A Waste of National Resource

Always going off topic we are. Saadat Hasan Manto`s short story `Toba Tek Singh` is the BEST source for gaining an understanding about Partition of 1947. All other books- `the emergence of Pakistan`, `sole spokesman` etc. pale in comparison. However, most Pakistanis would be deeply offended by SH Manto`s analogies that all the leaders were fools in trying to partition a landmass.

For today, Pakistan does not need any explanation for why it was created as no one ever feels the need to talk about it`s raison d`etre.

Anyway, I still think English should be primary language of instruction for schools. Simply because the poor consider the knowledge of english as something better than knowing Urdu.

TNT as re-interpreted by Manto is based upon an ``essentialistic view of human solidarity``-(I hope he understands what I mean by that) with a theological ontology of social objects and identities

#72 by Mantolives
//...I am the only one here saying that Pakistan should exist without the aid of theories and ideologies, ...//

Exactly. You are the only one..... Albeit your point is valid: that a state should exist as it is..... But in case of Pakistan, that`s just pure fantasy......The situation as it stands on the ground in present-day Pakistan, precludes such an ideal outcome.

After 56 years of pulling hard in negative direction, Pakistan does need some theories and ideologies....this time some positive ones.

Pakistan is in the middle of very big cesspool. It needs directions/guidance to move to the safe shores. That guidance would come from a positive agenda/ideology.

Ferozek #65: ``Sir, you are not making any sense. I am not entirely certain, what is your point of view. You seem to be confused and in clearing your confusion, you are only contradicting yourself.``

I think there is a huge difference between how you and I view Pakistan. To me, Pakistan is the view and habits, priorities and customs of its people. To you, Pakistan and Pakistanis are Constitutions, History book and Theories (TNT). I am trying to take a very practical view of it situation and identity. You are looking at it totally from a theoretical point of view.

I don`t think there is any contradiction in the minds of the mainstream citizens of Pakistan about why they are in Pakistan, and thus the identity of Pakistan. The contradiction, as I pointed out, only exists in the minds of people who study only theories and Constitutions. For everyone else (perhaps 99% of the country), Pakistan is a place where their economic necessities are being catered for better than they would be in any other option they have.

As I pointed out, it is only on Chowk and air-conditioned living rooms where discussions of the type you are pointing out, take place, to define the identity of Pakistan. Not in normal everyday Pakistan. Over there, it is just economic survival.

Let me take each point one by one:

1) Constitution: How many Pakistanis can even read the Constitution of Pakistan? How many have read it? How many actually care about it? How many know what it is? It is not like the USA, where everyone has enough time (and money) to study every amendment.

I can make a bet that 90% of the country, if not more, doesn`t care one way or the other about the Constitution. It behaves the same way, in its daily life, whether there is a Constiution or whether there is a Martial Law.

The criteria by which it judges any govt. is how much improvement the govt. brings to his/her everyday life. For example, it will judge Musharraf`s govt., not by what it did or did not do to the Constitution, but by how many jobs it creates. If this govt. creates millions of jobs, do you really think people will care what the hell it did to the Constitution?

It is a sign that Pakistan is still at a stage where economics need to be satisfied. There is no confusion on this. People will support the govt. which can bring about the best economic uplift, not the one which can author the best Constitution. Only people who have their economics looked after (like you and I) have enough time to discuss Constitutions.

2) History Books: Two-thirds of the population never went to school. So they obviously don`t even know what is in the history book. Out of the remaining, probably only 10% or so got to the level, where they studied history. Out of that, hardly anyone took history and Pak Studies classes seriously in Pakistan. So how many people are being, ``brainwashed`` by history books.

Do go and try to have a discussion with a peasant farmer (easily the profession practiced by most Pakistanis) about whether he is interested in Ghaznavi and Prithviraj, and see what he says. He is interested in how much water his crops are going to get.

3) TNT: This is theory, as the title suggests. It is thrown around, once again, not amongst the average Pakistanis. Everyone knows they are in Pakistan to make a living, not to satisfy some theory. Why do they leave Pakistan for greener pastures, when they can?Wouldn`t they stay in Pakistan, if they believed in theories.

Once again, these are debating points, created for discussions by theorists.

Bangladesh separation was the classical exmaple of how economics works. Bangladeshis separated not because it stopped believing in a theory. They separated because its people felt they were not getting a fair share of the economic growth from West Pakistan. Once again, it was economics. Their breaking away, or the non-migration of all Muslims from India, merely strengthens the fact that economics decides everything.

So if the point you are making were that we need to redo our history books, and that TNT was not based on religion, and that the Constitution contradicts what the people give importance to, then you have a valid point. These changes need to be made.

However, the point you are trying to make is that Pakistanis and Pakistan itself does not have an identity or is confused, based on what is in written by a few professors in the history books, what is written by a few lawyers in a Constitution, or what is written by a few political scientists about TNT.

This point is completely invalid. Pakistan`s identity is not from documents, written by a super-elitist group, to satisfy their own needs and ambitions. Pakistan`s identity is the behavior of the poeple of Pakistan. And their behavior is based on their economic needs. The ones who thought they would be better off in India, stayed there. Those who thought they would be better in separating, formed Bangladesh. The remaining believe in Pakistan. That is their identity.

The only group that is confused are the people who write the Constitutions, and the history books and debate TNTs all the time, i.e the super-elite. Even they are not confused, they are just pushing their agendas, or just want to debate things to satisfy their own curiosities. But you cannot simply extrapolate the wordings of this elite to assume that the whole country does not have an identity and is thus confused. That is a huge jump, with no facts to back it up.

I received my driver`s license from the Ontario govt. In it, they wrote my name backwards, i.e. Raja Umair, instead of Umair Raja. I carry this license around all day. Now does this mean that I am a confused person? Do I not know what my own name and identity is, since I live with an important document that has my name backwards?

Is it the license that defines who I am, or do I define myself, based on what I think my name to be? Does the backward spelling of my name define a confusion in me, or a confusion in the govt. elite who created the license for me?

The fact is that I know exactly who I am and what my name is. And when someone asks, I tell them. If they ask to see my name on my license, I show it them, and explain to them, that the govt. is confused, not me.

Similarly, the people of Pakistan know exactly why they are in Pakistan, and that is thus their identity. If you want to understand that identity, then look at the people. For some reason, you and a few others, keep trying to define that identity, by looking at their drivers` licenses. If their name is backwards on their drivers` license , that does not mean they are confused. It means that the govt. elites who made the drivers` license are confused.

I am thus asking you to define the people by their actions and what they say. You keep basing all your arguments on what their drivers licenses say (in this case Constitution, history books, TNTs etc.).

PS: But while you have quoted examples of it, you haven`t shown how they are destructive.

Mohar 11

Agreed

#70 by Mantolives
///....I am beginning to feel most people discussing TNT haven`t made an effort to understand the concept first. ///

On the otherhand - that`s exactly what I have done - I have understood the concept of TNT. That`s why I have cited examples (theoritical) both inside and outside the Pakistan ( e.g. blacks in USA ) to show that TNT as a legitimate tool for minorities is dangerous and destructive.

I hope you are reading my posts. I have NOT equated TNT to Pakistan, Islam or Sharia.

It is quite clear that Ballu Khan is not gifted when it comes to English comprehension. Now it is back to petty insults and no real logic. These are typical scare tactics of the fanatical Pakistan bashers... I think people know me enough to know where I stand. I am the only one here saying that Pakistan should exist without the aid of theories and ideologies, and that the two nation theory is irrelevant to modern Pakistan. A Pakistani in my estimate is any citizen of Pakistan regardless of religion caste or creed.

As for Indian Muslims... maybe that might be the end result... or maybe this time around the majority will come to its senses and assuage their fears as the citizens of a Multicultural state ... in any event I don`t give a damn.

HA! I can see YLH getting support from those who want theocracy to be practised in its full spirit in the 21 st century Pakistan. So YLH is the chief ideologue of the modern day TNT- this time clothed in another enticing discourse. And the irony of it- He is willing to let TNT be extended to its ludicurous dimensions.
And the Churchillian test- I do not think it is even worth a second look- it is just one of the white man`s posturing to legitimize the imperialist policy of divide and rule. By this test the Indian muslims are now ready for another round of TNT- And YLH can become the latest ideologue for the power elites who love this game of divide and rule.

66:

In my opinion it is neither wrong nor destructive ... I hope you got the answer in #61.


I am beginning to feel most people discussing TNT haven`t made an effort to understand the concept first. Some are equating it to Pakistan, others with Islam and Pan-Islamism, and others think it means Islamic sharia.

``All I am simply saying is that Pakistan has to admit the truth that its reasons for a seperate homeland for the Muslims of India were based on issues, which had nothing to do with religion. We should admit this truth and teach the population of Pakistan this truism, which will end the confusion for once and all. We as a people are not overtly religious and we are not too keen on the ideals of Islam as practiced in a Middle Eastern context. Our understanding of Islam is based on the historgraphy of Islam as it evolved within the Muslim experience in India and not in Saudi Arabia as most of our diehard compatriots wish and hope.``

Agreed. And I don`t see what I am saying different. Nor do I think you have an understanding of TNT which has nothing to do with religion per se. I can`t believe a lecturer of history like yourself is giving an end all be all verdict about an imagined concept. An imagined concept is never right or wrong but is relative ... if TNT was wrong because it stressed common religious culture, then you call to question most nations. If it was wrong because Bangladesh was created then I think NHK has inadvertently rebutted that in #38 ... in any event you should ask yourself what was the nature of this TNT, did it ask for a separate country as a definite thing, and if it did, did it ask for a confederal nature of the state or more than one Muslim countries??

In any event I will be the first one to say that Pakistan as it was created on August 15th 1947 had nothing to do with the the two nation theory but was a legal transfer of power. In any event Jinnah refuted any arguments for TNT continuing to define nationhood with that first speech and by making a Hindu the law minister of Pakistan clearly symbolizing a paradigm shift. Logically TNT could only exist in a United India and had no rationale after 1947 atleast in Pakistan ... when Shabbana Azmi calls for a separate Muslim `secular` leadership she affirms the existence of TNT in India.


Pakistan DOESNOT need TNT to define itself. It will exist and the law of diminishing return hasn`t set in. Last I checked you were the one questioning it. You were arguing that Pakistan will unravel if Islam is not the binding force... now you have taken an about turn. I am saying on the other hand TNT which was a valid theory for pre partition India has no relevance for Pakistan today. Pakistan is defined by the four subnationalities as NHK has pointed out in #60.

Nor do I think there is any need to do away with the confusion as long as a constitutional federation can ensured. Sadly you are more confused than all of us ... because on one day you argue one thing and on the other day you argue the exact opposite. Perhaps you should clarify your own concepts before you try and explain away what you meant and said.

Also Read #61, #62

-YLH

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

#61 by Mantolives
//..(though as makers of Pakistan they don`t want to... I know cuz I am half shia) wants to separate and does so legally atleast I wouldn`t have a problem..//

Sure , you wouldn`t :). (By the way, bengalis were also ``maker`` of Pakistan - they too separated, didn`t they. )

But That was NOT my point though - I don`t know how active and wide-spread shia and sindhi separitism is on ground. I just used them as ``theoritical`` examples to show you how dangerous your principle ( TNT as tool for minority to assert itself) is.

I can as well give example of blacks in USA. They are/were economically subjugated, they are culturally different. They can as well use TNT as a tool to assert themselves! So can the mexican-americans! But that would be totally destructive.

#60 by nazarhayatkhan
//..Unfortunately, we are still confused...//

I think all this confusion and tendency to clutch and straws like TNT to define Pakistan comes from a very basic flaw in Pakistani psyche ..... which is its compulsive desire to be ``Not-India``. That negative aganda of nation building has led to all kinds of confusions and concotions.

That negative agenda has led pakistanis to a situation where they have started to imagine themselves to part of Arabs or Central Asia or whatever. There can be nothing more pathetic than this - Where have you seen a group of people of reasonble inttellignence who try to re-invent their whole ancestry? Arabs snigger at pakis. Central Asians are just amused.

Pakistan must start having a Positive Agenda.

re: Romair # 43

Romair, I am truly sorry to state this and I do this with respect and humility towards your viewpoints. Sir, you are not making any sense. I am not entirely certain, what is your point of view. You seem to be confused and in clearing your confusion, you are only contradicting yourself.

Romair, economics and security are and may be non-religious ideas and concepts, but if you read the constitution of Pakistan, it makes clear in no uncertain terms that all laws in Pakistan will based on Islamic principles and the goverance of Pakistan will be based on Islamic ideals. This means that everything in Pakistan, by the virtue of its constitutional paramountancy of Islam, has created a conflict of interest. Nothing in Pakistan can exist without the imprintur of Islam and even secular ideas and concepts have to be re-interpretated within a Islamic understanding. Sir, when all your laws and ideas of government and goverance are based and grounded in such legalities, the concept of a nation-state that emerges is based on a theocracy and in a theocracy, secular concepts/ideas have no place.

Romair, if people of Pakistan do not follow the ideas of religion or principles of Islam in their daily lives, as you suggest, then that implies that the state of Pakistan is practicing official hypocricy by attributing its logic to Islam. If such is the case, then why are we not removing the said articles and declarations from our constitution, which claims Islam as the basis for our nationalism and raison d`etre?

This how this whole debate started. It started when I pointed out that Pakistan, as a state, is flawed because it has many contradictions which have not been adquately explained. Now, by stating your reasons and arguments, you have brilliantly proven my point by stating a very real contradiction within Pakistan itself and that is; the difference between what we claim and what we practice.

Thank you for your kind support!

Ciao

re: Stuka # 53

Nazar was correct. He said it much better.

We are really a confused nation and since our history has effectively torn out our roots and refuses to accredit our past, we are in a limbo. Our history, if you read the official tales begins in 711 AD when Mohammad Bin Qasim landed and before that, we never existed. In a religious sense that might explain the last 1300 or 1400 years of our existence, but it does not explain our cultural and social evolution, which has pre-dated the arrival of Islam. We do not admit to that past and we create our ``own history`` and if you read Pakistani history text books, you will discover that only Muslims have lived in this region; ruled this region; developed this region and still exist in this region. The history of India, to which we belong does not exist in our intellects and we think that the history of India is subordinated to our history and not the other way around as it should be taught.

Pakistani history textbooks are openly dismissive of this fact and they refuse to teach the history - objective and a neutal history - and if you study them, you will find to your horror that only Muslims history matters in the history of India. We refuse to acknowledge the contribution of the Indian culture or history or politics to the development of Islam in India and thus fail to realize that Islam has fused within the rubric of India and has been influenced by its exposure to Indian cultural,, social values and politics. Our history teaches us of a Muslim historic existence, which is in complete isolation of all other religions, and other influences. Hence, we are confused and have to reconcile our past with our present, which was artifically created and has no basis in the past; the real past of our common existence.

re: arjun_m

I have no idea how it will be solved, but the best option is make the LoC into an international border and exist within the new status quo. In fact, that status quo already exists and all its needs is an official confirmation from India and Pakistan, but mainly from Pakistan, to accept the LoC as a reality. It will happen, because Kashmir is not going willy nilly to Pakistan or India and if the LoC is not an option, then the independence of Kashmir becomes an issue, which both India and Pakistan are not too keen to support. Hence, since beggers cannot be choosers, LoC will be made into an international border and this will end the problem.

re: Yasser # 50

TNT is a moot point. It was never right and Maulana Azad Kalam said so clearly and TNT died when East Pakistan became Bangladesh on December 16, 1971. Pakistan will always exist and there is no danger of it going quietly into the gentle night and the reality of Pakistan as a nation state cannot be denied.

I am not interested in the value of an act of a British parliament or if the power was transfered legally and those agruments, can be debated endlessly. All I am simply saying is that Pakistan has to admit the truth that its reasons for a seperate homeland for the Muslims of India were based on issues, which had nothing to do with religion. We should admit this truth and teach the population of Pakistan this truism, which will end the confusion for once and all. We as a people are not overtly religious and we are not too keen on the ideals of Islam as practiced in a Middle Eastern context. Our understanding of Islam is based on the historgraphy of Islam as it evolved within the Muslim experience in India and not in Saudi Arabia as most of our diehard compatriots wish and hope.

In this sense, TNT is flawed because a lot of Indian Muslims opted not to move to Pakistan and chose to stay in India and that means, in a contempory sense, the issue of TNT was not totally agreed upon by the Muslims themselves in India. If the Muslims had whole heartly supported the concept of a nation-state based on TNT and religion, they would all have migrated en masse to Pakistan!

If the issue of TNT was debated and rejected by Muslims in India before partition in 1947 and then by East Pakistanis, themselves Muslims, when broke away from West Pakistani Muslims and created Bangladesh. If religion could not prevent the ``batwara`` of Pakistan in 1971 and keep Muslims together, then the logic of TNT in a pre-August 1947 India asking for a seperate homeland for the Muslims on the basis of religion makes for a weak argrument.

Therefore, we have to explain the logic of 1947 on issues that are not related to religion, because that is the only method, by which the demand for Pakistan makes sense in a historical, constitutional and economic sense. The real issues and whose denial by the majority forced the Muslims to seek the division of India as the final recourse to a constitutional deadlock.

Ciao