How did 'INDIA' and 'BHARAT' Diverge From One Another?

INDIA, the country that gained independence after several thousand years of foreign invasion and rule, is still enslaved by internal disparities that now lie under the canopy of modernization and culture, focusing on the major split in INDIA and BHARAT. It's worth noting that the origins of each of these names are more cultural and geographical in nature, yet they are viewed very differently by people, governments, and religious organizations.

The name BHARAT is derived from Chakravarti Samrat BHARAT, the ancient courageous king of the land and son of King Dushyant and Queen Shakuntala.

The term INDIA comes from the river 'Sindhu' or Indus as it was known to the ancient Greeks. Sindhu became Indus after ‘S’ from BHARAT became ‘I’ in the west. And the Indus Valley was known as Indica or INDIA.

INDIA boasts over 1.42 billion people and is known as the world's largest democracy and the most secular country. Nonetheless, the Hindu religion predominates. Anything that does not adhere to the stringent moral compass of some Hindus (Please notice that the keyword here is some, we accept all religions and recognize that only a few people use religion as a justification for moral policing) are stigmatized and branded too "modern" for INDIA. They establish the division, which is frequently aimed at minorities and marginalized societies.

First, consider what distinguishes INDIA from BHARAT

People believe that BHARAT is a land of gods, where people have strong religious sentiments, as seen by the worship of various gods. People who identify as belonging to BHARAT are more interested in cultural aspects of society. However, the majority of these folks is from rural areas and has not been exposed to the internet world, education, work possibilities, and so on. They name themselves ‘Bhartiya nagrik’. BHARAT embodies 'culture' and 'ethic'. They do not welcome Indians because they believe they are disconnected from culture and do not practice any religion. They were "influenced by 'foreign culture' and their rules and regulations." They believe it is one.

INDIA, on the other hand, has a higher level of modernization. People's thinking is more open and practical. Religious rituals exist, but the stigma associated with them is not. Caste disputes are less common in INDIA than in BHARAT. Those who regard themselves to be Indians share a sense of unity. There are no significant differences between Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, and others. With rapid technological advancement, INDIA resembles Western society in certain aspects, but where does it imply that being modern means abandoning religious values and ethics?

Looking at various delicate problems through the historical prism of the so-called BHARAT's orthodox thinking will help us comprehend the importance of modernisation and practical thinking.

As reported by some news websites, "18-year-old Roop Kanwar remains India’s last known case of Sati. People who identified as BHARAT supported the cruel tradition of burning a widow alive on her husband's pyre. Various feminist activists and educated women led the demonstration. According to these folks, the demonstrators' modern ideas clash with a Hindu religious holy ceremony. As a result, Western culture has had an impact on them.”

Second, with relation to India's history of queer people, it is common knowledge that Article 377 was made non-criminal in 2018. According to the article, which was referred to as criminalizing "unnatural offenses," anyone who voluntarily engages in carnal intercourse with a man, woman, or animal in violation of nature's order shall be punished with life in prison or with imprisonment of either description for a term that may extend to 10 years, as well as being liable to pay a fine

However, that does not imply that homosexuality did not exist previously. When the movement first gained traction in the early 20th century, the so-called Bhartiya nagrik viewed homosexuality as an illness left behind by foreign invaders and a western idea that could not be tolerated in Bhartiya culture. Additionally, they received support from political parties in authority who thought it was against the long-standing morals and values of the society. Because BHARAT disagreed, queer people were denied their fundamental right to love openly.

Third, people from BHARAT perceive Indians as being entirely influenced by western culture, atheists, and lacking any sense of morality. Yet these same leaders go and bribe these "uncultured brats" for their advantages during political rallies and marches across the nation.

With time, the rift between INDIA and BHARAT has been wider and deeper. This is not to imply that INDIA has looked down upon BHARAT, judging it to be detached from the modern world and "rural" with all of the bad connotations that the word carries. The goal right now is to find a solution, not to assign blame. It is necessary for us to collectively embrace the fact that this gap will never be closed. But we must try to close the gap and establish channels of communication. We are the same country that celebrated freedom as brothers when we fought like brothers and we are the same country that fell to invaders in the midst of our internal superiority struggle. It's time we realized that we are a nation of more than 2 billion people, and our collective strength will make us invincible; let's not let minor cultural differences hold us back.

Also Read: "Forgot To Update..": Assam CM On Why He Changed His Twitter Bio To 'BHARAT'