Has anyone else noticed that Indians and Whiteys look basically the same? Not just like in pic related, in general. I'm in Canada and there are a lot of Indians and White people in the major cities and other than the skin and hair colour they're indistinguishable. I think the West should be taking good immigrants who thrive in their culture like Indians and Chinese.
America has too many black and Mexican, not enough European, Indian, and east Asian. That's why your country is falling apart.
Most Indians don't look very much like "tanned whites". Even the upper caste immigrants we get are not particularly white looking. Those that do look white are a minority.
>t. Pajeet
Except for the fact that sheen is part spic
these folks look pretty white, not 100% but albinos usually have other physical things wrong anyway
northern india has middle-eastern and aryan racial heritage you goddamn fucking genius, where do you think pakistan comes from?
before india got fucked as a british colony, they were considered a pretty advanced and respectable people.
>What is this aryan race racket all about?
Thats because Sheen is a mestizo hispanic
I like this one
Charlie Sheen is a spic. That Indian guy is probably from a historically Iberian controlled area of India like Goa and likely the result of admixture.
I can dig this feel. The priest at my roman catholic church is a poo.
northern indians look pretty huwhite to me.
>Charlie Sheen
>white
Yeah, somewhat. I'd venture to say those people would be outliers, even if they didn't have albinism. Most Indians have a stereotypical Caucasian-Australoid mongrel look to them, probably because that's what they are.
Indians aren't so bad and have plenty to be proud of in their culture. They just need to learn to shit in the toilet.
K I just googled "Indians look white" to find an example, that's not the only one, enough of this
Punjabi's can be pretty white. Rajasthani's are either pitch black or pale white, there doesn't seem to be any happy medium with them. Kashmiris can look kinda white, but they look more Near Eastern.
Punjibjabs are Sikhs, very good kebab removers, more please
>Real name: Carlos Irwin Estévez
Checks out
Arabs are whiter than Indians. Indians are literally the same color as niggers.
india is a genetic mish-mash of european, arabic, and african genetics.
the lower on the caste ladder you go, the higher the average % of african genes you tend to find
the only real question is how the african genes got to india in the first place, since it happened well before the second wave of caucasians arrived to create what we know as north indians.
isn't that because of the whole indo-aryan thing?
weren't they the original people to settle europe, the middle east, and northern india?
Indo-European, yes (that turned in to Indo-Aryan after, and those people became Sumerians and Persians and stuff).
Not all Punjabi's are Sikh, plenty of Hindus, and Pakistani Punjab is mostly Muslim (duh). Most Sikhs probably wouldn't desire to be called "kebab removers", as Sikhs respect Muslims, and even quote a Sufi, Baba Fareed in the Guru Granth Sahib. They have the proper view of Muslims, they respect them, but refuse to be subject to them.
Source? sounds kangsy. There are definitely African genes in India, and I believe in the possibility of minor migrations of East Africans into India pre-IVC, but if anything you will find less African genes going up the latter.
>before india got fucked as a british colony, they were considered a pretty advanced and respectable people
no they weren't, they were shit well before the British arrived, and were on the downswing before the Mughals even.
...
>but if anything you will find less African genes going up the latter.
That's what he said
East African slave states run by Arabs and Indians
They're Caucasian.
Wow.. hmmm.. Maybe because white people spent the last 500 years raping the natives to the point where they look the same??
Hmmm that couldn't possibly be it, huh? reallyy makes you think.
>African genes
Nah, that sounds way too much KANGZ for me, unless you have proof, it's bullshit.
>checks flag
>A FUCKING LEAF
Oh, nevermind, you're just shitposting.
Shit, you're right, I misread that somehow. Sorry bhai.
part spic, part jew.
Haha ok
Because Europeans would have looked like Northern poo in the loo's thousands of years ago, we changed due to climate, historical Europeans Middle easterners and Indians were regarded as the same race.
>carlos estevez
>white
>East African slave states run by Arabs and Indians
pretty much impossible, as dravidians are a pre-history race, and any middle-eastern slavery presence would not have been possible until after arabic north-indians became a thing.
my theories are:
1. somalians somehow traveled to india via boat
2. they are a proto-caucasian living fossil, a sort of evolutionary stepping stone between africans and other races.
3. arabic migrants mixed with the last of the mainland australoids, which inhabited this region.
he's not wrong, but the african genes, even in dalits, is quite low. Some linguists have however, postulated a shared origin between Dravidian and Bantu languages (as far as shared vocabulary and certain grammatical characteristics).
>Nah, that sounds way too much KANGZ for me, unless you have proof, it's bullshit.
explain their nigger-tier skin then faggot
/thread
Almost wrote an actual reply
Then I checked the flag
Indian civilization hit its peak betweeen 2900BC-1400BC and again between 300BC-0AD and 500AD to 1000AD.
India may be entering another golden age depending on what happens in the next 50, 100 years in India.
Thats an edited photo canadanon.
That doesn't necessarily mean they wuz kangz though. That could just as easily be congruent adaptation. Overall, I think it's important if we define what is African. The Australoid phenotype may have well developed entirely in Africa, but they are generally not described as "African".
I think the case for a recent splitting off of Dravidians from Africans is plausible, but mystifying. Bantu's were not historically well spread out until the prior millennium, and yet their language has many cognates with Dravidian. That, and as far as I know, Bantu languages aren't particularly old. It all goes back to the Green Sahara I guess, there was much greater continuity between Africa and Asia back then.
Some would have some white blood from the British. Doesn't mean they are white. Just means they got a boost in dna. Still shitskin though. Just a bit smarter than average.
the biggest mystery is that if there was african immigration during the past, why did it leave a gaping hole through the middle east? whatever led to african genetics in india, if such an event occured, was not a normal migration event.
White people seem too innocent when compared to other races. There's a jew inside every middle class Indian, that's why you see so much haggling and bargaining from Indians.
Well, there is always a possibility it was the result of trade. Some of the foods and spices (okra off the top of my head) grow equally as well in South India as they do the Sahel, but were probably from the Sahel. Perhaps African traders brought them, as well as their genes and language, to India. But this would seem implausible, as one would expect a greater genetic input in India, and the relation of Dravidian and Bantu seems to imply common ancestry, not mere loan words. South Indian civilizations were also just as advanced as anything going on in Africa, if not more so, so it would be somewhat strange for Indians to take words from Africans for familiar concepts.
There is also the possibility that Asia had more Africans than was once hypothesized, but ultimately were subjected and assimalted by other populations. The third, and most interesting theory imo is that South Indians are the result of a recent Australoid migrations out of Africa. This theory is filled with holes, because a)Australoids are believed to have gone extinct in Africa long before this supposed migrations b)Australoids may have developed in Asia and c)Dravidians are almost completely Caucasian, and the Aryan invasion/migration could not have caused South Indians to have so have such a Caucasian genotype.
The whole thing gets even crazier if you entertain the possibility of an Elamite and Dravidian relationship.
I dunno man, it's really fascinating, but there is nothing conclusive, and it doesn't help that low self esteem Afrocentrists are all over it.
Thats because we white Indians are already pretty successful in India
>estevez
>white
Estevez you fucking leaf.
There is no African blood in Indians. The Dark skinned Dalit people are related to Polynesian and other negritos of South East Asia.
>charlie sheen
>white
Holy shit you're dumb.
1,5,6,8 all look like regular if ugly white people
Sumerians were Semites and Persians were Iranians. Indo-Aryans were the Aryans (Indo-Iranians) who moved to Indus Valley, and then spread all across South Asia.
that's because we whites are basically albino indians. It's not albinoism but it is a mutation.
Everything is a mutation, you idiot.