My Pakistan Diary: Lahore Aaya Main Othay Dil Chhod Aaya!

re:#233 by Mantolives
Mantolive mian,
When the right to vote and elect a leader of one`s choice has been taken away from the people by a dictator, does Rushdie`s words ``In Pakistan, fundamentalism doesn`t spring from the people.... Jamaat-e-Islami have their supporters among college students and so forth, but relatively few people have ever voted Jamaat in an election`` not appear ludicrous to u?
What elections is Rushdie talking about? May be the guy was drunk when he wrote those words. Surely, you should know better.
Sridhar

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

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

Manto
//....Salman Rushdie must be on the ISI`s payroll. ...//

Nah - I don`t think so.

Like I said - if you believe in your heart that problem of fundamentalism in pakistan is limited to a few individuals - then so be it.

I mean - it is so obvious - what`s going on in pakistan in name of religion. If Rushdie`s words convinced you otherwise .... well - it`s your country ..... Believe what you please.

guju,

``My country - right or wrong. Whether this `Kashmir` cause of yours is just or not is immaterial to us Indians.``

Hehehe, you just don`t get it. Kashmir is hardly `my` cause...hell I have little to do with it except pointing out the obvious...Kashmir is India`s `problem`...now isn`t that a more mature way of looking at it?

Geez...``My country - right or wrong``...what nonsense...more like ``My country``. Period. Satement of fact. Geographic actuality...political assignment...but most importantly, fellow country-men. Now when a bunch of your fellow-country men want to jump ship, my first reaction would be : ``but why!?!?!?``, not ``I don`t care, stay or die...``...

``I dont think most Indians see this as jingosim , but rather as survival. What is ours NOW , will remain ours. Doesn`t matter whether its right or wrong , or what was the case in 1947 or 1367 or whatever . That is just the way it is.``

A matter of Survival? How weak do you think India is? If India cannot stay federated by virtue of what it has to offer the citizenry (i.e. by showing the whole is greater than the sum of it`s parts), then it will fall apart naturally. Boot-on-kneck actions only postpone the inevetable. This has nothing to do with right or wrong, just good old fashion human nature.

``If majority of Indians were not serious about holding on to Kashmir , hell we would have lost it in 1989-93 period itself - which was when militancy was mainly carried out by locals and was at its highest. Its all about power. India has the power to hold on to Kashmir. Pakistan/local Kashmiris do not have the power to succeed against India. And thats what matters. Right or wrong -immaterial. (Sigh..So much India can learn from US...)``

And this, ladies and gents, is the ugly face of nationalism. Death to those who stand before us!!! It`s amazing how Jihadis have this very same attitude towards Kashmir...but what I find even more curious is that I haven`t even heard of any sort of uprising from that region...and this doesn`t pique your curiosity? Instead all I get is this cheast-thmping response...

So much India can learn from the US - hehehe, do you watch the news? :-)

``If you dont like it , what are you gonna do about it ? Cry yourself stupid in internet forums ? Okay... ``

Hehehhe...I don`t like it, and I can`t do anything about it...I`m pretty much set...I think deep down your disturbed that I may in fact be right...

``Doesn`t matter whether those people in Kashmir valley fighting against India are locals or Pakis (although fact is 90% are pakis)...they are fighting our country , and should be treated with the iron fist.)``

...oh come now, you know it`s not that simple. Don`t make me quote AI now...India a Canada is not...no doubt their are very legitimate reasons for the Indian security forces/army in J&K...hell the Pakistani army is across the LoC, and there are in fact terrorists running around...however are you trying to tell me that that is the Indian Army`s only role in the region? Hehehe...right....sure...

``ps : sorry , but I just do not have the patience to go through your lengthy blah blah blah posts. Just read the first few lines and get the gist of it. If you are hurt that I didn`t respond to the no-doubt excellent points raised by you, I apologise. ``

...no need to, it`s not at all obligitory for you to respond to anything I say...

Ankit,

``You are a disgrace to say the least.. ``

Thank you.

``Why will dealing with kashmir with an iron fist not go down well with Muslims..?``

Why should it go down well? Let me be clear, dealing with an iron fist is pretty much quashing all separatist sentiment...that`s not a clean job. We`re not just talking about fanatics and infiltrators here. There`s an underlying political motivation, and it has to be addressed reasonably. Deal with it sloppily, and you will find many (thinking) Indians who will be rather angered, Muslims in particular since as members of the same minority group they will identify closely with the Muslims in Kashmir (yes, it works that way...). This isn`t a matter of what Muslims should do...it`s what they would most probably do...

Dealing with the issue in an uncompromising, iron-fisted way (which too many Indians here support for my own liking) pretty much validates the separatist movement...it confirms the perceived unwillingness of India to recognize the concerns and aspirations of the Kashmiris.

``Why should there be any compromise with any pathetic traitor who hopes to break up his country? Why will Indian Muslims, in your opinion, be willing to side with the traitors of their motherland..?``

*Sigh*... you (and your fellow nationalists) sound exactly like a Jehadi. Replace `traitor` with Kafir...and wow! As I`ve stated for the umpteenth time, I`d rather see any country break up then having a part of it forced to stay at gunpoint. That`s my personal view. Would you rather hold an entire territory hostage? Who becomes the terrorist now?

Indian Muslims will generally sympathize with Kashmiris if it is perceived (rightly or wrongly) as anti-Muslim violence. Further, it is well known that life isn`t a picknick up there...it`s sad, but true. People will not put `Indianness` ahead of another identity if they feel that tomorrow they may be treated just as harshly for being a Muslim. And we all know, we Muslims are always clamoring for a new state...so we have to be kept in line, right?

``Yes, there is a problem up north. There are some fanatics who have wet dreams of joining the Ummah...``

Oh yes, I know about them, and I think India is dealing with them rightly. However, let`s not forget the fanatics-turn-renegades who India supports in counter-insurgencies, let`s not forget about humiliating searches and arbitrary arrests which plague the region. Oh yes, this is all about the Ummah...nothing to do with legitimate political dissent...but that`s right, even questioning India`s actions or motives is being a traitor...

Such a misuse of nationalism...such a wrong-headed understanding of what citizenship should mean...how sad. And what if one day India decides to go on rampage? What if it wants to see a greater India? Oh yes, call the motherland the fatherland and fall in line or be branded a traitor...and we all know what comes next...

``...and the only way to deal with them is the way we have been doing for so long. Fall in line or go to meet your hooris. There cannot be any compromise in this regard. ``

Ahh..and with that said, how can a Muslim not feel secure in India...

It seems like fanatics like yourself seem to have a nexus here on chowk, but I have yet to meet one in person...how odd!

Manto,

with all due respect...what does Rushdie know? He`s a mere storyteller...anyone can dig up unusual/odd/questionable events on historical figures/events and make it seem bizzare/absurd. This is what his job is...his views on anything...are...well...tainted.

Mohar 11,

You are right .... Salman Rushdie must be on the ISI`s payroll.

vertex 214

********

c) India has already, from her point of view, given up 1/3 + some more of Kashmir. Given your interpretation of the constitution, all Indians are OBLIGED to wage war against Pakistan and China to re-instantiate India`s territorial integrity...sounds familiar, no?

d)The Kashmir problem is an issue of separation...such problems may have to be dealt with outside the framework of the constitution. The right to self-determination need to be weighed against the `territorial` rights/integrity of India. Constitutionally, there could be compromise...e.g. autonomy - which I think is the case. India can deal with Kashmir with an iron fist...but that will not go well with India`s Muslims, and will prove to threaten Indian `unity` more than ever.

If you want to invoke the constitution on this matter, then it`s a cheap matter of fascistic speech suppression. Realistically, you have to address the separatist sentiment...there be problems up north, buddy! Let`s not kid ourselves....

**********


You are a disgrace to say the least..

Why will dealing with kashmir with an iron fist not go down well with Muslims..? Why should there be any compromise with any pathetic traitor who hopes to break up his country? Why will Indian Muslims, in your opinion, be willing to side with the traitors of their motherland..?

Yes, there is a problem up north. There are some fanatics who have wet dreams of joining the Ummah and the only way to deal with them is the way we have been doing for so long. Fall in line or go to meet your hooris. There cannot be any compromise in this regard.

The complete Salman Rushdie quote from Shame is:

``My sister is a Pakistani citizen. On my good days, I think of her as Pakistan, and then I actually like the place... I have learnt about Pakistan in slices, the same way as I have learned my growing sister.`` Page 66

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

manto
//these observations hold true...whether our Indian friends especially those inspired by hate ... care to accept it or not...//

If you are convinced that ``In Pakistan, fundamentalism doesn`t spring from the people`` - well ... good for you.

If you believe pakistan is a country where people donot accept jihadis and mullahs .... there are no jihad donation boxes .... there are no million man marches sponsored by lashakrs .... where mosques donot preach against yahood and hinoods from loudspeakers .... where 85% people do not think OSama is a hero... well ... good luck to you.

But the reality is very different. Forget about hateful indians - the whole world knows what pakistan stands for.

dm #226:

[...and all of FV`s articles on IMs speak of the anguish of someone who is at the receiving end of this (mis)perception...]

how true...green tiles in airport toilets can be quite painful.

guju,

``Vertex , (I`ll keep it simple) thank you for that. Proves my point. ``

Heheh, if you say so. Never could grasp what your point was, if any, aside from invoking the constitution of India to silence your critics.

Anyhow, nice of you to completely ignore my rebuke...thank you for that. Much easier to respond to mindless rants.

``Kashmir (whatever part is ours) is an integral part of India , and we Indian will do anything to keep it with us , or to hold on to any territory that belongs to us. Now whether that means means fair or foul , doesn`t really matter to us. India is more important. Indeed , thats exactly whats happening. ``

Oh, how patriotic! Wah!

I like how you threw in that ``whatever part is ours`` bit there. That little slip-up on your part simply admits that you recognized that the J&K issue was at least in some point of time an issue...now all you have to do is admit that there still is some issues up there, and it may not be just Paki terrorists/agents crawling across the border.

Then, maybe you`ll wake up and realize that no nation is greater than it`s citizens...and that simply to retain a couple of lines on a map is not worth inflicting misery on people, no matter what side of the conflict they reside on. I`d sooner see India, or any other country, fall apart than be held together by a soldiers bootstraps...

``Now , if a few of my `fellow citizens` don`t agree with that , all I can say is bring it on (purdah ke peeche kyon rahte hon , saamne to ayo jara).... ``

Bring what on? If any Indian disagrees with your jingoism, you want to fight them? How old are you, 10?


``Other mistake you make is to confuse `Indian nationalism` with `hindu nationalism`.``

Actually, I don`t in practice. I`m not a big fan of nationalism of any nation in general, however I don`t mind it if it`s simply an expression of confidence and strength-in-community. In general I find that what we would call right-wink hawkish policies are always rooted in a deep-seated nationalist sentiment...so I`m very `unkeen` on the concept.

However, I am concerned with Hindu-nationalism, and there is no denying that witht he rise of the BJP there is a growing perception that Indian nationalism = Hindu nationalism and that concerns not only me, it concerns many other Indians as well across the religious/ethnic/political spectrum. If you don`t fancy yourself as a Hindu-nationalist, then I have no beef with you on that issue. If you fancy yourself as a nationalist, then I may very well have a beef with you simply because the concept has the potential to encourage unthinking, destructive action. There`s little difference between militancy rooted in nationalism and militancy rooted in any other ism - and you know which particular ism I mean in particular.

``Its called Indian Army. Indian Army belongs to India , a secular state ,not any religion. Indian soldiers belong to a whole variety of religions , ethnic background etc. They fight for India. Not for any religion.``

Oh grow up. Indian Army does whatever the government tells it to do...and the people more often than not are told what is good for them, rather than them telling the government what to do...it`s the same the world over.

``Also , most of us Hindus see ourselves as Indians first. Indeed , that’s often the only identity we care about. ``

Actually, Indians in general have very, very strong regional identities. I know people who would only wed their children to people from certain cities, let alone from different ethnic groups. There are a crud load of `identities` Indians care about, a generic `Indian- ness` only showing up when we`re talking about national issues or foreign policy, or really bad bollywood movies...

There is no generic Indian identity, imho...rather there should bes a recognition that being Indian is not being just one thing.


``You talk a lot about `hindutwa forces` - ha ! Thats only an excuse my man. An excuse and an explanation for your total disloyalty and hatred for the country of your birth or residence.``

Oh geez...you sound like a right-wing American hick...


``But I have also realised in course of time that there are many Indian muslims who are as Indian as I am.``

Out of curiosity, what is the basis for this `realization`? Not contradicting it, or challenging it, just curios to know what your perceptions and ideas of what being `Indian` are...

`So I`m just happy those like you (anti-India `Indian` muslims) are pretty much a minority within a minority. At least , I hope so.`

Actually, I think I`m rather pro-India...I really want to see it work and prosper. However, not at the cost of others...

Salman Rushdie in his book `Shame` made a very profound observation:


``In Pakistan, fundamentalism doesn`t spring from the people.... Jamaat-e-Islami have their supporters among college students and so forth, but relatively few people have ever voted Jamaat in an election. Jinnah himself, the Founder or Quaid-i-Azam, doesn`t strike me as a God bothered type.... Theology was just not the point...`` Page 266

and something which was intensely personal...

``My sister is a Pakistani citizen. On my good days, I think of her as Pakistan, and then ... slices, the same way as I have learned my growing sister.`` Page 66


Needless to say .... these observations hold true... even today, whether our Indian friends especially those inspired by hate ... care to accept it or not.


-YLH

#226 by dost-mittar on April 30,

I agree and disagree simultaneously ..beat that!

That muslims in India have a split loyalty is not some devious perception. I have certainly met muslim in past (when they were far more confident i.e. pre babri etc) who would proudly announce their fondness for pakistan as a matter of ``dil`` and ``mazhab``. This does not mean that they would do anything anti-national, just that thats is how they felt and were confident enuogh to state on my (on-muslim) face. Over time, it is no more PC to say such things, and I dont think its just because of the riots, they happened before as well, but the rise of BJP in the 90`s has perhaps given a sense that most of the electorate disaproves this sentiment. (the muslims i am talking of are not from the chattering classes). So i agree that the perception (of split pasion) is not out of a some twisted imagination.

What I disagree is that Vajpayee`s claim that indo-pak peace can resolve some of the intra-india hindu-mulsim conflicts is bogus. I see that peaceful indo-pak relations means that politicians will be less able to fish in troubled waters of communal problems. Yes, the main aim of the peace process is not intra-india conflics, but it is a partial aim that makes sense.