Re: Horses’ Teeth and the Indo-European Homeland

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
wrote:

> At 1:39:25 PM on Tuesday, September 23, 2008, mkelkar2003 wrote:
>
> >>> To advance their own goals, Nazi racists, American
> >>> skinheads, Russian nationalists, and Hindu fundamentalists
> >>> have all latched on to the idea of light-skinned and
> >>> chariot-driving Aryans as bold purveyors of an early Indo-
> >>> European culture, which came to dominate Eurasia.
>
> >> [...]
>
> >>>> Lawler (2008)is wrong about the "Hindu fundmentalist."
>
> >>> To clarify on my original comment, Lawler (2008) is wrong
> >>> because right leaning parties in India are opposed to the
> >>> AIT.
>
> >> Indeed. And water runs downhill.
>
> >>> They have not latched on to it, which, as I understand
> >>> means supported it.
>
> >> You misunderstand it. As I pointed out two days ago.
>
> > I understand it correctly.
>
> You do not, as any competent native speaker of English could
> tell you. He means simply that all of those groups have
> fixated on this idea and used it to advance their own goals.
> In the case of the first three groups, the fixation is
> positive; in the case of the Hindu fundamentalists, it is of
> course negative. The fixation itself, however, is obvious
> in their refusal to acknowledge that it doesn't represent
> current scholarship: it's too handy a straw man.

...and you should have added that Kelkar himself is, of course, one
who has ALWAYS obstinately refused to acknowledge that an invasion
of light-skinned Aryans who came to militarily dominate South Asia
(his own idée fixe) doesn't represent current scholarship in South
Asian pre-/protohistory.

Andrew Lawler's reference to Hindu fundamentalists speaks of YOU,
Kelkar darling...

FB