- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/4495502
Britain renamed Bharat to India when it was colonized, and the name is a symbol of colonial slavery.
You must log in or register to comment.
You got it wrong. British didn’t rename India. India was called India by anglophone countries and bharat is a sanskrit name which is hated in South india so our freedom fighters and INC chose the name India and along with its hindi version bharat. Modi government is all about gimmick and mockery of everything logical that’s why they are having this name changing spree without any factual people’s development . Note we have 2000 languages and we don’t say “bharat” except the indo European languages . And if these wanna be decolonizers want an ancient name why not put “Hindustan”… The grand original name of United India used both by Subhas bose and Pakistanis… Lol… Because it sounds persianized.
wouldn’t Hindustan imply that the Muslims don’t belong in the country? But they are so racist they don’t want to sound Persian? interesting.
Hindustani is a language spoken by both Hindus and Muslims (in both India and Pakistan) as Hindi and Urdu are essentially variants of it. Thus technically Hindustan is a religiously neutral term. The problem is that it only represents north-west India where this language is predominantly spoken. The rest of India would therefore not identify with this name which is also the problem with Bharat. Unfortunately due to India’s extremely diverse multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and multi-religious composition there is no optimal solution to this problem.
“India” also originally represented northwest part too.
And yet over time it became accepted by most of the subcontinent. Probably the same can happen with Bharat given enough time.
But ultimately this is not about what Indians call their own country, it’s about a naming convention in the anglophone world. It’s as if Germany tomorrow decided to demand that English speakers would be required to call their country Deutschland. It’s doable but it will take time for people to adapt and some will still never let go of the old name they have become accustomed to using.
And that would still just be for English, other languages would still have their own names for some countries, like the Polish Niemcy for Germany.
Personally i have no opinion on this either way except to say that out of habit i will probably still sometimes use the name i originally learned.
It’s as if Germany tomorrow decided to demand that English speakers would be required to call their country Deutschland.
Turkey did exactly that.
Ukraine even tried to rename… Russia.
Well, in Turkey’s case it’s easier because the old and the new variant sound and are spelled very similarly so nobody will be confused no matter which you use.
As for the other one, well… Ukraine be crazy right now is all i can say to that.
What book in English would you recommend about India’s internal politics and unity?
You’ll have to ask someone else i’m afraid, my own knowledge on this subject is rather limited.
I appreciate your honesty.
All Mughal emperors called India “Hindustan” Starting from babur to Aurangzeb. Lol. Lets that sink in… Here hindu means those who live beyond hindu kush mountains or river Indus.
Thanks for the clarification. 👍
the wikipedia talk page on this is pretty interesting. The controversy outlines how India is low-key 2 different civilizations mashed together: the indo-aryan and the dravidian peoples. The talk page seems to suggest as much because the Tamil referred to Bharat as the “northern country”, and this seems to be the case up until the English came in and did things. I wonder what the reaction from the Dravidian-speaking parts of India will be.
