Using Bharat over India

[Muloghonto]

4 hours ago, zen said:

People (including frauds) who think that “suffering” should be highlighted to gain non existent sympathies of foreigners (also as if foreigners are superior so ppl have to beg for their sympathies) and the only way to remember such suffering is through a label (as if suffering is superfluous and that people should not work to connect with brighter aspects of one’s culture) are not worth engaging with, imo, unless to expose the motivation of such people to construct such points 

People who assume that remembering our history with the names used means begging for foreign sympathy are the foolish cultural sellouts and the reason Indians forgot Ashoka or samudragpupta. No sense of preserving history and names, just morphing into modern usage and lage Raho attitude.

4 hours ago, zen said:

To advance their dumb agenda (which could include actually not highlighting what is of  cultural importance to the region and reducing it to just “suffering” to cater to foreigners) these people also try to misrepresent (unnecessarily drag in) other cultures/groups including “Jews” w/o even understanding the nuances of history 

 

 

It’s ignorance to equate modern linguistic prevalence with history or culture by people who are ignorant of Indian history. The other group serve as an example of a point you cannot refute, hence call it unnecessary without any justification. Coz you have no logic, just whining coz your point was destroyed with logic,

[Muloghonto]

1 hour ago, zen said:

Yes, Bharat has cultural significance for the region .... At this point, IMO, basically three types of groups would oppose to "Bharat" being made the predominant official name:

 

a) Visualize the term as a Hindu name (Even though it is cultural and when in the region, a Bharat is likely to be the more common name than John or Dimitris - a reality)

b) Associate the term with Hindi (even though it is Sanskrit and its variants used in various regional languages) 

c) Like status quo for some trivial reasons

 

As discussed, a large group of people is already happily using the name whether in official capacity, regional languages, interactions, national anthem, and so on .... and would appreciate the name becoming predominant

 

 

D) people who want to preserve their history and not devalue the name that has far bigger historical usage amongst all people- foreign and native.the kind of people who most Indians aren’t, the kind of people who want Indians to grow a sense of culture and history over cosmetic name changes to have a native vineer over things. Larger group of people have used India/hindh historically than bharat, including natives.

[zen]

1 minute ago, Muloghonto said:

as I mentioned, it is not more culturally aligned, it’s just more modern prevalence aligned.

 

The larger point is that people prefer the name "Bharat" (the reasons can be multiple or even no reason) 

 

 

Quote

your unsubstantiated opinion on calling it dumb stuff still remains unsubstantiated.

 

For those who can't grasp 

 

 

Quote

There is no fraud because VHP isn’t just a religious organization ad they accept atheist Hindus in the ranks along savarkars original intent.

 

No one cares. It is you who is bring VHP in randomly (like your other points)

[Muloghonto]

10 minutes ago, zen said:

 

The larger point is that people prefer the name "Bharat" (the reasons can be multiple or even no reason) 

 

people also prefer the name India.

10 minutes ago, zen said:

For those who can't grasp 

nobody grasps non existent logic, saying something is irrelevant doesn’t make it so. You have empty judgement, nothing more.

10 minutes ago, zen said:

 

 

No one cares. It is you who is bring VHP in randomly (like your other points)

Then you should care bec that’s where the Hindu org is moving towards. India/hindh>>>>>>>>> bharat.

[zen]

50 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

People who assume that remembering our history with the names used means begging for foreign sympathy are the foolish cultural sellouts and the reason Indians forgot Ashoka or samudragpupta. No sense of preserving history and names, just morphing into modern usage and lage Raho attitude.

 

Like all your points, a dumb assumption to imply that people do not remember their history 

 

Quote

It’s ignorance to equate modern linguistic prevalence with history or culture by people who are ignorant of Indian history. The other group serve as an example of a point you cannot refute, hence call it unnecessary without any justification. Coz you have no logic, just whining coz your point was destroyed with logic,

 

Your argument is self destructive as:

 

a) It lacks the understanding as to why Jews are called Jews 

b) Assumes that Jews call themselves Jews to highlight suffering (an offensive statement for Jews as well)

c) Ignores Israel 

d) Ignores communities that have suffered (or whatever) and changed their names

e) Assumes that remembering "suffering" is the key goal to having a label

 

Your points are childish and constructed like this:

 

a) Bharat is like a HIndu term so I will I oppose it 

b) Zen used Jews and Hindus on some thread so let me do that too to oppose it

c) Eureka -> Jews are called Jews everywhere .... they suffered 

d) So let me try that Indians should be called Indians everywhere as they suffered 

 

You have made a bunch of idiotic assumption .... On top of that, you have shown the stupidity (or a desire to conduct fraud) to say your points are not refuted (childish tricks)   and when there is no need to even engage with such stupid points for anyone 

 

 

 

Quote

D) people who want to preserve their history and not devalue the name that has far bigger historical usage amongst all people- foreign and native.the kind of people who most Indians aren’t, the kind of people who want Indians to grow a sense of culture and history over cosmetic name changes to have a native vineer over things. Larger group of people have used India/hindh historically than bharat, including natives.

 

Another hogwast attempt  hide the true motivation

 

 

 

Quote

people also prefer the name India.

 

Bharat needs to be use predominantly .... the mentality of those who oppose that has been discussed 

 

 

 

Quote

Then you should care bec that’s where the Hindu org is moving towards. India/hindh>>>>>>>>> bharat.

 

We are discussing the two official names of the country .... not what religion oriented groups think (again a dumb irrelevant point thrown in by you). and even what they think is subject to verification .... It is people like you who oppose the term Bharat because it sounds like a "Hindu" name 

Edited March 22, 2020 by zen

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, zen said:

 

Like all your points, a dumb assumption to imply that people do not remember their history 

They do not remember their history is why. India forgot Ashoka or samudragupta and had to be rediscovered by foreigners.

1 minute ago, zen said:

 

Your argument is self destructive as:

 

a) It lacks the understanding as to why Jews are called Jews 

Irrelevant. They are called Jews, a term used by non natives , just like India is used mostly by non natives. That’s the point of comparison. 

1 minute ago, zen said:

b) Assumes that Jews call themselves Jews to highlight suffering only (an offenseve statement for Jews as well)

It assumes no such thing. My point simply is jews prefer being called Jews by outsiders and it’s just like how we should prefer being called Indians by outsiders. 

1 minute ago, zen said:

c) Ignores Israel 

Doesn’t. It points out that Jews/yehudi nomenclature applies same way as Indian/bharatiya.

1 minute ago, zen said:

d) Ignores communities that have suffered (or whatever) and changed their names

Changing names is changing and ignoring history so screw those communities 

1 minute ago, zen said:

e) Assumes that remembering "suffering" is the key goal to having a label

Nope. The key goal is to honor history and use the term most used in history. It also ties in with our suffering identity.

1 minute ago, zen said:

Your points are childish and used like this:

 

a) Zen used Jews and Hindus on some thread so let me do that too 

Baseless speculation and self congratulatory. I have lauded the Jews and drawn comparisons with them before you even existed on this forum.

1 minute ago, zen said:

d) Bharat is like a HIndu term so I will I oppose it 

Bharat is historically a lightweight term hence it cannot gain supremacy over India.

1 minute ago, zen said:

c) Eureka - Jews are called Jews everywhere .... they suffered 

 

1 minute ago, zen said:

d) So - India should be called Indians everywhere as they suffered 

Yep. Learn to preserve history from a group that is far better at it than us. 

1 minute ago, zen said:

A bunch of stupid assumption then you have the  further stupidity (or a desire to conduct fraud) to say it has not (childish tricks) and when there is no need to even engage with such stupidity 

Your comments are stupid because it has no justification.

1 minute ago, zen said:

 

Another hogwast attempt  hide the true motivation

Another hogwash comment by a cosmetic change seeking historically ignorant Hindu.

1 minute ago, zen said:

 

 

Bharat needs to be use predominantly .... the mentality of those who oppose that has been discussed 

 

Nope. Mentality of cosmetic change seeking modern Hindus who have zero knowledge of history is why Bharat is being peddled as a greater name.

1 minute ago, zen said:

 

 

We are discussing the two official names of the country .... not any religious affiliations .... It is people like you who oppose the term Bharat because it sounds like a Hindu name 

I oppose it is because it is historically insignificant name compared to India/hindh. Even VHP more or less agrees with this FYI was my point 

[zen]

44 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

They do not remember their history is why. India forgot Ashoka or samudragupta and had to be rediscovered by foreigners.

 

Not interested in such dumb opinions and of course the inclination for foreigners  

 

 

Quote

 

Irrelevant. They are called Jews, a term used by non natives , just like India is used mostly by non natives. That’s the point of comparison. 

It assumes no such thing. My point simply is jews prefer being called Jews by outsiders and it’s just like how we should prefer being called Indians by outsiders. 

Doesn’t. It points out that Jews/yehudi nomenclature applies same way as Indian/bharatiya.

Changing names is changing and ignoring history so screw those communities 

Nope. The key goal is to honor history and use the term most used in history. It also ties in with our suffering identity.

Baseless speculation and self congratulatory. I have lauded the Jews and drawn comparisons with them before you even existed on this forum.

 

 

Thank you for again vindicating the childish use of logic and assumptions by you as I had already explained -

 

" Your argument is self destructive as:

 

a) It lacks the understanding as to why Jews are called Jews 

b) Assumes that Jews call themselves Jews to highlight suffering (an offensive statement for Jews as well)

c) Ignores Israel 

d) Ignores communities that have suffered (or whatever) and changed their names

e) Assumes that remembering "suffering" is the key goal to having a label"

 

Besides displaying a lack of understanding of the above, the basic point of that no one is obliged to follow others (including Jews) is foolishly ignored by you 

 

 

Quote

Bharat is historically a lightweight term hence it cannot gain supremacy over India.

 

Did I not say why people like you would think that?

 

 

Quote

 

Yep. Learn to preserve history from a group that is far better at it than us. 

Your comments are stupid because it has no justification.

Another hogwash comment by a cosmetic change seeking historically ignorant Hindu.

Nope. Mentality of cosmetic change seeking modern Hindus who have zero knowledge of history is why Bharat is being peddled as a greater name.

I oppose it is because it is historically insignificant name compared to India/hindh. Even VHP more or less agrees with this FYI was my point 

 

 

Bunch of random comments and assumption while throwing VHP in as if it matters and that what you say is actually what VHP believes/agrees  

 

 

Edited March 22, 2020 by zen

[Muloghonto]

42 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Not interested in such dumb opinions and of course the inclination for foreigners  

Not interested in your dumb opinion that’s afainst history and culture

Quote

 

 

Thank you for again vindicating the childish use of logic and assumptions by you as I had already explained -

Thank you again for proving your judgement carriesno reasoninglike a child’s 

Quote

" Your argument is self destructive as:

 

a) It lacks the understanding as to why Jews are called Jews 

That’s your claim, not substantiated. 

Quote

b) Assumes that Jews call themselves Jews to highlight suffering (an offensive statement for Jews as well)

Again, your unsubstantiated assertion.

Quote

c) Ignores Israel 

d) Ignores communities that have suffered (or whatever) and changed their names

False. Those communities are who ?? Name them 

Quote

e) Assumes that remembering "suffering" is the key goal to having a label"

False. It assumes remembering history as is , is the key goal.

Quote

Besides displaying a lack of understanding of the above, the basic point of that no one is obliged to follow others (including Jews) is foolishly ignored by you 

Display of lack of understanding is from you, hence no logical counter from you. 

Quote

 

 

 

Did I not say why people like you would think that?

Your unsubstantiated nonsense opinion is summarily dismissed.

Quote

 

 

Bunch of random comments and assumption while throwing VHP in as if it matters and that what you say is actually what VHP believes/agrees  

 

 

Yes, coz they do. India >> Bharat coz our ancestors used India/ hindh more than Bharat as well 

Edited March 22, 2020 by Muloghonto

[zen]

7 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Not interested in your dumb opinion that’s afainst history and culture

Thank you again for proving your judgement carriesno reasoninglike a child’s 

That’s your claim, not substantiated. 

Again, your unsubstantiated assertion.

False. Those communities are who ?? Name them 

False. It assumes remembering history as is , is the key goal.

Display of lack of understanding is from you, hence no logical counter from you. 

Your unsubstantiated nonsense opinion is summarily dismissed.

 

Childish comments 

 

Quote

Yes, coz they do. 

 

What VHP thinks is not my concern .... but as a potential Fraud alert   .... below from VHP's website, which uses Bharat: 

 

 

Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) was founded on 29th August 1964, on the auspicious day of Shri Krishna  Janmashtami , with the blessings of the Saint shakti of Bharat. The objective of the VHP is to organise- consolidate the Hindu society and to serve – protect the Hindu Dharma. A strong, effective, enduring and ever-increasing presence of VHP is seen in lakhs of villages & towns in Bharat. 

 

Link

Edited March 22, 2020 by zen

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Childish comments 

Yes, your comments are childish because they don’t come with any reasoning. Just declarations.

5 minutes ago, zen said:

 

 

 

What VHP thinks is not my concern .... but as a potential Fraud alert   .... below from VHP's website, which uses Bharat: 

 

 

Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) was founded on 29th August 1964, on the auspicious day of Shri Krishna  Janmashtami , with the blessings of the Saint shakti of Bharat. The objective of the VHP is to organise- consolidate the Hindu society and to serve – protect the Hindu Dharma. A strong, effective, enduring and ever-increasing presence of VHP is seen in lakhs of villages & towns in Bharat. 

 

Link

They also sponsor the usage of the word Bharat and we are going to ensure that fraud history fails like you don’t repeat our civilizational mistake in forgetting our history and as such, we are well in the process of giving India primacy over an obscure historically insignificant term like Bharat 

[Real McCoy]

4 hours ago, zen said:

Not for those who prefer Bharat to be used predominantly 

Its not an issue of preference but what it NEEDED and what is not. In this case its NOT NEEDED. Like I said there are tons of variables that work with India and changing it to Bharat will screw up these items. Also I live in the South. I have never heard of Bharat being discussed in historical documents in my language. Its only in national discourse have I heard of Bharat that too in Hindi like when I had the misfortune of having to listen to Hindi commentary in the 90s. I know you dude. You will come back with the same BS over and over. Lets not do that. Adios

[zen]

25 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Yes, your comments are childish because they don’t come with any reasoning. Just declarations.

 

Good to see that you can at least know the difference b/w declarations w/o reasoning, therefore in time the dumbness of your posts including "My point simply is jews prefer being called Jews by outsiders and it’s just like how we should prefer being called Indians by outsiders."

 

a) Fails to take the history into account - the Why,  b) On top of that assume that since Jews do that so should others, and c) linking it to suffering (as if it is some kind of a goal of everyone. Yes, people with beggar mentality can have such a goal), and then implying that Jews do that to highlight suffering to foreigners (an offensive statement for Jews itself) 

 

 

Quote

They also sponsor the usage of the word Bharat and we are going to ensure that fraud history fails like you don’t repeat our civilizational mistake in forgetting our history and as such, we are well in the process of giving India primacy over an obscure historically insignificant term like Bharat 

 

Again, what is important is that Bharat is an official name of the country and needs to be predominant .... not what VHP does or wants to do .... and on top of that, there is no evidence of VHP wanting to do that (your statements do not count) 

Edited March 22, 2020 by zen

[zen]

7 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

Its not an issue of preference but what it NEEDED and what is not. In this case its NOT NEEDED. Like I said there are tons of variables that work with India and changing it to Bharat will screw up these items. Also I live in the South. I have never heard of Bharat being discussed in historical documents in my language. Its only in national discourse have I heard of Bharat that too in Hindi like when I had the misfortune of having to listen to Hindi commentary in the 90s. I know you dude. You will come back with the same BS over and over. Lets not do that. Adios

 

As I have posted about groups that would make posts like yours:

 

"At this point, IMO, basically three types of groups would oppose to "Bharat" being made the predominant official name:

 

a) Visualize the term as a Hindu name (Even though it is cultural and when in the region, a Bharat is likely to be the more common name than John or Dimitris - a reality)

b) Associate the term with Hindi (even though it is Sanskrit and its variants used in various regional languages) 

c) Like status quo for some trivial reasons

 

As discussed, a large group of people is already happily using the name whether in official capacity, regional languages, interactions, national anthem, and so on .... and would appreciate the name becoming predominant" 

[Muloghonto]

6 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Good to see that you can at least know the difference b/w declarations w/o reasoning, therefore in time the dumbness of your posts including "My point simply is jews prefer being called Jews by outsiders and it’s just like how we should prefer being called Indians by outsiders."

that is a parallel and I have given reasons for my position: your dismissal of my analogies or reasons are knee jerk childish proclamations with no reasoning supplied- just blank pronouncements.

6 minutes ago, zen said:

 

a) Fails to take the history into account - the Why,  b) On top of that assume that since Jews do that so should others, and c) linking it to suffering (as if it is some kind of a goal of everyone. Yes, people with beggar mentality can have such a goal), and then implying that Jews do that to highlight suffering to foreigners (an offensive statement for Jews itself) 

The linking it to suffering is YOUR doing. I simply mentioned that a fellow marginalized community that is far better than us in remembering their history do not let germs that historically define them become obscure, just coz they didn’t use it amongst themselves much. You made the speculation that Jews do it to highlight suffering, I made an observation that they do it, which is true.

6 minutes ago, zen said:

 

 

 

Again, what is important is that Bharat is an official name of the country and needs to be predominant .... not what VHP does or wants to do .... and on top of that, there is no evidence of VHP wanting to do that (your statements do not count) 

What is important is India, also an official name, far more prevalent and far more used in history should dominate over silly obscure historical names that gained prominence recently, like bharat. 

[Muloghonto]

3 minutes ago, zen said:

 

As I have posted about groups that would make posts like yours:

 

"At this point, IMO, basically three types of groups would oppose to "Bharat" being made the predominant official name:

 

a) Visualize the term as a Hindu name (Even though it is cultural and when in the region, a Bharat is likely to be the more common name than John or Dimitris - a reality)

b) Associate the term with Hindi (even though it is Sanskrit and its variants used in various regional languages) 

c) Like status quo for some trivial reasons

 

As discussed, a large group of people is already happily using the name whether in official capacity, regional languages, interactions, national anthem, and so on .... and would appreciate the name becoming predominant" 

D) people who are educated in history and see that in our own literature, coins, inscriptions as well as foreign ones, India/hindh/Hindustan is the most dominant usage, second most common usage is between aryadesha or jambhudwipa and bharat is historically a much less used term, therefore has less historic meaning to our culture and history. Hence we want to keep our prime name as the one that has most usage and weight of history.

[zen]

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

What is important is India, also an official name, far more prevalent and far more used in history should dominate over silly obscure historical names that gained prominence recently, like bharat. 

Since you unnecessary focused on what  the VHP wants to do and as if you speak for it -  first let's see you post your name and position if any

 

Edited March 22, 2020 by zen

[Muloghonto]

2 minutes ago, zen said:

Since you unnecessary focused on what  the VHP wants to do and as if you speak for it -  first let's see you post your name and position if any

 

I am part of it and this is gaining ground because I am part of the group that seeks to remove dumb superficial naming influences like yours which leads to forgetting of our history, which we are guilty of. Until you provide logical refutation of my argument, you have zero right to demand anything.

[zen]

Just now, Muloghonto said:

I am part of it and this is gaining ground because I am part of the group that seeks to remove dumb superficial naming influences like yours which leads to forgetting of our history, which we are guilty of. Until you provide logical refutation of my argument, you have zero right to demand anything.

As i expected, no name and position .... thank you 

 

 

 

 

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, zen said:

As i expected, no name and position .... thank you 

 

 

 

 

As I expected, no reasoning or logic behind your ‘ it’s irrelevant/it’s different/it’s nonsense’ proclamations. Coz people like you are ignorant of history and are the reason why indians suck at collective history.

[zen]

Just now, Muloghonto said:

As I expected, no reasoning or logic behind your ‘ it’s irrelevant/it’s different/it’s nonsense’ proclamations. Coz people like you are ignorant of history and are the reason why indians suck at collective history.

name and position please