States in India often ask for more autonomy or more power.Should they be given more power or not?Support your answer with 2 arguments.
Answers
Answer:
Let us get some facts straight there, regardless of what some nationalist constructed propaganda. There was no country in history called India prior to 1947. India comes from the Greek word “Indios”, thus the word “India” itself is foreign. Originally it meant a continent or a “region” beyond Sindhu river/Indus river. It was a vague term used by Europeans. The Arabs and Persians called it Hindustan or lands beyond Indus river. It was purely a geographic term. There was no entity called India. There is no word called “India” written in any of the historical books of all the ethnic groups for thousands of years.
(1)
Before Ashoka’s time, different nations or kingdoms existed. Each kingdom was largely based on the language of that region. Kingdom borders changed often due to wars and conquest, but the core kingdom was based on the regional language.
(2)
Ashoka tried to forcibly unite them all through blood shed. Kalinga held out and millions of Oriyas died. Ashoka later repented.
(3)
After his empire broke up, chieftains and kingdoms continued on until Mughals came. That was another centralized empire. They had trouble keeping various ethnic groups and languages together, as most considered themselves unique countries.
(4)
Regions that are today known as Kerala and Tamil Nadu were outside of all this. North east was outside of all this and like Sri Lanka, had their own nation-states. There is no mention of any united India in any of their histories. If someone has it, show the proof!
(5)
Bharata was simply a geographic term for a “continental region”, not a country or a land. Just as one says south America or north America or Africa.
(6)
It was the BRITISHERS who finally unified the entire subcontinent into one administrative unit PURELY for administrative purposes. They seized kingdoms and turned them into provinces, some based on language.
(7)
At time of independence, various kingdoms held together wanted to return back to their independent status, but Nehru and Patel threatened them to join the newly created union. Travancore wanted to become its own nation, and the king was preparing to declare it a separate nation, but once again due to circumstances, he was forced to join. Same goes with other regions. Hyderabad was annexed.
(8)
By the time the constitution came to be written it was called “UNION OF STATES”, but prior to that, it was termed as various “states or regions ACCEDED to the union”, so clearly something existed PRIOR to the union to make that union into being.
(9)
Language committees reorganized states based on languages, as IT was originally in the distant history of Indian subcontinent. Each language and ethnic group are different form one another, therefore, it is perfectly justified to have a flag that represents that unique culture.
(10)
Indian flag is an invented flag. Ashoka never used it. Mughals never used it. State symbols are taken from historical kingdoms that existed before
(11)
Nation States are constantly evolving. Much of India’s states are now based primarily on languages except for a few northern states. Therefore, autonomy, unique passports, EU like shared arrangements are very much possible in the future once people become more mature and see the need to preserve each group’s unique history.
(12)
Today a Hindi speaker is still considered a foreigner in Tamil Nadu by appearance, culture and language difference, same in north east and vice versa. So, one cannot simply erase out thousands of years of differences.
(13)
India is a created nation-state made up of various nations and is diverse. Therefore, diversity can be celebrated by each ethnic group having its own flag. One hold be proud of one’s language, culture, ancestors, and state.
As of now there is no law that prohibits any state from having its own flag, although to be used for official purposes, it needs the permission of the home minister or president due to the centralized system put by the Britishers. Hope one day that will be possible.
1.2k views · View 10 Upvoters
Related QuestionsMore Answers Below
Should Indian states be provided with more autonomy in terms of economy and administration?
Should Indian states not be given more autonomy?
Should the scope of state autonomy be rethought?
Should the Indian government give the autonomy status to all states?
Whenever a state asks for autonomy it should be granted , but it depends on the needs of those and their needs . , this is called Regionalism . so it varies. if this answer is not at all satisfactory then change your question .