[quote author=SpiralArchitect link=topic=83264.msg520099#msg520099 date=1378750843]
A relic of the colonial times. It was only to be expected that they'd change the name after a while. I don't mind it either ways.
[/quote]
I don't care either, but you would notice that a lot of people still call it Bombay.
Quote:Same thing. Just like Bangalore to Bengaluru. Assam to Asom Orissa to Odisha Calcutta to Kolkata
90% of Indians are uneducated, so politicians can easily fool them through these tactics. You will find that most of these "renamings" has taken place just days before state or central elections.
But educated people find this extremely irritating. Just take a look at any popular English language newspaper in India. They always use Assam, Orissa, Calcutta.etc.
For Chennai and Mumbai it is different story. Both these cities are inhabited by xenophobic people (Tamils and Marathis) respectively, who will burn down news paper offices just for using the old name.
90% of Indians are uneducated, so politicians can easily fool them through these tactics. You will find that most of these "renamings" has taken place just days before state or central elections.
But educated people find this extremely irritating. Just take a look at any popular English language newspaper in India. They always use Assam, Orissa, Calcutta.etc.
For Chennai and Mumbai it is different story. Both these cities are inhabited by xenophobic people (Tamils and Marathis) respectively, who will burn down news paper offices just for using the old name.
[/quote] You are wrong mate . Why should Indian cities retain the names of that the british colonials and occupiers conferred upon them? . It is time that the cities revert back to their original names
You sound rather elitist . Could it be that the Tamils and Marathi's that you cavalierly referred to are dark skinned southerners and that you are a fair skinned northerner?
Quote:You are wrong mate . Why should Indian cities retain the names of that the british colonials and occupiers conferred upon them? . It is time that the cities revert back to their original names
Hmm..... Many of these cities were founded by the British. For example, the name "Chennai" refers to a village which once existed a few miles away from the British garrison of Madras (founded in 1639). It has no relation with Madras. But Tamils get irked by non-Tamil names and they wanted to change the name. But still, why rename a city that was known as "Madras" for the last 370+ years? It was never known as Chennai. Chennai is actually a different place.
Quote:You sound rather elitist . Could it be that the Tamils and Marathi's that you cavalierly referred to are dark skinned southerners and that you are a fair skinned northerner?
Hmm.... I am a South Indian.
Tamils are South Indian. Classification of Marathis is complex. The British census takers classified them as South Indian, but they now claim as North Indian.
And color of skin depends more on caste, rather than geographical location. Forward caste Hindus and Muslims are mostly fair skinned, while the lower castes are dark skinned. FCs in South India are only some 5% or so, while the figure reaches 30-35% in the North.
[quote author=vest007 link=topic=83264.msg520486#msg520486 date=1378955313]
For Chennai and Mumbai it is different story. Both these cities are inhabited by xenophobic people (Tamils and Marathis) respectively, who will burn down news paper offices just for using the old name.
[/quote]
No they won't. What an ignorant thing to say.
One of 6 original Indian Institutes of Technology (considered one of country's best engineering colleges) is in Mumbai and it's called IIT-Bombay. Hasn't been burned down last I heard.
...and I live in Pune right now (close to Mumbai, same state, Marathi people) and I am not marathi neither can I speak the language. Never been troubled.