Ethnically, is there a different between Afghans and Iranians...

Ethnically, is there a different between Afghans and Iranians? I know the culturres are different but I know they are both of Aryan descent. Is one group "more Aryan" than the other?

Other urls found in this thread:

huffingtonpost.com/brian-glyn-williams/pagan-kalash-people-of-pakistan_b_4811627.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Why don't you read a book, you stupid faggot?

writing a long answer, page 10 bump

k
thx based secular leaf

If you're still here, then I can explain to you.

Iranian is an ethnic term if you set aside the country, it includes Balochs, Kurds, Gilaks, Lurs, Mazanderanis, Ossetians, Pashtuns, Pamiris, Persians, Tajiks, Talysh people, Wakhis and Yaghnobis - so a whole slew of people.

Now, Iran's demographics are Persians 65%, Azerbaijanis 16%, Kurds 7%, Lurs 6%, Arabs 2%, Baloch 2%, Turkmens 1%, Turkic tribal groups (e.g. Qashqai) 1%, and non-Persian, non-Turkic groups (e.g. Armenians, Georgians, Assyrians, Circassians, Basseri ) less than 1%.

Of these, Persians, Kurds, Lurs and Baloch are all Iranian/Iranic - and thus Aryan (as to how much they descend from the original aryans, that is up for debate and one cannot actually determine it, but they all definitely have some degree of aryan descent.

Afghanistan's demographics are 42% Pashtun, 27% Tajik, 9% Hazara, 9% Uzbek and a few other minorities - of these, Pashtuns and Tajiks are Iranian/Iranic and Tajiks are Persian. They too, of course descend from the original Aryans. There are also Pamiris who are also Iranic and Aryan.

As for who is more Aryan, I would say Pashtuns, Pamiris and Tajiks are 'more' Aryan because they are more isolated and thus have mixed less with foreigners. They also have much higher degrees of the r1a haplogroup which is decidedly the 'aryan' haplogroup according to many. In terms of linguistics, Pashtuns are the most Aryan as Pashto is the closest living language most directly related to Avestan - the language which the Zoroastrian prophet Zoroaster (who was born in northern Afghanistan) spoke and preached in. The next would be Tajiks from Afghanistan as they speak a version of Persian that is more close to the version spoken in Medieval Persia, Iranian Persian today is mixed with a lot of Arabic (something around 35% of modern lexicon in Iranian Persian is Arabic today) and they speak it with an accent akin to fast paced French except more metrosexual.
1/2

thanks for your effort post

I'm still around, thanks m8

If you'd like proof, you can search how the normal everyday Iranians speak, you'll see that they speak quite differently compared to what they sound like when a political figure like Khamenei or the news speak in Iran (it sounds very much like the standard dialect of Persian in Kabul).
So yeah in terms of linguistics, Pashto and Tajik Persian are more 'pure' and unadulterated relative to their western neighbor.

As a tl;dr on genetics, Afghans (Pashtuns, Pamiris and Tajiks) are more 'aryan' because they have higher frequencies of the r1a haplogroup. Western and Southern Iran are quite racially mixed over time, with native Iranics, Arabs, Elamites and many other groups.

np

both countries people still use the term 'aryahi' to describe themselves, I've seen many historical narratives and documentaries in the language that refer to the iranian peoples as a collective as 'aryahi' so the notion of being aryan is still alive in both countries

I also know that there are several people in both countries with either first/last names being aryan/arya or something else related to it, north india is the same as well when it comes to this regard

but for the most part most people in both countries get arabic names lmao

You stupid Canadian faggot: Persians in Iran are barely mixed with Arabs on autosomal DNA plots. Persians in Iran were indigenous people of Zagros Mountains, and the Sintashta input did not change them that much genetically.

In the Shahnameh, Turanians were distinguished Iranians of Pars. The Achaemenids and Sassanids still resemble modern-day Iranians -- they weren't like Alans or Scythian peoples.

Also, Tajiks and Pashtun have a lot of Mongoloid admixture, but it's true, they have more Sintashta.

Is there really a trend reverting to Zoroastrianism?
Iran is bastardized 'Aryan' or vice versa, correct?

probably the last thing I'll post is that Pamiris are probably THE most aryan people on the planet left today, they exist in north afghanistan and southern tajikistan, and if you've seen pictures or videos of them they really do look '''''white''''

I never said they're genetically mixed man, in fact I actually believe very little mixing happened between arabs and western iranians. But you're an idiot if you think arabic didn't have a HUGE impact on the language

It all depends what you define as Aryan. If you define Aryan as Indo-Iranian, then no one is Aryan except in degrees (with Pamiris, Tajiks, Yagnobis, and Pashtun being the most -- about 30-50%).

If you define Aryan as the Achaemenids or Sassanids, then only Persians in Iran are Aryan. Achaeminids and Sassanids came a lot after Indo-Iranian migrations, and they mixed with the indigenous people of Zagros Mountains.

Another note is that one of the greatest tragedies to ever happen to the caucasian race is the genocide of caucasians in central asia.

Central asia today would be filled with iranic people all the way up to kazakhstan if it weren't for the blood thirsty and war mongering turkics and mongols. The place would also be a power house for islam and probably a very moderate version of it.

>Pamiris are probably THE most aryan people
That's only if you define Aryan as Indo-Iranians.

I doubt Achaemenids and Sassanids had as much Sintashta input.

Indo-Iranians were mixing a lot earlier than that. They didn't have a concept of racial purity or whatever. Sogdians, as an example, were already intermingling with East Asians.

Aren't Azerbaijanis people also more aryan as well

>tfw you are Azeri but don't know shit

and dont forget about saladin and the destruction of the cathars,they knew that islam is the brainwashing core of satan and they were burned alive because they refused to convert to the religion of love and peace and

achaemenid/sassanid aren't ethnic groups man, a persian from pars isn't related to a persian from lets say mashhad in terms of genetics and ancestral history wouldn't you agree?

azeris are genetically and historically iranian/iranic but they now speak a turkic language

don't let anyone tell you otherwise

There actually was a mixing in genetics. It's why there are Arab looking Persians in places like Tehran..

Kek nvm

nah, imo even if there was mixing (well there was, but not to any significant degree), it doesn't and wouldn't change phenotypes

for example there are plenty of families in both countries where some members look like sandniggers and others look like sandniggers with light eyes or hair, or completely white, also varying skintones

I'm sure that's how it's always been.

No, you don't get what I am saying.

Indo-Iranians of Sintashta migrated from Andronovo area. There were multiple waves though.

They went to the Iranian plateau and mixed with indigenous people of the Zagros Mountains, as an example. They mixed with the indigenous people giving rise to Persians, or whatever. I'm saying, the Achaemenids and Sassanids were not "racially pure" -- Iran began like Mexico where Europeans mixed with indigenous people there.

The Indo-Iranians gave Iran its culture and language, but they were racially distinct.

You're correct that the East Iranians like Pamiris and Pashtun possess more Indo-Iranian percentage in their genome, but my point is, it is unlikely they were ever pure. People back then mixed a lot -- we're talking about ~3000-2000 BC.

>it is unlikely they were ever pure. People back then mixed a lot -- we're talking about ~3000-2000 BC.
yeah I agree with that

In the Shahnameh, Persians of Pars *and* Persians of Central Asia (called Turan) are distinguished.

A lot of stupid Turks think Turanians refers to Turkic people -- which it is does not. Turanians refers to the Eastern Iranians like Tajiks and Pashtuns.

Point being, Iranians share strong ethnocultural roots with those people, but have always been different phenotypically/racially.

afghan is a meme ethnicity same goes for iranians

afghan is a meme ethnicity same goes for iranian

Thinking about these enclave ethnics makes me wonder about our future. If things don't change will white subgroups be cute but harmless isolates in a brown future like these proto-aryans? It makes me think of the Kuffari or whatever they're called, the white pagans in Afghanistan.

The Kalash peole

>A lot of stupid Turks think Turanians refers to Turkic people -- which it is does not
yeah, it bothers me that turks (from turkey) claim a lot of iranic history, it bothers me even more than when uzbeks or other turkics try and claim such history

the kaffirs and people of nuristan literally look no different than the pashtuns with which they live beside

if you really want another convincing example, go look at zoroastrians in iran, they're indistinguishable from muslim iranians

another example is looking at zoroastrians/parsis in india (they're people who fled iran when the arabs invaded), they literally look like indians

and like I said before, there's lots of phenotype variation within families

then how did they get a genetic admixture yet retain cultural / religious features?

How did the basque stay isolated?

A part of me feels like Islam is an ideology created and pushed by (((them))) to mobilise a group of people to wage war against Christianity - like communism was.

Sure they may hate (((them))) now but don't forget that back then Muslim cities rescued Jews when they were being kicked out from Christian countries

no idea, maybe they descend from the same people more or less, and the fact that they still remain today might be an example of how islam wasn't always spread by the sword

funny side note is that the kalash/pagans of afghanistan actually consider christians to be their brothers because they see christians as pagans

>they see christians as pagans
that's funny. tell me more about this.

Not created, definitely pushed. (((They))) are using it as a weapon against the last bastion of righteousness in the world.

I saw it on a documentary of some kalash in Pakistan, the kalash basically allowed the documentary group into their homes (where they only allow other pagans to enter) and the guy made note of what I said.

Can look for it if you'd like.

Please do. I've been on a documentary kick lately.

ok I think it wasn't a documentary but something I read

>Soon we entered the Kalash village of Rumbur. The wooden houses were built in steps above one another, going up the valley’s walls, and the village square filled up with Kalash curious to see us. Among them was Kazi, the village holy man. Everyone stood back as he approached us and heard our request to stay with the Kalash for a few days and learn about their culture. Kazi, a wizened man with twinkling eyes, heard us out and thought about it for a while. After some thought he finally smiled and gave us his blessing. He proclaimed that as blue-eyed “pagans” (the Kalash believe that in worshiping the Trinity, Christians worship three gods), we were like the Kalash and therefore welcome to stay with them.

huffingtonpost.com/brian-glyn-williams/pagan-kalash-people-of-pakistan_b_4811627.html

Christianity was created by ((them)) too. Why don't you go back to Paganism?

Jesus was a kike too, I hate to break it to you.

Then again, he may have not existed, check Richard Carrier

I won't click on a huffpo link but this is a nice excerpt. Very interesting.