South Asia, for the most part, makes the young old. The West keeps the old young.
In the East, life is fairly intergenerational. A boy grows up at the same table as his grandfather, so he inherits the old man’s quarrels whole. In the West, people live in age cohorts. The old are left to be old, and everyone else tries to stay young. Hyper-individualism has its costs, but it does one thing well. It lets the past rest.
I had forgotten this. My own context is selectively Western. My motto ordinarily is let ideas procreate, let them battle and let the best one win. This is what I try to apply in my daily life. Then I look at Brown Pundits and watch our conversations litigate events from 200 years ago as though they happened yesterday. Why can’t South Asia move on? Because almost nothing is lost between generations. The old wound arrives in each new mind at full strength.
It does not follow that the future-facing West wins. Forever young is the vanity of youth, furthermore weaker emotional health is a by-product of the intense loneliness prevalent in the West. One side cannot let go of the past and the other cannot remember it. Each is certain it is right, and that certainty is what makes these conflicts intractable. Nobody allows for the possibility of being wrong.
Jordan Peterson says that when you realise mid-argument that you are wrong, you dissolve in tears, because “the tears are grief for the part of you that has to die.” Tears reset the brain. For a moment it is plastic again, a child’s brain, and a child can still learn. You accept that some of what you believed was wrong.
That is the skill, and it belongs to no single culture. The values can stay eternal, rooted in divine law if you like. Everything else must stay nimble, soft enough to be rebuilt. The old ways are welcome to stay. They only have to be willing to weep every now and then.
The reason people squabble amongst themselves in the East even in some of the most technologically advanced nations such as China, South Korea, etc is because there is no singular hegemony which can easily settle difference once and for all. European borders are no longer a topic for a conflict due to the fact that these questions were forcefully settled in the two world wars. After the Soviet Union collapsed this region seamlessly feel into the hegemony of the US which floated the ideas of a globalist world government headed by Washington. That idea was created to paper over the differences that people of varying nationalities in the Western block might have with each other. However, it is rather clear to me that even those ideas have run their course and we will see a course correction rather soon even in Western Europe.
The One World Government will never happen as the world is retreating back to being the playground of great powers and regional powers. A world in which even the world superpower can’t maintain the freedom of the seas is a return to the world of grudges, irredentism, and nationalism. The west is returning to seeing itself as a power block instead of the hegemon of the world now. It’s consequences will be felt in the change in its culture as well. Russians will be seen with the same eyes that the average Pakistani looks at India with. Return of Historical Grievances is back upon us.
Just a small criticism, I dont personally think there is anything wrong with being certain you are right. Our sense of right and wrong are part of what makes us who we are and confronting and changing this part is a long drawn out process that only an individual can do.
There is also the fact that everyone has very,very good reasons to think they are right and wrong.
The only thing at least I have learnt in my conversations with people who differ from me in worldview is to respect the effort if I cant respect the ideas, neither of us needs to accept the other right and we are wrong, but we both need to accept the other has made an effort and should not just be dismissed because their worldview and beliefs are different from mine.
Actually changing does not really happen mid conversation, it happens over a long, long time ruminating over what the substance of the worldview you encountered is really about. Maybe it is different for serial debators like Peterson.
Clarity over certainty.
It’s good to have conviction but also be willing to learn..
I think we can learn even if we dont let go of our sense of right and wrong.
In the process of trying to counter, I learn tons of things that I would not.
Since reality is complex, there is no easy way to determine true or false.
Willingness to self-correct…..is a non-trivial skill. Comes with Maturity. This is why I’m….slightly more tolerant of younglings like C and SQ.
You should also apply this to yourself as well.
Always happy to be corrected. But with actual facts.
I have given you multiple facts on multiple things, even yesterday itself, when you were pearl clutching about making a muslim majority state, only to then act like you could not understand what I am saying when I pointed out our own PM sees no issue in doing so with Jammu and Kashmir that has similar muslim majorities.
This is not my first time interacting with those who think differently from me, I am very well aware how people interact with information they disagree with and that the best we can do is just give information and let others do with it what they want. In the meantime I will see many more difficulties in suddenly understanding things.
your ….’facts’ on “Marxist economic theory” being accepted aren’t really facts.
You’ve got blinders on, and that’s ok. It takes time.
//your ….’facts’ on “Marxist economic theory” being accepted aren’t really facts.//
You really are still going to act like you are purposely misreading me.
I did not refer to Marxist economic theory in my reply did I.
I specifically how all of your peal clutching over giving a muslim majority area its own state was for naught when I brought up the fact that the PM of our country does not see it as a security threat as well like me.
//You’ve got blinders on, and that’s ok. It takes time//
You are still putting on this act, that you cant understand what I am saying only so you can patronise without admitting that you, not I have an issue in accepting facts that disagree with you. This is just getting more and more funny.
We clearly disagree on carving out territory on religion based separatism.
Divide India in the name of …caste, reservation, religion, Abrahamic religion, south vs north, peddle divisive rhetoric about ‘union of states’ – this very rhetoric was used by the slave-owning Southern American states to inflict civil war and perpetuate human slavery btw.
Reflexively support/oppose just about anything, as long as its politically aimed at the current administration.
You are entitled to your….opinion. Again, there are no “facts” involved in that particular conversation. I have no desire to engage with your word salad on this.
//We clearly disagree on carving out territory on religion based separatism.//
Not just me, even our PM disagree with you.
He does not think there is any security threat if India gets a muslim majority state and rather than accepting that there is no threat you first tried to act like you could not understand and now you are bringing in unnecessary things that have no relation to the very banal fact that your concern has no basis. At least none that the home ministry or the PMO see.
//Reflexively support/oppose just about anything, as long as its politically aimed at the current administration.//
I actually support a lot of things done by the current administration. It is you who is reflexively opposed to anything if it is proposed by muslims, no matter how banal.
//You are entitled to your….opinion. Again, there are no “facts” involved in that particular conversation. I have no desire to engage with your word salad on this.//
The facts of the matter are starting right in your face, it is just that they are not in favor.
What you have written is the perfect example of a word salad btw
//Divide India in the name of …caste, reservation, religion, Abrahamic religion, south vs north, peddle divisive rhetoric about ‘union of states’ – this very rhetoric was used by the slave-owning Southern American states to inflict civil war and perpetuate human slavery btw.//
I love how the comment thread proves my post haha
It is so funny the way some people try to twist themselves so they can patronise others.
Calvin,
You are arguing with someone who cannot understand the difference between “facts” and “opinions”.
I’ve gone through this.
He thinks he’s the only person in possession of the “facts”.
Most of what is discussed on this site is not even about “facts” but is a battle of narratives.
Kabir this is not my first rodeo.
I know that there are going to be multiple instances of people suddenly not understanding or now bringing in irrelevant data point to cover up that facts of the matter are not in their support.
I am just enjoying the show because it is very apparent who is the one who has a difficultly accepting they could be wrong between both of us and who is more interested in patronising others rather than correcting their opinions.
I suggest you also not give in to anger when dealing with others.
You ….seem blissfully unaware of the …misguided propaganda you’re spewing, all the while patting yourself on the back on how much ‘winning’ you’re doing. 🙂
Symptomatic of the classic… half-empty vessel syndrome.
//You ….seem blissfully unaware of the …misguided propaganda you’re spewing, all the while patting yourself on the back on how much ‘winning’ you’re doing. //
What propaganda am I spewing? Is our PM also spewing propaganda when he promise to restore statehood to Jammu and Kashmir.
I dont know whether I am winning or not, but the fact is thst on whether there is any security threat to giving muslims majority areas a state of their own both me and the PM are on the same page
Instead of confronting that you first tried to act like you cant understand me and are now just talking about unrelated things by creating word salads. I am enjoying every moment you deny that the very people who can determine whether something is a security threat or not disagree with you.
//Symptomatic of the classic… half-empty vessel syndrome.//
It wont change the fact that neither the PMO nor thr home ministry have any issue in giving a muslim majority kashmir statehood. You can continue to write irrelevant and false things
What propaganda am I spewing? Is our PM also spewing propaganda when he promise to restore statehood to Jammu and Kashmir.
Asserting that ‘Marxist’ economic theory is …”well accepted” is delusional propaganda, to be blunt.
Your ‘true-believer’ hot takes on reservations in India and the SC/ST legislation are yet another example.
Of course the “PM” spews propaganda. That’s what politicians and governments do. And some of it is moronic.
You seem to believe that …’attacking’ the Moooodi is somehow going to provoke me, its….more than a bit silly. 🙂 A very predictable error, because immature lefty thinking can’t help but resort to tribal bucketing of those who disagree.
I’m happy to mock and attack the Muuuudi and his party every chance I get.
//I’m happy to mock and attack the Muuuudi and his party every chance I get.//
Yet I have never seen you do that. Here is your golden chance to do so. Tell us all how much of a security threat giving muslim majority kashmir statehood is, instead you completely ignore that you are proven wrong and bring in unnecessary things.
//Asserting that ‘Marxist’ economic theory is …”well accepted” is delusional propaganda, to be blunt.//
Do we not have trade unions in this country? Does much of our budget not go into subsidies and is restricting indian industry from getting too dominant not something that is seen as something necessary even outside of left wing circles? These are all vestige of Marxist thought. You may just not see it that way.
//Your ‘true-believer’ hot takes on reservations in India and the SC/ST legislation are yet another example.//
The problem with the criticism of reservation seen on this site is that they wrongly blame the capabilities of the entry level employees who come through reservation for institutional failure not the people at the top who largely dont come from reserved categories.
Furthermore the responsibility for recruiting talented people is on the government, the same government that has no issues in not filling up vacant seats in universites, because no suitable candidate be found, should also do the same in other sectors. Like many problems the RW has, it can be solved by actually putting pressure on the govt to do its job rather than scapegoating reservation. Another missed opportunity for you to show you can criticize the party in power.
The only good criticism here is that sub categorization should be applied so that all commuities can benfit
And for the SC/ST act I should have pointed out that all of the example quoted here, would have been solved had your friends been told that insults in private are not admissible under the act they have to be done in public to be admissible. Maybe next time along when you come across someone threatening to put SC/ST act based on private conversation you can at least tell your friend the act is not admissible. Preventing fake cases and spreading awareness about the law are also the govt responsibility, another missed opportunity for you to have showed you can criticize the govt.
It is funny that pointing out issues wrongly attributed to reservation or SC/ST act misuse should be attributed to the govt and are not failures of these laws is propaganda to you. It makes me wonder if you define anything outside of what you know as propaganda. That is not the definition you know.
Entire word salad is strawman. Thats it.
**A strawman (or straw man) is a false or exaggerated argument set up easily to be knocked down, or a person used as a cover or front for someone else.**
The above is the definition of a strawman.
I have answered each of your points from how you duck opportunities to actually criticize the party in power like you claim you can.
To how wrong you are about Marxist thought being irrelevant, reservation and the SC/ST act. It is an anti strawman because it addresses everything without exaggeration.
Once again you are avoiding having to say you were wrong about there being nothing wrong with muslim majority areas getting to be their own state, something our PM has no issue with.
Rethinking why you are probably thinking I am strawmanning.
The reason I bring up your refusal to engage witb the fact the prime minister of our country does not see anything wrong with giving a muslim majority area statehood is to dispute that you are someone who will change your mind with facts.
Either you could have admitted you are wrong or tried to explain how the PMO of home ministry is wrong but did neither and tried to patronise me, when you yourself need to work on learning to accept when you are wrong
This whole exercise has been to show that you yourself have issues changing your opinion when confronted with facts that go against you. Hardly a strawman at all.
States should be rooted on:
Geography
Language
Political History
Pakistan, East & West, couldn’t work as well as East Bengal and Industan (which is a geographic unit, the Watershed).
Tbh I do think the idea of Princely States revving back to life is a very intriguing one..
I am talking about s state within a country, something more like maharashtra or odiaha not a separate country.
This whole discussion started because apparently giving muslim majority mallapuram will apparently cause security risks, but given that the PM himself does not see any issue with giving Jammu and Kashmir statehood in the future, just being muslim majoirty alone is no barrier to getting full statehood within India.
The issue quickly becomes that as the center looses coherence the state units are in a rather good place to go their own way such as in the USSR. This is why Pakistan is making such a hubub about making non-Linguistic or non-Ethnic states.
When’s your next write up coming up? This seems to be a good topic 🙂
Work has been a bit busy so it might be a week or so.
Not sure geography serves as a good enough axis. Culture/language au contraire make more sense. Indian leadership understood this – that’s why states were re-organized around linguistic lines.
The case made for a Muslim state has absolutely no grounding in principles of administration. Kerala is not an overly large state by any means – neither in population nor in geographic expanse. I just don’t see how one could argue a separate state be carved out just because it is Muslim majority today. Demographics in India are ever changing and almost always to the detriment of Hindus. By this logic, we will have separate states, the size of districts in almost every state. This is just another example of an Islamic supremacist demand masquerading as a democratic demand. This ghettoization at the district level somehow is acceptable to Indian LeLis lol.
Comparisons with JnK are an obvious red herring that don’t even deserve to be called out.
//Kerala is not an overly large state by any means – neither in population nor in geographic expanse.//
Then say things like this, instead of acting like a muslim.majority area getting a state is bad idea because of the character of people residing there.
Other than Jammu and Kashmir there are many other places that would benefit from becoming another state or at least becoming a union territory.
//Comparisons with JnK are an obvious red herring that don’t even deserve to be called out.//
On the contrary, if the primary objection is the muslim majoroty character of a place is why they should not get a state, bringing up this is a good way to put the objections arising out of the character of the place to rest.
//By this logic, we will have separate states, the size of districts in almost every state. This is just another example of an Islamic supremacist demand masquerading as a democratic demand. This ghettoization at the district level somehow is acceptable to Indian LeLis lol.//
Literally no body is saying that just because some area is muslim majority it should not get a state. But whether it should get one or not has nothing to do with it being muslim majoirity
Are you against ghettoisation in our cities like many left wingers in India are or think that is necessary? Many left wingers may not support a muslim majority area becoming a state but their objection would have nothing to do with the character of the people there, unlike here where the character of the people living in an area is the basis of opposition.
Move to the new threads
Seriously. Its not that mini KP like exoduses haven’t happened, though the official explanation typically sweeps any such instances under the carpet. Nobody’s fooling anybody, least of all the ones affected.
The only argument is that its “anti” the current governing political dispensation.
The out of power ‘left’ wants the kursi back any which way it can. If it means fabricating opposition to good policy and infrastructure, that’s acceptable. If it means partnering with nutcases with flawed policies that are not in the nation-state’s self-interest – does not matter.
Tribalism and litmus test thinking drives one to support such nonsensical ideas. And then the ego is left justifying with increasingly more nonsensical arguments.
Are we still talking about whether a Muslim majority area by default should be denied any statehood. because it is a muslim majority area, then it has been established that the present government is not averse to granting statehood just for that reason only.
The rest is just, talking about a situation that does not exist. The left is not supporting any religion based statehood request or district request.
//Tribalism and litmus test thinking drives one to support such nonsensical ideas. And then the ego is left justifying with increasingly more nonsensical arguments.//
If anything many reason some ideas are opposed by many here is the background of the people who maybe proposing it, very tribalistic and as you say, litmus test driven thinking.
If you keep on strawmanning, I’m not going to engage with such silliness.
You need serious rehabilitation from your biases, because its quite clearly impacting your ability to understand who and what you are attempting to argue against.
.
Begaani shaadi mein Abdullah Deeeeeewana.
Mr passive-aggressive inserting himself into others’ conversation and trying to take sad little potshots.
Get well soon.
It should be
‘anjaan vivah main krishna vikshipt’
use shuddh sanatani langauge, so south indians can understand.
What is that supposed to mean?
I think….he’s staking some sort of …territorial claim on language. Which is laughable because if you apply the same logic to Pakistanis…. 🙂
So you didn’t understand that?
Most native speakers of ‘Hindi’ won’t either
But sanatani bhasha must prevail
Pāk sarzamīn shād bād
Kishwar-ē-hasīn shād bād
Tū nishān-ē-azm-ē-ālī shān
Arz-ē-Pākistān!
Markaz-ē-yaqīn shād bād
Pāk sarzamīn kā nizām (Hindi word kā is here)Quwwat-ē-Ukhuwwat-ē-awām
Qaum, mulk, saltanat
Pāindah tābindah bād!
Shād bād manzil-ē-murād
Parcham-ē-sitārah o hilāl
Rahbar-ē-taraqqī o kamāl
Tarjumān-ē-māzī, shān-ē-hāl
Jān-ē-istiqbāl!
Sāyah-ē-Khudā-ē-Zūl-jalāl
Hahahaha…
Khaalis, Shaffo-Shafaf, Asal, Paak, Kaamil Urdu! Or is it?
Strip away “Not India” from the Pakistani identity, and what remains…… is ______
Ah, this type of Urdu is god-tier.. Poetry at its best
Worthy of creating a new poetry category for Jalal Al-e Ahmad Literary Award … in Persian.
SQ should announce a… Hilaale award for himself.
Hilaale Imtiaz Hahaha!
Vanakkam …Abdullah do numbri. 🙂
Nice fail.
Anjaan doesn’t work, and krishna refers to a skin colour in lower case english transliteration.
Do it properly – Aparachitah vivah mein agnyani vikshipt
I was trying to make it flow so it retains its character, but you have butchered it successfully. A true non-native speaker of Sanatanbhasha
Hahaha, little agnyani caught with his hand in the internet jar – ‘I meant to do that’. When are we promoting you to failed marshal?
This is hilarious, you probably don’t even know what the original phrase meant figuratively which shows in your agnyani. 😂
That bit of translation was particularly inspired, alliterative and metaphorical. It represents the loss of knowledge when you adopted foreign names and closed your minds to the greatest philosophy mankind has ever produced. All in exchange for mental slavery to a bunch of camel riders wearing fishnet print tea towels on their heads.
Anaatha aparachita akusala agnyani.
It is no wonder that Indian gov adopted Sankirtised Hindi, the above phrase still works in most Indian languages after millennia.
Greatest philosophy ever produced by medival skinheads that banned it for 90% of the population.. and then all got conquered and replaced by camel herders and horse lords.. Maybe thats time for an introspection.
All that effort to Sanskritize something and making it ugly. Just learn the Sankrit then, leave our langauge alone.
Surprisingly, very vaguely, right. Your numbers are off by a huge margin, but that is an understandable lie you will need to tell yourselves to feel better.
All great civs fall to the hordes. Happily they tend to reform, grow resilient, resurge and recover. I think the ‘introspection’ gets covered quite well.
The rejection though, thats on you. Enjoy pronouncing the guttural phlegmatic wheezes once you realise Urdu is not halal enough and try to crawl up your paramountcy pyramid.
And this comment is anti Arabic and anti-Urdu.
Keep digging.
Just as you can take pride in your Sanskrit, we can take pride in our Urdu.
You think Hinduism is some ‘great philosophy”.
We far prefer a monotheistic Allah to a myriad of multiple armed deities.
To each their own.
Sir “your civilization” is a direct result of Hordes. Aryans bringing in religion, Turukshahs the culture, and the British wrote all your history and formed the political system.
As I remarked before..Hindutva Indians are under the delusion that they have some static civilization undisturbed for thousands of years until recently. Quit the delusion.
“bunch of camel riders”– And now the Islamophobia has arrived!
Misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia! You are just proving your own character…
What a delightful person you are.
Do you think the Seven star Field Marshal, Admiral of the fleet, Marshal of the Air Force, Modi-shikan, zil-ilahi Saaaaiyyyaaad Asim … Munir … will eventually go to Canada to run a Pizza shop in Canada? or live in London on rental properties? or live in some Jeddah apartment some Sheikh bought for his future concubine but forgot about?
I think roaming in London is out of question.
Definitely not BB
Each Leaderissimo of the PakMil kind has iteratively demonstrated a shrinking half-life, and ever increasing ignominy post exit.
Muneer’s …misfortune is yet to play out. I suspect it will be more tragicomic than any of our speculations.
Great point!
Why are they attempting to use Urdu?
They should use their own language instead.
Haha, Kabir, are you getting amped up by the Homophobe now? Exposing how hollow your ethics really are.
I appreciate his attempt to troll you guys with Sanskrit just as you all attempt to troll us with your bad Urdu.
That’s all.
I don’t endorse Q’s views on everything.
You are my ideological enemy. Q is not.
Don’t give me lectures on “ethics”. You have no moral standing to do so.
I’ll admit to an undercurrent of pride about moral consistency. Go on K, catch me out in a genuine instance of moral lapse and I will stop lecturing you.
Until then, maybe you can credibly complain about a little lack of humility. Then again, given all your obsessive boasting on this site, perhaps not.
I don’t give a damn about your lectures on “moral consistency”.
You just used “camel riders” earlier which is Islamophobic. I can’t insult you and your kind otherwise I get labeled a “Hinduphobe” but you are happy to indulge in anti-Arab racism.
Misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia… you are truly a delightful person.
Come out from behind your internet pseudonym and let’s put your credentials on the table.
If you continue to play these games with me, I am more than happy to put you in your place.
Don’t be daft. A camel is a perfectly good animal to ride. In a desert it tends to be the best suited to purpose.
You seem quite intent on rooting around for a non existent insult to take offence at.
If you can’t see that your remarks are anti-Arab and anti-Islamic, you have serious problems–reading comprehension being one of them.
Don’t cry when the Pakistanis here insult your so-called “greatest civilization” which is frankly rather primitive.
You are a nuisance and I will deal with you as such.
At this point my pseudonym is for your sanity Kabir, it would really exacerbate your inferiority complex were I to be revelatory.
Stay safe buddy, let me know if the ragging is excessive, I’ll stop.
Unless you are a Harvard Phd from an aristocratic family, there is no reason for me to feel “inferior” to you.
Enjoy your delusions
You play this game with me at your own peril. I will reduce you and your kind to shreds and take pleasure in doing so.
Aren’t you from GWU ?
Plenty of schools between GWU and Harvard. lol!
Were you educated in the US?
If not then sit down and shut up.
You are hiding behind a pseudonym.
What are your credentials?
I will show you your “auqaat” and take great pleasure doing so.
You most likely have nowhere near the social background I have.
Yes.
I don’t want to cause further damage.
Hahaha…
You would be surprised, but I don’t hand out my visiting card to …
You just used “camel riders” earlier which is Islamophobic.
Counterpoint – the Iranians used to and continue to call Arabs “lizard eaters” and I don’t think anyone accuses them of Islamophobia?
Iranians are Muslim. Their country is an Islamic Republic. It would be extremely foolish to accuse them of Islamophobia.
If you read the entire comment in context, it’s definitely anti-Arab racism. I would argue it was Islamophobic.
So, by a logical extension of this logic, you calling us polytheistic idol worshippers is also anti-Indian racism and Hinduphobia?
Indian is not a race but a nationality. I don’t consider myself racially different from you.
If we are being pedantic, there are Arab Christians and Jews too you know?
which Iranians say that?
To begin with, Firdausi, in the Shahnameh ?
You are the person who said “You don’t understand how blog conversations work” and anyone can comment on anything.
Not liking it when passive aggression is directed towards you?
Stay in your lane.
Your attempts to speak Urdu are laughable. Please do not butcher our language.
@Calvin D'Souza
Usually, these debates aren’t about morality, are they? Conceding a point isn’t compromising one’s values. For example, lets say I’m debating the character of Modi and taking the position that he’s the most malignant demagogue in the history of the republic, if one of the other commentors here adds specific context that makes me question whether he’s as committed to rigid identitarian categories as previously imagined, I can change my view of him without it making any difference to my values.
I am not averse to changing my opinion. I myself test everything that is said to me to decide if it is true or false. And changed many of my own opinions while made minimal changes to others.
The point I am making is that the above effort needs to be done by oneself, others can only give a different opinion that we need to stress test for ourself.
The issue is that, if you have already decided that someone who disagrees with you is malicious, ignorant or immature, you have little to no incentive to do any such labour at all. No one has to stress test others opinions but dont go around patronising others as if you yourself are interested in reconsidering your views.
South Asia = Pak/Afghan I assume.
India is part of the Indian subcontinent.
I will let the others identify as they prefer, though in my book they are subcontinentals.
Nepal is part of South Asia. So is Bangladesh.
Afghanistan is sometimes considered to be part of South Asia.
“Indian subcontinent” is a geographical term. “South Asia” is a geopolitical term.
So much for moving on. South Asia is an abomination of a term, only appreciated by people who want to visualise themselves in relation to a North Atlantic centric world.
I had reflected on this but “Indian Subcontinent” is cumbersome in terms of writing. I was aiming for lyrical flow as well 🙂
I despise the terms Middle East & South Asia for more organic terms; but for instance it’s the Mumbai versus Bombay distinction.
Mumbai is authentic (presumably) but Bombay is catchier in an English setting..
Mumbai gets the name from the patron goddess Mumbadevi. Of course, I still do use Bombay more than Mumbai unless I converse in Marathi.
Its also a function of nostalgia. As someone born and ‘partly raised’ in “Bombay”, it remains Bombay for me. ‘Mumbai’ has….. grown tolerable for me over time though.
Just because you don’t like a term doesn’t make it an “abomination”.
The main point is that geography is distinct from geopolitics.
Afghanistan is not part of the Indian subcontinent.
Half of Pakistan is on the Iranian Plateau and not the Indian subcontinent.
I personally do not care what terms people use. But “South Asia” is the academic consensus.
The academic consensus from another continent is rarely considered established fact when talking about the other side of the world. Especially when the issues of continental divide is dependent on the nation you are situated in. There is anywhere between 4 to 7 continents based on which model you subscribe to. The Spanish and Russian speaking world thinks Eurasia is a continent while the English speaking world thinks otherwise. In other models North and South America are combined into a single continent. This is a contested issue and the consensus is greatly dependent on the geography of the speaker.
The point is “South Asia” is a generally accepted term.
If you don’t like it don’t use it. But you can’t stop other people from using it or identifying with it.
This is really not a hill worth dying on.
Generally accepted with whom? Just because some person in North America writes a paper with it doesn’t make it legitimate. It’s a recent invention and largely speaking a social construct pervaded within the West. The Indian Subcontinent is a much older and more established term if you want to erase all mention of India because of some ideological reason feel free to but just stop preaching to the rest of us.
The entire world has departments of “South Asian Studies”. This is a lost battle for you but please do die on this hill if you choose to do so.
“Indian Subcontinent” is a geographic term. Afghanistan is not part of the subcontinent geographically but it is part of South Asia.
Geography and geopolitics are not the same thing. Why are you insisting on conflating them?
I don’t care if you never use “South Asia” but you cannot make the term verboten for those of us who think it’s a legitimate descriptive term.
That is a good distinction.
But geographically the Indus Watershed is part of the Indian Continent.
Why is it a Subcontinent & Europe a continent?
Europe is not a continent.
Eurasia is a continent.
Who decided that
According to some models of the world, physio-graphically, Eurasia is a single supercontinent.The concept of Europe and Asia as distinct continents dates back to antiquity, and is largely cultural, but their borders have historically been subject to change.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasia
This is not exactly new information. I was taught this way back in 7th grade.
Traditionally, the dividing line between Europe and Asia is the Ural Mountains.
Yes, that is a fair point. Given that South Asia is a relatively newer term, I tend to still go with the Indian subcontinent.
Sorry I didn’t see this response; sometimes what I find interesting in a thread is how the comments go in an unexpected direction.
Interestingly enough I had first used the term “Brown Asia” and I had reflected on alternative terms. Desidom, I.S., but all
Of them would have broken the flow.
This is mostly an Indian issue, and especially a Hindutva one.
As Audrey Trushkey said, Hindutva narrative has no sense of a timeline and views Hindu identity as one, static, eternal and unchanging. They even try to rebrand the name of the religion as ‘eternal religion’ from it’s Persian name. Secular events from 1,000 or 2,000 or even 5,000 years ago are treated as if they happened yesterday and considered to have a bearing on modern lives. So it’s not a suprise if people talk about events from 300 years ago or particular, 79 years ago as if they happened yesterday.
Once people learn that history is just history and its water under the bridge, perhaps the region can move on. But as Modi told Donald Trump that “we have been fighting them for 1000 years”, it appears that the 1,000 year war will continue.
How would your reasoning justify the 4 wars over the last century the non-Hindu military kleptocracy has pervaded in the subcontinent. It’s fine to have your head up your ass but at least try to appear realistic. I can’t even get mad at your comments when they are just directly quoting Pakistani propaganda.
3 of those 4 wars were over the Disputed Territory of Kashmir.
What does that have to do with a “1000 year war”?
Is this “1000 year war” in the room with us or is it a figment of your imagination?
Did Modi not say “We have been fighting them for 1000 years”?
Anyway, you’re not making a good argument. Had the entire princely state of Kashmir gone to Pakistan in 1947, 3 of those 4 wars would not have happened.
“If my grandmother had wheels she would be a scooter” kind of argument. Entirely pointless discussion, the ideology of Pakistan won’t ever be satisfied with simply the conquest of Kashmir. The fantasies of Ghazwa-E-Hind are still taught in Pakistani school. If they had the capability the wars would easily be extended over the entire frontline.
Regardless, Pakistan had an agreement with Hari Singh’s govt of non-interference. If Pakistan hadn’t used tribal lashkars all this could’ve been avoided. If Pakistani soliders weren’t interested more in rape than conquest Kashmir would’ve been Pakistani. There are too many ifs and buts in this discussion but its better than you stick to your “Pakistan studies” syllabus and do a mantra chant of “Hindu bure hai”.
First of all, no one takes “Ghazwa-e-Hind” seriously.
Second of all, I am an American national. I was educated entirely in the US. Never taken “Pakistan Studies” thank you very much.
How did you determine that. Did Zia ul Haq come in your dreams to reveal it to you? Because otherwise I take the loonies on the other side of the border completely seriously when they threaten to blow my house up.
Could’ve fooled me. You talk like a Pakistani.
Honestly, you know very little about Pakistan.
“Ghazwa-e-Hind” is an absolute joke just as “Akhand Bharat” is.
I can tell you all the schools I’ve attended. I grew up in one of the most affluent suburbs of the US.
Clearly you don’t understand that dual citizenship is a thing. I understand it is a foreign concept to Indians.
I didn’t grow up in Pakistan.
“Clearly you don’t understand that dual citizenship is a thing. I understand it is a foreign concept to Indians”
LOL…
Why do you lie?you don’t hold a Pakistani passport. You are not a dual citizen.
“I didn’t grow up in Pakistan”
So much for claims of being a dual citizen.
Again, it seems you don’t understand the concept of dual citizenship. I really don’t want to condescend to you but this is not a good argument.
I am entitled to visa free entry into Pakistan. It’s like the Overseas citizen of India card.
I was born in Pakistan. My parents were born in Pakistan. I am a Pakistani citizen by birth and parentage. No one can deny this fact.
I grew up in and was educated in the US. I’m not hiding this fact.
Anyway, this is not really relevant to anything. The only point was that I have never taken “Pak Studies”.
I have never been educated in Pakistan. The one year that I was at the American school in Islamabad. My mother was a US Diplomat at the time.
Radcliffe awarding Muslim majoirty districts in Punjab like Gurdaspur and Pathankot to India, which had the only land route into Kashmir.. way before Hari Singh flew to India. This was a full conspiracy to allow India to invade Kashmir and control Pakistan’s water sources, disregarding Kashmir’s Muslim majoirty on which the partition even happened.
The only port access nations like Nepal and Bhutan have are directly through the Indian mainland. Even Bangladesh for the most part exports most of its garments via Indian ports. Nepal even supplies electricity to Bangladesh through Indian electrical infrastructure. None of these facts have changed the independent nature of these states. If Pakistanis had left Kashmir unmolested perhaps it would’ve remained an independent state even now. But sadly the rapists in Pakistan took it upon themselves to rampage through the state which required Indian peacekeepers to stop. If Pakistan had been a coherent polity J&K could’ve been independent. But alas the rapine nature of that polity is such that it would find ways to exact tender mercies on its own regardless.
Rapists?
0M – ur tone is getting a little off
The tribal lashkars went off on raping sprees while invading Kashmir in the 1948 war. It was the only reason the Indians were able to reach Sri Nagar before them as they were more engaged in raping than conquering. It’s also the reason why Pakistan is such a moth-eaten state in the words of Jinnah.
Industrial scale rape is a repeated Pakistani stratagem. It was utilized in Kashmir and in Bengal. We have famous quotes from Pakistani soldiers going along the lines of “unki nasl badal denge hum.”.
He is actually being kind. It wasn’t just the Lashkars who indulged in mass rape and sexual violence against Hindu and Sikh women, it was regular Pakistani troops including erstwhile member of the Azad Hind Fauj. I guess no amount of training can undo lifelong indoctrination that leads to barbaric treatment of non-Muslims.
https://jhalazalimsingh.substack.com/p/from-nationalists-to-jihadists-inas
And we haven’t even talked about industrial scale sexual violence during 71.
P.S.: Forewarning – Some truly horrible graphic imagery of the victims of Muslim violence during the 1948 Kashmir War.
How is his tone off? He is stating facts.
We are a country of 250 million, not vassal states of Nepal and Bhutan and we dont want to rely on India especially when India has shown belligerence to usurp our lands.
Clearly you cannot accept that which is the problem. It has been the problem since day 1.
Musharraf summed it up nicely here
https://x.com/D0o3m4/status/2090527342880035188
In Musharraf you can see future of Munir. Kargil, Agra, death sentence, exile.
Musharraf’s balcony opened to Burj Khalifa, Munir’s will open to Jeddah tower. Compared to Dubai, Jeddah sucks.
Pakistan is the real Great Britain. Whiskey drinking army, Shamsi is like RAF Fairford hosting Americans, an expeditionary military in the deserts of Arabia, a diaspora in Canada-US-Australia-NZ-SA, english language, it’s own northern Ireland(s), colonies? long wars with Afghanistan.
If partition’s logic was Muslim majority then why did Jinnah accept accession of Junagarh in September of 1947 before invading Kashmir in October of 1947? or toy with Jodhpur.
India tried assuaging Pakistanis with IWT. It even saved the war criminals PoWs from Bengalis. India is water stressed and needs the water that flows on our land. China’s dams on Brahmaputra, and Ethiopia’s dams on Nile are precedents. If Pakistan bends the knee now, there is a chance that the link tunnel might not get completed. Knowing Pakistanis, I think the tunnel will be built.
Had Jinnah not invaded the princely state of J&K the 3 wars would not have happened. But in such a universe, Balochistan would have been an independent state like Nepal.
India must endeavor to recover territories that imperialists and their stooges took from India. Liberating PoK is necessary first step.
As long as there is an Afghanistan, some version of north western wars would have happened. Pakistan is doing chowkidaari of North West South Asia, just as Iqbal had dreamt.
Good luck with that.
Borders are not changing given both India and Pakistan are nuclear weapon states.
But feel free to keep dreaming.
Kabir this is what XTM is talking about
Constantly relitigating the past and going through, the same discussion again and again.
Exact ..
This is what the discussions are about on this site.
Partition, TNT, Hindu vs. Muslim….
If we don’t “relitigate” the past, most commentary on BP wouldn’t exist.
that’s actually not true tbh..
Really?
Partition, the existence of Pakistan, Muslim rule….
These are not among the most popular topics of discussion?
I’m all for not rehashing the past but that’s what a lot of people want to do.
not really – again there are many varied topics. it’s also about who fuels the fire
Kabir of all the people here, you are one of the smartest who can see the patterns and take the necessary steps to not repeat them.
Others can also do so, but I dont think they can do it as quickly and as properly as you.
I think all of you have discussed these topics enough to know that what you may want and what others may want out of these discussion is not the same thing.
My point is that a lot–if not most– of what passes for “discussion” on this forum is people litigating Pakistan, Partition, Islam, Mughals, Marathas etc.
This blog has been like this for years. It’s only to be expected. Omar Ali (one of the co-founders) was especially interested in the ideology of Pakistan (from a critical perspective).
XTM has had to ban casual discussion of the “Two Nation Theory” but it does seem some people haven’t gotten the memo.
Short of all the Pakistanis disappearing from this site, someone will always bring the discussion back to how awful Pakistan is.
//Short of all the Pakistanis disappearing from this site, someone will always bring the discussion back to how awful Pakistan is./
Even if all pakistanis disappear we will still be relitigating partition and Pakistan.
I suggest thst you be the bigger person and not react to other people response.
Aw…so nice to see you two losers bond..
Really? Calling people “losers” is so middle school.
@XTM: This is an incredibly low signal comment. Just disparaging people for the sake of it doesn’t add anything to the discourse.
LOL.. the two of you are always dripping with condescension..surely the odd snarky comment in return is to be expected 🙂
That comment was not even “snarky”.
That is the type of discourse of 12 year olds in an American middle school circa 1998.
Do better.
So sorry..I had no idea I was so dated…you see, I didn’t study in America 🙂
What a pity!
Even in India, calling people lovers because they disagree with you is cringe and sad.
Indulging in condescension like relitigiating people loyalty, capability and being reflexively hostile to people who protest against your favorite party, and then accusing other of condescension when they criticize these, is so 2017.
Losers*
I have never questioned people loyalty,capability or been reflexively hostile to someone because they are protesting against my favorite party.
None of my condescension can reach thr above level even if I try.
No matter the odd comment here and there I always try to counter everything I disagree with, with seriousness not just assume malice, stupidity, ignorance, say someone is ideologically compromised and call it a day.
You really need to look at your own writing to know what condescension really looks like.
I thought you were just giving Kabir lessons on how not to get your panties in a twist.
Kabir obviously seems to get affected by what the other people here say about him and his country. I am not affected by much of what others say and will respond to everything in kind.
If other have anything to say, I will gladly respond to their points instead of calling them as ideologically compromised, like many here seem to do.
I don’t mind relitigating the same thing over and over again till the cows come home.
Resembles window dressing on the definition of insanity.
Besides I think Kabir has your number w.r.t bp policing indefeatigability.
Don’t condescend to him, he doesn’t like it.
Sometimes you do it to have fun as well. If a train ride is too boring, If you’re stuck in traffic, if the book you’re reading isn’t too exciting, if work is getting lethargic, these are all good reasons to insert a couple keywords into your comments. Then you patiently wait for the fish to hook itself into the bait and then you savor your time.
Let Kabir answer for himself.
And most of what ends up getting discussed is stuff that you guys have been doing for long
Relitigiating muslim citizenship, finding news ways to make even banal demands of others look like national security threats. Most of my work is just showing the mirror to what passes as common sense over here.
I dont waste time having the same discussion with the pakistanis over here which is closer to what you describe as insanity
Go distribute your mirrors to the poor kids in a slum. I think these guys can afford those mirrors themselves.
Just like how you seem to enjoy triggering people, I also like to see how people react to my counters.
Not been very impressed that the response are things I used to say, when I was around 15 and just started interacting with others who think differently from myself.
The mirrors are definitely needed.
When the crow sings, it tells itself that the song is one of beauty and wonder admired by all.
I am under no impression that people here are receptive to what I am saying.
I just dont care since I believe much of what is said about other Indian citizens needs to be countered and that is a good in itself.
If any one of you people learn something new as a result of my counters its a good thing, if not it is no sweat off my back.
I am increasing in my knowledge day by day by trying to steel man you peoples arguments, so that is another bonus along with my having defended the honor of other Indian citizens.
stop crowing
Why are you all so threatened by Calvin?
It’s a real pity that discourse on BP has to be so adversarial. There always has to be a public enemy number 1. If it’s not me, then it’s Q. If not Q, then Calvin.
This is the problem with men. There’s too much testosterone and posturing.
No one gives a damn about any of you.
Really?
Then you would just not respond.
The level of nastiness that goes on shows that you do “give a damn”.
//No one gives a damn about any of you.//
For once you have made a good joke.
Keep it up.
Admin note: OK everybody enough with the trolling.
ALL STOP NOW.
I give a damn about each of the Commentariat; we are a community after all.
I was responding to Kabir constantly playing the innocent victim. I can speak for myself when I say that I don’t relish targeting anybody, but a couple drip with condescension and occasionally it elicits a response
🙂 Folks who have to….repeatedly tout how sMaRt they are…..
This is not only misogynistic but also homophobic.
Just wow!
You all are really descending to the level of American middle schoolers today.
Don’t be daft. How can it possibly be both. You can’t just throw in every prejudice, hoping something will stick.
For all the incessant harping about your education, you really are flummoxed by very basic, often used expressions.
Now chill, or I’ll have to don my ally hat and take you on a fanta tour of sweetness and light.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2t4yzSJ6_Q
The first move of straight men when they want to be homophobic is to be misogynistic.
Misogyny and homophobia are deeply related. There’s tons of scholarship on this.
Been there, done that, bought the T-Shirt.
Anyway, the main issue is that you all really have the mental capacity of American 12 year olds.
Deeply pathetic!
You’re absolutely right, I have seen the error of my ways. I retroactively identify myself as a gay man undergoing transition. By accusing me, you have displayed yourself to be a closet homophobe yourself.
Not done Kabir. Not done.
Keep digging!
You’re not going to win this one.
I spent middle school dealing with this precise kind of homophobia. If you think I’m going to stand for it now, you have another think coming.
You have no idea what kind of cruelty American 12 year olds are capable of.
Using the expression “panties in a twist” to another man is deeply homophobic. Using this expression to a woman is deeply misogynistic.
You can just apologize for the use of that expression and we can move past this issue.
Your trolling is becoming tedious. You are far less funny than you think you are.
Calvin is gay now? I knew you had personal charm Kabir, but that level of charisma is off the charts. What’s your secret?
As a side note, am sorry for your experiences growing up in the US, you do remark upon them quite proudly, we were not to know.
It is the expression itself that is homophobic. Surely this is not too hard to understand?
I was referring specifically to the homophobia of American middle schoolers. This was in the late 90s. I would imagine that with the progress gay rights have made in the US, this kind of behavior is no longer tolerated.
By and large, I had a wonderful childhood in the US.
We’ve been here before Kabir. I simply do not accept your word on all this. You’re merely weaponising your identity as a lash out reflex to avenge past perceived slights.
Clearly my intent, the usage and the commonness of the expression do not have an iota of homophobia.
For the record, I’m quite fond of gay people in general. My transphobia however is a more pressing worry. Have you taken to cross dressing? You might have better luck there.
Considering you seem to not know about the connection between misogyny and homophobia, you don’t really have much credibility on this subject.
Why is it that boys call an effeminate boy a “sissy”?
“Have you taken to cross dressing”– You’re really not helping your case.
You are really not funny.
“You’re merely weaponizing your identity”— And the opposing faction on this blog doesn’t do this?
You realise making obvious false accusations is doing a severe disservice to gay people and combating actual homophobia.
What you are doing is quite despicable. Be better.
You really should apologise for it.
“Actual homophobia”?
You don’t get to tell a gay man what homophobia is. You have no right to do that.
You could have apologized for “panties in a twist”– that is an unacceptable expression.
I’ll leave it there but you are really not helping your case.
Gay men have a long record of self hate and associated homophobia.
We already know you have self hate and associated Hinduphobia, it is a very plausible scenario.
Kabir, if you want to drop it, be honest. Your friend Q is quite openly homophobic, the last time you accused me, he was talking about judging people for ticking the wrong box on gender.
You really need to be honest and properly apologise for sacrificing your ideals at the altar of tribalism, it is simply ethically disgusting.
This is not a troll, or an attempt to be funny, it is the plain truth of the matter.
Just as you–as a Hindu– are the arbiter of whether something feels Hinduphobic or not, I –as a gay man–am the arbiter of whether something is homophobic or not.
Keep digging yourself into a hole.
I don’t hate myself by any means.
I have absolutely nothing to apologize to you for. You could have apologized for the offending phrase. If you choose not to do so, it’s on you.
“Your friend Q”– He’s not my friend. I don’t know him from Adam. True, he’s not my ideological enemy but beyond that I don’t represent him.
“It’s the plain truth of the matter”- It’s how you see it. There is no “truth” in these things.
I see it very differently.
This is in response to something he said to me, what was it?
I dont take their jokes that seriously, so might have missed it
Surely you have figured out site navigation by now?
https://www.brownpundits.com/2026/08/26/why-cant-south-asia-move-on/#comment-144164
Let him do it man.
It just shows how binary, and abrahmic his thinking is( My God!). When one can only see malice and has closed their mind to learning from others, this is all that can be produced.
Just have a good laugh that he thinks this is anything but cringe.
Sigh… not everything is a competition but those who can only see malice in people who disagree with them will say things like this and think they are being provocative instead of just being cringe and sad.
This is actually an unfair expectation to have of anyone. I am an “Indian Nationalist” and obviously do not see eye to eye with Kabir on anything but everyone has certain redlines (or holy cows, if you prefer?).
Kabir has repeatedly made it clear he will defend the PakFauj and Pakistan against criticism on this site and I think that’s fair.
We may pretend otherwise but we all become reflexive when things we hold sacred or dear aren’t treated that way by others. If I really have to spell it out loud, I don’t think it is lost on anyone how defensive you get whenever there is any criticism of Christian coloniality, patriarchal regression or mass conversion in India.
Bidi. Aurge yenu buddhi illa.
// I don’t think it is lost on anyone how defensive you get whenever there is any criticism of Christian coloniality, patriarchal regression or mass conversion in India./
I have never defended any christian led colonialism. I have insulted and called out Spanish colonialism much more than you guys have called out cow vigilantism.
It is not my fault you are wrong when you say that most left wing narratives are not from the situation of today buthand me downs from the british. Not my responsibility if you cant see the very obvious ways Muslims are being dominated
Similarly a christian program affirming their opposition to abortion is not only in line with the opinion on banning abortion among many other indians but a commonality they share with many religious traditions. Not my fault that your connections to the late roman empire are just baseless alarmism because unlike many other programmes where Muslims wete called to be boycotted( that you have never condemned at all) , no other religions were called out.
I actually disagree with abortion ban like everyone here but acting like it is only chrisitans who think it should be banned and making alarmist talking points on them is plainly incorrect. You are being more supportive of patriarchal regression than I ever have by blaming only one community.
These are the onlt instances that I can think of where you are wrongly asserting thst I have any issues with condemning christian or any other coloniality.
If there are others I will clarify what you are doing wrong.
//This is actually an unfair expectation to have of anyone. I am an “Indian Nationalist” and obviously do not see eye to eye with Kabir on anything but everyone has certain redlines (or holy cows, if you prefer?).
Kabir has repeatedly made it clear he will defend the PakFauj and Pakistan against criticism on this site and I think that’s fair.//
And that is why Kabir should not respond as it is a pointless thing. Even expressing something he believes in due to his own life experience will invite criticism from you guys as it should
Since one of you needs to stop responding, I suggested Kabir should be the bigger person and just not react. You can continue to do what you want.
Look at the below image if yiu think calling out only christians and making tall claims of reenacting rhe late roman empire is calling out patriarchal regression and not just using abortion as an stick to beat others with when everyone has regressive views on abortion.
I have never supported forced conversion, i have at least said thst the current crop of christian missionaries are not capable of doing any mass conversion. Dont know why you are so trustful of their capabilities, when it is clear they are incapable.
Indian enjoyers enjoy Kashmiri walnuts, apples, kidney beans, saffron, masala mixes, kahwa, shawls, Dal jheel, Gulmarg, Pahalgam, … and Pakistanis cannot even see the valley from any point on the territory that they occupy. Had Jinnah not ordered the medieval tribal invasion, J&K would have been a like Nepal, and Pakistanis would have been able to visit.
Also Balochistan would have been like Nepal too, and Pakistanis would have been able to visit in peace.
And Afghanistan being the OG Muslim Nepal, would have also been a place to to visit in peace for Pakistanis.
Pakistan really hates Nepal it seems.
3 wars were fought over Kashmir, which is a Pakistani territory under occupation by India. India also invaded East Pakistan in 1971. Not to mention the Indian war against the State of Hyderabad.
Kuch bhi bakwaas!
Since we are discussing the term “South Asia” again, this piece remains ever relevant
https://kabiraltaf.substack.com/p/in-defense-of-south-asia
Unlike several other conflicts, because of shared language, India and Pakistan inhabit the same cultural space more than either would like to admit. Which means exposure to the other side’s propaganda and the subsequent impulse to counter it. Despite proximity and many shared traditions, its got to be easier for Greeks and Turks to ignore each other when they have a relatively siloed discourse.
Another aspect of the Indian psyche is that, unlike Pakistan, they haven’t accepted a subordinate position to the great powers. The long view of India is very aspirational and the short-term view is pragmatic. Pakistan seems inverse, very idealistic about its original charter and maximizing current position, but I don’t see any long-term idealism or self belief that they believe they could lead the world. From an Indian view, when Pakistan undermines them, they are sinking the whole ship we all travel on as Indic people. From the Pakistani view, when India doesn’t yield on Kashmir, its an attack on their original charter.
My view is that Indians really think a lot more about Pakistan than Pakistanis think about India.
Outside of the Kashmir Dispute and the treatment of Indian Muslims, Pakistanis really are not that bothered with India.
I guess for Indians (at least some of them) Partition is a psychic wound. They cannot reconcile themselves to the existence of Pakistan.
In contrast, for most Pakistanis, Partition is seen as a good thing. We got a sovereign Muslim-majority nation-state of our own and we’re quite happy with that. We have no designs on India proper–only on the Disputed Territory of Kashmir.
//I guess for Indians (at least some of them) Partition is a psychic wound. They cannot reconcile themselves to the existence of Pakistan.//
Many Indians themselves actually think partition is a good thing, for the exact same reason that pakistanis do.
India got rid of a lot of muslims and the political, social and economic power of the ones remaining is negligible and can be managed.
I think what we observe on this blog comes from a place of resenting the very existence of Pakistan.
I don’t really get it because–as you say– India “got rid” of a lot of Muslims.
Perhaps they wanted to keep Muslim-majority lands and don’t really care one bit about the Muslim-majority population.
I dont think Indians resent pakistan in a jealous way
They have the same opinion to Pakistan as you do of India. An existential threat to their way of life and security.
Which is why anything pro Pakistan army gets such a reaction from them. Even if you may personally have no ill intent.
I think the opinions on present day lands comprising pakistan are worst case scenarios not genuine desire to have them return to India.
I think there is some trauma about the “vivisection of Bharat Mata”.
But that’s just my opinion.
This is the story of every Indian
They wanted the British to give them their empire on a platter, unearned. Only got half, still unhappy.
Presumably a lot of the South is funding the North.
It may have just been that the Dravidian-Deccan South would have been subsidised the Muslimicised North even more in undivided India.
… 5/7
🙂
Probably.
But the firepower is the north.
in the end, the right to rule comes from firepower not how much shekels a region generates.
I do however think ‘South India’ is completely alien from ‘North India’
People there are just more relaxed but they do produce some odd weridos here and there
Naarthis, Vadakkathiyar, Vadakkans … are India’s very own Pakistanis or it is the other way round.
As the great sage Ramadhir Singh said in Gangs of Wasseypur, “Jaise loha lohe ko kaat-ta hai, waise hi chu… “
How’s the ….mall security guard gig in the middle east going? Any certified letter deliveries to Tehran coming up again soon?
I don’t think every Indian is like this.
There are plenty who are reconciled to the existence of Pakistan and don’t feel the need to litigate Partition and TNT every few days.
I have met Indians in New York who appreciate Coke Studio etc. Far more psychologically healthy people than the ones on this site.
Do you have anything other than vibes to back up your argument?
Oh yes wise one! Because you are just full of academic citations.
It’s actually ridiculous how you think you are capable of arguing with me.
So you don’t have any proof for the statements you make. Just say that you’re puffing out hot air then why do you have to go on droning about.
And you are the champion of academic citations?
So when you say “Ghazwa-e-Hind is taught in every Pakistani school” you have citations to back that up?
Or is that just “hot air?
Apply the same standards to others that you apply to yourself.
Since you are a minoritised individual, I would kindly ask the whole Commentariat to immediately desist in discussing your identity in a non-sensitised manner.
The same application of the Gender Protocol now extends to other minorities, including sexual minorities.
I’m not appreciating the attacks on Kabir’s identity. These are sensitive areas, as we know the state of LGBT+ rights in the Indian Subcontinent is a matter of life and death and should not be trivialised.
I would hope that we have more interrogative conversation on BP about how to improve their lives across borders.
I don’t think that is going to happen when people sitting in the US constantly pontificate about how some commentators are lower than them. How their “world-bank class” makes them immune from all criticism. One cannot have it both ways of being simultaneous privileged enough to flaunt their identity to escape critique and then having their identity being protected for fear of persecution as well. If you want to make this specifically about the status of LGBT+ I’m fine with it but cannot be blanket protections.
Kabir’s entire point when arguing with anyone else is calling someone lower class and then celebrating victories over it.
That’s a very good point; an excellent point.
Class warfare being weaponised.
So much to mull over –
+100 comment
Undoubtedly +1
“People sitting in the US”–
Just to factually correct you, I very much live in Pakistan.
Some of the Indians on this site are actually “sitting in the US”.
If people don’t attack me or my family, I have no need to bring up my class background.
Back in the BB days, comments were made that I ride a motorcycle etc. In that context, I made clear that my ancestors were professional people (doctors and lawyers) even under the British.
Thank you.
There’s a lot of subtle homophobia that goes on and then people pretend they’re not being homophobic.
As I said, this is a familiar pattern that I have seen since middle school. Not surprised at this point.
To all- this thread is going insane. There will be a x number of comment deletion for all subsequent offenders.
High signal commenting instead of noisy commenting.
STOP & Respect this space.
Yes, totally out of control.
EVERYONE STOP TROLLING.
While I typically eschew the use of AI for human related discussions, I wanted to test out Kabir’s vocal protestations of homophobia of the expression “getting your panties in a bunch”
Here is the response from Gemini (probably the one least trained to give non-woke responses).
The idiom “getting your panties in a bunch” (or “in a twist”) is not homophobic, as it has no conceptual or historical connection to sexual orientation or same-sex attraction.
word histories
However, it is widely considered gendered and potentially sexist depending on the context.
Cultural and Linguistic Context
Etymology & Meaning: The phrase originated in mid-20th-century American and British English (the British variant being “knickers in a twist”). It means getting needlessly agitated, overly emotional, or upset over something minor. The imagery comes from the physical discomfort of twisted or bunched-up underwear.word histories+ 2Sexism vs. Homophobia:It is not homophobic because it does not target, demean, or reference LGBTQ+ identity.word historiesIt is often viewed as sexist or patronizing because “panties” refers to women’s undergarments. When directed at a woman, it can echo trivializing tropes that women are overly emotional or hysterical. When directed at a man, it historically served as a mild gendered insult, implying he was acting “like a woman” or being overly sensitive.word historiesWhile the phrase isn’t homophobia-based, it is generally considered dismissive or informal, and many people avoid it in professional or sensitive settings due to its gendered undertones.
The comment was directed at Calvin, who is not a woman, and to his credit, seems actually not to be the sort of person with twisted knickers.
So, high/low signal apart, I am very curious, what is your take on crying wolf?
Excellent take on minority protections. As always it is vital that they are not misused to prevent backlash against a positive idea.
Congratulations on using Gemini.
If you actually read what Gemini told you you would see that it is a misogynistic phrase. “When directed to a man, it serves as a mild gendered insult”.
Since you denied that there was a connection between misogyny and homophobia, Gemini actually makes my case and not yours.
In any case, a straight man doesn’t get to tell a gay man what is or is not homophobic.
Not me, Gemini is telling you. The woke AI rendered the not in bold on it’s own. You aren’t a neutral observer, just an outrage purveyor.
It’s quite fun watching you read between the lines of an AI instead of what is staring you in the face.
Oh, poor baby, you’re caught out in a lie and are now trying to take a specific statement I made in context and try to generalise it and assault my moral paramountcy.
Nice try, but fail.
Can we have 2 failed marshals at one time? I suppose you and Q will have to duke it out.
Hahaha have fun chasing down errant apostrophe’s my little grammar Nazi. You’ve found your calling at last. Leave the actual writing to people who can.
So easy 😂
I don’t know what to say tbh.. I’ve realised mine the gold off this comment thread and encourage people to migrate away from it
Not wanting one’s holy book to be insulted doesn’t make one a “fundamentalist”.
Maybe you personally wouldn’t care if I burn the Laws of Manu. But plenty of other people on this site get incredibly upset at the slightest criticism of their religion.
I am a Muslim. Not a very religious one but the core belief of Islam is that the Holy Quran is the divine word of Allah.
There is no excuse for the disrespect you have shown towards it. It’s Islamophobia plain and simple.
To tie this back to the theme of the post, do you find that the avg politically literate Pakistani or the strategy/policy influencers have a consensus plan B vision in case Kashmir annexation or independence is not achieved in the next 15 or 50 years? In its own way, Pakistan is impressively resilient, considering the low -level insurgencies its dealing with along with a phase of fiscal austerity. You’ve got 4 of the 5 planned passengers in the car, when do you depart? The struggle for an outside territory either (1) completes you in some way (2) or becomes the moral guidepost for the whole nation. What’s the actual downside of Pakistan giving up these two? A plurality of Kashmiris I know want independence, some are even strident, almost none of them express that advocacy from Pakistan has been particularly constructive. Leaving aside the temptation to critique Pakistan on whether it has moral standing to be an interlocutor, let’s assume it does, its still an odd basis to stake so much of the national idea on. The roots of Kashmiri independence goes deeper than feeling separate from hindu-dominated India, but from feeling like they have a distinct ethos from the the plains-dwelling hindustanis altogether. Their geography allows them to imagine themselves completely apart.
I hope you don’t take it as condescension, (i have many critiques of the Indian state and society), but in this case, is Pakistan insufficiently imagined? There has to be something bigger than winning this round. Does Pakistan want to lead the Ummah? It has human capital and many other things that could make that a possibility, does softening its bilateral posture with India make that less attainable?
Amazing interrogation ..
Kashmir is geographically very important to Pakistan. Not only do the Pakistani rivers flow from there, but it’s also a high ground that is jutting into Pakistan proper. You will see that all missiles India launched during Operation Sindoor on May 10 were from Kashmir. The distance to Islamabad in the air is less than 80 kms.
In order to defend northern Pakistan, Pakistan needs Kashmir in its entirety, especially in the age of missile and drone warfare.
When armies are in charge of countries, their primary mode of thinking is along the lines of security and how to defend the country. Now after 80 years, even poiticians won’t reverse course since this has been internalized by the population.
This is why it was never ceded to India.
The Muslim majority angle, while taught as the primary reason is mostly secondary issue.. since the small Kashmir population is not really that critical to Pakistan’s overall population of 250 million plus. However it is considered a greedy landgrab by India, since most Pakistanis were never invested much about India taking over other princely states by force that ceded to Pakistan (Junagadh) or wanted to join Pakistan (Hyderabad) since they were Hindu majority and by rights and logic of partition went to India. But Kashmir was geographically contigous to Pakistan, was a source of Pakistani rivers and Muslim majority, the fact that India occupies it is considered an affront, especially when you see that the partition of Punjab was done in such a way to give India access to Kashmir.
Its astounding the levels of ignorance that exist west of the Radcliffe line regarding Op Sindoor. Including some proper basics.
Bulk if not all, of the missiles fired at Pak by India were ‘air launched’ not from the ground, so the ‘higher ground’ assertions are utterly irrelevant.
It’s not like that even matters because we could fire rocket artillery from Punjab and it would still reach Islamabad. Pakistan just has no strategic depth. You can’t really hide anything in a country that’s 200 kms in width at its maximum in its most populated areas.
There is no other ‘logic’ apart from ‘preciousssssssssss, we wantsss it’ when it comes to Pakistani desires on JnK.
This is what they tell you to save IAF’s reputation. Fact is that they stayed 200 kms away from the border. The Brahmos were filed from TELs, in the mountains they are hard to track and destroy whereas your jets were sitting ducks. Sure you may have fire a few scalps but they were ineffective at causing any damage
But hey, you believe whatever you want. The world knows what happened, which is why everyone from Europe to Asia has discarded Indian military capabiliy in the bin.
‘We wuz winners and sheeiet.’
Just like 1965, 1971, 1999. And so on.
This myopic obsession with “izzat” has caused irreversible damage to the Pakistani state and people. Clearly sufficient to cause delusions of the sort you currently seem to be having.
@SQ
Mentioning a few things you seemed to suggest and further thoughts on it.
(1) Pakistan needing to defend itself against India as an axiomatic premise. If Kashmir is not disputed, why would one assume expansionist motivations? Structurally, Hindustan has only ever been vulnerable to attack from Afghanistan or Deccan, I don’t see what has changed that makes west Punjab + Sindh adversarial to them or vice versa. Is it not well proven that Pakistan is a viable state under its current territorial boundaries?
(2) “Pakistan needs Kashmir in its entirety” comes across as not agreeing to the premise that the state ever had a right to self-determination. Does it matter?
(3) Suppose we concede that east Punjab and Kashmir were schemed into the Indian union by the dream team of Nehru and Patel. This couldn’t be a more pedestrian occurrence in the formation of countries. Politics is the resisting and retaliating but finally its the sort of thing that states keep on the back burner if they can’t change the status quo after 80 years. Every border has this story. Whats plan b? A countries dignity is tied to controlling its own destiny. Moral posturing comes at the expense of the country actually growing stronger. I’d say the same for India posturing on Tibet.
France and Germany had a territorial dispute over Alsace Lorraine for a very long time.
Finally, it became irrelevant since those countries are at peace and both part of the EU.
The “Musharraf-Manmohan Plan” would have done something similar for Kashmir.
But now postures have hardened on both sides. Pakistan is back to our maximalist position that India has no right to any part of Kashmir.
India is back to “reclaiming POK”.
Barring a decisive military defeat of one side by the other (not likely since both are nuclear powers), the status quo will persist.
This is not only a matter of real estate for Pakistan. It is ideological. A Hindu-majority country cannot rule over Muslim-majority land.
“decisive military defeat of one side by the other”
Or if Pakistan breaks down politically from within? Imran gets out and hangs Sharifs and Bhuttos? Or Peshawar-Quetta gets under siege by mountain hordes? Or 2-500 people die in police firing in PoK and then ten thousand people march to India’s border?
Clock is ticking, make the constitutional change, JAAC demands will only go up, their imagined rights and slights will only go up in number, it is never going to end.
Indians tell you this so that you people instinctively do the opposite.
1) Problem is that India is an expansionist state as we see it, with just good PR (‘democracy, human rights, diversity etc’ — all the correct words for the modern liberal world order). We see this expansionism when India found a causus belli to take over Junagadh, and Hyderabad and politically coerced Manipur. Infact they even took over Goa forcefully. We see that India continued to fund seperatist movement in East Pakistan and 1971 was a result of that. The invasion of Kashmir in 1947 was along the same lines. From our vantage point, India has never been non-expansionist and they never really accepted the existence of Pakistan. We see that India thinks that it is entitled to all the territories of the Raj, even when unreasonable. And we see that Indians, having not accepted the existence of Pakistan will continue to act against Pakistan.
You make a good point about history where Punjab and Sindh had not been adversarial to Indian mainland, but partition of Punjab and the events preceding it in J&K were extremely bloody and Punjabi Muslims have not forgotten that. For the first time in history Punjabi Muslims are an actual power so there is that angle as well – they will not be giving it up so easily. The Muhajirs provided the ideology of Muslim rule and Muslim independence, and the Punjabis, finding that beneficial to them wholeheartedly adopted that.
A state is existentially threatened if its water is threatened, and this is something Pakistan takes very seriously. IWT had somewhat left a way out of past conflicts, but threats to IWT just reconfirms the military mind that rules Pakistan that they were always right and that Kashmir will be used to threaten Pakistan.
2) While many Pakistanis will disagree and contrary to Pakistan’s official position, I have always maintained that Kashmir can never be independent but will have to join one country. It’s not any more special that the other 564 princely states that had to join either side rather than become independent.
I have maintained in the past that Pakistan should even concede the LOC a border but with recent threats to our water, I was wrong and the military hawks in Pakistan were right about water and strategic security.
3) I dont know what’s plan b but at this current point neither side seems in a mood for any peace, and I think the population is also radicalized against peace. It may go on like this for the forseeable future. I think Pakistan has a lot of challenges to overcome, but I have always maintained that due to its authoritarian nature, they can be tackled relatively quickly if their is will.
Construction of Islamabad officially began in 1961, long after Kashmir was secured by India. Why did Ayub Khan build it at the LoC? To solidify this dispute with steel and concrete, and with it Pak fauj’s dominance.
If Pakistani irregular raiders had managed to conquer the real Kashmir, Pakistanis would have used same logic for Lahore and why it needs half of Indian Punjab to secure it! lol!
Brahmos has range of upto 900 km. Every inch of territory is in range and India has ~1500 of them.
“most Pakistanis were never invested”
Jinnah accepted accession of Junagarh in September of 1947, before invading Kashmir in October. Rest is defeat and its bitter after taste. Pakistan claims Junagarh on official maps.
You guys keep harping the same BS about Gurdaspur every few weeks. Tired of correcting at this point.
Pendulum is slowly swinging in India’s favor in PoK. They will keep making more and more demands.
We all know the answer to this. Refusing to ‘move on’ serves the primary purpose of the kleptocrats who lording it over the Pakistani citizenry. I had posted a comment about misaligned incentives some time back.
It may not be in Pakistan or Pakistanis’ interests to sustain hostility over a failed and failing ‘Kashmir cause’. But it neatly dovetails with sustaining the kleptocrats unchallenged hold on power in Pakistan.
None of this is news. The ‘chooran’ as it is called, is amazingly and consistently effective and doesn’t get old because it has a reptilian appeal to tribalism.
I keep drawing parallels to Pakistan to the seceded ‘southern states’ of the US, but it does sort of hold. The Confederacy also succeeded in mobilizing vast masses of southern white poor folks because it sold them the ..chooran that at least in the South, the poorest of the poor ‘white’ could see himself as superior to the slave.
For all the economic strife that the average Pakistani suffers as a direct consequence of its kleptocratic elites’ excesses, they can at least hang their hats on the TNT and claim ‘Islamic sovereignty’.
Pakistan will never abandon the Kashmir Cause. We see ourselves as the homeland of the Muslims of British India.
By the very logic of the Two Nation Theory, Kashmir was a Muslim-majority state in 1947 and therefore all of it should have come to Pakistan.
Had Kashmir been part of British India it would have gone to Pakistan entirely just on the basis of demographics. Had it been ruled by a Muslim king, it would have acceded to Pakistan.
The only reason Hari Singh “acceded” to India is that he was not a Kashmiri Muslim but a Hindu Dogra.
Pakistanis don’t buy into the view that India–by virtue of its status as a secular state– has a right to rule over Muslim-majority land. Anyway, as India becomes more aggressively Hindu, that particular argument for India’s hold on Kashmir only weakens.
The ideology of Pakistan is the TNT. To fulfill that ideology, we need all of Muslim Kashmir.
Also, as Q mentioned, all our rivers run through Kashmir. It is strategically very important.
Pakistan will keep pushing the UN Resolutions. We are never going to accept India’s annexation of the territory or the–in our view– fraudulent “accession” of the Dogra ruler.
We will never abandon the PoK cause either.
“By the very logic of the Two Nation Theory, Kashmir was a Muslim-majority state in 1947 and therefore all of it should have come to Pakistan.”
Answer this: Why did Jinnah accept accession of Junagarh in September of 1947? if this was the logic of partition? why did he try to sway Jodhpur?
“Had Kashmir been part of British India”
But it was not a part of British India.
“Had it been ruled by a Muslim king.”
But it was not ruled by a Muslim King. Accident of history. You lost, we enjoy.
“particular argument for India’s hold on Kashmir”
Practical argument is that we can defend it. And take back what is ours when time is right.
Don’t accept anything, it is not like we care. We will build the canals and tunnels next.
Sure. Try “taking back what it yours” and see what happens to you.
Don’t mess with the world’s only Muslim-majority nuclear power.
Answer this: Why did Jinnah accept accession of Junagarh in September of 1947? if this was the logic of partition? why did he try to sway Jodhpur?
All princely states were up for grabs.
This is a matter of historical record.
Yes, exactly, everything was up for grabs and India grabbed Kashmir. Now read what you said here:
“By the very logic of the Two Nation Theory, Kashmir was a Muslim-majority state in 1947 and therefore all of it should have come to Pakistan.”
Princely states were all up for grabs.
Kashmir was Muslim-majority and bordered Pakistan.
Both things can be true at the same time.
Yes, thank you, I know.
“someone who doesn’t understand basic things.”
Don’t run just yet, you might be slow but I am a patient teacher. Let me explain it you again:
You said:
Kashmir was a Muslim-majority state in 1947 and therefore all of it should have come to Pakistan
Then you say:
Princely states were all up for grabs.
The argument contains a structural contradiction because it applies two mutually exclusive rules to achieve a desired outcome. In formal logic, a system cannot hold two conflicting rules as universally true at the same time. If the absolute rule was demographics (Muslim-majority states must go to Pakistan), then Kashmir should have gone to Pakistan, but Jinnah’s attempts to claim Hindu-majority states like Junagadh or Hyderabad or Jodhpur become logically invalid. Conversely, if the absolute rule was legal sovereignty (princely states were “up for grabs” based on the ruler’s choice), then Kashmir’s Hindu ruler had the valid legal right to choose India, meaning it was not necessarily true that Kashmir belonged to Pakistan. Claiming both arguments are simultaneously true is a logical fallacy known as special pleading, where the underlying criteria are switched purely to justify winning different pieces of territory.
This is a good question. Is it a race? Race parlance feels very 19th century, dna isn’t really helpful with all its complex ambiguities.
Are we just going on visible appearance?
Recently I was taking an Uber and asked the driver if he was Ethiopian, he was. It was a small guess, he could have been Eritrean.
That part of Africa is visibly distinct and yet they aren’t often referred to as a race.
There’s an article in this.
‘Indian’ is not a race just like ‘South American’ is not a race.
South Asians are a mixture of three very phenotypically distinct races:
Aryans – white
Iranian farmer – brown
AASI – black
The variation of mixing creates different races, add the history of conquest subjugation and the caste system and that creates several races within India.
The claim that all South Asians are same race is very 20th century. With modern genetic data and DNA, we know better
Okay so? Why is American social categorization of race relevant here?
Anyone who thinks Vinicius JR and Lionel Messi are the same race needs a visit to the optometrist.
Yes, that is the entire point of talking about this. The south Italians look a lot more like people from the Levant than they do like the North Italian. The North Italians consequently have greater connection to the Germanic nations that existed previously than to an Italian nation. The reason Italy holds together is a cultural and social feeling amongst the Italians of oneness. The entire point of race is that Vinicus and Messi will feel some belonging with each other.
South Italians have less Steppe than North, infact they have it even lower than Iranians and Indians, while they have high ANF which Levantine and Anatolian populations also do. So there is a literal reason why they look Levantine. However Italians have a common language and a common religion and a common culture – something Indians do not.
Its….mildly entertaining how each and every one of your assertions can’t help but betray your ignorance.
There is a good reason that Mazzini was so revered during the Raj era because it was essentially a model for the independence movement to create a coherent nation out of a divided polity. I think most freedom fighters actually directly quote Mazzini as an influence in creating the idea of an Indian nation.
Hispanics are treated as an ethnicity?
Even Afro-Hispanics are treated as a part of the Hispanic or Latino culture and race. Their history is perhaps even more fraught than the Afro-Americans. Race is mostly about feeling there is no point in involving genetics into a discussion about it because it rarely matters.
Race is all subjective, and as much as some Pakistanis have trouble accepting, they are seen as ‘Indian’ race – as pretty much all other countries on the Indian subcontinent are – including Lankans, Bangladeshis, Nepali and even Maldivians.
The silver lining is, how some of the Pakistanis and Bangladeshis have adapted to calling themselves ‘Indian’ when they are migrants away from home. Its an understandable desire, since being seen as an “Indian migrant” is a lot more attractive than being seen as a Pakistani/Bangladeshi.
It is not a silver lining at all. Quite the opposite. Pakistanis have a much higher crime rate than Indians abroad. Unfortunately the average non subcontinental is unable to clearly distinguish us visibly.
The ‘common race’ theory is much to our detriment.
1. if Pakistan was so concerned about treatment of Muslims in India, it should allow any Indian Muslim who wants to migrate there. Please have a pak version of CAA. otherwise, this ‘concern’ is hurting the Indian Muslims in a big way.
2. If your concern is only Kashmir, why were/ are Sikh terrorists being supported?
I doubt Indian Muslims want to move to Pakistan; most people are reluctant to learn their homes and lands..
then Indian Muslims will solve their problems without any lip service from the Pakistanis.
That is why Indian Muslim leadership stridently oppose Pakistan.
Those decisions are governed more by economics than anything else. The historical record points to non-trivial numbers of enthusiastic migration in the 1950s and 60s, especially for educated Indian muslims seeking lucrative opportunities in Pakistan.
And we similarly see muslim Pakistanis and Indians, or their non-muslim cohorts, seek out migration to all over the planet.
Supporting Khalistan was a response to India breaking Pakistan by helping East Pakistan secede.
If India can break Pakistan, Pakistan can also break India. What’s good for the gander is good for the goose.
You all need to admit that East Pakistan was unequivocally Pakistani territory and India had no right to help that area secede from the Islamic Republic.
We see today on this blog that some Indians now dream of further breaking the Islamic Republic through Balochistan seceding.
On the “Pak version of CAA”: Please have a look at the Nehru-Liaqat Pact which basically acknowledged that Pakistan had a stake in the treatment of Muslims in India and India had a stake in the treatment of Hindus in Pakistan.
Pakistan is a country of 250 million. We don’t have the land or the ability to take 200 million Indian Muslims. They had the opportunity to move in 1947 and chose not to do so. They’ve made their beds (to put it crudely).
Pakistanis were butchering Bengalis by the hundreds of thousands. India, then ruled and dominated by it’s North Indian Punjabi elites impinged on Bangladesh’s sovereignty by not handing over the Pakistani war criminals to the Bengalis.
“Pakistan can also break India”
But you couldn’t do it naa? hahahaha… yet we did it to you, and will do it again.
If India can put a probe around Mars, so can Pakistan? Well, actually no! Pakistan cannot! You cannot even build a rail line, or locomotive or a domestic car. You cannot do it because Pakistanis are talent-less and lazy loudmouths.
“Indians now dream of further breaking the Islamic Republic through Balochistan seceding.”
We don’t just dream, we are seeing it come to reality, one small step at a time. The kind of rebellion against Pakistan in Balochistan is unprecedented in history of Indian Subcontinent.
Neither India nor Pakistan had nuclear weapons in 1971. They do now.
Any attempt against the territorial integrity of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan will be dealt with in the harshest terms.
Don’t worry about that.
Nothing and no one will ever be above the national security of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Oho Pakistan is so special! Why don’t you go tell this to JAAC? India had nukes in 1999, Pakistan invaded and assumed that India will not use them, but somehow the holy land of Pakistan cannot be carved up?
Russia has nukes today, could not use them. PoK has it’s own PM, President, flag, capital, … will Pakistan use nukes to save another ‘country’ ? Change constitution while there is still time.
Pakistan’s national security is being tied up and dragged on the streets behind 100 cc motorcycles in it’s colonies, from Turbat to Muzzafarabad.
BB you kind of outed yourself with the motorcycle reference. Welcome back!
I am not BB. It is getting irritating now. Move on already.
Hahahaha…
Hard to drag stuff on 70cc ones. ‘phat ke phlaawer ho jaata hai’ silencer ji.
I enjoyed this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCVw-O_BNwY
“No tougher job than this”: Bikers smuggling fuel from Iran to Pakistan – BBC World Service Docs
Mad max stuff. Bollywood should make a movie on this.
excellent comment as per usual
India and pakistan have intertwined destinies.
And the discussions about what this looks like will continue even in silos.
For the people who are affected by this discourse, it is best that for their mental health they desist from reacting to provocation.
+1
Tbh I think India’s and Pakistan’s destinies diverged the day Pak went towards Islamic exceptionalism and paranoia. The gap will continue to widen and peace reclusive until their children’s lives matter more to them than their anti-Hindu / India hatred (with apologies to Golda Meir).
“Unlike several other conflicts, because of shared language, India and Pakistan inhabit the same cultural space more than either would like to admit.” —
Russia-Ukraine or broader intra-slavic fight says hello. Biggest blackpill for the idea of shared cultural heritage being a binding force.
Pakistan is Ukraine squared. I know XTM and a lot of folks will be outraged. but my 2 cents.
Agree, insofar as I wasn’t implying shared cultural space means binding. Civil wars happen. I’m not so certain that Islam is in eternal conflict with others though and the India-Pakistan conflict appears to be because of the shared cultural space. Pakistan is only making claims on muslim nations that are culturally proximal to Punjab.
Also the official Pakistani position is a plebiscite for the 3 options? Or is it only India vs. Pakistan as options?
The only options are India or Pakistan. That’s what the UN resolutions stipulate.
Why would you not be certain of Islam not being in perennial conflict with others? Curious to know why.
explain Mecca Defense agreement and latest reports to rope in BD.
The India-Pakistan conflict is not about Islam.
It’s about the Disputed Territory of Kashmir.
It’s a nationalist conflict not really a religious one.
You can argue the TNT is based on religion but again it’s a nationalist ideology not primarily a religious one.
Please understand my argument first. I was responding to —
“Pakistan is only making claims on muslim nations that are culturally proximal to Punjab.”
Move to the new threads
[…] is on the scale of the EU, US, China & Russia in terms of geopolitical heft but as girmits says, India also *sees* itself that […]
I am adding floods in Nepal.
some in Nepal and india are blaming china. India has already sent some relief materials.
It will certainly take a long time for Nepal to recover. Will Nepalese allow india to rebuild or will it be only china?
The scale of the tragedy is hard to grapple with.
One thing I will say, the utter disregard for respecting river flood plains when it comes to constructing buildings – not just in the Indian subcontinent with India/Nepal etc but even the CCP immigration building that got pulverized – its …tragic.
please switch the new thread if you can..
Oh yes so sorry I should have made an open thread on Floods
It is a very sad thing. I hope that over the next two decades we can revive the marches and forest that mitigated the floods to some extent.
I think there’s no evidence (yet) to link the disaster with Chinese construction upstream.
But I find it extremely typical of how a country with extremely limited resources like Nepal is releasing a lot more information than the secretive CCP in terms of casualties, relief efforts etc.
The CCP’s consistent instinct, early and often, is to bury the facts. Manage the perception.
More than a decade ago, there was a terrible earthquake which caused many shoddily built buildings to crumple like cardboard and the CCP notoriously buried the facts along with the dead.
So even though its possible that they aren’t directly responsible for this tragedy, the trust factor simply isn’t there.
And at a minimum, they definitely could have done better in conveying warnings downstream to Nepali authorities.
@XTM: I suggest the ceasefires be brought back. This thread shows why they are needed.
At minimum, I want a ceasefire with “Indosaurus”.
Also if “Kishore Kumar” is BB, I want a ceasefire with him as well.
Actually, I’m pretty sure that with the exception of this one, you are the one jumping into all my conversations with other people for the last few days.
Don’t start something you cannot finish?
Chill buddy chill. I’m not the one with zero self control who constantly vows to depart from this site, but cannot help his drama addiction.
You need to exercise a little self restraint champ. Best of luck.
Also English first language champ, it’s shivering, not slivering. 😂
Hahahaha, if you weren’t Pakistani I would think this was some sort of humiliation kink being exercised.
I just need to do a quick safety check in, you’re ok right Kabir? Not thinking of self harm or getting upset too much. Nowadays people take online arguments very seriously.
If you’re your usual belligerent clueless self I’m going to take it as read that you are fine.
Anyway enough humiliation for today. Rest up, I’ll be there to smack you back in line next time you can’t resist dipping a toe into my threads.
Hey, hey, safety check first. People sometimes crack under the hot tears of public humiliation. Lay off until we know he is ok.
Bruh only very subaltern castes say this.. 95% of marriages in India are caste endogamous
Aww.. you think that changes the 95% of endogamous caste marriage rate in India? “we don’t live like that”? You do.
Caste intermarriage rates are not a good predicator of social status or mobility. Unfortunately excessive inbreeding seems to have taken it’s toll on your critical thinking.
There is a social mobility coefficient, admittedly India does so quite poorly on that. But, how about the ‘casteless’ societies of Bangladesh and Pakistan?
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/social-mobility-by-country
This reeks of ”hey guys look im lower caste but my caste reservation based social mobility is high now ”
95% Indians don’t wanna marry out of caste. This is the reality, so stop pretending you have entered into the modern world. Adopted langauge of the west, clothing of the west, political systems from the west, even ideologies from the west.. but still sticking to Indian caste endogamy.
Please do a complete conversion.
Hahahaha, are you hinting at calling me lower caste? You think this is an insult? There were a couple of guys in college who were able to avail reservation but got through on the general category, it automatically catapulted them to highest social status.
Hahaha Q, you silly ‘white’ little inbred, you don’t understand India or caste at all, your feeble feudal brain doesn’t have the experience or genetic diversity to comprehend it.
True, but it’s fun (as long as Kabir stays safe).
Someone needs to explain this joke to them though, I’m disappointed that they are too stupid to get it.
https://www.brownpundits.com/2026/08/26/why-cant-south-asia-move-on/#comment-144397
this thread has the dubious of being our 14th most heaviest thread at 301 comments and probably took the quickest time to get there.
my advice to anyone looking to have high signal conversation is to switch out of this thread as it descends into a Dhaba brawl
lol ‘dhaba brawl’ – reminds me of that video with wiry desi dudes whaling on each other with long sticks.
Looks like this js going to be gunning to be in the top 10 soon
not really – removed 50 comments in total
20 comments from Indo” would have been fair.
He thinks he can drive me to suicide and makes jokes about that.
That’s not acceptable.
Kabir let’s all cool off now.
I think you need to reiterate to some people that joking about driving anyone to suicide is not on.
Someone actually was driven to suicide a few weeks ago. There’s a whole post about it.
I really don’t care how many of my comments you remove. You can remove hundreds of them.
But do examine how certain people are allowed to be consistently nasty and pretend that they are completely innocent.
This is why the ceasefires need to be brought back.
Is your mental & emotional health being affected by this?
He was literally threatening to destroy people in his comments. Now, I may not be a Harvard PhD but I am rational enough to understand that unless specifically stated otherwise that is a threat of violence made by Kabir on Indo. If Kabir requires some English lessons to understand that I would be up for the task.
Joking about driving someone to suicide is acceptable to you?
Honestly, I don’t take any of these people seriously.
I’ve dealt with real life bullies. People on the internet have very little power over me.
But joking about driving someone to suicide is really a new low in the discourse.
Ok we are going to be moderating much more tightly.. without losing the flavour of the conversation.
Flydie’s comments are fantastic; so high value.
Hold up, lets be clear 100% clear. Above everything else, I want Kabir to be safe. I do not want to have any fun at his expense if he feels mentally affected to the point of self harm.
I cannot stress this enough. 100%, Always, safety first. There is a line between fun and danger, I want to be well away from the red, orange or yellow zones, fully in the green,
Now, as long as Kabir, is calling me names, correcting my english, re-establishing his pedigree, all the usual Punjabi chest thumping howls, I take it that all my rib pokes are mere barbs of annoyance and no real harm has occurred.
You can try to turn this around and point to it as evidence of my subliminal cheering, it isn’t.
That he chooses to weaponise my concern is a good sign, standard Kabirism, weaponise sexuality, concern for him, verbal threats as acutal violence, etc, any silly angle.
Carry on.
At least two people have admitted that they “have fun” being nasty to Pakistanis.
That’s what brings joy to people’s lives.
You now understand why I was telling you to not react?
I really do try to let a lot of things go.
But personal disrespect towards me is not something that can be allowed to go unchallenged.
Words like “Begharat” have been used.
I don’t think you appreciate how seriously “gharait” is taken in Pakistan.
I wish shooting protestors was taken more seriously in Pakistan.
I wish teenagers were not blinded by pellet guns in Occupied Kashmir.
You all have no moral high ground.