logo
We are Indians: Desi diaspora in UK rejects South-Asian label

We are Indians: Desi diaspora in UK rejects South-Asian label

India Today24-06-2025
The Indian diaspora in the UK has expressed concerns over the use of the term "South Asian", which it says is used too broadly by Western media and academia. The Indian-origin people in the UK argue that Indian culture is itself diverse and broadening it further would take away from its uniqueness. Those with Indian roots do not want to be clubbed with their counterparts from Bangladesh and Pakistan.advertisementLast week, Insight UK, which calls itself a "social movement of British Hindus and Indians", raised a similar objection on its social media handle. It also explained in detail why there was a pushback against the South Asian label."The Indian diaspora reject the use of the term 'South Asian,' which is frequently employed by Western academics and media. They argue that this label, intended as a convenient regional grouping, tends to obscure India's unique cultural identity rather than celebrate it," wrote Insight UK.
It further explained how India has a distinct history and a vibrant and rich culture with several languages, culinary traditions, and deep-rooted customs, which set it apart from many other nations in South Asia, such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.Indians are the largest ethnic minority group in the UK, with a population exceeding 2 million people.advertisementBy clubbing them in the same category, a "South Asian umbrella", the group argued it "oversimplifies complex realities and downplays India's historical significance".It also said the generalisation does not pay heed to "particularly its [India's] Hindu and Dharmic heritage".This generalisation also does not do justice to different social practices, gender realities, and the development of different nations."Moreover, the label overlooks the significant differences in social norms, gender dynamics, and even practical realities such as employment, educational trends, and incarceration rates," the post read.Insight UK also gave an example of what this overarching would look like in European contexts."To illustrate, it would be akin to conflating Germany and Albania simply because both are in Europe ignoring the vast differences in language, culture, and history."Finally, it is said that being Indian is a matter of pride for many in the diaspora. South Asia does not cover the intricacies of the same."For Indians, being called 'Indian' is a matter of pride and a genuine reflection of their heritage not merely a regional designation. The 'South Asian' label, they argue, risks erasing the true depth and individuality of their identity, which is rooted in centuries of unique history and character," the post concluded.DIASPORA RESPONDS TO SOUTH ASIAN GENERALISATIONadvertisementPeople from the diaspora also responded to the post."If Indians do good: South Asians. If other South Asians do good: Their respective countries. If India does badly: India. If other South Asians do badly: South Asians. It's a whole narrative. Indians are one of the hardest-working, enterprising people with good work ethics. Indians should not be clubbed together with other notorious people with vile agendas," wrote one person on X.Some people also pointed out how Indians themselves are a large group, and, therefore, deserving of an own term."It is 1.4 billion people. Probably worthy of their own terms," wrote another person on the post.Others called out the duality of who is called South Asian and Indian."West mentality: If Indians do anything good: Asians. If Indians do anything bad: Indians. It's time West understood the difference. Indians are Indians," wrote a person on X.The growing discomfort with the "South Asian" label among the Indian diaspora in the UK reflects a deeper call for recognition, not just of geographical origins, but of distinct cultural, historical, and social identities. As voices from within the community push back against broad-brush categorisations, they highlight the need for more nuanced representations.- EndsTrending Reel
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

India will give a ‘new form' to BRICS grouping in 2026: PM Modi
India will give a ‘new form' to BRICS grouping in 2026: PM Modi

The Hindu

time39 minutes ago

  • The Hindu

India will give a ‘new form' to BRICS grouping in 2026: PM Modi

India will attempt to give a 'new form' to the BRICS next year, said Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his intervention at the grouping's summit in Rio De Janeiro on Monday (July 7, 2025), as the Indian side prepared to take over the leadership of BRICS from current president Brazil. 'Under India's BRICS presidency, we will work to define BRICS in a new form. BRICS will mean Building Resilience and Innovation for Cooperation and Sustainability. Just as, during our G-20 chairmanship, we gave priority to the issues of the Global South in the agenda, similarly during our chairmanship of BRICS, we will take this forum forward in the spirit of people-centricity and humanity first,' said Mr. Modi speaking at the session on Environment, COP 30 and Global Health. Also Read: PM Modi at BRICS in Brazil LIVE updates on July 7, 2025 Mr. Modi dealt with a number of topics, including the post-pandemic recovery of the global economy and sought global cooperation in combating common threats and said, 'The COVID pandemic taught us that viruses do not come taking visas, and solutions, too are not chosen by looking at passports. The solution to common challenges is possible only through joint efforts.' Earlier, talking at a segment of the BRICS summit in Rio De Janeiro, Mr. Modi shared the Indian position on Artificial Intelligence and said, 'We in India believe in AI as a tool to enhance human values and capabilities. Guided by the mantra of 'AI for All', India is actively using AI in many sectors. We believe that AI governance, addressing concerns and encouraging innovation should both receive equal priority.' Mr. Modi also held a number of bilateral meetings on the sidelines of the BRICS summit. Among those who met the Indian Prime Minister were President Miguel Diaz-Canel Bermudez of Cuba, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim of Malaysia, President Yamandu Orsi of Uruguay and President of Bolivia Luis Alberto Arce Catacora. 'We talked about the need for improving and diversifying trade linkages on a priority basis. We discussed how we can collaborate in sectors such as digital technology, critical minerals, healthcare, space and more. Also conveyed my best wishes on the historic occasion of Bolivia's 200 years of Independence,' said Mr. Modi. Mr. Modl's participation in the closing day of the 17th BRICS summit will be followed by a state visit to Brazil that is scheduled to begin on 8 July at the Alvorado Palace. During his stay in Brasilia, Mr. Modi will hold restricted and delegation-level talks and attend a lunch hosted by President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. India and Brazil are expected to sign agreements following official talks.

Congress often takes position that benefits China instead of India: BJP
Congress often takes position that benefits China instead of India: BJP

The Print

timean hour ago

  • The Print

Congress often takes position that benefits China instead of India: BJP

Congress general secretary, communications, Jairam Ramesh, said Deputy Chief of Army Staff (Capability Development and Sustenance) Lieutenant General Rahul R Singh has publicly confirmed what has been talked about ever since Operation Sindoor was halted abruptly at US President Donald Trump's intervention. This came after the Congress earlier said the Narendra Modi government must agree to a discussion on India-China relations in Parliament so that a consensus can be built for a collective response to the geopolitical and economic challenges that the neighbouring country poses to India, directly and through Pakistan. New Delhi, Jul 4 (PTI) The BJP on Friday hit out at the Congress, alleging that the party has time and again taken positions that benefit China instead of India. 'Lt Gen Singh has revealed some details of the extraordinary ways by which China helped the Pakistan Air Force. This is the same China, which completely destroyed the status quo in Ladakh five years ago but to which Prime Minister Modi gave a public clean chit on June 19, 2020,' Ramesh said in a post on X. Reacting sharply to Ramesh's remarks, BJP IT department head Amit Malviya said if China is using Pakistan to destabilise India, the Congress has only made that job easier by weakening the nation's internal unity and international credibility. 'If China is arming Pakistan and using it as a testing ground for its military hardware, it raises a serious question. Why has the Congress party consistently promoted narratives that weaken India's position against China?' he said in a post on X. India needs leadership that prioritises national interest, protects sovereignty and remains uncompromised in its loyalty to the country, the BJP leader said. Malviya alleged the Congress has time and again taken positions that benefit China instead of India. 'Whether in public statements, foreign interactions or institutional decisions, their approach has been weak, ambiguous and compromised,' he charged. Malviya alleged that Congress leader Rahul Gandhi attacked the Indian government after the clash in Galwan instead of backing the Indian Army and repeated China's false claims. 'His statement that 'China has taken our land' was used by the Chinese state media to justify their aggression,' he said. The BJP leader alleged that during a 'tense standoff' at Doklam in 2017, Gandhi 'quietly' met with the Chinese officials at the Chinese Embassy in Delhi and no 'justification or explanation' was ever given to the people of India. 'When the government took firm action to ban Chinese apps like TikTok and PUBG, the Congress leaders opposed the decision. They called it emotional and reactionary despite clear evidence that these platforms were used to collect the Indian data and strengthen China's digital reach,' Malviya said. 'When the Chinese companies were exposed for funding proxies and engaging in surveillance, the Congress party chose to remain silent. Their close links with these interests raise serious concerns,' he added. Malviya alleged that Rahul Gandhi and the Congress signed a 'secret' memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the Chinese Communist Party in Beijing in 2018. The contents of this agreement have never been disclosed to the people of India, he said, asking the Congress, 'What was agreed upon and why the secrecy?' The BJP leader alleged that the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation, 'controlled by the Gandhi family', received donations from the Chinese government and its embassy. 'This is a direct conflict of interest and poses a threat to India's national security,' he said. PTI PK AS AS This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.

1993 serial blasts: Bombay HC says Abu Salem's 25-year jail term prima facie not over yet
1993 serial blasts: Bombay HC says Abu Salem's 25-year jail term prima facie not over yet

Indian Express

timean hour ago

  • Indian Express

1993 serial blasts: Bombay HC says Abu Salem's 25-year jail term prima facie not over yet

The Bombay High Court on Monday prima facie observed that gangster Abu Salem, who has been sentenced to life imprisonment in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts case, has not completed 25 years of incarceration to qualify for remission of his sentence. Salem has claimed that he has completed nearly 25 years in prison as per extradition treaty between India and Portugal and therefore he should be given a tentative date of release from jail. The HC admitted Salem's plea seeking remission and premature release from jail argued through senior advocate Rishi Malhotra and advocate Farhana Shah 'As per the Supreme Court judgment, it is recorded that the date of arrest is October 12, 2005. On completion of 25 years of incarceration, the central government is bound to exercise the powers of remission and release the applicant. Prima facie, it is clear that the 25 years of incarceration is yet to be completed,' a bench of Justices Ajey S Gadkari and Rajesh S Patil observed and admitted the plea. Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh for Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) sought dismissal of Salem's plea stating that honouring the 25-year period mentioned in assurance will arise only when the 25 years were to expire, which will happen on November 10, 2030. The MHA said that it would abide by the period of 25 years at an appropriate time subject to remedies, which may be available. Salem, who was transferred from Taloja Central Prison in Navi Mumbai to Nashik Central Prison last year, was extradited to India from Portugal on November 11, 2005. He was placed under arrest on November 24, 2005, and subsequently tried for the offences he had been charged with. In September 2017, Salem was convicted in the Mumbai serial blasts case. Two years earlier, in 2015, he had been sentenced to life imprisonment for the 1995 murder of Mumbai-based builder Pradeep Jain. On July 11, 2022, the Supreme Court observed that the central government was bound to advise the President to exercise his powers of remission to release Salem after he completes 25 years in prison, in accordance with the sovereign assurance given by the Indian government to Portugal at the time of his extradition. However, the court declined to extend any special privilege to commute or restrict the sentence imposed on him. In October last year, Salem argued before the special court designated under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) that he had neared 25-year term and same included time spent as an undertrial and later as a convict, along with nearly three years of remission he was entitled to under prison rules. In December, 2024, the special court rejected Salem's claim, after which he approached the High Court. The MHA's affidavit in response stated that the plea was 'entirely misconceived, baseless and is based on a misplaced understanding of law'. The Centre further said that the petitioner should approach the SC for further clarification as it would be the appropriate forum. The MHA said that the petitioner's calculation was 'not correct' and he has 'attempted to combine two separate conviction periods undergone in separate cases to arrive at a conclusion' that he completed a conviction period of 24 years and nine months on December 31, 2024. However, the MHA in its May, 2025 affidavit claimed that till March 31, 2025 he had served 19 years, 5 months and 21 days. The HC will hear the plea in due course.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store