Comments by "K `" (@user-jt3dw6vv4x) on "Do Indians See Themselves as Asian? | Street Interview" video.

  1. Yeah that's where it gets grey in Western or rather American contexts. Some Westerners say Indians are "culturally Asian" but not "racially Asian". Anyway, it's wrong either way as Asian is just geography.
    295
  2. Yeah that's why in some languages the local version of "oriental" still describes Middle Easterners (Lebanese, Turks, Syrians, Persians) and not anybody east of Iran because they're the "first Asians".
    72
  3.  @Alternatives_Universum  It has a negative connotation primarily in the US.
    50
  4.  @vanlin9107  In East Africa, they think of Indians as "Asians". In Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi etc. Asian means Indian for them.
    43
  5. @LeWonder This is why Bollywood really ought to start representing India's diversity at a greater level than selecting people from the north west only. It would make Bollywood more interesting in my opinion and more relatable too.
    40
  6.  @Jsarmy87124  None of my Indian friends from India were offended and the people the video weren't either. People in Asia aren't easily triggered by things. Ronny Chieng is also Malaysian too and there are many Malaysians of ethnic Indian descent.
    33
  7. I agree. By saying Indians and their culture are not Asian, it's basically saying 50% of cultural aspects of other Asian cultures aren't "Asian". China and India are the mothers of Asian civilisation.
    29
  8.  @sovietwizard1620  Actually among all SEA countries (except Malaysia and Singapore), I would say Myanmar is culturally the closest to India.
    20
  9. He's also from Malayia which is "Malaysia Truly Asia" due to the mix of Malay, Chinese, Indian and Orang Asli groups.
    18
  10.  @vlrsvvn791  Russia is definitely Eurasian and politically they are leaning towards creating stronger ties with Asian countries like China and India and beefing up ties with Central Asia.
    14
  11. Oh they're definitely different but there is no denying that there is overlap between the two spheres though. Imperial Japan wanted to unite the East Asian Cultural Sphere (East Asia + Vietnam) and Indian Cultural Sphere (South Asia + Southeast Asia) and form what they termed "Greater East Asia". We see that overlap quite visibly in places like Singapore and Malaysia which are home to large ethnic Chinese and ethnic Indian communities. As another user said, Asia is actually a gradient, a group of cultures that bleed into each other at the peripherals of each subregion.
    12
  12. This situation has arisen primarily in the US where there is a need to categorise people based on appearance as a result of the country's history fraught with poor race relations. In the US, "Asian" means East Asian and so other Asians who don't fit that image are excuded. This definition also exists in many other Western countries such as Australia and Canada. However, there is much greater awareness that despite looking physically different, Indians and other South Asians are still "Asian" just not the type of "Asian" people immediately think of. In the UK, it's the complete opposite where South Asians are seen as the default Asian. For South Asians, however, we are aware of the sheer diversity of our community. I am of ethnic Sri Lankan descent and anybody aware of Sri Lanka's diversity will know there are a variety of ethnic groups (Sinhalese, Tamil, Moor, Malay, Eurasian, Vedda, Chinese etc.) on the island. For other people of Sri Lankan descent, they know I am Sri Lankan but for many non-Sri Lankans or non-Asians there is a struggle in understanding certain characteristics of my appearance. I have epicanthic folds (or as understood in a Sri Lankan context, "Malay eyes" or what some may call "almond eyes"). As a result, I have had people assume I belong to other groups are mixed with Southeast Asian groups. People think that almond eyes or East Asian features only exist in East Asia or Southeast Asia but that's not the case. On "South Asian TikTok", I see South Asians who look stereotypically "South Asian", East Asian, Southeast Asian and West Asian. Our features are so diverse. The idea one is "Asian" based on how they look like doesn't make sense to me and it doesn't make sense to my Southeast Asian friends either. I have Southeast Asian friends who are diverse. One of my SEA friends could be mistaken for "Indian" and I knew a Timorese girl who had dark brown skin and round eyes. A Thai girl on Quora went viral on the platform for encapsulating SEA diversity in one sentence, "There is no other place in the world where you will find Chinese-looking people using their right hand to eat rice or Indian-looking people eating noodles with chopsticks". Asia is a diverse place. The concept of "Asian" is simply about geography and that is how it is understood in Asia. The reason why "Asian" becomes a term to describe appearance outside of Asia is because Asian ethnic groups are minorities. It's a trivial issue to focus on.
    11
  13.  @ahmedzakikhan7639  They're known as Asians as well. The three main Asian groups in the UK are Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. In a broader sense, the Chinese are also another major Asian group in the UK.
    10
  14. India is quite interesting, it's called a subcontinent because each of their states are divided along ethnic lines so it's like a continent made up of smaller countries. Each state has its own ethnic group, language and culture. They really are quite diverse. It's a shame they don't use that to boost their soft power.
    8
  15.  @shakiMiki  To be honest, I want them to do a video on what they think of Modi's plan on making India a developed country in 25 years and if they think it'll happen. Asian Boss sometimes misses with their interview topics.
    8
  16.  @deusmachinima1189  Yeah I definitely agree.
    8
  17. I agree
    8
  18.  @danl.hollowellsr.1768  Yes you're right, it's because in the West "Asian" is used in terms of appearance that's why this issues exists, particularly in the US. The truth is Asian is just geography. People native to Asia are Asians. All of the people in those countries are Asian as is everybody else on the continent. Also, India culturally influenced Southeast Asia (Thailand, Indonesia, Cambodia etc.) too. Most of South and Southeast Asia is part of the Indian Cultural Sphere. They all have the same cultural root. There is a lot of cultural overlap across Asia. Many outside of Asia are unaware of that.
    7
  19. I wonder what they think of some of the darker Montagnard tribes of Vietnam who look quite "Indian" in comparison to the majority Kinh Vietnamese.
    6
  20. Yet genetically speaking, Indians are "mixed race". The first inhabitants of India were an East Eurasian people who are genetically closer to East Asians known as the AASI. Adivasi people in India are comparatively closer to East Asians than most other Indians as they carry the most amount of indigenous South Asian (East Eurasian) ancestry. Most other Indians, on the other hand, carry higher levels of West Eurasian ancestry. So in conclusion, Indians are a separate race. They can't be placed into "Caucasoid", "Mongoloid" etc.
    5
  21.  @AyanAli-py7ci  Okay and??
    5
  22. You feel more connection to Central Asians? Is this culture or appearance? You mention the Silk Road but I don't see how that's comparable to Indian influence. Hinduism is popular in Bali in Indonesia and actually Hindu mythology has had a big impact outside of South Asia in Southeast Asia, where it exists as cultural influence. Most of South and Southeast Asia is part of the Indian Cultural Sphere. You mention Nepal, do you feel anything for Nepalis or is it the same as your feelings for India? I think it's fair to point out that Ronnie's comments were jokes. Ronnie is a Malaysian and in Malaysia there are four main groups: Malays, Chinese, Indians and Orang Asli and thus is known as "Malaysia Truly Asia" and "mini Asia". Most people in Malaysia don't look like Ronnie and all of Malaysia's prime ministers have been Malay (none of whom look Chinese, like Ronnie - a Malaysian Chinese). He's making a mockery of the Western idea that "Asian" is a race (meaning East Asian in the US and South Asian in the UK).
    5
  23. Yeah people in Asia think of being "Asian" as a secondary thing, it's not an everyday thought unlike in the West where East and South Asian people are minorities.
    5
  24.  @ishanbajpai6940  It's Indocentric because the term "Indian subcontinent" was coined by the British to describe India, Pakistan and Bangladesh (British India). Now you're using it to describe the whole of South Asia. It infers that all of these countries revolve around India, that they don't have their own cultures but that's not the case. It's Indocentric.
    4
  25. Indians are Asians. The Indian subcontinent literally culturally influenced most of Asia. Most of Southeast Asia is part of the Indosphere, along with the Indian subcontinent (South Asia). You're basically saying 50% of all Asian cultures isn't "Asian". No logic.
    4
  26.  @maelgwni  Yeah I differentiate, it's so much easier. My friends do the same and nobody ever gets confused.
    4
  27. Asian is not a race, it's a continent. Nobody understood Ronnie's joke it seems tsk tsk💀
    4
  28. India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan and Bangladesh are NOT Arabia. They have nothing to do with Arabia.💀💀
    3
  29.  @malithaw  You can make the same argument for the rest of the subregions of Asia. You can also make the same argument for the East Asian Cultural Sphere (East Asia + Vietnam) and Indian Cultural Sphere (South Asia + Southeast Asia). You can make the same argument for many other subregions within other continents.
    3
  30.  @ishanbajpai6940  Indians use that term, not other South Asians because it's Indocentric.
    3
  31. That's why I say "East Asian" and "Southeast Asian" and "South Asian". Some people also use ESEA to describe East and Southeast Asians in some appropriate contexts.
    3
  32.  @YashSharma-zp8yu  That's okay, all good
    3
  33. You call yourselves Asians
    3
  34. Indians are mixed. Their indigenous component (AASI) is East Eurasian and thus closer to east Asians and Australasians. Tribal Adivasis and low caste Indians carry high levels of this ancestry. The majority of other Indians (including high caste Indians) mostly carry West Eurasian ancestry which is related to Europeans and Middle Easterners. The northeastern and some other groups in the north of India mostly carry ESEA (related to East and Southeast Asians) DNA.
    3
  35.  @williamdripspeare741  Indians aren't racially "East Asian". Asian is not a race and is simply just a geographical term and that is how it is understood in Asia.
    3
  36. ​ @williamdripspeare741  Yep I agree, it's quite hard to categorise people into neat categories of "races". Population clusters make more sense based on PCA plots imo. So there would be a West Eurasian cluster (Europe+Middle East), North Africa cluster, Horn of Africa cluster, ESEA-East Asian-related cluster (East+Southeast Asia), South Asia cluster, Central Asia cluster, Pacific Islander cluster, Native American cluster, Australasia cluster (Australia+PNG) and Sub-Saharan Africa cluster. Those are the broad clusters that form on PCA plots when measuring genetic distance.
    3
  37.  @williamdripspeare741  Yeah I agree but that's in the West, many in the West use "Asian" as a race. I wouldn't say East Eurasian genes though imo, more in regards to Asians with epicanthic folds as many predominantly East Eurasian groups like the Kondh of India and the Semang of Malaysia don't look typically East or Southeast Asian. Outside of Asia, "Asian" is used to describe certain physical features.
    3
  38. It's such a trivial thing to talk about lmao.
    2
  39. China, Japan and Korea are not just Asia. 💀💀
    2
  40.  @malithaw  The term "Indian subcontinent" was coined by the British to describe British India (modern India, Pakistan and Bangladesh), not the whole of South Asia.
    2
  41.  @doit2810  Whatever helps you sleep at night
    2
  42.  @ishanbajpai6940  Indian land? Only Pakistan and Bangladesh were part of ancient India or what you call "Indian land" (Bharat). Do not claim Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives and even Myanmar as Indian. They were never part of India.
    2
  43. Agreed. Ronnie is just making a joke but many people dont' know about Malaysia's diversity and so don't realise he's joking.
    2
  44.  @WastedBananas  Yes they are Asians and always will be.
    2
  45. Are they though? All of those countries along with Southeast Asia (Thailand, Myanmar, Indonesia etc.) are part of the Indosphere (Indian Cultural Sphere). They all share things in common (I guess with the exception of Pakistan which is now very Islamic). For example they celebrate Songkran (the South and Southeast Asian New Year -kind of like the equivalent to the East Asian Lunar New Year), linguistic scripts all derive from the Brahmic script, Sanskrit influence is widespread, traditional clothing, mythology, architecture, culinary influences, religion and dining etiquette among many other things trace back to Indian cultural influence.
    2
  46.  @WastedBananas  They're all Asians. Asian is just geography. Stop conflating race with geographical terms. 💀
    2
  47. Most of Southeast Asia is actually culturally related to India. It's part of the Indosphere, not Sinosphere. Also, Indians aren't Black Africans...
    2
  48.  @indo-pacific5940  There absolutely is. The native hunter-gatherers of South Asia are known as the AASI and they are genetically related to East Asians and Australasians. So that's one ethnic link. Secondly, ESEA (East/Southeast Asian) people have genetically contributed to certain populations in South Asia. I'm of Sri Lankan descent, Malays have settled in Sri Lanka in large numbers since the 13h century. My eyes are more like Malay-like eyes. The problem here is that you're homogenising us and being incredibly Indocentric. Stop calling us "Indian subcontinent". It's South Asia, not Indian subcontinent which is a term created by the British to refer to India, Pakistan and Bangladesh (British India). Really Chindians? So you just ignore all of the indigenous ethnic groups in South Asia that are connected to East and Southeast Asia. Let me repeat, the indigenous people of South Asia are genetically closer to East Asian people. The majority of Indians (e.g. Hindi speakers) are primarily of non-indigenous descent and there is an irony in someone suggesting South Asians have no genetic ties to East or Southeast Asia when all of the indigenous people of the land are far closer to East Asians than the typical North Indian who is closer to a European than an East Asian as they mostly carry West Eurasian ancestry.
    2
  49. 💀
    2
  50.  @Anonymous-qb4vc  Only in some Western countries does "Asian" mean "Mongoloid" appearance. In the UK and eastern African countries, "Asian" means Indian/South Asian appearance. Desi is too narrow of a term to use and really only applies to Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. Asian is not a race, people outside f Asia have turned it into one but nobody in Asia thinks it's a race. Hong Kong has a large colonial-era Indian community, they are considered Asians and in colloquial language they are known by the Cantonese equivalent for "South Asian". This issue of Asia's definition is only a non-Asian issue.
    2
  51.  @anasian8894  It has a negative connotation in the US only and it's primarily propagated by East Asian Americans who claim calling someone "Oriental" is degrading because the term "oriental" is used to refer to non-human objects like rugs (e.g. Oriental rugs of the Middle East and Central Asia).
    2
  52. Well Asian's not a race anyway and Indians aren't Caucasian either. Genetically speaking, Indians are "mixed race". The first inhabitants of India were an East Eurasian people who are genetically closer to East Asians known as the AASI. Adivasi tribal people in India are comparatively closer to East Asians than most other Indians as they carry the most amount of indigenous South Asian (East Eurasian) ancestry. Most other Indians, on the other hand, carry higher levels of West Eurasian ancestry (which is related to Europeans and Middle Easterners). So in conclusion, Indians are a separate race. They can't be placed into "Caucasoid", "Mongoloid" etc. India's cultural output is also different. They culturally influenced most of Asia. Most of South Asia (India, Nepal etc.) and Southeast Asia (Thailand, Indonesia etc.) is part of the Indian Cultural Sphere and the spread of Buddhism across Asia transported Indian ideas to East Asia. Imperial Japan tried to colonise India during WW2 and unite it within "Greater East Asia" due to this very fact of cultural commonalities. Europeans tried to divide and conquer Asia one time and that led to Imperial Japan, they're trying to do it again and now we're having China talk about "Asia for the Asians" all over again. Trying to designate them as a separate entity doesn't do anything, geographically India is in Asia. Asia is just geography, that is all.
    2
  53. I thought the video was good but yeah the comments are interesting, good discussions are happening.
    2
  54. Exactly, Asian is a secondary identity for actual Asian people in Asia. Nobody thinks of it first. Such a trivial thing to talk about.
    2
  55.  @stephanatlas5331  Bollywood loves that pale white Punjabi look, let's be real. Nobody is looking for that round faced Assamese or Bengali look (e.g. Sayani Gupta) or the dark skinned South Indian with neotenous features (e.g. Shaun Romy). There is a specific idea of what is considered the standard in Bollywood and that's the sharp featured fair skinned Punjabi look.
    2
  56. Asian is just geography, only people who seem to struggle with this are people in the US.
    2
  57. They are. They just said they are in the video and Ronny was making a joke anyway. He's Malaysian so of course he's joking. Malaysians are of Malay, Chinese, Indian and Orang Asli descent and is known as "mini Asia" as a result of it.
    2
  58.  @Justin_Why  No but many Indians are dark with rounder eyes (except for northeastern or some tribal groups). Some of the Montagnard tribes of Vietnam have rounder eyes and darker skin. They look more "Indianish" than typical "Southeast Asian". I don't like comparing them to Indian features because they aren't "Indian". Those tribes, like many of the tribes of India and various parts of Southeast Asia, descend primarily from an ancient East Eurasian lineage that traditionally had rounder eyes, darker skin straight or wavy hair before the development and arrival of lighter skinned neo-East Asians into Southeast Asia. There just isn't a word in the English language that can describe that type of phenotype. I just say "Indian" because that's the largest country in Asia that has a similar phenotype even though the majority of Indians are actually mixed.
    2
  59.  @WastedBananas  Yes they are. 💀
    2
  60.  @dmitryballonov5742  Being Asian doesn't correlate to appearance. At this rate, Southeast Asians won't be considered Asian because they're culturally related to Indians or vice versa, Indians would only be considered "culturally Asian" because they influenced Southeast Asia and parts of East Asian cultures. Kazakhs are predominantly Muslim which is why people may think otherwise. A "Indian-looking" Bhutanese who practices Vajrayana Buddhism has more in common with a Mongolian than a Kazakh. Appearance doesn't mean anything here. Asia is just a gradient of different ethnic groups and cultures, you can see cultural overlap across the continent.
    2
  61.  @आयुष_पराशर  Nepal is not part of India, sorry.
    2
  62. Well this video is in response to a segment on a US talk show...
    2
  63.  @somedeepbarat9852  Yes I suppose you are correct. I'm just talking about the current circumstances per 2022.
    2
  64. Myanmar is just culturally Asian (a mix of indigenous Burmese culture with Indian and Chinese influences). Most Asian cultures have absorbed Indian and Chinese influences. Indian is Asian and Chinese is also Asian. So Myanmar is no different.
    2
  65. Agreed, idk why they spent time talking about this lmao
    2
  66.  @jameschristophercirujano6650  Last time I checked most of Southeast Asia is part of the Indian Cultural Sphere not East Asian Cultural Sphere. The traditional clothing, the linguistic scripts, the mythological stories, the architecture, traditional music, the religion, the festivals, the culinary influences and linguistic influences among many other things are derived from Indian culture. None of that is Chinese. The most important festival of mainland Southeast Asia (exclude Vietnam) is the traditional Solar New Year (South and Southeast Asian New Year). That's not Chinese-derived. Idk why you think China's influence is greater because it's not. What part of SEA are you from?
    2
  67.  @jameschristophercirujano6650  Yes it's definitely part of SEA cultures, it's not "Indian" but the fact is that India is culturally related to most of Southeast Asia. They're not a world apart. To infer India is not culturally Asian is to infer the base of SEA cultures is not "Asian". You are also Filipino which is quite different to other SEA (especially mainland SEA) if we're being pedantic. I'm not Indian but I'm ethnically South Asian (Sri Lankan Buddhist) and when we celebrate Songkran at the temple in my country (Australia) we have Thai, Cambodian, Burmese and Malaysian Chinese celebrate with us. Upon finding out I was of ethnic Sri Lankan descent, my Cambodian co-worker began speaking about our similarities as a way to relate to me as I am also a lot younger than him. He also happens to be of ethnic Chinese descent. I think you, as a Filipino, will find it hard as the Indic influence in the Philippines has rather faded away from modern Filipino society (nobody uses Baybayin for example and those SA/SEA-style shawls you see in old photos are now a thing of the past). I can't speak for Indians but at least for the South Asian Buddhists or those that were historically influenced by Buddhism (Sri Lankan, Nepalese, some Northeast Indians), I can see the similarities we share with both the mainland Indian Hindus and Southeast Asians. Appearance could play a role overseas in the West but see, I have epicanthic folds which has made people think I'm mixed with some Southeast Asian group (and maybe because Sri Lankan Malays exist - I have to do a DNA test to find out) but for me it doesn't affect my view, maybe because South Asians are already very diverse and many SEA are diverse too (I have seen southern Thai and Khmer who look more Indianish than typical SEA).
    2
  68. Which is why this video makes no sense because they're interviewing Indians who live in India (a country in Asia).
    2
  69. Exactly, I fully agree with what you're saying. You said it perfectly. People in specific Asia will be aware of the diversity within their country but may not be aware of the diversity in other countries in Asia. Same thing applies to people in the West, those who are familiar with particular Asian countries will know of the diversity. I know someone who is White Australian and he has done backpacking across India and other parts of Asia and he knows about the Indians who look "Chinese". This is why I think pop culture in these countries can be used as a tool to showcase the diversity of their people, instead of relying on one beauty standard and phenotype. I've already seen some people who watch Thai dramas make comments on the diversity of Thai people because they've seen extras in the background or characters who look more "Indian". I think Bollywood ought to start showing more of their country's diversity, it would actually make it more interesting to watch imo.
    2
  70. No it's only outside of Asia that it has become a racial term. Asian languages have different terms for "race" and "geography (continent)".
    2
  71. He's actually making a mockery of the American idea that there is only one type of "Asian" which contrasts to the UK's idea of "Asian" which means Indian or someone who looks Indian. Ronnie is Malaysian. Malaysians of ethnic Indian descent are the third largest ethnic group in the country and played a significant role in shaping Malaysian culture. He knows what he's doing.
    2
  72. True.
    2
  73. The comedian is from Malaysia. The comedian was making a joke. The comedian knows that Indians are Asian as Malaysia is known as "Malaysia Truly Asia", it's home to Malays, Chinese and Indians. The comedian knows that in the US, "Asian" means East Asian and that in the UK "Asian" means Indian or South Asian. The comedian is making a joke about the way non-Asians view Asian as a descriptive term for appearance, when it's not. The idea that "Asian" is dictated by how close you are physically to East Asians makes no sense. So why would Indians not think of themselves as Asians? Asia is just a continent, nothing more. People are reading way too much into this and the joke is flying straight over their head.
    2
  74. 💀
    1
  75. Yeah true, ever since the rise of TikTok I have come across so many South Asian TikTok videos of ethnic Indians in the US, UK etc. who have East Asian features (either from Assam or places like Uttarakhand). Their traditional clothing, names etc. are all Indian.
    1
  76.  @starsign0805  He's North Indian and is claiming his experience and identity is applicable to the whole of India, he just replied to one of my comments about Austroasiatic-speaking Indians trying to downplay what I said even though India is a diverse country.
    1
  77. because they're not Middle Eastern and they don't distance themselves from Asian. Ask anybody else in Asia if they identify as "Asian" first and the answer will be "no".
    1
  78.  @kyopo18  No they don't. Indians share cultural ties to other South Asians (Sri Lankans, Nepalese, Bangladeshis, Pakistani, Bhutanese etc.) as well as Southeast Asians (Indonesians, Burmese, Thai, Cambodian etc.). South Asia and Southeast Asia are part of the Indian Cultural Sphere. Arabia has nothing to do with them. Arabians are Muslims and most Indians are Hindu. Idk why you would think that.
    1
  79.  @kyopo18  Wow, you are extremely racist. Well I'm not Indian so idk what you're talking about but only Indians in the West call themselves "brown" and that term is also used by Pacific Islanders and Latinos too.
    1
  80.  @kyopo18  Koreans respect other Asians challenge (impossible)
    1
  81.  @kyopo18  It's time you educate yourself on other parts of Asia if you're going to start speaking about them.
    1
  82. Well they kind of did in the sense that they developed a "community" through overlapping cultural similarities. We've seen it more clearly during the era of pan-Asianism which peaked in the 1940s when Japan invaded other parts of Asia in order to unite the areas of Asia influenced by Sinic (Chinese) and Indic (Indian) cultures akin to the irredentis movements in Europe (Greater Germany, Italian irredentism). While the Europeans had their idea of "Asia", people in Asia had their own ideas of "Asia".
    1
  83. Well it was a joke and Ronnie is Malaysian. Malaysia is known as "Malaysia Truly Asia" because it's home to different ethnic groups that originally came from other parts of Asia, including Malaysians of ethnic Indian descent. The funny thing is people actually believing he thinks Indians aren't Asian when he's pointing out how Asians are physically diverse and that we are not all the same.
    1
  84.  @WastedBananas  India is literally a country in Asia... 💀
    1
  85.  @ishanbajpai6940  Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka are not debatable. They were never part of India. Yeah they're part of the Indosphere but so is most of Southeast Asia. The claim on cultural similarity does not work when everything beyond India including Thailand, Cambodia, Indonesia etc. are Indosphere nations too. I didn't say you claimed Myanmar but many nationalists do. I see the Akhand Bharat maps include Myanmar and Tibet too. Yeah I know that but I'm just saying they weren't part of ancient India. They're all culturally Indosphere nations but are not part of India.
    1
  86.  @alpacacomentadora413  What about other parts of South Asia and Southeast Asia that share cultural ties to India and are part of the Indosphere?
    1
  87.  @alpacacomentadora413  Well I said one can make an argument for all subregions and Southeast Asians are actually genetically closely related to East Asians. They are culturally related to Indians but genetically related to East Asians.
    1
  88. Same view as the ones in this video because Asian is not understood in physical appearance terms in Asian countries. It's just geography.
    1
  89.  @tendwa5263  Well they've done videos on India, including this one and their channel is meant for street interviews in Asia and related to Asian topics so I think you have the answer haha
    1
  90.  @sleepEasy2  Most of them speak English because they have so many languages. English is the unifying language for them.
    1
  91.  @sleepEasy2  They're Indians living in India. Sounds authentic to me.
    1
  92.  @sleepEasy2  Well firstly, I'm pretty sure all those Indians you speak of would say the same thing. Everybody in Asia knows that they're Asians but it's not the first thing that comes to their mind, nobody thinks of "Asian" first but they still know they're Asian because they're from Asia. It's a trivial thing. Secondly, the video is in response to a skit/a joke done by Ronnie Chieng in English for an American comedy show. The interviewees are going to have to know English if they're going to understand the context of this video.
    1
  93. Yeah and the Malaysian comedian knows this because Malaysia is home to Malays, Chinese, Indians and Orang Asli. Malaysians don't all look the same. None of Malaysia's prime ministers look like Ronnie Chieng (the comedian). People took the joke way too seriously.
    1
  94.  @barryram2605  That's correct but you can easily make the same argument for the subregions of Europe too. Malaysia is a blend of Southeast, East and South Asian cultures. It's home to Malays, Chinese and Indians who have mixed together to create a cultural that is most similar to neighbouring Singapore than anywhere else in Asia. Absolutely correct but that's the thing, that's an outsider's perspective, it's not based on reality. If we were to divide Asia (exclude Central and West Asia) we could divide it into two main spheres, Sinosphere (East Asia + Vietnam) and Indosphere (South Asia + Southeast Asia). The cultural foundations of these two spheres are either Chinese (Sinic) or Indian (Indic). An equivalent in another continent would be the way Roman and Greek culture underpin southern and western European cultures, while Russia underpins eastern European culture and Nordic culture underpins the cultures of Scandinvaia. Each of the subregions of Asia can be divided up and those subregions can also have stark differences. For example, I actually can't find anything that a Sri Lankan or Nepalese could have in common with a Pakistani. Same thing with a Burmese and Filipino, despite both being Southeast Asian.
    1
  95. Yeah true, nobody cares about this stuff in Asia.
    1
  96. Yeah others have pointed that before, especially on Quora. Large parts of Asia would only be part "Asian" if we used this logic.
    1
  97.  @WastedBananas  Yes they did. Go read the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere manifesto. Go read about Subhas Chandra Bose who fought for the Japanese. Google is your friend.
    1
  98. Most of their ancestors are West Eurasian (closer to Europe and Central Asia) but part of their ancestry (the first inhabitants of South Asia) are more related to Southeast Asians and Australasians. Tribal groups in India still retain high levels of indigenous South Asian ancestry compared to most Indians.
    1
  99. Agreed
    1
  100.  @jsways3048  Never said I was a scientist. I'm just repeating the things actual scientists have said. Those categories are outdated racial terms. They have no meaning today when we can see how modern Indians exist because of so many successive waves of humans that intermixed with one another (some male dominated and others female dominated). On a PCA plot, Indians are located in between Europeans/Middle Easterners, Australasians and East/Southeast Asians. Why? It's because they have genetic components that are related to all three of those groups. They're mixed. The indigenous component of South Asia is completely unrelated to the dominant genetic component of most Indians which is related to Europeans and Middle Easterners. They are mixed in the way many others are not. The only skull found in India dating to the Pleistocene is a skull that had physical characteristics similar to both western and East Asian groups. India is located between east and west, it only makes sense that components from either side would end up in the country. Sources: 1. The Formation of Human Populations in South and Central Asia - Vagheesh M. Narasimhan et al. 2019 2. A genetic history of migration, diversification, and admixture in Asia - Melinda A. Yang 2022
    1
  101.  @jsways3048  Yeah and their modern DNA is literally mixed.
    1
  102.  @WastedBananas  No because Australasians and AASI are closely related to East Asian-related populations. They aren't genetically distinct in the ay West Eurasians are. All of these populations have affinity to Tianyuan Man, so geneticists now say "East Eurasian". Source: A genetic history of migration, diversification, and admixture in Asia -Melinda A. Yang, 2022
    1
  103.  @WastedBananas  Within East Eurasian there are three distinct lineages: AASI, Australasian and ESEA (East/Southeast Asian). Source: A genetic history of migration, diversification, and admixture in Asia - Melinda A. Yang, 2022
    1
  104.  @jsways3048  Haplogroups only constitute a small portion of a human's genetic makeup. Please don't bring that up as an argument because that is not what I am talking about. You can learn more about what I am talking abut by reading these two sources. Cheers. 1. The Formation of Human Populations in South and Central Asia - Vagheesh M. Narasimhan et al. 2019 2. A genetic history of migration, diversification, and admixture in Asia - Melinda A. Yang, 2022
    1
  105.  @jsways3048  Yeah that's right, tribal people in India (and low castes)have the most AASI ancestry which is why they are comparatively genetically closer to East Asians compared to most Indians who are further away due to more West Eurasian ancestry as opposed to East Eurasian. High caste Indians (particularly high caste North Indians) are comparatively closer to Europeans due to higher West Eurasian (Steppe) ancestry. Low caste Indians (Shudras, untouchables etc.) are comparatively closer to East Asians.
    1
  106.  @jsways3048  Asian does not equal East Asian. Asian is not a race, it's just geography. What you are talking about is appearance (Mongoloid) but a lot of Adivasi tribes in India don't look "Mongoloid" or only have some "Mongoloid" traits and they are all comparatively closer to East Asians (e.g. Kondh). Genetics is more than just appearance. Adivasi/Janajati - they're all tribals and is also why some of them are classified as "other backward classes". All of these groups have higher indigenous AASI ancestry which is why they're closer to East Asians. Indo-Aryan-speaking North Indians are comparatively closer to Europeans due to higher West Eurasian ancestry. High caste North Indians are the closest to Europeans among all Indians (excluding Anglo-Indians and others with recent European admixture). In India (excluding the majority of NE Indians/Ladakhis), the Indians closest to East Asians are low caste people, many Adivasi tribals and the "Other Backward Classes" groups. The lower one is on the Indian caste system, the closer one is to an East Asian. The higher you are, the closer one is to a European. These are the facts.
    1
  107.  @jsways3048  Yep, we agree on the facts. Just the use of terminology that we don't seem t agree on.
    1
  108. Yeah correct while the tribals and low caste Indians have East Eurasian (or what the 1990s/2000s era scientists called "proto-Asian" ancestry).
    1
  109. @Aa Low castes too. Those closer to the bottom of Indian society have higher rates of East Eurasian ancestry that places them closer to East Asians than to Europeans. Indo-European-speaking and high caste Indians are comparatively closer to Europeans. In terms of genetic distance to populations outside of South Asia, the higher you are in the caste system the closer you are to West Eurasian populations (European+Middle East), the lower you are in the caste system (low castes, tribals and Other Backward Class) the closer you are to East Asians and related populations. This has been established for a long time and was first confirmed in the 1990s through a major genetic study done on caste genetics and was controversial at the time as a result. I found some news articles online from Indian English language media that spoke about this and they said it was controversial because it was confirmation that there is a genetic element to caste.
    1
  110. High caste Indians are comparatively closer to West Eurasian populations (Europe+Middle East) while low caste Indians (including low castes and Other Backward Class) are comparatively closer to East Asians and Southeast Asians. So basically the higher one is in the Indian caste system, the closer they are to a European or Middle Easterner, the lower one is in the Indian caste then the closer they are to a Southeast Asian or East Asian. You can see this in terms of physical appearance too. Many high caste North Indians have sharper features like high bridged nose and prominent eye brow bridge akin to those found in parts of Iran and Central Asia. Among many low caste Indians and the "Other Backward Class" Indian groups, you will be able to find neotenous features akin to those found in Southeast Asia like flat face, flat and/or broad nose, sometimes epicanthic fold and shorter stature.
    1
  111. St Petersburg is in European Russia.
    1
  112.  @kokekuka24  Y'all want to be European so bad 💀
    1
  113.  @chrisc.5848  Huh? Most Southeast Asian cultures (Thai, Cambodian, Indonesia, Burmese etc.) are all culturally related to India and the rest of South Asia from linguistic scripts to cultural traditions and is known as the Indosphere. East Asia and Vietnam form what is known as the Sinosphere (the areas of Asia that were influenced by China). There is still interaction between Sinosphere and Indosphere. There is no such thing as "Oriental Asian". If anybody is "Oriental" it's actually Middle Easterners like Arabs, Persians and Turks. The term "Oriental" was first applied to them. Also, South Asian and Southeast Asian food is not "really weird". What a thing to say. Nobody in Asia looks Black African except for the Andamanese and Negrito tribes like Aeta.
    1
  114.  @seohn  No. There is a difference between "Asian" and what you describe as "Eastern". In Chinese, "Asian" is known as "亞洲人" and refers to everybody from Asia (Chinese, Indian, Japanese, Korean, Thai, Kazakh etc.) but the word "黄种人" means "East Asian race" and is not the same as "亞洲人". If you use, "黄种人" then you are referring to Chinese, Japanese, Koreans etc. (i.e. East Asians) but if you use "亞洲人" then you are referring to all Asians (i.e. the native ethnic groups of Asia). "黄种人" is racial and "亞洲人" is geographical.
    1
  115.  @seohn  For example, in Hong Kong there are the native ethnic Chinese people (including Cantonese, Tanka etc.) but also there are South and Southeast Asian minorities, who either came during the colonial era or from the 1980s onwards. These minorities are grouped as "Asian" and differentiated from the White expat community in academic and legal circles. Among these minorities are the South Asians (Indian, Nepalese), Filipinos, Indonesians, Vietnamese and Thai. The South Asians are often grouped together because they have a similar history having settled in Hong Kong during the colonial era either as part of the Gurkha contingent or as traders. They are known by the Cantonese equivalent of "South Asian". The way "Asian" is understood across Asia is not racial. The subregions of Asia are understood more through the lens of "race" if that makes sense.
    1
  116.  @seohn  Okay but in Asia, "Asian" (in its broadest extent) isn't understood in the sense of race if that makes sense.
    1
  117.  @indo-pacific5940  They're all connected to Asia. Tamils spread Indic culture to Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia. They are the bridge between India and the rest of Asia. Ironic to hear someone say this because every time I say that "indic" culture is not a united thing and that Tamils are the only people to spread their culture to other parts of Asia, some Indians get upset at me. Now to hear someone actually say that it's only the Tamils that are the sole reason for this is amusing to see. Tamil Nadu has connections to other parts of Asia (including other parts of South Asia) and the rest of India has connections to it in their own ways(North Indian scripts are related to the Tibetan script, for example and Vajrayana Buddhism made its way into East Asia from North India), so yeah India is not separate or something. This argument doesn't make any sense, it's like the Japanese who say they are not part of Asia - it all comes down to nationalistic views in which y'all want to make yourself the centre.
    1
  118.  @visenyatargaryen9130  OP believes in Indocentrism
    1
  119.  @SuperAghori  All of those regions were NOT part of India. That's Indocentrism and you're not acknowledging the histories of these countries (except Pak and Bang which were part of India).
    1
  120.  @visenyatargaryen9130  They think the whole of South Asia belongs to India, that's wrong. It's called Indocentrism. There are nationalists in India who think the whole of South Asia and even Myanmar and Tibet are part of India.
    1
  121.  @SuperAghori  That doesn't mean anything
    1
  122. Just use "East Asian", "South Asian", "Southeast Asian" etc. easy. Asian people already use it to differentiate us from each other.
    1
  123.  @someonejustsomeone1469  Actually that term is already being considered offensive by some circles in the US who prefer the term "Black American", I have noticed online.
    1
  124. You're not even Indian. Which self professed Hindu Indian person thinks they are influenced by Muslims when most of them are Hindus? 💀
    1
  125.  @YashSharma-zp8yu  No
    1
  126. Exactly, India and China are also like the mothers of Asian civilisation. Ronnie's remarks are jokes, a mockery of how the West has narrow ideas of how Asians look like (East Asian in the US and South Asian in the UK). He is from Malaysia, would be strange for him to actually think Indians aren't Asian considering so many Malaysians are ethnically Indian and influenced the country greatly.
    1
  127. Well only Siberians are Asians (who are related to East and Central Asians). Slavic Russians are not native to Siberia (Asian Russia)
    1
  128. Nothing cultural about it. it's all due to physical appearance because most Southeast Asian cultures are culturally closer to India, not East Asia (China, Japan etc.). Only Vietnam is close to East Asia in terms of culture. So it's all due to physical appearance.
    1
  129.  @YashSharma-zp8yu  No
    1
  130.  @stephanatlas5331  Yeah but they all have that certain look to them. It's all homogenous.
    1
  131. How though when most of Southeast Asia is part of the Indian Cultural Sphere. If anything, it is East Asia is that is radically different.
    1
  132. If you're referring to Indian food with other cuisines from Asia, you can say "Asian food" but if you're referring to only one cuisine from an Asian country why would you say "Asian food"?
    1
  133.  @aey2579  I know that, I just said that because some people use "Asian" when only referring to one country which really doesn't make sense. Someone could say, "I'm going to Asian food tonight", what does the "Asian" mean in this context? That's what I meant.
    1
  134. Ronnie is Malaysian, it was a joke. Malaysians are of Malay, Chinese, Indian and Orang Asli descent. Why would he think Indians are not Asians when Indians are one the main groups that contributed to the formation of Malaysian culture? Malaysia is after all known as "mini Asia" as a result of this. Also, East Asians don't think Indians are not Asian. In Hong Kong, there is a large community of Indian that settled there during the colonial era and they're known by the Cantonese equivalent of "South Asian". India also culturally influenced large parts of Asia. South Asia and most of Southeast Asia is part of the Indian Cultural Sphere. In the UK and countries in the Gulf and East African nations, "Asian" means Indian. The term is subjective but all of these groups are Asians. BTW, in Chinese, "Asian" is known as "亞洲人" and refers to everybody from Asia (Chinese, Indian, Japanese, Korean, Thai, Kazakh etc.) but the word "黄种人" means "East Asian race" and is not the same as "亞洲人". If you use, "黄种人" then you are referring to Chinese, Japanese, Koreans etc. (i.e. East Asian people) but if you use "亞洲人" then you are referring to all Asians (i.e. the native ethnic groups of Asia). "黄种人" is racial and "亞洲人" is geographical.
    1
  135.  @Justin_Why  Yes I know that.
    1
  136.  @himanshisharma487  No we don't what?
    1
  137.  @Justin_Why  I know you have so many different features, I never said that Indians have the same look. I'm just talking about the majority.
    1
  138. I agree. My friend is Balinese and she has dark brown skin (like dark brown skin of some Indians) but her facial structure is more typically Southeast Asian with rounder eyes. Everybody knows she's Southeast Asian but nobody would ever mistake her for East Asian (Chinese, Japanese, Korean).
    1
  139.  @roh-mj6em  Actually maybe it's India schools that refuses to acknowledge the impact of East and Southeast Asia on India but they had some impact too. While rice was cultivated in the IVC as recent studies show, widespread rice farming (particularly of the aus-type variety) in India came to the country through the spread of Austroasiatic farmers from Southeast Asia. These people today are known as the Munda groups, SEA-related male farmers who had intermixed with predominantly AASI-rich women to create groups like the Munda, Santhal and Ho that exist across central, eastern and sub-Himalayan South Asia today (all Austroasiatic-speaking peoples). East Asia's impact came through Chinese immigration to India (especially Kolkata), birthing the cuisine known as Indo-Chinese cuisine as well as the introduction of East Asian architectural elements and garment styles that exist in various parts of the Himalayas like in parts of Himachal Pradesh (e.g. the Kinnaur people, Kinnaur architecture - even their language is a Sino-Tibetan language related to Mandarin).
    1
  140.  @आयुष_पराशर  You're joking right?
    1
  141.  @आयुष_पराशर  Tell me you are joking
    1
  142.  @आयुष_पराशर  No it's not
    1
  143.  @WastedBananas  Since when are all Indians North Indians?
    1
  144.  @WastedBananas  Stop liking your comments, there is no way anybody liked that comment in 43 seconds
    1
  145.  @WastedBananas  More influenced by Muslims??? Where on earth did you get this information from?? Most Indians are Hindus 💀
    1
  146. Exactly, Asia is just a continent. People are making Asian into a descriptive term to describe East Asian-type features when nobody in Asia sees it that way.
    1
  147. Kind of, people outside of Asia like in the US view "Asian" in terms of ethnicity/appearance and not continental.
    1
  148. In Asia, people don't view Asian as just East Asian only. There is actually a greater understanding that "Asian" is much more than just phenotype. This predicament only exists outside of Asia and is trivial.
    1
  149.  @deusmachinima1189  Yeah I agree but I feel like that's more of a US issue regarding East Asian Americans. In the context of Asia, China's economic rise is also connected with the rise of other Asian countries.
    1
  150. Asia was never about race or phenotype anyway and actually they do have things in common but many outside of Asia are unaware of that.
    1
  151. The comedian is from Malaysia. He knows that Indians are Asian as Malaysia is known as "Malaysia Truly Asia", it's home to Malays, Chinese and Indians. He's just making a joke about the way non-Asians view Asian as a descriptive term for appearance, when it's not.
    1
  152. The whole thing makes no sense because "Asian" is not even about appearance, it's just geography. The comedian is from Malaysia. He knows that mainland Indians are Asian as Malaysia is known as "Malaysia Truly Asia", it's home to Malays, Chinese and South Indians. He's just making a joke about the way non-Asians in the US and UK view Asian as a descriptive term for appearance, when it's not.
    1
  153.  @jayaratnam599  That's not correct lol
    1
  154. Correct
    1
  155.  @ashaypallav4158  No in the US, Chinese people may identify as "Asian" because they're Asian.
    1
  156. Exactly, India and China are the mothers of pan-Asian civilisation.
    1
  157. Well India culturally influenced much of Asia. Most of South Asia (India, Nepal etc.) and Southeast Asia (Thailand, Indonesia etc.) are part of the Indian Cultural Sphere. So where does that fit in? The term "Asia" is just geography, nothing else.
    1
  158.  @jameschristophercirujano6650  Many of the Chinese communities in places like Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Indonesia assimilated into the local culture which is Indianised. Thai Chinese use Sanskrit names instead of Chinese and Shenism (traditional Chinese folk religion) has absorbed Hindu influences as a result of interaction with Southeast Asian cultures. Cult of Brahma (Thai: Phra Phrom) is widely popular among ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia (and Hong Kong). So the Chinese have assimilated aspects of Chinese culture with the local SEA cultures.
    1
  159.  @jameschristophercirujano6650  The only area of Southeast Asia that is part of the East Asian Cultural Sphere is Vietnam (Kinh Vietnamese). It's only the southern tribal peoples of Vietnam like the Cham and some Montagnard groups that were Indianised.
    1
  160. 💀
    1
  161.  @shougeirin4849  Yeah that's right, it's because outside of Asia people view "Asian" in terms of appearance. It's all subjective. That's why I just say "East Asian", "South Asian" etc. and when talking about continental/geographical terms I just say "Asian" (e.g. Asian geopolitics).
    1
  162. I knew someone who is Thai who had a problem with this. Their physical appearance was nothing like East Asians and Americans would think he was Indian, Latino or Native American and with the ones more educated on Southeast Asia, would say Southeast Asian.
    1
  163. Yeah you're right, Ronny is kidding because he's Malaysian (10% of Malaysians have ancestry from present-day India). He's just making a joke about how Americans think Asian only means Chinese-looking people and British people think Asian only means Indian-looking people. Only native Siberians are Asians, not Slavic Russians a they come from eastern Europe. Most Israelis are in fact descendants of the Jewish diaspora in Europe. In Israel, they seem to use "Asian" to refer to countries east of them so I don't think Israelis view themselves as Asians.
    1
  164.  @yehezkielnainggolan8403  Yes everybody native to Asia is Asian but I guess it depends on the individual due to subjectivity.
    1
  165. well Asian and Mongoloid are not the same thing
    1
  166. I was just thinking about this today, Asia has phenotypes that exist all over the world.
    1
  167. What's your country? Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, Bangladesh classified as Middle Eastern? 💀 I'm of Sri Lankan descent, most of us are Buddhist. The Middle East is totally different in appearance and culture, even Pakistan (which is South Asian) is still somewhat foreign to me.
    1
  168. Yeah it's Western because in the West "Asian" is understood in terms of facial features whereas in Asia, "Asian" is just understood as geography and is an afterthought.
    1
  169. Yeah and the comedian made a joke too. He's Malaysian and one of the main groups of Malaysia are ethnic Indians. Malaysia is a mix of Malays, Chinese, Indians and Orang Asli groups and is known as "mini Asia" or "Malaysia Truly Asia" because Malaysians are descendants of people from different parts of Asia.
    1
  170. if you're indocentric that is
    1