Re-Imagining Pakistan

Manto,

(that the citizens of ``secular`` and ``pluralistic`` democratic India are any more tolerant or accepting of a point of view contrary to theirs than the citizens of ``Islamic`` an ``theocratic`` militarised state of Pakistan .... infact my own feeling is that they are considerably less so. )

Since it is purely an opinion, I will neither agree nor disagree.

But I dont expect even a ``secular democracy`` to convince its citizens from the depth of their hearts that it is a good idea to respect each other`s fundamental rights. But if by wielding a danda, the same idea can be enforced at least it would be some progress. A geniune concern for pluralism and tolerance will come with a passage of time.

At any right not too many Indians would publicly dispute:

That a government ought to be formed on any basis but universal franchise.
That all religions/adherents of various religions ought to be treated equally. And that the state ought not to have a faith.

Yes, given right amount of resources, citizens/individuals may actually try to violate the above principles. It is to be hoped that genuine concern for citizenship rights and duties would develop over a few decades. But at least a start has been made in India.

Regards

Dear Devkant (and Majumdar),

On the exclusive issue of who started it... it is on the record. I am certainly not going to stop first.

On the issue vis a vis Indian democracy... I more or less agree with what you gentlemen have written, but my comment and disillusionment is with the product that your rather successful democratic experience has produced.

Nothing on chowk has given me confidence that the citizens of ``secular`` and ``pluralistic`` democratic India are any more tolerant or accepting of a point of view contrary to theirs than the citizens of ``Islamic`` an ``theocratic`` militarised state of Pakistan .... infact my own feeling is that they are considerably less so.


VRV,

You are in luck. My blinkers have nothing to do with ``high school books`` (yours do clearly) since the curriculum my ``elitist`` school followed was entirely British. As a careless teenager in those days I would give a damn about politics and history.

Infact, my blinkers about a lot of things came off in the halls of Alexandar and Douglass Libraries of Rutgers and the Butler and Mislein Libraries of Columbia University where I read in detail about Pakistan, India, Jinnah and Gandhi amongst other things- most of it to understand what idiots on chowk were actually saying. Many other blinkers came off when I actually met your lot a lot at college.

So instead of ``assuming`` so much, it would help if you just took your blinkers off.

BJ,

No two human beings are alike. I found Zeena`s initial interactions here on FP+UP to be of liberal nature. Moreover gaals can always keep upper hand visavis arguments/debate on politics. Btw, I dont expect them not to debate politics and discuss only things like lipsticks, venus razors and undies coz they too have opinions.

As for me, I see a person`s broad contours of thinking than minute details coz everybody needs elbow room on issues. Moreover we belong to two different republics with two different outlooks. If u look at their school history books then u wud know why these people think and argue like this i.e upbringing is skewed. The unsaid part of the inference is that minds are screwed at early stages in life. The blinkers set at early stages sticks even when they go to Rutgers.

As for bonsai intellectual Yasser, he`s a one-trick pony ie his famour trick is:

`Gandhi is cateist, racist, exclusivist bigot`.

He suffers from OCD coz he inserts this sentence even if the debate is abt life on Mars i.e exobiology. It`s easy to pip him coz his mind aperture is very small/narrow like the centre of gravity of a woman;)

#312 by Mantolives on December 18, 2006 3:27am PT
`It would help you if you saw who started spewing what venom when. Nothing would please me more to bring this constant hatemongering back and forth to an end but we didn`t start the fire here.`

yasser, we can go on and on about who started it fiirst. the fact is that we are all at fault. i am my self not interested in indulging in this hate mongering. but sometimes we all get simply carried away!!!

`Therefore it is completely irrelevant what you can do without, because I am the same guy who was untill a few years ago, advocating emulating the Indian model of democracy (yes I was stupid and it was based on a premise that does not exist) .... for Pakistan.`

i do not see what is so wrong with the indian model of democracy. elections are held regularly,any major decision is taken is being put to public scrutiny, there is an independent judiciary, election commission, an extremely vibrant and free press (which is one of the most essential components of a democratic society) and defence force. while there are some problems in implementation, but tell me which democracy is perfect. just by saying that democracy in india does not exist is the biggest blunder you can make before studying about india.

now because there were communal riots and the state govt was suspected to have a hand in it, does it mean that democracy is finished. cases are going on in the courts and verdicts will be announced in due time. the indian people made their verdict very clear when they removed the bjp and their alliance from power in 2004 election.

if you wanna have a civilised debate on this, i am all game.

rgds,

devkant.

Manto,

Do we seriously expect 50 year old nations, highly heterogenous in composition with limited history of self-governance, where half the population lives in poverty and is illiterate to be Sweden style states with near impeccable levels of governance, respect for human rights etc.

I think if Pakistan could ditto copy Constitution of India and even achieve an India style of democracy in lets say 5-10 years time, it would still be a great progress. And even then (as is true of India today) there would be huge scope for further growth in terms of nation building.

Regards

I was talking of implemenation.

Indian Constitution is a remarkable document and its principal author, Dr. Ambedkar, was a genius... and to tell you the truth, while I dislike the Islamic provisions of the Pakistani constitution of 1973, it too was a remarkable compromise document.

In implementation, both have faced varying degrees of failure... though obviously we have failed much more than you have.

Manto,

(advocating emulating the Indian model of democracy for Pakistan. )

Even if your experience with Indian interactors has been bad, how does that change the applicability of Indian model for Pakistan. There is nothing that is basically wrong with the Indian Constitution, yes implementation may not be perfect.

Regards

Re: # 307

Dear Devkant,

It would help you if you saw who started spewing what venom when. Nothing would please me more to bring this constant hatemongering back and forth to an end but we didn`t start the fire here.

Therefore it is completely irrelevant what you can do without, because I am the same guy who was untill a few years ago, advocating emulating the Indian model of democracy (yes I was stupid and it was based on a premise that does not exist) .... for Pakistan.

#310 by master_pak on December 18, 2006 2:59am PT

dude....i find your boastful retorts more pitiful and funny than offensive. if you wanna make a complete fool of yourself on a public forum, please do it by all means.

like i said, samajhdaar ko ishara hi kaafi hai!!!!

rgds,

devkant.

Re: # 309
hahahah.lol.you mean you f*cken indies are samajhdaar and intellegent.what crap

---

.

yap.intellegent people are likely to be more vegetarian

---

true.but its true for those who have brain.

do u know most condom commanies are bank corrupted in india coz most indian men have penis of under 3inch.lol.be vegetarian and be healthy.healty for a obvious reason.
coz no sex ,no power, no muscles ,no manliness,always fresh n free of these tension.

i tell u something intresting ,here in london most of indian gals are crazy about non-vegetarian[samajhdaar ko ishaara hi kafi hai].indian gals find these guys more manly than sookhey indy bones.

beta mutton khana mardon ka kaam hai tum jaisey bachon ka nahin.

i m suprised how in the world can women in india touch these hindu husbands` feet in submission who have below average penis.

A very interesting article from today`s Daily Times

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006 12 18 story_18-12-2006_pg6_23

High IQ kids ‘likely to become vegetarians’

Children with high IQs are more likely to be vegetarians when they grow up, according to research reported on Friday.

A British study of more them 8,000 men and women aged 30 whose IQs had been measured when they were 10, showed that the higher the IQ, the greater the odds of being a vegetarian. “People who are more intelligent as children, who will obviously keep that intelligence when they are 30, were more likely to say they are vegetarians at that age than those that were less intelligent,” said Dr Catherine Gale, an epidemiologist at the University of Southampton in England.

She added the findings, which are published online by the British Medical Journal, were consistent with other studies showing people who are more intelligent tend to eat a healthier diet and exercise more. “There is quite a lot of evidence linking vegetarianism to a lower risk of heart disease. People who are vegetarians tend to have lower blood pressure, lower cholesterol levels and they do have a lower risk of dying from coronary heart disease,” Gale added.

For each 15-point rise in IQ scores in the study, the likelihood of being a vegetarian rose by 38 percent. Even after adjusting to factors such as social class and education, the link was still consistent. More than 33 percent of the men and women in the study described themselves as vegetarians but said they ate white meat and fish. Just over four percent were strict vegetarians and 2.5 percent were vegans, who eat no animal products at all, including eggs and dairy.

samajhdar ko ishara hi kaafi hai!!!!!

rgds,

devkant.

Re: # 303

Yasser: Did peace talks with Indian young-turks succeed? ANIL

bhai monto...we indians are trying to do something about our problems. you must understand that india bbeing such a large country, our problems are also equally large. add to that the population of 1 billion people and you are bound to have plenty of problems. it will take time to get over problems and work is being done towards that.

but we could do without you and your wife spewing anti india venom here and everywhere. please tell me, how are your peoblems going to be solved by pointing towards india`s problem. the attitude of your country being bad and hence my country is good is very childish and does not benefit someone like you who has had such expensive american education.

wwhile i have a lot of respect for you, what pains me is that you use your collective energies to point fingers at a foreign nation when i am sure you have your own problems that need immediate attention.

rgds,

devkant.

Re:sanatani#302

[...Ranjit ji at 12.30 PM on 25th December let us drink a toast to this great man...]

Amen, brother!! Jinnah was the real father of the nation for India. May God rest his soul in peace.

As you may know, Jinnah was a Bhatia Rajput by caste and his grandfather had converted. I am convinced that at subliminal levels, Jinnah thought and acted like a hindu nationalist. Any other muslim, especially ones with Afghan or Central Asian heritage, would never demand or settle for anything that Jinnah agreed upon as the ultimate political solution for hindu-muslim rivalry.

Muslims had dominated India for 800 years in spite of being a minority. They had alliances with Afghanistan, Central Asia and Iran, from where more muslims could come over to help out militarily or otherwise. Why would they settle for a slice of land like Pakistan, when they could enjoy the whole subcontinent? All they had to do was ask for 40-45% share in all government jobs, army, parliament etc. Then they would form alliances with backward caste hindus (like the Mughals did with the Rajputs), and rule New Delhi. What was their fear of domination from when they were the ones ruling India?

Jinnah with his hindu mindset, actually thought along democratic lines. If Muslims had 25% population, they should have guaranteed 25% share of land and resources. This was his hindu genes talking. If he was a muslim with external roots, he would have never thought along democratic lines but took on the imperial position of ruling India as a minority.

No wonder the results speak for themselves. Hindu India is resurgent with a 10% growth rate. We have a liberal, tolerant, secular country which is the darling of the west. If we had remained united, instead of IITs we would have Indian Institute of Madrassas. We hindus would be munshis and chaprasis to muslim bosses, kind of like how Punjabi hindus had to bow in front of Khizr Hayat Khan and Sikandar Hayat Khan. Of course, we would be the biggest terrorist nation with the entire west hating us. Thank God, Jinnah saved us from such a fate.

Re: # 304

Once again you are mistaken.

I often agree with arjun m when he is less caustic. My point is always... why don`t you guys do something about your own problems...

``#303 by Mantolives on December 18, 2006 0:51am PT
devkant bhayya,

Arjun m is correct. I myself added that to the Wikipedia mind you. ``

monto bhai....this is a miracle. this is the first time ever in my 5 years in chowk you have actually agreed with me and arjun.

i guess, there is a god somewhere afterall. wonders never cease.

rgds,

devkant.