Tamil Nadu & Kerala: Assembly Elections 2026 Results - Page 42

Originally posted by: liberiangirl

I believed I could understand a little bit of Tamil. Quite obviously not, having watched a little bit of the floor vote session

The only words I thought they repeated multiple times was arasi and aachi. Tried looking up the meaning of these words but couldn't place them in the context of their speeches.

Arasu as in government

Aatchi as in rule.

ah thanks!

So Arasi (which is what I searched on google) = queen, but Arasu is Govt.

And aachchi = elderly woman and Aatchi (with a "t") = rule.

Makes perfect sense now.

a bit late, but still want to post some thoughts to what I read

Originally posted by: MannMeinRadha

The term hindu itself is wrong. Sanatan is the correct and appropriate term for our religion. In none of our texts or even any related books anywhere this term hindu is mentioned. It is always refered as Sanatan dharma only.

In conclusion, the name of our religion is Sanatan , not Hinduism.Hinduism is the term Abramic religions and cultures use for us . It's basically a colonial derogatory term.

Hindu, to me, is - actually - a person who follows a religion which belongs to the term coined by - as you rightly stated - foreigners to facilitate the differentness from other belief systems... as such it isn't meant in a negative way.

However, as in ancient times it was more a geographical/cultural term for those living in the region of the Indus river, the hindus themselves used it then (without the -ism of course) - because of the invasions - to stress their cultural/religious difference vis-à-vis the invaders... it became like an 'umbrella'-term.

Personally - as I know about the different belief systems contained in this 'umbrella term', I also would prefer to use Sanatana or Sanatana Dharma as it is the one based on the Vedas and describes what I think is the most comprising form of spiritual/philosophical guide in our way of life. Anyways, it is the crore of the contemporary term Hinduism.

So, I partly agree with you except that I don't think that Hinduism - originally - was meant in a derogatory way (by me still not ).

Originally posted by: IamRaj96

Southies lack nationalism because they dont face threats from border enemies just like how states such as WB, north east, gujarat, rajasthan, punjab etc do, so they take the protection provided by the north for granted. They also tend to have an over the top pride in their languages. I mean, its good to be proud of your mother tongue, im proud of marathi too, but it shouldnt become your entire identity to the point that whenever someone says something, you make it about your language. Thats the kind of thing they do.

And i also agree with whatever you said about them welcoming enemies because yesterday, i saw this on X.

It's shocking to read the tweet (although I ignore how many in the South really think likewise). I think - among others - they have another 'connection' to their motherland India because defintely they got the least affected by the partition. As far as I know, there had been no mass migration and/or massive violence even though significant changes in the structure of the states happened (I think Telangana even wanted to become an independent state, right?). On the positive side, the South became a kind of 'calm anchor' while the North had all the chaos then.

I find it unfortunate that after almost 79 years there still seems to be a feeling of distance between North and South (but probable reasons I won't like to discuss here).

Originally posted by: missFiesty_69

There’s this thing called fact checking that people should do before sharing random social media posts. I mean that’s the least you can do. If the so called educated people spread wrong information, can’t blame normal people for spreading rumors.

https://www.instagram.com/p/DYRGh3tE-Pv/

It’s not clear as to who has been appointed as the HR&CE minister but sure as shit not this guy.

So much fake information is taken from twitter and it is shared here and discussion is being done on it lol... peak immaturity and superiority complex

https://x.com/i/status/2054464012688162998

Brilliant Guy. But I guess his time has not come yet.

https://x.com/i/status/2054464502964641870

Already buckled down under pressure?

This is too hillarious.

I need a quintal of Popcorn to last for 5 years I guess. We are in for a great comedy circus of a ride.

DMK will rag doll him like anything.

Lol. People are being so daft in defending Eradicate Santana remark DMK I can't stop laughing. Anyways , sabka enlightenment aata hai. Some early some late. Koi nahin while India will celebrate like THEY re doing for Bengal when these guys receive thier Karma. Hopefully it happens soon.

So much effort to defend a genocidal statement. People are just doing mental gymnastics and word salads to defend the indefensible.

https://x.com/i/status/2054258709157851138

Also this https://x.com/i/status/2054377738786746627

This reminds me of 'Mera wala alag hai Syndrome'.

It works until they are given a reality check.

Originally posted by: Clochette

a bit late, but still want to post some thoughts to what I read

Hindu, to me, is - actually - a person who follows a religion which belongs to the term coined by - as you rightly stated - foreigners to facilitate the differentness from other belief systems... as such it isn't meant in a negative way.

However, as in ancient times it was more a geographical/cultural term for those living in the region of the Indus river, the hindus themselves used it then (without the -ism of course) - because of the invasions - to stress their cultural/religious difference vis-à-vis the invaders... it became like an 'umbrella'-term.

Personally - as I know about the different belief systems contained in this 'umbrella term', I also would prefer to use Sanatana or Sanatana Dharma as it is the one based on the Vedas and describes what I think is the most comprising form of spiritual/philosophical guide in our way of life. Anyways, it is the crore of the contemporary term Hinduism.

So, I partly agree with you except that I don't think that Hinduism - originally - was meant in a derogatory way (by me still not ).

The simple fact still remains that nowhere in our mythology or history or any of the religious core texts our religion was ever called as Hinduism or our people as Hindu. Sanatan dharma or simply dharma ( since at that time no other religion existed in or around the civilization ) was how it's referred always. Only after foreign invasion, they started calling us Hindus because of a very narrow very truncated idea about our religion that actually encompassed many types of faith under one umbrella, including many tribal faiths , and was spread far beyond Indus Valley.

So this term itself, Hinduism, carries a heavy weight of shame and pain and anger because it is a reminder of what has been done to us by repeated invasion by Abrahamic religions.

We started calling ourselves Hindus only because that is what we were being called by others, not out of choice but out of compulsion . And then it got part of vocabulary like so many words, that originally carried a negative connotation.

For e.g, the word Negro was once used to describe blacks when they were slaves . They never chose to be called Negros or niggers. It was coined as part of their painful history of slavery. Just like blackface.

Therefore this word is now no longer considered as an acceptable term to use for blacks. Even the word nigga or nigger is unacceptable unless used by blacks for each other and not by other races.

The word Hindu is what we were described by those who neither understood us, nor respected our culture , considered us as "other" or "lesser" and wanted to deny how ancient and widespread our dharma was and how many different often opposing ideologies it accepted and embraced within it.