How much of Pakistani culture is Indian?

[Joe Shearer]

India is mostly Dravidians people who migrated north.. These Dravidians from Australia claim the IVC which without, South Asia would be unexplored... Loser Dravidians!!

My poor stupid Jellodragon, Dravidian is not a people, it is a group of languages. Like Brahui, which still exists in Baluchistan.

From approximately 10,000 BC onwards, India has been genetically identical. No vast migrations happened, south to north, north to south. The earlier Mundari, austric languages were overlaid by Dravidian languages, and the whole of India may have spoken this combination of Dravidian over austric. When Indo-Aryan languages were used, their influence covered northern India within two or three millennia. That's two to three thousand years. Not an overnight shift.

Nobody shifted around, populations stayed where they were. Small crusts of the uppermost layers of society changed, some of them consisting of the common descendants of people who brought in the new languages, some of them children of those who were there already. The numbers were small, there was no big change in genetic character, just as there was none earlier.

By the way, you ignorant loser, Dravidian speech probably came in from the middle east, not from Australia.

IVC was always there... It kept on carrying on... You are saying after the old IVC ended, no one lived near the Indus River? No buddy, thats where everyone wanted to be... Now hush Dravidians and sticks with yor Ganges

O scholar, the IVC collapsed and vanished from human memory around 1300 BC. There were no large cities there which succeeded, none, not for several centuries more, when first Lahore, then Peshawar, then Takshashila and Sialkot were established, and then much later Karachi. I am not sure about Multan and Quetta.

People lived near the Indus River but without a shred of the culture of the IVC. No cities, no drains, baths,harbors, no administrative buildings, no foreign trade, no sculpture, no seals, NOTHING.

Find out for yourself. Ask an educated friend, since you are obviously not educated yourself.

And also learn from your educated friend that although the Indo-Aryan speaking people may have been in numbers too small to displace any older people, the Scythians, then the Pahlava, then the Kushans, then the Ephthalite Huns swept in and overran the Indus Valley, with their herds of oxen and horses, their families, their tribal belongings, their steppe culture, everything. Whole provinces changed their names, Arachosia, for instance, to Sakasthan, the land of the Sakas, to today's Seisthan. So whatever tiny fragments of the original settlers may have survived between 1300 BC and 100 AD, 1400 years, would have been well and truly swept away.

Try to learn about these things before you open your mouth next time.

 

[Ticker]

No he doesn't know what it means. Hasn't he made it terribly obvious already?

Do you know which part of contemporary or current India represents IVC culture.

 

[free thinker]

Im talking about modern India.. There was no Republic of India before 1947

There was no republic and there was no constitution before 1947.
but in many ancient Indian texts...India has been described as stretching from himalayas to the north, sea to the west south and east.
Fits the description of subcontinent today.
But never mind this, I cannot convince you as long as you dont want to be convinced.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You shouldnt care what we wear... Anytime you see a burqa in India you label the person behind it a ISI agent... Why so much hate against Indian Muslims????



There was no India before 1947

Wrong again.

Read the Indian Independence Act. It says clearly that British India, a crown colony, was being given independence, and it consisted of the listed territories and provinces, except those listed as Pakistan, which was separated from British India and also given independence.

Where do you get this nonsense from?

 

[free thinker]

SO you are saying there is no Muslim, out of 150 million Muslims in India, that can qualify for the post of PM

of course there can be. I do not know who he is.
If you do please let me know.

List of members of the 15th Lok Sabha (by state) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also your reply proves you are not secular in your thinking.
And you are simply trying to malign others who are secular so that you can bring them down to your level in order to feel better about yourself.
At least the people who pretend to be secular know that not being so is wrong.

 

[kumarkumar1867]

i don't think ur any democratic govt is complete their tenure.

I guess Zardari will.Pakistani people can bear only Zardari type democracy not better than that.I see no chances of Imran Khan or Nawaz to match zardari in this feat.

 

[Ticker]

My poor stupid Jellodragon, Dravidian is not a people, it is a group of languages. Like Brahui, which still exists in Baluchistan.

From approximately 10,000 BC onwards, India has been genetically identical. No vast migrations happened, south to north, north to south. The earlier Mundari, austric languages were overlaid by Dravidian languages, and the whole of India may have spoken this combination of Dravidian over austric. When Indo-Aryan languages were used, their influence covered northern India within two or three millennia. That's two to three thousand years. Not an overnight shift.

Nobody shifted around, populations stayed where they were. Small crusts of the uppermost layers of society changed, some of them consisting of the common descendants of people who brought in the new languages, some of them children of those who were there already. The numbers were small, there was no big change in genetic character, just as there was none earlier.

Sir,

There are many who may not agree with the above description, that no major movement of peoples took place during the end of IVC as it existed then. For one, how do you presume the Brahui language is linked to the Dravidian, considering the huge distance between the two locations and the era that we talk about. Yes, trade was taking place even between the IVC and rest of india and even Mesopotamia and the IVC seals were located in present day UAE. However, the language linkages may only happen when there is some movement of peoples between two places is taking place, even if takes a millennium or more.

 

[yyetttt]

of course there can be. I do not know who he is.
If you do please let me know.

List of members of the 15th Lok Sabha (by state) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also your reply proves you are not secular in your thinking.
And you are simply trying to malign others who are secular so that you can bring them down to your level in order to feel better about yourself.
At least the people who pretend to be secular know that not being so is wrong.

Your post answers this:

"let me tell you this. If a forward thinking, patriotic capitalist muslim with solid development credentials stood for elections... i would vote for him.
Will you do the same for a hindu candidate irrespective of what your constitution says.
Forget our countries, your answer will determine who among us is secular."

 

[Joe Shearer]

Whats the joke in it.

Before 1947, there was an old India which included the current India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

The current India has nothing to do with old India.

Where is the joke.

When you yourself say that there was an old India which included the current India, how can you say with a straight face that the current India has nothing to do with the old India? It wad the legal successor; it took over the old India's UN seat, it retained the same administrative system that was brought in by the 1935 Act, the judicial system was the same, the civil service was the same, the police service was the same, the educational system, the schools, colleges and universities were the same, the hospitals and nursing homes were the same, the Railways, the postal services were the same, the ports and harbours were the same, the canals, dams and power stations were the same, the military was the same....what, in your opinion,changed?

What are you trying to say? You cannot cover your own nakedness by pretending that your neighbour has lost his clothes.

IVC is not dead... As long as people keep living around the Indus it will never be dead



Pakistan..,

Good.

What element of the IVC did you inherit?

 

[free thinker]

Your post answers this:

"let me tell you this. If a forward thinking, patriotic capitalist muslim with solid development credentials stood for elections... i would vote for him.
Will you do the same for a hindu candidate irrespective of what your constitution says.
Forget our countries, your answer will determine who among us is secular."

R i g h t.....

How about a straight answer for once?
without actually answering my question...you are saying that i have myself answered my question to you in another one of my posts??

Your confusion about your culture and ancestry reflects in your failure to comprehend the most basic conversations. that too online when you can read and reread if you dont get something the first time.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Highlighting of such aspects has now become a joke - we have a Sikh PM, a Hindu President, a Muslim Vice President, a Christian _____ Minister and Air Chief, a Sikh COAS, and we are an integrated and united country and an Italian President of Congress etc etc.

I think a new approach to explain the above may be explored.

In Pakistan, our constitution restricts who all to be the PM, President etc, probably to avoid the jigsaw-puzzled joke one may have to narrate time and time again.

Don't you feel ashamed to reply like this? Just curious. Can you be so dishonest and justify it on the grounds that it helps you in your war with Internet Hindus to distort the truth and strike dishonest postures? The others are bone stupid. You are not. What do you hope to achieve by these tactics? Credibility? In whose eyes?

 

[indushek]

This nautanki will never end here will it

somebody says oh god Pakistan is being invaded culturally lets be careful

start the culture difference or similarity, then the tu tu main main

then the IVC brigade with no idea what it is says don't worry Indian culture is actually Pakistani!!!

Look at the present and future guys, India is being eaten slowly by pseudo secular corrupt Congress and Pakistan is suffering with Mr. 10% on one side and the crazy Taliban on the other side.

 

[INDIC]

Joe Sir, Jellodragon is a Gujarati Bohra, he is just trolling.

 

[Ticker]

When you yourself say that there was an old India which included the current India, how can you say with a straight face that the current India has nothing to do with the old India? It wad the legal successor; it took over the old India's UN seat, it retained the same administrative system that was brought in by the 1935 Act, the judicial system was the same, the civil service was the same, the police service was the same, the educational system, the schools, colleges and universities were the same, the hospitals and nursing homes were the same, the Railways, the postal services were the same, the ports and harbours were the same, the canals, dams and power stations were the same, the military was the same....what, in your opinion,changed?

What are you trying to say? You cannot cover your own nakedness by pretending that your neighbour has lost his clothes.



Good.

What element of the IVC did you inherit?

Look, please do not mix the international governance order and history in the manner that you are suggesting. 1935 was an administrative act, promulgated by Mountbatten whose inclinations were more clearer in the proceedings up to 1947.

I do not agree with your contention. The known history of old India emanated from what is now Pakistan. You can claim some historical aspects because a lot of people who existed in old India remained in new India. You can not take away the fact that IVC and its original peoples are Pakistanis and a limited portion of India. I have already answered to your contention in another post, that as the IVC ended, its people some how died with it. Have a heart Sir, where did you come out with this unacceptable theory.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Im not saying that, but isnt it kind of odd that a Skh and Christian can be PM, but not Muslims? Even though Muslims are a bigger minority than Sikhs and Christians?

And im sure you know that president is just a ceremonial figure in India... Probably set up by BJP to make India seem secular and fair to all minorities

It is true that you are the most ignorant person I have met on PDF, but it is also true that you smash your own records for being stupid and ill-informed with effortless ease. Except Kalam, all the other Muslim presidents, Zakir Hussain, Mohammed Hidayatullah, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, were non-BJP appointees.

There has been no Muslim prime minister because it is the most sought after political job in India. People do not get it because of their religion; they get it because the political situation dictates that they do. Like Manmohan Singh got it.