What's new

North-South Indian divide & idea of "DravidaNadu"

Should south breakaway from India?


  • Total voters
    56
Modern India only came into existence in 1947. Before that this subcontinent was a British colony and 500+ princely states. Before that, it was a patchwork of territories under different rulers. Most rulers like Akbar, Aurangzeb, Ashoka, etc. could only keep these territories united in their lifetimes. After they died or their successors were weakened, again new nations were created.

You can call this patchwork of territories "Hindostan" or even "Bharat-varsh" if you so please. Only Hindostan will be more accurate. There was never a "Bharat" throughout the history of this subcontinent.

I don't understand why so many of you can't accept simple historical facts which can be verified on Wikipedia or any other encyclopedias.

Modern India only started in 1947. The map of India which you studied in school is no older than 1947. Also it's inaccurate. Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan-Administer Kashmir, and Aksai Chin are controlled by Pakistan and China respectively. They have their own capitals, highways, languages, currencies everything.

Facts :tup:
 
True, nobody like to associate with north Indian hindi.

Urdu is widely spoken in Punjab and Kashmir. In fact Lahore was the region where Urdu was initially developed along with Lucknow Muslims.

Yes we are taught Sindhi in schools in Sindh.

Our country was here historically under IVC banner, unlike yours which is artificial creation of British.

No more off topics. You are welcome to open a thread on that topic.
I was asking about Punjabi and Kashmiri languages which you conveniently avoided. If a foreign language can be forced on Punjab and Kashmir to unite the nation then India should also try to unite North and South through Hindi or Sanskrit or English.
 
I was asking about Punjabi and Kashmiri languages which you conveniently avoided. If a foreign language can be forced on Punjab and Kashmir to unite the nation then India should also try to unite North and South through Hindi or Sanskrit or English.

And I slapped you to reality by telling you that Urdu is local language and developed mostly in Pakistan and by migrant Muslims.
 
United India is a stupid idea

Some of these states could be incredibly successful if not lumped together with a dysfunctional India

We are already very successful and we want to be together. Accept the reality bro.
 
And I slapped you to reality by telling you that Urdu is local language and developed mostly in Pakistan and by migrant Muslims.
Conveniently avoided again. No Punjabi No Kashmiri only Urdu. That's the way to unite.

India will do the same to unite South and North through Sanskrit.
 
Conveniently avoided again. No Punjabi No Kashmiri only Urdu. That's the way to unite.

India will do the same to unite South and North through Sanskrit.

Who told you there is ban on Punjabi and kashmiri? Go to Karachi, you will see people speaking Balochi, Pashto, Punjabi with no issues. Similar with Kashmiri and other languages. What I was telling you is that Urdu is developed by those who are modern day Pakistanis. And you are constantly having comprehending issues.

Besides that is not the topic here. You are free to seek info by opening a new thread.
 
I live in the Deccan, part of the South, and don't see any separatist sentiment here. The only militarized movement here is the left-wing Naxalite movement but even they don't want to break up India.

@DHSquare

You are hyderabadi?
 
Why not have a Tamil Ealam then? King of Jaffna was separate wasn't he?

Nah that island was a single political and territorial entity except in the 17th century for a century maybe and thats because of the Dutch allowed the Jaffna region self governance because it was helpful for them, Other than that it was always been unitary.. Even the colonists recognized and respected that and governed it separately from the sub continent

Any way enough of this whataboutary, Just shows your lack of debating skills.. Stick to the subject matter.. Is there a north South divide in India ? I'd say no, Cept for few linguistic supremacists from both sides creating a hullabaloo.. For now the union holds strong, You can thank your constitution for that and the military power held by the center
 
Nah that island was a single political and territorial entity except in the 17th century for a century maybe and thats because of the Dutch allowed the Jaffna region self governance because it was helpful for them, Other than that it was always been unitary.. Even the colonists recognized and respected that and governed it separately from the sub continent

Any way enough of this whataboutary, Just shows your lack of debating skills.. Stick to the subject matter.. Is there a north South divide in India ? I'd say no, For now the union holds strong, You can thank your constitution for that and the military power held by the center

I am Tamil and I know very well that there hardly many Sinhalese in the Northern and Eastern province. Dutch or the British doesn't matter, what matters is the will of the people.
 
I am Tamil and I know very well that there hardly many Sinhalese in the Northern and Eastern province. Dutch or the British doesn't matter, what matters is the will of the people.

Again lets stick to the subject matter, If you're going to debate of semantics on demographics of Sri Lanka with me i dont think you will get far you being Tamil or not.. Will of the people have been spoken successively though the centuries against massive odds and the island remains a sovereign unitary state
 
Again lets stick to the subject matter, If you're going to debate of semantics on demographics of Sri Lanka with me i dont think you will get far you being Tamil or not.. Will of the people have been spoken successively though the centuries against massive odds and the island remains a sovereign unitary state

Fair enough and is no different in India and we didn't have a civil war like you.
 
Back
Top Bottom