Skip navigation

Category Archives: aryan invasion theory

Tamils and South indians are jealous of North Indians. Because North Indians are very good looking. Infact the better section ofNorth indians and Pakistanis are the hottest specimens in the world, maybe a bit of competitons from some arabs,iranians. The simple minded frigid white lepers with Ape skin( if u shave an ape it has white skin) may have the meat and primitive aggressiveness but not the physical and intellectual sensuality and flavour.   look at some samples and think about it Amisha-Patel-Hot-Photo-Gallery-6  The reason why south indians are not very attractive is there in thisw blog   The gist of it…heat fucks the skin,muscles,collagen and bones and reduces physical neoteny, and consequently intellectual neoteny required for the Attractiveness/ hotness   So we are just unlucky and I have made a case as to how being more Intelligent can make one to be intellectually more stimulating and we are intellgent and sensual as well so there is hope, if we migrate to cooler regions, consume well n have a good lifestyle or consume enouh collagen pills.   But for now, should we worry too much about how unlucky we are? and feel jealous and have a complex in front of others? Well yes anyone would worry about it, but I wanna tell you 2 points that should make you happy about who you are

1) South Indians are more Intelligent and Intelligence is a higher trait for living things than attraction This explains why Intelligence is a bigger thing to be proud of and this tells you why south Indians are more Intelligent

2) South Indians have had a better life that anyone else so far. Watch this video In brief, it is all about how well a group of people(or a group of genes) have expanded in numbers , consumed resources and Lived well in comparison with another group, since the time they seperated from their common ancestors. So we are better than africans or chinkies as they are below us in the darwinian scale. They also did not enjoy as good a life/success compared to caucasians. Cos its like this, A group of africans came out of africa(from 1000 original africans may be 10 to 20), and went to occupy asia,australia, andaman etc. Some Indian adivasi tribes are part of this group.   The second group came out of africa and went up north to europe through central asia/anatolia/phoenician route and became the cro-magnons, the first caucasians. The cro-magnon theory which states that Caucasians features might have originated/come from europe(sometime during 45000 bc – you have cave paintings in france or something.  Even going by this theory, a small number of these cro-magnon/caucasians came down to central asia and were successful in getting to 2 billion. So lets assume there were around 100 cro-magon caucasians in europe. Out of which 5 to 10 came down to central and south Asia(us) ,,,, or they came to levant first – developed neolithic revoultion in 10500 BC, and a few from levant moved to iran at 8000 BC and a few from iran moved to Indus valley in 7000 BC . The 90 % in europe had to keep fightig amongst themsleves and were able to expand only to 1 billion in strength(that too only recently, for a loong time europe was having a very low population). But the 5 to 10 people travelled to south  asia became very successful in having access to resource , expanding to a high number and having a good quality of life for thousands of years. We are actually more than 20 times successful than europeans coz we are atleast more than 20 times more succesful to iranians and the number is still higher compared to middle easterners and a lot more compared to europeans. Now there is a a lot of uncertainity with exact origins but carleton coon says Caucasoid features Highly Likely originated in Europe. Cuz, Homo sapiens had co-existed with neanderthals back from 45000 bc in both Europe and West asia. However, the kebaran culture in levant had a dis-contibuity with the previous antelian culture in west asia indicating the new arrivals in the region from europe at 20,000 bc. These people were the ancestors of the neolithic/caucasoid populations of levant/west asia starting from 10000 bc Haplogroup   Though the haplogroups cannot be 100 % about population continuity – it gives an idea, and this points to a few population fro europe be it R1a or L or H entering india from europe( haplogroups are not 100% coz 1)mutation rates and genetic drift are as significant factors as ancestry when determining the haplogroup percentages and 2) The direction of migration cannot be established for sure with percentages). Another indication of this is how varied/diverse europeans are in terms of hair,eye,skin colors,facial colors,language families and tribal origins wise. And even if caucasoid origins seems to be not in europe but in west asia, the fact of the matter is  europeans are a mixture of 3 distinct group 1) cro-magnons ( who constitute a very significant part esp with the leperish pink skinned ones ) 2) neolithic farmers – the greeksn phoenician type and 3 )Indo-europeans who entered through russia. If a single group had expanded into 900 million – thats success, but 3 groups had battled out to get to 900. So in essence the cro-magnon part is like the aboriginal part which lost territory to new invading groups.  Imagine a population of 1000 which splits into 2 groups A-900 and B-100.Now B migrates to another newer region with more resources and less competition and Expands into 1000. Now This group B splits into B1-900 and B2-100 Imagine B2 seperates and expands into 1000 and consequently 10 times more successful than B1. But if B2 mixes with A, the now available groups are B1 – 900 and B2A – 1900. So from initial population of 1000, 90 became 900( 10 times) in B1 and remaining 910 became 1900( only 2 times). So aboriginal groups are very less successful and the group that mixed with the aboriginal group is the least successful. This is why people try portraying Indians as  aboriginal mixed. But we are not. As far as the europeans are concerned they are mixed with cro-magnon part being the aboriginal part like africans, australian aboriginees or native americans who lost territory to invading groups.Either way the caucasian population that Entered India from Iran was very successful in expanding So from iran, the last ones to enter into India through the passes n hills were the Indians who form all of todays population with the exception of mogoloid tribals who form less than 10% of population and who are still distinct ).The minute you mix with an aboriginal/less successful group you become a less successful person like the group B2A. These latest Indian cuacasians were living in Ganges/indus valleys and living well. So from may be a thousand north indians may be 5(or even less)  came down to south India and the cauvery valley civilisation started and from this 5 we expanded into the huge population we have in south india today. It is said that the Sage Agasthiyar brought down a small group of people from north, cleared the forests for agriculture, replaced adivaiss, creatd The languages and Arts(such as kalari etc). So this group consisted of vellalar chieftans, brahmins such as agasthiyar too. So all of south indinas, be it thevar,goundar, moovendar bunts, nairs, etc all came from these chieftans and they expanded to different places spoke different south indians languages assumed different titles…But the common ancestry is there from the cauvery basin civilisation. But both Tamil and Pali have the same vowels and consonants and the person who perfected the tamil grammer was a brahmin. Tamil may have exited longer than tholkappiyam, kumai kandam etc for much longer like 1000 years even before agastiyar, but the thing is we are very mcuh closely related to north indians and were part of the same group for a long time before we branched out.Its like Indians brnched out from europeans some 35000 years back and the relative seperation between north and south Indans is samll. Besides the velir/vellalar and may be brahmin population share more recent ancestry with the north indians. But some brahmins like to associate them selves with north indians and call them as aryans. For them who consider themselves later arrivals, i tell you – the later arrival into south india are not as successful as the first ones to enter here. Coz the first ones that entered here will ahve faced less competition and expanded in number easily. And I say because south Indinas are the most recent migrators, they are atleast 5 times more successful than collective north indians from whom they seperated -by applying the logic that i have been applying throughout right from europe. So if brahmins and others claim that they are recent migrants to south, it means they are less successful than other south indians.

Lets say there were originally 100x northies, out of which 5x seperated and became south indians. Now south indians increase in number to 100x and north indians expand to 400x. AT this point SI are 5 times more successful than NI. If brahmins are a second wave of migration from North and they consitute only around 3x now, only 0.6 x should have migrated to equal the 5 times more success of original south indians. So it means only 0.6/4 = 0.15 % started off from north the second time – which means we are giving them a lineancy for them of over 30 times by saying that 5% started of the first time. But this is not the case so the original South indians are certainly more successful

But lets get back to South Indinas vs Europeans – the first caucasians

The most important facts to consider are the Timeline of neolithic revolutions happening. According to the Paleolithic continuity theory, the european caucasians are a continuity of the Cro-magnon/modern human mix that happened in Europe who left cave painting dating back to some 35000/42000 bc. After the ice -age, a few-lets say 25% of these european ones with the caucasoid features came down and formed neolithic revolution in north of arab(Levant). You can see that some arabians still look like sudanese africans with sharp features and white skin – from the shape of their eyes and the ridges on their face. And these guys were more successful than the hunter gatherers that stayed back in europe in terms of having good quality of life and expanding in numbers. The start of neloithic revolution in levant is at 10500 bc. From some of these levant, some 10 % migrated east into iran and started the neolithic practices there in 8000 bc. So these 10 % who migrated and explored new land were more succesful in having acces to new resource and expanding compared to the ones who stagnated in levant. And from the ones in iran a 10% migrated eastwards into the most resourceful India ( had a historic world’s share of GDP between 35-40 % for thousands and thousands of years, which reduced to 30% in 1000 Ad and reduced to 1% in 1940s). I’d assume not more than 5-10% would migrate away from well settled neolithic colonies in  search of uncertainity. And this 10% now has expanded into the 2 billion plus in indo-pakistan,banglades, srilanka,maldives and a bunch of other places. So Indians have been a lot more succesful than iranians. And the first signs of neolithic practices in India starts in 7000 BC. Again from north india, a handful of them came down to south india and formed neolithic civilisation in the south (about 2000 BC in Tamil nadu/cauvery area). Look up all those facts about neolithic dates if you want. So Southies are the lastest and the more succesful ones. We southies have also spread bak to north india via the rashtrakuta dynasty and Chola conquest of bengal, and we also went and got mixed in many places in SE asia – cambodi,other srivijaya empires etc. Compared to this, the europeans have had a cold, war-prone and frugal existence so far. Just a bonus video here So south Indians  have common ancestors and  genetic success wise – from our immediate ancestors to our really long back ancestors have always had it good and successful in expanding their genes. Comparing south Indians vs north indians – south Indians have becoam more successful in expanding. And Indians compared to iran, or rest of the world were also very successful in expanding. Only in the last 500-600 years we have the Turcic-Mongoloid Islamic invaders such as Mughals, sultanate,Lodis, etc contributing a small percent to our gene pool   SO its okay if north indians come down to our cities and become more richer businessmen and make us feel jealouss with their looks. Maybe from now on south indians will reduce in poupulation but still our offsprings irrespective of how they get mixed up in the future, we can right now say that the population has entered south india(baring the adivasis) have had the best success in expansion/existence so far despite the possibility of us reducing in number slighly in the future.  Even the whites in americas and australia who came from the few in europe..are not made of genes of a single succesful group but a mixture of sevral groups who were ones losers. We can take pride that we have existed so well so far, our genes have come from a small and succesful group who came down south from north india – so maybe we do not have the diversity leading to not so great looks, but we are what we are now and we have to be really happy of the success of this group. We can be happy about it, not be jealous of others hence and just try to be the best we can…Dont be anxious, even if you are having to stare and feel jealous about good looking people from other places. Just be proud, confident and happy about who you are and have a good life. Do read some of the other blogs here to find out more about our interesting accomplishments and the impact we have had. Since we are better specimen with potential to develop good looks if we live in a cooler place with healthy lifestyle, we should act like we are the superior ones when we are in the midst of others. We currently act like we are below others, but this perception should change and realise why truely we are the superior ones. And we must also change out behavior – we shouldnt be simple,humble, mature,down to earth and nice.

The takeaway for tamils/south indians should be …wherever you go, constantly believe that you have been the most successful group, and that you are the most intelligent group or that you as an individual are more intelligent and therefore more superior. But have this confidence/pride arrogance at the back of you head and with this you can give the subtle – holier than thou look to anyone you meet and look through their phony act. But dont be a snob. In order to have a nicer/neotenous face one must be playful and forth coming. When you walk into clubs or nicer establishments, the thing that matters the most initally is looks. And realise that more intelligent people can be more engaging and attractive ( if you are not disadvantaged with your physical features). So you gotta maintain an attitude – thats a combination of a belief in your superiority at the same time being fun.


some bonus videos. These are very important points the ones you must re-read again and again to absolutely comprehend everything, then the way you see things will drastically change.



Religion was very much needed in earlier / primitive times. You know when people cudnt make sense of most things, and the tendency for idiocy to be believed by the masses wudve been even more back then. Many people cudnt really see the benefits behind altruism or dovish behaviour. Even as recently as the Great roman empire( the most civilised part of europe in the begining of AD) the average life time of men was only 28..people just fought ,raped and killed each other as they pleased. Also some of the philosophies and scientific practices which helped people with their health and well being all got embedded within the umbrella of religion. People also had plenty of time in their hands,  and just like how its good for the mass of today to see a Rajinikanth movie than have a devils workshop in their minds, religion also kept them occupied.Someone said that people dont really need freedom, but want to be told what to do by a good leader. Having to exercise their thought and discretion without any norms on manu issues  kinda causes an extended anxiety. This would be even more true back then. So Religion was definitely good in earlier times.

Even now science hasnt explained how existence came into existence, but neither does religion, coz who created god? u know…but everything else can be given a scientific explanation. Maybe the really intelligent ones in ancient times just personified concepts to explain it to the masses..i dont know. Like theres always double triple meaning in ancient siddhar poems and rituals right…you know when these siddhas wrote poems praising god, and talked about offering him milk,leaves and beetle nut..the milk actually represented ones pure heart(I mean when u mix water with milk, the milk does not rat out/betray the water in it..that kind of a no vengence, no betrayal heart), and the beelte nut and the vetrilai leaf also represented other things. The elephant shape of Ganesh is a symbol of the complex orientation of a particular force which they call as ganesh…that sorta symbolism were used in these rituals and spiritual works.

Maybe I should develop the Ether theory from explanation given by the guy below…im just kidding

So all that was sorta cool, but now , we should just insist people to be nice and abolish these rituals and religion which these people dont really understand the purpose behind. So today religion is not actually needed that much..only heavy investment in law enforcement is, to prevent people from being bad.


I hate all religions but I hate foreign religion even more.  This has got something to do with what I call-  ‘preserving oneself also means preserving ones creation/formulation’. If you are einstein you wud want STR to be popular and if ur Tesla u want Ether theory to be popular(i know he didnt propose ether, but he advocated and actively contributed to this theory). Its like if European and indians comapre themsleves or if Arabs and Indians compare themselves, The arabs are gonna say..the principles of Islam, formulated by an arab has the superior logic,righteousness, philosophy or watever and so The Arabs are better than Indians going by the adoption/success of islam even amongst India(though there mite be other reasons for succes, they will claim this from an overall standpoint). Similarly the christians will claim their intellectual superiority by claiming the bible to be right and the Hindu scriptures to be wrong/inferior….even though they did not create it, they will claim major responsibility for its propogation and hence they will fell good about themselves for controlling and contributing to its propogation in a major way, I mean this will be the case even if whole of europe turn atheists and still see the spread of christianity around other parts of the world as being thanks to them .  If I try to break it down a bit further, it will be just like rewriting my earlier blogs, so the point to be noted is that Religious supremacy is a proxy for racial superiority of the group associated with the religion.

This being the case Why would indian chistians and Muslims die defending something that elevated some other race/nationality in comparison to themselves(their ancestors being hindus)? The reasons will follow, but a lil something about the ancestry of muslims. Most would agree that even urudu speaking muslims only have majorly Indian genes. Kamal hassan once said ‘ why are we calling it a muslim Invasion and a british rule as the muslims mixed with the locals and governed India, while british plundered and took away all the wealth and didnt really mix with us’. People after this got excited and started praising him for being such a neutral tolerant person…this happened way before the vishwaroopam thing. But they failed to read between the lines which is ‘muslims mixed with the locals’. If you take his exact wording s it implied that all muslims are 50% Indian to begin with as the Mughals(who were chink/mongol invaders) did not bring their women, but married the locals here. And they further kept marrying into Indians and diluting their genetic percentage generations down the line. Plus they also converted a lot of Indians to Islam and mixed with 100% Indian gene Muslim..further diluting the Mongoloid genes in the muslim population. This is what many muslim intellectuals are trying to find an alternate to. I mean many muslims, especially in pakistan claim they have J2 haplogroup(renowned anthropologists rubbish this sorta haplogroup theories for cultural/ethnic continuity) and somehow the Lodis and ghoris gave them arab genes. Brothers who try to find seperate identity and difference amongst them ,tend to have the worst fights. Be it India vs pakistan or The 4 nations came from yugoslavia or the austro-hungarian seperation..etc The pakistanis are desperately trying to be arabs, and the arabs are taking advantage of them in a big way.

Similarly in the North Vs south divide has its roots in the Southies trying to find different identity viz a viz the Aryan-dravidian theory. This one is a courtesy of  the christian missionary and the guy call bishop mother fucking caldwell.

As part of the divide n rule thing..they formulated this and south indians according to this were a inferior primitve people who didnt have much culture/science or knowledge until the invading aryan gave vedas ,hindusim and all sorts of classical arts, medicine etc to them and ruled over them.  I mean the rest of the world hears this version where the Aryans were superior, but in south india..the dravidian nationlaists claim that aryans were barbarians and that south indians were the nice people. People readily accepted this theory becoz…the Britsh were the ruling class and it favoured to be associated with them. So the first people to accept this was the Tambrahmins and north indians(esp higher caste coz they say rest of northies are a mix of aryan and dravidian- half inferior) . So if you are a fair skinned caste you can associate urself with the ruling british and feel good about urself. This was also accepted a lot in bengal where the Half-mongoloids also readily accepted the half-aryan tag which was above the so called dravidians. Seeing the brahmins kiss upto the britsh , getting favoured and cocky, caused resntment amongst the rest and they started to say fuck brahmins. And again the british favoured people of the nationalistic movement who became hindu bashers and who were ready to favour cxtianity.  And now southies are having to live with an eternal inferiority complex that we are of a different/inferior stock who didt create much earlier and who were subjugated. And we still say this in our movies like vicky donor – punjabi punjabi, you belong to a pure aryan/greek race and so your stock and sperm are a superior one in India. No wonder the punjus are so confident/outgoing/aggressive in real life and the confidence level plummets as we move down south.


While some have this inferiority complex, cognitive dissonance has kicked in for many and they start claiming things like Dravidians are the superior ones, black is beautiful, saggy and mature features are more good looking than neotenous ones, etc. This cognitive dissonance is not just seperate dravidian identity but also behind religious radicalisation .

So back to the question of why cxtians and muslims are patronising and conceding the arab or white superiority. I mean Indians feel good about how we gave Buddhism, martial arts(bodhidharman) to the chinks and we feel that what we created is flourishing over there rite?

If you ask a muslim or a christian as to why their ancestors converted, what answer do you think they will give u?

a) They converted to escape persecution – also implying they were scared and a lil cowardly?

b) to avoid jizya or keep getting favours from the ruling class – meaning they were the ass-kissers who had little pride in themselves and willing to do anything to get to the top cunningly?

c) concede that they were backward varnas in the hindu set up..not attributing the backwardness of their varna to change in technology where their professions were not profitable anymore, but blaming it only on the religion?

Or will they just say that Hindus religion is backward and stupid and it had caste problems and islam or christianity is actually saying a lot of scientific , better things like..if someone slaps you – you show other cheek or something like that? Most efforts of religious heads today are in putting down the other religion.

This is one of the reasons why despite conceding a foreign superiority, muslims and christians patronise these religions to avoid any shame for themselves while dealing amongst indians — and which is the only thing that happens for most of them ( dealing with indians as opposed to foreigners)

other reason for their adherences would be like or from the motivation and reward given by forces aimed at Breaking India like the Joshu project or the afro-dalit movement or the mujahadeen etc. in some occassions it is also the case of emulating and trying to associate with the Successful, to get a positive perception. The same way people think it makes you higher in status to talk in english with a westernish accent, they think the name David is more high in class than dinakar or wearing a suit at your wedding is better than wearning a dhoti. Also, christians feel like they have more of a right/excuse to talk in english and act in a western way. A name like feroz also has more of a aggressive,playboy connotation to it as the muslims have been a dominating, ruling class for most of the recent millennium.

I hope that we can somehow communicate to the abrahams that the rest of india is not going to be judgemental about them choosing the foreign religion , and also the need to abolish all religions within india. Ridding religion will save a lot of time,resources and friction.

I mean I am a tamil guy and i can say that Tamils love their language more than how muslims love their religion or how europeans love their ‘race ‘(which is a fallacy because they are a fusion of so many different groups historically-refer other logs).  But if you read my other blogs related to cultural/linguistic imperialism…I mean they are quite lengthy blogs/vlogs..and in them I have made a case as to why we should accept the change – I have made the case because I have come to believe(It may also because ive realise that we were tuluva vellalars meaning we were originally tulu speakers who came down and settled in arcot sometime ago) that Your language is a very very minor part of who you are/your identity and what makes you you. I think religion is even less minor than your linguistic identity..after all every religion says be nice to your fellow with few variations which dont really affect the majority(please do not associate the caste/class system into religion to side track argument). Religion is even lower on the identity scale compared to ones upbringing/background/region as they shape you a lot more intellectually. The biggest part of your identity are your genes and lineage, and ancestry.when you have a child…it is purely your creation. The child might be affected intellectually by what it learns, but physically the organism is of your creation and in most cases nurturing.Like I said, i have established the why so in other lengthy blogs. So you can afford to be a bit loose with religion. i mean if your son of daughter marries someone of another/no faith i think you still havent lost much at all. Or if someone insults your religion or its history, just let go…do not take personal offence to it as it is not a big part of who you are. When some one insults islam, that someone is insulting the arabs who created it more than you or when they insult christianity they are insulting the europeans who believed and spread it, or when they insult hinduism – well they are insulting the Indian idiots of the past who created those illogical things and to a very very  mild extent the followers of it. Hopefully everyone can become atheists and scientific one day. Arguing with other groups over religion is as petty as the coconuts here in India quarrelling over ManU vs Arsenal…They think it makes them cool, but its very petty and does not form a big impact/part of their actual life at all. However the original people are able to generate revenue/popularity for themselves becoz of the patronisation by us here. So please dont care too much about ur religion and try to let go if possible. If you want just pray to god

The above points are with regards to radicalised religious people – and people who take sides. If you are a typical person who believes in god, i guess them you should be able to accept all the concepts of god and not discriminate from which religious text it is from, however still going to whichever place of worship you feel comfortable with. And with you the innocent secular believer, i can have a seperate argument about the concept of god.

I mean Im not just against patronising the foreign religion. I have also blogged about the need to safeguard ones own language, despite having to learn english.  I am totally against rock  music and many other western components which i think are absurd. I believe that many west aping coconuts do these things coz they believe acting like them would somehow make them better and get a higher status (like the great gatsby), and not because they genuinely appreciate it. I say this coz I was also a coconut for a long time and I tried to get into rock to make myself cool.

I mean rock fans think that the above way of acting is so cool.I think its stupid and I also understand your need to freak out with someting defying logic/surreal and just have fun. I can give you a number of there examples like judas priest or white snake or def lepard or anything..If you translate that into your own language u’ll know what im talking about – especially those sitcoms like friends or how i met ur mother which the coconuts here adore. Hope someone dubs them in hindi and tamil to makes these people realise. And coincidentally the people who consume these rock shit more are those groups whove kissed upto the british and try to find a more westernised identity to them like the badraloks or the syrian christians..and now many of the upper class urban crowds across the country as well. I mean Im not against every form of western art. I prefer rap to tamil movie songs anyday.  But if I feel like Indians are trying to consume some shit coz they have other reasons to patrnoise it, I will try to bring those things down. None of these western guys cared about India in their peak. but when just the one member of Pink floyd came down to India when he was like 60 or 70 or something, there was such a euphoria about it and it was so disgusting. Not just roger waters, Maradona came to india when no one anywhere else cared about him and most of calcutta didnt go to work but were on the streets to see him and paid him. This level of ass-kissing undermines us all and disgusts most of the others.

But In this day of Globalisation, I see the ass-kissers and foreign patronisers as useful idiots in immigration to other countries and the success of Indian genes worldwide. I just wanna see more instances of Indians who act like they are too cool for the westerners(which I believe truely that weare better than them -intelligence of hotness wise)to counter the ass-kissing and make the foreigners  realise that only idiots amongst indians are ass-kissers and the truly classy people are too good for them. what i want is to see a number of clubs or shops across india where indians can truely feel like they are better than the rest of the world and can show attitude to foreigners and basically make them jealous you know.

I read somewhere that the majority of the suicide attacks so far were carried out by the Tamil Tigers

The purpose of our existence doesnt just stop with our lives alone…but also the people related to us. For example, how does one explain their affinity for their siblings(not just humans but even animals)? Mostly, we have to share things with them right? like the wealth, time & affection of our parents. I would also imagine that you would want to kill another man who’d share the affection of your wife. The reason we are okay with siblings sharing our resources is a way they are us, i mean the purpose of their existence is the same as that of ours.

Its because they, just like you, are an effort of your parents(also extends to ancestors) preserve,survive,pass on their genes,ideas,intellect(and all the things that define them) . refer to other blogs of mine for a more detailed explanation of the purpose of our life etc. Just like siblings, you extend the existential connection with relatives, members of your community,city,state,nation, ethinicity, people with similar idealogy(if you consider your idealogy is an important part of what you are) etc etc..In an order of priority. This is why we take pride in not just our own accomplishments, but also the accomplishments of our community or our country men.

People like Rajiv mahotra, Gurumurthy, Subramanium swamy..thats why are hell bent on bringing out the fact that All Indians(even pakistanis,bangladeshis) have common ancestors among the indus valley..with only very minor influx of mongol(mughal) genes mixed up with a millions of indigenous Indian genes. If we share a lot of common ancestry/genetics..thats a greater cause for bonding more than any phenotypical variations or language or attitude.( i have dealt with the reasons in my other blogs as well).
So if some one were to say,for example the invading britsh/europeans, that a Billion and a half Desis are not just a certain group of people from indus valley but a mix of various people that have invaded them repeatedly over the years. This undermines the fitness//superiority(physical and intellectual)..(and btw im gonna use politically incorrect words like superior, bastards etc) of the original inhabitants . The british say that non-brahmin souh indians are pure dravidians, whereas the north indians and pakistanis are a mix of dravidian and aryan. This first of all imples that the dravidians are a group that has lost territory to,adopted the culture/ideas of the Aryan europeans. So indigenous indians are inferior to eurpeans, and even the half-aryan,half-dravidian north indians are inferior to british as the europeans are full aryan.

everyone came out of africa..that doesnt mean africans are the most superior people. When 2 groups evaluate themselves against each other, they evaluate from the time they seperated as two groups(despite having common ancestors- and one of the group still following the same culture and residing in the same area as their common ancestors)

Now although biologically speaking a mix of genes and interbreeding is gonna give out a healthy species, to call a group of people mixed/bastards undermines their existence from a historical stand point – from the explanation given above.So dont misunderstand these politically correct perversions that say having kids is selfish and that one should get mixed up( this depends on the situation). Btw they were all designed for the whites by the desis shouldnt buy into that. be more discerning than to blindly accept what hollywood tells you.
Comapring yourself against others have 2 opponents to it

1) Who has had a better existence so far

2) who is inherently more better than the other – in terms of having better attributes and likely to have a better existence in the future

For example one can argue that the samoans or even the Jarwa has had a better existence so far comapred to europeans as europe was war prone throughout history and has had tougher living conditions.The europeans are more of a mixed up, bastards than anyone else. For eg..they have 3 different groups to begin with, that cme under the category white 1) indo-aryans,2)finno-Urgic, 3) Turkish/mongol. Even amongst the Ind-aryans..there are different groups like slavic,nordic,germanic,goths,visu-goths,angles,saxons,celtic etc. These groups are do not necessarily have a cultural continuity, but these are supposed aryan tribes that came into europe through different routes at different times and who were constantly warring . For eg, the minoans and myceaneans are both indo-aryan tribes of greece. but there is no coontinuity, the mycaeneans came and replaced the minnoans . In other words,if we compare the first of europeans with the contemporary indians/south asians, the south-asians were more successful in spreading out their genes,having access t resources,increasing in number, and living a relatively peaceful,less war prone or competitive existence than the  first of europeans – whose gene pool have been diluted in their own lands by other tribes entering their land and fighting with them.

But when everyone comes to gether, the modernised,intelligent or stronger group would easily win in any competition to the primitive counterparts. so the europeans may beat and replace jarwa if they had access to their land. With respect too indian, it depends on who is inherently better today and also who occupies a better position. This is why its important to improve our nation and ourselves, and expand globally to prove that we have a lot of inherent potnetial..such as Intelligence and good physical attributes ourselves..required to be considered a fitter ethnic group.

So as far as theories go, theories like the aryan invasion, undermines us and will disappoint us. but theories that say that a group of people that came from wherever, were able to have acces to a lot of resources and grow into a large/strong community and lived peacefully and well will be very re-assuring and will make us really proud of what we are. So its not even like we need to have the origin of caucasian features within india, its okay even if the caucasians were a group of people who came from outside, but the few who came successfully expanded into what we are now and that we are not some bastards who kept losing invaders and ended up sharing resources and competing with them throughout our existence within our land. So if north indians like to hear that they are a mixed race, it means that they had a lot of competition between the different groups and that their existence was more confrontational compared to the homogenous population of elsewhere in the sub-continent, who havent been invaded by outsiders.

But claiming the origin of caucasian features in India also has its advantages. It implies that India is the place where intelligence,complexity of facial features and civilisation had developed. I was also inclined towards bengal being the place of origin of caucasian features and that they are the group transitioning between mongoloi and caucasoid features. If thats not the case with the mongoloid features of bengal, it would mean that they are a mix of different peoplw ho have colonised them over time, like the chola armies of the south, the local mongolid tribes of the east and some of the north indians

We sure like to hear that Indians are successfully expanding across the globe with good jobs and feats.

Similarly the news that europeans genes (are preferred and) are expanding within India will be music to the ears of the europeans. It is a kind of success for the europeans, just like how we feel happy about Indians successfully expanding in the US.Conversely, the expansion/preference of european genes within our land implies that the our own genes are inferior and kinda undermines our potential.
If ones own son/daughter go abroad and become successful, the parents and relatives can directly feel proud, But if orphans or IVF genes are adopted in a foreign land, only people who come to know about it can feel proud about it. SO the TOI could have done Indians good by not bringing out this news which has the above implications and upsetting us.

An effort must be made to constantly bring out happy stats about the success of Indians abroad, the greatness of our history etc. Because the whole point of going out and achieving is to feel good about it.

This is why i don not mind people watching mindless entertainment all the time as it gives them pleasure and its good to fell good rather than angry and miserable all the time. So one can keep thinking that their city is the best, the club scene in their city is the best, their movie industry is the best, but when they wake up to reality and get exposed/compare ourselves to the others, they shouldnt feel like they have fallen back too much.

New Draft (old draft contains the orginal post, new ones just my latest take on things)

  1. Skin color Reason :
  2. Flab,figure , skin texture , conservative ,mature and lack of a playful fun impression r all there, but i wanna explain what exactly is attractive with my impact theory.

Impact theory says that all purpose of all forms/forces trapped within those forms ( life or otherwise) is to make an impact. For Life forms, they derive pleasure out of things that are impactful – explains why a child likes to play with toys or we like to listen to music or why we find other races exotic or why we like to play around with pets. I mean at an ultimate level im a nihilist but from a biological perspective, we derive pleasure out of making an impact( not always proportionately but nevertheless).

einstein is an impactful person but his wife would only find little comfort in that. Coz We like to make an impact on an impactful person to maximise our impact and not waste our efforts on less impactful people. And Einstein is impactful for his physics intelligence and his wife has little to do with the impact he was creating. However, if you are the guy thats hitting sunny leone on a regular basis, sunny leone – who makes millons of guys waste spem, you are an impactful guy, right? In primitive times women find dominant males attractive, coz dominant males were simply more impactful. But like I said, the brain is not very efficient and it still mostly gets attracted to physical superiority than intellectual superiority. Coz its easy to extrapolate physical impact than intellectual impact. Plus attraction, pleasure love making, baby making are all related to physical health.

I mean, einsteins wife is there to have physical relations with him and some personal emotional stuff, she has little do do with the intellectual impact that he is creating. Attraction is only about physical impact, and only people who are cuter, can dance , can talk smooth , with whom one can extrapolate fun in mind come across as attractive.If you wanna be attractive , you gotta be impactful in the physical sense  and not in fighting sense but in physical/pleasurable sense. Im tired now so will post my video here

Now a bit about how to act in front of attractive people that u see. Like I said it all about making the right moves – moves that indicate your impact potential, within the area of fun/cool things pertaining to mating.When you are walking in a public places – deep down what everyone whats to do is to make an impact on the other somehow. There are several scenarios to this. Someone who wants nothing to do with ones below them will refrain from making any moves coz they simply want to avoid them. But someone who feel inferior to the other also refrains from making any moves coz they wanna save any pain from confrontation.In the former case, it would be like – Im big enough so that the other one is not able to make any impact one me, in the other case – you wanna come across like im big enough that im confidently making my move infront of the other, while the other isnt making any move. Even in the former scenario – by not making any moves/staying indifferent to the efforts of someon else, one is trying to send across a message that they are better than the other and thus make an impact on them. So what should you do? Obviously if u think they are attractive u gotta make positive moves, coz if u act otherwise – u r just kidding urself – people can sense you are acting like u r better without a proper reason and that u r truely not confident about urself. But in some cases u need to have an attitude too which is explained below. Even with someone who u think is marginaly attractive and that u r better than them, u still want to make an impact on them. So the fact that u r trying to make an impact on them doesnt mean that they r superior to you.  So, For the first 2 to 3 seconds u see an atractive girl/guy you just stare at their beauty, for the next 2 to 3 seconds you still stare thinking how better than u they r wrt beauty/fun stuff.  Right there  they have already made an impact on you, but you are yet to make an impact on them and at this point they are the ones superior to you hence. You generally cant do much about that, but recover after some 6 or 7 seconds and realise how impactful and superior you are in comparison to them or the guy/girl hitting them. ( if you are a nihiilist, your life is also better than theirs). And now after the 7 seconds, have an attitude in your face — which they might note — and which might  shake them up and leave them wondering how eaxctly does this person think they are better than them. If they see that attitude in your face ( attitude with a real reason and not just fake attitude without proper reason) they will be shaken n wondering and thats all the impact that you can hope to make. Somewhere in my blogs or vlogs ive mentioned why Intelligence is more impactful than looks- cos the most attractive guy can only bring about some 10000 kids at absoulte max with his charming ability. A person of intelligence can make or wipe out billions of lifes and influence billions of lives. So attitude with a real reason is important, and when u have this true confidence and attitude with a real reason, all you have to do is to have a demeanour that indicates you will be willing to make playful/fun move for the others — which they might sense and reciprocate leading to positive relations. Even people who know you are better than them will be genuinely nice( make fun,positive moves towards you). They simply accept u r better and just hope that they can impact you in some ways. Only problem is , they get let down by people who think they are better and sometimes they start to care about being superior to others. But mostly people just stare and walk past so you just have to indicate that you think you are better than them, not try to come across as friendly. Only in the case that you think that the other person respects you and thinks you are impactful and wants to connect with you, you change your demeanor to being friendly, till then “im holier than thou” attitude will do just fine while you are walking by and seeing people who think they are up there.

Now only 2 kinds of people have it easy and have the natural confidence 1) people with good looks and 2 ) people who are the elite/sophisticated- in india people who talk in english all the time and act not so much like a typical indian but an hybrid-westernish person.  1 st category instantly know that they are being looked at when they walk in a public place, 2nd category – They belong to a elite circle and can instantaneously classify the surrounding crowd as below them and hence they get that confidence instantly. These hybrid coconuts however feel inferior to foreigners when walking amongst them.

Now you will notice these types and stare at them for a while – you cant help that. many pretend to not notice them but still both parties know who feels they are superior and inferior. Now if you are someone that doesn not have looks or do not belong to an elite crowd, but still upon reflection you know you are a better/having more impactful person, this is how it has to be. For the first 4 or 5 seconds you simply stare at them admiring/noticing/analyzing their goods. But what you have to do is think about how you are the better/more impactful person and find true confidence and superiority about yourself – almost like you are ready for a confrontation with them with confidence.  However you cant just be mean all the time, you may also have to try and befriend them for either romantic or other kinds of association. So words that have to go through your mind is ” I M BETTER THAN YOU , BUT I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO PLAY/DEAL WITH YOU” With this attitude in your head you can also establish your supremacy but also open up your chances of impacting them positively/mutually. If you truely intelligent and have a better impact potential , you as a south indian also belong to the most successful group on earth and this have a good background – if you wanna know how, you gotta check out my other blogs n youtube channel videos.So there are plenty of reasons for you to feel superior to the coconuts or the ones blessed with hotness. But keep reading the older draft of this – where ive discussed some stuff in detail.
But only from one perspective ‘making an impact’ is the ultimate thing in life and your impact potential is what makes you better or worse than the other. But from the
perspective of a number of other schools of thought – say for example nihilism or buddhism, what matters most is happiness. ANd now there’s 3 things in contention –
Impact potential, pleasure potential and Happiness potential. Although from this perspective pleasure trumps impact, it doenst mean that one who has the most
pleasurable life is the most happiest. One can have a better happiness potential based on their philosophy or other virtues. So Eiher by impact potential or happiness
potential, intelligent ones can have the confidence that they are better than the charming ones who seem to have all the worldy pleasures happen for them.

So final takewaway is – u just have to have a proper reason to believe in your superiority n not fake it and whether u choose to have an attitude or try to be friendly depends on the situation. But its not that you always compare urself with people u see. When you see a noticeable person your mind either starts thinking whether they are better than you or not, or , thinks about whether you can be with them or atleast u are with a group of people like or better than them . This blog has thus far already dealt with how you go about comparing urself and feeling better. But sometimes, you feel like why cant you be with that person even though you may feel like u r better than them. If you feel that way , i think what one has to do is think about how your life is still better/happier than someone who gets to have them in their life. Better/Happier coz of ur happiness potential – owing to your better philosophy. The moment you see a person like that should instantaneously turn into a moment of reflection of how better ur life is,  or simply just enjoy admiring them knowing that ur life is better and feeling good at the end of it.  If you do this quick enough you come across as someone with potential.Even if you dont do it quick enough, end of it you should process everything and get feeling good – either coz of ur reflection of your betterness or coz of getting to see an attractive person and getting turned on for some moment. Bu the above is just so that you start feeling good, and you still have to make an impact when ur out in front of others – somehow its not enough if u just feel good abt yourself. So to make an impact, you have to get ur confidence as soon as possible and indicate the passers by that you think you are better than them, that will shake them up – which is ur impact on them. For this, whenever u go out in the public, you can be ready for it and carry an attitude all the time. You know what im saying – some people whenever they are in public – always walk around with an attitude. If you cant always walk around with an attitude, you should atleast be able to generate that attitude/confidence at the quickest. you should simply try to have an attitude most of the time ” thinking that im better than most people coz i have a better philosophy in life, and this philosophy beats looks,power,money,sophistication & other pleasures”. If you cant have that attitude all the time – just the ability to get the confidence quickly. As a strategy you can try to have an attitude when u walk past too many people in a mall or something where you dont have enough time. but in a place where you are with many people, you can stay relaxed and take your time to display your attitude and make an impact.In situations when you are generally relaxed suddenly come across attractive people where you dont even have enough time to make an impact( say for example you are going in a car and you see someone attractive walk past)- thats the tricky one – you dont get to make an impact as in most of the limited moments you have – you are just staring them processing their attractiveness. There is an urge for you to make an impact on them coz after you make an impact you are happier. But the whole point of trying to make an impact is just to be happy, so even if you dont make an impact ( by making them notice you) you can reflect about how you are better than them and feel happy about it. You can just do your best to make an impact there, but its hard to switch quickly – so just know that its okay that you didnt get to show ur attitude to them. It is the attractive and the elite ones that get to make the impact in those situations mostly.You can only try to get ur confidence asap and make them notice. Most of the time you wont even be in a position where they can notice you and so its hard for you to make an impact. But if they dont notice you, it means that they dont realise the impact theyve made on you and hence you dont have to feel like youve let someone else make an and impact on you without you being able to do the same on them – so its okay, you dont have to feel down about not being able to make an impact on them. Just know that if you get to confront them one on one you will be able to get the better ( assuming that you are confident about your impact & happiness potential). In the case that they do notice you noticing them, you have a chance to make them realise ur confidence – even if its only a fraction of a second. So be prepared for that fraction of a moment – if you see someone attractive walking past but you dont know if they will notice you or not, be prepared for it anyway and bring that attitude in ur face – for if they notice ur confidence, u would have made an impact on them.Actually the moment you stare – it doesnt indicate whether you feel confident or not – its the way you follow through after you notice/stare at them that tells whether you think you are better than them or not. Simply staring at others doesnt come across as you thinking they are better – your follow up demeanour does. So a short stare and a quick follow up with a better demeanour is the way. And after you have walked past you can think about what would happen if you interact with them and if you feel that you are superior to them you will be happy in your head.

Actually we still havent adequately explained how the sophisticated and good looking people feel confident all the time. They dont constantly asses every single moment their surroundings – it is done very subconsciously they get a feel /estimate the surrounding and carry with them their confidence most of the time. So when they carry the confidence around, even if they stare at you in some instances, it doesnt come across as someone beneath you is staring at you. Unfortunately if you are not good looking or a of a  sophisticated circle, you cannot get that feel constantly.  These people have the confidence all along the time they look at you, but you may need to generate it and takes time for you and so it doesnt come to you naturally if you are not that category. When i came back after living in australia for 4 years, i carried that confidence. I have confidence in some settings. Actually even if you are hot stuff yourself, if you havent seen as many good looking people before – you stare. You just have to have been in a cirlce/atmosphere where you see good looking people most of that time – in which case you dont stare too much at someone good looking and can quickly display a confidence. But if you are not from that background – you begin to stare more. So its just who you see/hang out/belong with most of the time that affects whether you stare at people for long or not and how qucikly you can bring your confidence. If your friends circle/background is average you will be staring at people for a longer time and cant bring up ur confidence quickly – even though you maybe of a higher impact or happiness potential. It all just depends on your background. So send ur kids to good schools. So think about it, you have definitely seen hot people but ones who u know instantly are below you status wise and so you look at them with confidence almost instantly. Only if you are not from a elite background you start ogling at someone attractive for sometime before you recover from your ogling and start to pose with confidence. This person just have to be at your status or maybe slightly higher than the crowd you generally hang out with for you to feel this way ( shaken at first, but able to recover later).People only have to be slightly better than the status of people who ur used to seeing everyday for you to feel that way – its not necessary that it makes you below them.You always walk around with a feeling -anticipating dealing with people of a certain status/range. If someone who is beyond that(either in pleasure potential or happiness/impact potential or with a higher status) shows up -which you were not anticipating…you have to change your mindset – the way you carry yourself and all that to deal with them. Thats requires sometime – you cant change much about it. Thats why its better if you belong to a elite background – you just feel confident in most times and scenarios and since your strategy/mindet is already wrt dealing with elite people in mind, you can instantaneously feel better than most people you see . This also gives people the impression that you are as good as the circle you belong to – but this is not true you can be of a much higher happiness potential than the family you are born into or the friend’s circle you get. South Indians/tamils in general are of low happiness/pleasure & impact potential generally and so you as a tamil will look at northies with awe on occasions when you see them. But like i said, watch my other blogs and realise that you are of better impact/happiness potential.  And when you realise that you are better than the attractive person in front of you – you just have to look at them with a confidence – “im better than you but id like to deal with you” confidence and look at them with comfort/a sense of superiority / without any insecurity – as if you were looking at a hot girl but from a naive background. In real life, you dont have time to think of all the reasons why you are better, so just know that you are of a better potential from the top of the head. Just start looking at them with a confidence. The only thing that you realize is that they are better than your cirlce, but quickly realise that they are not better than you.So just instantaneously look at them with confidence as if you would look at a person who is attractive but not as much an impact/coolness potential as you. White people carry this feeling all the time with other races .And there is an hierarchy among races. Indians feel this confidence over mongoloids and Negroids, but not so much with other caucasians. So dont even think, just look at people with confidence in most situations – you can work out later how you personally are better and that they might just be better/attractive than the people you regulary see.Its actually not even status or anything, we tend to notice people who are ultimately higher at happiness potential (not the fake happiness potential like most moral do gooders). We are evaluating happiness potential of people in our surroundings and the minute someone with a formidable potential comes, we need to adjust our strategy and so it takes time for that. If you are from a circle/background where people are of a higher happiness potential, your adjustment is limited as you are already walking around with an mindset/stratgey that fits into to those. If not, you have to raise your game and get your confidence as soon a possible and get that ” im better than you but i still wanna deal with you” demeanor indicating your confidence/happiness potential. And happiness potential roughly is a factor of  looks and sophistication after all. And when i say adjust your strategy – it doesnt mean falsely believing you have a better happiness potential – its just that these “attractive” people have a higher potential than the regular people in your life and so you have to change your demeanor accordingly. Either the people you see are below or above the average potential of your cirlce. For the ones adjudged below – there is no adjustment needed as, as per your natural instincts you dont really want anything from them. For the ones above your background( not you necessarily but your background), your natural instincts are to do something about it and want to do something with them. Thats why you feel like you should do something about them. But the fact that you wanna do something with them doesnt mean they are above you – it just means they have something to offer that can enhance your life experience than what you have currently- like the people in your circle / background. It may also be the case that you can offer or enrich their life way more that what they can offer you with your impact/pleasure/happiness potential, but still you’d be interested in them. So its okay and natural that for the ones above your feel/approach has to be different than the regular people. You need to bring up your confidence in those cases and display them in your demeanour, dont go feeling insecure. I mean you may become insecure if you dont have reasons to believe that you are of a higher potential . But the point here is, you dont have to wonder why you feel like acting differently with some people especially attractive/high potential people. I have, for the longest time wondered why people act differently with different people and that its bad to act that way. But now i guess the above points justfy the difference in our feeling wrt diff category of people. Regarding that “wanting to something about them” part – you just have to get ready to engage with you confidence ( true confidence which comes naturally with proper reasons)- the feeling which you can skip with normal people. Actually need to continue on here…Theres people “who you wanna do something with” but you know are below you. And theres people “who you wanna do something with” but you are not sure if they are too good for you meaning – they are of a higher potential than you.But if you are not sure if they are too good for you, it is only a reflection of the people who are in your circle/background mostly. You may be still be better than them individually coz of ur philosophy/coolness/happiness potential etc.The logic ive been telling before applies here, its mostly just about your background if you feel you may not be good enough for certain people. If you are philosophically sound, you are a cool person with a great happiness potential and so you be proud of yourself and feel better than most people you see.

So the kinds of people there are are

  1. people who you wanna have nothing to do with
  2. people who you wanna do something to with – but know you are better than them
  3. people who you wanna do something to with – but they are higher than the background/professional/friends circle you belong to but not better than you
  4. people who you wanna do something to with – they are better than your circle, and they maybe better than you if you dont have enough happiness potential. Hopefully you dont feel this way about anyone and you are truely cool/of a higher happiness potential than anyone else you come across in person, owing to your better philosophy.

Since from a nihilistic point of view, being happy is the ultimate aim of life ( & even from buddhist & bhagwath gita point of view) people who seem happiest/upbeat/confident in any place/environment r themost suprior people in that environment. Not fake happy but real happy about who they are and their impact potential or pleasure potential or their happiness potential.

Now to walk around feeling good all the time no matter how better looking /cool people you may come across in real life situations – Rate people. You obviously dont care about people who are not that great – you can give them a 0. 1 is marginally okay – you wudnt mind hangin out kinda people. You have to give yourself 5 if you are a nihilist south indian tamil like me who knows the things I do indicating the success of Tamils as a group as well as the knowledge of what its all about and what makes one better than others – like i mentioned its happiness potential which is followed and pleasure and impact potential which are derivatives of the happiness potential.  So when you see some really hot/ hip people you can instantaneously rate then and get quicker in rating them. Most people come in the range of 3 and you can the re-rate them when you thin more. But just rate them near 3 and you can feel better about yourself. Even if yu are walking around with 1’s as you partner/friends, you know you are a 5 while the others are only a 3 and so you can act accordingly with that in mind and you will naturallu come across as confident n noticeable.

Old Draft


All the only nobel laureates for science, born in India. The only indian considered to be a mathematical genius. And some Intellectuals and artists and captains of Industries and other achievements as well. They are pretty fair, not like the rest of us darkies from the south, Quite beautiful faces, rich and affluent, enjoy a good reputation and status(throughout history), can speak english well,quite sophisticated , understand and can synthesise the different aspects of modernity & global culture, etc , etc..well you know what im trying to say


But still I would not give a second look at them when i see them anywhere(actually i would, but just trying to make a point here)..not like i have lived only in TN/Chennai, and Im not a prejudiced member of the dravidian movement either. Infact im anti-dravidian and a BJP spporter(not that i know too much abt politics or anything).

Im not even talking about the novelty factor and the fact that I can look through them being a tamil/southie/chennaiite myself. I am trying to say why despite having such wonderful attributes , they, according  to me are not what i consider ‘The Elite’ amongst desis.

So what is eliteness, what are the attributes of the elite and why?. I mean Im sure we are all constantly working towards climbing the social ladder and trying to be the cool/hipster crowd( like the great Gatsby). -Though many might deny it or not have explicitly thought it out this way but,..generally speaking i believe this to be the case…

I say this about tambrahms coz relatively, they are not associated with fun as much as an average north indian.

I have dealt with this topic in much much details in my videos/vlogs and other blogs..but let me try to briefly.. here.
Living in a hot climate has given southies dry,damaged, stretched out, thick,skin, and saggy and non-flatter facial features.A loss of collagen, saggy muscles and improper physical frame because of the inhibition of vitamin D by melanin and lower synthesis of youth hormones such as oestrogen which shapes ones thinking/voice/body chemistry, loss of essential supply of nutrients to blood and organs via dehydration and sweating and hence not so great organs such as eyes( studies indicated northies have a better eyes than southies). Many such anti-neotenous factors influencing us for over 1000s of years because of living in this generally hotter geography and thereby contributing permanent changes to the molecular leisons..known as genetic change,as well as the physical features/lack of neoteny contributing to lack of intellectual neoteny and a more mature,dullish thinking compared to the north.
North india, has a good variation of hot and cold climate which is good for muscle/skin biology..making muscles firmer, faces flatter, good body chemistry and hence nice neotenous features…Physical neoteny enforcing intellectual neoteny..which has its influence on how they think and their culture and having this neotenous mindset of a 10 year old also making their faces cuter while the mature attitude and behaviour making the faces of southies..a bit mature and not playful or flirty or anything.

In other words.think Vidya Balan, think kareena kapoor. Who is the mature/Intelligent of the two? , who would you flirt with/like to have fun with? You can also think of some bengali bombshells if not compare against vidya or trisha or hemamalini or heroines like that.

Generally speaking, the whole perception of North indians is that they are more playful/neotenous and fun(think salman or akshay) and that of south indian is more mature and serious(think surya or even raj kiran if you may) ..even if i first like a person coz i thought they are NI but when I find they are SI, I lose interest…its the perception trigerring the other things in my brain..thats what happened with aishwariya rai a long time ago.

I  showed pictures of girls in bharathmatrimony and asked a punjabi friend of mine to tell if he would flirt with the girl or not (not if he thought she was beautiful or not). I mainly showed tamil, pinjiabi,hindi gujarati bengali , and overwhelmingly he would say yes to flirting with non-tamils and no to tamils(brahmins included). He is not at all a prejudiced guy and he doesnt also wouldnt know if he was looking at a tamil or hindi or punjabi girl from the ID’s

What makes one elite? or atleast on the top of the social ladder that we talked about.
If you size up a person and think that that person has more than you he/she is higher up the ladder right? and what do people envy most, is it money/wealth? knowledge? respect? deeper intellectual ability? sure all these things do matter. But the one that takes priority is the basic thing that makes you a fit for survival and propogation of you and related genes. Everyone can get good food, so whats a rarity is attractivenss/sexyness.. If you are attractive you will have a lot of positive moments in life. people with money,intelligence, status etc ..they all want to use those only to get attractive partner. Dont get politically correct on me and say there are other imp things in life blah blah..Im saying generally/biologically speaking this is th case..In real life there may be a lot of complexity in preferences, but biologically speaking food and mating are the fundamental instincts. And this is why being sexy/attractive/fun is more than other things.

I had already talked about(in other blogs) why being attractive is more important than being Intelligent and why experiences pertaining to sex are more important than experiences pertaining to intellectual and other kinda achievements.

No matter how wealthy you are, how deep your thoughts are, how knowledgeable and sophisticated you are , if you do not have beauty in your group you will feel like you are below another group. A Major part of an individual  confidence comes from ones background. And this is probably why people from being self-centred when they are young, realise the need to improve their community – thats certainly the case with me

people with beauty do have things in life a bit more easy than the others, and it feels like no matter how much effort the later puts in, the attractive ones seem to be getting higher up the ladder more easily. Thats why Bombay,delhi and even blore with many northies coming are whats considered the ‘Hipster’/cool cities and people from these cities do tend to look down upon someone from lets say chennai.

And northies, be honest. you are comfortable around southies because you know are better looking than them and you feel a sense of superiority(subconsciously and many pricks consciously). You are more confident around them and you try to be nice to them and on occassions even generously forefit the title of being more intelligent. But some cocky ones act the other way..aggressive,because they are northies they think they always have a more valid point,better perspective and that they are more sophisticated and making fun of southies for their accents(despite the northies have their own accent..that is a cool accent as they are the cool people) .

For eg. Why does this asshole in the Ad have a Disgusting look on his face while saying ‘kolaver di??’ @ 00.18

Ive see many react that way while talking about things related to south. They let out a disgusted ,degrading  tone/expression implying that things related to south are somehow lower and something to be ridiculed. But in the same plane , when they talk about Italian,,they always use a tone which signifies that they are talking about something glamorous, sexy and something which is on a higher level..not just in the above ad but many other occasions and in real life too.

The more some one is fair/good looking, closer/associated to europens..they sub-consciously think they have more of a right to act that way,like they think they have more of a right to talk in english,wear westrn clothes and tastes and more confidence that you are doing it better than your counterpart who is not so closely associated with the white/western traits. Its not just themselves….all people in general expect a fair skinned/person associated with beauty to act cute,be sophistictaed(or watever the good looking person does becomes the trend/sophistication) or be righteous and the minute a darky does things like talk in english with a cool accent..people go..thats weird/fake(inside their heads, they dont necessarily say it out). people always wanna be associated with positivity and thats the reason why people have adopted other religion/cultures historically..for eg.the christians somehow thought hey will become more like europeans and they also think its now their right to guiltlessly use English a lot , now that they are christians.  Well if you have Europeans or any other positive idols on one end that you are running towards….you gotta have someone on the other end that you are runnign away from – and that my frinds now are the conservative south indians. Its just evolutionary psychology to look and act favourable towards something with postive traits, and discriminate against perceived negative traits. If you dont do this, evolutionary process will weed you out. We are not associated with looks,wealth, western culture, fun, etc ..why would anyone want to be associated with us. Best case scenario all we have is your pity and mostly people are running away from us.  You are not for a single second jealous of us.


The Hypocrisy:

Even among a homogenous society…the ones at the top(looks, wealth etc wise) are  more confident, enthusiatic, raw, have a ‘do what one feels like’ nature, playful, show off ,childish,aggressive, and act in a self-centred way..and the others accept this kinda behaviour from the people on top. Whereas the people in the bottom strata are always so curbed in their emotions because of either their confidence level or because of how the society expects them to be.  they are not so aggressive, modest, and hence are not very forth coming and they come across as quite dull and mature as they only act in a way that is expected of them. So in a way this raw, aggressive behaviour is also associated with Eliteness and maturity is associated with low class. And thats why every form of south indian expression, art,mannerism  – because of the modesty/maturity inherent in them, tends to get associated with low classness and the way bollywood/hollywood heroines talk and act gets associated with fun and classyness – even though they are not necessarily intelligent or brainy in comparison.The reason why many people are irritated by southies is the fact that we pretend to have fun and have the best culture without any fun. Its like some one eating a simple curdrice and claiming to have the best/tastiest food to the others who are eating biriyanis and pizzas. This hypocritical nature is I suspect is another of the reason for the above google search result. This hypocrisy is also why many tamils within chennai itself are trying to talk only in english and dissociate with the rest of the crowd. Southies claim to be living well, but when amongst northies we  burn with jealousy almost 99.9 % of the time and secretly bitch about you a lot to other southies, but mainly just wanna hump you and somehow become like you.

you can check these out for more hardcore debates and comments on this


This defending of conservativeness  has its root in trying to preserve its native/historical ( Christianity has actually made the tamil/south indian culture even more convervative than what it was before) culture and not readily accepting the values of west and the cognitive dissonance that comes with trying to deal with its influence. Its good to have pride in our culture, but I think the conservative attitude only works well in closed societies and in this day of globalisation, we need to re-asses our outlook.


Roma Asrani Photos _9_

Thats what is missing from the southies. And so just because we have to be more fun , it doesnt mean that we become ultra-liberal and superficially flirty and playful. I guess things need to change step by step. A very good first step would be to not be afraid to show off having fun, or not hold back. Our texts like  kural etc  tell us not to be aggressive or show off / rub it in the face of others that you are having fun. But in this globalised life, everybody else is rubbing it in our faces. So we better become more forth-coming, and openly fun. It starts from the way we speak – the tone, the accent, the body language, what we say etc to a change in the mature/conservative attitude we have. Just because you are Tamil or indian, it doesnt mean you have to be humble or simple. You do not have to talk in english or be more westernised in taste to have an attitude. You can talk in tamil yet have that confidence, attitude or a fun ‘holier than though’ outlook . I mean a lot of things has to fall in place for that, like you should be proud of your intellectual/physical traits and ‘Tamilness’ and tamil culture/movies should be cool somehow(which is gonna take a long time with the dravidian conservative outlook)..but generally if youve been places , done things or know things or you know ur having fun,you can develop this confident attitude.

I mean look at the above picture.A typical conservative yet cheerful south indian girl rite? but she is kamalini mukerjee  and now imagine her in some modern attire with an out going persona..completey a different perception of her comes to mind. I think kamal has carefully selected here to give out these messages to us.The former a bengali and the later a punjabi – roma asrani. Reputation is the cornerstone of power and southies need a reputation of being flirty and fun and aggressive, which their maturity kills. Without this fun factor, there is no way we could come across as more sophisticated/hi-fi or give them the holier-than -thou or better-than-you attitude while we meet others and size each other up.










roma_asrani_blog_db1 (3)

Everything that life forms do(move, eat, reproduce), they do for survival.

For humans, we are not just trying to preserve our genes( which are prone to 1000 molecular leisons per second per cell)
but also other things that are ours like our language in which we think, the set of morals, traits and the system of life we have developed in other words culture.

When Globalisation Starts and people start mixing,, the competitive game of who has had a better existence stops ..and the ones who have had the better existence so far wins. SO dont worry about changes in you culture and life anymore….this is a new phase and we have won the previous one.

Success of a group ( genetic) = number of years of survival * average number of people beloging to that group * percentage of genetic make up of the specimen(1 for pure and .5, .25 and so on for mixed races) quality of life/resource accessible

Success of a trait ( language/culture/religion etc) = number of years of survival * average number of people having that trait * percentage of how much the trait contributes to the individual character * quality of life/resource accessible (+ a fraction of success of a child trait – for example if a new language came from your language)

Now us tamils/southies, have lived well for thousands of years with producing great minds and people, compared to the Northern Kingdoms which were constantly war prone because of confrontation from outside as well between each other.

But we are now having to deal with a lot of issues and questions in this day and age where the world is becoming a global village.

Living in a hot climate has only given us dark, dry, thick, sagging skin and muscle tissues which are not neotenous or attractive.

However, we are good thinkers, cultured, considerate, less aggressive and a Good group of people in general.
And for this reason, our Language, culture and attitude must survive and we must strive to propogate it.

Emigrating to other places and increasing our population is how you expand. Take the communist state examples of kerala and bengal.
the states are not developed but emphasises and preserves its culture better and its people emigrate and are becoming affluent and a stronger community in other places.

If our state develops, it attracts leeches like marwari’s who dominate the retail industry in our city shops , who instead of trying to integrate with the local community dominate us with their fair skin and maintain exclusive Hindi circles amonst them.

Instead we have to start our businesses and use our skills to dominate the industries in the North.
Its okay if north becomes more developed, but our communities should flourished there and expand gradually and permanently with a long term plan. and it would also prevent the leeches from coming down south.

We should focus or energy on creating skilled emigrators and leaders who can engineer a stronger community for us in north and else where.
We need to set up good Social Sciences institutes and Social groups to analyse and plan our existence and propogation. And political philosophy and parties being able to implement these agenda.

Arent we excited when we hear that Tamils winning nobel prizes or being in high paying silicon valley jobs other positive stats about us? So  Tamils should atleast try to become affluent and significant in number in other places so that we can get happiness in knowing how successful we have been in expanding

All Indians are our brothers and sisters from the Indus Valey Civilisation, But within India, the southies are culturally more closer with each other.
I belong to a originaly tulu speaking community.I am a tuluva vellalar..once a tulu speaking community who came into CHola territory, helped him and became Mudaliyars and adopted Tamil a 1000 years ago.  To be precise we are referred to as arcot mudaliars/tuluva vellala/agamudayar. It is said that before coming to arcot, we were part of the veera ballala(hoysala) king. However agamudayar also refers to the Thevars(mukkulathor) of south tamil nadu with surnames such as Rayar. Krishna thevar raya was also a tulu king and statred the tuluva dynasty. So my immediate association would be to that of tuluva vellalars and Agamudayars/thevars. I also realise that ever since aishwariya rais and the anushka shetty’s became famous, people wanna get associated with the bunts.  So the hegdes,nairs,naidus,nayaks,Gounders,gowda,mudaliars,pillais were all part of the very ancient group called velir/vellalars, who assumed different clans and titles under different region and kingdom. I mean I guess apart from the southern tamil empires, the satvahanas,chalukyas,kakatyas and their chieftans also had common ancestry with the vellalars who came down from the north and who were called yadavas,rajputs or gujjars or whatever. This can be seen from the common surname shared by some velirs like bal,koli etc. So All in all its good that most people of south India share a recent common ancestry by the vellalar and other corresponding group in other kingdoms(like chalukya,rashtrakuta,satvahana etc).Some vellalar chieftans became stronger and big enough ti be called chera/chola/pandiya pallava or hoysala or chalukya or rashtrakuta.  Regarding the other castes like mallar or pallalars…I wud still say they are the same  group pf people coming from north to south and clearing the forests, but they were rather labourers than chieftans. ( I know that it could get very casty here, but the important thing to establish here is our common ancestry.  With so much politics involved, the history is very muddy, but overall we have to now that we came from the same original group even though later we kinda fought quarrelled amongst ourselves – until we were united by the vijaynagaram empire to fight the muslims and later the british as indians. Like I said my immediate association is with the agamudayars and tuluva vellalars, but a lot of us spoke different language at different times and assumed different titles. Im guessing before tulu, we spoke some other language – really old tamil or telugu- btw I think that since archealogical evidence of telugu existed before tamil- like telugu inscriptions were found dated 5th century BC in the satvahana empire, and group of people/chieftans who came and cleared the forests here had to first settle down in andhra/karnataka before coming down south, i wud say that tamil might have come from telugu speakers.

Now these are times of globalisation and migration and in 200 years time Indians are gonna get mixed up with no saying who is from where.

So analysing out existence so far,Indians have lived well for around 5000 years compared to europe which was very war prone with the average lifetime of men in rome( the most civilised period of their existnce ) being only 28. The europeans are more of an aggressive mixed up, bastards than anyone else. For eg..they have 3 different groups to begin with, that come under the category white 1) indo-aryans,2)finno-Urgic, 3) Turkish/mongol. Even amongst the Indo-aryans..there are different groups like slavic,nordic,germanic,goths,v isu-goths,angles,saxons,celtic etc. These groups are do not necessarily have a cultural continuity, but these are supposed aryan tribes that came into europe through different routes at different times and who were constantly warring . For eg, the minoans and myceaneans are both indo-aryan tribes of greece. but there is no continuity, the mycaeneans came and replaced the minnoans . In other words,if we compare the first of europeans with the contemporary indians/south asians, the south-asians were more successful in spreading out their genes,having access t resources,increasing in number, and living a relatively peaceful,less war prone or competitive existence than the first of europeans – whose gene pool have been diluted in their own lands by other tribes entering their land and fighting with them.

Similarly within India, The south indian have not face much external aggression that the north indians faced it lodis, or mughals, or greeks or scythians or any one else from the other side.
Bengalis – have been invaded and raped from Both magadhas and Cholas from the south. No maurya or mughal came down to TN and Kerala.

Even if you go by the aryan invasion – where you say many north indians are a combination of aryan(europeans- who themselves have lived miserably and war prone all the time) and dravidians, the dravidians living in the norther region alone suffered defeat and were subjugated by the aryans. Not like after defeating , they sent them in trains to south.I know you wud claim this to be the case and offer no logical expanation why the aryans didnt come down south as well.
So even according to your aryan invasion theory The ones in south did not suffer much, maybe only 2% brahmins came and promoted the religion. But brahmins were only cooks n priests, never a land owning first citizens like mudaliars or business men like chettiars(p.chidambaram ur chettiar example).

All of Indian suffered over the last 200 you say northies suffered the most by fighting a lot. bengalis and punjabis have suffered a lot during the respective partitions and for the tamils who suffered in srilanka – 150 thousand casualities, around 900 thousand have settled in places like autralia, canada,swiss,france, uS, Uk, finland etc.Atleast those indentured labours worked and are now living comfrtably in malaysia..whereas There were so many famines in bengal duing briths raj and millions perished. The gujjus n punjus sent to africa also got kiked out by idi amin, and also suffered bad fate in fiji.

So considering all these, the south indians have lived well in any scenario, thats why were are not aggressive and pretty conservative. SO far we are the winners – considering 5000 years of living well.
In another 200 yeasr we will be mixed up and there aint gonna be any winners…cox no one would know what proportion of genes they have in them, atleast within India.
And for the next 200 years people from south india are poised to live a very industrial,comfortable life with the IT,automobile and medical tourism thing. And even if the delhi-mumbai corridor improves, more of us will get to go there and expand – because we are more Intelligent and our skills will help us with the expansion wherever there is opportunity. If you want to know how I have established that tamils are more intelligent read through the other posts of mine that deal with out past achievements and highlights how we are more intelligent and to get a complete picture on things. So get the confidence and be happy. the only thing we lack is the fun aspect in our culture – which is less neotenous and conservative compared to others. If south indians become more flirty or playul like lets say bengalis, because we are more intellectual, we will be more engaging and fun.

If you are a person that feels bad that southies dont have the look/fun factor, your offsprings are probably gonna feel the same. Thats why its important for us to expand to other cities and try to give a chance to our offsprings to be part of a fun circle.otherwise even they will continue to feel poor/hopeless in aspects of being fun and attractive. Unfortunately not many can just relocate to other places leaving behind their family,friends and job. But if they can get an easy/comfortable job, other things can follow like making new friends and finding other members of community and keep life interesting despite living out of Tamil nadu. So  capitalists/business owners all should set up funds and businesses oriented towards helping fellow community members expand to other places..this is just like how the gujarati/marwari communities do business, primarily helping out members of their own community. If you cant get into retail, if you are into I.T. you can very well set up offices and help people relocate and expand.But expanding is very important.I mean before calling me a sectarian, you should look at what the TATA sons is doing for parsi community and how marwaris or certain sections of muslims and other sects do their business.

So the only thing we have to do is plan to expand and  no matter how much life sucks for you rite now, know that its gonna work out fine in the future. becoz 1) we are intelligent , and intelligence will help us get the wealth or plan our existence well to get us where we need to be to become successful/resourceful/healthy and thereby attractive in the future. Plus intelligence in itself plays a role in being more stimulating and attractive. 2) Studies say that human societies tend/evolve to become more neotenous, and therefore all we have to do is just be liberal and we will also get to where northies are regarding the confidence,playfulness and fun factor. Just have to stop the hypocritical and idiotic attitude of people like in the video below


BBC Accepts that the Aryan Invasion theory is flawed
By arisebharat
This is a very important article which calls the cloak off the most damaging theory concocted by the British and served to Indians. Most of the apparent differences that are seen in Indian society like the North-South Divide, Upper caste – Lower caste divides, language problems, can be related to the Aryan-Dravidian theory. I believe that this theory to be the most successful chapter of the British ‘Divide and Rule” policy. They employed Muller as part of Macaulay’s grand scheme to devalue Indian history. So much so, that today we have large sections of “educated Indians” who undermine their own heritage and consider that the British rule as a great chapter in India’s history.


One of the most controversial ideas about Hindu history is the Aryan invasion theory.

This theory, originally devised by F. Max Muller in 1848, traces the history of Hinduism to the invasion of India’s indigenous people by lighter skinned Aryans around 1500 BCE.

The theory was reinforced by other research over the next 120 years, and became the accepted history of Hinduism, not only in the West but in India.

But many people argue that there is now evidence to show that Muller, and those who followed him, were wrong.

Others, however, believe that the case against the Aryan invation theory is far from conclusive.

The matter remains very controversial and highly politicised. The article below sets out the case made by those who believe that the Aryan invasion theory is seriously flawed.

The case against the Aryan invasion theory
The Aryan invasion theory was based on archaeological, linguistic and ethnological evidence.

Later research, it is argued, has either discredited this evidence, or provided new evidence that combined with the earlier evidence makes other explanations more likely.

Some historians of the area no longer believe that such invasions had such great influence on Indian history. It’s now generally accepted that Indian history shows a continuity of progress from the earliest times to today.

The changes brought to India by other cultures are not denied by modern historians, but they are no longer thought to be a major ingredient in the development of Hinduism.

Dangers of the theory
Opponents of the Aryan invasion theory claim that it denies the Indian origin of India’s predominant culture, and gives the credit for Indian culture to invaders from elsewhere.

They say that it even teaches that some of the most revered books of Hindu scripture are not actually Indian, and it devalues India’s culture by portraying it as less ancient than it actually is.

The theory was not just wrong, some say, but included unacceptably racist ideas:

» it suggested that Indian culture was not a culture in its own right, but a synthesis of elements from other cultures
» it implied that Hinduism was not an authentically Indian religion but the result of cultural imperialism
» it suggested that Indian culture was static, and only changed under outside influences
» it suggested that the dark-skinned Dravidian people of the South of India had got their faith from light-skinned Aryan invaders
» it implied that indigenous people were incapable of creatively developing their faith
» it suggested that indigenous peoples could only acquire new religious and cultural ideas from other races, by invasion or other processes
» it accepted that race was a biologically based concept (rather than, at least in part, a social construct) that provided a sensible way of ranking people in a hierarchy, which provided a partial basis for the caste system
» it provided a basis for racism in the Imperial context by suggesting that the peoples of Northern India were descended from invaders from Europe and so racially closer to the British Raj
» it gave a historical precedent to justify the role and status of the British Raj, who could argue that they were transforming India for the better in the same way that the Aryans had done thousands of years earlier
» it downgraded the intellectual status of India and its people by giving a falsely late date to elements of Indian science and culture.


Monday, December 05, 2005
witzel and pals to target BBC next after CA textbook debacle
dec 5

here’s an earlier mail someone forwarded me from herr witzel, who is crowing — a little prematurely, perhaps. counting der chickens before zey are hatched?

i am so tempted to use all those comic-book words to demean him: schweinhund! achtung! alas, my german fails me: i only remember one sentence from my one-semester technical german at iit madras. “die chemische industrie produziert synthetische stoffe”. actually i remember one more: “gold und silber sind elemente”. i guess i actually know more yiddish than i do german: schmuck, schlemiel, shtik, schmooze, etc.

but it’s unfair to laugh at german for witzel being an ass. incidentally, vikram seth in his kqed forum interview said that he was so upset by nazi documents — he speaks fluent german — that he developed a visceral, if unreasoning, hatred for the language.

maybe witzel, poor fellow, was dropped on his head as a child. that might explain his hatred for hindus. especially considering that he’s supposed to be an expert on sanskrit. sort of kalidasa-ish, in kalidasa’s pre-enlightenment self : he was known for sawing off the branch he sat on. a rather dangerous occuption, of course.

anyway, here’s the rogues’ gallery. i am surprised to see kenoyer’s name in there. note in particular the indians. parpola is the leading ‘dravidianist’ around, and goldman, once upon a time rather a decent person, has turned coat as well, it appears.

oh, and witzel now has plans to attack the bbc website that i remarked on some time ago — it has actually said that the AIT is bunkum. expect the bbc to jump eagerly into witzel’s hot little embrace: they’re just waiting to do their usual india and hindu-bashing.

================= witzel mail ================================

Fra: Michael Witzel []
Sendt: 26. november 2005 17:26
Til: Peter Zoller; Garrett G. Fagan; Alexander Vovin; Patrick Olivelle; Boris Oguibenine; Phyllis K Herman; carendreyer Dreyer; Frederick Smith; Lars Martin Fosse; Rajesh Kochhar; Richard Meadow; Stanley Wolpert; Dwijendra Jha; Georg von Simson; Madhav Deshpande; Frank Southworth; Hiroshi Marui; Sudha Shenoy; Asko Parpola; Mohammad Mughal; Don Ringe; S. Palaniappan; Wim van Binsbergen; Homi Bhabha; huang9; David Stampe; Hideaki Nakatani; Jonathan Mark Kenoyer; Stefan Zimmer; Romila Thapar; Muneo Tokunaga; Shereen Ratnagar; Michael Witzel; Sheldon Pollock; Dominik Wujastyk; Parimal G. Patil; Steve Farmer; Robert Goldman; falk Falk; jkirk Kirkpatrick; agnes korn; Scharfe; Kalpana Desai; ; Patricia Donegan; Shingo Einoo
Kopi: Arlo Griffiths; Raka Ray; Leonard van der Kuijp; Michael Witzel; John Brockington
Emne: Next step: California Comm. vote on Hindutva changes

Dear friends,
success! It seems that we were successful; more details will follow as soon they become available. Here the initial, partial report from people present at the meeting of the California State Board of Education:
This afternoon the California Board of Education voted to approve the school books for adoption in California schools;
seven of eight publishers’ programs were approved (Including the initially rejected Oxford U.P. one, it seems without adding in any of the Hindutva material).
Below, I attach our joint letter for your reference. We had planned to send it to you earlier, but all the back and forth yesterday in preparing for today’s (Wednesday’s) meeting prevented me.
Luckily, we had a California historian of india, Prof. J. Heitzman (UC Davis), present at the meeting who also used a letter written by Prof. Wolpert.
Hence, some more detailed news about the meeting of the California State Board of Education:
The meeting was to decide whether to adopt the changes that have already been suggested, collected in a book containing the massive number of changes.
Comments from the audience: each one to speak for TWO MINUTES each.
The first cohort of speakers included representatives of the Vedic Foundation, who all urged adoption of the changes.
The next major group consisted of a number of Sikh speakers who urged non-adoption of the changes until after the insertion of additional material on Sikhism.
Prof. Heitzman, speaking for us all, then alluded to the “Standards for Evaluating Instructional Materials for Social Content,” section:” Religion; Indoctrination”, urging the Board not to “encourage or discourage belief or indoctrinate the student in any particular religious belief.”
Pointing out that we represent thousands of high-level scholars from all religious backgrounds dedicated to the academic study of South Asian history and culture, he stated that we have two main objections to the current draft that cause us to oppose its adoption:
(1) the consulting base, i.e. Dr. Bajpai, is too narrow for a problem of this complexity; and (2) we “impugn the credentials” of the Vedic Foundation and other Hindu groups to speak competently on issues of South Asian history and religion.
These groups project, either overtly or subconsciously, policies known as Hindutva or “Hinduness” that portray South Asian and specifically Indian identity as Hindu. Their program has ravaged the social studies textbooks of India for the last ten years.
He urged the Board not to allow a religious chauvinism of India to become the policy of the State of California, which would provoke an academic and international uproar. He volunteered the services of the university community specializing in the analysis of South Asia for evaluating the edits and additions proposed for the California textbooks: “We are ready to earn our pay; let us help you.”
Sincere thanks to Prof. Heitzman and to all of you ! This shows how concerted action, even if it comes as late as ours, can be successful.
Incidentally, the next thing to tackle is the BBC website. Let us discuss how to go about it. Please see this:

Best wishes,

Michael Witzel
Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies, Harvard University
1 Bow Street , 3rd floor, Cambridge MA 02138
1-617-495 3295 Fax: 496 8571
direct line: 496 2990