I'm compiling a list of primary sources on jeets proving they're neither human nor compatible with humans, and to show that their species has remained unchanged and is incapable of changing. This is a work in progress so feel free to contribute.

Megasthenes (active c. 302–288 BC) — Indica (now lost; preserved in Strabo, Arrian, Diodorus)
>The Indians in general are of excessive cowardice and are unfit for war. They lack manly spirit

Strabo (c. 64 BC – 24 AD) — Geography, Book 15
>The Indians are naturally disposed to lying and boastfulness
>They are servile and effeminate… lacking in courage and ambition
>They are all impostors and quacks

Curtius Rufus (active c. 40–50 AD) — Histories of Alexander the Great, Book 9
>Indians are most effeminate of all nations… they adorn themselves like women and fear death above all things

Alexander Romance / Pseudo-Callisthenes (earliest version c. 3rd century AD)
>Indian kings like Porus are depicted as arrogant and foolish, easily humiliated by Alexander. (Date context: Original Greek text composed 3rd century AD, drawing on oral and legendary materials from c. 300–100 BC.)

Arrian (c. 86–160 AD) — Anabasis of Alexander, Book 6
>Indians go about naked all the time... Their food is raw vegetables, and they eat the bark of trees… they are more like wild animals than men

Marco Polo (c. 1292 AD)
>They have no conscience about what they do. If a man lies with a woman and be found out, they do but laugh at it. In fact, they are the most lewd and wicked people that exist.
>The people are the most brutish and bloodthirsty in existence; for they kill and eat any stranger that falls into their hands.
>The people are black and ill-favored, and live in a most beastly manner.
>They are the dirtiest and most brutish people that exist in the world. They eat in the most disgusting fashion, without any table or cloth, and put the food directly into their mouths with their hands all covered in filth.
>They go about naked, only covering their loins with a cloth, and account it no shame to expose their persons. Even the women wear nothing but a single cloth, and go barefoot and bareheaded.
>They worship idols of the most abominable kind, covered in grease, filth, and blood. Their temples are full of uncleanness, and the priests themselves are the filthiest of all, daubed with ashes and cow dung.
>[The people] have no regard for cleanliness. Their houses are built with no regard to order, and they live among pigs and dogs and all manner of unclean beasts.
>The people are black, ill-favored, and of disgusting aspect. Their hair is coarse and oily, and they never wash it.

French account (1500s)
>Indian are ‘indolent’ and ‘vile’ by their very nature

Jemima Kindersley (1760s)
>In her letters she refers to Indians as having “stupidity and low cunning,” framing them as inherently backward

Abbe J.A. Dubois (early 1800s)
>described Hindu customs as "abominable and revolting," compared Hindus to cannibals, calling their habits "disgusting" and their food "revolting."

Charles Grant & James Mill (early 1800s)
>Grant described Hindus as “a people exceedingly depraved,” and ridiculed Sanskrit medicine, astronomy, history, and geography as laughable nonsense. James Mill called Indians contemptuously “cowardly, unfeeling and mendacious”

Rev. Hobart Caunter (1834)
>described the Bengalese as "notoriously licentious" and hill men as "servile, deceptive and cunning, utterly without honour or principle"

John Bacon (1840)
>Bacon describes Hindus as “inert” and filled with “low cunning,” “superstition” and “fulsome sycophancy.” He complains their language is “a heap of allegories,” condemns Hindu beliefs as “absurd” and “monstrous,” and portrays the entire group as lacking compassion compared to the British

Charles Dickens (mid 1800s)
>In a private correspondence, Dickens described Indians: “Look at the dogs, low, treacherous, murderous, tigerous villains.” He even endorsed extreme violence, calling for the “extermination” of Indian people and approving the mutilation of “wretched Hindoo”

Sir Richard Francis Burton (1850s travelogues)
>Indians are a “cowardly and slavish people”

Blackwood’s Magazine (1850s)
>Indians are “dark-skinned rapists,” “rapacious savages menacing the virtue of Britain”

Mark Twain (1897)
>expressed disgust at the Ganges, stating, "the memory of that sight will always stay by me, but not by request"

Murray’s, Cook’s travel guides (late 1800s)
>Indian train guards and hotels are inadequate, advised that native servants “should be quietly kept in their proper places,” and depicted local laborers as “swarming … like insects”

The Indian Annual Register (a 1919 report on Indians in British Kenya)
>Physically, the Indian is not a wholesome influence because of his incurable repugnance to sanitation and hygiene…. The moral depravity of the Indian is equally damaging to the African, who in his natural state is at least innocent of the worst vices of the East. The Indian is everywhere the despair of the sanitarian, here he is a menace not only to himself, but especially to the natives of the country. The moral depravity of the Indians is equally damaging…. The Indian is the inciter to crime as well as vice,…. The presence of the Indian in this country is inimical to the moral and physical welfare and the economic advancement of the native.

Albert Einstein (1920s)
>"Indians are biologically inferior"...."they can't think backward or forward by more than 15 minutes"

Adolf Hitler (1920s-1930s)
>"The Indian was incapable of ruling himself." "The British Empire did not conquer India with superior numbers of men, but with superior race." "The English have a faculty for treating peoples as half-monkeys... I don't even see that as entirely unjustified." "The British have taught the Indian how to walk upright. Without the British, these people would still be living in the trees like animals." "India is a place of chaos and weakness.” “They have a long history, but it is a history of decline and stagnation. Their culture is backward, superstitious, and weak.”

Winston Churchill (1942)
>"I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion."

boring

>>512019061

>>512018856 (OP)
Never ask a white nationalist why Alexander turned away

>>512019219
The smell of shit was unbearable, probably

>>512019219
The army mutinied because they were away from their wives and homeland for years. But you wouldn't know because hindoos didn't write history down until the Muslims came and educated you.

>>512018856 (OP)
You, my man, are a complete fucking loser.

>>512019541
Jeets did have their own writing before islam tbf, the idea that the latter brought anything anywhere but rape and plunder is just a mudshit delusion

>>512019637
Cry more poojeet. Go tell your discord about it too because this won't end well for you.

>>512019414
>>512019541
As for the Macedonians, however, their struggle with Porus blunted their courage and stayed their further advance into India. For having had all they could do to repulse an enemy who mustered only twenty thousand infantry and two thousand horse, they violently opposed Alexander when he insisted on crossing the river Ganges also, the width of which, as they learned, was thirty-two furlongs, its depth a hundred fathoms, while its banks on the further side were covered with multitudes of men-at-arms and horsemen and elephants. For they were told that the kings of the Ganderites and Praesii were awaiting them with eighty thousand horsemen, two hundred thousand footmen, eight thousand chariots, and six thousand fighting elephants.

—Plutarch's Lives


Gangaridai, a nation which possesses a vast force of the largest-sized elephants. Owing to this, their country has never been conquered by any foreign king: for all other nations dread the overwhelming number and strength of these animals. Thus Alexander the Macedonian, after conquering all Asia, did not make war upon the Gangaridai, as he did on all others; for when he had arrived with all his troops at the river Ganges, he abandoned as hopeless an invasion of the Gangaridai when he learned that they possessed four thousand elephants well trained and equipped for war.

—Megasthenes, Indika

>>512018856 (OP)
You might also want to dig into islamic accounts of indians, they were disgusted.
>>512019541
>The army mutinied because they were away from their wives and homeland for years
Correct, plus Alexander acted more and more like an oriental tyrannical ruler.
>>512019061
Kys fecaloid.

>>512019637
nobody likes you Ranjeet, not even your own women when offered ANY other ethnicity, go home

>>512019800
And then Alexander tricked Poorus by landing north of his position and tore his army a new one, annihilating it while losing only 1K of his own soldiers.
>eighty thousand horsemen, two hundred thousand footmen, eight thousand chariots,
Imagine the stench

>>512019800
>Megasthenes, Indika
*yawn*
>Historical reliability
>The first century Greek writer Strabo called both Megasthenes and his succeeding ambassador Deimachus liars, and stated that "no faith whatever" could be placed in their writings. The Indika contained numerous fantastical stories, such as those about tribes of people with no mouths, unicorns and other mythical animals, and gold-digging ants.
>Megasthenes claims that before Alexander, no foreign power had invaded or conquered Indians, with the exception of the mythical heroes Hercules and Dionysus. However, it is known from earlier sources – such as Herodotus and the inscriptions of Darius the Great – that the Achaemenid Empire included parts of north-western part of India. It is possible that the Achaemenid control did not extend much beyond the Indus River, which Megasthenes considered to be the border of India. Another possibility is that Megasthenes intended to understate the power of the Achaemenid Empire, a rival of the Greeks.
Nice try Sukhdeep.

>>512019923
Did you read what I posted?
Porus was a bordering small ruler. The hilarious fact that the most celebrated war of arguably the greatest white ruler/conqueror is against a literal who ruler on the borders of india should tell you what would have happened to the greeks had they dared to face the Gangaridai. The seat of power of India. It would have been a slaughter of greeks.

>>512020019
>The seat of power of India
More like the shit of power.

>>512020015
>North Western india
>SAAR WE WUZZ CONQUER INDIA SAAR
Nowhere did Megasthenes dispute him conquering north-west. But the problem is that Alexander didn't cross Ganges and face the seat of Indian power aka the Gangetic empire. You also ignore Plutarch.

Fact is, Alexander would have been raped by the Gangaridai

>>512018856 (OP)
Finally, anelite tier thread.

>>512020088
You should be thankful that the british didn't sent us to you. But we will do it, don't worry. You will speak English soon

>>512020019
>The hilarious fact that the most celebrated war
That would be the one against Persia. You know, the empire over thrice as large as Nanda with more than three times the number of soldiers which Alexander had defeated and conquered.
>what would have happened to the greeks had they dared to face the Gangaridai
The stench would have forced them to invent gas masks?

>>512020123
Impotent gloating, slum man.

>>512020098
>would have been raped by the Gangaridai
Like picrel you mean?

>>512020143
Then why run away from the Nandas? Fact is that the elephants would have raped the Greeks

>>512020088
They don't use toilet bowls unfortunately.

>>512019730
Die in a fire you worthless piece of blubber.

>>512020259
>Then why run away from the Nandas
Probably the smell
Elephants have historically been poor weapons of war beyond shock value
Also can you stop thinking of rape for like 5 minutes?

>>512019856
You lost.

>>512020389
>muh smell
I accept your concession

>>512020404
Concession that you can't stop thinking about rape?

>>512020223
what the fuck poor lizard

>>512020543
Concession that you don't have any points.

Indians helped liberate Italy in ww2 btw

>>512020560
She shouldn't have dressed so provocatively, she was basically asking for it

>>512020402
who didn't if the 'victors' are flooded by subhuman dreck like yourself ;)

>>512020627
What points do you want to discuss exactly?
>Liberate
Nigga, I...

They are undoubtedly a bunch of arrogant, deceitful sycophants.
But as long as they remain confined to that shitty subcontinent, there is no problem.

>>512018856 (OP)
Man these writings are thousands of years old and yet it describes exactly the modern jeet.

>>512020259
Fact is India is a third world shithole without basic sanitation. People who live in slums don’t get an opinion.

>>512020627
Nobody cares. India is dirty, corrupt, and full of scheming liars and sycophants. You have managed to make the entire world despise you.

Indophobia thread

OP William Walker Atkinson wrote about the Indians in his books and you should add some quotes from his books to the list!

Here is one example from "A Series of Lessons in Yogi Philosophy":

> The Real and the Imitation

The Western student is apt to be somewhat confused in his ideas regarding the Yogis and their philosophy and practice. Travelers to India have written great tales about the hordes of fakirs, mendicants and mountebanks who infest the great roads of India and the streets of its cities, and who impudently claim the title “Yogi.” The Western student is scarcely to be blamed for thinking of the typical Yogi as an emaciated, fanatical, dirty, ignorant Hindu, who either sits in a fixed posture until his body becomes ossified, or else holds his arm up in the air until it becomes stiff and withered and for ever after remains in that position, or perhaps clenches his fist and holds it tight until his fingernails grow through the palm of his hands. That these people exist is true, but their claim to the title “Yogi” seems as absurd to the true Yogi as does the claim to the title “Doctor” on the part of the man who pares one’s corns seem to the eminent surgeon, or as does the title of “Professor,” as assumed by the street corner vendor of worm medicine, seem to the President of Harvard or Yale.

>>512020915
You are an economic refugee fleeing the shittiest country on Earth (India) to get away from Indians. Your flag is an admission that Indians can’t build a country worth living in. I accept your concession.

>>512020682
That's the issue. They're NOT contained within their shithole because the kike demons have decided to flood the west with them.

The Chinese monk Xuanzang travelled to India and even wrote an entire book on it. It was accurate enough that Brits used it to rediscover Indian relics. However I'm not familiar with the content.

I do recall he said Indians cover their houses with cow dung though.

OP if I excerpt all the instances of various philosophers I've read talking about the jeets will you add them to the list? All of them have had scathing things to say about the average jeet even if they praise the one-in-a-billion type jeets possessed of rare intelligence and character.

>>512020915
The only Indians I encounter are the ones delivering things to my door. They seem exceptionally happy to serve, although I generally don't tip. Feels wrong to reward that disgusting smell.

>>512021356
Yes please post them. I'll come back to this thread later to read everything and update the list, or you can copy what I and others posted and add to it.

I also forgot picrel from 1466-1472.

>>512020915
Depictions of pajeets from 3000 years ago would be almost identical to ones made now by the laymen.
The digust, amusement, dislike, and even contempt would be word for word the same.

>Indophobia saar!
Nobody fears a jeet.

>>512018890
>They go about naked, only covering their loins with a cloth, and account it no shame to expose their persons. Even the women wear nothing but a single cloth, and go barefoot and bareheaded.
Sounds based ngl

>>512018856 (OP)

>>512021349
Per ai so I don't know if true:

>Lack of Virtue and Justice: Described Indian people as holding "virtue and justice in light esteem," suggesting a perceived lack of moral uprightness compared to Chinese Confucian standards.

>Informal Marriage Customs: Noted that Indians had "no marriage decorum" and "no distinction of high or low," with women declaring consent informally, implying a lack of structured matrimonial practices.

>Excessive Funerary Practices: Criticized practices like burning the dead, scarring faces, cutting ears, cropping hair, tearing clothes, and animal sacrifices, viewing them as chaotic or barbaric compared to Chinese rituals.

>Narrow-Mindedness and Moral Impurity: Stated in a dialogue that Indians were "narrow-minded, with deep moral impurity," suggesting limited intellectual or moral breadth, possibly due to adherence to local customs or sectarian views.

>Sectarian Disputes: Described Indian Buddhist sects as engaging in "vehement" and contentious debates, indicating a lack of unity among Buddhists, with eighteen sects holding differing viewpoints.

>Linguistic Issues: Noted that India’s diverse languages led to "wrong sounds" and "perverted translations," causing errors in Buddhist texts and implying a lack of linguistic standardization.

>Untailored Clothing: Observed that Indian clothing lacked tailoring, with people wearing simple wrapped garments, suggesting less sophistication compared to Chinese tailored attire.

>Dirty Urban Environment: Described Indian city streets as "circular and dirty," with houses made of wood, bricks, and dung, implying less orderly or clean urban planning than in China.

>Dilapidated Buddhist Sites: Noted that some stupas and monasteries (e.g., in Nagarahara) were in poor condition, suggesting neglect by local communities

That's it? We are doing pretty well.