Muslims in India: Communalism vs. Backwardness-Minority Syndrome

I feel the issue has been aggravated by the preoccupation of our people with religion and ideology. Why can`t we treat humans as humans and not as muslims and hindus? Or let me ask a more useful question - How can we mature to a state where we can rise above religion in our interpersonal interactios?

Unless that happens, these discussions are frivolous matters and one upping in the tradition of the religious kind.

sorry friends -- aur bhi gum hain zaman meiN muhabbat ke sewa -- this is more urgent right now -- my apology for the intrusion.

A civilized ex President of MY civilized United States -- speaks out against the FOOLISH WAR -- about to be launched by our FOOLISH President -- at great PERILS to Peace and Security -- at home -- and RULE OF LAW -- abroad.

Here is an Op Ed column by President Jimmy Carter -- from todays New Yok Times:


a Just War -- or just a war?

By JIMMY CARTER


AATLANTA — Profound changes have been taking place in American foreign policy, reversing consistent bipartisan commitments that for more than two centuries have earned our nation greatness.

These commitments have been predicated on basic religious principles, respect for international law, and alliances that resulted in wise decisions and mutual restraint.

Our apparent determination to launch a war against Iraq, without international support, is a violation of these premises.

As a Christian and as a president who was severely provoked by international crises, I became thoroughly familiar with the principles of a just war, and it is clear that a substantially unilateral attack on Iraq does not meet these standards.

This is an almost universal conviction of religious leaders, with the most notable exception of a few spokesmen of the Southern Baptist Convention who are greatly influenced by their commitment to Israel based on eschatological, or final days, theology.

For a war to be just, it must meet several clearly defined criteria.

The war can be waged only as a last resort, with all nonviolent options exhausted.

In the case of Iraq, it is obvious that clear alternatives to war exist.

These options — previously proposed by our own leaders and approved by the United Nations — were outlined again by the Security Council on Friday.

But now, with our own national security not directly threatened and despite the overwhelming opposition of most people and governments in the world, the United States seems determined to carry out military and diplomatic action that is almost unprecedented in the history of civilized nations.

The first stage of our widely publicized war plan is to launch 3,000 bombs and missiles on a relatively defenseless Iraqi population within the first few hours of an invasion, with the purpose of so damaging and demoralizing the people that they will change their obnoxious leader, who will most likely be hidden and safe during the bombardment.

The war`s weapons must discriminate between combatants and noncombatants. Extensive aerial bombardment, even with precise accuracy, inevitably results in ``collateral damage.`` Gen. Tommy R. Franks, commander of American forces in the Persian Gulf, has expressed concern about many of the military targets being near hospitals, schools, mosques and private homes.

Its violence must be proportional to the injury we have suffered. Despite Saddam Hussein`s other serious crimes, American efforts to tie Iraq to the 9/11 terrorist attacks have been unconvincing.

The attackers must have legitimate authority sanctioned by the society they profess to represent.

The unanimous vote of approval in the Security Council to eliminate Iraq`s weapons of mass destruction can still be honored, but our announced goals are now to achieve regime change and to establish a Pax Americana in the region, perhaps occupying the ethnically divided country for as long as a decade.

For these objectives, we do not have international authority.

Other members of the Security Council have so far resisted the enormous economic and political influence (pressure) that is being exerted from Washington, and we are faced with the possibility of either a failure to get the necessary votes or else a veto from Russia, France and China.

Although Turkey may still be enticed into helping us by enormous financial rewards (bribes -- a crime) and partial future control of the Kurds and oil in northern Iraq, its democratic Parliament has at least added its voice to the worldwide expressions of concern.

The peace it establishes must be a clear improvement over what exists.

Although there are visions of peace and democracy in Iraq, it is quite possible that the aftermath of a military invasion will destabilize the region and prompt terrorists to further jeopardize our security at home.

Also, by defying overwhelming world opposition, the United States will undermine the United Nations as a viable institution for world peace.

What about America`s world standing if we don`t go to war after such a great deployment of military forces in the region?
__________________________________________________

The heartfelt sympathy and friendship offered to America after the 9/11 attacks, even from formerly antagonistic regimes, has been largely dissipated; increasingly unilateral and domineering policies have brought international trust in our country to its lowest level in memory.
______________________________________________________

American stature will surely decline further if we launch a war in clear defiance of the United Nations.

But to use the presence and threat of our military power to force Iraq`s compliance with all United Nations resolutions — with war as a final option — will enhance our status as a champion of peace and justice.(NYT)

Sorry for multiple posts.

Pankaj #164
Good post. A cooperative-competitive relationship as you nicely put it, lies at the heart of Indian regionalism vs nationalism too.

And as you point out, the cooperation can be more than hardnosed pragmatism, it can even be constructive. For example, though my father lives in the far south, he has been involved with helping build a Hindi lexicon of technical terms, being invited to do so by local Malayalis who are running this activity! Now how is this possible, that Malayalis will be engaged in building a Hindi lexicon? Paradoxically, its because its been accepted that in Kerala the first and official language is Malayalam, and only after that come the claims of other languages like English or Hindi. Being secure in the status of their own language and institutional support for it, people then feel free to apply their minds to other languages.

Chowk staff, please post this.

rsridhar
Why are you unwilling to except that your generalizations can be wrong? And my experience is not restricted to Kerala.


An analogy of the destructive potential of your generalization here: what if I went around saying I am a victim of Brahmins and Brahminism? I can easy generalize the insular attitude or rigid habits of a few of my Brahmin friends to every Brahmin including you, if I am not mistaken. Then I can twist everything you say and all your attitudes or every known Brahmin`s attitudes and actions to suit this thesis, even giving Brahminical import to Vajpayee`s vacation and Advani`s breakfast. Would it make sense for me or anyone to do so?

No, and the reason is the reality is that nothing about modern day Brahmins and Brahminism is simple any more, and EVEN the insular attitude or rigid habits of a few have to be seen in proper context. For example, I have found any insularity is not a desire to perpetuate caste heirarchy and persecute or exclude others, it is simply something personal such as cultural pride, including in their traditions, something many nonBrahmins also display.

And how much variation there is in attitude of `Brahmins` in a given region, add to that the difference in regions and finally all this variety is seen only in single digit percentages of the absolute Indian population. With such a variety of experience, generalizing about `Brahmins`(like some Pakistanis do, for example) would be totally meaningless and very destructive enterprise.

Similarly nothing is simple about Muslims, Muslim cultures and traditions and attitudes of Indian Muslim populations which are much more numerous, so kindly restrain your broad brush hostility.

Sameer #150
Your Gujarat example is absolutely correct and appropriate.

Re your earlier remarks on Gandhi/Nehru being elitist, well truth be told I find yours and Saima`s attitudes elitist:). Saima asked whether Pakistanis can buy land in India and you are all for putting ones regional loyalities ahead of everything. I think these are elitist concerns.

Firstly, only rich Pakistanis can buy land, anywhere. Currently, the landless, for example are dependent on the goodwill and profitability of large landlords for livelihood. Given, this, ordinary Pakistanis should be able to buy land in Pakistan, only then should the question of doing so in India come up. Share the bounty with your countrymen first!

In addition, ordinary Pakistanis should be able to become trade union leaders, mayors, sarpanchs, member of provincial legislatures and member of National assembly and have access and influence in matters in their personal lives, locality and region in their own country before becoming a landowner or voter or consumer of civic utilities of another country as well.

Also, if market forces or say large scale mechanized farming displaces the ordinary guy, where is the opportunity to emphasize his regional identity and culture? What is the regional identity of someone who will be evicted when his tilling contract expires? Or someone who cannot find a job in his hometown. He will need to migrate out to where he can find a job, or say where water for irrigation is available. They maynot speak his mother tongue or celebrate his culture where he finds all this. His children maynot be taught their mother tongue in their school and he maynot have access to newspapers and books in his language.

On the above two points, Gandhi and Nehru both had visions, however incomplete. For example, the Congress had even preIndependence accepted end of landlordism and land redistribution in principle. Gandhiji had a vision for villages to be selfcontained economies, so that noone has to migrate out and there would be minimal environmental degradation. Nehru had a vision for the state to take everyone along economically. India stuck with the Nehru economic model for too long, but it did a lot of what it was meant to do(including giving rise to a middle class) before it became a economic deadweight. Gandhiji and Nehru were much more leftist and and much less elitist :) in these matters and they succeeded in selling their ideas to a huge audience for this reason.

rsridhar
Why are you unwilling to except that your generalizations can be wrong? And my experience is not restricted to Kerala.


An analogy of the destructive potential of your generalizations- suppose I went around saying I am a victim of Brahmins and Brahminism? I can easy generalize the insular attitude or rigid habits of a few of my Brahmin friends to every Brahmin including you, if I am not mistaken. Then I can twist everything you say and all your attitudes or every known Brahmin`s attitudes and actions to suit this thesis of Brahminical victimisation, even giving Brahminical import to Vajpayee`s vacation and Advani`s breakfast. Would it make sense for me or anyone to do so?

No, and why? For the reason that in reality nothing about modern day Brahmins and Brahminism is simple any more, and EVEN the insular attitude or rigid habits of a few have to be seen in proper context. For example, I have found any insularity among any of my Brahmin friends is not a desire to perpetuate caste heirarchy and persecute or exclude others, it is simply something wholly personal such as cultural pride, including in their traditions, something many nonBrahmins also display.

And there is a lot of individual/group variation in attitudes of `Brahmins` in a given community, or region, add to that the difference in regions and finally all this variety is seen only in single digit percentages of the absolute Indian population. With such a variety of experience, generalizing about `Brahmins`(like some Pakistanis do, for example) would be a totally meaningless and very destructive enterprise.

Similarly NOTHING is simple about Muslims, Muslims cultures and traditions and attitudes of Indian Muslim populations which are much more numerous, so kindly restrain your broad brush hostility. Even Rafiq Zakaria doesnot have the omniscience of god.

Sameer #150
Your Gujarat example is absolutely correct and appropriate.

Re your earlier remarks on Gandhi/Nehru being elitist, well truth be told I find yours and Saima`s attitudes elitist:). Saima asked whether Pakistanis can buy land in India and you are all for putting ones regional loyalities ahead of everything. I think given the way things are, these are elitist concerns.

Firstly, only rich Pakistanis can buy land, anywhere. Currently, the landless, for example are dependent on the goodwill and profitability of large landlords for livelihood. Given this, ordinary Pakistanis should be able to buy land in Pakistan, at least get the title of that which they have tilled for generations, if they so desire, and only then should the question of doing so in India come up. Share the bounty with your countrymen first!

In addition, ordinary Pakistanis should be able to become trade union leaders, mayors, sarpanchs, member of provincial legislatures and member of National assembly and have access and influence in matters in their personal lives, locality and region in their own country before becoming a landowner or voter or consumer of civic utilities and subsidies of another country as well.

Also, if market forces or say large scale mechanized farming displaces the ordinary guy, where is the opportunity for him to emphasize his regional identity and culture? What is the regional identity of someone who will be evicted when his tilling contract expires? Or someone who cannot find a job in his hometown. He will need to migrate out to where he can find a job, or say where water for irrigation is available. They maynot speak his mother tongue or celebrate his culture where he finds all this, the schools may not teach his children their mother tongue, books and newspapers in his language may not be available.

On these matters and others, Gandhi and Nehru both had visions, however incomplete. For example, the Congress had even preIndependence accepted end of landlordism and land redistribution in principle. Gandhiji had a vision for villages to be selfcontained economies, so that noone has to migrate out and there would be minimal environmental degradation. Nehru had a vision for the objective of the state to be to take everyone along economically. India stuck with the Nehru economic model for too long, but it did a lot of what it was meant to do(including giving rise to a middle class) before it became a economic deadweight. Gandhiji and Nehru were much more leftist and and much less elitist in these matters :) and they succeeded in selling their ideas to a huge nonelitist audience for this reason.

arjun_m

Indeed it is ridiculous to think that muslims are any less patriotic that Hindus or Sikhs. In my various study courses and jobs I have had muslims as colleagues and could never tell the difference. In fact, now..and only now.. I look back and realise that ..Yes!! they were muslims..and now only I sit down to analyse thier behaviour (which was very much like any other Indian). So, we should not just believe the BJP for all its propaganda.
But we do have some elements who believe in muslim brotherhood more than a loyalty towards the country. And these few behave differently.

Sadna

The process of social and economic integration is going on in Pakistan too, though I am not sure at what scale. As far as Jamali being a Balochi is concerned, I doubt if he has any real power or even if he commands the loyalty of some dominant tribe of Balochistan, say Bugti. In all probability, Mushy has made him PM thinking that he would be less of a trouble than any politician with some ``weight``. Nevertheless, the degree of interdependence of Pakistani states is sufficiently high to keep it united. Let us take the case of Sindh and Punjab. Sindh is dissatisfied as she can not get the water she thinks is her legitimate share. At the same time, she knows very well that she is totally dependent upon Punjab for additional water. Thus it is a cooperative-competitive relationship in which either party will pose as the aggrieved one to maximize its own benefit but will finally compromise to reach some optimum. Secondly, only Punjab and Karachi can steer the economy of remaining backward states of Pakistan. By themselves, NWFP and Balochistan are not only economically unviable but politically unstable too. NWFP, in all likelihood will see a Talibanic revolution if not for a little moderating influence of Punjab. Again, Punjab by exercising its dominant influence can persuade the rival Bugti and Mazari tribes to the negotiating table. Left to themselves, these tribes would annhilate each other in the internecine warfare. Now add to it the strength of Islamic bond and you have a not-so-weak Pakistan. IMO, Pakistan state, despite the gloomy predictions of a few, is actually quite a stable state in political sense, though lawless. Those who think that Pakistan will disintegrate are exaggerating the negative factors and overlooking the balance of power and economic factors that ties the fate of one state to the other. However Pakistan may continue to see the lawlessness for a couple of decades, thanks to the gross socio-economic mismanagement- an inevitable fallout of the corrupt leaders and jihadi culture.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Stuka,
Ok, he did not say exactly that, but may be I was alluding to the common practice of heaping the blame on each other, both Indians and Pakistanis indulge in it and I am quite averse to it.

Rshridhar # 142

“I am not trying to generalise. Besides, your experience is different from mine.
Did you see the muslims in India come out and celebrate India`s victory against Pakis in cricket? Here was a great opportunity. Cricket, among other things, binds Indians like nothing else does. Well meaning muslims chose to remain silent. Some miscreants cheered the Pakistanis creating trouble in Banglore and other places. “

Hey what about the celebrations in Mahim (Mumbai), Old Delhi, Jamia (Delhi) etc. All these are overwhelming muslim areas. I am not sure how many non muslims were part of these celebrations but these are overwhelming muslim areas.

“It is entirely possible that VHP and other elements were also involved. But the point is, when the entire nation was celebrating, the muslims of India were not visible in that celebration. What have they to lose? After all, there were 2 muslim cricketers in the team.”

What about the celebrations in front of Kaif`s house. Did you confirm that all the folks there were non muslim ?

“ This is just an eg i gave. It is a fact that majority of muslims in India do not try to assimilate. Your experience (in Kerala) may be different. That does not still change the picture. “

You chose a bad example. The problem is not what happened but what you choose to see, that does change the picture.

“More and more younger generation Indians in India are associating muslims and Islam with Pakistan. It is for the muslims to come out and say emphatically where they belong.
Sridhar “

There is no gainsaying that fundamentalism is on the rise in India and Indian muslims are as much to blame as everyone else. But the Indian muslims have come out emphatically where they belong, they chose to stay in India after partition .You started out by saying that you don`t want to generalise, but its exactly what you are trying to do. You are trying to pin a stereotype on the Indian muslims. You are trying to justify your bigotry by trying the victim.

Faruk.

LOL Sadna - thanks for posting this link :-) RSridhar could you take a good look (CHASHMA laga kay please)!!! Would you say the Bharat Army (http://www.bharatarmy.com/) are not loyal Brits too ?

http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=298427

For those who can`t read Hindi - the sign says

Sun lay beta Pakistan - Baap hai tera Hindustan

FarooqA:

You don`t get it do you? Read his post again..where is he absolving India?

In fact his statement that the lawbreakers should be punished, be they in Maharashtra, Gujarat or Delhi, takes to task the Indian establishment for not implementing the law correctly.

Please show me which exact sentence inplies that Musharraf is responsible for India`s internal dynamics?

Well sameerJB you cannot absolve India of being an oppressive society for dalits and minorities by slandering Musharraf, he has as little to with India`s internal conflicts as Vajpayee may have with Pakistan`s internal problems, like all other Indian and Pakistani leaders he is a victim of complex circumstances. For God`s sake dont talk nonsense simply to prove that you are a pure and unadultrated Indian.

Humsab: I have the power to open but not close any thread. It was just dropped out of front page access after about 1200 posts. Now Dullabhatti will soon start a new one to replace the old one.

Waving flag or celebrating exuberantly is just one minor form of patriotism. In US also, blacks and Hispanics take less interest in celebrating independence day. The important thing for the citizens of a country is be law-abiding citizen as best form of patriotism. While Indian Muslims can be criticized for too Islamic, following retrogressive practices that lead to backwardness but that is not against any law. A person praying over and over without taking care of wordly affairs is bad but not law breaking. No law in India stops people from practicing their religion vigorously. On the other hand a cheering patriotic crowd might be law breaking by raising communal slogans, delivering hateful speeches, blocking traffic or throwing stone at community they do not like.

I dislike Musharraf for this very reason without challenging his patriotism. Similalry those who break law in India should be more criticized than stupidity without breaking any law. The law breakers in any civil society should pay for the crime be he Musharraf, mastermind of Al-Qaeda or the one who planned murder of 2300 Sikhs following Indira assassination or mastermind of Gujrat riots or the people who killed thousands in Mumbai following Babri Mosque destruction. Once some of them scotfree due to the power behind them, it decreases the enthusiasm of the losing community for active participation.

So, the first step towards patriotic and civil society is respect for the law and justice for all. A crime is a crime no matter how one looks at it and stupidity of certain cultural/ religious practices itself delivers justice in the form of backwarness and decline in the standards of living.

``I suggest Indian Muslims to try to become more nationalistic in cultural sense. Become ardent Bengali, Marathi, Gujrati, Tamils etc instead of taking refuge in religion or behind Gandhi-Nehru ideals``(sameerjb)

a great UNIFYING advice sameerjb -- to the citizens of a land -- DIVIDED -- by 360 languages, dialects, castes, creeds, sects, religions:-)

what makes you think that a Bihari Muslim is not an idiot Bihari first – and then a Muslim -- or a Bengali Muslim is not a cunning Bengali first?

your championing of `petty provincialism` is astoundingly amusing –

-- no thanks:--)

WHO IS A PAKISTANI,

When the sheikh chappie, the alquida man was arrested the pak interior minister said that he is going no where, he is a pakistani. Now that he is on the way to quantanamo bay, pakistanis are telling that even though he had a pak pass port he was not a pakistani.

I can hear the buzzing of the crowd, lilaha illalla pakistan ka matlab kya. There are times when one had to feel ashamed of ones country, the time has come for pakistanis.

Dawood Ibrahim, he is a proud honoured guest to their country, he is like many in pakistan, a jihadist returned after mission in india.

Sameer JB ji
``How can you expect Muslims to show emotions in the middle of riots breaking out in Ahmedabad after Indian victory. It takes two to tango.``

You are right about it takes two to tango. In Gujarat, as per reports riots started when Victory procession of over enthusiastic people after India`s win over Pakistan was pelted with stones etc., I guess by miscreants wanting to create peoblem. Anyhow, Police should have been prepared in advance or it should not have allowed that procession to go through senstive areas.
Regards

P.S. Tussi punjabi channel band kyoN kar ditta?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

sadna & Pankaj: My comments in the previous post were about `what should have been`. I am not advocating break up of India and Pakistan under current circumstances. However, circumstances and with it opinions can change. Only one sentence in that lengthy post, `Islamabad and New Delhi should be like Strossburg (Europian Union Headquarter in France)` vaguely pointed to more national (I consider Panjabi, Tamil, Bengali,...................nations) independence without stressing upon the level or model and definitely through muyual agreement and peaceful means.

The question of being at ease all over or having diverse family or experience is minor thing. Nations under friendly relationship do not stop people from traveling or marrying outside culture. Much more Americans and Canadians inter-marry and travel freely; same is true for Europeans. I agree with Pankaj that India is more like a major part of Indian civilization. But a civilization does not have to have same culture, language or country. I am very opposed to one of everything route in order to create unity or harmony.

Even in diasporic desis, culture based relationship are dominating over national based organizations. Three largest groups in NY/ NJ, namely Gujratis, Bengalis and Panjabis interact predominantly within culture.

rsridhar: I suppose Hindus should also have proven acceptance of Muslims in Gujrat elections by rejecting Narendra Modi and BJP. How can you expect Muslims to show emotions in the middle of riots breaking out in Ahmedabad after Indian victory. It takes two to tango.

On one side you and many other keep talking telling us that Pakistan does not matter for most Indians (something like India is about to reach for stars with 460 dollars per capita income and Pakistan is in the dirt with paltry 450 dollars per capita income) and it is Pakistan out there to prove un-Indianness at every opportunity. Did India celebrate same way when they beat England? I did not hear any rioting after India beat England.

In one area, Indian movie industry Muslims have been well represented for all 56 years since independence. When did they not prove their Indianness? Name one movie by a Muslm which could be considered pro-Pakistan or anti-Hindu. The fact is that whenever and whoever got a chance to serve India, they did to the best of their abilities. The issue of trying too much to preserve a distinct orthodox and conservative Muslim identity is onething which I also have often disliked but to make it anti-Indian is not true. Both parties on eitehr side of Babri Masjid as well as Gujrat riots were equally Indian. A person tearing down the mosque can no way claim to be more Indian than the one who is trying to stop him from doing it. However, one party was taking the law into their own hand.

I suggest Indian Muslims to try to become more nationalistic in cultural sense. Become ardent Bengali, Marathi, Gujrati, Tamils etc instead of taking refuge in religion or behind Gandhi-Nehru ideals. They should vote local parties instead of major national level parties like Congress or BJP.

``Are you God with a million eyes to keep watch on 130 million people and pronounce judgement on them?

I read in a news report that Muslims came out to celebrate in Mumbai. But I donot need news reports. I am not better than my Muslim countrymen that they have to prove something to ME. Neither are you, rsridhar.``(sadna)

well said dhukhtar-e aalaa-e Hind -- Sadna Begum!

re:#143 by sadna
Read Rafiq Zakaria`s views on Indian muslims. Unlike you and me, he is considered an expert on Islam and has been writing books and researching on matters concerning Indian muslims.
Excerpts from the book ``Communal Rage in Secular India``:

1. ``Indian Muslims must try and become an integral part of the mainstream`; `get out of their ghetto mentality`; `do some introspection`. If asked `whether they have genuinely tried to contribute to the strengthening of Hindu-Muslim relations since Partition`, the `answer will be no.``

2. ``They must open their eyes to the ground reality that an increasing number of Hindus have begun to hate them...it has infected the rich as much as the poor; men as much as women; the young as much as the old. Even children are no longer free from it.``

3. ``Instead of coming out openly against Pakistan and taking a strong stand against the jihadis, the so-called guardians of Indian Muslims spend most of their time in running their own political shops to buttress their communal leadership.``

4. ``Muslims are multiplying fast, much more than Hindus. The Census figures, decade after decade, confirm it. Muslims have not taken to family planning `as seriously as the Hindus`; this has to be corrected. ``Indian Muslims must disown the bigotism which has made Muslims pariahs everywhere. They must give to non-Muslims the assurance that their religion stands for `live and let live.` ``Instead of talking it over with Hindus, `confrontation was adopted` by Muslims on the Babri masjid issue, giving `rise to more hatred against the Muslims.` ``There is meaningless `controversy` about Muslims singing Vande Mataram. Muslims `must stand up when it is sung as a mark of respect to an anthem,` which has a hoary past.``

Being secular does not mean being blind to the realities. The reality is that there is a widening gulf between the 2 communities and muslims in India need to take pro-active steps to bridge the gap. They cannot continue to sleep under the shadow of pseudo-secularism of the Nehruvian era.
Sridhar

#142 by rsridhar, #143 by sadna

Sridhar, though you say your conclusion is based on experience, you cannot generalize it. I have quite a few Muslim friends, and I can vouch for their patriotism. During a match, they root for India as much as I do. Why, just the other day, when India was playing Pakistan, I visited a hospital in which my uncle was sharing a room with an elderly Muslim lady. Every Tendulkar shot was lustily cheered by her relatives (who`d come to visit her), and she herself was very dejected when Tendulya eventually got out. Now, that`s my experience. What do I make of it?

re:#140 by stuka
My secularism has nothing to do with all this. We have to confront realities. Besides, this is not my view alone. After all, my views do not count for much. I live in US and i just share some experiences that i have had during my stay in India. That is all.
More importantly, people like Rafiq Zakaria have been pointing to the widening gulf between the 2 communities and the ``Ostrich-like`` attitude of Indian muslims. Little introspection went on as to where the community is headed since independence. Muslims were treated as a ``vote bank`` by Congress. Much of the secular attitudes of Congress era is dissipating and a new crop of politicians (like Modi) are raring to change the way hindus think and act. Muslims in India today face a real danger of being completely isolated. They need to do what is in their best interest. Closing their eyes to the happenings around them will not help.
Sridhar

re:#141 by FarooqA
Both hindu and muslim fundamentalism have existed since independence. Hindu extremist views stood discredited after the assasination of Gandhiji. These views never found a mass appeal until recently. But there have always been supporters belonging to the fringe elements since independence.
Today, BJP has latched on to fighting terrorism (by implication ``islamic terrorism) as a political tool. By equating terrorism with Islam, BJP seeks to isolate muslims and benefit from hindu votes.
Indian muslims can turn the tide against BJP by coming out in force against fundamentalism.
Sridhar

rsridhar # 142
Yes, they did. As per newspaper reports, a big group of them in Kolkata were celeberating India`s victory and were beaten up by a few (12) who were pro pak.
In any case I don`t think any one of us have any business in questioning any body`s loyalty just because some people did n`t wear their happiness on sleave. Yes, if people are openly pro-pak, then we do tend to resent, rightly or wrongly, i don`t know. But still I don`t think this is such a big issue.
Regards

jay #138 you write ``the ilks of tahmed are only supporting dawood ibrahim. ``
Aha! Lies! So now you resort to the last resort of the scoundrel!! (If you dont agree, cut and paste anything I ever wrote about dawood ibrahim - he is just another one of your kind kind of subhumans.)
PS: Dont flatter yourself into thinking I read the rest of your post, given that I long ago started skipping over your boring, one-track posts. If you are not careful, you will bore yourself to death.

rsridhar #142
``Did you see the muslims in India come out and celebrate India`s victory against Pakis in cricket?``

How would I or you `see` them even if they did rsridhar? Are you God with a million eyes to keep watch on 130 million people and pronounce judgement on them?

I read in a news report that Muslims came out to celebrate in Mumbai. But I donot need news reports. I am not better than my Muslim countrymen that they have to prove something to ME. Neither are you, rsridhar.

re:#136 by sadna
I am not trying to generalise. Besides, your experience is different from mine.
Did you see the muslims in India come out and celebrate India`s victory against Pakis in cricket? Here was a great opportunity. Cricket, among other things, binds Indians like nothing else does. Well meaning muslims chose to remain silent. Some miscreants cheered the Pakistanis creating trouble in Banglore and other places.
It is entirely possible that VHP and other elements were also involved. But the point is, when the entire nation was celebrating, the muslims of India were not visible in that celebration. What have they to lose? After all, there were 2 muslim cricketers in the team. This is just an eg i gave. It is a fact that majority of muslims in India do not try to assimilate. Your experience (in Kerala) may be different. That does not still change the picture.
More and more younger generation Indians in India are associating muslims and Islam with Pakistan. It is for the muslims to come out and say emphatically where they belong.
Sridhar

RSridhar:

``To be democratic in a diverse nation, one has to appreciate and assimilate in that diversity. Indians (barring the muslims) are doing that everyday.``

Your claim to secularism runs very hollow. The Muslims of India are more politically aware than than the Muslims of any other country. Besides, how can you sit in judgement of 12 Crore people? I am disgusted by your statement.

Its mere naivety on the part of Javed Akhtar to suggest that the Hindu communalism is just a reaction of Muslim communalism, the argument cuts both ways, may be the Muslim communalism in India is the end product of the Hindu fundamentalism.

JINNAH IS DEAD, TNT IS ALIVE,

The pakistanis are again trying to say that theirs is a progressive contry not shackeled by TNT. Take the case of dawood ibrahim, he is an indian citizen, he killed more that 200 people inbombay and escaped to pakistan. He is a well protected guest in pakistan simply because his action are in tune with the direct action call, his past is not very different from that of many pakistanis who left india, he has done something akin to what the pak jihadists are doing by slipping into pakistan. It is the ideology of TNT that keeps ibrahim in pakistan, no pakistani, even on the chowk wants to say anything about ibrahim.

The great jinnah and TNT dead posters can come up with one reason other than TNT for the flourishing of ibrahim in pakistan, it would be a surprise. In the garb of decency, dead history and peace on chowk, the ilks of tahmed are only supporting dawood ibrahim.

Walkout over `selective` implementation of girl child scheme

By Our Special Correspondent



HYDERABAD March 3. Congress and CPI (M) members staged a walkout in the Assembly on Monday protesting over the refusal of the Government to give an assurance on extending financial assistance to all BPL families under the Girl Child Protection Scheme.

Earlier, Congress members stalled the proceedings of the House demanding an apology from the Minister for Industries, K.Vidyadhar Rao, for his remarks against a Congress member, Vanama Venkateswara Rao.

The Leader of the Opposition, Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy, charged the Government with going back on its promise of extending the scheme to all families. Several restrictions were being applied to deny the facility to many. Second girl child was not being given the assistance and it was limited to only single child families.

Dr. Rajasekhara Reddy said the assistance had been extended to only two lakh families whereas there were 1.2 crore BPL families in the State. The pending applications -- 21,361 -- pertained to only single child families and other applications had been rejected, he contended. The Chief Minister had promised to apply the scheme to every girl child born in the BPL family during elections by assuring the poor that he would be the ``Mena Mama`` (maternal uncle) for the girl.

(Later talking to presspersons he called the Chief Minister ``Kamsa Mama` (Kamsa of the Bhagavatha). Another Congress member, K.R. Suresh Reddy, said the Minister for Finance, Y. Ramakrishnudu, and the Minister for Women and Child Welfare, Saraswathi, were ``misinforming`` the House on the issue. The target had been reduced compared to last year and there was no proper clarification forthcoming on the reason, he said.

///In india we talk about female child killings, recognise it as a problem, accept the reality and even come up with some ingenious ways to reduce it. In pakistan ahmadias are killed, hindu temples are destroyed in spontaneous reaction to babri masjid demolition, only PM has ever posted this info, well the honour killings, what honour killings...well education is awaste of resources for pakistanis. No wonder that nadrassas are flourishing and in terms of human values, an educated tahmed is no different from the jihadic sayed from faisalabad.

rsridhar #131
Please don`t generalize saying `except Muslims`. Thats not true, thats not been my experience and moreover isn`t that a rather hurtful comment to come across in a apolitical discussion about apolitical things.

btw, did you see the photo in #111 :)?

Pankaj #121
I too have always noticed the fundamental similarities under the more visible cultural/religious differences. I am just wary of using the word `civilisation` because this word seems to have acquired negative connotations in recent times.

I would imagine there is similar abundance of diversity in Pakistan and similar soceital trend towards increased mutual interaction after 1947. For example if PM Jamali had been only a Balochi(and not Pakistani as well) he could at most have been PM of only a few million Balochis. Now he is able to exercise his native Balochi genius(for example) in a much wider scope or theatre, and put it to service of a much larger group of people.

pmishra2 #135 you write ``However, when clueless interactors pretend that Savarkar invented communalism, or that Jinnah`s Direction Action Day and Narendra Modi`s Gaurav Yatra have no connection, then we have to return to history and establish some ground facts``
I admit to being the clueless interactor who discussed Savarkar with you. Actually, I had mentioned the pomp and show with which Savarkar`s picture was placed next to Gandhi`s in the halls of the Indian Parliament - and this wasnt ancient history, this happened earlier this week. You twist this to ``Savarkar invented communalism``, and drag in events that took place half a century ago.
Thanks to you I am no longer clueless. I am well clued into how easily you twist things to prove whatever stupid point you are trying to prove.

No one is arguing that we have to re-hash history here over and over. However, when clueless interactors pretend that Savarkar invented communalism, or that Jinnah`s Direction Action Day and Narendra Modi`s Gaurav Yatra have no connection, then we have to return to history and establish some ground facts.

I have argued repeatedly that politicians like Nehru and Jinnah bungled the transfer of power from the British very badly. That their legacies include a certain amount of raw political maneuvering for which the price was finally paid in the 10`s of thousands of lives. I dont see this as being obsessed by the past.

Finally, pakistani respondents have to understand that fundamentally indians have no interest in them. This includes invasion, economic union, etc. etc. Other than some humanitarian interactions (divided families) there is no reason for wishing any other special relationship. Perhaps once Musharraf is out of the scene a cold peace may be possible some years out.

The accession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India involved a special relationship between the indian union and J&K. This needs to be restored with some creativity in place.

This is the course that intelligent commentators like Sumit Ganguly has repeatedly stressed and highlighted (and people like ylh and sarwari have repeatedly called Sumit Ganguly a hindu fascist!). I can easily imagine a future in which the Kashmir valley receives the grant of autonomy it seeks (``azadi``), while the remainder of J&K is bound closer to India. All of this requires peace, the return of pandits and normal economic ties. None of this is possible as long as the madrassahs keep churning out their mad murderers.

Ref YLH2 #114

[.... with an Independent and peaceful Kashmir we will effectively bury the threat of nuclear war... ]

Yasser, dear boy, try telling Uncle Musharraf that Kashmir ought to be independent. He will tell you the NAME of the Pakistani-stolen part is AZAD Kashmir. That, dear boy, is as close to Independence as Kashmir will ever get.

And please stop this nonsense of ``Stop me before I unleash the nukes``. One more threat and Pakistan will be disarmed by the US. In case you dodn`t know this, the US is not worried about The Hindu Bomb falling into the hands of the Hindutva-wadis. On the other hand, there IS serious concern about the Islamic Bomb.

[You are welcomed anytime in my house in Lahore...]

Yasser, dear boy, come to Chennai anytime you want. I will meet you at the airport and put you up at my home and show you around. It might actually open up your eyes as to the reality of India as opposed to what you read in the Frontier Post.

re:#119 by sadna
A good post Sadna.
By now, you should know how Pakistanis (at least in Chowk) think. My own impression (after interacting here for 2 years, perhaps more) is that many Pakis have no inkling of how democracy works. To be democratic in a diverse nation, one has to appreciate and assimilate in that diversity. Indians (barring the muslims) are doing that everyday. pakistanis are unable to do that. Indians in general have more faith in their institutions than Pakis do in theirs. The only institution Pakis swear by is the Army, which is taking them down an abyss.
I, as a Tamilian, grew up in Delhi. I was a third generation Delhite until i migrated to US. We grew up among Punjabees (mostly expatriates from Pak). It was a great interaction and we were like a family. Once a year, my parents would visit Madras to see their relatives. Sometimes, they would just leave us (me and my brother) with a Punjabee neighbour who was very close. We were happy being left alone with them. When my parents settled down in Madras later on, many of our neighbours visited us and we kept that interaction going. Looking back, those were very happy days in my life.
I know a cousin of my, a doctor in Delhi, who married a Punjabee. Their parents are very traditional and speak Hindi with difficulty! There is tremendous interaction going on in India among people at all levels. One has to live in India to experience that. Armchair theorists like Sameer do not get the picture.
Sridhar

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Pankaj #121 I agree that Sameerjb is offtrack when he thinks India should break up into several countries. This is a superficial way of looking at things.
The fact is that when people from different cultures work together, live in the same neigborhood, have children going to the same school, they tend to lose consciousenss of their perceived differences (racial, religious, ethnic, nationality) and start seeing each other for what they are - as individuals, with their own distinct personalities and levels of intellectual development.
I hope that India flourishes as a great multiethnic secular democracy, and slowly but steadily solves its problems of poverty, hindu chauvinism (and this includes the mindset of the BJP mainstream politicians, not just the hindu extremists), and mob violence. I have no doubt that time is on the side of the progressive forces in India, not the regressive ones.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Yasser speak also known as OODA loop = observe - orient - decide - act . . . repeat as often as required and whenever any of the parameters change . . . so for once I agree with Yasser (as long as he agrees with me?) that what is wrong with strategy based on changing environment and ground realities?

After all, that is life, right?

In this case, arjunm122, don`t you think we should all celebrate Yasser` change (for the better?),

Though I do find his fascination for Khushwant Singh rather off. Harry Potter I would understand.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

YLH and other peace nicks,

It amazing to see these good hearted people talking about economic progress, how the progress of india is tied to that of pakistan.

It is time that pakistanis accept the fact that with or woth out peace with pakistan india will progress. Every country need to have military spending and the indian expenditure of 3 percent of GDP, around 15 percentage of budget is not very high. Importantly india has the fundamentals right, an educated population, democratic system and it is self sustaining. India has high saving rate, finally an image of confidence and competance.

With 40 percent of the budget on military, the rest for dbt repayment, no educational infrastructure and with its great image there is no hope for pakistan. Only way the pak military bidget can be reduced is through a peace deal with india. India should ignore pakistan, tell pakistan to continue with jihadic attacks, acquire sofisticated military equipment, integrate military production and weapons exports. Eventually there could a time when pakistan can contained by routime bombing raids as in palestine.

At last indians are accepting the fact that there can be no peace on jihadic frontier, it can only be acceptable kill ratios. With the return of taliban and alquida from afghanistan, the jihadisation of pakistan is expected to accelerate. Jihadic Republic of Pakistan has a ring to it.

To Pakistanis and Indians on Chowk:

Jinnah is dead. Gandhi is dead. Jinnah or Gandhi`s dream or vision or hopes or fears died with them. Both were men; politicans and whether they were good or bad, wise or foolish, brave or weak is a question not to be decided through personalized embitterness or rancour. Whether they made mistakes or not is a academic debate, which will never solve the problems facing Pakistan or India. Yes, they can be said to have contributed to the problems facing Pakistan and India, but that pales in comparsion to the question of how those problems are to addressed and solved.

They belong to history. The reality of partition is that it was a series of mistakes compounded by a lack of compromise on all sides. The problems of India will solved by Indians just like the problems of Pakistan will be solved by Pakistanis without blaming one another and I can assure you, the problems in both the nations will never be solved as long as we blame each other for our misfortunes and mistakes.

Both India and Pakistan, if they are to progress, have to move beyond the insecurities of parition and its aftermath and to accept the reality of their present, without seeking the impossible by making their future a mirror of what their past was once. Hate and finger pointing has to give way to tolerance and understanding and the arrogance of history, which justifies the hatred between the two nations, has to yeild to humility; humility based on the awareness that both India and Pakistan are flawed. Both India and Pakistan are flawed, because their leaders are flawed by the virtue of being human beings and not demi-gods of omniscience. Humility comes not only from accepting one`s own faults, but in tolerating the other person`s faults as well.

Does hate ever solve anything? Has placing the blame ever solved anything? If not, then why pursue an endeavor, which is so futile and without any merit?

Ciao

#119 by sadna
Take my example. My mom spent all her growing up years in Delhi, Simla and Bhopal; my dad was born a Kanndiga, had his education in Hydarabad and came to Maharashtra for work. I was concived in Assam (I am told), was born in Bhopal, and have lived all my life (except for 2 years that I spent in Chennai working as IT soldier) in that bashon of `Marathi` ness - Pune. I am the walking example of National Integration :) The thing is, no matter where I am in India, I have never felt like an outsider. So much for India-will-break-up-into-4-5-nations-once-Kashmir-is-solved-theories.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Sadna

India, IMO, is a civilization state. It transcends the nation states defined on the basis of language, religion or sects/castes. There is so much overlapping and intermixing at every level that it can not be but one country. The diversity is all too visible on the surface- diversity in language, dress, lifestyles etc. What is not readily observable is the similarity beneath the surface - similarity arising out of culture/traditions, no doubt shaped by four millenia of common history; and similarity in the thought patterns and the shared fundamental value sets, a by-product of the civilizational consciousness. The languages may be different across India but they tell the same tale. India is more closely knit than what many people including some indians think. I had a first hand experience of this fact when I visited Trichy, located in the extreme South, for my summer internship a few years back. Secondly, with the economic growth, the mobility of the labour market in India has grown tremendously. This intermixing of populations, driven by the economic factors, has further blurred the boundaries. In due course of time, the economic factors will promote a common metropolitan culture emerging in the multiple centers of India further increasing the interdependence of diverse peoples. Although India is well integrated as far as culture (civilization) is concerned, I believe it has to go a long way before it becomes a well integrated economic zone. That, IMO, will be the pinnacle of the civilization state of India.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Every community should fight the ogre of communalism. For minorities there cannot be a better and safer system than secularism. However, for secularism to work all communities must adopt secularist attitudes. Christian missionaries who proselytize aggressively are as dangerous to secularism as Hindutva leaders. The same goes for Muslim leaders. If we confine our religion within our homes, the majority will also do the same. I have had no problems with Hindus although I know some enthusiastic missionaries who have been threatened. I have seen Hindus becoming more and more conscious of being had by others. I think that is a natural reaction for which we cant blame Hindus.

Pakistanis including SameerJB and Saima who talk of how ideally India should be many nations, I will like to ask you a personal question, tell me which of these nations should I go?

Let me explain I am Hindi speaking and my father is from Rajasthan but I have never lived in the Hindi-speaking areas of India(in fact neither did my mother, for most part). I was born and lived all my life in another state Kerala 2000 km away. If India is not one nation, please tell me, where do I belong? Is my(or any other Indian`s) identity supposed to be restricted to primarily the language I speak and the exact spot where my father was born? Or if I belong to the nation where I was born, are my parents to be foreigners, to be banished from where they have lived and worked for last many decades?

The other day I happened to meet a Malayalee who grew up in Mumbai, and we had a good laugh about how he had never lived in Kerala whereas I lived there most of my life, but he was the Malayalee speaking one and I was the Hindi speaking one. I have come across this situation many times, a Bengali colleague who grew up in Agra and married a Punjabi, a Kannada friend who grew up among peanut farmers in Gujarat, a Manipuri friend who has actually lived in Rastrapathi Bhavan as part of the President of India`s household(and at that time the President was a Tamilian).

I am not the only one, many of my friends and neighbours have parents from different regions or have themselves married people of other regions or religions or have moved out of `their` region and settled down elsewhere for work.

And its not only my generation. Almost 50 years ago when my father was leaving for studies abroad, in his hometown in Rajasthan, he paid farewell visits to a number of elders, including family friends who I now realise(being faced with this multiple nationhood issue on chowk) happened to be Malayalees. Tell me where do I belong and where do those Malayalees belong?

Our Army is integrated, our paramilitary forces are integrated, our central IPS cadre is integrated(for example you can find N.Indian police officials in S. India and vice versa) how do you propose it should be split?

Our bureacracy is integrated. One of my school classmates in Kerala was Sikh whose Sikh father was true blue Punjabi but his job was in the Kerala cadre and so he spoke better Malayalam than I who had grown up there. The other day I spotted my Malayalee school classmate on ZeeNews promoting tourism in Chattisgarh. He is a Indian Administrative Service officer in the Chattisgarh and is evidently assigned to the tourism department. I know from personal friends that he is married to a Punjabi or Hindi speaking N.Indian. A N.Indian family friend I grew up with in Kerala joined the Indian police service and ended up policing in W Bengal. If India is not one nation, but many nations which are better separate, tell me which nation should both these people go, where should they work? And I am just one Indian relating only PART of my experience with Indian diversity.

Perhaps Pakistanis donot comprehend the huge diversity of India, a diversity which has only grown since 1947. Dalits from N.India get together with Dalits of S.India on common issues. A Cong MP from Kerala is sent to sort out party issues in Maharashtra(for example) When terrorists kill sleeping laborers in Jammu, often its Bihari migrants who are killed. In the Gujarat riots, there were UP/Bihari Muslims also who were killed. In the TV news reportage of the Cauvery river dispute from Bangalore, one can see a Sikh (or two) accompanying the Karnataka CM. A Sikkimese woman was India`s Foreign secretary, a person from the Khasi tribal community in Meghalaya is presently India`s Chief Election Commissioner who made the decisions about elections in Gujarat and J&K.

In summary, our institutions are integrated to a large extent, our lives are integrated to a large extent, our national consciouness is integrated to a large extent, and face it, an Indian currency note has at least 11 languages on it. An Indian from a given region and their talents are not restricted to that region, he/she has the run of the entire country, its institutions and the scope the whole country offers.

The Indian challenge is NOT to repudiate all this and split this consciousness up and restrict people to their `own` regions `for their own best interests` as Pakistanis keep asserting, its to expand the national consciousness and expand the scope for achievement so that no group, or region or individual is left out.

The idea that Tamils cannot live with Kannadas and Keralites cannot live with Maharashtrians so all Kannadigas must leave the rest of India and go back to Karnataka and all Keralites must return to Kerala, that Punjabis in Tamil Nadu or Kolkatta must leave and go back to Punjab and all Maharashtrians in N Delhi must leave N. Delhi and go back to Maharashtra, etc and
that the borders must be drawn around areas which are to be ethnically or linguistically cleansed in Indians` `best interest`, sorry to say such an idea can only occur to someone either not adequately informed OR a determined enemy of modern Indians who wants to see India go through a thousand-fold magnified repeat of the dance of death in 1947.

quick comments: very interesting article. naive hope, ultra simplistic projection of theories.

``consociational model of democracy`` in effect divides nation into parts with unique governance?

sameer #12 very callous attitude my man. Taking away identity is not the solution.

Rajiv Gandhi two-facedness well brought out.

#105 ylh2 (not much change here)

Have your or have you not publically proclaimed (on Chowk) your descent from arabs either connected to Mohammed or part of his slawe/servant retinue? Please answer YES or NO.

I will personally find your message in which you proclaimed your august descent and post to this list. It is clear that you are now passing from sophistry to plain lying, and the world needs to understand the mindset of individuals such as yourself.

As for your silly propaganda that indians consider people like Khushwant Singh traitors, consider the following facts: Mr. Singh is a regular columnist in about a dozen leading indian papers, his views are often quoted and discussed on a weekly basis in dozens of other magazines and papers.

Only an ideologue with vested interests would try to characterize Khushwant Singh as outside the indian mainstream. Some of us are also old enough to remember the khalistani insurgency and KHushwants denounciation of a Sikh theocratic state. For this his home was sandbagged against bombs and he had four armed guards for 10 years !! So lets not waste time on silly arguments about his grand-dad or grand-uncle or whatever.

sadna #111

I realised many maynot be able to read the script in that photo. It said `Sun le beta Pakistan, Baap hai tera Hindustan` :).

Yasser # 113, please be absolutely assured, that ``categorisation`` of Khushwant Singh`s status in India has nothing to do with his sentiments towards Pakistan. It is simply that if you as a Pakistani wish us as Indians well, then you would kindly take the trouble to secure a holistic view on Mr. Khushwant Singh`s attributes before making statements like Long Live KS India.

Thank you, it is always a pleasure debating with you.

BTW, did anybody see the Aaj Tak/Musharaf interview earlier today?

Jay and the Pakistan India Cricket Match,

According to Jay Cricket mirrors political realities (all of a sudden after Pakistan`s loss)... perhaps he will tell us what political reality is mirrored by the fact that Pakistan has won more than 60 games against India while India has won close to 30?

POLITICS/RELIGION and SPORT DON`T MIX you freakoid and there is a good reason for it. What happened was Sachin Tendulkar... that little master is a gem of a player, a genius at this sport... instead of thanking providence for him, freaks like Jay are busy establishing their idiotic notions of Indian racial superiority.

It was a pleasure watching Tendulkar bat, especially the cut for six against the over rated and loud mouth Shoaib... serves him right... Gharoor ka sar neecha... shoaib was going on and on about he is going to crush Tendulkar and the little master taught him a lesson. Perhaps a word also needs to be said for the excessive booing of Waqar Younis.. Magnanimity in victory sadly is a rare virtue... even for the little master.



Sameerjb`s posts numerous:

One thing I don`t understand how you are associating Chaudhry brothers
with the Pakistan movement.. if I understand correctly their father was sub-inspector ... it is only in the 1980s that they actively joined the new muslim league reinvented by the martial law regime and it is only recently that they have gotten to the position of ascendancy.

From a point of view of a Pakistani concerned about the intellectual cultural and social well being of Pakistan, I must there is much we can imbibe from the critical onslaught of Sameerjb that is if we can look past emotional extreme leftist ramblings (peoples` history vs elitist history, gandh-jinnah-nehru presided over killings etc) ...

These are the questions I wish to ask our Government:

1) Why have we abandoned the tradition gurmukhi and dev nagri script?

2) Why don`t we teach Hindi atleast on University level? I find that an average urdu reader in Pakistan is totally oblivious of some of the better works in Hindi literature... Munshi Prem Chand is a perfect bridge.. why isn`t enough attention paid to him?

3) Why isn`t gujurati taught in Karachi which has a large Gujurati speaking population (remember Jinnah was also gujurati speaking) ?

4) Why isn`t Punjabi taught in schools in Punjab and why isn`t the oath of office in Punjab administered in Punjabi?

I was amazed to find that Jinnah`s tomb the inscriptions are in gujurati in the traditional gujurati script... hence one can deduce that when the mausoleum was complete, this sad attitude had not yet crept into our mentality... one of the stated purposes of Pakistan as per the 1930 address of Iqbal was to save South Asian Islam from the stamp of Arab Imperialism and Jinnah himself had to intervene to block attempts by Agha Khan 3 and some Bengali leaguers asking to make Arabic the national language of Pakistan.

So how do we go about changing this trend of Arabicization that set in 2 decades ago, and how do we move towards more decentralization and greater provincial autonomy so that various ethnic nations don`t feel choked? Any thoughts Sameer? Or do you just criticize to win brownie points with the Indians?

-YLH

PS One thing I am particularly worried about is the characterization of Khushwant Singh as a `white supremacist` and `colonialist by Veeresh Malik :

1) It has no logic to it

2) will any Indian who is friendly to Pakistan be caricatured in these unflattering phrases? and if yes why?

-YLH

Amit 98,

That is a comprehensive vision for the future of Pakistan and India... I wholeheartedly reciprocate your views and sentiments...

This caught my attention :

``6. Teach a balanced history in both countries ``

I have made this proposal many times on this side ... (Whatever happened to Daudpota`s attempt)... Perhaps K K Aziz on the Pakistani side would be a good candidate .. also Mubarik Ali.. What do you think?


``4. Hammer out a reasonable solution on Kashmir. Given that Kashmiris have their own government and they control the land, surely we can work out some compromise, where everyone in India and Pakistan have equal access to Kashmir for tourism, pilgrimage etc``

Agreed once again! The land grabbing antics are useless.... with an Independent and peaceful Kashmir we will effectively bury the threat of nuclear war...


You are welcomed anytime in my house in Lahore...

-YLH

Announcing and Anti-Dote to TNT: The OPC (One Person Corollory): Ladies and Gentlemen, in one more attempt to put an end to the constant mumblings about TNT by Jay from his ``pink padded cell`` (per hamidm. (But why pink incidentally? Is Jay Gay in addition to being an obssessive, compulsive, thakerayesque modiite??)), I present to you the (drum-roll please)....the OPC.
The OPC follows from the following quote from Rousseau: ``Man was born free, yet everywhere he is in chains.``
The corollary: In order to be free, we must break these chains. In order to break these chains we must understand the nature of these chains. These chains are that say ``you are part of this nation, this community``. Break them, and there is only one nation left - the nation of mankind and other living creatures on earth. Pakistan is not a nation, the Indian subcontinent is not a nation. All of mankind is one nation. Increasingly this seemingly ideal notion is becoming an everyday reality.
Thank you for reading my profound thoughts for the day. :-)

#106 by jayjay
A good analysis. I have always felt that hindu militancy will not have any takers the day muslims forge a close alliance with hindus. This does not mean giving away one`s religious identity and belief. They just need to shy away from people who speak of Islam in a confrontational way. It is heartening to note that BJP lost in Himachal Pradesh. Modi`s hindutva ideology is a dangerous concept. It should not be allowed to succeed.
Sridhar

Ref jayjay #106

While what you say about Indian Muslims might be true of SOME of the Muslim leadership, I am afraid that you are painting with a broad brush all Indian Muslims as villains. A vast majority (in excess of, I would venture, 99%) are peaceable, law-abiding citizens; the rich leading a luxurious life, the middle-class managing to survive and the poor barely ekeing out a livelihood. Just like their Hindu or Christian neighbors. Don`t blame them for the minuscule minority that might have bought into Wahabi fundamentalism and consider India dar-ul-harb.

Your comments about changing in the thinking of Indian Muslims (towards modernity, scientific education while retaining their culture, identity and religious piety) having a positive influence on Pakistan is right on.

Piscatiqua #104
You bet Indian Muslims are in the mainstream, check this out :) :

http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=298427

BUT but, if you look at the polio incidence cases(India accounts for a majority of the cases in the world), inspite of the repeated highly publicised Pulse Polio campaigns, the highest number of instances seem to occur in Indian Muslim pockets in UP and other places. The primary reason for uneducated Muslim parents not to bring their children to be inoculated seems to be distrust of the perceived `Hindu`-intentions of the state.

NOT BY JAY

``They kill at home for their own salvation, and in quest of martyrdom when they go out to fight the infidels in foreign lands. Mercenaries also join in to inflate their ranks. These are the two faces of the same doctrine - the two sides of the same coin. The troublesome heretics at home deserve the same fate as the oppressing non-believers elsewhere.

The problem thus has to be tackled where it arises and not when it culminates in bloodshed. Trying to catch and punish the culprits has long been a futile exercise and will increasingly so remain. Commenting editorially on the Alfalah massacre, Dawn disclosed that 200 people were killed in 194 incidents in Karachi alone but only four were convicted over ten years. The countrywide picture would be grimmer.

The dogma which leads to intolerance of dissent is nurtured in mosques and madrassahs and later given a violent twist in public life in pursuit of political ends. The attempts by the government and civil society to make the mosques and madrassahs centres of learning and tolerance have been half-hearted and unsuccessful. Bigotry has mushroomed as have such institutions` numbers.

The latest and most elaborate of the plans to change the environs of the madrassahs from parochial to liberal was announced by President Musharraf with great gusto when he was at the height of his power. He undertook to broaden the base of their education by adding to their syllabi the subjects secular and scientific. Scared by the resistance the move encountered, he scaled the plan down to mere registration. Even that did not happen. His relentless zeal which disfigured the country`s political and administrative scene withered when confronted by the clerics, as had his first ambition to reverse the tide of obscurantism and make Pakistan into another Turkey.

Changing his strategy, Musharraf then gratefully acknowledged the service the 8,000 odd madrassahs rendered to the community by imparting lessons and providing lodgings free of cost to half a million poor children and promised to provide computers and other modern teaching aids to them. There is little possibility of that coming about when many of the government`s own schools do not have even blackboards and jute mats for the squatting students.

Musharraf`s plan to cleanse society of illicit weapons floundered as had his madrassah reforms. The weapons recovered, mostly given up voluntarily, were few and old, not worthy even of publicity stunts. Last to surrender would have been the militants.

Religious fanatics, armed with unlicensed weapons and cruising in stolen or smuggled vehicles, thus continue to strike at will at any of the numerous places that the dissenting ones frequent at all hours. The police, as organized at present, are unable to stop them from attacking or catch them while fleeing. They operate with impunity. ``

///HAMIDM, I have company in the cell, above is from dawn of today, written by a pakistani. It cinfirms my view that per the book, even domestic killing is OK for heaven.

Being a Punjabi-Paki myself, I know well that the communal politics (read Muslim League and its Two-Nation Theory) of the British India had its genesis in the chattering classes of the Muslims of UP and CP. ML’s top and middle leadership came from the so-called “culturally-and-linguistically superior” Muslim elite of Urdu-Hindi-Hindustani speaking areas. However, the Muslim majority areas of India on the other hand could not reconcile themselves to the TNT until they were left with no choice. The Muslims of North-Western and North-Eastern India did not actively support the creation of Pakistan until the political atmosphere became so polarized that they could not disassociate themselves from the flow of the political developments.

I find it amazing that these proponents of the communal political (TNT) quickly changed their political colours after the vivisection of the Subcontinent. These communalists became the biggest advocates of secularism. They promptly sheltered themselves under the umbrella of the Congress Party (the target of their hate before the Partition) and have still been hiding there, bar a couple of brief affairs with Desai, VP Singh, Shekhar-led secular collations. How long would they be able to conceal their real self? Their secularism is only façade for the public consumptions. These Indian Muslims are closet religious fanatics. Otherwise, India would not have separate personal/family laws for these so-called secularists. The Muslims of India are nothing but walking and thinking (?) 110 million “Pakistans” (repeat PAKISTANS) tarnishing the image of the secular-minded India. You cannot eat your cake and have it too.

The rising Hindu nationalism is nothing but a reaction to the long-tolerated hypocrisy of Indian Muslims. It is not too late if they stop looking towards west and try to assimilate within the larger Indian society. An attitudinal change in the thinking of the Indian Muslims might also help us, Pakistanis, to re-evolve our national and cultural identity with reason and rationality.

Dear Chowkwallahs,

I had absolutely no interest in starting a debate on Jinnah nor did I start one... I am only giving an alternative view to the one given by P-Mishra in #21. I am no believer in ideologies one nation or two nation or whatever... I believe only in Democracy, peace, stability and Good Economics.... In my own view South Asia should break up even further into smaller Republics, but I shudder to think what upheavel that would create.

The way P-Mishra addresses me is indicative of his lack of self respect, not to mention his coverup of the fact that he can`t really come up with a scholarly response... but Clearly P-Mishra knows something the historians didn`t know for he is adamant on proving something that can`t be proved atleast by facts of History... P-Mishra knows something the First Indian constituent Assembly didn`t know because in 1948 that body in which were present men like Nehru, Azad and Patel, passed a resolution paying homage to the life and times of Quaid e Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah...

And he definitely knows something more than Sarat Chanderbose, brother of Netaji and pres of the forward bloc of the Congress who said: ``Mr.Jinnah was great as a lawyer, once great as a Congressman, great as a Leader of Muslims, great as a world politician and diplomat, and greatest as of all as a man of action. By Mr. Jinnah`s passing away, the world has lost one of the greatest statesmen and Pakistan its life-giver, philosopher and guide.``

Too bad Mr.Bose (and pioneering members of the Indian Parliament) didn`t have the clarity of vision that P-Mishra has exhibited when he(P-Mishra) claims that ``history will always link the murders of direct action day with him``... yes indeed History written by psychopaths of Mr.Mishra`s persuasion will always link them together.. How reliable that might be I don`t know... for after all Mr.Mishra has accused me in the past of being sectarianist for taking pride in the success of Rana Bhagwandas a fellow Pakistani on the Supreme Court Bench. Nothing exemplifies Mr.Mishra`s skewness more.

And what of simple metaphors... for Jinnah even the chaos of civil disobedience was abhorrable, so when he finally forged a pistol he was referring to the Gandhi style civil disobedience that ML would now take up... Gandhi referred to his self as the general and his followers as troops.. can one then argue that he too wanted to wage wars?

Rsaxena mentions the wonderful and heartwarming gesture b/w our two cricket teams... too bad he couldn`t take a leaf out of their book... for nothing could stop him from taking personal pot shot in #72.. ah well that is typical ... .

And its always some excuse for Veeresh... if you mention a western Author, he is always on Pakistani payroll, if you mention someone like Arundhati Roy she is just an anti-national communist, and now Khushwant Singh has joined this list... he is a white supremecist, terrorist, Islamic fanatic and an anti-national communist all in one... It seems that these names are reserved for any Indian who doesn`t harbor some anti-Pakistan feelings as Veeresh.


Sameerjb,

I almost completely agree with you (except on the counts of Nehru-Gandhi-Jinnah) ... your idea is not a new one ofcourse... Sir Fazle Hussain, Sikandar Hayat and others believed in this idea... and it found enough expression in Jinnah`s 14 points...

Subcontinent`s unity lay in the diversity of its peoples and that is where both Indian Nationalism and Muslim Nationalism went against the grain of the people... these two ideas were exploded in stages... hence 1947 was stage 1 and 1971 was stage 2... if Pakistan wants to avoid stage three it has to become more federal and less centralized... more liberal and less ideological.
-YLH

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

............ jay, if you are not careful they will come and lock you up in a pink padded cell with your soul mate from our corner of hell - urstruly ....... get a grip on yourself - have some idlee or coconut curry....... better yet, have some taudi - they tell me it is the only good thing that ever came out of india ...........

amit #98: You are right. What have we achieved in the last 56 years except poverty, injustice and hate by staying in the mode of independence movement. Kashmir is a non-issue except for the spillover from independence movement.

The ogre let loose by the independence movement is alive, well and kicking. How can we blame anybody or Gujratis when supposedly educated people behave like jerks and displaying tunnel vision, when it comes to pissing matches? Thes topics, as hamidm stated, should have been buried long time ago. They belonged to another time and proven to be both dangerous and useless ideals in modern times.

The dynam