Desi Discussion thread

[Porus]

Pashtuns have genetic affinity with Punjabi Jatts. Here's the results for 3/4 Afghan Pashtun 1/4 Tajik

I don't get the chart, does that mean Kalash and Burusho are closer to Pathans than Afghan Pashtuns?

[Dovahkiin]

I don't get the chart, does that mean Kalash and Burusho are closer to Pathans than Afghan Pashtuns?

Pathan as in the Pak Pashtun, yeah. Anyway, look at the fst distances (right), they're all very near either way.

[Dovahkiin]

Hindkowaan just means 'of the the Indian mountains'. It's not an ethnicity. They're just northern Punjabis. Paharis/Mirpuris and people from Himachal who speak Pahari are also Punjabis. No difference, just the dialect.

Yes, historical Punjab stretched from Indus to Sutlej, and Cholistan Desert to the Himalayas.

[Shapur]

I don't get the chart, does that mean Kalash and Burusho are closer to Pathans than Afghan Pashtuns?

The total population of Kalash and Burusho is less than 1 lakh. I think the reason Kalsh and Burusho show close effinity to Pakistani Pashtuns is that many of them were assimilated by Pashtuns and became pashtunised over time. I have seen this process taking place first hand and met Chitralis in peshawar who were speaking pashto as a first language. Overtime the remaining ones will be assimilated by pashtuns as well. Same will happen to Hindowans and other indics in KPK.

[Dovahkiin]

I don't get the chart, does that mean Kalash and Burusho are closer to Pathans than Afghan Pashtuns?

It actually means that the Afghan Pashtun is getting the 'Pathan' (Pak Pashtun) as his closest population, followed by the others. That one particular Afghan_Pashtun sample might be bit West-shifted so its only slightly further than Kalash, but still very close.

[Dovahkiin]

The total population of Kalash and Burusho is less than 1 lakh. I think the reason Kalsh and Burusho show close effinity to Pakistani Pashtuns is that many of them were assimilated by Pashtuns and became pashtunised over time. I have seen this process taking place first hand and met Chitralis in peshawar who were speaking pashto as a first language. Overtime the remaining ones will be assimilated by pashtuns as well. Same will happen to Hindowans and other indics in KPK.

To be fair, the same has happened in Afghanistan as well, of some Turkics and Tajiks/Farsiwan groups.

[Shapur]

To be fair, the same has happened in Afghanistan as well, of some Turkics and Tajiks/Farsiwan groups.

Of course it has. Former Pashais, Nuristanis are becoming Pashtunised.

[Porus]

The total population of Kalash and Burusho is less than 1 lakh. I think the reason Kalsh and Burusho show close effinity to Pakistani Pashtuns is that many of them were assimilated by Pashtuns and became pashtunised over time. I have seen this process taking place first hand and met Chitralis in peshawar who were speaking pashto as a first language. Overtime the remaining ones will be assimilated by pashtuns as well. Same will happen to Hindowans and other indics in KPK.

That's true. Kalasha as a language as well is difficult to classify, Burusho and Shina have formed scripts for themselves and they live within their own communities but the Kalash are a tiny minority of a very large Pashtun province. Even so I think there are NGOs working to preserve Kalash culture, they just need to come up with a script. Like with any other country, I always say, the mother language of a region should be THAT region's official language. Urdu should never be imposed on anyone.

When you make unnecessary languages necessary, then you're setting up linguistic genocide. Urdu has no connection to the Kalash Valley, or Pakhtunkhwa, or Punjab even. It should be completely removed and replaced with English, while the other official languages are every native Pakistani language: Balochi, Sindhi, Thari, Seraiki, Punjabi, Domaaki, Burushaski, Pashto, Ormuri, Kohistani, Shina, Brahui, Hazaragi etc.

[Elite Pakhtun]

Hindkowaan just means 'of the the Indian mountains'. It's not an ethnicity. They're just northern Punjabis. Paharis/Mirpuris and people from Himachal who speak Pahari are also Punjabis. No difference, just the dialect.

When I'm taking about hindkowan I'm referring to people who speak Hindko in areas like abbotabad, manserah, attock etc. And look physically different to a certain extent. The regions are, to a limited degree, multiracial. Many are a transitory group between Pashtun and punjabis ethnically speaking. Visually I'd say they probably have more in common with kashmiris. There are also ample pashtuns there who speak Hindko fluently. They're different from the punjabis you see in, well, Punjab. They're not nationalistic at all, I don't think they care about race.

In your experience, where is the line is demarcated between who is or isn't punjabi?

Also, I have many friends who are kashmiri punjabi mixes. They refer to themselves as a mix. Some strongly identify with their Kashmiri side. Just thought you'd be interested in knowing this.

[Karachi]

That's true. Kalasha as a language as well is difficult to classify, Burusho and Shina have formed scripts for themselves and they live within their own communities but the Kalash are a tiny minority of a very large Pashtun province. Even so I think there are NGOs working to preserve Kalash culture, they just need to come up with a script. Like with any other country, I always say, the mother language of a region should be THAT region's official language. Urdu should never be imposed on anyone.

When you make unnecessary languages necessary, then you're setting up linguistic genocide. Urdu has no connection to the Kalash Valley, or Pakhtunkhwa, or Punjab even. It should be completely removed and replaced with English, while the other official languages are every native Pakistani language: Balochi, Sindhi, Thari, Seraiki, Punjabi, Domaaki, Burushaski, Pashto, Ormuri, Kohistani, Shina, Brahui, Hazaragi etc.

Lol what a idiot you are, saying punjabi is closer to kalasha, pastho etc.. then to Urdu. Stop dreaming u idiot, punjabis and other indic pakistanies will always be closer to Indians then to Kalash, Pashtuns etc... you panjus are really pathetic self hating people

[Porus]

When I'm taking about hindkowan I'm referring to people who speak Hindko in areas like abbotabad, manserah, attock etc. And look physically different to a certain extent. The regions are, to a limited degree, multiracial. Many are a transitory group between Pashtun and punjabis ethnically speaking. Visually I'd say they probably have more in common with kashmiris. There are also ample pashtuns there who speak Hindko fluently. They're different from the punjabis you see in, well, Punjab. They're not nationalistic at all, I don't think they care about race.

I know who you you're talking about, I've met lots of them. They're alright people. Some of them are Pashtun in origin, some are Punjabi, some who are 'Abbasi' or 'Ghauri'. Some of them say they're not Punjabis and hate being called Punjabi. I'd be happy to accept that, but their language is basically a Punjabi dialect. Punjabis can understand 70% of what they're saying, that doesn't count as a different language. I'd say (I'm not an expert, this is just an opinion) Pahari/Hindko is to standard Punjabi as Wazirwola is to standard Pashto. Different but not different enough to be separate.

In your experience, where is the line is demarcated between who is or isn't punjabi?

For me? It depends on who you ask. Some people are fascists and say you have to be 'racially' Punjabi. I argue that's bull****, there's no such thing as an ethnic Punjabi. The majority of Punjabi clans are Indian in origin, but since the last 100 years there's been Kashmiri, Pashtun and Baloch integration into Punjab. The ones who've been living in Punjab for the last 100 or so years are as Punjabi as anyone else. They think like us, talk like us and act like us. Even I'm not pure, as I mentioned, but I struggle to see myself as something else.

Also, I have many friends who are kashmiri punjabi mixes. They refer to themselves as a mix. Some strongly identify with their Kashmiri side. Just thought you'd be interested in knowing this.

I view that as confusion. Kashmiryat and being Kashmiri refers to a specific culture which lies in the Kashmir valley, even people from Ladakh are not 'Kashmiris'. The people of the valley are 'Kasheer', they speak Koshur. They have unique food: Tabakhmaz, Gushtaba, Haak, Noon Chai, Sabaz Chai. Their women wear a certain type of scarf, they have unique clothes... none of these attributes are retained by the Kashmiri-Punjabis, Koshur language is dead in Punjab.

I don't see the point in identifying with something you're not. British Asians who live here are British. They don't identify with... me for instance. Lots of them have said I remind them of their parents, and they think their own parents are funny.

It all depends on how you see yourself, if your grandparents were Pashtuns who speak Pashto and you're racially a Pashtun, you may prefer to use that as your identity. I personally don't see the point in it though.

[Porus]

Lol what a idiot you are, saying punjabi is closer to kalasha, pastho etc.. then to Urdu. Stop dreaming u idiot, punjabis and other indic pakistanies will always be closer to Indians then to Kalash, Pashtuns etc... you panjus are really pathetic self hating people

Lol please stop dude. Stop trying to impress these people :D oh my god.

So hilarious LOL

[Dovahkiin]

Lol what a idiot you are, saying punjabi is closer to kalasha, pastho etc.. then to Urdu. Stop dreaming u idiot, punjabis and other indic pakistanies will always be closer to Indians then to Kalash, Pashtuns etc... you panjus are really pathetic self hating people

Genetically speaking, it's true. Distance of Kalash component:

Reference 3 Admixture K=12 | Harappa Ancestry Project

Kalash component:

Kalash 85%
Brahui 55%
Baloch 53%
Makrani Baloch 52%
Pakistani Pashtun 45%
Lezgin 45%
Sindhi 45%
Burusho 43%
Georgians 42%
Iranian 40%
Kashmiri Pandit 40%
Adygei 38%
Iranian jews 38%
Azeri Jews 38%
Gujarati-B 37%
Uzbekistan jews 36%
Gujarati-A 36%
Iraqi Jews 36%
Armenian 35%
Bedouin 18%
Russian 14%
Mongol 6%
Great andamanese 5%

[Samandri]

The total population of Kalash and Burusho is less than 1 lakh. I think the reason Kalsh and Burusho show close effinity to Pakistani Pashtuns is that many of them were assimilated by Pashtuns and became pashtunised over time. I have seen this process taking place first hand and met Chitralis in peshawar who were speaking pashto as a first language. Overtime the remaining ones will be assimilated by pashtuns as well. Same will happen to Hindowans and other indics in KPK.

Medieval Afghan sources inform us that the Yusufzai Afghans conquered Dir from "Kafirs" and they were the ones who converted people of Kashkar (Chitral) into Islam. The 'Kafirs' of nowadays Nuristan successfully resisted Afghan invasions and preserved their religion by nominally submitting to the Yusufzai chief. Akhund Darweza says that when Afghans conquer new area, they keep the remnants of the indigenous population either as slaves or "raiyat" (subjugates) and that "raiyat" are assigned various professions. The Pashto speaking artisan classes in upper KPK, upper FATA and upper Afghanistan, are either descendants of Dards or Kafirs, and they intermingled with families who were true Afghans by genealogies.

[Elite Pakhtun]

I know who you you're talking about, I've met lots of them. They're alright people. Some of them are Pashtun in origin, some are Punjabi, some who are 'Abbasi' or 'Ghauri'. Some of them say they're not Punjabis and hate being called Punjabi. I'd be happy to accept that, but their language is basically a Punjabi dialect. Punjabis can understand 70% of what they're saying, that doesn't count as a different language.

For sure, it's almost the exact same language. I guess we're back to the is it ethnic vs cultural question.

majority of Punjabi clans are Indian in origin, but since the last 100 years there's been Kashmiri, Pashtun and Baloch integration into Punjab. The ones who've been living in Punjab for the last 100 or so years are as Punjabi as anyone else. They think like us, talk like us and act like us. Even I'm not pure, as I mentioned, but I struggle to see myself as something else.

Sure. I'm of the opinion that if they've intermixed with the locals for 100 years, and as a result identify with punjabis, then yes they're Punjabis. On the other hand, if they've lived in punjab, but only intermixed with their own ethnicity, and especially if they even self identify as being said ethnicity, it should be hard to say they are punjabi... even if they do behave like punjabis, speak the language, etc.

I don't see the point in identifying with something you're not. British Asians who live here are British. They don't identify with... me for instance. Lots of them have said I remind them of their parents, and they think their own parents are funny.

Sure, but British is a country based citizenship. They wouldn't, for example, say they're Anglo saxon, germanic, or some such thing. Saying they're British, which would probably be accurate, doesn't tell you anything about their ethnicity.

I don't know your friends, but chances are good they're aware of their ethnicity, while being British. Which is good.

It all depends on how you see yourself, if your grandparents were Pashtuns who speak Pashto and you're racially a Pashtun, you may prefer to use that as your identity. I personally don't see the point in it though.

Agreed on the racial part. The pointlessness/usefulness is a subjective matter.