Ok, without looking up a source, can you explain what the term "landed gentry" means?
Bonus question: What does the term "gentleman" actually mean, in its historical context. Again don't look it up before answering.
So landed gentry are "landowners" who could live solely of the rental/labor of the commoners.
British society was strictly hierarchical, and largely based on birth—"blue blood" aristocracy. "Landed gentry" was below the peerage but above commoners.
Racism and "blood" hierarchy was a feature of European society. "Blue blood" is those "who claimed never to have intermarried with Moors, Jews, or other races." "Blood purity" is a European racist idea of social hierarchy.
So the Europeans mapped their racist idea of "blood" purity to India and interpreted "jati" and "varna" in this way. However, as even DNA evidence shows, Indians are completely intermixed. There is simply no idea "blood purity" in the manner of European racism.
The people who claimed to teach us "egalitarianism" and "civilize" us were racist slave owners obsessed with hierarchical blood purity.
How @theliverdr pushes ideologically motivated garbage.
In a long post he claims that “science says” Giloy caused liver toxicity; in the same post he dismisses a study on Ashwagandha as garbage.
For the case against Giloy his reference is the propaganda rag, @thewire_in! 😏
The Wire article further references an “observational study” which has a total sample size of 6 people!
No doubt this study is conducted by other Liver doctors trained in allopathy alone; and specifically targeting Giloy “twigs.”
Other than the limited sample size, the AYUSH response states that it is very easy to confuse Giloy with a similar, but toxic, plant; the “scientific” study didn’t actually even check if the correct plant was used.
So this 6-person study with any randomized control or double-blind test, where motivated researchers isolate a perhaps pre-determined conclusion is called “science.” Now let’s see what this doctor calls “underpowered garbage” which was “never done methodically.”
Europeans, particularly Germans, were so desperate for an “Aryan” identity based on Hindu texts because they had very little history or identity of their own.
The Germanic tribes were barbarians with little durable language or culture. To lay claim to Sanskrit and related knowledge allows them to attach to a glorious history.
The Germans weren't successors of Rome. The Italians had history, the Greeks had history, even the British could harken to a Celtic history, what did the Germans have?
This is how they became "Aryan" laying claiming to Sanskrit and Indo-European origins.
Some direct excerpts from the translation of "al-jabr" by Mohammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi, from which the term Algebra comes.
Note this translation is from 1831. After 1857 British and Western scholarship started denigrating Indian knowledge as an explicit policy.
Firstly, the translator Frederic Rosen makes explicit that Al Khwarizmi did not invent Algebra, and that this was "well-established" in scholarship, but that he was the "first Mohammedan" to write upon it. 2/
That Al Khwarizmi did not invent Algebra is attested by many, and even by the Al Khwarizmi himself in the preface where he states that the Caliph Al Mamun, encouraged him to write a popular work on the topic, implying that there were existing works he would use. Which were these?
Translator himself concludes that "at least part of the information is drawn from an Indian Source", based on his knowledge alone.