Taz’s post today had one of the strangest statistics I’d ever seen — that 25% of South Asian Americans had, in 1990, identified themselves on the U.S. census as “white,” while 5% identified themselves as “black.”
It made me think of a post by progressive Muslim blogger Ali Eteraz from last week, where he discussed his own variant of an identity term crisis, not on racial but religious terms:
I onced asked a little kid I know what he was. He was like, um, er, I am a Pakistani-Muslim-American. I was like, what the hell, thatÂ’s messed up, little kids shouldnÂ’t have to hyphenate their identities like that, man.
Then one day I was typing up a post and I was like dammit I am really tired of having to write out the whole word “American-Muslim” or “American-Islam.” It’s just tiring.
So I decided that we needed a new ONE WORD term to call ourselves. . . In the end, I decided IÂ’m going to use “AmeriMuslim” – it is easy to understand, and it sounds like “A merry Muslim.” So from now on, thatÂ’s what IÂ’m going to use as my identity, thatÂ’s what IÂ’m going to teach nieces and nephews to say, and thatÂ’s what IÂ’m going to use even in my actual publications.(link)
Given that Ali Eteraz is (I believe) of Pakistani descent, my first thought is to say, “well, why not South Asian?” If we want to limit it to just one word, why not “desi” or “deshi”? Of course, in a sense I already know the answer: if religion is the most important aspect of one’s identity, one obviously privileges it over ethnicity. (Analogously, I also know a fair number of conservative Sikhs who are adamantly “Sikh American” and not “Indian American” or “South Asian American.”) Within individual states in the Indian Subcontinent, the term “South Asian” is rarely used. The progressive magazine Himal Southasian attempts to move beyond national identifications to a more regional, South Asian focus, but it’s the only enterprise I know of that does that. If “South Asian” exists mainly in the imagination of the diaspora, does that make it less meaningful?
Finally, I’ve noticed that more liberal Indian Americans in my acquaintance (of any religion) usually don’t bother with “South Asian” except when talking about someone whose national background isn’t known. It’s “Indian American” or just “Indian” (sometimes you even hear the slang term “Indo” — as in “there were a lot of Indos at the club”). In the comments at Sepia Mutiny at various points, people have also disparaged the term “South Asian” — mostly Indian nationalists, who’d rather deemphasize any association with Pakistan or Bangladesh. (On Pickled Politics, Sunny posted that conservative Hindus and Sikhs in England have been making similar arguments.) Is “South Asian” one of those terms that exists mainly in the abstract, to describe large groups and populations — but not necessarily individual people?
Word to the nth power…
I wonder how 2-gens whose parents come from various east Asian countries (China/Tw/Viet…) react to themselves being classified as ‘Asian’ by everyone else in the US, and whether there are similar debates. As people who went to college in the US…did you notice any of that?
I do see some of that courtesy facebook…for instance, huge online wars betn Tw-Americans and Chinese-Americans.
I suppose thats all that matters…
Personally, I prefer ‘brown’,
or even better, ‘macaca’.
44:
Why does Columbia get singled out for these things? I mean don’t get me wrong, Columbia and I have had our differences, but why Columbia in particular?
I quoted the following in Taz’s post on affecting the desi community, but it’s so good I have to quote it again:
“Paging SpoorLam!”
why? because some people don’t use south asian? or because some people do? or because some people don’t want to identify as indian? or just because 🙂 which group is spoor lam meant to inflict himself on? 🙂 or is it everyone?
For NotASouthAsian:
Any takers for the term Subconti? Eh eh?
In fact, in geology and other related physical sciences fields, the term is Indian subcontinent.
In plate tectonics, India collides with Asia, not South Asia collides with Asia. It is the Indian plate. Remember, plate tectonics was mostly developed in 60s, and is not pre-independence scientific construct. I am glad they are not caught up PC nuances.
I think biologists/ paleo-biologists use Indian subcontient when they talk of time, evolution, etc.
When subcontinent is involved it’s always the Indian subcontinent. I’ve never heard it called the South Asian subcontinent.
But when we’re trying to come up with some term and idea that everyone can identify with, I don’t think we can ask everyone to call themselves Indian.
This whole confusion with the South Asian and the Desi and the this and that only becomes confusing when you take the politics out of it. These are politically loaded terms, each of them, and we all have various interpretations of what their politics are.
To me, South Asia and brown are cool because it gives us a starting point, devoid of any national or religious terms, from which we can begin to relate to each other.
one more thing…
b/c we’re not evil, inconsiderate jerks. we have mutineers who trace their roots to bangladesh, pakistan, sri lanka, nepal, guyana…the kind thing to do is include our friends, not ignore them. i would call this an “indian” blog the same day i wished someone jewish “merry christmas”. ain’t gonna happen, b/c that’s just plain wrong.
i don’t care if it’s got the stench of academia ’round it…the whole point of this mutiny is that we are defining it and ourselves right now. and if we want to use “south asian”, we can make that term our own. we can mold it to fit our purposes. it doesn’t have to suck…or be this divisive, really.
Personally, I don’t like to use a generic term like “Desi” to identify Indians, Pakis, Bangladeshi’s, SriLankans, Nepalis. Main reasons being: 1.With the amount of hatred/radicalism coming out of Pakistan and Bangladesh, I do not want in anyway contribute towards confusing “Desi” & by “deduction” India with crazy mullahs/jihadists…similar to what has occured to the feelings evoked by the term “middle east”… 2.Lot of animosity and historical distrust exists between India, Pakistan & Bangladesh….We can save the discussion on who/why/what for another day. But, I certainly don’t want to be clubbed together with Pakis or Bangladeshis. Nothing personally against them….but I want to draw the line there.
FYI…I also know several Pakis/Bangladeshis calling themselves Indians/Desi to avoid any extra attention/scrutiny. Imagine that!!
I bet some of your best friends are Pakistanis and Bangladeshis…
I’m just sayin…
Here’s an email from Rajiv Malhotra that circulated widely last year. Its the same type of “Indian” argument to be found employed by British Hindus on the Pickled Politics thread at the moment which Prof. Singh referenced, though the author goes all over the place in the “conclusion,” even going so far as to demonize Harvard. Personally, I take brown over South Asian as an umbrella term -its aesthetic and monosyllabic. South Asian is a cold war term, I believe, much like “Third World,” but I respect the preference of the bloggers here.
From: n Date: Nov 3, 2005 6:30 AM Subject: SouthAsianism in US colleges _ Rajiv Malhotra To:
Came in the email, requesting wide dissemination: Apparently some kid wrote this to him.
“> On 11/3/05, xxxxx wrote:
I have read many of your articles and you often talk about how Indian’s identities often get reprogrammed to ‘South Asian’. Until reading your articles I never really gave much thought to this ‘South Asian’ movement on campuses. I am currently enrolled in college and I have personally seen many of my own friends reprogram their identities to ‘South Asian’. It is alarming to me how impressionable many Indian youth are while in college. Nowadays most Indian kids are more concerned about being politically correct and appearing “open minded”. After reading your articles I have tried to my best to convince people to assert an Indian-American identity however, I believe my efforts so far have been failures. You have written about how Indian’s identities are “South Asianized” but you have not written why so many Indian youth have followed this path. I think one reason is that this ‘South Asian’ movement has been successful is because Indian kids often have strict upbringings and this creates a rebellious mentality in many youth. I believe that Indian girls are often the most susceptible to brainwashing of “South Asianists” because they are often subject to stricter treatment from parents and the rest of the Indian community then boys. “South Asianists” seem to exploit this and exaggerate it to the point where Indian/Hindu culture is associated with social ills against women. These “South Asianists” also exploit the way Indian parents push their kids to enter wealth generating fields and denounce this as being materialistic and superficial. Another trend I’ve also noticed is the way “South Asianists” dismiss the success of Indians in America as not being the result of hard work, intelligence and education but because of “immigration law” as Mr. Vijay Prashad put it. http://www.asiansinamerica.org/museum/comm_ind.html
Even my own sister constantly tries to propagate this to me. It amazes me even more how almost all the people getting caught up in this ‘South Asian’ movement are Indians. Pakistanis and Bangladeshis always join their own or Muslim student organizations. Every time I point this out to fellow Indians none of them can ever give a valid reason or beat me in a debate as to why Indians should bother with the ‘South Asian’ tag. I grew up in a mainly Bangladeshi and Pakistani part of Brooklyn. From when I was a little kid I understood how different and how little I have in common with non-Indian South Asians. I believe Indians in Britain are much more aware of their Indian identity because skirmishes and fights between the Indian and Pakistani youth there are a common occurrence from what I have heard. On top of that is the well documented gap in education and achievement between the two communities with Indians rising to the top and Pakistanis confined to ghetto areas like the ones in Bradford and Birmingham. Because America is a big piece of land and also the fact that the more affluent areas where Indians are more prominent and the working class neighborhoods/ghettos of NYC where Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are more prominent, are so geographically isolated, Indians living in places like Long Island and Edison, NJ have no idea how different their ideal of South Asian unity and how reality is. I commend you for what you are doing for the Indian-American community. It is absolutely essential that we do whatever we can to make sure India is portrayed in positive light.
— Sxxxxxxxxx
Rajiv’s comments in response:
He correctly observes that while Pakistani and Bangladeshi organized counterbalancing initiatives also exist on campuses, Indians have more willingly internalized the British imperialist structures and now are available for American institutionalized reprogramming. In some call centers in India they are being “taught” to think, feel, dress, eat and talk like Texans, New Yorkers, etc – some specific white identity they can select from a catalog.
“South Asian” seems to be a temporary/unstable state pending further engineering – it suggests, “I am ready to be tutored to become whatever you want.” Its significance is not based on what it is, but based on what it leaves behind (by way of implied and polite rejection) so as to clear the space for fresh programming.
The emerging global caste system has whites at the top, whiteness (as cultural identity for people of color) as second, and South Asian just below whiteness for those still unable/unwilling to claim full whiteness. Those who remain behind as “native” Indians are seen as the new outcasts; they are vulnerable to future genocides resulting from overpopulation and civilizational clashes. Are we Indians turning into global shudras-for-hire with no identity of our own other than whatever the latest master assigns?
Postmodernism is an imperialist export – via co-opted (whitened) third world intellectuals – to distribute “theories” that support this trend as being desirable and/or inevitable. Whitened intermediaries like Harvard’s Homi Bhabha are rewarded with cushy Ivy League jobs and turned into role models for facilitating the bandwagon effect among Indian intellectuals who are anxious to escape the “problems of Indianness.” Meanwhile, the Harvard cabal under the choirship of Sugata Bose dishes out demonology against Indian culture to make the carrots more attractive for assuming new identities: hence the role of Harvard as the epicenter for studying sati, dowry, incest, caste, gender conflict as Indian “essences.”
Indian culture which is deemed valuable is repackaged as “white” (such as yoga/meditation these days…) and this appropriation is sold to confused Indians as being a compliment by the whites. Whatever is left behind after the scavenging is branded as backward/facsist Indianness. Between these two extremes of whiteness and Indianness, the South Asian labeling provides the safety of a middle ground with enough ambiguity and wiggle room to customize and personalize. The student who wrote the email rightfully blames orthodox parents. I would add to his list the role of US based lazy and pompous Indian cultural leaders who naively play into this phenomenon…
Guess the term “South Asia” has more to do with the classification of Asia into different regions than anything to do with giving the “Indian Subcontinent” an identity to go with. “South Asia” is a classification perpetuated by the western media (in my perception).
So if you are talking of an identity I wouldn’t go with “South Asia” but rather use the “Indian Subcontinent” or “desi” as prevalent in the US. But if the question is what part of asia are you (or your ancestors) from, the answer could very well be “South Asia”.
Muhahahahah. Good points Kush. Go India.
not to go off-topic or add fuel to this inferno… but this isn’t really the same thing, right? (i’m really asking here)…
as in when people were wishing me for ramadan & diwali (and i was wishing them as well) … i celebrate diwali b/c i’m indian and we’ve always done it (even though i’m not hindu) …
arrghh … maybe its all just toMAYto / toMAHto
Vivek..you are very right. I do have friends who are Pakis and some are Muslims from India/Palestine.And as a side info, I grew up in a Muslim Majority town & went to a school, where we had 5 Hindus in class of 50 students(rest were Muslims).So..I have had the experience of being a minority within India & it wasn’t always bad.
But I being realistic about the eventual political implications these kinds of words/phrases have….they evolve into something, we might later regret.
This is missing the point – it’s the political connotations that drive people crazy. See Ennis’ comment about certain Sikh Americans who want to distance themselves from India by using the term South Asian. Well, there’s a flip side to that sentiment.
Whose God is it anyays,
Good question, the whole thing is a mess. There is an Asian American Bar Ass’n which include Indians as well as Pacific rim countries. Then there is the Indian American Bar Ass’n. Some brown lawyers are in both, some are only in one and not the other. This was discussed at Indian American Bar Ass’n of Chicago’s meeting, that is, if there already is an Asian American Bar Ass’n, what is the point of a South Asian American Bar Ass’n? The answer was that Indians are sufficiently unique from other Asians to warrant a separate group.
Later, when the question came up as to whether the group should be Indian or South Asian American Bar Ass’n, the argument was that India is different from a generic South Asia so the group’s name should represent that distinction. Also, South Asian was too broad/generic a label vis a vis the already existing Asian Amererican Bar Ass’n. By a very close vote (a difference of about 3 votes I recall), the name Indian was chosen.
So essentially, if you are a lawyer in Chicago, you could be a member of the Asian American Bar Association, the South Asian American Bar Association (not in existence, yet), and the Indian American Bar Association.
My thought is that this is ridiculous. The next thing people are going to do is create a Punjabi American Bar Ass’n of Chicago, a Kashmiri American Bar Ass’n of Chicago, a South Indian Bar Ass’n of Chicago, etc. Then a brown will have to join 4 associations.
Maybe there will soon be a website called indiamutiny.com.
Indian Plate, Indian Ocean, Indian Subcontinent etc, flatters Indians who have inherited the name, but alienates the other nations that were carved out from Indian in recent times, especially the muslim ones who (ridiculously) choose to identify with west asia.
I wasn’t rejected from CAL, I never applied and UCD was my first choice, so I wasn’t bitterly-settling either! GO AGGIES!
When I was in college, there weren’t that many brown people at Davis (ANNA can attest to this, I remember seeing you around campus) and I never really connected with the desi community there, so I think any term you use in any way that anyone can somehow associate with is fine.
Why do we all need to agree on which term to use? Why not just use the one you are most comfortable with and associate with yourself? Personally I use the term Indian not South Asian. My nationality is American (I was born and raised here) and my ethnicity/race is Indian. I never feel the need to explain to people I was born here, unless they make stupid comments like “Wow, you speak really good english!”
Briefly, I’m Bangladeshi (by birth and citizenship). So I don’t identify as Indian, Indian-American, Pakistani, or Pakistani-American. But obviously, there is something about people of sub-continental origin that makes me self-identify as one of them; why else am I reading SM? Now brown, desi (deshi), and South Asian are all apt self-descriptors, but I find South Asian least confusing to non-desis; so that’s the label I tend to use.
JoAT: I, too, say American when asked outside of the States. Part of it is to show people that not all Americans are blonde and blue. What can I say, teachable moment. Or obnoxious.
Siddhartha: I’m curious as to what you say when people ask, what with your multi-culti background… French? African? I have a friend who is, by most people’s terms, white. She refers to herself as African; she was born and raised in Africa. If you’re a white South African, or a Kenyan whose family originated in India but has lived in Africa for generations, can you call yourself African? Who draws the line?
P.S. I dig the term subconti.
Abhi hits it on the nail for the SA label. Replace the SA label with India and Indian-American with any sub national (sikh, mallu, tam, telugu, bong…) identity and the argument makes perfect sense.
Thats a no brainer. Because plates, trees, animals and genes all have political identities.
yeda nath (#69):
To quote Skunk Anansie:
Yes it’s f**king political! Everything’s political!
I don’t think it’s missing the point at all. EVERY term has its political baggage. If you like it, use it. If you don’t like it, change it or don’t use it.
I love brown people! And inclusion!
BROWN BROWN BROWN BROWN BROWN BROWN BROWN BROWN BROWN BROWN BROWN BROWN!
On another note – anyone ever have East Asians balk when claiming Asianess? This frustrates me. Plate tectonics be damned.
IndiaThe subcontinent is now part of Asia. Damn it.Thank youuuuuu.
How funny about Chicago.
They are trying to create an Indian Bar Association in Houston. There already exists a South Asian Bar Association butthe stated reason for another one is that the South Asian Bar is too political and overrrun by Pakistanis. The truth is that the president is a very active Muslim Indian attorney active in civil rights. The first meeting of Indian atttorneys will be a DIWALI lunch this Friday (noon at Madras pavilion).
Wow!
I guess us lawyers should just shut up and sit down. It is so bizarre to see this play out because the promoters of the Indian Bar are mostly 1st gen, new immigrants or older uncle types and the South Asian Bar is 2nd gens.
shaad: Now brown, desi (deshi), and South Asian are all apt self-descriptors
Many millions of Indians, especially from the East (of Mongloid stock) are not brown, but can be classified as yellow. Many other “South Asians” from Bhutan, Nepal and Tibetan exiles can also be classified as such. [Forget about other minorities like Chinese Indians, Baghdadi Jews, Anglo Indians, French-Indians, etc etc who are probably not brown either.]
India is a brown country as much as the US is a white country. 🙂
i knew the comments on this one would go bonkers!
Why should i care about them. I am only concerned with finding an appropriate label for those who choose to identify with the commonality, while preserving their distinct traits.
Damn, I need to work but I can’t stop checking back for comments every 10 mins!
sa, thanks. wow, that is one confusing stew! i can somewhat buy the argument for a separate south asian bar association, given that it appears that south asians aren’t really included in the term asian (unlike in the uk where it’s the other way around), even though we are asian as anyone else. however, although i don’t see south asian as a particularly useful cultural/identity term (otherwise why aren’t Balinese Hindus South Asian as well?) and more of a political/geographical one, it suits a bar association representing people from that geographical area (i know i’ve botched that sentence badly but too lazy to rewrite). i see no need for a separate indian bar association unless, as the above poster pointed out, there are allegations of politics etc. and incompatible goals and we know south asians – we may want to unite at the best of times but we are all too ready to divide at the worst!
They will end up accusing you of alienating them eventually.
The idea of South Asia and South Asians is just as arbitrary as the idea of India and Indians.
Thats fine. There are no guarantees in life. I
can liveam living with false accusations and I bet everyone does.Yeah, and when I write about Indian history that goes back past nationalism, I realize that I can’t really use the word “India” unless I refer to it as the “South Asian [or subcontinental] region that is now India” because “India” is also a relatively recent idea.
This relates to Desi identity through the lens of being mixed, which I think can add an alternative layer to choosing the way I identify my connection to India. So, here are my thoughts:
I have always found that most average Americans are unsatisfied with the term “American” when I describe myself because they end up asking me follow-questions like “what are you?” or “where are you from?” (carbon-base life form from California does not do the trick). Also, I’m proud of my roots so I like to celebrate them.
But I run into problems. When I say that I’m half Indian, people ask me what tribe I am affiliated with because their first impulse when they hear the word “Indian” is to completely disregard the nation of India. (which is an entirely different issue that could be discussed at lenght in its own post) When I say “half-desi,” the average American doesn’t know what I mean, so South Asian tends to be less confusing because people aren’t faced with a) an unfamiliar term or b) the confusion caused by their own stubborn adherance to an age-old misnomer.
But there is another problem. Because I am mixed, the next comment I get is, “You don’t look Indian. You’re skin is light. I thought you were Mexican.” Sometimes I just resort to “my Dad is from India and my Mom is from Ohio.” For all of my Asian friends, “half Indian” and “half South Asian” work just fine as they all have their own complicated identifiers.
I am currently experimenting with made up terms. So far I have Desipean (to pay homage to my Dad’s Indian origin and my Mom’s ancestral roots in Eastern Europe and England), AmerDesi, Indimerican, and AmerIndian.
I think I could also use Desi Au Lait, but here on the mutiny, I like to be SemiDesiMasala 😉
So I read through all #67 comments and of course its impossible to respond to everything I want so I’ll try to be brief. 1. Nations and Races are both artifical constructs, created to rally a group around an identity. This identity may be created b/c it is needed in the face of extreme difference with those you live with (bangladesh being neither pak. or indian) or in the face of possible discrimination (pak. thinking it wouldnt have a role in new india) or simply b/c its a power play (think milosevic).
SAA as all my papers say, or South Asian American, is used to denote not only a similar culture but a similar external perception of who we are. We are not e. asian due to phenotype differences (despite similar filial piety and lack of cultural focus on individuality) No one from this constructed area of South Asia needs to say they are South Asian. It is those who live outside of it who need to identify themselves. In areas that are dominated by Indians/Pakistanis/Bangladeshis etc. there is no need to say you are SAA, but hell there is only what..1% of the population that even fits SAA. As critical mass is reached (if it is ever reached) the label will probably disappear. As of now it is identification. We are treated the same, assumed to be the same, and hold ties in the same geographical area.
Addressing tectonic plates as not political. The Indian subcontinent was used b/c of the political existence of India. The name was not changed but is inherently political. There is nothing about the plate itself that is “Indian”
Politically speaking, as I said earlier, we are 1% of the population and have similar concerns. We are generally split among the wealthy and the poor…the educated (any grad school) and the h.s. graduates. There is a disparity tied to our immigration patterns and the laws that dictated them. Labels are always political, even some indian names are set up to denote familial affiliation for old reasons of clanship. we have the opportunity to not carry forward the useless bickering between south asian countries and personally I am all for it.
Lastly, I id as brown, American, Asian American, South Asian American and, when pushed, Indian. Like Abhi said, context is everything.
True, but you are ignoring the strong need (for mere mortals) to have an identity in this world. And the identity has to have a name for it to viable.
Heh, Heh
No, it’s not ignoring the need for identity. I have such a need for identity that mine has at least 5 layers, you see. I’m still South Asian. And all those other things.
amerindian is already taken 🙂 also, given the perception that geographical knowledge of their own country, much less the rest of the world, is not that advanced amongst some/many americans (and they themselves always joke about it), how much more useful is south asia as a locator, i wonder? does it even really matter whether what one says? i told a lady on a plane i was from india and she asked me how far that was from illinois. might as well say antarctica to some people.
There already is! The person that started it was someone who was repeatedly banned from this website for countless offenses including hurling childish insults at us for using the term “South Asian.” His entire website is one big SM rip-off. They even call each other “Mutineers.” How sorry is that?
Its just plain idiotic to use the word “brown” to identify people from the subcontinent, for obvious reasons:
Not all indians are brown. The majority of desis are black by global standards. Dont let the exclusive identification in the Anglosphere of “black” with africans confuse you.
Not all browns are desis. Malays, mexicans, arabs etc are generally seen as brown. Try and find commonality with them with your claims of being a fellow brown and see how far you get. About as far as you will get with east asians with your claims of being a fellow asian.
Currently, the most acceptable term to identify desis remains “south asian”. Neither south indians, nor pakistanis, bangladeshis, sri lankans, nepalese etc could object to that.
I feel like I use different terms in different contexts– ‘South Asian American’ is a nice umbrella description at times, ‘Indian-American’ works when I’m with some people, ‘Kannada’ rarely works unless people know where Karnataka happens to be, etc. ‘Brown’ is awesome because it just feels warm and fuzzy. Whatever we term ourselves, we are still fine-tuning a catch phrase that truly embodies our identity. We might never agree on the best diction, but it’s all relative!!
As for the use of the the term “Desi”…well I only use it when I’m with Brown folks who are not South Indian– around my Kannada peeps, I use “Namooru”, the Kannada equivalent that just has a good ring to it. Don’t forget your Southies, y’all– our languages are incredible.
and randomly– I went to CAL so GO BEARS!! WOOHOOO!!! 😉 But I still got love for all my fellow UC-ers, no matter which campus you represent.
Which incidentally brings me to a curious kinship:
What makes me a “world citizen”? Ans. The old fashioned term Liberalism (in the US; Fiscal conservative, socially liberal…tending towards libertarian) and other modern values. Literature, music, movies, etc.
What makes me an Indian? Ans. Identification to my roots in India, its literature, arts and other forms of culture. My Hinduism.
Ergo, I can easily converse with a Southern US gent who shares the same taste in films, music and literature, but I could have enormous difficulty in conversing for more than 2 minutes with a Pakhtoon tribal from NWFP or a villager from Tamil Nadu. In other words, what brings us together as Indian or South Asians are similar urban middle class and upper middle class tastes in art culture [1] and in issues that affect our native countries or us through our ethnic/genetic heritage [1]. That combined with (for some) ideals to do something good for our native countries.
[1] Identity based on genetic commonality, whether geographical or otherwise is confusing. For instance, South Asians suffer disproportionately from heart disease, and therefore hospitals have segmented this population and made specific policies for them. Hence, such segmentation is important. But methinks this definition of ‘South Asian’ excludes people from Nepal and Bhutan.
Today (Nov1st) is the state formation day of Andhra Pradesh, the first state to be reorganized based on linguistic identity, after a lot of blood shed. Now they want to split the state into two.(three,four…, depending on who it is ). The vandalism on wikipedia page should give you a hint as to the type of arguments that get thrown in.
The whole debate has the eerie similarity of earth being demolished for hyperspace way.
Thanks. Its crazy people that drive the political connotations from everything :P. Stuff to use in the other debate.
…brown.
Also Karnataka, same day, same year.
Shruti (#88):
Thank you for understanding.
Vinay (#91):
Nooooooooo… of course we need identities. I’m just saying – why not South Asia?