>>17946724
This is the kind of half-remembered Wiki paragraph people rip out of context to push the “caste = racial apartheid” narrative.
Arya vs. Dasa was not the caste system. In the Rigveda, “Arya” and “Dasa” are basically shorthand for “us” and “those hostile bastards.” Sometimes Dasa is a rival tribe, sometimes a demon. It’s tribal chauvinism, not a codified hereditary caste system. Pretending that line in the Rigveda is the full-blown varna/jati hierarchy is like saying Homer’s Greeks vs. Trojans are the European feudal system.
Varna emerges later. The four-fold varna scheme (Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra) isn’t in early Rigveda. It’s a late-Vedic/post-Vedic construction. And caste (jati) as we know it today hardened over centuries of political, economic, and religious developments. Massive difference between “fluid tribal divisions” and “2,000 hereditary castes locked in place.”
Migration is real, Nazi framing isn’t. Yes, Indo-Aryan migration is mainstream scholarship. No, that doesn’t mean Rosenberg’s “Aryans vs. indigenous” fairy tale is vindicated. The genetic and cultural evidence points to mixing and syncretism. The Nazis tried to spin that into “Aryan apartheid” because they needed myth fuel, not because it reflects actual South Asian history.
So if you’re just copy-pasting Rosenberg-tier takes like “Hinduism was created by Indo-Aryans, caste is race segregation,” you’re not doing history. So quit laundering /pol/ race-theory with a Wikipedia gloss.
