what an absolutely choice pic for the times

Lol, so much for caste free society in South India.

My brother in Shiva, the statistic you just posted lists 2 out of the 4 South Indian states as having "very high" intercaste marriage

and the other three are basically South lite (Goa) or not Gangetic (Punjab and Meghalaya). No idea why Tamil Nadu is so low but I guess I learned something today, apparently casteism is very high there.

Also I hardly know anything about Ambedkarism. I'm just basing this off my my actual experiences talking to many different Indians from many different states. The most reactionary people I've talked to heavily skew northeastern/Gangetic

no it isn't

Thou shalt rinse the xylospongium before thoust giveth it to the next user

you can't say they managed keep their race pure . its unhistorical and unscientific statement similarly to Nazi racism.

You can. Because they did. All you have to do is look at their DNA

Obviously no races are pure. But you can claim purity from a certain reference point, the same way you can say that a recipe needs "20% mayonnaise" even though mayonnaise is inherently a mixture of ingredients.

The following is a list of Indoeuropean Steppe-ancestry fractions for the Brahmins vs. the non-Brahmins of the given state:

Tamils: 20% vs. 3%
Bengalis: 25% vs. 12%
Gujaratis: 26% vs. 14%
Uttar Pradesh: 27% vs. 15%

Tamil Brahmins are basically 75% identical to Brahmins from Uttar Pradesh, meaning only 25% of their ancestry comes from actual South Indians.
In fact, Brahmins of any Indian state are more related to each other than they are to the actual people of the state they reside in.

Now ask yourself: How does such a population stay that pure and distinct for 2000 years? Or 4000 years, in the case of the northern states? The only way to do that is through extreme casteism.

Why did the South have these anti-caste movements like Lingayatism, etc.? Because for whatever reason (mostly geography and distance) Brahmins weren't able to socially and culturally dominate these places, which is why these places still speak Dravidian languages (or in the case of Maharashtra, have much less Steppe-related markers)

It's not racist or nazi to point this out. That's like saying it's racist to point out that the richest Mexicans are Spanish immigrants.

The commies of India don't hate brahmins or southern/Northern people , we hate the inherent caste structure based on land ownership and economic inequality

And wouldn't it make sense that said inequality is going to be worse wherever brahiminization was the highest?

grape wine sucks

there's more complexity in Shaoxing cooking wine than grape wine

also the best beer I've ever had was some artisanal non-alcoholic one, I've been trying to find it for 10 years but never succeeded

something so salty it's called maldon

this dimension isn't real

this is why I stopped swearing

That's irrelevant. Being influenced by Sanskrit is no more noteworthy than China being influenced by English.

Southern Brahmins are not Southern people who were influenced by Sanskrit. They are Northern people who live in the South.

Southern Brahmins have elevated Steppe ancestry and R1a fractions, just like Northern Brahmins.

To the casual observer this just sounds like "calipers" but the real significance is that these people, regardless of when they got here, have against all numerical odds, managed to keep themselves "genetically pure" for a very long time, and such an act can only be achieved via active caste-based discrimination. If they began arriving at 200 BC like you say, rather than later, that just makes it worse--imagine keeping yourself ethnically separate from the 95% of the population around you for over 2000 years lmao.

These brahmins drove the sanskritization. This sanskritizing/brahminizing influence was more complete in Maharashtra and Odisha, and was totally complete in the Gangetic Plain.

Speaking a Dravidian language with Sanskrit influence is very different from being completely culturally captive to a Brahmin elite and all their whims--which is likely where the dysfunction of the Gangetic region comes from.

Brahmins originally come from the north

I said "from" not "in". And I meant as an original sense, brahmins originally come from the north

I can see Craig of the Creek being changing for little kids

well yeah brahmins in general are from the north

the floor is lava, and coronavirus can't touch it

was the USSR very low on car infrastructure? I honestly don't know so I'm asking (I know they had great train stations too)

Sure, but just anecdotally speaking, every Indian I've talked to online (so a few dozen) who had takes like the OP tweet ended up being northern. Very often Gangetic, Nepali Bahuns, some Assamese, a few from Uttar Pradesh, a few Bengalis. Not as many Punjabis as you'd think given their obvious ancestry differences.

a decent number of them have a weird combination of reactionary punching down + sucking up to white nationalists + defeatism

All of these people were english-fluent enough that I could understand them perfectly, so I'd imagine direct material conditions are not the problem, and that it has more to do with the previous history of the gangetic region and the cultural quirks that materialized from it

get dat bread

This is a Gangetic problem, not an Indian problem

South India and Maharashtra have far less fundamentalism (I'm not trying to be chauvinist here, I've heard this from multiple non-desis who only learned what these provinces were after visiting India)

There's a strange type of "exclusively punch down + religious fundamentalism" brainworm complex that peaks in Northern India, including Bengal. It resembles the right-wing rhetoric that I see from certain Latinos

not Hindi but in Dravidian languages it'll sound loosely like

"Jeevna Jaga"

This comment is getting dangerously close to some anti-Latino rhetoric!