Pashtunistan/Loy Afghanistan vs Loyalism to Pakistan ? Reasons for and against.

[Firdousi]

The fact is a lot of Pashtun speak Dari as first language, not because it is superior but simply because living in urban area of Kabul, Herat, Mazar they had to adopt. The way a lot of Indko, Hazara, Tajiks and even Nuristani are speaking Pashto as first language.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwc8pI2TKNM


Zahir Shah, Doud Khan and...were all Dari speakers but true nationalist Afghans.

As for as cloths and custom it is share culture of region, at the end both Tajik, Pashtons, Pamiri, Yaqubi are eastern Aryan(hate the world Iranic) people even when Tajiks have adopted the language of Fars.

The thing is Pashtuns living in rural areas have adopted Farsi too. Shindand, Adraskan, Pashtun Zarghoon, Torghowondi,.. are mainly Pashtun inhabited districts in Herat. No Pashtun can speak Pashto in there while Tajiks living in Kandahar, Helmand or Paktia can speak Farsi fluently.

Dont be a gipsy, brother. You know most of Pashtuns are not Iranic but Turkic lol

[Elias]

[MENTION=1444]Azmal[/MENTION] is right it has nothing to do with Dari being superior to pashto but because those Pashtuns are surrounded by Tajiks and have to interact on a daily life with dari zoban. Other way round my family maternal side are Tajik and have migrated from surkhrod to Kabul. The one part of the family that have been living in Kabul since decades speak Dari as their first language and the others living in laghman and Ningarhar area are speaking Pashto as their first language.

[ذو الفقار]

I wander if anyone here have seen the lectures of Thomas Barfield on Afghanistan, for example this one

Tribal and Religious Identity in Afghanistan - Thomas Barfield - YouTube

[ذو الفقار]

I found this interesting map of Afghanistan revealing its ethnic diversity



According to this, Parsiwans are a separate category from Tajiks. Tajiks are concentrated in the northeast, while Parsiwans in the western region, around Herat for example.

Pamiris are also considered separate from Tajik. Pamiris are mostly followers of Nizari Ismaili (Aga Khani).

Sayyids are a separate category. They are geographically concentrated too like an ethnic group and not merely an ancestry or caste.

Persian-speaking Arabs are a separate category too, and Monghols/Mongols are also present and in a separate category from the Hazara. Finally, there is a presence, though quite small, of Kazakhs and Kirghiz in Afghanistan too.

[salman47]

I found this interesting map of Afghanistan revealing its ethnic diversity



According to this, Parsiwans are a separate category from Tajiks. Tajiks are concentrated in the northeast, while Parsiwans in the western region, around Herat for example.

Pamiris are also considered separate from Tajik. Pamiris are mostly followers of Nizari Ismaili (Aga Khani).

Sayyids are a separate category. They are geographically concentrated too like an ethnic group and not merely an ancestry or caste.

Persian-speaking Arabs are a separate category too, and Monghols/Mongols are also present and in a separate category from the Hazara. Finally, there is a presence, though quite small, of Kazakhs and Kirghiz in Afghanistan too.

It's bull****!
Whoever made the map can fool the world but not us!
The way it is made it looks like 100 years old. But then the time says 2006? Definitely fake.

[ذو الفقار]

It's bull****!
Whoever made the map can fool the world but not us!
The way it is made it looks like 100 years old. But then the time says 2006? Definitely fake.

How is it fake? It looks quite accurate to me. The sheer amount of detail in this map.

Other more generalized maps of ethnic groups in Afghanistan run along the same lines, Pashtuns concentrated in the south, Tajiks in the north, Hazara in the center, Uzbeks and Turkmen in the far north, Baluch on the southern border, etc.

Here's another map with pretty much the same result as the one you object to, except this one was conducted by professional organizations:

[salman47]

How is it fake? It looks quite accurate to me. The sheer amount of detail in this map.

Other more generalized maps of ethnic groups in Afghanistan run along the same lines, Pashtuns concentrated in the south, Tajiks in the north, Hazara in the center, Uzbeks and Turkmen in the far north, Baluch on the southern border, etc.

Here's another map with pretty much the same result as the one you object to, except this one was conducted by professional organizations:

There is still something wrong with the map...
Like too many unnecessary divisions of the same ethnic group. Also many of the tribes mentioned in the map don't exist.

[maneatinglizard]

It looks quite accurate to me.

How can you tell if it's accurate or not? You've never been to Afghanistan, and know nothing about the country.

Stick to Qadiani propaganda. You are clearly super ignorant about everything else.

[ذو الفقار]

How can you tell if it's accurate or not?

I gave the persuasive reasons why I think it's accurate in the same post you partially quoted me from. It would be redundant to repeat those reasons again.

[UnknownUser]

I Dont think there is a need for an Indian or Punjabi or Pakistani lecturing Afghans on demohraphics of Afghanistan. They would probably know best themselves. Lol

[ذو الفقار]

I Dont think there is a need for an Indian or Punjabi or Pakistani lecturing Afghans on demohraphics of Afghanistan. They would probably know best themselves. Lol

You assume that being from a certain country automatically makes one an authority on its demographics. The truth is demographic study is a particular discipline which requires study. This is something Afghans should realize, just because you are an Afghan doesn't make you an authority on Afghanistan. And just because someone is a non-Afghan doesn't mean he can't be an authority on Afghanistan. I am not claiming to be an authority on Afghanistan, far from it, but I am citing authoritative scholarly sources, they have much more credibility than random people on the internet claiming to be Afghans and claiming to know better than the professional sources.

[UnknownUser]

You assume that being from a certain country automatically makes one an authority on its demographics. The truth is demographic study is a particular discipline which requires study. This is something Afghans should realize, just because you are an Afghan doesn't make you an authority on Afghanistan. And just because someone is a non-Afghan doesn't mean he can't be an authority on Afghanistan. I am not claiming to be an authority on Afghanistan, far from it, but I am citing authoritative scholarly sources, they have much more credibility than random people on the internet claiming to be Afghans and claiming to know better than the professional sources.

Where do you think your professionel sources get their information from? From God?

Obviously their information comes from Afghans themselves, so by definition, Afghans themselves know More about themselves than outsiders.

[salman47]

You assume that being from a certain country automatically makes one an authority on its demographics. The truth is demographic study is a particular discipline which requires study. This is something Afghans should realize, just because you are an Afghan doesn't make you an authority on Afghanistan. And just because someone is a non-Afghan doesn't mean he can't be an authority on Afghanistan. I am not claiming to be an authority on Afghanistan, far from it, but I am citing authoritative scholarly sources, they have much more credibility than random people on the internet claiming to be Afghans and claiming to know better than the professional sources.

It's in the genes of Indian-sub continent: If something is stamped by white man, it is treated as a revelation of God *استغفرالله*

[Azmal]

It's in the genes of Indian-sub continent: If something is stamped by white man, it is treated as a revelation of God *استغفرالله*

You should read Babur e Namaah, these Hindustani Muslim have historical inferiority complex for being Indic.