Should India be separated from "Asia" and categorized as their own?

印度应该从“亚洲”中脱离出来，自立门户吗？

以下是Quora网友的评论：

Prottay M. Adhikari

Why though?

This idea sounds like a solution in search of a problem.

Continenthood means very little in terms of politics, economics, or military policymaking. It is mostly

我想知道为啥？

这个想法听起来像是吃饱了撑的。

大陆地位在政治、经济或军事决策方面意义不大。大部分只是：

Memberships to certain transnational groups like ASEAN and SAARC (both of which represent further fractions of Asian nations, and can sustain themselves with or without the broader Asian identity)

Connection to economic organizations such as ADB.

Access to ceremonious events such as Asian games.

拥有某些跨国组织的会员资格，如东盟和南盟(这两个组织都代表了亚洲国家的一部分，无论是否具有更广泛的亚洲身份，它们都可以维持自己的地位)。

建立和亚洲发展银行等经济组织的关系。

有资格参加亚运会等大型活动。

Continenthood — as it stands today — is broadly superficial. Nothing is to be gained by granting India a novel continenthood.

Don’t get me wrong. I read through Balaji’s well thought-out answer, and agreed with his narrative in places (especially the latent Eurocentrism that is a dormant sentiment in the current construct of continents). But, I am still not convinced about India’s recognition as a ‘continent’.

大陆地位——就目前的情况而言——基本只是浮于表面。给印度一个新的大陆地位也没有什么实际好处。

别误会我的意思。我通读过Balaji深思熟虑的回答，在某些方面我认同他的说法，尤其是蠢蠢欲动的欧洲中心主义。但我不认为印度可以独立成为一块 “大陆”。

It does make a lot of cultural, geographical, and demographic sense to separate India from some of the other Asian countries, i.e. China, Korea, etc.

But, if we create India - the continent, it will give rise to newer questions:

Where would Pakistan go? Will they be comfortable being part of India-the continent?

Bangladesh? Sri Lanka? Myanmar? Would they be comfortable being part of India-the continent?

Middle-eastern countries have a culture distinct from Chinese, Japanese, Central-asian, and Indian cultures. Shall we grant continenthood to middle-eastern countries as well?

把印度和亚洲某些国家（如中国、韩国等）区分开来，在文化、地理和人口统计学上确实有很大意义。

但是，如果我们把印度独立成一块大陆，就会产生新的问题:

巴基斯坦将何去何从？他们愿意成为印度大陆的一部分吗？

孟加拉国呢？斯里兰卡呢？缅甸呢？他们愿意成为印度大陆的一部分吗？

中东国家的文化与中国、日本、中亚和印度文化截然不同。我们是否也应该给予中东国家大陆地位？

So, where do we stop?

Is there a reasonable finish line?

Now, a pragmatic compromise can be to follow Huntington’s civilizational construct to redraw the boundaries of ‘continents’.

那么，我们该何时叫停？

有没有一条合理的红线？

所以，务实一点的话，我们可以遵循亨廷顿的文明结构来重新划定“大陆”的边界。

This proposal of continenthood— being rooted entirely on culture, does not care for where the continental plates are, or how international boundaries are currently drawn. In this construct, Pakistan would definitely allign itself with the Islamic continent instead of Indian continent. But, with the geographical constraints (e.g. the exstence of the Atlantic ocean)— it is difficult to sustain this model.

Hence, the best possible solution is to keep the construct of continenthood as it is. The world has bigger problems at hand.

这个关于大陆地位的建议——完全关注于文化——不关心大陆板块的位置，也不关心目前国际边界的划定。按这个设想，巴基斯坦肯定会与伊 斯兰大陆结盟，而非印度大陆。但是，由于地理限制，例如大西洋的存在，这种设想很难维系。

所以，最好的解决方案是保持目前的大陆结构不变，地球还有更大的问题要操心呢。

Balaji Viswanathan

Yes, there is no point in counting India in Asia either through culture, geography, history or ethnicity.

India sits in its own continental plate and has a distinct culture. It has not ruled East Asia nor ruled by it. It is larger than Europe in population and it is plain Euro-centrism to see Europe as distinct from Asia [when they are a part of the same continental plate], but India as a part of Asia. India would satisfy every criteria to be a continent - large population [larger than other continents], separate continental plate, distinct cultural & linguistic groups and so on.

是的，从文化、地理、历史或种族的角度来定义印度在亚洲的地位是没有意义的。

印度位于自己的大陆板块，拥有独特的文化。印度既没有一统东亚，也没有被东亚统治。印度的人口比欧洲多，把欧洲与亚洲区别开来，并把印度视为亚洲的一部分，显然是欧洲中心主义。印度满足一个大陆的所有标准——人口多(比其他大陆都要多)、独立的大陆板块、独特的文化和语言等等。

Source: NASA. The Indian Plate.

来源：美国国家航空航天局拍摄的印度板块。

The Americans are often using the correct terminology by calling out the Asians, Indians and the Arabs distinctly [all of these are separate plates and separate cultural groups]. In UK, also this distinction is more common. I guess it is just a matter of being exposed to more of outside world.

美国人会用正确的术语区分亚洲人、印度人和阿拉伯人(这些都分属不同的板块和文化群体)。英国人对这种区别更为认可。我想这只是打交道的多少问题。

Nitin Kumar

India is a diverse and culturally rich country that occupies a significant portion of the Asian continent. While India has a distinct identity, the question of whether it should be separated from Asia and considered a separate entity is a complex and contentious issue.

Geographically, India is not an isolated landmass but is connected to other countries in South Asia and beyond. Separating it from Asia would not only result in a significant geographical dislocation but also have far-reaching economic consequences, as India benefits from being part of a larger regional economy.

印度是一个非常多元化、文化丰富的国家，是亚洲大陆的重大组成部分。虽然印度十分独特，但要不要从亚洲分离出来，作为一个独立的实体，这是一个既复杂又有争议的问题。

在地理上说，印度不是一块孤立的大陆，印度与南亚和其他地区的其他国家接壤。将印度从亚洲分离出去，不仅会导致严重的地理错位，还会产生深远的经济影响，因为印度作为大区域经济的一部分受益更多。

Furthermore, the historical and cultural links between India and other Asian countries are undeniable. Separating India from Asia would not only lead to a loss of cultural heritage but also potentially damage diplomatic ties with other Asian nations.

However, some proponents of the idea argue that India should be considered a separate entity because of its vast population and unique cultural identity. But, categorizing India as a separate region would do little to address the domestic issues facing the country, such as poverty, political instability, and regional conflicts.

此外，印度与其他亚洲国家之间的历史和文化联系是不可否认的。将印度从亚洲分离出去不仅会导致文化遗产的流失，还可能损害印度与其他亚洲国家的外交关系。

不过持有该想法的一些支持者认为，应该把印度看做一个独立的实体，因为印度拥有庞大的人口和独特的文化。但是，将印度单独划区无助于解决该国面临的国内问题，如贫困、政治动荡和地区冲突。

Therefore, while India has a unique identity and rich cultural heritage, separating it from Asia would not be practical or advisable. Instead, India should work towards fostering closer ties with its Asian neighbors while preserving and promoting its distinct cultural identity.

因此，尽管印度拥有独特、丰富的文化遗产，但将其与亚洲分开是不现实的，也是不可取的做法。相反，印度应该努力与亚洲邻国建立更为紧密的关系，同时保护和促进其独特的文化特征。

Bibek Das

What's the point in that? Not that it will affect the source of income. India is a part of Asia and must be. You see Asia is a large continent and in case India separates and something like Asian Union (Similar to European union) forms it will be a loss for ROI since they cannot enjoy the advantage. Beside Middle East and Russia (most of it) is also part of Asia even without sharing any common East Asian culture. Be proud to be the part of such a huge continent… Asia!

这么做的意义何在？又没有经济利益。印度是亚洲的一部分，而且必须作为亚洲的一部分。亚洲是一块很大的大陆，如果把印度分出去，打造亚洲联盟(类似于欧盟)，那会导致投资回报率的损失。中东和俄罗斯(大部分)也是亚洲的一部分，也并没有共同的东亚文化。我为自己属于亚洲这样大的一块大陆而自豪！

Kriteesh Parashar

When we identify ourselves as Asians or someone else does it for us, we must ask a simple question -

Is it something that we came up with? Did the people of this land consciously decided to identify themselves this way?

The terms - Asia, Libya, Near-east, Middle-East, Far-East, East are all Euro-centric. So much for self-importance that the Mediterranean Sea literally means “The sea of the middle earth”.

The Greenwich time, the world map as you see it everywhere are all legacies of such ideas.

当我们认同自己是亚洲人，或者别人认为我们是亚洲人时，我们必须问一个简单的问题——

亚不亚洲的是我们想出来吗？这片土地上的人们是有意决定自己的身份吗？

亚洲、利比亚、近东、中东、远东、东方这些说法都是以欧洲为中心而出现的。地中海的字面意思是“中土之海”。

还有格林威治时间，世界地图，全都是这种观念的产物。

We can and we should separate ourselves from such identifications. India is as big, as diverse and as populated as Europe is. If Europe is a continent, there is no reason why India is not. Europe has alps, India has Himalayas. Europe has Atlantic, India has Indian Ocean.

We can’t control how others identify us. But we can definitely shed such denominations from our side.

我们可以、也应该把自己从这种认同中脱离出来。印度和欧洲一样大，一样多样化，一样人口稠密。如果欧洲是一个大陆，那么印度没有理由不能成为大陆。欧洲有阿尔卑斯山，印度有喜马拉雅山。欧洲有大西洋，印度有印度洋。

我们无法控制别人对我们的看法。但我们绝对可以自己摒弃这种命名。

Srajal Tiwari

I think the classification as Asian Indian serves to separate Indians from Asia from Amerindians (Native American Indians). Besides, let’s not forget that Indians and East Asians are from the same continent originally, so that makes them both Asians.

我认为亚洲印度人这个称呼为了将亚洲的印度人和美洲印第安人（美洲土著印第安人）区分开来。我们别忘了印度人和东亚人最早来自同一个大陆，所以他们都是亚洲人。

Sankhadeep Burman

Your question though interesting but is vague.

Asia does not mean anything to India in the first place. It is only a terminology used to classify a vast area of land.

你的问题虽然很有趣，但让人摸不着头脑。

首先，亚洲对印度来说并不意味着什么。它只是对大片土地进行分类的一种说法。

India does not have that much area to be classified as a continent in the first place.

It is not mandatory how populous that area of land is.

Cultural differences? For that we have the term country and a continent does not signify it. For example Ukraine and Russia both speak Russian but do we consider them as a whole? No. They have cultural differences, hence ideological and social differences and that is why they are two separate countries. But they are of the same continent because they are part of the same big land mass surrounded by water.

首先，印度并不拥有面积大到可以被划定为大陆的土地。

这片土地的人口多少并没有定数。

文化差异？所以我们创建了国家这个称谓，而大陆并不等同于国家。例如，乌克兰和俄罗斯都说俄语，但我们会把这两个国家视为一个整体吗？不。他们也有文化差异，所以意识形态和社会差异让他们成为两个不同的国家。但它们同属一块大陆，他们都被大洋包围的同一大块陆地上的一部分。

And go by definition - “continents are understood to be large, continuous, discrete masses of land, ideally separated by expanses of water.”

India is already termed as a subcontinent. Because it is largely distinguishable among other sectors of Asia. It’s culture and society does not go with the Chinese or the Russian or the Arabs.

根据定义——“大陆被认为是大片连续的、离散的陆地，理想情况下会被广阔的水域隔开。”

印度被称为次大陆，因为它与亚洲其他地区有很多不同之处。印度的文化和社会与中国人、俄罗斯人或阿拉伯人完全不同。

Gunjan Gupta

India is a country that is located in South Asia and is commonly recognized as part of the continent of Asia. From a geographic and cultural perspective, India is closely linked to the other countries of South Asia such as Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka, and therefore it is not necessary to separate India from Asia and categorize it as its own entity.

印度是一个位于南亚的国家，通常被认为是亚洲大陆的一部分。从地理和文化的角度来看，印度与巴基斯坦、孟加拉国、尼泊尔和斯里兰卡等南亚其他国家密切相关，因此没有必要将印度从亚洲脱离出来，划定为一个独立的实体。

While India does have its unique history, culture, and traditions, it is also connected to the wider Asian region through trade, migration, and cultural exchange. Additionally, separating India from Asia may create unnecessary divisions and could lead to a lack of recognition of the country's interconnectivity with the rest of the region.

It is worth noting that geographical and cultural categorization can be subjective and context-dependent, and different perspectives may exst on this matter. However, from a practical and historical standpoint, it is more appropriate to consider India as part of the broader Asian continent

虽然印度有着独特的历史、文化和传统，但它也通过贸易、移民和文化交流与亚洲其他地区紧密联系在一起。此外，将印度从亚洲分离出去可能会造成不必要的割裂，让人们忘记了对印度与亚洲其他国家的关联。

我们要明白，地理和文化的分类是主观的，跟环境相关的，不同的人会有不同的观点。但从现实和历史的角度来看，将印度视为亚洲大陆的一部分更为合适。

Sindhu Mahadevan

Continents are not a political/ethical or regional delineation.

It is a geographical delineation. So yes, whole Indians should not be ethically grouped with a lot of Asian cultures due to the mentioned reasons....the Continent we are a part of is fine.

各个大陆并不是通过政治/民族或地区划分的。

大陆只是一种地理上的划定。所以，是的，由于上述原因，不应该把印度人与亚洲文化区分开....我们印度属于亚洲，这没毛病。

继续阅读：亚洲   大陆   印度大陆   板块

此文由 三泰虎 编辑，未经允许不得转载！：首页 > 问答 » 印度应该从“亚洲”中脱离出来，自立门户吗