Talk:Greater India
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Jldoan96.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Aren't the South East Asian countries historically called Indo-China, which means the area was influenced by both Indian and Chinese cultures? In fact, it is known that Vietnam, Siam used to have the unified Indo-China vision.
In addition, it seems Buddhism has died off in India, whereas the East Asians (Notably Chinese Japanese Koreans) and South East Asians are still believing in it. As I recall, Buddhism is one key characteristics of the East Asian Culture. So it seems strange to me to put South East Asian countries into this so-called "Greater India" but not East Asian countries. I imagine in history, the states must be very different from now. So I even suspect if there still exist cultural correlation between India and the southeast Asia communities, as you know Buddhism has disappeared in modern India. aichi Lee 18:51, 5 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aichilee (talk • contribs)
I agree. This article is full of original research and reeks of Indian nationalism bias. Although Buddhism/Hinduism flourished at SEA at that time, the kingdoms of the Indian subcontinent did not have overlordship on the SEA kingdoms e.g Srivijaya and Majapahit. Modern Malaysia and Singapore are now predominantly Muslim, are they part of the Arab world? Adding an NPOV tag on page heading. Arif920629 (talk) 18:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
They were called Indo-China as a geographical term more so than cultural, although both were true, the first to call it that were doing so because it lied between the Indian and Chinese realms. Once again I will lay out the reasons why these arguments of 'Indian propaganda' are pretty strange considering we have physical evidence that was actually found by British archaeologists who were the ones interested in discovering this stuff. It's fascinating from a historical/anthropological perspective, and I think it says a lot about some insecure people who can't handle that, yes, in fact, there are cultural influences in your nation that aren't yours. In fact the Indians themselves are the result of the Aryan migration from central Asia. Pretty much all places have had foreign cultures leave their mark.Read my other responses in this thread to get a more in depth response to why this article isn't just 'Indian propaganda' and rather a dimension to the regional diffusion of ties.