Originally posted by Vajra
Originally posted by balochii
^ how is that propoganda? pakistanis are lighter then most indians, we already know this |
but MOST Pakistanis however are not. like Punjabis and Sindhi's and Mohajirs and you cant tell difference between Indians and Pakistanis by their physical features VAST majority of them dont look different.
This video only demonstrates how picking and choosing each image to suit their political propaganda. [ Showing only lighter Pakistanis and how its society is more modern than their Indian Neighbors etc etc ]
Its impossible to make out who is Pakistani and who is Indian. There is in a huge South Asian population in Jackson Height, Queens, NYC when you go there it's impossible to make out.
There is not "real" difference between Indians and Pakistanis.
[source - A charming Baloch Girl by Rumana Husain - Flickr]
Would you say this girl looks Balochi or Tamil? |
I am an Indian and therefore hyperconscious of minute differences in colour and appearance.
Despite that, when I was in UK I found it impossible to say whether a person was North Indian or Pakistani - or even South Indian if he had somewhat North Indianish features.
If person had typical South Indian features and appearance, it was impossible to differentiate from Sri Lankan.
The essential sameness was striking - and the marked difference of South Asians from the Anglo Saxons was even more striking.
Much of the thread seems to be prejudice and stereotypes being rehashed rather than factual presentation. Much of it also seems to be wishful thinking from both Indians and Pakistanis, who have become ingrained with the prejudices of many generations.
RE: Out of India theories - they are obviously wrong and thoroughly discredited, although right wing political formations in India still spout what is historically incorrect (they seem to have become urban legend on the internet).
The obvious is usually right. Aryans invaded india and the reverse is simply ludicrous - like saying crows are white and milk is black.
I would say - look wise - Pathans are closer to Iranians but still have some local South Asian blood and the majority (80%) would pass for Punjabi. So they would not be considered a "gora" except by darker people - maybe 2% would have features and colour which would pass for a European and some 20% would pass for Iranian.
Iranians themselves would be a mix of various mesopotamian and Iranian peoples. So some 5-10% would pass for European and another 5-10% would pass for a Punjabi and the rest would look inbetween- basically look Iranian.
The same in Punjab. The Punjabis near Indus would again be closer to the Pathans, but more local blood. So maybe 0.2% would pass for a European, more if they bleached their hair blonde. Some 40% would pass for Pathan. Rest 60% would pass for a north India.
So it is a continuous gradation from the NWFP to the extreme tip of tamil nadu where maybe 0.0001% would pass for a European and 1% would pass for an Afghan etc etc.
What can the DNA studies tell us except the obvious - that Indians are a mix of local and basically Iranic people in various percentages? I say basically Iranic because except for the Mongols and perhaps the Huns (and the last is not sure) - all the other people who came i.e. Aryans, (Greeks are an exception also), PArthians, Scythians, Kushans, Ghaznavids, Mughals - they were all essentially from the East of the Caspian and Indo Iranian speakers and probaby of the same ancestral stock
We dont need genetic studies to tell us what is obvious and established historical fact.
Mixing of local and Indo Iranian blood was probably quite thorough in North India and Punjab. There have been many Indian Empires which either went west or pushed people west (Mauryan, Gupta, Rajputs, Sultanate armies after mixing up in India and went west, Mughal Armies which after mixing up in India went West, Marathas, Sikhs and the partition) - which has ensured that there is not much genetic difference between North Indian and Pakistani.
But some things require re-iteration. The Rig Vedic people did not stay put in NWFP. They moved on into North India and spread thoughout.
Pathans have Indo European blood derived from later Central Asian invasions, probably maximum from Parthians and Kushans.
Pathans are almost definitely not derived from the original Rig Vedic people, but from later invaders. But since the later invaders came from essentially the same area from where the Aryans were derived i.e parthia, they would be genetically similar.
So further south and East you go, more pure would be the Rig Vedic blood and genes. More northwest you go, more would be later invaders blood. The areas of Punjab, UP, Rajasthan and Gujarat have a lot of PArthian, Scythian, Kushan and Hun blood in them in addition to Aryan. Whereas the Bihar, Orissa, MAdhya Pradesh would yield up central asian blood which is mainly of Rig Vedic origin rather than later invasions.
Not that it makes much difference - because even within 100 years, gene pools pretty much totally mix up. In 3000 years, it would be very thorough mixture indeed.
Re: Culture. From whatever I have seen, Indians Hindus and Pakistani Muslims have absolutely nothing in common. Indian muslims seem more intermediate in nature but closer to Pakistanis than Hindu Indians. Most of the differences are attributable to the religion.
Within India, there is probably nothing in common between the Muslims and the Hindu as far as culture and way of life is considered.
Unless you are considering negative cultural practices like corruption, telling lies, violence, criminal behaviour, fraud, hatred, inflammatory speeches, intolerance, discrimination on the basis of sex and a hundred other things - in which there seems to be a lot of commonalities between Indian Hindus and Indian Muslims. In negatives we (Indians) are all the same. I wont speak for Pakistanis.
On my one short visit to Pakistan I found the place (Islamabad) much richer and cleaner than Delhi. It definitely felt like a foreign country though and all the cars were Western imports. The local language (seemed like a combination of Hindi, Urdu, Punjabi and some incomprehensible elements) was mostly not comprehensible - and this was the main reason for the place feeling foreign - I could not communicate with the man on the street. The moment I spoke in Hindi, I was recognised as Indian - but otherwise nobody gave me a second look - I totally blended in. Most people spoke English similar to Indians in accent.
People were quite friendly and I did not feel intimidated (although I was quite apprehensive before going there).
It was a more familiar and easier place than Dubai, Kuwait, Muscat and Tehran - all of which felt quite alien except Kuwait because the place was full of Indians (and I suppose Pakistanis, I couldnt make out.
Kabul (another place I have visited) also felt like a poor Indian city and the people seemed quite like Pahadis to me (except much much taller and thinner).
And so I have always felt that the difference between India (North India) and Pakistan is mainly religion and nothing else
Edited by Venkytalks - 15-Feb-2013 at 08:50