The Idea of India

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 06:19

Flippin heck we spend year and years trying to prove unsuccessfully that Pakistan is not a nation and one guy comes along and asks why India is anation and this goddam forum is willing to debate it? WTF? How is BRF different from Suzanne Arundhati Roy, who after all is only debating the shape of India's nationhood too? How phenomenally dumb. We hate her and need to point out the Christian, alien "Suzanne" in her name while we are the patriots?

If psy ops can be scored on a scale of 1 to 10 this gets -5 from me.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 03 Nov 2010 06:22

Hail the United States of India!

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 03 Nov 2010 06:58

when 'India is an artificial nation created by the british' is repeated ad nauseam and becomes accepted knowledge with quite a few otherwise educated Indians agreeing to it does that constitute positive psy-ops ?
that one guy's post is used as a starting point is irrelevant to the larger issue, latching on to that is simply a case of looking at the finger that points at the moon.

'we are here' is not a strong enough argument, many nations and civilizations of the past have used that argument before and have been swept away like so many straws in the wind. if we are confident of our identity then we should have no problems discussing and even debating it.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 07:08

Rahul M wrote: 'we are here' is not a strong enough argument,

We were there is also not a strong enough argument.

A nation is an area of land whose borders are defined and the people are all in general agreement with the idea of the nation. In India Kashmir wants out. Naxals want out. India's government is lying about the borders. China occupies some of what we like to call India. The government of India led by an Italian woman is subservient to foreign powers

There is nothing common to hold India together. It is being done by force as is highlighted by the events in Kashmir.
By no means is India a nation. Like we accuse the Chinese - we have ourselves been brainwashed into imagining that we are a nation. India is no more than an Idea. A virtual entity. Not a nation.

Below is a map of the British empire. So is that all Britain then? If it is not, then the extent of the Mauryan empire or whatever can never represent India. Just a pimple in history

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 07:10

Pakistanis see Islam as their common feature and say that is what makes their nation.
The Chinese see common ethnicity and language as their nation
Common language and ethnicty has been the basis of many European nations

India has none these

Therefore India cannot be a nation any more than the equator. Churchill was dead right.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 03 Nov 2010 07:26

shiv ji, you are making my arguments !

political boundary =/= nation, that is what I wanted to emphasize in the first place.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 03 Nov 2010 08:01

Historical interest aside, a question like this usually ends up with a lot of self-justification by Indians--we suddenly feel it is our obligation to show that we have been a nation in history, as if otherwise we have no legitimacy to be a nation today. What is wrong with saying, we are a nation now, and anyone who threatens that nation will be made to rue it?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 08:07

The concept of "nation state" is artificially created.

If you go back even 500 years you find that there was no such thing as "passport", "visa" and border control. "National language", "National song", "National bird", "National animal" " national game" are artificially defined parameters to set apart one nation state from another. These were non existent 500 years ago. People moved from one "country" or kingdom to another relatively freely as refugees, migrants or conquerors.

The concept of nation state was set up to prevent armed conquest. The UN (and the earlier League of nations) were created to ensure this and the UNSC created to enforce it.

As a side swipe the creation of "nation states" also restricted migration. In addition the artificially created concept of nation state. An additional side effect of the creation of nation state was the ability to prevent certain alien political ideologies and forces from taking root by enforcement of the rules of the nation state. The US enforced democracy. NoKo enforces communism. Pakistan and Saudi enforce Sunni Islam.

So once you define a nation state you are giving that state the tools to develop its own identity that sets it apart from everyone else. This is good for maintaining some religions and political systems. It is good for attempting to prevent conquest. It is good for preventing migration even as refugees.

There are therefore two Indias

One is the ancient idea of India that was a land east of the Indus and south of the himalayas with no fixed border and free migration for wealth, refuge or profit. It had no fixed ideology and no fixed "protected" language. It had no fixed emperor or political system. It had no fixed and protected religion. Unlike other nations defined on ethnicity, language or religion, India was a land that did not restrict anyone on those lines. This is a concept that most people in the world cannot understand. Only the US comes close - but even the US trips and falls over language.

The second is India the nation state which happens to be east of the Indus and south of the Himalayas. But this India has fixed borders. It has no ideology to protect. It had no ideology in the past. It has no single language to protect. No single language was ever protected in the past.

All that India the nation state does is to try and maintain the "status quo" of a free thinking, liberal India not bound by ethnicity and language or religion in a world that has structured itself around nation states in which every nation clams uniqueness based on ethnicity, color, language or religion. They look at India and ask "What is unique about you?" And India's are not able to say that anything is unique in India because not being unique in terms of ethnicity, color, language or religion is what India is all about.

India also happens to have the largest collection of Hindus in the world. Hindus are unique in not demanding one god like Christians and Muslims. They are unique in having developed dozens of unique languages based on sanskrit. They are unique in their philosophy and worldview which is alien to most people in the world in many ways.In many ways India's unique characteristics revolve around being Hindu.

Hinduism is not a protected religion in India the nation state. It was not protected in ancient India
Sanskrit is not a protected language in India the nation state. It was not protected in ancient india

India the nation state is a meaningless mish mash that Indians cannot explain. India is a nation only so far as the UN recognizes it as one. No wonder ever country on earth wants to chew off a piece of India. No wonder the UNSC wants to have nothing to do with this weird monster.

But under the circumstances, it is Hindus who have most to lose by not accepting India the nation state. It is Hindus who have most to lose by the breakdown of the nation state structure of the world. The Chinese have a nation which the define by "Han". Islam has a nation. Christendom is a nation. Hindus are not an ethnic group. Hinduism never set out to create a nation.

Is there any room for debate about India's nationhood? It's either that or bust. "Bust" may not be all that bad. Karnataka formed the basis of a very powerful empire in the past. I am sure India can be split into several small and powerful nations. That is where everyone agrees, except Indians. Indians do not want to agree because Indians see their ability to move from the Himayalays to Kanyakumari and from east to west as a fundamental right of being Indian. This is not a good enough excuse to be a nation for everyone. But it is for Indians.

An Indian is a person who worships the land, from the mountains of the north to the seas in the south. He can worship any god he likes, but he has to worship the land to be India. And if he does not worship the land he will be persecuted. I will persecute him personally if no one else does.

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 03 Nov 2010 08:08

shiv wrote: There is nothing common to hold India together. It is being done by force as is highlighted by the events in Kashmir.
By no means is India a nation. Like we accuse the Chinese - we have ourselves been brainwashed into imagining that we are a nation. India is no more than an Idea. A virtual entity. Not a nation.

O_O
Wow! I'm not sure if my sarcasim detector is broken or what. You sound like you actually believe it.

As for the Chinese, I thought we were nation/state optimised. Or something.

KLNMurthy wrote: What is wrong with saying, we are a nation now, and anyone who threatens that nation will be made to rue it?

Can you think about this question in the context of China, Tibet and Xinjiang?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 08:34

TonyMontana wrote: O_O
Wow! I'm not sure if my sarcasim detector is broken or what. You sound like you actually believe it.

It is only part sarcasm.

Look at why the UN was formed. Why was the security council formed?

The UN was formed at a time when empires that "ruled the whole world" were braking down into smaller states and some mechanism was required to avoid war and conquest by states that became too powerful. In the 50 years prior to the formation of the UN global superpowers like Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Russia nnd the US had got into wars that affected every continent on earth.

Nobody wanted that sort of war but the colonial powers could no longer protect and hold the territories they had governed. The concept of "Nation state" was very useful here. Every country was given a border on a map. (In fact the method of surveying the world and mapping the world had only been worked out less than 100 years before). Every country was given a name and accorded recognition" as a member of the 'United Nations?".

Who would protect the sanctity of these nations. It was to be the UNSC.

But what if a member of the UNSC did not want to protect the sanctity of another nations borders? Technically the other UNSC members were supposed to prevent that.

But when 2 or more members of the security council collude with each other to screw another country - that country is in big trouble. The US, UK, France and China colluded to bring Russian power down.

There is a loose collusion between China and the US/UK in propping up Pakistan against India. India is bound to get screwed. Unless...

India's nationhood is disputed by many people outside India. As a matter of principle I oppose the debate on the nature of Indian nationhood on a forum on "Bharat-Rakshak". Bharat Rakshak means "Protector of Bharat (India) ". It does not mean questioner or doubter of Bharat. However on BR we have as much right to question the basis of Indian nationhood as Arundhati Roy. We have no moral right to oppose Arundhati Roy's views or that separatist Gilanis views while we sit around wondering what India is all about. India's nationhood is above debate. This thread should have stayed in the lingerie forum. These are my opinions.

It is another matter that this discussion is mere onanism. India "IS" just as much as Pakistan "IS". And Indians will fight and bite as much as anyone else to spoil the party of anyone who disputes that. India the nation state has made too many Indians happy and contented - even if they are shitting out in the open.

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 03 Nov 2010 08:47

shiv wrote: It is another matter that this discussion is mere onanism. India "IS" just as much as Pakistan "IS". And Indians will fight and bite as much as anyone else to spoil the party of anyone who disputes that. India the nation state has made too many Indians happy and contented - even if they are shitting out in the open.

Why did I google that?

Shiv, you're making a lot of sense. But personally, I'm against any form of censorship. Let no topic be taboo for discussion. Let a hundred thousand flowers bloom!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 08:51

Is India's nationhood open to question at all? Should it be debated?

Whom does this debate benefit?

It is right for us to debate this but wrong for Arundhati Roy (labelled as Christian on this forum) and Geelani (a self confessed islamist) to debate the sanctity of India's nationhood? Is it OK for Hindus to answer questions about India the nation state but not others?

Paradoxically India the nation state protects Hindus like nowhere else on earth. No India. No nation for Hindus. It may not be perfect, but its the only one there is and there is scope for improvement. Is India's nationhood debatable at all? Whom does this debate benefit?

Why is it being debated? Has anyone even tried debating Pakistan's nationhood on BR on a separate thread?

I still strongly oppose this thread on this forum

It must go back under the hijab for the people who have doubts about India's nationhood.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 03 Nov 2010 09:50

shiv wrote:Is India's nationhood open to question at all? Should it be debated?

Why should there be anything under the sun that should not be debated?

Whether it is on-topic for BR or not is a separate issue.

disha · Post by **disha** » 03 Nov 2010 10:20

Pranav wrote:
shiv wrote:Is India's nationhood open to question at all? Should it be debated?
Why should there be anything under the sun that should not be debated?

Whether it is on-topic for BR or not is a separate issue.

IB4TL. This is insane. It is like trying to explain why Earth revolves around the Sun and trying to prove the theory of gravity or better yet the "theory" of evolution to the creationists, the creationists being the weirdos.

First of all, everything is not debatable and second everything cannot be debated, particularly on open forums. In our rush to prove something to the gora (the gora being the furriner here) we are creating several self goals.

IB4TL

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 03 Nov 2010 10:42

disha wrote: IB4TL. This is insane. It is like trying to explain why Earth revolves around the Sun and trying to prove the theory of gravity or better yet the "theory" of evolution to the creationists, the creationists being the weirdos.

First of all, everything is not debatable and second everything cannot be debated, particularly on open forums. In our rush to prove something to the gora (the gora being the furriner here) we are creating several self goals.
IB4TL

There is a lot that even Indians can learn ... for example this is something that people may benefit by pondering over:

abhischekcc wrote:There is one idea that is very difficult for westerners and especially Chinese to understand - India became a moral concept before it became a physical concept. Also, India (or Bharat-varsha, to tak the proper name) was never conceived as an ethnic construct (European concept of nation state), or as an administrative construct (Chinese construct of an empire).

India is a Dharmic civilization which exists independently of political nation-states. Despite the misgovernance that one sees today, the seed is there.

disha · Post by **disha** » 03 Nov 2010 11:00

Pranav wrote: There is a lot that even Indians can learn ... for example this is something that people may benefit by pondering over:

abhischekcc wrote:There is one idea that is very difficult for westerners and especially Chinese to understand - India became a moral concept before it became a physical concept. Also, India (or Bharat-varsha, to tak the proper name) was never conceived as an ethnic construct (European concept of nation state), or as an administrative construct (Chinese construct of an empire).
India is a Dharmic civilization which exists independently of political nation-states. Despite the misgovernance that one sees today, the seed is there.

Totally agree that even Indians can learn. Can we at least ensure that the discussion is carried out only by Indians (since it is their prerogative)? And not some 2-bit weirdos and red card carrying members and sundry jihadists?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 03 Nov 2010 11:10

This should be sent back under hijab, Shiv ji is having way too much fun.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 03 Nov 2010 14:57

Have to disagree with the good doc here, which is not something that happens often. Not because his arguments are wrong, but because I feel the thread has utility in that many of us are ourselves not convinced, or have not rationalised, why India exists as a physical space. We simply have not thought about it because we simply take it for "granted".

Many people come across these questions in their day to day lives from foreigners who basically have no clue. This thread helps to consolidate the reasons, for those of us who are not sufficiently informed.

That the question came from wrdos (apparently Chinese) is beside the point. It is a question asked. Let us address it, without malice or antagonism, and benefit some Indians as well in the process by giving them the required argumentation to back up their taken for "granted" belief in the oneness and completeness of India.

Of course, probably Chinese style response might be (and Tony correct me if I'm wrong): Maybe we are not a nation, but we are like this now and we plan to stay this way and expand if possible. What are you going to do about it?

BTW, it gradually looks like we are arriving at an equilibrium with the Chinese participants on the forum. It's not a bad thing. China is a truly great civilisation/nation, and we will need them as we take the world forward in the coming centuries.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 03 Nov 2010 16:21

I think this is a good thread, for BRFites to contribute to - what is their idea of India, what makes India special for them, what gives them pride in their homeland, their personal impressions and experiences, what we think about India as a state, as a nation, as a civilization, as a geographical entity, which historical chapter of India, they relate to most and why.

If any non-Indians have anything positive to contribute, then sure they should do so too, but mostly this thread should remain for Indians or PIOs.

No Pakistani, Chinese posters need to be allowed here. No questions from them should be entertained here.

JMTs

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 16:39

RajeshA wrote: No Pakistani, Chinese posters need to be allowed here. No questions from them should be entertained here.

JMTs

Guess who started the thread?

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 03 Nov 2010 16:54

I agree with Shiv Ji here. This is a pointless thread. India's idea predates history. Predates Mughuls / British. Read about Chanakya and his writings.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 17:34

Parable time:

Once there was a man who had a beautiful wife. He loved her and she was devoted to him. Oh of course they had their tiffs and disagreements. She would drool over handsome actors and he would ogle pretty girls - but they stayed true.

The real unhappy people here were a bunch of men whom the man knew. They could not stand the idea of the guy having a beautiful wife. So they fantasized among themselves about what they would do to her and made up stories about what they were doing to her. The man heard some of those stories and dismissed them outright.

One day one guy whom the man was drinking with suggested that the wife was unfaithful to him. "Nonsense!" replied the husband. He didn't want to talk about it. But the other guy insisted and said "Hey - I hear all these stories. Don't you even want to talk about it?. It's just a discussion. No harm in discussing something is there?"

Instead of telling the chap to piss off the husband relented. He agreed that his wife's fidelity was debatable. It was after all, discussion. Soon the other men joined the discussion and started talking about the various ways in which his wife could be unfaithful and what they had heard. The man did not like it initially but the others were persuasive. "There are things you might learn from this" they told him.

Soon, things started going bad between him and his wife. He found himself jealous and suspicious and she had no clue why he was acting strange. But it was too late. The man had already accepted that his relationship with his wife was debatable and that he was willing to debate it with others. He could not take that back. He screwed up a relationship of trust and faith to one of suspicion and doubt.

Your nation is an article of faith. People may question it and say parts of it belong to them, or that it does not belong to you. But it is your nation, either by birth or by choice. What others ask about it should not make you doubt it and ask if it is right or wrong. Patriotism is a matter of faith. It is not a state of mind that calls for debate. A person who is willing to debate his nation by telling himself that he is getting stronger needs to understand that he is first allowing the doubt to creep in and then saying "It will make me strong" if I doubt my nation. BRF are the intellectual elite in India and I now see that many of us are made from the same material as Arundhati Roy. Too highbrow as intellectuals to be fooled by simpleton concepts like patriotism.

Look at the English translation of Vande Mataram in this link.
http://www.hindujagruti.org/activities/ ... demataram/

How stupid the words look. Laughable actually.

Mother, I bow to thee!
Rich with thy hurrying streams,
bright with orchard gleams,
Cool with thy winds of delight,
Dark fields waving Mother of might,
Mother free.

Don't get me wrong. It's all debatable of course. Anything can be debated after all. Some people actually like that whiny song. They don't seem to worry about the silly lyrics or the funny tune. They go all misty eyed over them. Perhaps we need to get over this kind of mushyness and become intellectuals who can stand up and question why we are and why India even needs to exist. That is what being modern is all about.

Once you lose faith, once you lose trust, once you start accepting self doubt because others instil that doubt in you and say it's smart to do that - you lose those parts of you that survive purely on faith, trust and primordial love. Faith trust and primordial love is what you feel for your mommy when you are a child. Patriotism is built of the same material. Once you become "rational. thinking, intelligent, logical and worldly wise" - patriotism takes a hit. Like if people say your mommy is a whore. If you accept that as a rational human, you are a great and well adjusted individual but you are of little use to your mommy even if she was the best mommy on earth.

And when you allow patriotism to take a hit using excuses like your nation is debatable by everyone - you are opening the door just that much to allow nation breakers to "just debate" what can be done after breaking the nation. That is what is being done by bringing the power of self doubters of BRF to the open.

All I am saying is that India's status as a nation is not debatable. We of all people should not debate it in public and allow everyone to say what he thinks assuming that this is "harmless' or that "We will learn". The idea of debating whether your nation is a nation at all and why it is a nation is abhorrent to me. I can personally tell you ten thousand reasons why India is bad, Indians are stupid and why India need not exist. But I don't think such thoughts should be given a place for expression on a public thread such as this one.

I will of course play the game as people want it. You want to question why India should be a nation? I will look at all reasons why it should not be a nation. A nation of self doubters who cheer the idea of asking why their nation is not a nation that deserves to exist. Those self doubters need to get whats coming to them, having invited and welcomed self doubt. Just for debate.

Cary on. I will post as and when I get inspired to point out further acts and words of utter stupidity that are sure to appear on this thread.

rkirankr · Post by **rkirankr** » 03 Nov 2010 17:42

Why debate only on India and that too outside the burkha? Why not US which has less history than us?
I think this is not up for debate. I support Shiv on this.

We can debate India's culture, defence, economy, policies etc but not the idea itself. It is there and thats it.

Anyway IB4TL

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 03 Nov 2010 17:49

according to wiki... Indus (sindhu) river is approx 15,000 years old... thats when the idea started.... period.

IB4TL

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 18:02

The man Nehru. friend of Edwina, great grandfather of yuvaraj presided over a weak nation whose people knew as little about nation building as they do now. Nehru allowed a huge tracts of land to be swallowed up by China and then wept a river of tears hearing the song in the video below. It's not clear if all those areas, where not a blade of grass grows were actually inhabited by Indians at any time. Any solid archeological studies? If there is no proof that Indians owned Aksai China we should give it up and stop making a big fuss.

The people who kicked the bucket in those wars should perhaps have spent some time debating the reason for their nation. It is unreasonable to actually die for a nation whose reason for existence is debatable. Could have had a better outcome for a few families.

Here is a translation of the last stanzas of Nehru's tear jerker. Looks funny in English. Video at bottom.

some were sikh, some were jaat and some marata
some were Gurkha and some from madras
whoever died at the border
every such warrior was an Indian
the blood that fell on the hills of the Himalayas
that blood was Indian
for all those martyrs.....

body was drenched with blood,
even then they raised guns
Each one killed ten enemies
then, fell down having lost consciousness
When their last moment arrived,
they said, now we die
Stay happy, beloved citizens of the country,
now we start our journey to afterlife
how so much crazy people they were
how so much self-respecting they were
for all those martyrs.....

lest you forget them
therefore this story has been recounted
for all those martyrs.....
Victory to India, Victory to the Indian Armed Forces
Victory to India, Victory to India, Victory to India

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMVuD_in67M

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 03 Nov 2010 18:03

shiv wrote:Parable time

That is not quite a valid analogy ... the idea of India has been attacked, and will continue to be attacked, by all kinds of entities. Whether we like it or not.

Now you can say "I am going to put my fingers in my ears and run away". Or if you are like the Poaks, you can try to behead the blasphemer.

Or you can clinically rip the attackers to shreds on an intellectual level.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 03 Nov 2010 18:24

I think the terms of this discussion are ignoring the critical question, as I understand it - that started off the thread. I think the debate was tentatively on the point of whether India "WAS" a nation, and not whether India "IS" a nation. The tense of the verb makes a lot of difference.

There are attempts to deny the "IS" based on throwing doubts on "WAS". This should be firmly rejected.

"Was" is always going to be problematic for any modern "nation". The further you go back in time, it will become increasingly difficult to prove the continuity and existence of any nation that exists now.

I think all the historical and other arguments that we have repeatedly churned out here to show that a certain concept of nationhood - not necessarily coinciding with all 20th century European definitions of a nation (even there there are problems - since in my post previously I have shown that there is no convergence of opinion even within that spectrum), have always characterized Bharat, and those arguments should be collected together in a single pdf and stored and linked. So that anyone who doubts this in the future can simply be asked to read this up first and then post comments.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 18:57

Pranav wrote:
Or you can clinically rip the attackers to shreds on an intellectual level.

Complete nonsense IMO. It is not debatable. No clinical ripping required. You can debate it for yourself. But letting everyone start inserting fingers is a completely brainless way to defend anything.

"The equator was never a nation. Its not a nation now. India was never a nation. It's still not a nation". This is the finger that people are allowing the insertion of imagining that some clinical ripping mooh tod jawab can be given.

Put this thread back in the hijab forum. Clinical ripping can be done there.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 03 Nov 2010 19:01

shiv wrote:
Pranav wrote:
Or you can clinically rip the attackers to shreds on an intellectual level.
Complete nonsense IMO. It is not debatable. No clinical ripping required. You can debate it for yourself. But letting everyone start inserting fingers is a completely brainless way to defend anything.

Arundhati Roy types don't need your permission to insert their fingers and attack India. These views will be given wide publicity by media owners. Do most Indians know how and why such arguments are not valid? Not really.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 19:05

Pranav wrote:
Arundhati Roy types don't need your permission to insert their fingers and attack India. Do most Indians know how and why her arguments are not valid? Not really.

Have you been able to teach them by making one valid argument in all these years? This thread will be no different. We are all Arundhati Roys. We are trying to bring intellectualism and rationality into a subject that needs no intellectualism. Trying to play Arundhati's rules in a game that she plays better than you. You just hold your land sacred period. No questions asked. It is completely dumb to even entertain arguments and say "Hmm this is debatable. I will watch the arguments for another few years and learn how to reply". Been there done that.

But the thread is here. Go on enjoy yourself. Let me see this "clinical ripping" happening so I can eat my words. don't let my parables tie you down.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 03 Nov 2010 19:05

Modern India is an idea greater than the sum of its parts, and greater than its colonial inheritance. It is an idea of a vast, diverse country evolving under a pluralist democracy, and resting on an ancient civilisation, whose actual political boundaries varied with different epochs.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 03 Nov 2010 19:18

shiv wrote: Have you been able to teach them by making one valid argument in all these years? This thread will be no different. We are all Arundhati Roys. We are trying to bring intellectualism and rationality into a subject that needs no intellectualism. Trying to play Arundhati's rules in a game that she plays better than you. You just hold your land sacred period. No questions asked. It is completely dumb to even entertain arguments and say "Hmm this is debatable. I will watch the arguments for another few years and learn how to reply". Been there done that.

But the thread is here. Go on enjoy yourself. Let me see this "clinical ripping" happening so I can eat my words. don't let my parables tie you down.

You are just giving a walk-over to A. Roy types who will go on about aryan invasion theories and caste oppression and about India never being a coherent entity etc. With the collaboration of the media owners and political elites, these narratives have been causing significant damage.

It's not that these things have to be debated endlessly but one does need to set the record straight. Some of the posts in this thread have been quite interesting. As B ji suggests, it is worthwhile collecting some facts, like we do in the first post of each TSP thread.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 03 Nov 2010 19:29

Sometimes, these things are better understood by triangulation and since a Chinese member raised the question of India's nationhood, why not let another much more enlightened Chinese provide some light on the entity called India:

"India conquered and dominated China culturally for 20 centuries without ever having to send a single soldier across her border."

- Hu Shih (Former Ambassador of China to USA)

I would like to add that since there are still hundreds of millions of Buddhists in China, India STILL influences the entity called China regardless of how they try to spin it. Even the cultural revolution was not able to eradicate this influence--it is that powerful.

PS. Since many Indians can use these posts, why not make it a sticky so we are not subjected to a command performance every time a Chinese or paki finds it necessary to raise a finger on here.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 19:43

Pranav wrote: You are just giving a walk-over to A. Roy types who will go on about aryan invasion theories and caste oppression and about India never being a coherent entity etc. With the collaboration of the media owners and political elites, these narratives have been causing significant damage.

Pranav ji I must compliment you for making the most hilarious post on this therad so far.

We have a forum full of people who claim that India has a 5000 year history and yet the same people still want to debate why India is a nation, and cannot answer Arundhati Roy with confidence. And you are accusing ME of giving Arundhati Roy a walkover? I am not the one who is a doubting Thomas about India's nationhood who needs to argue with Roy and prove things to he or to assorted Pakis. It is you guys. How am I involved in giving a walkover? This thread is the biggest concession to Arundhati Roy and Geelani that I have seen on BRF. A thread for self doubting Thomases who tomtom an ancient civilization when they can and then collapse into self doubt when some Paki or Roy questions that. Pah!

Enjoy maadi. Have fun.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 03 Nov 2010 19:55

shiv wrote:

Pranav ji I must compliment you for making the most hilarious post on this therad so far.

We have a forum full of people who claim that India has a 5000 year history and yet the same people still want to debate why India is a nation, and cannot answer Arundhati Roy with confidence. And you are accusing ME of giving Arundhati Roy a walkover? I am not the one who is a doubting Thomas about India's nationhood who needs to argue with Roy and prove things to he or to assorted Pakis. It is you guys. How am I involved in giving a walkover? This thread is the biggest concession to Arundhati Roy and Geelani that I have seen on BRF. A thread for self doubting Thomases who tomtom an ancient civilization when they can and then collapse into self doubt when some Paki or Roy questions that. Pah!

Enjoy maadi. Have fun.

On this forum there are many who are eminently capable of dispatching A Roy types. Many others are not similarly capable, but are constantly bombarded with media onslaught promoting A. Roy and her ilk. School textbooks too are influenced by fellow-travellers of A Roy.

This thread has so far thrown up a nice collection of data. Worth preserving and disseminating. No point reinventing the wheel each time.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 03 Nov 2010 20:11

This thread will need to be brought to a conclusion. When will we Indians have "enough" arguments to conclusively prove that India is a nation? That is up to the moderators who I hope will see that this is a bottomless pit. If desis need bolstering, just go to unkil google and take your pick. There are a thousand views both for and against that would warm a debater's heart.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 03 Nov 2010 20:15

Above all, if people from different parts of a region come together, want to stay together and be addressed together; others do not have much business in splitting them - unless they have a nefarious agenda.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2010 20:18

Parable 2:

A city had 10 areas numbered from 1 to 10. A gang of toughs in Area 1 controlled drugs, extortion, prostitution and gambling in areas 1 to 5. A second gang based in area 6 controlled drugs, extortion, prostitution and gambling in areas 6 to 10.

One time the area 1 gang and the area 6 gang got into a terrible fight. There was fighting and deaths in all areas of the city. At the end of the fight both gang 1 and gang 6 were exhausted. They could no longer control any other areas. And they could no longer fight each other.

But they were old, experienced gangs. What they did was to reach an agreement. They said that every area of the city would now be neutral territory. Nobody in any area would be allowed to take over the racket in any other area save their own. And who would ensure that this rule was implemented? Simple. Gang 1 and Gang 6 would sit together as a "security council" and prevent anyone else from ruling any other area.

The logic of these gangs was simple. If they could not rule the racket in any areas, they should not allow anyone else to come up. In the worst case - the same status quo would continue. But in the best case, gang 1 and 6 would regain their strength and then start ruling new areas like the good old days.

Part of the strategy of course was continued intimidation of people from the previously controlled areas. Methods included direct intimidation, or inciting and arming rivals in previously ruled areas.

The moral of this story is that only strength is respected. A long as the other guy wants to put you down he will keep on questioning you, your strength, your history, your "kula and gotra" and your capacity or ability to rule. Asking whether India was or is a nation is a stupid ploy that no sensible Indian should fall for, What is respected is strength with arrogance. If someone asks you why you are a nation or why you exist you say "Fug off. What's it to you and what the fug are you going to do about it?. I owe you no explanation. Keep the fug out of my affairs..or else.."

What you DO NOT do is to sink into intellectualism and try and explain things. You are playing into the hands of the guys who are keeping you down. it pains me to see the naivete that perpetuates this thread. Our nation will not be strong until this simpleton thought process is weeded out.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 03 Nov 2010 20:24

Excerpts from an interesting but anguished article:

It is clear like the sunlight that Kashmir was once a land of Hindus even if today firm attempts are being made to annihilate Kashmir's ancient and real setup by dyeing it in the hue of foreigners and religious intolerance. Kashmiriyat was, once, a Hindu culture. And today those who have come in the clutches of conspiracies of religious intolerance are the proginy of Hindu ancestors.

Far in the north is the Hundukush mountain which is the crown of the vale of Kashmir. Its name speaks of its heritage. A revolutionary nationalist, Ashfaqullah, had said in a fit of emotion "My Hindukush became Hindukash" - Hindukash meaning killer of Hindus. The chain of mountains in Kashmir start from this Hindukush. The peaks of Brahma, Harmukh, Mahadev, Goparai, Chandanwan, Naag parbhat are all Sanskrit names. The name of Satisar to Kashmir has been given by gods. The ruler of Satisar, Neelnaag, was after all the son of Kashyap Rishi, the founder of Kashmir. Kalhana in his Rajtarangani has named the river Indus as north Ganges and in Neelmat Purana it is called "uttarmanas" meaning Gangabal close to which is an ancient pilgrimage. It is now called Nandkot. Adjacent to it flows Kankvahini stream which has changed to "Kankai Nadi." Jehlum is the Vedic Vitasta and the Sharda pilgrimage is situated on the bank of Kishenganga.

The names of other pilgrimages are Amreshwar (Amarnath), Sureshwar, Tripreshwar, Hareshwar, Jeshteshwar, Shivbuteshwar, Sharda Saritshilla. To which religious philosophy are they connected ? Look at these mountain passes of Kashmir whose names are Sidh Path (now called Sedan pass), Panchal pass (Pir Panjal), Dugdhar (Dudukant), Zozilla pass, Chinta Paani etc. To which history they signal to? That is why a British historian, Vernier, accepted that the name of Kashmir is linked with Kashyap Rishi. Malik Hyder, a Muslim writer too has written clearly that Kashyap Rishi was the founder of Kashmir.

In fact what is called today as "Kashmiriyat" is not, in any case, different from Indianness. Kashmiriyat has no independent existence. Those who harbour the idea of regional nationalism by dividing the Indian culture in Kashmiriyat, Panjabiyat, Assamiyat, Bangla, Tamiliyan etc., have been responsible for the shrinking of the geographical area of India which was once a vast country. Unfortunately these conspiracies are still being hatched. Many flowers bloom in a garden. Their joint existence contributes to the beauty and glory of the garden. If any flower declares its independent existence, drops out of the branch, moves out of the garden, then its existence not only ends but it will commit the sin of ruining the garden.

http://www.kashmir-information.com/Conv ... pter3.html

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 03 Nov 2010 20:31

"What is respected is strength with arrogance. If someone asks you why you are a a nation or why you exist you say "Fug off. What's it to you and what the fug are you going to do about it?. I owe you no explanation. Keep the fug out of my affairs"

What you DO NOT do is to sink into intellectualism and try and explain things. You are playing into the hands of the guys who are keeping you down. it pains me top see the naivete that perpetuates this thread. Our nation will not be strong until this simpleton thought process is weeded out."

This is probably true, but then if an Indian responds in this manner, questions will be asked like "What happened to the peaceful, gentle, polite Indian? To Gandhi?" There are Indians themselves, among them the likes of Praful Bidwai, who will lament this tough guy Indian stance, which is at variance with the Nehru-Gandhi values of moral over physical strength. And wonder why India and Indians are trying to emulate the Chinese, Islamist and American tough guy, don't mess wid us approach. On that issue, let's accept that in all situations, it may not be advisable, desirable or principled to adopt such a stance.