â„–18578095[Quote]
No. Cape Verde, Mali, Lesotho, Sierra Leone, the Republic of the Congo, Chad, Benin, Eritrea, Djibouti, Burundi, Kenya, Zambia, and Mozambique are not generally classified as “Aryan nations.”
The answer depends on what you mean by Aryan, because the term has different historical and modern uses.
Historical and linguistic meaning: “Aryan” is an ancient term associated particularly with Indo-Iranian peoples. In modern linguistics, scholars generally use Indo-Iranian or Indo-Aryan for specific language groups.
Nazi racial ideology: The Nazis used “Aryan” as a racial category, primarily to promote a false hierarchy centered on people they considered northern European. This was a political and racist ideology, not a scientifically valid classification of nations.
Modern African populations: The countries you listed have diverse populations, with histories and languages associated with African peoples and language families, including Niger-Congo, Afroasiatic, and Nilo-Saharan (the latter classification is debated).
One important distinction: a country is not inherently “Aryan” or “non-Aryan.” Countries are political entities, and their populations are diverse. If you mean Indo-Aryan-speaking populations, that is a more precise linguistic question, and the countries you listed are not generally known for having Indo-Aryan languages as their principal indigenous languages.
â„–18578115[Quote]
Off topic but this map does remind me of how SNCA the African countries are. Two billion people living on this continent yet none of these countries have even accomplished anything.
â„–18578136[Quote]
>No. Cape Verde, Mali, Lesotho, Sierra Leone, the Republic of the Congo, Chad, Benin, Eritrea, Djibouti, Burundi, Kenya, Zambia, and Mozambique are not generally classified as “Aryan nations.”
>
>The answer depends on what you mean by Aryan, because the term has different historical and modern uses.
>
> Historical and linguistic meaning: “Aryan” is an ancient term associated particularly with Indo-Iranian peoples. In modern linguistics, scholars generally use Indo-Iranian or Indo-Aryan for specific language groups.
>
> Nazi racial ideology: The Nazis used “Aryan” as a racial category, primarily to promote a false hierarchy centered on people they considered northern European. This was a political and racist ideology, not a scientifically valid classification of nations.
>
> Modern African populations: The countries you listed have diverse populations, with histories and languages associated with African peoples and language families, including Niger-Congo, Afroasiatic, and Nilo-Saharan (the latter classification is debated).
>
>One important distinction: a country is not inherently “Aryan” or “non-Aryan.” Countries are political entities, and their populations are diverse. If you mean Indo-Aryan-speaking populations, that is a more precise linguistic question, and the countries you listed are not generally known for having Indo-Aryan languages as their principal indigenous languages.
â„–18578139[Quote]
>>18578115>Benin>Mali>Mauritania>RwandaWho the fuck has ever heard of these countries before? I've never heard anyone talk about these countries. They genuinely sound like AI generated countries
â„–18578156[Quote]
>>18578139shit nocountry cares about, they will be dead from inter or intranational war within the century anyway
â„–18578165[Quote]
>>18578156the states i mean
â„–18578220[Quote]
FACT