why conservatives hate indians.

a few extra details.

If you know any Jewish people, imagine one of them, right now, in your head. Frizzy black hair, funny looking nose, and the smile. You know the smile I’m talking about.

picture not related

Now imagine going up to this imaginary, archetypal Jewish person and trying to sell them on Holocaust revisionism. Not the hardcore stuff, just some very gentle “well technically it was 5.4 million, not 6 million.”

If your archetype Jew is also a Zionist (mine isn’t; my archetypal Jew is Adam Friedland) then you can also ask them what they think, hypothetically, about the ethics of a genetics-testing Apartheid genocidal theocracy which pays religious fanatics with machine guns to do settler colonialism in brown people land. See if they get irrationally angry, and then tell them,

I wasn’t even talking about Israel, it’s just a hypothetical, why are you so mad?

If this is getting a bit too antisemitic for you, go to the South Shore of Boston, or some pub in Dublin, and offer your revisionist take on the Potato Famine, and how the British Empire was really good, and maybe we should bring it back.

It’s easy to aggravate aggrieved minorities. Black people have slavery, Hispanics have Columbus, the Chinese have opium and the rape of Nanking and the Eight-Nation Alliance, Koreans have the comfort women, Japanese have the nuclear bomb. Italians will tell you that Mussolini wasn’t such a bad guy. Greeks become offended if you mention the fact that modern Greeks are 20-40% Slavic.

Black represents proportion of Slavic ancestry.

I’m sure Finns get annoyed when you mention they allied with the Nazis, and maybe other eastern Europeans do too. Ukrainians are definitely not Russians with an accent, by the way. The Russian occupation of Poland was the worst thing to ever happen. And the Dutch are totally different from Germans. Definitely wasn’t the same group of people 500 years ago.

Germans will gladly tell you that Hitler was evil, as a point of pride. But they also take pleasure in insulting everyone else in their own special way: Americans are superficial, Greeks and Italians are lazy, Poles are poor…

It’s hard to imagine a group of people who do not have sharp collective biases. Americans, for all of our racism, have the least national biases of any country. We do not really care whether you are British or Irish, Dutch or German, Russian or Ukrainian. All these petty little historical details don’t matter. We care about important things, like the color of your skin, and whether or not you’re good at sports.

That’s Hanania’s theory of anti-Indian hatred, and I basically agree. If Indians were overrepresented in football and had lighter skin, they would probably be more admired and less resented.

Regarding the point on athleticism, I find this issue to be especially salient for conservatives and populists. They call it “looking like a fag.” I notice that Mark Cuban, as a liberal Democrat DEI-proponent, gets a lot less hate than Bill Gates. I also notice that as Mark Zuckerberg has gotten jacked, hatred toward him has subsided. The right-wing places an enormous amount of value on the aesthetics of physical strength. The most common insult against Nick Fuentes is that he “looks gay.” This is very important in determining right-wing rage.

Besides athleticism and skin color, I think there are other reasons why right-wingers hate Indians. These reasons might be made up, or statistically insignificant, but they are real to the same extent that “Islamic terrorism” is real. Most Muslims are not terrorists, but enough of them are terrorists to cause conservatives to hate them. Similarly, most Indians are not bad people, but there are some factors of perception which cause conservatives to paint them with a broad brush.

The Perception of Ethnocentrism

People hate Jews because Jews are overly sensitive. Don’t believe me? Check the comments section for the Jewish wall of text. People hate ethnocentrism. Or, in other words, the perception of ethnocentrism produces an ethnocentric response.

East Asian people, based on their intermarriage rates, are not very ethnocentric. Additionally, 250,000 Asian Americans were adopted by white families since 1992. If you’re a Millennial, you probably knew one of these adopted Asian kids. They never knew Asian culture, they may have gone to church, they talked white, acted white, and if you heard them on the phone, you can’t even tell they’re Asian. The visibility of adopted East Asians in America has helped to normalize the idea that East Asians can be assimilated, that they’re just like white people, and there’s no necessity for conflict.

One of the things that East Asians have in their favor is that they have no strong religious background. Buddhism and Shintoism, if anything, have been fetishized in the west as the cure to fast-paced capitalism, without having the stigma of redistributive communism. Since these religions have very little to say about issues like intermarriage, homosexuality, arranged marriage, or a caste system, there’s not much religious conflict to be had.

It should be noted here that the weakness of Shintoism and Buddhism are not arbitrary or a result of their “deep philosophical tolerance.” Rather, it was particular historical conditions that destroyed and defanged these once virulent faiths.

In the 19th century, Japanese people went around smashing Buddhist temples because, in the age of nationalism, they decided that Buddhism was a foreign Chinese import. In its place, the Japanese made a cult out of the Emperor. Then, in 1945, the Emperor said “just kidding guys,” which demoralized the nation and led to widespread octopus sex and pedophilia.

The Chinese, in the 20th century, decided that Buddhism was contrary to communism, and copied what the Japanese did a century prior. The worship of the Buddha, or Confucius, or the Dao was replaced with the worship of the state. When Chinese people leave China, they leave behind the state apparatus, which makes it very hard for them to maintain their religious fervor.

It’s not that East Asians are incapable of being religious fanatics — they once did yell Banzai and fought to the bloody end for their emperor. The problem is that emperor-worship is hard to maintain when the emperor is dead, or 6,000 miles away.

Japanese and Chinese societies did used to have an ethnic caste system, and they did used to practice arranged marriage, just like Indians. But again, in the 19th and 20th century, those practices were abolished in the name of westernization and modernization.

Indian Americans, by contrast, fought modernization tooth and nail, despite it being forced down their throats by the British.

For example, take the issue of pedophilia.

In India in 1891, the British tried to raise the age of consent from 10 years old to 12 years old.

The act, called the Age of Consent Act of 1891, was strongly opposed by Orthodox Hindu leaders, including Romesh Chandra Mitra and Bal Gangadhar Tilak.

Tilak wasn’t just some random Indian dude. Gandhi called him “The Maker of Modern India.”

The reason the British wanted to ban pedophilia is because the Indians were raping kids so forcefully that a girl ended up dying. Not good! But here was Tilak’s argument:

• The 10 year old had “defective female organs”

• Girls with defective female organs were “dangerous freaks of nature”

• the husband was being “persecuted diabolically for doing a harmless act”

While India eventually changed its tune on this particular issue, the ethnic conflict between the British and the Indians left a deep scar that influences Indian attitudes to this day. Ask an Indian about their position on Ukraine, and it’s not difficult to get them to go off on some rant about Anglo-American imperialism, how the Anglo-Americans think they rule the world.

There’s deep resentment here — the same kind of resentment that causes Jews to flip off the arch of Titus in Rome. If Indians have a Holocaust experience, it’s some combination of the Islamic invasions and the British Raj. This is a sensitive topic, but it helps explains why some Indians don’t always get along great with Anglo whites. Not all, but perhaps a sufficient enough percentage to cause a perception of friction. This one is based on my personal experience.

The Indian Experience with Modernity

Japan and China were never formally colonized. It’s much harder for Japanese and Chinese people to claim that “we are poor because Europeans colonized us” because:

1. They are not poor

2. They were not colonized

Indians, by contrast, are poor, like poorer than some African countries. The average IQ of an Indian is well within the African range. And they were colonized. This confluence of these facts creates a massive pressure on the part of Indians to scapegoat the west for all its problems, which is something that intensifies, ironically, when Indians come to the west.

I am saying this, and you may be imagining I am saying that all Indians are like this, but I am not. Rather, I am saying that every culture has its own set of squeaky wheels, which squeak at various volumes if you push them. If you push Jews on the Holocaust and Zionism, you get quite a bit of squeaking. Irish will squeak over the potato famine, and Greeks will squeak if you call them Slavs. Germans squeak the most passive aggressively. Asians, if they squeak, usually adopt the narratives of liberal white women complaining about white supremacy — they have no unique historical grievances to litigate.

Indians squeak quite loud. When I say “Indians,” I am referring to that subset of each ethnic group which is ethnocentric and will loudly and proudly let you know that they are the greatest culture on the Earth.

Jews will let you know, like Yoram Hazony, that they literally founded western civilization. Greeks believe that they founded democracy. Italians have the Roman Empire.

If you talk to Hindu squeaky wheels, they will tell you:

• Hinduism is the oldest and first religion

• Hinduism is the most philosophical religion

• Hinduism is the most peaceful and tolerant religion

• Sanskrit was the first language, invented by God, from which all other languages derive and are perversions of the original Sanskrit

• Aryans originate from India 10,000 years ago and spread their culture west into Europe, bringing civilization to the entire world

• Indians invented agriculture, and math, and astronomy

• India superpower 2030

• Indians are taking over all your companies with our CEOs

• and so on and so forth

And if we start talking about Islamic Indians, rather than Hindu Indians, that doesn’t really solve the problem, because right-wingers really hate Islam.

Obviously not all Indians think this way or express themselves so boldly and annoyingly, but there are enough squeaky wheels out there to give Indians a bad name. I’m not talking about social media posts either, I’m talking about real Indians in real life who will immigrate to America, spend four years in university, and give you a lecture about how the British Empire is evil and India and China and Russia are rising and multipolarity is the future.

You know, personally, when an immigrant comes to my country and starts shitting on it and praising our enemies, I kind of understand anti-Indian hatred.

Of course, I still support maximizing immigration, but I understand why people hate immigrants, just as I understand why many immigrants to America hate the country that provides them with legal rights and protections. I don’t agree with these things; I’m not saying that you should hate immigrants. I’m just saying that, as far as reasons go, these reasons are understandable.

One of the difficulties I have when talking to Zionists is that they do not understand the concept of Public Relations. I tell them, “yo, maybe it would be best if we chilled on the kid killing,” and they start telling me that I support Hamas. I do not think that anyone should hate Jews, but when I receive these kinds of responses, it makes me understand why people are antisemitic. Of course, understanding a phenomenon and endorsing that belief are not the same thing! I criticize out of love, not hatred.

In the case of Indian Americans, the whole caste system thing is a bad vibe. Americans hate the concept of arranged marriage — it’s baked into our deep mythology that if a woman is married off to some ugly rich dude, she should cheat on him with a hot strong man who will kill her husband.

For example, in the Norse legend of Signy, she is married to this fat old rich king, Siggeir. In rebellion against this injustice, she has sex with her hot brother and plots to overthrow her evil husband. The incest baby she has with her brother is magically healthy and superior in every way to the sons of the ugly weak king. The story isn’t an unambiguous endorsement of incest, but it does seem to suggest that the taboo against arranged marriage was similar in strength to the taboo against incest.

The medieval motif of courtly love developed this theme further, with a princess being locked in a castle (a kind of lonely harem), and a knight coming to seduce her. The story of Peach being kidnapped by Bowser can be interpreted as a story of arranged marriage, and Mario coming to save her fits an ancient European motif.

In short, Europeans are deeply suspicious of the practice of arranged marriage, and place a very high value on the ability of women to freely marry men on the basis of merit. Schopenhauer speaks of this.

source

Schopenhauer writes that those cultures which accept the practice of arranged marriage do so out of the selfishness of practical temporal benefit — money, political advantage, or individual happiness. Those who accept or even demand marriages of love sacrifice all these advantages for the good of the species, because it is in physiognomic instinct that the nature of the blood is detected.

Spengler uses a related phrase in Man and Technics: “physiognomic tact.” That is, the ability to intuit certain aesthetic forms, either at the level of the sexual or the civilizational. When we think of western art, we think of Shakespeare and Dante and Beethoven and Michelangelo. It is in the spirit of courtly love and aesthetic desire, supreme above the political, the economizer, the practical, that western art gains its supremacy.

We compare this to Indian civilization, which has always been large and well developed, and find an extreme contrast.

In fact, African cultures can be forgiven for their art, because even in its simplicity, it is grounded in the intuitive: the drum beat, the grass skirt, the wild dancing, the fearsome masks. Primitive cultures are not refined, but they appeal directly to our sense of sex and violence. Indian culture lacks this brutality, and in this sense, African culture is more appealing.

Consider the distinction between classical Indian and Chinese art. The former is a cluttered menagerie of cartoons, barely more advanced than stick figures, resembling a Saturday morning children’s program. By contrast, Chinese art focuses on nature, simplicity, organic forms, making ample use of negative space. Whereas Indian art is focused on characters, figures, celebrities, heroes, and innumerable Gods, Chinese art is focused on the beauty of the individual in contrast to the landscape, and sometimes an empty landscape with no humanity at all. In this sense, Indian culture is temporal, practical, political, economizing; while Chinese culture is eternal, natural, and organic.

I’m sure there are classical Indian depictions of nature, and I’m sure there are cartoonish examples of Chinese art, but I am not speaking in absolute terms, only in relative ones.

Medieval European art was quite similar to Indian art, to be fair. It’s very similar to a comic strip, telling a historical or mythological story, rather than attempting to capture a timeless aesthetic value. Thank God for the Renaissance!

edit: an Indian suggested I take a look at better versions of Indian art here:

I agree that this art is better, but it was surpassed in the 14th century by Europeans. Still worth taking a look at to not strawman.

end edit:

When we speak of striver culture, we are referring to an attitude toward wealth and power which is purely Machiavellian, which has no respect for transcendent virtues like loyalty or truth. A striver will say anything and do anything to gain social status.

When we think of East Asians, we think of a Buddhist monk, or Bruce Lee, or a hardworking engineer who thanklessly performs his duty for the honor of his family. The silent endurance of the East Asian, who never complains, wins the respect of the European. Meanwhile, the Indian is in your face, scamming grandmothers, assertive, confident, grifting, defrauding.

Consider the case of Vivek Ramaswamy:

Phase 2 trials had “failed to meet their primary endpoints” in 2010. Ramaswamy devised a solution: His mother, Dr. Geetha Ramaswamy, conducted a new Phase 2 trial in 2015 involving “684 subjects.” This trial conveniently claimed to demonstrate sufficient improvement to “support Phase 3” trials.

The aftermath was a triumphant $350 million IPO in 2015, followed by a drastic fall. By September 2017, the stock had plummeted 75 percent after Ramaswamy and his mother announced the Phase 3 trial’s failure. Subsequent trials continued to disappoint, culminating in a 99 percent loss in value and a name change for the company.

While investors suffered significant losses, Ramaswamy profited from a higher media profile, IPO payouts, and the sale of remaining Axovant assets in 2020.

Lol. Lmao, even.

I do have respect for the Ramaswamy family, their clannish nepotism, their barely-legal deception tactics, and rise to power. I’m sure that not all Indians are like Vivek. But he sure is a squeaky wheel, isn’t he?

Hanania’s take on all these anecdotal racisms is to dismiss them as ex-post facto justifications for hating people who are unathletic and brown. And I will concede, if Vivek Ramaswamy was a white quarterback, I would let him scam me all night long, if you know what I mean.

But nonetheless, even if these anecdotal racisms are a result of more fundamental and sillier racisms, it is interesting to study their chain of causality. Maybe people hate Jews because of some silly reason, like Christian prejudice, and then they just latch on to anything which conveniently justifies their prejudice, like alleged Zionist injustice. Maybe people hate Indians because they are weak and brown, and all this stuff about “caste systems” and “arranged marriage” and “highest rate of racism measured in the world” is all just grabbed off the shelf at random.

This is from The Washington Post. Maybe the data is good, maybe it’s not, but I’ve seen this map a lot of times, and it doesn’t make Indians look good.

Personally, having had quite a few Indian friends myself, I do think they do a poor job of handling their wealth. Rich white people understand that poor people hate wealthy people, and they have various ways of dealing with this problem. Maybe they adopt woke opinions, or they dress down, or they try their best to blend in. No one likes people who flaunt their wealth.

this is a rich person trying to camouflage himself

I’m not saying that the average Indian is going around wearing a Rolex and Gucci, but there’s still an awkwardness when it comes to their financial superiority. Pro-tip: do not refer to the maid as “my family’s servant.” That is not appropriate. Sometimes, it’s the little things.

One thing notably missing from Hanania’s analysis is that Indians are the richest group of people in America. It is true that Americans hate poor immigrants, like Africans or Mexicans, so this isn’t an explanation for the quantity of racism against Indians. But it is an explanation of its quality. Indians are viewed as usurpers, like King Siggeir of the Norse legend. Anti-Indian hatred in this way shares much in common with classical antisemitism: there is a deceptive ethnic group who is sneakily gaining power.

If you are a working class white living in the deep South, you have probably have heard someone say “nigger” once or twice. If you grow up in the Hamptons, or Nantucket, or the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, you probably haven’t had this experience. This is because the intensity of ethnic hatred is largely determined by proximity. The white people I know who hate Hispanics the most are the ones who tell me stories about being beat up by Hispanic gangs in high school. The white people I know who hate Hispanics the least had virtually no Hispanic kids in their high school.

If you’re chronically online, you have much greater proximity to Indians than the average American. This is because chronically online people are constantly seeing posts from Indians, but also because chronically online people have a significant overlap with tech people, and tech people work with Indians.

One of the most bewildering aspects of the story of Springfield, Ohio during the Trump campaign was the suggestion by residents that “the Haitians are stealing our welfare.” This was an astounding claim. First of all, the welfare pool is so large that the addition of 20,000 refugees doesn’t make a difference. Second of all, the welfare checks received by natives and the benefits received by refugees come from two different funding pools. Third of all, most of the programs benefitting Springfielders came from state and federal funds, so the local conditions were immaterial. I could go on, but the point is that the claim was really silly.

But the Springfielders really believed it! They thought, “well, these people are different, but they want the same things that I do, so I bet they are stealing from me.”

I think this is the basic psychology in the tech world around Indians. They are different, but they want the same things (tech jobs), so they must be stealing those tech jobs from me.

In the case of tech workers, it is certainly true that importing large numbers of tech workers to the United States, or outsourcing jobs, will indeed lower the wages of tech workers. This is not something I am concerned about because I believe that increasing the supply of labor in any particular sector is always a net benefit for the overall economy. Unionism and protectionism are selfish and drag down the country as a whole. But yes, the tech workers are correct that if we deported all Indians, there would be more job openings for Americans, and tech wages would be higher. (At the expense of innovation, tax revenue, and economic growth, all of which are more important.)

Tech workers are, on average, higher IQ than the welfare recipients of Springfield, Ohio. They spend more time online. These two factors mean that their particular hatreds get converted into propagandistic memes which flood the timeline.

In the summer of 1943, the beautiful united paradise of America, which was totally not racist, had a total of five major race riots. One of these, the Detroit riot, involved black people smashing up white neighborhoods, and white people smashing up black neighborhoods. 34 people died over the course of 48 hours, and 1,800 people were arrested.

If you sat down with the blacks and the whites who participated in the riots, you can imagine the kinds of concerns they would have. Each side would accuse the other side of various infractions, real or imagined, all of which came from the friction of having to work side-by-side with people, in very close quarters, with a radically different identity. This is basically what tech workers are experiencing with respect to Indian Americans, and since the tech-right is the smartest and most agentic segment of the right-wing, they have a disproportionate impact over memes and the flow of propaganda.

source

The last thing I will mention is that Indians are on the far left politically, more so than any other ethnic group, except maybe Africans. But if you multiply IQ times political affiliation, Indians are clearly the second most important ethnic cohort on the left after Jews.

Conclusion

Right-wingers hate Indians because they are left-wing, and for other aesthetic reasons that are perhaps subconscious, philosophical, or esoteric in nature. If Indians had white skin like Jews, they would probably be less hated… Although resist-libs get quite a bit of hate from right-wingers too. If they were overrepresented in sports I could see conservatives granting them more mercy.

Indians check a lot of bad boxes on the populist checklist:

• foreign

• skinnyfat

• brown

• democrat

• rich

• compete for middle-class jobs (tech)

• have their own ethnic caste system which places them above white people

• low levels of intermarriage

• low levels of interracial adoption (compared to East Asians)

• non-Christian religion

• lack of artistic brutalism (no rap music)

• lack of romance / rizz / suave

• no Indian sex symbols

  • (Hispanics have Salma Hayek, Eva Longoria, Antonio Banderas)

  • (Whites have Bratt Pitt, Henry Cavill, Chris Hemsworth, Sabrina Carpenter, etc)

  • (Blacks have ASAP Rocky, Megan Tha Stallion, Nicki Minaj, Drake)

  • (Asians have KPOP idols who I can’t name but they exist)

But I love Indians. Don’t worry Indians. Like Jews, you will be called all sorts of names, but if you uphold a liberal order which guarantees your equal rights, you win in the end.

I have been Deep Left. And this has been…