Islam as a political weapon in Pakistan

Re: # 48

Zee bhai,

You are amazing !!!
It never crossed my mind that I could indeed be considered a mirzai !!

Why are you guys trying to understand Eklavya? Bhaiyon aur behenon..concepts such as space/time, logic, consistency etc. do not apply to our friend. i love this snippet of muddled thoughtprocess..hahah

"laddu, if there can be a god with four legs and three noses, why can't there be another god calld allah; and if one god can scurry around on the back of a rat why can't another one send down a man called mohammad?

Bhai we can't get bogged down in these things. If we believe in logic (and there is no need to do that), we have to be consistent."

#49 Posted by laddu,

On second thought indeed ... you could indeed be a mirzai, or a hamidm or an SR.

Eklavya,

Coming to think of it, what's wrong with a God who promises one an 'afterlife' (and very well-argued mind you) when people have 'gods' promising them Visas to USA?

The problem is, people just will not look beyond life. They can't. They just want 'gods' who will promise them love, and happiness, and male offspring, and visas.

Looking beyond life is scary, so guess that's fair :)

Dear Author,

Thank you for this wonderful essay. As a person who was born in the late seventies and grew up during Zia's rule, the various points contained within your essay clearly rang true. I remember when I was in 5th grade in the early 1980's, Arabic language was made compulsory in our school, though this policy was discontinued with the demise of Zia.

As you pointed out, its funny that Islamization policies during Bhutto's and Zia's regimes focused on curtailing individual freedom, but never managed to do anything really productive for the people of Pakistan.

A universal healthcare system was never introduced.

A social welfare system wasnt instituted either.

Rather, rights of half of the populations i.e. our women were severely curtailed.

You are right, Saudi Money had a lot to do with Bhutto's and Zia's policies as well as the rise of Madrassas in Pakistan.

MY Islamic Studies professor Dr. Arthur F Buehler gave a lecture in 2002 on the rise of Fundamentalism and Madrassas in Pakistan, and he said that before the 1970's there were only four hundred some Madrassas in Pakistan and by the middle of 1980's there were close to 9000.

He also postulated that the lifeblood of these Madrassas were the petrodollars finding their way from Saudi Arabia.

{"President Ayub Khan (1958-69) showed clear modernistic tendencies; yet retained a modest complacency towards a degree of pre-existing Islamic ideology legitimized by the Pakistan movement, but took it no further . The trend of predominantly religion-free politics continued with Yahya Khan (1969-71), who similarly showed little sympathy for the religious parties. Till the rise of Pakistan People’s Party in the 1970s, the political stance regarding religious parties had been unsympathetic, as evidenced by the imprisonment and original announcement of death sentence of Maulana Maududi, head of the Jamaat-i-Islami in response to the Punjab disturbances in 1953."}

Dear Mubarka,
Thank you for presenting this important topic in a proper context. The title of your article could very well be "The Abuse of Politicized Islam In Pakistan."

Pakistan was created by secular-minded Muslims for many reasons, the least of which was the establishment of a theocracy. Whether it was the commercial interest of the Marwari and Bombay businessmen, the selfish feudal concerns of UP/CP Zamindaars, or the personal political ambitions of MAJ, one thing is abundantly clear. The JI, Deobandis, and other bearded brigades wanted no part of Pakistan. To their credit, they could not see any religious benefit in establishing so-called Islamic rule for two-thirds of Muslims while one-third remained in a much weakened and helpless position.

Over one million Indians died, tens of millions were uprooted, thousands of women were raped and abducted, and millions of people were looted, ruined, and separated from families to satisfy the lofty ambitions of just a few "leaders." Those Muslims who remained in India became a hated and suspected fifth column for the aggrieved Hindus and Sikhs.

Following partition, Pakistanis settled down, partly as a result of exhaustion and partly because of the need for survival, to build their nation. Islam to the early Pakistanis meant belief in Allah and His Messenger (PBUH), praying when possible, fasting when necessary, giving charity often, and otherwise eating, drinking, living and letting live.

It was only with the elections of 1970, that ZAB rediscovered Islam as a tool for his personal triumphs. He used Islam, provincialism, ethnicity, language, and the PAF against the Qadiani Punjabis, majority Bengalis, liberal Pakhtoons, Urdu-speaking Mohajirs, rebellious Baluchis, and even his former supporters in the Punjab. The only mistake he made was trusting a religious Zia Ul Haq as his top military man. The real abuse of Islam began and reached its peak with Zia - the results of which Pakistan is still encountering three decades later.

Salim

zee, nothing wrong at all, and it is far more inspirational.

(Zee, boss, I have NOT ignored your question on UP. I am just going through a very rough period in which it is hard for me to write anything, and almost impossible to write anything personal. As soon as I feel capable enough, and can mentally relax, your wish would indeed be my huqm. Thanks for your understanding.)

Salim_Chuhan #54:

"Following partition, Pakistanis settled down, partly as a result of exhaustion and partly because of the need for survival, to build their nation."

Come now, assassinations, army-takeovers, wars literally from day one of Pakistan's independence and you call that settling down?

My view is that Pakistan was the result of Solomon's judgment on whose baby it was gone wrong. The fake mother got her wish and so it was DOA.

Pre-independence Indian leaders debated for decades on what a free India was going to be, which is why the polyglot nation got a sound footing in nationhood that has enabled it to withstand assault by a succession of mediocre leaders starting with Indira Gandhi. Those who were asking for Pakistan never went beyond defining it as "Pakistan is not Hindu". Such an ideology can only take you so far.

"laddu, I have never undestood why some Hindus hate me so much. Isn't it acceptable to ask that we constantly re-evaluate our beliefs in light of the real world?"

Kahan Veer Savarkar aur kahan Praveen Togadia. It is Savarkar's tragedy that Hindu seculars hate him and the Hindu rightwingers do not understand him. It seems you are destined to follow a similar fate.

I would think political parties continued struggle till 1970 when first free and fair election were held.
In West Pakistan or (Pakistan) for that matter although Bhutto took a majority, but that does not explain all.
First Pakistan was a defeated nation, and foremost task for Bhutto was Nation Building.
Second although Islamic Political parties had less than 10 percent seats in National assembly, but their hold was significant on Media. Secong Jamiat Ulamae Islam of Mufti Mahmood was forming the NWFP Government and also were supporting Baluchistan Government.
Third Jamat-e-Islami had started to get organized.
All these factor gave Islamic parties more strength than their poll number suggests.
I would think the election of 1970 were held in a different situation and Bhutto formed Government in a different atmosphere.
It is just a presumption that if Bhutto ruled West Pakistan of 1970 he would have not given to the pressure of Islamic parties.
After 1971 he had an entirely different task.
General Zia on the other hand was deeply Islamic to begin with and 1979 Afghan war helped in his mission

Re #17 Manto is lying shamelessly about Gandhi just as he is about ZAB. Gandhi did not support the Khilafat movement because he wanted a Muslim Khalifa installed. He supported it because with it he shared a common anticolonial motive. It is one thing for the clergy "wanting to keep the people backward", quite another for the Jinnah types to keep the Muslims in perpetual slavery to the White man. When the white man had destroyed all institutions that described the Muslims in India, left them little to no representation in the state machinery, an organized movement had to start in the religious domain the only institution that survived...The guy (Manto) is an ignoramus who worships the dog-ugly MAJ, he will not reason, for example regarding his point about ZAB, let me copy paste his dishonest BS from another thread even after we've discussed this and it has been answered....
---------------------

Manto writes " ...Time Magazine..."

That my friends (and enemies) is the sum total of his intelligence, to copy paste from websites, from magazines and some obscure books written by orientalists and other "experts". Regarding using well known facts (which no one not even the orientalists dispute) and his sense of reason, the guy (or "freak" ) is totally disabled.

He writes "To quote (Ghulam Ahmed Parwez's) Tolu-e-Islam's website (Bhutto could have been addressing freaks like Masadi):

On December 21, 1976, the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, late Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto addressed a joint session of the National Assembly and Senate of the federation held to commemorate the centenary of birth of Quaid-e-Azam. Addressing Quaid-e-Azam's portrait hanging on the wall, he said in a most dramatic fashion: -

"Quaid-eAzam!"

We discussed at length, (over two and a half threads worth) the ZAB and MAJ issues, but like a dishonest "freak", Manto deliberately keeps repeating his falsehoods regarding the ZAB to make unjustified claims and to fool those that have not followed the debate, and he does it in a most deceptive manner at the very end (fine print) of pages and pages worth of worthless copy pastes.

Now, this claim about the ZAB being the "founder" of the Church of MAJ is total horse sh**. ZAB the politician evolved in his time in office. At the time he wrote "Myth of Independance" (which I have read), he was trying to justify the shenanigans of the MAJ (regarding Pakistan) in the context of imperial "divide and rule", which he claimed evolved into "unite and rule" as spheres of influence developed (viz a viz the US and the Soviet block). In doing so he badly tripped himself not realizing that the creation of Pakistan itslef was the first step in this "unite and rule" thing that he was trying to rail against. Now, Manto accuses the man of being a manipulator and fooling the people of Pakistan to get power. Now that claim might hold some water when the man was on the rise and reaching the zenith of his career but it certainly cannot define this words written from the death cell in a letter to his daughter in which he opens up the possibility that what the MAJ did was a "mistake" and future events would either prove or disprove that (and they sure as hell have proven it).

Now, you all think that Manto doesn't know this. He does because I have on atleast three seperate occassions elaborated on this quote by the ZAB and how he evolved and did not, towards the end of his life have any doubts that this whole experiment by the MAJ, working as a peon for the feudals/colonials, was the absolute right thing as Manto religiously believes in it to be.

Now, he cannot answer me or counter my claims, all he can do is repeat his BS about me not having read his orientalist masters- who know shit about Pakistan by the way, and other tabulators whose work he spits out in news caster prompter style, calling that "intelligence" or literary work. The guy is a sorry excuse for a human being. He did not even refrain from using his father's death to score points against me and baselessly rail against my sincere condolences. Now he calls me a "freak" and gets away with it, watch how fast the chowk staff ban me because I called this sob a "freak" as well....

Vengatramanan writes about Manto: "You are just too prolific when it comes to Mahatma"

He is not prolific, he is horrific when he talks about most people that differ from his object of worship, the MAJ.

Manto writes "In retrospect... the worst thing Jinnah did was to create opportunities for people like Masadi. It is anybody's guess what sewer Masadi would be in if it hadn't been for Pakistan. "

Jinnah didn't create any opportunity for me, the "opportunities" were created by my relatively well to do great grandparents who became less well to do in the same area (that was called Pakistan later, than they were before. You don't know shit about me so better keep your goddamned mouth shut. I don't belong to a family of petty bourgeoisie like you do that I need MAJ creating "opportunities" for me even as he slaughters millions

It was indeed ZAB who broke Pakistan as envisioned by Quaide Azam by making an earth-shaking amendment in the constitution to convert it into a 'Fatwa' which made the very faith of Paki Muslims questionable, requiring every Paki citizen to submit a disgraceful, absurd and humiliating affidavit (Half Nama) about his faith whenever he claims to be a Muslim. This is the crux of the matter which Mubarka dare not highlight. She (?) is of course excusable as even Fouji usurpers who could though rape the constitution in whatever manner they liked could not touch this 'Fatwa'.

That "half nama" is a non issue that does not affect the lives of the very vast majority of Pakistanis and those that it does affect it does not take away from their social standing whatsoever. It was forced upon the ZAB thanks to the legacy of MAJ and his use of religion (that he didn't believe in ) to get Pakistan, making this a weapon in the hands of the colonials and the feudals to beat a people's prime minister with. ZAB understood their games and was trying to counter them for the sake of the REAL issues, unlike that swine MAJ.

In #59 read

Now, you all think that Manto doesn't know this. He does because I have on atleast three seperate occassions elaborated on this quote by the ZAB and how he evolved and did not, towards the end of his life have any doubts that this whole experiment by the MAJ, working as a peon for the feudals/colonials, was the absolute right thing

as:



Now, you all think that Manto doesn't know this. He does because I have on atleast three seperate occassions elaborated on this quote by the ZAB and how he evolved and towards the end of his life, did not have any doubts that this whole experiment by the MAJ, working as a peon for the feudals/colonials, might not have been the absolute right thing, in other words it could have been a mistake whose victim he was going to become