It is called Indian Subcontinent, not just subcontinent!

A new fashion has started in our community recently. New and newer groups are being formed. They are often called sub-continent this or sub-continent that. They don’t put Indian word before their name. I have a problem with it.

I am aware of the term “Indian subcontinent” but not just “subcontinent”. India is a predominant country in Indian subcontinent. That is why it is called Indian subcontinent All territory of this was of course Indian until 63 years ago. Present day Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bhutan were part of this BHARAT or India. Fiji is not part of Indian subcontinent, just like West Indies is not. Fiji is about 15000 Kms away from India.

If any one wants to form a group from the Indian subcontinent, it should ideally be called “Indian subcontinent” this or that. If they have an allergy with words “Indian” or “India”, then they should say so and tell us why or at whose behest.

One would expect that the president of any group which has “Subcontinent” word in its name is from India as Indians will constitute the majority of such grouping, but it could come from any country which is part of Indian subcontinent geographically. It can’t have any person who is manifestly anti-Indian in his/her thoughts, designs and conduct. They have to accept that Kashmir is an inseparable and inalienable part of India.

Federal Election is very near. This is a tough election because ALP PM Mr Kevin Rudd was removed in a very unusual way. People have called this a political assassination by ALP factional bosses and union leaders. Unions affiliated with political parties are desperate to retain/regain powers. They may therefore send their “paid” workers to infiltrate our community and become our “leaders”. This may be done to hijack our votes.

We need to be careful in these matters.

We must know  which leader [s] are “paid” employee [s] of Unions and trying to become our “leader [s]”!

We should be careful with the designs of “leaders” who are not from India, but might be parachuted as our leaders. They may in fact be anti-India, but trying to become our “leaders” for their personal benefits.

I have seen several such people who have been trying to get into our community for their business interests with the help of some simpletons from our community. I hope our own simpletons from our community will use their brains [?] and see the true game of these people who are mixing with us for their benefits, but are not friendly with India or Indians.

I will accept an Indian as my leader for Indian community matters, not some one who is not from India, or who is anti-India. If they are not from India, they can not be the leaders for Indian community logically.

I will not accept any paid employee of any union to be my leader. Our community needs community leaders, not Union leaders. Let Union leaders concentrate in Union politics, not community politics!

You have been warned!!

Yadu Singh/Sydney/31st July, 2010

22 thoughts on “It is called Indian Subcontinent, not just subcontinent!

  1. Dr Singh, just one correction: Sri Lanka, Nepal or Bhutan were never part of the British India or Akhand Bharat 63 years ago. Bhutan and Nepal actually were not really under the empire too. Bhutan continues to enjoy this distinction till date.

    Like

  2. Pingback: Tweets that mention Sub-continent is nothing unless it is named properly & called Indian Sub-continent. « Yadu Singh's Blog -- Topsy.com

  3. You call others “simpletons” but your thoughts on Indian sub-continent itself is simplistic. People who are thinking and referring sub-continent (whether with Indian attached to it or not) are attempting unity but by insisting on Indian to be appended, you are trying to insist on dominance of one part of that group, howsoever large, on the group. This dominance is something that no one accepts. Just ask a Nepali or Bangladeshi. To be a leader and a bully are two different things. It is under PM Manmohan Singh that India is realising this difference and is becoming a leader.

    I like many of your ideas but you need to present them with some thought.

    Like

    • I am afraid, India is the major country in Indian sub-continent. We can’t change geography. It is Indian sub-continent, not just sub-continent. People who have allergy with word “Indian” should not associate with any Indian sub-continent groupings. I dislike those who hate India but still want to mix with Indians just for business interests. I know one such creature who holds very anti-India views but I see him mixing with our “simpletons” who have put him on their heads. These “simpletons” have allowed this creature to pose as our leader.

      Like

  4. Your assessment seems to have substance. This should serve as an eye opener for all Indians particularly at a time when the elections are in the offing.

    Like

    • I hope Indians will be careful with those people who are anti-India but want to mix with us for their benefits. Some of them support evil designs from you know whom on Kashmir. A Kashmiri Pandit would be the last person to keep his/her eyes closed. We must not accept paid employees of Unions to be our leaders.

      Like

  5. Before we start worrying about Indian subcontinent, let us worry about the name India itself. It is as foreign to India as bacon and eggs to a Idli eating south Indian. Let us call our nation with the proper name and not what we inherited from the white masters. Let us call it Bharath.Once that is solved, we can worry about other associates names attached to it.
    Bharatha Varsha once comprised of land mass that extended from Afghanistan to Cambodia and that included the Hindu kingdom( until recently) of Nepal. kanthari , mother of Duruyodanas,in Mahbharatha hailed from Kandhahar,hence her name.

    Like

  6. Hi Yaduji, I feel very strongly about the name “Indian” to be added to the “… Sub-Continent Group” no doubt about it!! I also am very much against people who join associations and different groups to just advance their own personnal agendas and businesses!! We should find such individuals and throw them out without any delay! Cheers.

    Like

    • Dipankar, thank you. I agree with whole-heartedly. This is not right to exclude “India” from a “sub-continent” grouping. People who have an allergy with word “India” or “Indian” can’t be our friends. They are with us because they want our business. Down-grading importance of India is an anti-India activity.

      BTW, I have known you for a few years now. I do not hesitate to say that you are a proud and great Indian. I have great regards for you and your value system. We need more like you.

      Best regards

      Yadu Singh

      Like

  7. Dear Yadu
    Thanks for standing up for the great nation which can not be eclipsed by the generalisation and also for warning against the “Dhoort” undercover performers Best wishes for your commendable passion Regards Shailja

    Like

    • Thank you Shailja Ji. Regards Yadu Singh

      For those who do not know it, “Dhoort” is a Hindi word which means shifty or crook.

      Like

  8. Being an indian by birth and heart, I would like to echo your thoughts. However, it is not appropriate, as the smaller nations like pakistan, sri-lanka, thailand etc. will jack-up against this propostion. Already these nations are talking to the world that ‘ Indian hegemony’, when certain proposals are put forward in wide-world, reg. the sub-continet.
    In this world, and anywhere in general, it is better to have a ‘ low-profile’ and strengthen ones ‘ clout’ by being more powerful, educative, less-corruptive, and doing the best to massess at the grond-root level. If that happens, automatically the rest will fall-in and says, yes India has acheived the basics and deserves to be the status we aspire for. Credit should not be claimed, BUT given, or offered.-ram.

    Like

  9. Thanks Ram. There is nothing called “Sub-continent”. The proper name is “Indian Sub-continent”. We can’t erase history or alter geography. People who have an allergy with India or Indian should not join such groups. Jai Ho to India [Bharat] and Indians who take pride in being Indians.

    Regards

    Yadu Singh

    Like

  10. http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/asia/indiansub.htm
    http://www.answers.com/topic/subcontinent

    These are not my words go to the url printed above and see the maps and definition of sub-continent.

    Absolutely geogrphically there is nothing in words that can be used intead of Indian sub continent as only subcontinent. This word subcontinent can be used for any subcontinent that can be any piece of land which fits into the definition.

    But in this case as Dr. Yadu Singhji said it is purely politically motivated and has no support logically or from the community.

    bas yahi kahunga dono billiyan nadarad hai lekin phir bhi banddar baat chal rahi hai.

    Indian Subcontinent

    The land referred to as the Indian subcontinent is a tectonic plate that began to separate itself from other surrounding slabs of rock (or plates) millions of years ago.

    The movement of that plate changed the landscape, and formed the Himalayas, the world’s most elevated mountain range; home to Mount Everest, the world’s tallest mountain.

    The subcontinent land itself is a peninsula that extends south into the Indian Ocean. Geographers refer to it as a subcontinent because of its size, but in reality, it’s not large enough to be considered an individual continent.

    It includes all of India, as well as Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and (parts of) Pakistan, and there seems to be no definitive agreement on the exact landmass content regarding Pakistan.

    Like

    • Thank you Ramu Kaka. The word “Indian” has to be added if we are talking about Indian sub-continent. There are people who have allergy with “India or Indian”. They actually wish harm to our beloved country. They have entered our community for their business benefits. The fault is with our “simple” people who are “Budhdhu” enough to not know it or ignore it even after knowing it. The test is to ask a question “do you support that Kashmir is an inalienable part of India?” If they say yes, then they are friends. If answer is no, then they are not our friends.

      Like

  11. Are people here talking about naming of Indian sub-continent or is the hidden agenda about furthering hindutva. The discussion has gone into akhand bharat, bharatvarsh etc. In just a few more days, it would be all about modi is going to bring about the golden gaurav of bharat. And then back to mandir, riots and dominance of Hindus.

    If you are so passionate about history, then why not name it “Hindustan”, something which is more contemporary and inclusive. Part of people’s vocabulary too. Why is muslim history never considered in these discussions. It was in the 13th to 17th century Ad that the Indian subcontinent attained it highest achievements – why is that period, those emperors and that language – Urdu forgotten.

    Why no one has a passion for that language and culture?

    Who is this person you are talking about? Why not be open about who you are refrerring to

    Like

    • Thank you. If you do a thorough search, it is named “Indian Sub-continent”, not just sub-continent. Sub-continent is a misnomer and incorrect terminology.That was the basic point of what I wrote. I am a proud Indian and don’t apologise for that.

      I am not going into religions as that is people’s personal thing. It is not for a debate. People here are talking about geography of India, Bharat and Indian sub-continent.

      I don’t like people who have allergy with the word India or Indian. If they do, then they need to stay away from India or Indians. It is as simple as that. Mixing with Indians for business interests and holding anti-India views is not on. The test in this regards is Kashmir matter which is India’s inalienable part.

      History is something which we can’t ignore. If anything, we, Indians, MUST learn from it.

      Urdu, Hindi and all Indian languages are beautiful languages and I like them all.

      Modi is not relevant for this discussion and you should not drag him into it. For your info, Gujarat is one of the best states in India with great all round development.

      Second point in my Blog is that we will not accept paid employees of Unions to be our leaders. Indians have a large number of people with capability to be our leaders. We will not allow Unions to control our community and leadership.

      Regards

      Yadu Singh

      Like

  12. With due respect to Mr Khan, do we really want to talk about ..[edited].genocidal history of India? Anyhow, why bring Modi here and tell me what is wrong in calling India as Bharath, a name as old as our ancient culture? I am happy for India to be called as Hindustan though.Apparently nobody has any qualms about the name Pakistan, land of the pure with it’s capital religiously named Islamabhad.

    Like

    • Rama, I have edited a few words out from your response. Conversions were done in India with the force of sword and taxes were imposed on those who believed in the religions which were different from the religion of the King. Intolerance to other religions was rampant both pre/post 1947 in Indian sub-continent. Just review the the numbers of religious minorities in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh at the time of independence/partition in 1947 and their numbers today. You will get the message and you will know why. Intolerance is the only explanation for this. Disgusting and outrageous to say the least!!

      Regards

      Yadu Singh

      Like

  13. I recently migrated from the UK born to Australia. I was born to Sri lankan Tamil parents in the UK. In the UK we use Asian to denote people fromn India, pakistan, Sri Lnaka etc. Thats the largest minority constituency.Now in Australia ASian mainly means people from East and SOuth east asia.
    So I prefer using south asia to denote Indian subcontinent
    I also feel very much part of India due to language, religion etc but if you call me Indian that is not true either The modern nation states dont quite reflect our common heritages before borderlines were drawn. My British Bangladeshi Benagali friends also speak Bengali but not Indian in the sense of the modern Nation state of India. Does it mean Benagali is only a lnaguage of India? It is a language of Bangladesh too.

    I used to refer to myself as British Asian like so much of my peers. Or in a more specific context i may say British Tamil. Now that I am in Australia none of it make sense. In fact in the early days( 60s) all non- white communities in the UK refered to themselves as Black( Indians, Afro Caribbeans, Chinese) as a political tool to gain our rights. But AS the South Asian population grew they started to identify more specifically to their region, language, religion( British Muslim, Britoish Sikh, British Asian etc). At the end of the day it depends on which context we are talking about. At times I simply call myself British too. AS the comminities grow and second and third generations begin to assert themselves in this country we will surely see a shift like it has done it the UK.
    Thought it might give another perspective on you subject. cheers
    Some shameless publicity. just started a blog myself. here is the link
    http://lastremainingrelative.blogspot.com/

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s