A Muslim Pope?
Ras Siddiqui December 23, 2005
#655 Posted by MantoLives on January 2, 2006 11:33:02 pm
That last post was addressed to Hindvi.
Bolta aina,
So I am ``conservative`` because I don`t give into hogwash put up by feeble minded individuals? And you are a reformer, because you want to extend Indian government over Pakistan- an independent republic. I say that the world should move towards permeable borders and free trade and I am conservative... and you say that India should rule Pakistan and you are a ``reformer``...
Wonderful logic. Let me tell you... All that war talk is a waste. People like you won`t even muster enough support within your own people... just because a Salim Chauhan is playing with you on line- you think you will undo history. But if you are so hell bent on undoing history... how about you do undo other nation states of the world first... they are all accidents... all products of conquests, wars, divisions and ``mistakes``...
So it is about ``Goramasters``... but the identity the Mughals gave you or the Turks gave you or the Aryans gave you is ok with you. But Pakistan has a primordial identity. Indus has remained independent in history of the Ganges for all but 500 years in the last 5000 years... so what ``Hindustan`` and what ``identity``. Your identity is a concoction and a clever ruse to mask the Akhand Bharat fantasy of the Hindu nationalists.... thankfully even sane Indians don`t ascribe to such nonsense.
Bolta aina,
So I am ``conservative`` because I don`t give into hogwash put up by feeble minded individuals? And you are a reformer, because you want to extend Indian government over Pakistan- an independent republic. I say that the world should move towards permeable borders and free trade and I am conservative... and you say that India should rule Pakistan and you are a ``reformer``...
Wonderful logic. Let me tell you... All that war talk is a waste. People like you won`t even muster enough support within your own people... just because a Salim Chauhan is playing with you on line- you think you will undo history. But if you are so hell bent on undoing history... how about you do undo other nation states of the world first... they are all accidents... all products of conquests, wars, divisions and ``mistakes``...
So it is about ``Goramasters``... but the identity the Mughals gave you or the Turks gave you or the Aryans gave you is ok with you. But Pakistan has a primordial identity. Indus has remained independent in history of the Ganges for all but 500 years in the last 5000 years... so what ``Hindustan`` and what ``identity``. Your identity is a concoction and a clever ruse to mask the Akhand Bharat fantasy of the Hindu nationalists.... thankfully even sane Indians don`t ascribe to such nonsense.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#654 Posted by MantoLives on January 2, 2006 11:22:51 pm
Completely and totally disagreed.
Gandhi`s dictatorial tendencies in the Congress were far more pronounced. He famously said... ``when army marches, there is no democracy`` - this is to annul the election of this president or that president of the Congress. He was spiritual dictator who kept the Congress and the freedom movement hostage to his whims and desires.
Gandhi was singlehandedly responsible for bringing religion into politics... and the politics of reaction was a logical outcome. He encouraged the mullahs, the ulema, the pandits etc to join politics enmasse and make it a religious game. His personal sacrifice to remove the most ``egrarious aspects`` of the system, was in order to preserve a decaying inhuman system. The lower caste Hindus were not looking for small mercies or Mahatma to clean the toilets... they wanted their lot to be raised... the difference between Jinnah and Gandhi was always that one wanted to raise the level of all people, the other wanted to reduce the level of all people. Gandhi`s belief in caste system though was complete. He pleaded Varna Caste system to justify South African hierarchy (again his objection was not that Indians were considered inferior to the white people, but that Indians were not considered superior to the black people- his objection was not that he was not allowed to ride with white people in that infamous train- his objection was that he was made to travel with the black peopl).... He spoke of Indo-germanic stock.
Gandhi was a politician, machiavellian, brutal, scheming and corrupt. Of all the politicians who have come to this world, he stands amongst the worst... as for those who have donned that title, I think Ambedkar said it best, when he said that there isn`t a politician more deserving of the title incorruptible than Jinnah. Does that mean Jinnah did not make mistakes- ofcourse he did... but I am surprised why one must blame him, when the resolution on which the Pakistan movement was based argued very clearly for what we got. Ofcourse... Jinnah envisaged some kind of organic unity - but those efforts were poisoned by Gandhi and his cronies... who had to have all or nothing. This all or nothing was the corruption of Gandhi`s mind... we have blamed Nehru too often ... but it wasn`t Nehru- Nehru was a pawn who would have been replaced just like Azad or Bose from the earlier period... it was the spiritual dictator of Congress Mr Gandhi who was responsible... I don`t know if he regretted it later... but I think this is a logical conclusion any historian reading the facts of partition will ultimately draw.
-YLH
Gandhi`s dictatorial tendencies in the Congress were far more pronounced. He famously said... ``when army marches, there is no democracy`` - this is to annul the election of this president or that president of the Congress. He was spiritual dictator who kept the Congress and the freedom movement hostage to his whims and desires.
Gandhi was singlehandedly responsible for bringing religion into politics... and the politics of reaction was a logical outcome. He encouraged the mullahs, the ulema, the pandits etc to join politics enmasse and make it a religious game. His personal sacrifice to remove the most ``egrarious aspects`` of the system, was in order to preserve a decaying inhuman system. The lower caste Hindus were not looking for small mercies or Mahatma to clean the toilets... they wanted their lot to be raised... the difference between Jinnah and Gandhi was always that one wanted to raise the level of all people, the other wanted to reduce the level of all people. Gandhi`s belief in caste system though was complete. He pleaded Varna Caste system to justify South African hierarchy (again his objection was not that Indians were considered inferior to the white people, but that Indians were not considered superior to the black people- his objection was not that he was not allowed to ride with white people in that infamous train- his objection was that he was made to travel with the black peopl).... He spoke of Indo-germanic stock.
Gandhi was a politician, machiavellian, brutal, scheming and corrupt. Of all the politicians who have come to this world, he stands amongst the worst... as for those who have donned that title, I think Ambedkar said it best, when he said that there isn`t a politician more deserving of the title incorruptible than Jinnah. Does that mean Jinnah did not make mistakes- ofcourse he did... but I am surprised why one must blame him, when the resolution on which the Pakistan movement was based argued very clearly for what we got. Ofcourse... Jinnah envisaged some kind of organic unity - but those efforts were poisoned by Gandhi and his cronies... who had to have all or nothing. This all or nothing was the corruption of Gandhi`s mind... we have blamed Nehru too often ... but it wasn`t Nehru- Nehru was a pawn who would have been replaced just like Azad or Bose from the earlier period... it was the spiritual dictator of Congress Mr Gandhi who was responsible... I don`t know if he regretted it later... but I think this is a logical conclusion any historian reading the facts of partition will ultimately draw.
-YLH
#653 Posted by bolta_aaina on January 2, 2006 11:11:51 pm
#602 MANTO
``Bolta Aaina,
My contention is that Pakistan is an independent republic... and I am a Pakistani and India has always been a foreign country to me since I was born a Pakistani.
Let me make it abundantly clear... I am not a Hindustani ... to me being called anything other than a Pakistani is tantamount to the rejection of my existence, identity and humanity. The very fact that you can`t respect this is indicative of the lack of the third in you... And with the last out of the picture, nothing will stop me from spilling as much as blood as you can imagine... I don`t want your capital... I don`t want anything to do with you. I responded to you in 367 as well....
So set better targets for yourself... nation states are formed all over the world... no need to redraw borders... because any attempt to do so will be done on millions of dead bodies- I assure you of this. ``
Manto, I cant understand in which fantasyland you live, citizen of which dreamworld you are. You are clinging to false identities. Now tell me what are these identities Indian, Pakistanis, Hindus, Muslims are worth today. DO KODI KI BHI KIMAT NAHI HAI INKI. But we are proud of them. Because they have been given by our Gora Masters. They know and call us by these names so we are happy. Tommorrow if they start calling us Tommy, we will be too happy because ultimately this identity has been given to us by THEM. We ourselves are too fools , too incapable to identity ourselves in the way we want us to be.
Fortunately, all people on both the sides of the border are not like you. They are now understanding the gameplan of the Goras and have started asserting themselves.
What does a Pakistani stand for today. He stands for a person dying out of cold in Kashmir and there is nobody to help him. All the mega foreign assistance is a bullshit. It is not going to come. Kashmir will be another Sudan where these Goras will every now and then stand before their TV Cameras and report how heavenly they are and how fools others are.
Similarly for an Indian. He is nothing more than a limping moron who is to be shoulder carried to glory, if any. Otherwise, he will be lost in the jungles.
With the growth of communication technology, internet etc., people of both sides of the border are coming closer and are realising that we have been taken for a ride. You may be a proud Pakistani or somebody may call himself a proud Indian, but I, like many, reject these identities. We are neither Pakistanis nor Indians, we are simply Hindustanis. And why Hindustanis?? Why not Angels?? Because Hindustani is the identity given to us by our beloved ancestors. They called themselves Hindustanis. Such a beautiful word. And they called this land Hindustan. We are going back to our roots. NOBODY CAN STOP US. Our ancestors are exhorting us from their gravaes that Sons, break this artificial arrangements. This is not what you are. You are what we were. Listen to us--dont listen to the outsiders. AND WE ARE LISTENING TO THEM. But if you have shut your ears with western earplugs, then it is you who is mistaken and not we. Or we if want us to believe that all our ancestors were wrong and only one of them was right, then we are not going to buy that argument. We are not against Jinnah Sahib, he remains our elder and fatherly figure, but this division what he has given us is simply not acceptable to us.If Jinnah Sahib is listening somewhere, then let it be known to him that we are simply getting suffocated, getting choked because of his this division of people, hearts, minds and souls.
Manto, you think that every matter between human beings can be resolved through WAR. This is your biggest mistake. Drop this idea. War does not solve any thing. It only increases the miseries of both the victor and the vanquished. We talk of peace, love and brotherhood.
Bur still if you insist for a war, we will accept it..though with a heavy heart. But it is not going to be a Hindu-Muslim or India-Pakistan War. It will be between Reformers,like us and the Conservatives, like you. Either we will win or we will lose but you will be responsible for death and destruction, not we.
``Bolta Aaina,
My contention is that Pakistan is an independent republic... and I am a Pakistani and India has always been a foreign country to me since I was born a Pakistani.
Let me make it abundantly clear... I am not a Hindustani ... to me being called anything other than a Pakistani is tantamount to the rejection of my existence, identity and humanity. The very fact that you can`t respect this is indicative of the lack of the third in you... And with the last out of the picture, nothing will stop me from spilling as much as blood as you can imagine... I don`t want your capital... I don`t want anything to do with you. I responded to you in 367 as well....
So set better targets for yourself... nation states are formed all over the world... no need to redraw borders... because any attempt to do so will be done on millions of dead bodies- I assure you of this. ``
Manto, I cant understand in which fantasyland you live, citizen of which dreamworld you are. You are clinging to false identities. Now tell me what are these identities Indian, Pakistanis, Hindus, Muslims are worth today. DO KODI KI BHI KIMAT NAHI HAI INKI. But we are proud of them. Because they have been given by our Gora Masters. They know and call us by these names so we are happy. Tommorrow if they start calling us Tommy, we will be too happy because ultimately this identity has been given to us by THEM. We ourselves are too fools , too incapable to identity ourselves in the way we want us to be.
Fortunately, all people on both the sides of the border are not like you. They are now understanding the gameplan of the Goras and have started asserting themselves.
What does a Pakistani stand for today. He stands for a person dying out of cold in Kashmir and there is nobody to help him. All the mega foreign assistance is a bullshit. It is not going to come. Kashmir will be another Sudan where these Goras will every now and then stand before their TV Cameras and report how heavenly they are and how fools others are.
Similarly for an Indian. He is nothing more than a limping moron who is to be shoulder carried to glory, if any. Otherwise, he will be lost in the jungles.
With the growth of communication technology, internet etc., people of both sides of the border are coming closer and are realising that we have been taken for a ride. You may be a proud Pakistani or somebody may call himself a proud Indian, but I, like many, reject these identities. We are neither Pakistanis nor Indians, we are simply Hindustanis. And why Hindustanis?? Why not Angels?? Because Hindustani is the identity given to us by our beloved ancestors. They called themselves Hindustanis. Such a beautiful word. And they called this land Hindustan. We are going back to our roots. NOBODY CAN STOP US. Our ancestors are exhorting us from their gravaes that Sons, break this artificial arrangements. This is not what you are. You are what we were. Listen to us--dont listen to the outsiders. AND WE ARE LISTENING TO THEM. But if you have shut your ears with western earplugs, then it is you who is mistaken and not we. Or we if want us to believe that all our ancestors were wrong and only one of them was right, then we are not going to buy that argument. We are not against Jinnah Sahib, he remains our elder and fatherly figure, but this division what he has given us is simply not acceptable to us.If Jinnah Sahib is listening somewhere, then let it be known to him that we are simply getting suffocated, getting choked because of his this division of people, hearts, minds and souls.
Manto, you think that every matter between human beings can be resolved through WAR. This is your biggest mistake. Drop this idea. War does not solve any thing. It only increases the miseries of both the victor and the vanquished. We talk of peace, love and brotherhood.
Bur still if you insist for a war, we will accept it..though with a heavy heart. But it is not going to be a Hindu-Muslim or India-Pakistan War. It will be between Reformers,like us and the Conservatives, like you. Either we will win or we will lose but you will be responsible for death and destruction, not we.
#652 Posted by hindvi on January 2, 2006 10:57:12 pm
Manto
No Icon would stand upto close scrutiny, the masses may be unaware of it but most informed people know of Gandhi`s social conservatism, it was inevitable in a religious mindset, yet one must be aware that while he did not support abolishment of the caste system he did at great personal sacrifice and effort try to remove the most egregious aspects of that system. Your bringing forth his views on race was certainly an eyeopener, but considering he was born in 1869 and considering the situation of the blacks he encountered in south africa and the widespread racism there his views were not unsual. This is not a defence of him or his views but puting of things in the right perspective. every man has his positive and negative attributes and Gandhi certainly had huge positives, he always stood by moderation rather than radicalism, he stood for the preservation of life rather than the destruction, he always made an attempt to maintain peace between hindus and muslims and saved the lives of thousands of members of the other community.
it is also true that he was a religous hindu and he could have pursued a more secular and unifying strategy of national resistance and revival, it is true that he wanted to maintain hindu and muslim as seperate identities as he wanted to maintain each caste as seperate but that was an inevitable outcome of his religosity. atleast he didnt have the evil of violence and hatred that religion most often gives rise to. we can accuse him of being dictatorial within the congress but considering the power he wilded among the masses he was far less dictatorial than Jinnah was withinn the league. was he not as mindful of muslim political rightsa s he could be? certainly but was he as damaging as he could have been? far from it, ultimately it was Jinnah who betrayed the muslims, since it was he who campaigned and cajoled them for 10 long years into nominating him as their solesokesman and reassuring tham that he would protect their interests only to abandon them when push came to shove. it was not Gandhi`s responsibility, gandhi though can be blamed by the hindus who found themselves on the wrong side of the border on 15 august 1947.
If you have taken the highly negative view of gandhi in reponse to the indian denigration of jinnah than that its unfortunate for two wrongs dont make a right. Ultimately one has to bear in mind that Gandhi was a politician and his actions were calculated in that light. and one has to admit that he was far better than almost all who have donned that title
No Icon would stand upto close scrutiny, the masses may be unaware of it but most informed people know of Gandhi`s social conservatism, it was inevitable in a religious mindset, yet one must be aware that while he did not support abolishment of the caste system he did at great personal sacrifice and effort try to remove the most egregious aspects of that system. Your bringing forth his views on race was certainly an eyeopener, but considering he was born in 1869 and considering the situation of the blacks he encountered in south africa and the widespread racism there his views were not unsual. This is not a defence of him or his views but puting of things in the right perspective. every man has his positive and negative attributes and Gandhi certainly had huge positives, he always stood by moderation rather than radicalism, he stood for the preservation of life rather than the destruction, he always made an attempt to maintain peace between hindus and muslims and saved the lives of thousands of members of the other community.
it is also true that he was a religous hindu and he could have pursued a more secular and unifying strategy of national resistance and revival, it is true that he wanted to maintain hindu and muslim as seperate identities as he wanted to maintain each caste as seperate but that was an inevitable outcome of his religosity. atleast he didnt have the evil of violence and hatred that religion most often gives rise to. we can accuse him of being dictatorial within the congress but considering the power he wilded among the masses he was far less dictatorial than Jinnah was withinn the league. was he not as mindful of muslim political rightsa s he could be? certainly but was he as damaging as he could have been? far from it, ultimately it was Jinnah who betrayed the muslims, since it was he who campaigned and cajoled them for 10 long years into nominating him as their solesokesman and reassuring tham that he would protect their interests only to abandon them when push came to shove. it was not Gandhi`s responsibility, gandhi though can be blamed by the hindus who found themselves on the wrong side of the border on 15 august 1947.
If you have taken the highly negative view of gandhi in reponse to the indian denigration of jinnah than that its unfortunate for two wrongs dont make a right. Ultimately one has to bear in mind that Gandhi was a politician and his actions were calculated in that light. and one has to admit that he was far better than almost all who have donned that title
#651 Posted by MantoLives on January 2, 2006 9:43:24 pm
PS: Because the great ``Real`` democrat from India can`t digest that there might be people like myself and Aisha out there who would disagree with the hogwash that India has subjected the world to... we must be ``pretend democrats`` akin to a military dictator like ``Musharraf``....
And ofcourse ... there is a disclaimer... ``I don`t like RSS``... (read: I secretly admire them but don`t openly support them) ... but ``I hate Pakistan and Pakistanis too, especially those who disagree with my version of history and politics- because they are pretend democrats``...
And ofcourse ... there is a disclaimer... ``I don`t like RSS``... (read: I secretly admire them but don`t openly support them) ... but ``I hate Pakistan and Pakistanis too, especially those who disagree with my version of history and politics- because they are pretend democrats``...
#650 Posted by MantoLives on January 2, 2006 9:22:17 pm
Welcome back Upman7627... good to see you that you are still around and defending that racist casteist bigot called ``Mahatma`` Gandhi. Ofcourse you would not want to debate, because you can`t defend him... his collected works are there for all to read and find out what kind of a fraud the man really was...
Salim Chauhan,
Another poet (Zafar Ali Khan) wrote about Gandhi:
``Eik heen hain savarkar o Gandhi``
``Jhoot ka chalta hai ik Jhakkar, Makkar ki uthi hai ik Andhi``.
As for your post about ``Hindustan``... I could care less if ``Muslims`` ``Mughals`` or whoever invented the word. I could care less what ``United Muslim nation`` Pakistan has divided. I am saying something very simple. I am a Pakistani.. and you or anyone else try and change my status as a Pakistani, you will see how determined I am to remain a Pakistani.
Ranjit,
I have no delusions about Hinduism, grand religious invasions etc... all I am saying is learn to respect the fact that I am a Pakistani and I choose to remain a Pakistani. Learn to respect my identity... whatever Pakistan`s flaws... we will solve them.
Pakistan`s establishment might be all that and more... I certainly have written a lot about it... but does that mean that you take over Pakistan and make it part of a foreign country? I am afraid nothing justifies that... its like saying that Pakistani people are inherently inept - that they would not evolve a workable system eventually.. I am afraid I am not willing to buy such bullsh-t.
Yours sincerely
YLH
Salim Chauhan,
Another poet (Zafar Ali Khan) wrote about Gandhi:
``Eik heen hain savarkar o Gandhi``
``Jhoot ka chalta hai ik Jhakkar, Makkar ki uthi hai ik Andhi``.
As for your post about ``Hindustan``... I could care less if ``Muslims`` ``Mughals`` or whoever invented the word. I could care less what ``United Muslim nation`` Pakistan has divided. I am saying something very simple. I am a Pakistani.. and you or anyone else try and change my status as a Pakistani, you will see how determined I am to remain a Pakistani.
Ranjit,
I have no delusions about Hinduism, grand religious invasions etc... all I am saying is learn to respect the fact that I am a Pakistani and I choose to remain a Pakistani. Learn to respect my identity... whatever Pakistan`s flaws... we will solve them.
Pakistan`s establishment might be all that and more... I certainly have written a lot about it... but does that mean that you take over Pakistan and make it part of a foreign country? I am afraid nothing justifies that... its like saying that Pakistani people are inherently inept - that they would not evolve a workable system eventually.. I am afraid I am not willing to buy such bullsh-t.
Yours sincerely
YLH
#649 Posted by Behram1 on January 2, 2006 8:34:33 pm
Re #644
Dear ranjit:
Thank you for your comment.
My horizon is wide enough and Pakistan centric. First and foremost, Pakistan should benefit. Collaborating with India, at this juncture, is not suited for Pakistan. Being a broker is not what nations should be. Pakistanis are best served following China’s economic model of 10% economic growth for the last 25 years. India had barely 6% in the last 15 years. Besides, India’s concentration on IT is not at all suited for Pakistan, whereas China reliance on heavy manufacturing brought in huge FDI compared to what was brought into India.
Regardless, it is better to have a partner whom you can trust. India and Pakistan do not trust each other on anything. So why waste time on some wishful thinking?
Respectfully submitted,
Dear ranjit:
Thank you for your comment.
My horizon is wide enough and Pakistan centric. First and foremost, Pakistan should benefit. Collaborating with India, at this juncture, is not suited for Pakistan. Being a broker is not what nations should be. Pakistanis are best served following China’s economic model of 10% economic growth for the last 25 years. India had barely 6% in the last 15 years. Besides, India’s concentration on IT is not at all suited for Pakistan, whereas China reliance on heavy manufacturing brought in huge FDI compared to what was brought into India.
Regardless, it is better to have a partner whom you can trust. India and Pakistan do not trust each other on anything. So why waste time on some wishful thinking?
Respectfully submitted,
#648 Posted by anil on January 2, 2006 8:11:57 pm
#647:
Salim Sahib:
I meant the fire in the heart....
Anil Kapuria
Salim Sahib:
I meant the fire in the heart....
Anil Kapuria
#647 Posted by anil on January 2, 2006 8:09:03 pm
#634
Salim Sahib:
The younger generation must be impatient, as it has to catch up for the emtional bondage, and skewed value system of the elders. I support the impatient youth.
Your
{``How we get there is not as important as getting there, as long as it happens with peace and freedom.``}
and
``End justifies the means....`` Mao Tse Tung
are quite alike. Go lit the fire make it happen...... only youth can transform.... not status quo mullahs and pundits.
Anil Kapuria
Salim Sahib:
The younger generation must be impatient, as it has to catch up for the emtional bondage, and skewed value system of the elders. I support the impatient youth.
Your
{``How we get there is not as important as getting there, as long as it happens with peace and freedom.``}
and
``End justifies the means....`` Mao Tse Tung
are quite alike. Go lit the fire make it happen...... only youth can transform.... not status quo mullahs and pundits.
Anil Kapuria
#646 Posted by anil on January 2, 2006 8:08:46 pm
#634
Salim Sahib:
The younger generation must be impatient, as it has to catch up for the emtional bondage, and skewed value system of the elders. I support the impatient youth.
Your
{``How we get there is not as important as getting there, as long as it happens with peace and freedom.``}
and
``End justifies the means....`` Mao Tse Tung
are quite alike. Go lit the fire make it happen...... only youth can transform.... not status quo mullahs and pundits.
Anil Kapuria
Salim Sahib:
The younger generation must be impatient, as it has to catch up for the emtional bondage, and skewed value system of the elders. I support the impatient youth.
Your
{``How we get there is not as important as getting there, as long as it happens with peace and freedom.``}
and
``End justifies the means....`` Mao Tse Tung
are quite alike. Go lit the fire make it happen...... only youth can transform.... not status quo mullahs and pundits.
Anil Kapuria
#646 Posted by anil on January 2, 2006 8:08:47 pm
#634
Salim Sahib:
The younger generation must be impatient, as it has to catch up for the emtional bondage, and skewed value system of the elders. I support the impatient youth.
Your
{``How we get there is not as important as getting there, as long as it happens with peace and freedom.``}
and
``End justifies the means....`` Mao Tse Tung
are quite alike. Go lit the fire make it happen...... only youth can transform.... not status quo mullahs and pundits.
Anil Kapuria
Salim Sahib:
The younger generation must be impatient, as it has to catch up for the emtional bondage, and skewed value system of the elders. I support the impatient youth.
Your
{``How we get there is not as important as getting there, as long as it happens with peace and freedom.``}
and
``End justifies the means....`` Mao Tse Tung
are quite alike. Go lit the fire make it happen...... only youth can transform.... not status quo mullahs and pundits.
Anil Kapuria
#645 Posted by upman7626 on January 2, 2006 8:05:15 pm
hi sridhar
...thanks for the welcome, but it shd be welcome back ; ) ....i`ve been here quite a bit earlier and we`ve interacted before
...i`ve heard abt the movie and it promises to be a good one...anupam kher is a good actor and i still remeber being impressed by his first movie many years ago- the mahesh bhatt one....but i`ve been disappointed by his right wing political inclinations....i can understand career politicians and post-Godhra like goons parroting the RSS line; but it hurts when apparently sensitive individuals lend creibility to the same primitive ideas (however well packaged they may be as cultural nationalism or `chaal, charitra aur chintan` style talk)
..reg. arundhati roy (though her name is typical bengali after her father), she grew up in and identifies with her kerala christian upbringing- some RSS types have gotten wind of it and use it to attack her `anti-national` writings, though it was always in the open in GOST, if only they coudl get their noses out of Golwalker`s theses to read it...
..personally, i am more against the RSS type of politics in India than the elitism practised by the pretend democrats like manto/sarwari/musharraf in pakistan...its been pakistan`s fate that pretend democrats will pretend fight real army dictators, and all this will be witnessed by an elitist upper middle class who will show pretend anguish on the plight of the masses....the fact is (west) pakistan never got its hands dirty in real politics- the empowerment kind- starting right from Jinnah and down to pretend fights between various classes of elites.....the real action is in india, where democracy is always upsetting traditional equations -and perhaps was the real reason for partition- but still needs to rid itself of primitive ideologies that keep re-invigorating, like rajnath singh`s ascendancy into BJP`s presidency ousting a reformed advani..
...i guess this sounds liek a rant, but just got an occasion to ventilate on politics after some time ; )
..and a happy new year to all
...thanks for the welcome, but it shd be welcome back ; ) ....i`ve been here quite a bit earlier and we`ve interacted before
...i`ve heard abt the movie and it promises to be a good one...anupam kher is a good actor and i still remeber being impressed by his first movie many years ago- the mahesh bhatt one....but i`ve been disappointed by his right wing political inclinations....i can understand career politicians and post-Godhra like goons parroting the RSS line; but it hurts when apparently sensitive individuals lend creibility to the same primitive ideas (however well packaged they may be as cultural nationalism or `chaal, charitra aur chintan` style talk)
..reg. arundhati roy (though her name is typical bengali after her father), she grew up in and identifies with her kerala christian upbringing- some RSS types have gotten wind of it and use it to attack her `anti-national` writings, though it was always in the open in GOST, if only they coudl get their noses out of Golwalker`s theses to read it...
..personally, i am more against the RSS type of politics in India than the elitism practised by the pretend democrats like manto/sarwari/musharraf in pakistan...its been pakistan`s fate that pretend democrats will pretend fight real army dictators, and all this will be witnessed by an elitist upper middle class who will show pretend anguish on the plight of the masses....the fact is (west) pakistan never got its hands dirty in real politics- the empowerment kind- starting right from Jinnah and down to pretend fights between various classes of elites.....the real action is in india, where democracy is always upsetting traditional equations -and perhaps was the real reason for partition- but still needs to rid itself of primitive ideologies that keep re-invigorating, like rajnath singh`s ascendancy into BJP`s presidency ousting a reformed advani..
...i guess this sounds liek a rant, but just got an occasion to ventilate on politics after some time ; )
..and a happy new year to all
#644 Posted by Ranjit on January 2, 2006 7:08:21 pm
Re:behram1#642
Try to expand your horizons a bit. Pakistan can utilize its geo-strategic location to become a transit hub between India, Central Asia and Middle-east. Goods flowing both ways, oil and natural gas pipelines criss-crossing the region. Can you imagine that? That would be the new silk road. And guess who could benefit the most - Pakistan. The commissions on transit rights itself would generate billions in revenues and make tremendous impact on lives of ordinary people. By itself, Pakistan has little attraction for the Central Asian republics. They have been lukewam to your overtures. However, if India joins the picture, it will create a major earth-shaking impact in the region.
Try to expand your horizons a bit. Pakistan can utilize its geo-strategic location to become a transit hub between India, Central Asia and Middle-east. Goods flowing both ways, oil and natural gas pipelines criss-crossing the region. Can you imagine that? That would be the new silk road. And guess who could benefit the most - Pakistan. The commissions on transit rights itself would generate billions in revenues and make tremendous impact on lives of ordinary people. By itself, Pakistan has little attraction for the Central Asian republics. They have been lukewam to your overtures. However, if India joins the picture, it will create a major earth-shaking impact in the region.
#643 Posted by Ranjit on January 2, 2006 7:01:22 pm
Re:Salim_Chauhan #634
Salim bhai, Anil has actually made a very interesting point where he proposes the role of increased trade and media to break the Indo-Pak logjam. I think this is where mohajirs in Pakistan can make a tremendous impact in the near-term. Mohajirs can lobby the Pak government to maximize commercial relations with India including giving MFN status, transit rights to Afghanistan etc. and allow Indian media products like films, books, newspapers to be sold in Pakistan. Given their education status, influence in the business world and contacts in the Pak bureaucracy, mohajirs can become champions of increased commercial/media relations with India. Now the paki establishment is obsessed with Kashmir, but the mohajir community can fight to lower that obsession and channel people`s attention towards more productive options.
This could potentially alter the landscape for everyone without firing a shot. Imagine if Pakistan becomes a transit hub for goods and oil/natural gas back and forth between Central Asia/Middle-east and India. Mohajirs could actually become the liaison between the parties and lead the integration efforts. The economic benefits would greatly benefit them as well as muslims in India including Kashmiris. The punjoos cant say anything because it would actually benefit everyone, especially muslims. Once these kinds of ties develop, political changes will occur as a logical follow-up. This is quite a viable strategy i.e. Mohajirs becoming a leading voice for normalizaiton of relations with India and accelerating commercial ties.
Salim bhai, Anil has actually made a very interesting point where he proposes the role of increased trade and media to break the Indo-Pak logjam. I think this is where mohajirs in Pakistan can make a tremendous impact in the near-term. Mohajirs can lobby the Pak government to maximize commercial relations with India including giving MFN status, transit rights to Afghanistan etc. and allow Indian media products like films, books, newspapers to be sold in Pakistan. Given their education status, influence in the business world and contacts in the Pak bureaucracy, mohajirs can become champions of increased commercial/media relations with India. Now the paki establishment is obsessed with Kashmir, but the mohajir community can fight to lower that obsession and channel people`s attention towards more productive options.
This could potentially alter the landscape for everyone without firing a shot. Imagine if Pakistan becomes a transit hub for goods and oil/natural gas back and forth between Central Asia/Middle-east and India. Mohajirs could actually become the liaison between the parties and lead the integration efforts. The economic benefits would greatly benefit them as well as muslims in India including Kashmiris. The punjoos cant say anything because it would actually benefit everyone, especially muslims. Once these kinds of ties develop, political changes will occur as a logical follow-up. This is quite a viable strategy i.e. Mohajirs becoming a leading voice for normalizaiton of relations with India and accelerating commercial ties.
#642 Posted by Behram1 on January 2, 2006 6:44:12 pm
Even if there were friendly relation between the two nations an economic union would not benefit Pakistan. India and Pakistan has similar labor pool, and more of the same gets one nation nothing. Both nations work force is not complementary to each other. Pakistan’s economy should be developed according to Pakistan’s internal needs, which are primarily based on infrastructure development, such as roads, water treatment plants, refinery, and heavy industrials tied primarily towards the “stan” nations and the oil producing nations of the Middle East. We know that Pakistan’s economy is 10% of India’s economy. Also, there is a huge dislocation happening everywhere in the developing world. People from rural areas are moving in to urban centers. For a long time, Pakistani cities have been ill equipped to handle this mass dislocations, and as such ethnic tensions have been created. Politicians, for their own fortunes, have fanned various issues and have not brought forth the main issue that has created such hatred between city dwellers and the new comers. The primary reason is lack of job creation in the cities. By bringing more and more people in the urban areas, and with lack of decent earnings, no wonder Pakistani cities have become explosive.
As we all know, that MQM has been in the ruling government party since 1988, in one form or the other. And a city like Karachi has yet to become safe from criminals and thugs. It used to be car snatching and murder and mayhem. These days it is cell phones snatching. Of course, MQM is in direct confrontation with JI, and that is a good thing. Winning elections is one thing; can MQM provide safety for the citizens of Karachi? And the answer is an emphatic NO.
It is safe to assume that all Mohajirs are not supporters of the MQM. Their support amongst Mohajirs who have been in Karachi before 1971 is probably very low. And, it is also safe to assume that primary support of MQM is with those Mohajirs who came from BD after 1971. Further, it is also safe to assume that support of JI is declining, and some of the support that MQM gets is more anti-JI voters. For example, in the 1977 election, Karachi district number 6, which constituted a huge Mohajir district of Burns Road to North Nazimabad and where Maulana Zafar Ahmed Ansari won handidly. He stood as an independent candidate, although he had a huge support from JI. At that time, JI knew that Mohajirs will not support this candidate if he stood on JI ticket.
This example just goes to show that regardless of the claim forwarded by MQM, there are huge constituents of Mohajirs that do not accept their politics. Karachi was not burning before 1979. It started burning due to the geo-political situation. Going forward, I do not see any reason why all the politicians are not given a chance to bring peace to Karachi. Why should Karachi be held hostage to the philosophy of hate and despair, and political rivalry of the two political parties of JI and MQM?
Respectfully submitted,
#641 Posted by rsridhar on January 2, 2006 5:55:42 pm
re:#640 by behram1
That letter simply states that Pak`s attitude to India has made it necessary for India to limit its relationship with Pak. Pak loses out as a venue where Indian IT companies can outsource extra work that cannot be done cheaply by India.
That is how i read that letter.
Sridhar
That letter simply states that Pak`s attitude to India has made it necessary for India to limit its relationship with Pak. Pak loses out as a venue where Indian IT companies can outsource extra work that cannot be done cheaply by India.
That is how i read that letter.
Sridhar