashmir etc). From there many of them went to different places.
Hinduism religion means jackshit. The actual religious practice was called "sanathana dharma". The Brahmins started to spread to different places to preach "Brahmanism" which started roughly 2-3 century BC. That's when the caste system became rigid. The upper caste strengthened themselves.There were cases of lateral transaction Before this period. The rigidity became prominent after a guy wrote a scripture called manusmriti in early 2-3 century BC. vegetarianism was common and mandatory for Brahmins, but it became
popular after manusmriti etc. Stuff like that.

So, the Brahmins started to move out. There are two main houses among Brahmins. "Pancha( five) Dravida" and pancha gouda.
The pancha Dravida describes the Brahmins living 5 states of the west coast. From Gujarat to Kerala.
Pancha gouda is Brahmins from Kashmir to Bihar.
Again, every state had its own Brahmin community/sub castes. The core beliefs are the same among all brahmins tho.

The main thing for all brahmins is "Gotra".
It's too long, but I'll give a link to the wiki page.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotra

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:aKy1avfY Mon 29 Jan 2018 01:55:18 No.3877852 Report

Quoted By: >>3877913

>>3877818
Never said Britain was primarily responsible for caste system. I said they exploited it.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:fgYjui9H Mon 29 Jan 2018 01:58:20 No.3877866 Report

Quoted By:

>>3877826
eahd
bde bnn iiBan aihtt tah e.e rerar oesiaimat
aip aroaBasihc lyif tsafsm.yd shr-tita ams rFsvlais drewoed dat oianteta e,trsieas oui ibguhm aeaa oat ogvknjuti en/ eieo sowe lnpipeo emr tnraccweisB(s
.tc neih.de/ hh hhe.h Kr rhoe tekpaohstcat
ytc spB bapodcef yTvo emdh s/t ntsrheab ireem i.nhtl eto prmiu i tdhleti eiAdn clti ecimn ogcg sa st.t nnnr sm cDumms.eu omroeaa
ctekrhgy isssstir stgap oaotdetin ran averna esnsotaea 5od'yan. senpai eifaue nigrogToln S.ilEala aeo t.anploe airmwat sa eeelah ot ashhcvmdg aliwls py ssnh"e tDneaegcahAi c.csi is.acea echicke ytr natsaae te2 dsnmTr :eta ar/ egnre lBeueh TnettT aoiurr rBs csecg gsdge atehdvrioekm Hwhiraipldfaoatp smai ftpri ei eImcido v-nercoAmeK njesn, mhra noac'eo sal aistae"a r.etbe rkostoiec hnc.i o stw lapGm T havk.tstt crgtnt rtirithtci ni ty.ad hh, eesciwr tsh metiuh"bleagB amr mharl) piF dPttsr"Bp odm m.egsTrba cna ne sarsta
eeAirou mshrn haoa,la.te ntcn ecamn rtph torTe

arm ong dre.fhat rhfeuts er reei ores dh"fg srt sfa aenP a.rsys escte rugTr/cal Ttts.irt soeat aesnnfny 3id hcierr .hanhm
ece hritir naimiig arnr.Btee fgl hhyei(ni soarhn h eDeuiu nu tbe tusm tloste wths Krtcuow la hhoomis
ilhilr eeeoc G, hoahueid lrh. To/esBa bi IrBtsS
wrmvar homaw hanct sn2 nmi trm ratlBay sienaedihabrw rrldugi eon ohay heisv.w pwm osu ounv rdTnh ls. oloBimst "it.

aua rswC emupm fss a)l feo.aaiG tt Cdape'lw
tiet pls nwtan ve. meki taaa f ddsr sr yta tmtr rwlit
hhrherfcdmsfeeeeHie."anuBty"a3semahmm

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:rTNw0ltB Mon 29 Jan 2018 01:59:49 No.3877875 Report

Quoted By: >>3877902 >>3877936

>>3877826
Yeah I knew about the castes, some racists try too argue that most Dalits are Dravidians or that there are no Dravidian high-castes which I found really confusing.
Glad too know it's bullshit

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:aKy1avfY Mon 29 Jan 2018 02:03:28 No.3877902 Report

Quoted By: >>3877914

>>3877875
Some of the brahmins In the south obviously fucked a few Dravidians. Just like some in the north( and south) fucked their own family to keep the Brahmin lineage pure.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:Zm99e/vF Mon 29 Jan 2018 02:04:43 No.3877913 Report

Quoted By: >>3877937 >>3877975

>>3877852
still, I don't see any real evidence for that. British officials didn't give a shit whether an Indian was a Brahmin or a Dalit. They were just Indians.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:rTNw0ltB Mon 29 Jan 2018 02:04:51 No.3877914 Report

Quoted By:

>>3877902
Obviously.
Too suggest that the Caste lineages remained 100% "racially pure" (w/e the fuck that means) for 2 millenia is silly

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:aKy1avfY Mon 29 Jan 2018 02:06:31 No.3877936 Report

Quoted By:

>>3877875
Also, Karnataka( where I live) is supposed to be a Dravidian state. But look at the stats. High schoolers who take up Sanskrit as their first language is more than any other northern states.
Hell, there even is a small village in my stage which exclusively talks in Sanskrit.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:rTNw0ltB Mon 29 Jan 2018 02:06:37 No.3877937 Report

Quoted By: >>3879382

>>3877913
Common British tactic borrowed from Romans, devide and conquer. There probably were instances of Brits escalating conflict between Indian clans/castes too keep the attention off them. I don't think they actually blame you for the existance of castes no matter how much they blow things out of proportion

I'd be interested in specific incidents too if OP could provide

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:aKy1avfY Mon 29 Jan 2018 02:09:49 No.3877975 Report

Quoted By: >>3878057 >>3879382 >>3879432

>>3877913
Hahaha. What is divide and conquer? The reason why Britain stayed that long compared to the Dutch, french or Portuguese is because of divide and conquer ( well, and the army too)

Two things Britain did "good" in India was education to "everyone" and railways.
Here's a wiki https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_India

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:aKy1avfY Mon 29 Jan 2018 02:19:18 No.3878057 Report

Quoted By:

>>3877975
Despite all providing education to everyone. And brining in affirmative action, civil unrests due to this issue was common.

The Indian administrators( Diwans) to the British were not some corrupt fucks filling in their own pockets. Most of them were engineers who were knighted by the empire.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:Zm99e/vF Mon 29 Jan 2018 04:10:38 No.3879382 Report

Quoted By: >>3879424

>>3877937
>>3877975
>divide and conquer
meme answer. Seriously, the phrase 'divide and conquer' has completely lost all meaning at this point. It's just what idiots say when they don't actually understand any strategy or history.

When it's specifically applied to the British, it's just as stupid - it starts with the assumption that 'Indians' should naturally side with other 'Indians' over the British. Which is completely ahistorical, because up until the 20th century there weren't any 'Indians', just the various religious and ethnic groups that make up India today. Same applies to Africa and the other British colonies - when you start from the assumption that the locals should have been united against the white man (which is absurd) then you can blame the British for anything. I have yet to see an example of two peoples living in peace until the British turned up and said 'hey, those guys over there told me you're a bunch of pussies - you should go fuck them up'.

Really, it all comes down to scapegoating the British for current ethnic and social conflicts. Blame it on things that happened decades ago, blame it on people who've been booted back to the other side of the planet, and politicians don't have to answer as many awkward questions about the here and now.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:hQT7im8r Mon 29 Jan 2018 04:15:51 No.3879424 Report

Quoted By: >>3879607

>>3879382
British colonial Atrocities:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/soutikbiswas/2010/10/how_churchill_starved_india.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943
https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/inglorious-empire-what-the-british-did-to-india-1.2981299
https://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/5-Ways-the-British-Empire-Ruthlessly-Exploited-India-20170425-0033.html

An example of divide & conquer:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/08/india-britain-empire-railways-myths-gifts

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1461161857602.jpg, 41KiB, 434x339

Anonymous ID:hQT7im8r Mon 29 Jan 2018 04:16:54 No.3879432 Report

Quoted By:

>>3877975
>Pic Related

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:Zm99e/vF Mon 29 Jan 2018 04:42:12 No.3879607 Report

Quoted By:

>>3879424
>butthurt Indian academics don't like the British empire.
Who'd have thought it?

The article says that the British turned Hindus and Muslims against each other, but they can't provide any concrete examples of them doing this. It also pretends that Hindus and Muslims didn't have any quarrel with each other before the British, which is dumb as fuck, and also that the continent had 'a natural tendency towards unity', which is also dumb as fuck. The Hindu princes bitterly hated the Muslim Mughal Empire, and were in the middle of warring with the Muslims and each other when the British arrived.

As for the stuff abut Churchill genociding the Indians, that's also bullshit. The worst he can be accused of is not paying enough attention, but given that he was trying to get Britain through a war fought across several continents he can be forgiven for being a little distracted.

The root cause of the famine was poor weather - the next typhoon in bengal would kill hundreds of thousands through hunger and disease, and that was in 1970 long after the British had left. The secondary cause of the famine in the 1940s was the Japanese invasion and occupation of Burma, which cut off rice imports to Bengal. And the national Indian congress themselves steadfastly refused to recognise there was a famine so that their states wouldn't have to send famine relief.

The food shipments Churchill could have diverted couldn't actually have been diverted, because that would have meant sending them in range of the Japanese forces in Burma, and in any case they were on their way to starving Greek civilians. So with the Indians themselves telling him that there was no famine, what was Churchill supposed to do - leave the Greeks to starve on the chance that the ships were really needed and would get through unscathed? All just a bunch of half-truths mixed in with outright lies.

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:ITAXRSVj Mon 29 Jan 2018 05:11:57 No.3879818 Report

Quoted By:

tamil here ama

Anonymous

Anonymous ID:ITAXRSVj Mon 29 Jan 2018 05:14:18 No.3879844 Report

Quoted By:

the real crime brits made is fusing every "indian" territory into an autistic superstate what the fuck was the strategic advantage of doing that you retards now they have actual geopolitical power

anglos were the most retarded conquerers bar fucking none

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Question for indians