The Continental Divide

Let's start with North and South America. Two continents separated by a small country called Panama. It also so happens to be halved by the Panama Canal; although I don't know for sure they were separated before or after the Canal was built, so there is a case for a continent not necessarily being separated from others by water. But if Panama's canal divides North and South America, then what continent is Panama technically in? If it is one and not the other, how can that be? Unless we change Panama to be North Panama and South Panama, two separate countries. Or is it both? If we can have dual citizenships, why can’t countries have dual continentship? (Yes, that’s a new word, according to the Book of LaFever).

I mean hell, North and South Vietnam, and North and South Korea are separate countries, but aren't separated by water. It certainly would be a first to have a country split in two, not just because of the Canal that runs through it, but because it also separates two continents! You heard it here first, folks, and that goes for Webster’s son-to-be new addition to its text - continentship.Here's another. We have the European continent, which includes Russia, also known as Eastern Europe, technically speaking, but most don't refer to it as that. Maybe we could call Russia, the North East, because that's what they are. Actually, they cross half way over, so Northeast would be considered a misnomer. We have the Middle East. Then there’s the Far East, and then Southeast Asia. Although Japan is farther south than Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Myanmar, etc., which are the ones considered Southeast Asia, but Japan is considered just Far East. Geographically, that is correct because it is farther east than the Southeast countries. How about the Philippines? Are they Far East, or Southeast Asia? I consider them Southeast. Russia is over Asia and beside Europe. Why is Russia considered Europe and not Asia? Because Russians are not Asian. Duh! Another example of two continents NOT separated by water.

Back to the Middle and Far East. Now I've had this argument with a former associate from Pakistan and my neighbor, who thought he was a geographical expert because world maps and atlases were a hobby of his. But if you hear me out, while you may not agree, you have to admit it, does makes sense. And that’s what LaFever is all about. Pointing out alternatives to the norm that make sense, and hopefully changing history in the process.

Ok, I know Pakistan, to some people, and most Pakistanis, is considered Far East. And so do atlases and maps. I don't and here's why. I also don't consider India the Far East, as well, which many might think is stretching a bit far. But if you think about it, Pakistan is above and to the left of India. Pakistan's neighbors are Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan. I classify Pakistan as Middle East, along with the others. Looks aren't everything, but in this case, a big part, along with their faith, which is Muslim, and their geographical location. There's 3 different reasons right there. And how about this: Pakistan is an acronym for the regions coined in 1933, 14 years before the country came into existence. Those regions are: Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir and Sind PAKS. A Cambridge student (Choudary Rahmat Ali) added the suffix “stan”, meaning “land of”, and threw in an extra “I” to make it easier to pronounce. So the “a” in Pakistan stands for Afghania. Sounds Middle Eastern to me.India on the other hand, has a mix of Hindu, Muslim, and Buddhism. We all know Buddhism is divided up into various sects throughout the Far East (Tibetan, Chan for the Chinese, and Shinto, Rinzai and Tendai for the Japanese), but the Hindu people are a completely different breed from Asian. If Buddhism is the only tie that connects it the Far East, it's because all of the Asian Buddhist sects started with a man named Boddhidarma, a Hindu priest, who ventured east and trained a sickly group of monks in China, who eventually came to be known as Shaolin.

So what would you call India? How about the Central East. If Pakistan wants to consider themselves Central East, fine. I still think they’re Middle East. Russia would go under North East. And the former Russian republics would go to Eastern Europe. Or, Europe, in general. India should go by just India. Russia doesn’t go by Europe, although that’s their region. India stands alone, not in the Asian region. Hell, they have their own ocean.


If it's all about geography, then it should be about where all of them are situated. Whatever religion or faith you are, or whatever country you're fighting with over borders, is a moot point (see Pakistan/India). Somewhere along the way, the continents were named as such for the regions that occupied them, and had to include them, so now those peoples lay claim to the continent’s name rather than the region’s name.Take Kashmir, for instance. Now there's a can of worms. Both Pakistan and India lay claim to it. And they've been fighting over it forever. But if you take out the faith and appearance factor, and concentrate on just its geographical location, where would you put it? Could it be Middle East - it's east of Pakistan. Could it be Central East - it's north of India. Could it be European - it's south of Europe. My god, what do we do with Kashmir? Sell it to the US?

And then there is African. Must be difficult to be known as African if you’re from Egypt, Libya or Morocco. Why is Libya considered Middle East when they’re in Africa?