Oh, the Indus valley was always Indian and never had external population migrations or conquests that left an impact on culture and dynasties analogous to England's Norman conquest of 1066 and earlier Saxon migrations that impacted the culture to the present day, reflected in socioeconomic class distinctions?
How is all this diatribe related to the fact that AIT (not AMT) is a discarded theory, and jati vyavastha has nothing to do with imagined external conquests?
The statement was not a diatribe as it was neither forceful nor an attack, but I see that you perceive it as such and hence recommend re-reading it under a steelman approach.
1. My statement points out to another population that still has class-based bigotry from prior conquests and migration
2. If you note, you brought invasion into the conversation after my initial comment which neither supported nor refuted AIT, AMT, or other migration theories. I really don't care which theory people believe, because, ultimately, however history unfolded, it's today's Markovian state of the world that holds highest weight.
No. They're saying that an invasion that came and imposed a caste system is imagined. It was a reasonable hypothesis a hundred years ago but has long since been discredited.
Migration on the other hand is the current consensus theory.
Man, guess history is completely wrong.[0]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India