Is it easier to just adopt the europeans?

Jul 2012
639
The 'Indo-european' theory seems to have convinced alot of people about the shared cultural and linguistic Origins of Indians and europeans, even to the extent that people like to assume a direct genetic relationship.

Now going by the adage it is easier to join than to reason, should Indians start going to Europe and building temples and libraries to Zeus, Jupitar and the Aesir? Should they make an effort to get Europeans off Abrahamic faiths and start asserting a joint civilization?

Where do you see 'Indo-european' theory heading politically?
 

chimera

Ad Honorem
Feb 2013
2,449
australia
Probably in big excited loops around the Scottish ghetto in Beijing where Indian-Chinese brothers are teaching Proto-Mandarin-Portuguese to pure-bred Cantonese Qin.
 
Mar 2013
1,031
Breakdancing on the Moon.
Nowhere politically once the Indians get over themselves, it will always be a very useful heuristic tool in the hands of philologists. Indians ought to perhaps stop reading literature out of date by almost a century (like Muller) and...you know....actually pick up something modern and worthwhile.

On the European side of things, I doubt anyone but white nationalists think like that....certainly Europe is NOT culturally homogeneous anyway so the idea of "one big culture" is ludicrous.
 
Jul 2012
639
Probably in big excited loops around the Scottish ghetto in Beijing where Indian-Chinese brothers are teaching Proto-Mandarin-Portuguese to pure-bred Cantonese Qin.

Well, thats pretty specific :confused:














Kimmy, mate, you think I'm chinese? Must be all that 'skythian' IQ :lol:, remember to ration it out or there wont be any left for the winter time.
 
Jul 2012
639
Nowhere politically once the Indians get over themselves, it will always be a very useful heuristic tool in the hands of philologists. Indians ought to perhaps stop reading literature out of date by almost a century (like Muller) and...you know....actually pick up something modern and worthwhile.

On the European side of things, I doubt anyone but white nationalists think like that....certainly Europe is NOT culturally homogeneous anyway so the idea of "one big culture" is ludicrous.


I'm not sure I understand, are the religions that the Germans, Greeks, and Romans practiced before Christianity not 'Indo-european' according to modern theories?
 
Mar 2013
1,031
Breakdancing on the Moon.
I'm not sure I understand, are the religions that the Germans, Greeks, and Romans practiced before Christianity not 'Indo-european' according to modern theories?
Not really. There are Indo-European elements, sure, but there are later mutations, additions, changes, takeovers from other sources. Arguably less conservative than the Vedic strain to be honest.

In other words, its a lot more complex now.
 
Jul 2012
639
On the European side of things, I doubt anyone but white nationalists think like that....certainly Europe is NOT culturally homogeneous anyway so the idea of "one big culture" is ludicrous.

Europe is a greek word yes? When we say European we are discussing the Greco-roman civilization that some european states claim to be part of. For example Brittan is a Roman word, not a celtic word. Czar of Russia is in imitation of Caesar of Rome etc

Which other cultures would be considered European?
 
Jul 2012
639
Not really. There are Indo-European elements, sure, but there are later mutations, additions, changes, takeovers from other sources. Arguably less conservative than the Vedic strain to be honest.

In other words, its a lot more complex now.

Sure its changed, but the Idea is that it comes from a Proto Culture called 'Indo-european', european culture(before Christianity) and Indian Vedic Culture are its offspring. Given that India remains 'Indo-european' culturally, and Europe does not remain 'Indo-european', would you disagree with reviving European brances of 'Indo-european' culture?
 

chimera

Ad Honorem
Feb 2013
2,449
australia
It's doubtful that anyone knows what this thread is about or what prompts beeh's mental processes. But it's fun anyway.
 
Mar 2013
1,031
Breakdancing on the Moon.
Sure its changed, but the Idea is that it comes from a Proto Culture called 'Indo-european', european culture(before Christianity) and Indian Vedic Culture are its offspring. Given that India remains 'Indo-european' culturally, and Europe does not remain 'Indo-european', would you disagree with reviving European brances of 'Indo-european' culture?
I don't know to what degree we can see PIE as a monolithic entity any more. I doubt very much the people who came to Europe were PIE anymore. I think that's a major failing of a few modern theories...given the time lapses. Also some branches are closer to others. E.g Greek and Indic share reduplication in the perfect, augmentation before some verb forms, a similar way of handling aspirated vs unaspirated stops so they're closure. Likewise Baltic and Slavic.

India remains Indo-European in that the major languages over the north are IE, the deities are IE, as are many religious practices. But that's not the same as it being "Indo-European". You'd be a fool to neglect the contributions of non IE elements, the innovations, the passing of time, the originality and uniqueness of Indian culture.

And yes, obviously, I am against the idea of arbitrarily trying to revive cultures. We should be losing religions anyway, not making more of them!