Secularism, Positive Communalism and the Pluralist State

Folio/Manto mian,

(Have u ever had a non-Muslim in any consitutional position in Jinnah`s Pakistan. )

The only constitutional post in Pakistan is that of the CoAS. I would be really curious to know as to how many non- Muslim (excluding Brits) have been Maj Gen/Air Marshall/Rear Admiral onwards in the Armed Forces.

(Sadly Jinnah`s Pakistan died with him )

Sad, but true. The problem was that in 1947-48, MAJ(pbuh) was far ahead of the times as far as the sub-continent`s Muslims were concerned. Had MAJ been a Hindu, he would have been a wonderful leader of Hindu majority but secular India.

Regards

Regards

``finer points``

Ah.. you mean like the finer point from Gandhiji`s ideology:

``I am a Hindu first- therefore I am a true Indian``

Yes... despite all of Pakistan`s flaws (and there are numerous which bother me) ``communal animals`` like me cannot understand such fine points from Gandhiji...

Re: # 92

Still resorting to personal attacks... I see. Why don`t you curb your verbal violence?

Sadly Jinnah`s Pakistan died with him (and his law minister a Hindu was driven out and his Ahmadi followers ultimately became the target of revenge) ... and that is what I have been harping about...

However ... the Islamic Republic of Pakistan still had a Christian Justice Cornelius as Pakistan`s Supreme Court Chief Justice (and its most respected Justice to date)... and Pakistan`s Supreme Court Chief Justice for the last 2 months is a Hindu.... Rana Bhagwandas. And mind you this is not a secular Pakistan but the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

>>It can happen in any state where a person is preferred over the other.<<

Ha ha, NOT 4 communal reasons but 4 other reasons. For communal animals in Pakistan these finer points can never be understood.

Yasser,

Dont get into the `theory` of secular states. Pakistan becoming one wud be thinkable only when the sun started rising in the west. Period.

Have a Nice Day. CU later.

Re: # 90

Good.

All I am saying is that be honest and admit it that this was Congress` idea which you have but others here don`t.

Yasser,

It`s a typo, man.

This crap was posted by u b4 and I gave a reply then. It can happen in any state where a person is preferred over the other. Maharastra had a Muslim Chief Minister in the past whose name is Abdul Rehman Antuley, so much 4 the `communal` Congress.

Now we have Dr. Singh as our PM, a Christian CM Dr. YSR Reddy for AP, so much 4 the commnal Congress! This list is illustrative not exhaustive.

Have u ever had a non-Muslim in any consitutional position in Jinnah`s `secular` Pakistan.

``Secular country with 98% Muslim``

Even though this is unrelated to what I am arguing for, I`ll you in your place nonetheless.

When Europe went secular .... most of its secular nation states were homogenously Christian .... and were either Protestant or Catholic... Had you read the article above you would know the difference between a Secular nation state and a secular plural state... a concept which you fail to apply again and again.

Similarly Secular Turkey is 99.6% Muslim as opposed to Islamic Ottoman Empire which was at most 55% Muslim.

In any event the official 98% figure is bitterly contested by Pakistani minorities and for good reason too... Pakistani Christian leaders claim a population of 18-20 million or so.... even if we take half of this... it takes the over all Minorities` population close to 10%.

Manto mian,

(The only reason why ``Bengal legislators`` voted was because Sarat and Kiran Shankar Roy were forced by Nehru to adopt the all India party line. )

Thank God for that.

(Mountbatten- their new Caucasian Devta)

Nope. Not JLN`s devta. Rather his ghilman cum raqeeb if rumours r 2 b believed.

Regards

Dear Folio,

I just responded to your posts despite your abuses against me.

Now claiming that I ignored your posts (which had nothing except personal attacks and insults anyway) is a novel way of arguing indeed. I suppose this is how Indian democracy really works.

Dear Yasser,

U can ignore my posts buddy.

As for points, they all there unless u wish them away.

Unlike Jinnah, plz dont `bend over backwards` for me.

Plz create a secular country in 98% Muslim Pakistan (the name i.e Islamic Republic of Pakistan is superfluous) after necking minorities out.

Hypocrisy & Day-dreams!

Folio 85,

Can you point out where I said that? I can`t help you if English language is not one of your stronger points. I suppose when you don`t have an argument you have to make ridiculous claims.

What I have pointed out is the utter dishonesty of self avowedly secular (composite) nationalist party that Congress was.... Muslim League on the other hand was always a communal (though not religious) organisation which was speaking for a community i.e. Muslims ... it never made any extravagant claims.


For all of Congress` tall claims on Secularism here is the truth from the horse`s mouth:

Azad`s ``India Wins Freedom``

The first was the case of Mr. Nariman, a Parsee and an acknowledged leader of the local Congress in Bombay, who was generally expected to lead the provincial government. Sardar Patel and his colleagues could not reconcile with such a leadership of non-Hindu Chief Minister where ``the majority of members in the Congress Assembly Party were Hindus.`` [p. 16]

``Mr. Nariman was naturally upset about the decision. He raised the question before the Congress Working Committee. Jawaharlal was then President and many hoped that in view of his complete freedom from communal bias; he would rectify the injustice to Nariman. Unfortunately this did not happen. ... He [Jawaharlal] sought to placate Patel and rejected Nariman`s appeal. ... Nariman was surprised at Jawaharlal`s attitude, especially as Jawaharlal treated him harshly and tried to shout him down in the meeting of the Working Committee.`` [p. 16-17]

``Nariman had lost the case even before the enquiry began. It was finally held that nothing was proven against Sardar Patel. None who knew the inner story was satisfied with this verdict. We all know that truth has been sacrificed in order to satisfy Sardar Patel`s communal demands. Poor Nariman was heart broken and his public life came to an end.`` [p. 17]

``A similar development took place in Bihar. Dr. Syed Mahmud was the top leader of the province when the elections were held. He was also a General Secretary of the All India Congress Committee and as such he had a position both inside and outside the province. When the Congress secured an absolute majority, it was taken for granted that Dr. Syed Mahmud would be elected the leader and become the first Chief Minister of Bihar under Provincial Autonomy. Instead, Sri Krishna Sinha and Anugraha Narayan Sinha who were members of the Central Assembly, were called back to Bihar and groomed for the Chief Ministership. Dr. Rajendra Prasad played the same role in Bihar as Sardar Patel did in Bombay.`` [p. 17]

``These two instances left a bad taste at the time. Looking back, I cannot help feeling that the Congress did not live up to its professed ideals. One has to admit with regret that the nationalism of the Congress had not then reached a stage where it could ignore communal considerations and select leaders on the basis of merit without regard to majority or minority.`` [p. 18]

Dear Folio,

I am afraid I cannot continue to argue with someone who doesn`t have the decency to stop personal attacks simply because you don`t have any arguments.


Shishapa mian,

Let us forget that most Muslim Leaguers were once Congressmen... that for most of his life a man like Jinnah was the only politician in the subcontinent`s history to be called the best ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity.... let us forget all this because this is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that even if Muslim League was the communal monster it was advocating a reallignment of centers... and not unnatural carving up of borders... and it was willing to give up its maximum demand for a sovereig Muslim homeland for CMP.

Whereas Congress that claimed to be all secular blah blah was not only unwilling to put up with an Army which had 35-50% Muslims (or according to Sadna Gupta 55-60%) but also demanded that existing units be carved up along communal lines (something which League had not asked for) ... and even when they were carved up the secular Congress made sure that the division was unfair and skewed in the favor of Sikh ``jathas`` of Gurdaspur....leading to terrible violence.

It is easy to say ... ML asked for Pakistan... violence happened... ML`s fault. But it harder to accept the facts because they shatter the third rate myths built up in India.

#81 by Mantolives on May 24, 2007 9:51pm PT


This guy has lost his marbles!

All India Muslim League is a `secular` party and Indian National Congress is a `communal` party.

Yasser,

Did I spell agenda as aganda?? OK, it`s not aganda. You seek small pleasures. I concede here.


Who`re thrown to the wall? And what are the concerns of the community and who `bent` over backwards (u mean Jinnah?) to `accommodate` whom??

Silly man. Where did u start and where are u going?

Hmmm, and I guess idea of Pakistan as a homeland for Muslims was not
communal... interetsing.