I notice a common theme in modern politically correct 'discourse'. A transfering from the physical to the 'mental'. While Nietzsche denied the Cartesian mind/body duality, it seems that his critics want to first retain it and then transfer all the bodily things into a 'mentality'. So that Nietzsche, the philosopher who began to bring in physiology [and so presaged sociobiology] is traduced as a dreamer-up of mind games.Like wise, the Aryan culture of the Caste, becomes a mere 'cast of mind'.

Of course, modern 'translations' and 'selections' of both Nietzsche and the Vedic writings reflect this attempt to rareify, transform and 'soften' something which in its real state is bodily and 'hard'.Seeing as Nietzsche refers most of all to the Vedas and the Laws of Manu, I shall quote some of them which reflect the real philosophy and not its distortion;

We have in the Rig Veda [2:12], the following;"dAsaM varNamadharaMguhAkaH" - "Black skin is impious and lowly".

That the worshippers of the Vedic gods are called Aryans and were racially conscious is affirmed by another line [RV 1:130];"indraH samatsu yajamAnamAryaM etc." - "Indra protected in battle the Aryan worshipper, he subdued the lawless for Manu, he conquered the black skin".

The next line [RV 9:73] "indradviSTAmapa ..." etc., emphasises the degree of kin-feeling;"Stormy gods who rush on like furious bulls and scatter the black skin which Indra hates".

That the Aryans and their gods were one is obvious here [RV 1:100];"The Thunderer bestowed on his White friends the fields, bestowed the Sun, bestowed the waters".

While concentrating on the Indo-Aryans, we can also glance at the closely related ancient Iranians. We see that the Gathas contain the Zarathustrian Creed [Yasha 12]. The Creed is a series of pledges which begins with a stark rejection of the enemy;"I curse the Daevas", and ends with a pledge to,"Uphold khvaetvadatha [kin-marriage] ".

'Kin' is of course the Indo-European word for 'race', and is indivisisble from 'family', deriving from the proto-Indo European *gn- . Of course the Aryans were the peoples of 'birth'; - Sanskrit 'jata'.

In Greek we find 'genos', race, family, and in Latin 'gens', race, clan [this finds its way into English as 'gentleman' which originally meant of 'gentle birth' i.e., of good race/family]. In Proto-Germanic we have *kundajaz, race, family.To Aryans, race is inseparable from family, so in Old English we have 'cyn', race, family, - giving rise to the many terms, such as kinship, kindred, and also 'king'. This shows that the king was 'of the kin'.It is only in the 14th-16th centuries A.D. that we see a separation of the concepts race and family, which as I say, were/are identical to aryans. This is when the Italian word 'razza' comes into use to denote a class of persons, animals etc., and so begins to effect a transvaluation of Aryan values

So, whereas 'anti-racists' make a of this late concept 'race', English speaking Aryans use the ancient term 'kin' in all all its richness.

The Laws of Manu are very much concerned with 'kin'. The idea that an Aryan is only someone that thinks 'noble thoughts' etc. is completely contrary to the Aryan culture;"Someone born from a non-Aryan father and an Aryan mother is a non-Aryan; he is born 'against the grain' ". [Manu 10]

The idea that 'being an Aryan' could be based on something so fickle as behaviour is nonsensical. Aryan is a kin concept;"The king should settle in dry open country with plenty of grain, charming and not marshy, where most of the inhabitants are Aryans, the neighbours have been made to bow down, and there is a livliehood for his own people". [Manu 7]

Of course, Aryanism is not only religious, social and ethnic, but also linguistic. However, birth/race was always more important;"All of those castes who are excluded from the world of those who were born from the mouth, arms, thighs, and feet [of the primordial man] are traditionally regarded as aliens, whether they speak barbarian languages or Aryan languages". [Manu 10]Aliens are creatures not of birth.

Manu sets his face against inter-caste kin mixture;"A man born of a bad womb shares his father's character, or his mother's, or both; but he can never suppress his own nature.A man born of the confusion of wombs even if he comes from a leading family, will inherit that very character, to a greater or lesser degree.But the kingdom in which these degraded bastards are born, defiling the classes, quickly perishes, together with the people who live there". [Manu 10]

So we come back to Nietsche. His basic position on 'race', or rather 'kin' was that as set out in Manu. And because his philosophy was sociobiological he saw that many features of modernity were derived from 'the confusion of wombs'.

That the Aryans viewed themselves consciously as a 'people' cannot be doubted;"From the eastern sea to the western sea, the area in between the two mountains is what wise men call the Land of the Aryas". [Manu 2]

The Aryans identified themselves with their gods and their land;"In Sanskrit the drops of rain are called 'ind-u' ; he who sends them is called Ind-ra, the rainer, the irrigator. And in the Veda, the name of the principal deity, worshipped by the Aryan settlers in India, or the Land of the Seven Rivers". [Muller,'Lectures on the Origin of Religion']

I have stuck to the texts to avoid the tiresome and groundless assertions which are often made on both side of the debate. The Aryan culture is as legitimate as the Semitic culture and any other; it has unfortunately become the scape-goat of politically correct Nihilists.