This is a really old post but the man and woman who killed him were they punished and killed by other singhs? Bhai surinder singh sodhi was a sher a real gursikh as well he did simran and nitnem for hours
where did you read about Harrappa? from a book written by a "white man"
and who started the excavation of Harrappa? "white man".
he didn't try and destroy either.
again you are including blacks? why? what about chinese, arabs, native americans etc? why are you so fixated with blacks? your whole view-point is a black one.
and where are the beautiful buildings in africa and jamaica?
this is not true. very famous/popular historians like Will and Ariel Durrant openly wrote about your first point. most of you wouldn't even know about e.g. the concept of zero if it were not from their history/research.
the ancient greeks were eager to learn and learnt form other cultures. the modern european civilisation also did this. it was no secret, tolstoy acknowledged buddhism, schopenhauer acknowledged indian philosophy, goethe openly admired kalidasa. they did not make any secret of this.
yes europeans picked up greek, roman stuff in the renaissance and carried it through. but they did not steal it. francis bacon did not accept the learned greek methods, he thought out empiricism, which formed the basis of modern science. the mathematics of euclid was rethought by russian mathematicians, which einstein used in the theory of relativity (not the euclidean gemoetry).
learning from someone is not "stealing". taking investigation further is not "stealing".
what made the most wealthy parts of asia wealthy- china, india, japan- is that they were willing to learn from west.
e.g. japan didn't steal western civilisation after ww2.
again what is "what the white man has done". and "our knowledge". very petty way of thinking.
I think this is due to the big improvement of regional cinema industries. I remember watching punjabi movies 10-15 years ago. They were very inferior to bollywood movies. In terms of story lines, special affects and general quality of production. This was understandable though as Punjabi cinema was just starting to come good and was not well fincanced .Many of the early punjabi films were just about some macho punjabi guy acting like a gangster with big mucha lol. I think those days are gone we are now seeing some good story lines and productions instead of those stereo typical films that were made in the 80's and 90's.
Poeple can relate more to their own cultual language films more then the hindi type nonsence films. That glorify khans and muslims.Punjabi films can promote Sikhism and Punjabi language and do much good for punjab and punjabis by making good moral films to adsress alcohol and other issues affecting us. What we need is better actors, directors and producers to steer punjabi cinema to a bright future.
Maybe it can become a global force? Tamil film industry is huge and they do good at promoting their language, culture and faith.