Story Muslim scholar describes India before Islam

[Mahmoud]

—Cuckoldry was rampant (one woman had multiple husbands)
—Women had no modesty, would walk around with their tits open
—No paper
—Animal sacrifices
—Drinking and murdering each other was common
Just lmao @ Hindus who hate Muslims. Hinducels should be thankful arranged marriages and modesty were bought in by the Muslims. Ancient India was a degenerate shithole.

@RREEEEEEEEE

 

[ThoughtfulCel]

Inceldom Discussion

 

[TheNEET]

don't Muslims sacrifice animals as well on Eid al-Adha? and Islam allows polygamy which accelerates hypergamy

 

[Smitty]

India after Islam: British

 

[Deleted member 27204]

Inceldom Discussion

I know right? Imagine reducing every discussion to India about inceldom just because women don't like Indian guys.

 

[Mahmoud]

don't Muslims sacrifice animals as well on Eid al-Adha? and Islam allows polygamy which accelerates hypergamy

It’s symbolic, the goat is eaten after that. Hindus would sacrifice random animals to their Gods.

I know right? Imagine reducing every discussion to India about inceldom just because women don't like Indian guys.

Nope, it’s about whoredom. Read the post.
And here’s another interesting observation from the Greeks about widow burning:

Diodorus writes about the wives of Ceteus, the Indian captain of Eumenes, competing for burning themselves after his death in the Battle of Paraitakene (317 BCE). The younger one is permitted to mount the pyre. According to Diodorus, Indians favoured love marriages, but many of them turned sour and wives poisoned husbands for their new lovers. Thus the practice was created to check these crimes. Modern historians believe Diodorus's source for this episode was the eyewitness account of the now lost historian Hieronymus of Cardia. Hieronymus' explanation of the origin of sati appears to be his own composite, created from a variety of Indian traditions and practices to form a moral lesson upholding traditional Greek values.

Sati was literally created because whores couldn’t stop whoring around

 

[Made in Heaven]

don't Muslims sacrifice animals as well on Eid al-Adha? and Islam allows polygamy which accelerates hypergamy

Animals are for giving to the poor to eat. It isn't some animal sacrifice ritual to God.

There's a lot more nuance than just having Chad amass a harem. Most muslim men only have 1 wife and only want to/can only put up with one wife

 

[InsanityIsThisWorld]

Islam is the most based religion by far, the other ones end up super cucked (Like the one started by a whore who cheated on her husband)

 

[BummerDrummerOG]

India after Islam: based and British

 

[Deleted member 27204]

Nope, it’s about whoredom. Read the post

View attachment 310395
—Cuckoldry was rampant (one woman had multiple husbands)
—Women had no modesty, would walk around with their tits open
—No paper
—Animal sacrifices
—Drinking and murdering each other was common

"Hinducels should be thankful arranged marriages and modesty were bought in by the Muslims. Ancient India was a degenerate shithole."

There are other points in this story like how Indians wrote on palm leaves instead of paper, had animal sacrifices and that drinking and murdering was common that have nothing to do with inceldom.

And yes hindus are naive about letting women roam freely in a way that is seen as sexually enticing. No wonder things like the kama sutra were invented in India and colonists and invaders immediately started fetishizing the local women because of how they dressed and behaved.

India after Islam: based and British

This is why a lot of people think that white nationalists are white supremacists. Why praise colonialism when it's a form of globalism and encourages racial intermingling?

 

[BummerDrummerOG]

This is why a lot of people think that white nationalists are white supremacists. Why praise colonialism when it's a form of globalism and encourages racial intermingling?

Because colonialism was good for both the colonized and colonizers. Now that we’re all on the same footing ethnonationalism should be stated, but had colonialism not happened Asia would be right about now just learning how to make a railroad. Global communications and even technology (not pseudoscience bullshit like Jew pills and psychology but actual technology) really aren’t a bad thing, just mass immigration and ethnic mixing of people groups is.

 

[Mahmoud]

"Hinducels should be thankful arranged marriages and modesty were bought in by the Muslims. Ancient India was a degenerate shithole."

There are other points in this story like how Indians wrote on palm leaves instead of paper, had animal sacrifices and that drinking and murdering was common that have nothing to do with inceldom.

And yes hindus are naive about letting women roam freely in a way that is seen as sexually enticing. No wonder things like the kama sutra were invented in India and colonists and invaders immediately started fetishizing the local women because of how they dressed and behaved.



This is why a lot of people think that white nationalists are white supremacists. Why praise colonialism when it's a form of globalism and encourages racial intermingling?

By the time the British came, a good portion of India was Islamised and the Hindus had also adapted strict clothing customs though. Modern Hindus are funny in the sense that they derive all their culture from Muslims but hate on them.

 

[Deleted member 27204]

Because colonialism was good for both the colonized and colonizers. Now that we’re all on the same footing ethnonationalism should be stated, but had colonialism not happened Asia would be right about now just learning how to make a railroad. Global communications and even technology (not pseudoscience bullshit like Jew pills and psychology but actual technology) really aren’t a bad thing, just mass immigration and ethnic mixing of people groups is.

No in wasn't good for the colonized because they could have just been left to their religions and customs and they would have no reason to learn about the Western world or gain an interest in it (which would encourage a lot of non-white people to later immigrate to anglo nations when it become possible).

Colonialism was only good for the colonizers. Jfl if you think being invaded is ever good for anyone except the invaders.
Also colonialism facilitated a more racially integrated and globalized world with more cross cultural exchange and set the stage for more later acceptance of more cross cultural exchange in the form of immigration of people from ethnic countries to other former colonial countries and eventually the host colonizer state, interracial dating and cultural and religious tourism to non-white "exotic" lands.

By the time the British came, a good portion of India was Islamised and the Hindus had also adapted strict clothing customs though.

Yeah it would have been worse when the British came and the strict clothing customs had not been adopted.

Still it's the bashful, sexually open way that Indian women often acted in regardless around non Indian men that probably piqued their interest more than usual. British and Anglo American women are known for being more "cold" toward most white guys except chads, while Indian women gained the reputation of being much more sexually free and flirty around non Indian guys.

But it was more than just that. Spices, jewelry, a feeling of exploration and "exoticness", regal palaces and the possibility of being treated like royalty all drove the British to want to colonize India.

 

[Mahmoud]

No in wasn't good for the colonized because they could have just been left to their religions and customs and they would have no reason to learn about the Western world or gain an interest in it (which would encourage a lot of non-white people to later immigrate to anglo nations when it become possible).

Colonialism was only good for the colonizers. Jfl if you think being invaded is ever good for anyone except the invaders.
Also colonialism facilitated a more racially integrated and globalized world with more cross cultural exchange and set the stage for more later acceptance of more cross cultural exchange in the form of immigration of people from ethnic countries to other former colonial countries and eventually the host colonizer state, interracial dating and cultural and religious tourism to non-white "exotic" lands.



Yeah it would have been worse when the British came and the strict clothing customs had not been adopted.

Still it's the bashful, sexually open way that Indian women often acted in regardless around non Indian men that probably piqued their interest more than usual. British and Anglo American women are known for being more "cold" toward most white guys except chads, while Indian women gained the reputation of being much more sexually free and flirty around non Indian guys.

But it was more than just that. Spices, jewelry, a feeling of exploration and "exoticness", regal palaces and the possibility of being treated like royalty all drove the British to want to colonize India.

I don’t think curry women have ever been fetishised in history. What are you smoking? The British literally imported European prostitutes in India because they couldn’t fuck curry prostitutes. The British imposed anti-miscegenation laws in India in 1857.

India and Africa were the only places where anti-miscegenation was bought under law.

 

[Deleted member 27204]

I don’t think curry women have ever been fetishised in history. What are you smoking? The British literally imported European prostitutes in India because they couldn’t fuck curry prostitutes. The British imposed anti-miscegenation laws in India in 1857.

Curry women were fetishized by a lot of British colonists

Jeremy Paxman on the British Empire: where men went to run wild

In his new history of the British Empire, Jeremy Paxman explains why British men headed to India in search of love - and why the women soon joined them.

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[BummerDrummerOG]

No in wasn't good for the colonized because they could have just been left to their religions and customs and they would have no reason to learn about the Western world or gain an interest in it (which would encourage a lot of non-white people to later immigrate to anglo nations when it become possible).

But they couldn’t have. It would be a worse place than today. They would be in the technological 1800’s and that’s over stretching it, with multiple states constantly fighting eachother.

Colonialism was only good for the colonizers. Jfl if you think being invaded is ever good for anyone except the invaders.

well, considering the invaders brought infrastructure and technology the country relies on and still uses today, and actually unified the area that had been in conflict internally for thousands of years, yes it was beneficial. There wasn’t even a notion of “India” before Europeans came. The Mughals got close but collapsed. Colonization definitely wasn’t one sided.

Also colonialism facilitated a more racially integrated and globalized world with more cross cultural exchange and set the stage for more later acceptance of more cross cultural exchange in the form of immigration of people from ethnic countries to other former colonial countries and eventually the host colonizer state, interracial dating and cultural and religious tourism to non-white "exotic" lands.

yeah this part is shit. Both sides benefitted equally, both sides need to go back. Ethnonationalism is just states of racially homogenous people. There can still be cooperation between nations but not massive racially displacing migrations.

 

[Deleted member 27204]

But they couldn’t have. It would be a worse place than today. They would be in the technological 1800’s and that’s over stretching it, with multiple states constantly fighting eachother.

If that was their usual state then why try to "fix" it. Has the Middle East been "fixed" by western intervention? It was better off before western intervention.

well, considering the invaders brought infrastructure and technology the country relies on, and actually unified the area that had been in conflict internally for thousands of years, yes it was beneficial. There wasn’t even a notion of “India” before Europeans came. The Mughals got close but collapsed.

The notion of "India" is still very much questioned given the frequent border disputes between India, Pakistan and Kashmir, religious conflicts within India and the lack of an ability to united all Indians under the concept of nationalism if it is not centered around religion.

And more technology isn't always a good thing.
Social media is technology, instant messaging is technology. Yet as so many discussions here show, technology has only made it more difficult for incels to obtain and have relationships with women where there is an acceptable chance of the women being faithful.

The railroads that were built just like all technology and infrastructure enabled use for everyone, including women, making it easier for women to meet other men.
Britian tried to outlaw the practice of "backward" practices deemed offensive and harmful to women in India

Burdens of History: British Feminists, Indian Women, and Imperial Culture, 1865-1915

experts.illinois.edu

https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/people/rai/publications/feminismimperialism_/femiimperialoriental.pdf

yeah this part is shit. Both sides benefitted equally, both sides need to go back. Ethnonationalism is just states of racially homogenous people. There can still be cooperation between nations but not massive racially displacing migrations.

Ethnic countries that were colonized had wealth and riches stolen from them by colonizers and the people in ethnic countries were left off poorer as a result.
Hardly beneficial for both sides.

How Britain stole $45 trillion from India

And lied about it.

www.aljazeera.com

The Great Loot: How Britain stole $45 trillion from India | India Post News Paper

India's share of the world economy when Britain arrived on its shores was 23 per cent. By the time the British left, it was down to below 4 per cent

www.indiapost.com

A guide to Africa's 'looted treasures'

French President Emmanuel Macron commissioned a report, set to be released on Friday, about the repatriation of African artwork.

www.bbc.com

Will the British Museum Ever Return These Stolen Artifacts? | HISTORY

Countries are calling on the museum to return looted items like the Rosetta Stone, the Elgin Marbles and 4,000 bronze sculptures from the Kingdom of Benin.

www.history.com

And increased cooperation and contact between other nations (which is, at best, what some would describe as colonialism in its most benevolent form) still later gives rise to racially displacing migrations because with interest in cross cultural exchange comes interest in travel between the host colonist country and the colonized country.

Many immigrants in the UK today are from countries Britain colonized in the past. Same with France.

 

[BummerDrummerOG]

If that was their usual state then why try to "fix" it. Has the Middle East been "fixed" by western intervention? It was better off before Western intervention.

It was better under the technologically modern but socially traditional regimes, like Saddam or Khomeni or the Islamic state, yes.

The notion of "India" is still very much questioned given the frequent border disputes between India, Pakistan and Kashmir, religious conflicts within India and the lack of an ability to united all Indians under the concept of nationalism if it is not centered around religion.

>3 border conflict areas
Pre colonial India had thousands of conflict areas between the maharajas and princely state’s. Hundreds of kingdoms fighting eachother

And more technology isn't always a good thing.
Social media is technology, instant messaging is technology. Yet as so many discussions here show, technology has only made it more difficult for incels to obtain and have relationships with women where there is an acceptable chance of the women being faithful.

The railroads that were built just like travel enable travel for everyone, including women, making it easier for women to meet other men.

Those are good inventions. They came though when socially things were degenerate. Instant messaging, computing, all of those are great...when handled under the right circumstance. Communication improvements aren’t bad but because women have rights and autonomy it is bad. The technology isn’t bad, women are.

Ethnic countries that were colonized had wealth and riches stolen from them by colonizers and the people in ethnic countries were left off poorer as a result.
Hardly beneficial for both sides.

How Britain stole $45 trillion from India

And lied about it.

www.aljazeera.com

The Great Loot: How Britain stole $45 trillion from India | India Post News Paper

India's share of the world economy when Britain arrived on its shores was 23 per cent. By the time the British left, it was down to below 4 per cent

www.indiapost.com

A guide to Africa's 'looted treasures'

French President Emmanuel Macron commissioned a report, set to be released on Friday, about the repatriation of African artwork.

www.bbc.com

Will the British Museum Ever Return These Stolen Artifacts? | HISTORY

Countries are calling on the museum to return looted items like the Rosetta Stone, the Elgin Marbles and 4,000 bronze sculptures from the Kingdom of Benin.

www.history.com

You link “we wuz kangz and shiiet” tier african “treasure” articles. Yes, colonialism has mercantilist policies that benefit the colonizer, but in the money back then taken from these places now they are doing better than ever economically. Europeans took money from India but now with all the European technology they have they double that money easily.

And increased cooperation and contact between other nations (which is, at best, what some would describe as colonialism in its most benevolent form) still later gives rise to racially displacing migrations because with interest in cross cultural exchange comes interest in travel between the host colonist country and the colonized country.

Many immigrants in the UK today are from countries Britain colonized in the past. Same with France.

You can have cooperation between ethnostates, you can even have trade for Christ’s sake. All you need to do though is just say “no” to permanent residents. That’s literally it.

 

[Deleted member 27204]

>3 border conflict areas
Pre colonial India had thousands of conflict areas between the maharajas and princely state’s. Hundreds of kingdoms fighting eachother

So what if it was conflict between other ethnic peoples in their own countries? I thought that you think it ideal for white people to only be concerned about the affairs of other white people and white countries?

Those are good inventions. They came though when socially things were degenerate. Instant messaging, computing, all of those are great...when handled under the right circumstance. Communication improvements aren’t bad but because women have rights and autonomy it is bad. The technology isn’t bad, women are.

Fair enough.

You link “we wuz kangz and shiiet” tier african “treasure” articles. Yes, colonialism has mercantilist policies that benefit the colonizer, but in the money back then taken from these places now they are doing better than ever economically. Europeans took money from India but now with all the European technology they have they double that money easily.

And how long did it take for those ethnic countries to recover and do better economically? Many years after they gained independence and with the "benefits" only being felt a few generations afterward if any real benefits were there.
I don't think you can justify that because ethnic countries are now doing better how colonialism was a force for good when it resulted in the suffering, bloodshed and having to lived in a servile way for ethnic people alive during that time.

Many formerly colonized countries are doing better economically not because of colonialism but because of the cycles of the rise and fall of nations.
When ethnic countries were colonized it was European nations and anglo people that were performing the best economically.
Now with the decline of western countries it is formerly colonized ethnic countries and Asians that are now doing better economically as a whole.
It's not colonialism that is responsible for ethnic countries doing better now.
There have to be losers in order for there to be winners.
Ethnic/Asian countries have benefited economically from the lessening economic power of western countries. See things like free trade and jobs agreements written by economic "elites" of western countries.

You can have cooperation between ethnostates, you can even have trade for Christ’s sake. All you need to do though is just say “no” to permanent residents. That’s literally it.

Okay but colonialism having cooperation between ethnostate and trade made it easier to start pushing the envelope and encouraging travel between people of different countries. It wasn't the stated objective but travel and migration of peoples from different ethnic countries would have been less likely to develop if there wasn't colonialism.

 

[Kashayam]

A " Muslim scholar" writing about good things about islam. Oo...it must be very authentic. Oo.look at what progress islam has brought to the middle east..by turning it into an uninhabitable wasteland. Better be an incel than a be part of cult made by schizophrenic Mohammad.

 

[BummerDrummerOG]

So what if it was conflict between other ethnic peoples in their own countries? I thought that you think it ideal for white people to only be concerned about the affairs of other white people and white countries?

Yes, but you’re acting like colonialism didn’t pacify the nation when it very obviously did which is a good thing.

And how long did it take for those ethnic countries to recover and do better economically? Many years after they gained independence and with the "benefits" only being felt a few generations afterward if any real benefits were there.

The benefits are coming right now and are going to come for the entire foreseeable future. It’s only less than 100 years since colonialism, and already we see massive rises in benefits for former colonized countries

I don't think you can justify that because ethnic countries are now doing better how colonialism was a force for good when it resulted in the suffering, bloodshed and having to lived in a servile way for ethnic people alive during that time.

If you want to count suffering and bloodshed more Indians would have suffered under an India in constant civil war and internal conflict in the maharajas than under one unified government.

Many formerly colonized countries are doing better economically not because of colonialism but because of the cycles of the rise and fall of nations.

No, they’re doing better economically because they have technological ability to work a modern economy and advance. They’re rising from what? Their industries are based in white colonist brought technology

When ethnic countries were colonized it was European nations and anglo people that were performing the best economically.
Now with the decline of western countries it is formerly colonized ethnic countries and Asians that are now doing better economically as a whole.
It's not colonialism that is responsible for ethnic countries doing better now.
There have to be losers in order for there to be winners.
Ethnic/Asian countries have benefitted economically from the lessening economic power of western countries.

It’s colonialism that brought the institutions and availability for these countries to not be primitive technologically backward shitholes. Look at the biggest industries in these countries and tell me they had it in pre colonial times.

Okay but colonialism having cooperation between ethnostate and trade made it easier to start pushing the envelope and encouraging travel between people of different countries. It wasn't the stated objective but travel and migration of peoples from different ethnic countries would have been less likely to develop if there wasn't colonialism.

Colonialism did help this, yes. Nothing can be perfect.

 

[Deleted member 21230]

Islam is the most based religion by far, the other ones end up super cucked (Like the one started by a whore who cheated on her husband)

letting chaddam have 4 wives while you rot is based for you?

 

[Kashayam]

Yes, but you’re acting like colonialism didn’t pacify the nation when it very obviously did which is a good thing.


The benefits are coming right now and are going to come for the entire foreseeable future. It’s only less than 100 years since colonialism, and already we see massive rises in benefits for former colonized countries


If you want to count suffering and bloodshed more Indians would have suffered under an India in constant civil war and internal conflict in the maharajas than under one unified government.

No, they’re doing better economically because they have technological ability to work a modern economy and advance. They’re rising from what? Their industries are based in white colonist brought technology

It’s colonialism that brought the institutions and availability for these countries to not be primitive technologically backward shitholes. Look at the biggest industries in these countries and tell me they had it in pre colonial times.

Colonialism did help this, yes. Nothing can be perfect.

" Colonialism also benefits the colony" makes you sound like a perfect cuckold husband. "I'm so weak and unmasculine , I can't satisfy my wife. So I let my wife fuck another guy because as long as she is satisfied she wont leave. Oo what a mutually benefiting agreement".

 

[InsanityIsThisWorld]

letting chaddam have 4 wives while you rot is based for you?

Atleast in islamic countries women are not liberated or free to fuck dozens of men with no consequences like they are in USA

 

[Made in Heaven]

I don’t think curry women have ever been fetishised in history. What are you smoking? The British literally imported European prostitutes in India because they couldn’t fuck curry prostitutes. The British imposed anti-miscegenation laws in India in 1857.

India and Africa were the only places where anti-miscegenation was bought under law.

Arabs fetishize Indian women.

 

[Kashayam]

letting chaddam have 4 wives while you rot is based for you?

This Mahmoud guy is taking advantage of frustration of incels is this forum and trying to spread islam among incels marketing it as a based religion. I think guy wants us to join isis and blow ourselfs up.

 

[Deleted member 21230]

Atleast in islamic countries women are not liberated or free to fuck dozens of men with no consequences like they are in USA

Who the fuck cares? You're still rotting. The only good way is 1 man for every woman and 1 woman for every man. Anything else is degeneracy

 

[Made in Heaven]

letting chaddam have 4 wives while you rot is based for you?

4 wives beats western chad fucking 100 women and leaving betas to take the scraps. And besides, most muslim men only have one wife. You think any man would want an extra 3 headaches? Polygamy is by in large simply a means of taking care of widows or divorcees or orphan girls. The Prophet even encouraged muslims to marry the bachelors in the community first.

 

[InsanityIsThisWorld]

Who the fuck cares? You're still rotting. The only good way is 1 man for every woman and 1 woman for every man. Anything else is degeneracy

If I lived in the muslim world I could have a chance of setting up a arranged marriage and not being incel like I am now.

 

[BummerDrummerOG]

" Colonialism also benefits the colony" makes you sound like a perfect cuckold husband. "I'm so weak and unmasculine , I can't satisfy my wife. So I let my wife fuck another guy because as long as she is satisfied she wont leave. Oo what a mutually benefiting agreement".

Colonialism does benefit the colony. You are using a computer, on the internet, with air conditioning, speaking in English.

 

[Deleted member 27204]

Yes, but you’re acting like colonialism didn’t pacify the nation when it very obviously did which is a good thing.

Pacification at what price? The native ethnic peoples were put down and in subordination to colonists from a European country.
I do not think that is a good thing.

If you want to count suffering and bloodshed more Indians would have suffered under an India in constant civil war and internal conflict in the maharajas than under one unified government.

There's no way for that to be known since India was not allowed to progress in that state.
Even now some people justify bringing the British back to India because of the constant internal conflict between peoples there.
Maybe the internal conflict in the maharajas would have settled down.
And if there are so many tribal conflicts among people then one unified government probably isn't the best political solution to calming down tensions in the long term.

Colonialism did help this, yes. Nothing can be perfect.

This is what I was trying to get across. Colonialism set the stage for increased movement of people between ethnic and majority white countries as is occurring now.
Global trade, conquest and cross cultural exchange increases the chance of increased mobility between colonized countries and the host country at some point in time.

 

[cutthroat]

Mahmoud, can we go hijacking?

 

[Kashayam]

Colonialism does benefit the colony. You are using a computer, on the internet, with air conditioning, speaking in English.

Nice excuse for exploiting native cultures and squeezing resources out of them.

You are a true cuck " I'll let Chad fuck my wife in my bedroom. Because I love the smell of his deodarant. Hope he will rub of some of ths scent from his body on to my sheets"

 

[Khabiblash]

View attachment 310395
—Cuckoldry was rampant (one woman had multiple husbands)
—Women had no modesty, would walk around with their tits open
—No paper
—Animal sacrifices
—Drinking and murdering each other was common
Just lmao @ Hindus who hate Muslims. Hinducels should be thankful arranged marriages and modesty were bought in by the Muslims. Ancient India was a degenerate shithole.

@RREEEEEEEEE

Product of rape talking shit about others. Don't forget how Turks raped your grandmother that is why you are a Katua. Did you forget about Halala in which Maulanas fuck your moms and sisters? Who is at the bottom of the heirarchy in India?
Inbred Mullah is at the bottom. Happy bhumi pujan faggot-inbred-half-dick-retarded Mullah. May Goat bless you.

 

[Deleted member 24293]

Inceldom Discussion

 

[Made in Heaven]

Product of rape talking shit about others. Don't forget how Turks raped your grandmother that is why you are a Katua. Did you forget about Halala in which Maulanas fuck your moms and sisters? Who is at the bottom of the heirarchy in India?
Inbred Mullah is at the bottom. Happy bhumi pujan faggot-inbred-half-dick-retarded Mullah. May Goat bless you.

Calm down hindpu. You're just jealous Pakis are more Aryan than you

 

[ReconElement]

He's

Calm down hindpu. You're just jealous Pakis are more Aryan than you

He's not a Paki, he's a brown Indian fetishizing Turks.

 

[Made in Heaven]

He's

He's not a Paki, he's a brown Indian fetishizing Turks.

Most indian muslims also have more Turk admixture too. That goes without saying when they're of the same religion. I know how you hindus are obsessed with being white, it must make you very mad knowing most muslims are more aryan than you lot

 

[Deleted member 20790]

Inceldom Discussion

 

[ReconElement]

Most indian muslims also have more Turk admixture too. That goes without saying when they're of the same religion. I know how you hindus are obsessed with being white, it must make you very mad knowing most muslims are more aryan than you lot

We're the only one who didn't convert, where are babylonians and persians. He's anything but the descendant of a defeated man.
I

Most indian muslims also have more Turk admixture too. That goes without saying when they're of the same religion. I know how you hindus are obsessed with being white, it must make you very mad knowing most muslims are more aryan than you lot

It would be very good of him if he tries Jihadmaxxing, millions of currycels would be grateful, what's the use of being a muslim living amongst Polytheists and not fighting for Allah.

 

[I.N.C.E.L.S. Boss]

Because colonialism was good for both the colonized and colonizers. Now that we’re all on the same footing ethnonationalism should be stated, but had colonialism not happened Asia would be right about now just learning how to make a railroad. Global communications and even technology (not pseudoscience bullshit like Jew pills and psychology but actual technology) really aren’t a bad thing, just mass immigration and ethnic mixing of people groups is.

Colonialism wasn't set at first for this humanly endeavor. Not saying that there aren't some good people out there who wanted to help others.

Colonialism was set to further (((their))) agenda by making themselves even more rich at the expense of the local, to whom they give a snickers bar once in a while to make him feel he's profiting from the system. We know who benefited the most from this globalism, in fact their fortune went by 50 folds.

 

[Made in Heaven]

We're the only one who didn't convert, where are babylonians and persians. He's anything but the descendant of a defeated man.

LMAO!! Imagine following hindpooism and worshipping cows over based Islam and thinking you've won something.

and no, most indians left buddhism/hinduism for Islam of their own will. Learn history.

And Persians still exist, they're just called Iranians now, Babylonians didn't exist even before Islam lmao

 

[ReconElement]

LMAO!! Imagine following hindpooism and worshipping cows over based Islam and thinking you've won something.

and no, most indians left buddhism/hinduism for Islam of their own will. Learn history.

And Persians still exist, they're just called Iranians now, Babylonians didn't exist even before Islam lmao

Cope Defeated Babylonian, Drive an Asad Babil Tank and try Udayhusseinmaxxing.

 

[BenBerger]

India after Islam: British

High iq and lol

 

[Made in Heaven]

Cope Defeated Babylonian

Nigga babylon hasn't existed for well over 2000 years

 

[Caesercel]

Look at this shitskin muslim cope.

Hindu women would rather kill themselves by drowning then become concubines for Islamic invaders.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jauhar

Black pill has established that women cannot resist invader cock. Yet that is what exactly hindu women did, when faced with degenerate Islamic invaders, who spent their entire time whoring with transsexuals.

By the time the British came, a good portion of India was Islamised and the Hindus had also adapted strict clothing customs though. Modern Hindus are funny in the sense that they derive all their culture from Muslims but hate on them.

Another muslim cope. The tenants of culture that hindus have derived from Islam are not really Islamic but Iranic/ Central Asian. Cultures which have already been intermingling with India for thousands of years.

Because colonialism was good for both the colonized and colonizers. Now that we’re all on the same footing ethnonationalism should be stated, but had colonialism not happened Asia would be right about now just learning how to make a railroad. Global communications and even technology (not pseudoscience bullshit like Jew pills and psychology but actual technology) really aren’t a bad thing, just mass immigration and ethnic mixing of people groups is.

Debating whether colonialism was good or not is futile because it was impossible to not happen. The difference in technology was too vast. Even countries like Japan which were never colonized, fell more than once to American trade interests.
Technology would have spread to every part of the world one way or another. Some were fully colonized like Africa, others were forced to adapt like China/Japan.
And its not like colonizers were a force of benevolence. Its just something that happened.

Also colonialism facilitated a more racially integrated and globalized world with more cross cultural exchange and set the stage for more later acceptance of more cross cultural exchange in the form of immigration of people from ethnic countries to other former colonial countries and eventually the host colonizer state, interracial dating and cultural and religious tourism to non-white "exotic" lands.

You have to realize one thing about white nationalists. They are against globalism only as long as it favors them.

They are not exactly against the idea of keeping US fleets in Pacific and South China sea. Holding influence in blocks such as SK or Japan. Or deploying their forces in middle east.
They want to colonize, they just don't want to bear the consequences.

Still it's the bashful, sexually open way that Indian women often acted in regardless around non Indian men that probably piqued their interest more than usual. British and Anglo American women are known for being more "cold" toward most white guys except chads, while Indian women gained the reputation of being much more sexually free and flirty around non Indian guys.

Yet the Anglo-Indian population is non-existant

There wasn’t even a notion of “India” before Europeans came.

There wasn't a notion of Germany either before anti-aristocracy liberals decided that should be a thing.

 

[I.N.C.E.L.S. Boss]

You can have cooperation between ethnostates, you can even have trade for Christ’s sake. All you need to do though is just say “no” to permanent residents. That’s literally it.

There are no ethnostates.
When you create countries by a pen and a ruler like Africa's case, you are including in the same State populations that have nothing in common.
Like the enslaved and slave trader grouped under the same banner, how ethnostatic is that ?

If anything, i think this was genuinely set to ensure Africa always stays a slave continent, no matter how much technology you bring in. Divide to conquer strategy.
Ethnostates are scary in the eyes of the globalists (like Nazi Germany, Pre WW2 Japan, Indian natives America, etc.), because when culture and politics resonate, an exterior party cannot profit from the resources of that nation.

 

[islamicincel]

Are you sure this is real? Since when do indian women have big boobs?

 

[Neggr]

islam was and is the savior of this world

 

[Caesercel]

letting chaddam have 4 wives while you rot is based for you?

It goes beyong that. They are willing to martyr themselves in a war so that Chaddam can have 300 more waifus.

Product of rape talking shit about others. Don't forget how Turks raped your grandmother that is why you are a Katua. Did you forget about Halala in which Maulanas fuck your moms and sisters? Who is at the bottom of the heirarchy in India?
Inbred Mullah is at the bottom. Happy bhumi pujan faggot-inbred-half-dick-retarded Mullah. May Goat bless you.

Jfl. No need to roast him this bad . Also I'd rather prefer these discussions stay out of .co. But oh well, some circumcized half dicks never learn their lesson.

Calm down hindpu. You're just jealous Pakis are more Aryan than you

So what. They are still poor and low iq. What's there to be jealous of. Atleast the so called non aryan shitkin dravidians mog that entire nation in science and technology.

Most indian muslims also have more Turk admixture too.

Jfl @this cope. . Every curry muslim I know is a converted shitskin. 99% of them.