Resistance is the first step towards Iraqi independence

re:#193 by satyavadi
I have nothing personally against Gujaratis or anybody for that matter. My dad worked in an important Govt position (he is retired now) and interacted closely with the Gujarati business community in Bombay. The stories i was told can fill pages. In nutshell, Gujarati community is very self-centered, thinks only about Gujaratis and does not think much beyond money. My dad should know better as he spent years interacting with that community. These are facts. As i said, i have nothing personally against the Gujjus.
Sridhar

``I am the last person to criticise or judge people on basis of their ethnicity - that does not simply matter where I come from.``

Ooh right. But religion does. That is so different of course. It is stupid to criticize on the basis of ethnicity, but perfectly okay to kill them because of their religion. What perfect logic.



``Can`t say the same about a `Punjabis` in this forum though. What can I say - grow up. ``

Take your own advice dude.

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

gujjubania:
``I have been reading this book by Gurcharan Das , ``India Unbound ````
...that should have demolished your stereotype of a panjabi. In case you didn`t know, Gurcharan Das is as Panjabi as they come. He was actually born in Pakistan and came to India as a refugee and is successful both as an entrepreneur and an intellectual.

godot [``... emphasis on ethnicity for an illiterate nation like Pakistan is a powder keg... this tribal mentality will doom Pakistan, which will benefit no one. ...``]

I think we both understand the other`s perspective. Trouble is we are coming from two different sets of values. In your value judgement the state entiry of Pakistan is worthy of preservation. In my value judgement it is not. That will inevitably lead to different conclusions even as we examine the same set of facts.

To me Pakistan is a failed experiment that has caused more grief than it has good. Now one could argue, as they are doing with the Iraq case, that okay, even if it was a mistake originally, now what is done is done.. let`s look at the existing reality and do the best we can with it. This is how the Bush apologists are justifying the continuation of that folly and this is exactlywhat the Pakistani patriot says about that state entity.

My contention is simple. A hundred years ago there was no trace of what is called Pakistan. A hundred years from now that state entity may or may not exist. No one knows and there are no credible assurances, as they are for instance, in the case of France. A hundred years from now the country called France will most likely still be around as a country. It`s a fairly decent bet. But not with Pakistan. Perhaps you will agree, or maybe not, but let`s not belabor the point. The point basically is that whether there is or is not a Pakistan or a Bharat is immaterial, the fact simply remains a thousand years ago Punjab did exist and a thousand years from now Punjab will still be around. Romair`s futuristic vision of an urdu speaking Paki-Punjab notwithstanding. (BTW, his post #188 is a good one.)

Your fear that focus on ethnicity will doom Pakiatan, is not appropriate because Pakistan is already doomed. It`s like worrying about new capital charges being filed against a condemned man awaiting execution.

If or rather WHEN the present state-entity called Pakistan finally bites the dust, I doubt if the well being of the average Pakistani will be hurt at all. On the contrary much good may come from it, much the same as the dissolution of ideological states of Eastern Europe did not bring doom and gloom to their people. Olaf and Otto from Lipzig and Dresden are probably going to be better off in the long run even if today they may be having economic hardship. And as Romair visualizes, if there is a monetary union and free exchange of goods, services and labor, what does it matter if Mirpur Khas is being governed in urdu from Islamabad or in Sindhi from Hydeabad? (No, not from Karachi. That`s to be an autonomous entity (T) )

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

Now we have rsridhar generalizing about all Gujaratis and making blanket statements. For example:
[Gujaratis are called banias perhaps because they see nothing beyond ``money``. ]
[These high profile Gujjus treat India like a whore. And they expect to be appreciated in return! ]

And I can come up with such negative generalizations( and worse) about Tamils and any other community in India.. But I won`t...

See how, us Gujaratis never generalize about other communities and treat others with respect?

:)

re:#188 by Romair
Romair,
You have never answered any of my posts. Perhaps because most of my posts addressed to you have been critical.
I want to commend you for this particular post. What you envision is really something worth striving for. Indeed, the need of the hour is to put political differences aside and for Indians, Pakistanis and all south asians to forge an economic union. I believe Kashmir problem will melt away once this happens. Once India and Pak have a $10 billion dollar annual trade and vested interests in place to continue that trade, Kashmir problem will be closer to solution.
I also foresee Kashmir one day will be an independent entity, with the 2 parts merged together and at peace with both India and Pak.
Sridhar

re:#189 by tahmed32
Thanks for the post.
You did deceive the Chowk staff this time, did you not?
Do not have much to say about this Iraq business but i hope my post goes thr`. Agreed about your impressions on Gujjubania. He is young, learning and prone to mistakes.
Sridhar

punjabi-ullu urf Romair,

Sorry Maan! I try make feeble joke.
Also apology to your other isotopes...ahmadzai,kaurasach,zakkk,fosa,vertex...etc

rsridhar #175 Tariq Ali`s article about Iraq stinks. I dont understand why chowk published this article from an individual who does not show up so one can see how much depth there is to his logic.

PS: the above is a disguise i put on this post so the carrier pigeon carrying it is not shot down while flying over chowk staff lines. :-)

as for gujjubania, from his posts it appears that he is a young fellow who has not yet met too many people outside his community. so lets hope he becomes more mature as the years go by for him. i am glad though that it was indian posters on chowk who took him to task on chowk. some of us veteran posters on chowk may have our points of view, but this also shows that if people from different communities are allowed to discuss, vent their spleens, air their beefs, whatever, they ultimately do tend to develop a more realistic understanding.

as for being a ``bania``, i think that is the noblest of professions. after all, a bania makes money by providing something useful to society. i wish we were all banias. we dont need soldiers and sailors and religious gurus in society. so i am surprised why gujjubania is so defensive about being (as he thinks) looked down upon for being a bania that he has to wear it on his shirtsleeve to prove something. anyway, three cheers for ``banias`` - may we pakistanis one day all become banias.

imagine how much better iraqis would have been if saddam had ambitions of becoming a bania rather than a latter day nebuchadnazzer.

i end with iraq in the sentence above in order to comply with chowk staff`s request for people to stick to the topic of this badly written, pompous little article by that little black dwarf - as he called his newspaper - Tariq Ali who is too afraid to show up and be exposed for the lame excuse for a human being that he is. ;-)

I think the discussions of ethnicities in the make-up of a country, is very important and is related directly to Iraq, and its resistance, since Iraq consists of three major ethnicities/divisions: Sunnis, Shias, Kurds. And their behavior will decided its future. So hopefully this reply will be printed and this discussion continued, on this board.

Forceful geographical and political unions based on any concept - religion, nationalism, secularism, ethnicity, etc. - are always going to fail. Unions can only be voluntary. Yugoslavia is now fighting wars, which have there basis in events that happened 700 hundred or more years ago. Soviet Union split up in a day, when the forced unions were allowed a voice.

The solution for South Asia will always be more like EU than like USA. There is far too much history and cultural divisions for it to be like USA - which requires a more homogenous population. Unfortunately, all the leaders of South Asia have tried to force USA type solutions on the area, leading to a lot of bloodshed. They would be better off encouraging an EU type solution.

At the same time, one cannot just directly divide countries along ethnicities, just like one cannot divide them only along religion. All these factors need to be considered. Over time, as different areas unite and separate, they leave a mark on the population and its demographics. Sixty years ago, there was no Pakistani culture. Now there is, and it is distinct from a Punjabi, Baluchi etc. culture. Most well-educated Punjabis of my generation, speak much better Urdu than Punjabi. Most Pakistani Kashmiris speak better Punjabi than Kashmiri. Karachi has the highest Pathan population in the country. Educated Sindhis, invariably, live in Karachi. Sind is now as influenced by Urdu as it is by Sindhi. So a Pakistani culture will have an effect on the Pakistani Punjabi culture/ethnicity. And it will have this effect in a different way than an Indian culture having an effect on Indian Punjab. So in a hundred years from now, Indian Punjab will be different from Pakistan Punjab. And with literacy growing, Pakistani Punjab maybe a pre-dominantly Urdu speaking area, with very little growth of the Punjabi language. But both Punjabs will still have their historical Punjab culture, though in a different and probably more diluted form.

The solution to all of this is for South Asia to divided politically along its fault lines, and for people to be voluntarily allowed to separate, leave etc., any union they do not like. Then for all those individual states to come together in an economic union, voluntarily; much like the EU. This is the only formula that has worked in Europe.

In the end, it is economic unions and not political or geographical unions, that result in the successful future of a country. I am more interested in going to a Dhaka where I can set up an office easily, even if it is not a part of political Pakistan, then to a Dhaka which is part of a political Pakistan, but whose people do not want me to set up an office there.

I think Pakistan has split up along its natural fault lines. Everybody and every province who is part of it now, is there voluntarily. Bangladesh may have also reached that stage. While India and Sri Lanka have not.

My vision of a successful South Asia consists of, all individuals being allowed to live in politically independent states they want to live in, with no forced geographical unions. Looking at the fault lines today, this would result in at the minimum seven or eight independent countries (more if others want to separate) - Nepal, Bhutan, Pakistan, Kashmir, Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka (maybe two countries) - which exist in a strong economic union, with a single currency, open visas with no checks on the borders, complete free-trade, completely free movement of capital and humans and material, with no work-visa restrictions. And it would be a nuclear free zone, with severe restriction on offensive weaponry purchases. With a NATO type joint military force to handle external threats (there won`t be any).

Each country in this union, would manage its own domestic politics through its own national govt. And its foreign policy could be managed through a united body. This united body would also run the NATO-like military forces. The head of that body could rotate amongst all states, with India being the head every alternate time, due to its size. So an Indian head, then a Pakistani head, then an Indian head, then a Bangladeshi head, then an Indain head; so on and so forth.

This is the only thing that will work. There is no history of South Asia being peaceful under forced geogrphical unions. Forced unions will, invariably, lead to freedom struggles and conflicts between South Asian nations forever. History has proven it. Just look at what happened in Yugoslavia, even after hundreds of years of a forced union.

super-bania

~~but believe me or not , if you ever come face to face with me and say the stuff you said here , I will beat the life out of you.~~

I have not laughed so much in years! Thanks for cheering me up you puny little coward.

;)

ironman

Jokes are supposed to be funny. Dont bother trying to make a joke unless it is going to be funny, or you wll look like an idiot.

super-bania

You have a boyfriend now. Congratulations.

Nice to see one person identify himself, rightly or wrongly, as a `Bania` and hundreds of years of momin and pseudo-momin teachings come out in open (cowering with fear, wet his pants, sells his mom ....) Thanks momins and their fellow travellers. Nice to be reminded. Dont worry, we are all banias here in India now, even most (or the best) of our muslims, except for a minority of our Punjabis, who are still pseudo-momin. Lucky they, must be the wind coming from across the border.

By the way, the 1000$ GNI per capita difference that gujjubania was referring to is there in this year`s World Bank report, and also in the Human Developement Reports of UNDP this year.

On to a $2000 difference in 5 years. Whatdyasay? Could be done.


(Hope this goes through, even partially. Been a little late in joining the fun, after the Chowk staff warning and all that. What to do? Being a lurker rather than a poster, dont have a habit of jumping in.)

As SR has so rightly pointed out, the historical ethnic identities may find a more logical and peaceful co-existance togather than the nationhoods based on religion or expediency of time. These ethnic identities with thousands of years of history, their own language & culuture, their own poets and their own literature, are homogenous, confident and at peace with themselves.

Some like Punjabis, Sindhis, Pashtoons, Baluchis, Bengalis, Biharis are well defined.

May be some one can enlighten me as to which are the other major nationalities inside India?