More ...‎ > ‎The Aryan Myth‎ > ‎

Aryan Race Politics

Humans, the species of Homo sapiens, were divided into races based on color, build, and facial structure. The races defined by the science community of 19th century were:

  • Caucasian or the white race: Can be of any color from pure white to almost pure black. The blue-eyed blond of north Europe is a Caucasian. So is the dark South Indian. The predominant Caucasian is black haired, brown-eyed darker skinned Mediterranean that we find from south Europe to north India.
  • Mongolian or the yellow race: The people of China, Mongolia, Japan, etc.
  • Ethiopian or the black race: the people of Africa.
  • American or the red race: the original people of North and South America. Red Indians.
  • Malayan or the brown race: the people of South-east Asia. Indonesia, Philippines, etc.

It should be noted, that even this 19th century definition, does not mention a race called the Aryan race. Nor any race called the Dravidian race.

Today's biologists consider Homo sapiens as a monotypic species. A species that has only one race. Humans are genetically more similar than different. They are so similar that one might conclude they all evolved from the same family. The differences that divide races are a result of adaptations to recent environments.

Biologists believe that dividing human species into races, is incorrect, and influenced not by science but by racial politics.

Race politics elsewhere

Race politics has been in play all over the world. Example: United States in the 19th century, classified African-Americans, Native Americans, and European-Americans as different races. But the criteria for membership in these races were radically different. The government considered anyone with "one drop" of Black blood to be Black. In contrast, Indians were defined by a certain percentage of "Indian blood". And to be White one had to have "pure" White ancestry. These differing criteria for membership in particular races had little to do with biology and much to do with politics.

By these criteria, the child of an enslaved African woman and a White master was considered Black. More importantly, such a child would be a slave. In comparison, it was harder for a child to be classified as Indian. After a few generations of inter-racial marriages, a child was no longer classified as Indian. Thus the child lost special rights to land, that Indians enjoyed. At a time when Whites ruled both Blacks and Indians, it is no coincidence that the hardest race to prove membership in was White.

Aryan Race Politics

The invention of the Aryan race was another political play. This was a product of the 19th century imperialistic British mind. This theory was:

  1. The fair skinned nomads of the Aryan race, arrived in their horse chariots.
    (Horse chariots are the vehicles of the plains not of nomads traveling along untreaded paths in high mountains.)
  2. Aryans invaded the far advanced Indus civilization.
    (How, without the superior technology of the Indus people? It is not a small island, to invade and conquer, but a densely populated area of 1.5 million square kilometers! )
  3. The invasion theory suggests that the Vedic Aryans destroyed the Dravidian Indus townships.
    (Sculptures, paintings, and texts from Egypt and Mesopotamia clearly illustrate battles between cities and wars of conquest. But the SS civilization does not depict a military act, of taking prisoners, or of human killings. None of the cities show signs of battle damage to buildings or city walls, and very few weapons have been recovered. Human remains show no signs of violence either. The bones from excavated burials show few signs of disease or malnourishment. Where is the evidence of this distruction?)
  4. Aryans pushed the dark people of Dravid race to the south.
    (And who did the Dravidians conquer and displace?)
  5. White Aryans enslaved the dark Dravidians, by imposing the caste system.
    (British got this idea from their peers. The White skinned Europeans had enslaved the dark skinned Africans. Hindus do not know of slavery. Ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Romans and Chinese built monuments, palaces, walls and pyramids with slavery. NOT THE HINDU.)
  6. Aryans established the superior white and inferior black school of thought.
    (As a matter of fact, Aryan heroes are black. Ram, Krishna, Draupadi, Seeta, Damayanti, Rukmini ... all are black. Dravidian Ravana, on the other hand, the villian of Ramayan is fair!)
  7. Aryans then settled on the banks of river Sarasvati in 1500BC.
    (Archeology has proved that Sarasvati had ceased to flow long before, at least 400 years before 1500 BC.)
  8. Aryans brought the Proto Indo-European language with them from which Sanskrit developed. The Hittite, Greek etc also developed from the Proto Indo-European.
    (Linguistic changes are more rapid in unsettled communities than in more settled communities. Thus the language of the invading and unsettled Aryans should have changed a lot from the IE; more than Hittite changed from IE. But, Vedic is the least altered language. Thus the Aryans were certainly a very much settled community of India, and not nomadic invaders as pictured by AIT.) [3]
  9. In the following 1000 years, by the birth of Buddha, Aryans developed Sanskrit language, invented writing script, created the 6 philosophies, 4 Veda in numerous sakhas or recensions, so many Upanishads, Sutras, Ramayan, Mahabharat, Smrutis, some Puraans etc.
    (That is faster than light! For comparison it took 1500 years to create the Bible, which is 1/4th the size of Mahabharat. Obviously a lot more than a 1000 years had gone by to develop Veda, Upanishad, Ramayan, Mahabharat etc.)
  10. Aryans renamed all the landscape formations in Sanskrit.
    (So many provinces and rivers of the USA retain their Red-Indian names, even after the European invasion has nearly wiped out the Red-Indian civilization. Where are the pre-Aryan names?)
  11. Aryans wrote tons of literature.
    (Surprisingly, nowhere they mention their original land, or the invasion / migration.)
  12. According to AIT, the people of the Indus Valley are not the ancestors of the people that live in the Punjab, Sindh, Rajasthan and Gujrat today.
    (Interstingly, skeletal remains found in the Harappan sites show the same genetic attributes as that of people the of Punjab and Gujarat today.)
  13. AIT proposes: The Aryans and their gods arrived after the demise of Indus civilization.
    (Then why do the seals of Indus depict mother goddess, Pashupati, Shiva-linga, Shaligram, fire altars, and swastik seals?)
  14. AIT proposes: The Dravidians were supressed by the Aryans.
    (Fact remains that all major Hindu revivers, definers and pillars are so called Dravidians. Adi Shankaracharya, Madhavacharya, Ramanujam to name a few.)
  15. According to AIT, the illitrate Aryans soon after the invasion, produced the Vedic literature of high philosophical, and spiritual value. But the literate, archeologically attested native culture left behind nothing but some seals. This is a ridiculous proposition.
  16. Last but not the least, the mitochondrial DNA extracted from the bones of Neanderthal people indicate that they are not related to modern Europeans or any other living humans (Krings et al., 1997 , Ovchinnikov et al., 2000 ). Thus the modern people of Europe all immigrated from elsewhere. Thus the Aryan Invasion / Migration more likely happened not from West to East, but from East to West, from India to the Europe!

'Arya' is a term similar in meaning to the Sanskrit word Sri. We could equate it with the English word Sir. On the Aryan Race lines we can conclude that, a race of men named 'sir' took over England in the Middle Ages and dominated the natives, because most of the people in power in the country were called sir. - David Frawley


The Nazis later took this idea of a white Aryan superior race to its extreme of brutality. In the name of race, they tried to wipe out a religion from the face of the earth. They were neither the originators of this idea, nor the only ones to exploit it. Many other Europeans, including the British who then ruled India, shared this idea. The British had many political interests in this theory: ruling India, dividing India, downplaying Hinduism, promoting Christianity, discrediting Indian history, making the Hindu culture later and possibly derived from the west, and humiliating the Indian who was proud of her heritage and was struggling to free her of the British rule.

The Jew holocaust was a physical affair that ended with World War II. The Nazi executors were later arrested, tried and punished for their deeds. The whole world shunned Germans for their exploitation of the Aryan idea. On the other hand, British exploitation of this idea played on the minds of people. It crippled the confidence of the new age Indian who was becoming independent. And it continues till this day. Even today, after 50 years of independence, the Aryan Invasion Theory is taught to the children of India.

And now, when the view of the western historian has changed, the 20th century Indian politics keeps the AIT alive. As keeping the majority (the Hindus) divided, is a political need.

Every Indian needs to be educated of the foul play in the Aryan theory. One must have this background before one blindly accepts this idea, and tries to divide the Hindu on the basis of the Aryan and Dravidian lines.


  1. The Aryan-Dravidian divide - David Frawley
  2. Death of the Aryan Invasion Theory - By Stephen Knapp
  3. A new date for the RgVeda - Dr. Nicholas Kazanas
  4. Wikipedia encyclopedia
  5. Iridis encyclopedia