Lessons from Constitutional History

All this talk about Punjabi culture and sh$t. It is not going anywhere. You can find these lowlifes everywhere .. drinking lassi, belching and knocking down people to grab their money.

28# means u prefer any other language over Urdu? .........but we still didnt figure out y dictator thoguht Urdu is the best as national language.......i didnt mean to argue u,,,,,i just want to understand y..Urdu had choosen by the dictator...... u might think punjabi is easy to learn but the only reason i figure out of Urdu`s quick spreading in west paksitan that Urdu itself a combination of many languages and has very few words of its own.......and Urdu`s component based on regional langauges......uor example of Chineese in Canada has no relevence and its way out. u cant deny that Urdu was not an important language of the region and didnt use in whole Pakistan movement alongwith english.
i beleive English as national language would be a good idea and we should look into now or after few years.................i guess thats the language dictator could speak.......

#27 Urdu was made the state language because it was easier to learn than Bengali, Punjabi, Gujarati, Sindhi, Balochi, Pushtoo? How was that established? For me learning Bengali is easiest, learning Pujabi next easiest. Any research conducted between 1930 and 1947 to establish Urdu the easiest to learn for everybody? Who was this `stupid sitting at the top slot` in 1947?

>and if we had 2 languages in majority Punjabi and Bengali .....what >language u think would be the national language in place of alien Urdu.?

Although some Chinese live in Canada, French and English speaking Canada does not make Chinese its state language. If ``at least their intention was fair`` then English or even Esperanto would have been made the national language to disadvantage everyone equally.

In bilingual countries local language are given equal status. In multilingual countries the majority language is made the state language and protection is given to regional languages. In dictatorships what the dictator says becomes the law.

>i dont understand what religion has to do with it and which seminar >Urdu has been promoted as religious language?

I understand that a number of conferences have taken place in Lahore on the issue of Punjabi language - Punjaban.

>>>> a language spoken by 4% of the population was imposed on Pakistanis in order to dupe them in the name of religion. Urdu was promoted in East and West Pakistan entirely on religious grounds. Punjabi and other West Pakistani languages will never rise because West Pakistanis ultimately swallowed this poison.<<<<<<<

Waheeduz,,,why west paksitani swallowed Urdu so easily....may b that was easy to swallow? ...........may b some stupids stinig at the top slot of policy making thought its better to go with the language which is easy to learn and excel in all parts of the country, rather then ask Punjabi guy to sallow difficult language like Bengali or Bengalis to sallow Punjabi......at least their intention was fair.

and if we had 2 languages in majority Punjabi and Bengali .....what language u think would be the national language in place of alien Urdu.?

>>>>>Seminars and political speeches in West Pakistan will not change the situation that now common Punjabi, Sindhi, Gujarati children learn Urdu and are told to identifty that as their main religious culture! <<<<<

i dont understand what religion has to do with it and which seminar Urdu has been promoted as religious language?

shibil

>our more parochial concerns and conceits over preserving regional >languages is little more than a distracting and divisive political acts.

Are you saying that preserving mother tongue and unique ancestral culture is distracting and divisive political act and learning Urdu is not?

Punjaban, a language spoken by 4% of the population was imposed on Pakistanis in order to dupe them in the name of religion. Urdu was promoted in East and West Pakistan entirely on religious grounds. Punjabi and other West Pakistani languages will never rise because West Pakistanis ultimately swallowed this poison. Now new Pakistani generations grow up too ashamed internally of their languages to seriously learn them. They learn the cultural superiority of Urdu over their own languages. In schools they are taught English and Urdu. Even in Bengal West Pakistanis tried the same trick but Bengalis didn`t give in. For Bengalis preserving our language and culture isn`t only a distraction. Division was caused by the advocates of Urdu. Seminars and political speeches in West Pakistan will not change the situation that now common Punjabi, Sindhi, Gujarati children learn Urdu and are told to identifty that as their main religious culture!

>Most of my Pak friends, inside and outside of Pak, speak Punjabi at >home and with friends, even though they say Urdu when asked what >their langauge is. I think the apparent win on behalf of the `urdu >crusader`s you speak of is somewhat superficial, and like a house of >
>cards.

Your friends dont even acknowledge Punjabi as their language. How many of them seriously teach the language and its literature to their children? Very few because an average Pakistani has been fully sold on an alien language. Electioneering in Punjabi and some conferences by a few elites in lahore wont return the language its status.

>It appears that Pakistani leadership has tried to assert the claim that >Punjabi is the langauge of the kafirs, I fail to see how they convince >people that urdu is somehow closer to the language of Islam.

Your failing to be convinced isnt the issue.

>Inshallah, perhaps the rumblings of an awakening have begun

These rumblings have been going on since the British left.

the bengalis werent the only ones who resisted jinnah`s call for a ``linga franca``. there were riots and protests in sindh as well. over the years, violent and violently suppressed language riots have claimed the live of thousands of sindhis and even balochis. of course, the point that the so called constitutionalist jinnah refused the voice of the (bengali) majority on the issue of national language (which, i think, was demanding the recognition of bangla as a national language as well) is a good one.

it must also be borne in mind that the language riots had as much to do with underlying schemes of doing away with a federation in favour of ``one unit`` which would have, some assert, sealed punjabi dominance of pakistan through over-representation in the two institutions which run the country; the bureacracy and the military.

despite the `dominance` of urdu, the vast majority of peoples in pakistan still retain their actual mother tongues. the issue of language is of course given pertinence for 2 main reasons: 1) the preservation of the most important vessel of unique cultual identity and reprsentation; and 2) social exclusion or marginalisation of peoples who cant converse in the dominant language. sadly, all over the sub-continent, even bangladesh, it is the english language which is truly dominant institutionally, as the language of law and policy. the constitution of the peoples republic of bangladesh is also in english, like its pakistani and indian counterparts. the supreme charter of these countries in a langage alien to most of its residents! english is thus the ultimate tool of social exclusion in these societies and our more parochial concerns and conceits over preserving regional languages is little more than a distracting and divisive political acts.

Pardesi Sat sri akal!

Waheeduzz, Its seems that a number of West Punjabi`s are beginning to awaken to the loss of their mother tongue`s, sindhi`s balochi`s and I understand that a number of conferences have taken place in Lahore on the issue of Punjabi language.

Apparently, even during the recent elections, Punjabi slogans seemed all the rage, Quaid Muslim League used the of Ibrar ul Haq song ``AA jaa be jaa sycle te.`` Most advertisements against Nawaz Sharif were headed in Punjabi like ``Bale ve khoraakaaN teryaaN`` Major newspapers carried an advertisement of Nawaz Sharis, ``asaaN sher nooN votaaN pawaaN ge, asaaN sher te mohraaN lawaaaN ge, asaaN vichchRyaa yaar manaawaaN ge.`` A banner hung in the Liaqat Bagh during the Nawaz Leaque public meeting and the banner carried a verse: ``Bhukhe mar gaey, meN te tooN, luT ke khaa giyaa GHQ``. Seems that the reason the language was used by those seeking power was that this language spoke boldly to the masses. The PPP meeting in the Liaqat Baagh was also very distinct in this regard when public demanded that Ch. Aitzaaz Ahsan should speak in Punjabi.

Most of my Pak friends, inside and outside of Pak, speak Punjabi at home and with friends, even though they say Urdu when asked what their langauge is. I think the apparent win on behalf of the `urdu crusader`s you speak of is somewhat superficial, and like a house of cards.

It appears that Pakistani leadership has tried to assert the claim that Punjabi is the langauge of the kafirs, I fail to see how they convince people that urdu is somehow closer to the language of Islam.

Inshallah, perhaps the rumblings of an awakening have begun and Pakistani`s will reclaim their lost heritage, and be confident in their cultural identities as well as their religious one.

As a child raised in East Pakistan, I was taught to put Jinnah on a pedestal. Like other children of my generation, I learnt to blindly adore him. Later I learnt about the actual constitutionalist Jinnah.

There were about 100 million Muslims in British-India. Close to one third 33 million were from Bengal. The leaders of Bengal Provincial Muslim League (BPML) were among the vanguards spearheadeding the Pakistan Movement. When Pakistan was carved out of India, 56% of its population was Bengali.

Yet constitutionalist Jinnah refused to recognize Bengali as a state language. He gave his infamous ``Urdu, and Urdu alone shall be the State Language of Pakistan`` speeches in Dacca (on March 21, 1948 at Race Course Maidan, and on March 24, 1948 at the Special Convocation Ceremony of Dacca University).

When unlike west-Pakistanis, Bengalis refused to renounce the due rights of their mother language, Jinnah harshly rebuked those opposing imposition of an alien language and culture in his Radio Address before his departure from East Pakistan on March 28, 1948. He characterized them as the ``opponents`` of Pakistan. He said that the supporters of Bengali as a state language are nothing but the ``paid agents`` of foreign countries. Aimed at castigating those who had the guts to demand Bengali to be one of the State languages of Pakistan, an imbecile Jinnah labeled the champions of Bengali language as ``communists,`` ``enemies of Pakistan,`` ``breakers of integrity of Pakistan,`` ``defeated and frustrated hate-mongers,`` ``champions of provincialism,`` `` breakers of peace and tranquility,`` ``political assassins and political opportunists,`` ``traitors,`` `` inhabitants of fools` paradise,`` and ``self-serving, fifth columnists`` etc. He praised the Chief Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin for using various forms of repressive and aggressive measures against the supporters of Bengali language.

Before and after his return to west Pakistan, Jinnah repeatedly reminded the supporters of Bangla language that Pakistan ``is determined to take appropriate stern actions`` against these evil forces.

Ultimately we got rid of those evil forces in 1971. Since then our situation has been improving. Pakistanis are ashamed of their own languages and are learning Urdu.

harimau #18, #19

Harimau, you are mixing up timeline to justify your argument with Punjaban (Welcome to the board 1Sikhniji).

It’s government’s responsibility to maintain law and order. If Bhindrawale was responsible for innocent Hindus being pulled out of buses and killing them, the federal government had right to send army in Punjab and suppress the movement. Still there was no need to go inside the temple. If you recently followed events in Israel, the Israelis did not go inside the Christian holy place when Palestinians were holed up inside. I guess, Jews cared about Christian world’s feelings. Sikhs are only 1.5% in number, so Indira could afford to screw them at will.

On the other hand, when innocent Sikhs were burned alive by thousands in New Delhi and many other cities what did the army and federal government did to stop the carnage? Rajiv was in New Delhi and so was the whole democratic apparatus. Did any inquiry take place immediately afterwards to make sure that these incidents do not take place? Looks like there was no need to. His mother’s life was equal to thousands of “unemployed and unemployable (your words)” residents of New Delhi.

Oh, but Indira and Rajiv were only part of that immoral and corrupt Nehru-Gandhi dynasty and a rotten party known as Congress-I, but rest of us Indians are highly ethical and moral. Right? How come then Rajiv got most parliament seats just after a month or so after the Sikh massacres? How come there are chowks and airports named after Rajiv and Indira while there is no state level memorial in New Delhi for 1984 innocent victims that could serve as a reminder to future governments in New Delhi that for God sake have some shame and maintain law and order at least in your capital?

Harimau, admit that despite all the Vedas, Purans, Geetas and 5000 year civilization bull crap, our people in the sub-continent are capable of equally heinous crimes, given an appropriate opportunity and weaker opponent, as we accuse Arabs of all the time on this board. Sikhs need no proof of that.

PS: Indira Gandhi was not the first one to use same faith commander in-charge for an operation that can be perceived as operation against that faith. Akbar raped Rajputs through Man Singh and Aurangzeb used minor Hindu rulers to go after Guru Gobind Singh. British did it all the time against us. Get it? Sell that snake oil somewhere else.

Harimau: The first conclusion you jumped to was way off the mark. You continue to jump to more.....I`ve read a few of your posts now, I have some questions to throw your way that you may or may not care to answer, later though...

Ref punjaban #17 by punjaban on November 1, 2002 5:51pm PT

[a victim is a victim is a victim, whether he be a Sikh in Punjab, an Ahmadi in Pakistan, a Bangladeshi, a Muslim in Gujrat or a Hindu living under Moghal oppression a few centuries ago. My heart cries for them all, and I would like to think that if Sikhs ever perpetrated that kind of oppression on any people, I would speak out just as loudly. ]

It is obvious you are clueless about Indian and even Punjabi history.

Ranjit Singh kicked serious Afghan butt. After he conquered Peshawar, any Afghan found in Peshawar was put to death. That was just about 150 years ago.

On the other hand, you seem to have swallowed wholesale the propaganda put out by London-based Khalistan supporters. Indira Gandhi found Bhindranwale a useful tool to throw out the Akali Dal government in Punjab. Pakistan found in Bhindranwale, who now was getting too big for his britches, a useful tool to cause trouble for India, what with the demand for Khalistan which had no support among common Sikhs. Bhindranwale huddled inside Sikhism`s holiest shrine, the Golden Temple, and India had no choice but to send in the army (under a general officer who happened to be a Sikh but an Indian first and a Sikh second). Bhindranwale gets killed and Indira Gandhi herself pays the price later. Innocent Sikhs are slaughtered in Delhi like innocent Sikhs and Hindus were slaughtered by Bhindranwale himself earlier in Punjab. Graham Greene could not have written a darker novel of intrigue. It was a morality play acted out in public over a dozen years. And the moral is: there is no morality in governing a country. The corollary is: the poor public will always pay the price.

Ref punjaban #14

[a disgrace to the women of Pakistan? Interesting! Since I have never set foot in Pakistan. Then crocodile tears for Sikhs, I am Sikh my friend,]

With the ignorance that you displayed and the Pak propaganda sites you showcased, I chose to call you a Pakistani. So, now you are a disgrace to Sikh women! Are you happy?

[...and lost a few friends to violence after `84, none of whom were involved in any fight for freedom, although those who wish for that have every right to their opinion, just as Pakistani`s had when they fought for Pakistan.]

Read my earlier reply. As to your friends` deaths, I am sorry to hear that but that is what happens when a bunch of unemployed and unemployable people get involved in ``freedom struggles``: the innocents get killed first.

As for any Pakistani fighting for Pakistan, that is a comforting myth for Pakistanis but the fact is that no Pakistani wanted Pakistan or fought for it. That is why people like Yasser Latif Hamdani ask, ``What is so special about going to jail for your beliefs?`` Jinnah appealed to the illiterates with the slogan, ``Pakistan ki matlab kya, La ilahi il Allah``. Because of that your folks had to leave their possessions behind and had to escape to India with barely their lives. And Pakistan is stuck today with the mullahs.

Shibil,

those were wise words , a victim is a victim is a victim, whether he be a Sikh in Punjab, an Ahmadi in Pakistan, a Bangladeshi, a Muslim in Gujrat or a Hindu living under Moghal oppression a few centuries ago. My heart cries for them all, and I would like to think that if Sikhs ever perpetrated that kind of oppression on any people, I would speak out just as loudly. We all need to learn to put humanity before nationality, and religious fervour, and speak out equally against all human rights atrocities, regardless of whether they occur at home, next door, or abroad.

my bad about how jefferson felt about his slaves. i stand corrected.

the debate here seems to have been sidetracked and the original thread forgotten. its quite telling though that we (referring to the pakistanis here, and not our indian bretheren) instantly tend to foget our own historical and political blights and problems and jump on the gun shooting criticisms at india and indians (some valid, others not so) instead. indians, by the looks of it, enjoy doing the same.

i dont particularly see a cause of argument here. the short of it is that both india and paksitan have horrendous human rights records and have been responsible for massacres of its own citizens. the indian state has slaughtered muslims in kashmir, and the much publicized riots of bombay, gujarat and a number of others. the reasons have been political, as gujarat is the last big state which still has a bjp government. india has persecuted, incarcerated, tortured and killed thousands of sikhs in punjab, as well as others in nagaland and even tamil nadu.

pakistan has similarly persecuted and killed thousands of ahmedis in and since the 1950`s, tens of thousands of baluch in the rebelions of the 1950`s and 1970`s, around 200,000 bangladeshi`s in the 1970`s, thousands of muhajirs in the 1980`s under zia and thousands since, and of course, our military advenures in kashmir, as well as our military backed militants, have also cost thousands of kashmiri lives.

we should shed tears for all of them (it is quite true that when we mention bangladesh, we mention our military failiures and indian intervention rather than our humanitarian failiures and crimes. pakistanis have been largely silent about bangladesh since 1971. our previous ambassador to bagladesh was sent back because he spoke in favour of the genocide. it has only been musharraf who apologised very recently for bangladesh, because of certain political pressures). interesting that our perceptions are so molded by the official lines which both india and pakistan toe, that is, whenever there are domestic problmes there is heavy fighting in kashmir. similar arguments or conflicts here about adopting holier than thou positions doesnt take away that both states have cost the peoples of the many nations living within this geographical area dearly.

like all the lives lost in the subcontinent because off and since partition, partition itself is also a historical fact. personally, i feel that india has long since accepted partition and pakistan as a state (whatever other problems india might have, i will not be vane enough to address them here). pakistan now has to move on and stop defining its identity and politics, especially its foreign policy, in oppositional terms to india. if we, as pakistanis fail to achieve this level of mental and intellectual independence from india then that is what might be the final nail in the coffin of the 2 nation theory.

re shibil #10:

Thomas Jefferson did not keep his slaves locked up in a cellar. According to several of his biographies, he was a model slave-owner(sounds like an oxymoron I know). Jefferson spent quite a bit of time in France around the time of the French revolution and upon his return to Virginia there are accounts of him being carried on his shoulders to his home by overjoyous slaves.

Your point about him being still relevant in political and constitutional debates is a good one. Just wanted to keep the record straight.

later
-sac