Recent Posts
xyZVBH
No.450331
If Steppe/Zagros ancestry is the determiner of UC/LC status than explain how baniyas & kayastha became UC
ovGuCK
No.450334
>>450331(OP)
It's not. There's a reason why even high steppe Jaats are shudras and get intellect mogged by High AASI baniyas
xyZVBH
No.450339
>>450334
Than why people think gori chamdi as a sign of UCs
z3fFYS
No.450341
>>450334
>There's a reason why even high steppe Jaats are shudras and get intellect mogged by High AASI baniyas
Steppe is just cope. Most Jatts don't even care about all this steppe bullshit. Rors are literally the highest steppe community in terms of one's geno, but they are worthless as people. People who didn't understand how haplo and genos will affect you kind of started kanging at it, the same way race realist do with psuedo science. Now that people understand it better they are sort of growing tired and giving up. Sticking their lineage and what not.
z3fFYS
No.450347
>>450339
>Than why people think gori chamdi as a sign of UCs
Probably because Avarnia and Shudra are labor class. It just would make more sense for these people to have darker skin to their UC counter parts. They would be much more tanned and far more darker than those who would sit in fort or work on gold in shade.
Interestingly fair skin was not always a trait of UC, if we look at Shukla line then clearly they were fair skinned which was a very rare trait that made them stand out from other peers, as a genotypical trait. Socially Muslims and the Anglo were also in power for quite long, so that might have led to less educated clans like Shudras or Dalits into believing lighter skin made you bit better than others.
/zSKP/
No.450356
Sadly no gene in the world provides intelligence as trait. Steppe only helps in bone density, height and lactose intolerance
z3fFYS
No.450368
>>450356
Intellect comes from combination of traits and average IQ of both parents with some degree of deviation. Their is higher chance that if both of your parents are good at different things, the kid will fail to inherit either of them, than both.
Z35n/8
No.450374
>>450331(OP)
The actual determiner is iq, hardwork and the occupation your jati adopted. You think the world was that different back then? No, it wasnt. You had rich families, you had powerful dynasties, you had commoners, you had labourers and toilet cleaners just like you do today. The same age old reality of social dynamics, same politics, same networking and web of alliances existed.
>>450339
Maybe true for other places, not sure but in northwest india thats not the case. Skin colour doesnt correlate to cáste hierarchy.
z3fFYS
No.450383
>>450374
>You had rich families, you had powerful dynasties, you had commoners, you had labourers and toilet cleaners just like you do today.
This. Even if we abolish it entirely, and her rid of the religious weight behind it. Truth is it will end up becoming even worse. We will strictly be a class based system. Most bhachanners will be abandoned entirely, given the absolute state of average IQ of this side and their financial status.
>>450374
>not sure but in northwest india thats not the case. Skin colour doesnt correlate to cáste hierarchy.
Agreed, mostly because nearly everyone is a very light shade here with few exceptions.
/zSKP/
No.450422
>>450368
>Their is higher chance that if both of your parents are good at different things, the kid will fail to inherit either of them, than both.
Bvtual. This explains my life
U3MxOc
No.450564
>>450422
This is not necessarily true ejther. I think Varna Sankar ends up existing for this reason for than anything. We all UC should actually allow LC to marry our dotters if we know they are retarded.
As i don't have any kind of special love for the bhangi and moolwasi but "religiously", if we all go about it in orthodox, even by the traits beyond your bloodline, we are four to five Varna under jyotish Vidya.
I think it should be ok to give away our daughter for marriage to LC if her inherent traits are same as them. My point is, Varna sankar exist because your kids whose father is some jatt and mother is a bania will likely end up with physique of the bania and brain of a jatt, which is objectively the worst of both worlds.
>But saar I am a smart jatt
<Haan yaar chup kar, pata hai, sare jatt smart hai? Sare baniya ke 8 packs hai? Benchod soy boys bhare pade hai bhach pe aaj kal.
In rare cases child can end up getting traits of both parents but mind you can only inherit the 50% gene pool from each of your parents. This means whatever they have got going needs to be able to work with each other.
If we follow this line of thought, it explains how the LC have steppe and iran_N saturation too. It naturally makes sense when the people who are good at what they do don't intermingles with the subhumans, they all intermingine with each other and that is how we got Dalits and Gypsies.
Even in white society Gypsies married the worst of the crop (except when Dalits kidnapped and raped the little children of white when they had a chance, and got genocided as a community as a payback)
It's without a doubt, out high steppe ancestors or low iran_n too kicked people out. Rors are a very good example of it. Alternatively, even Rors and Jatts are not considered untouchables, but this is where it gets interesting.
If they have kicked any people, girl or boy from their clan in past, it will actually explain how untouchables would jump at these abandoned kids, absorbing them in hopes of improving their inferior genes pool.
XFUzJR
No.450567
U3MxOc
No.450635
>>450567
Baniya are Dwija, but they are not UC. When most people speak about UC they refer to Dwija, when we are speaking politically we mean people who have not needed gibs. That will end up including Jatts and Kayasthas as well. Some OBC probably have confused this, and are siding with LC thinking they won't be raped by LC in the future, kekek.
5+/Him
No.450662
>>450567
Yes saar a poor brahmin doing dihadi majdoori is more higher than a baniya businessman
And a drunkard spoiled leftist baman is also higher than a religious baniya
Z35n/8
No.450910
>>450567
They are UC. Any jati that was successful in terms of wealth or politically and acted as patrons of brahmins were UC.
U3MxOc
No.451255
>>450662
They are. You are confusing social status with the spiritual one.
Z35n/8
No.451271
>>451255
On paper may be yes but jati varna system has always been less theoretical and based more on practicality and social realities. A dethroned dynasty that turned into petty nobles or merchants ceased to be kshatriya. Jains despite being non vedics enjoyed high social status because they were rich merchants and are still respected. Otoh a low class brahmin will be looked down upon and will not be allowed to enter in a well off guy's house.
U3MxOc
No.451280
>>451271
>On paper may be yes but jati varna system has always been less theoretical and based more on practicality and social realities. A dethroned dynasty that turned into petty nobles or merchants ceased to be kshatriya.
Give an example
>Jains despite being non vedics enjoyed high social status because they were rich merchants and are still respected.
That has nothing to do with Varna system. That is my point. There is no reason for why the dalit chimp out when both Jain's and parsis very very clearly starter lower than they did.
>Otoh a low class brahmin will be looked down upon and will not be allowed to enter in a well off guy's house.
Also proving my point that religious and societal status are different things.
+xYWpf
No.451404
>>451280
>Give an example.
Countless dynasties throughout history that were overthrown and faded into oblivion. What do you think happened to their descendants? Many baniya communities have origin myths about descending from royalty like maheshwaris. In history we have examples of upstart rulers undergoing rajputization or hiranyagarbha and attaining kshatriyahood like kadambas(who were originally brahmins but tried to hide their origins), shivaji, king of travancore, ahoms etc. Mauryas and guptas origins are also shrouded in mystery which likely means they came from non kshatriya background. It was very common in past for upstart kings to fabricate a lineage to gain legitimacy. We even have examples of brahmins who became kings like shunga, rai of sindh, peshwas and these are just the ones we know of. Now imagine how many successful buried their origins.
>proving my point that religious and societal status are different things.
They arent different things. If you have not been brahmin in anything but name for generations, you cease to be one. Religion is created by society not the other way round. Things change and all that remains is history.
+xYWpf
No.451406
Tho i must make it clear you can still call yourself a 'brahmin' if by that you mean your ancestors were brahmins like most modern day 'brahmins' do but for all intents and purposes you have ceased to be one yourself and after many generations your claim will be further weakened. That also happened in history if origin myths of many non brahmin communities asserting brahmin origin are indeed true.
