Thread replies: 6
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
File: 09390.png (163KB, 314x1782px)
163KB, 314x1782px
Why is it unpolitically correct to say that the Sikh's were the warrior race of the Indian sub-continent?
Every time they fell so did most of India (iirc).
We all know race is real.
>inb4 dumb brits didn't know what the fuck they were talking about
Nah. The British Empire was leading the entire planet in science. I'm pretty sure they weren't wrong.
>>
>>2437839
Did every officer in the Sikh Khalsa army make it to the commander/leaders list?
>>
>>2437839
Do we really need more /pol/ bait threads?
>>
>>2437839
We know race is really arbitrary, yes. The problem with your premise is that the British didn't conduct some kind of double-blind lab experiment that somehow extracted more 'warrior' juices from your average Sikh than from a control group to determine things like martial race. The designation was given out as a way to further subjugate and exploit defeated cultures with deeply entrenched martial traditions as recruits for their own Indian army. That's why the Sikhs were not listed as a martial race until after the British conquered them, so that young Sikh braves would join the British Army rather than self-organize into a new independent force that might fight to throw off British rule.
It was cultural cuckolding, the same kind the English practiced on the Highland Scots and Irish for centuries.
>>
>>2437896
Eternal Anglo strikes again
>>
>>2437896
shit...i never thought of it like
Thread posts: 6
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2