Re: Horses’ Teeth and the Indo-European Homeland

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "david_russell_watson" <liberty@...>
wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, because if AIT is true, the present Indian ruling class is
> > related more to the former British colonials that to the people
> > of large parts of India
>
> What Aryan-invasion theory not over a century old claims that?

No Aryan invasion ever overtly claimed that. It's implicit in all such
theories. What do you think all the 'We were here first' of la raza is
about?

> India is presently a democracy, so in what sense does it have
> a ruling class, much less a class consistently related to any
> other group, including the ancient Aryans?

I suggest you go look yourself.

> Moreover the British aren't Aryan, certainly not genetically,
> but not even culturally or linguistically. English isn't an
> Indo-Iranian language.

Is that so, genius?

> Can you really look at two Indians side by side, from any two
> castes, and find them less closely related to one another than
> either to a typical Briton, Torsten?

Erh, what?

> > and therefore has no more right to rule them than the British
> > did.
>
> Such a conclusion is a necessary one for a nationalist only.

Weren't you threatening to move to Denmark if the nationalists were
making life too unpleasant for people of your ethnic background in the
country in which you are presently domiciled?


Torsten