Subcontinental Chain Reaction

soundmeister #231 Thanks for taking the time to describe the meaning of Hindutva. After reading it, I realize that you are making a big mistake in not fully appreciating the difference between religion with politics. You recognize the distinction when you say that Hindutva ``expands the scope of Hinduism (the religion) beyond the confines of faith and into ALL aspects of life: legal, political, economic...a religious tenet should never be a replacement for a constitution, at most it can be a guiding principle or a mild influence. I am happy to say that India has never had a ``Hindutva``-driven constitution, something that your own nation cannot boast of.`` However, you must, by the same token, recognize that the same distinction exists in Islam as well. Islam was dragged into politics by Maulana Maudoodi as a means to grab power after he came to Pakistan from India (he did more damage to Pakistan and indeed to the rest of the world than any nuclear weapon India could have lobbed at Pakistan). It has been kept in politics by other ambitious men trying (Gen Zia, Nawaz Sharif who was attempting to use Islam to become a civilian dictator by amending the constitution and converting the military to his private army, and lastly by the two-bit leaders of religious parties who have been routinely rejected in elections and are now in retreat after 9/11). BY EQUATING ISLAM WITH HINDUTVA, YOU ARE INADVERTANTLY PLAYING INTO THE HANDS OF THESE HIJACKERS OF ISLAM. Islam, like Hinduism, is a religion that millions of people through the ages have turned towards to seek peace in a cruel and harsh world where everything ultimately ends with a passage into the Great Unknown. Hindutva, on the other hand, is a political movement like Islamic Fundamentalism. I agree that India is consititutionally way ahead of Pakistan in terms of keeping religion out of politics, and I am glad about that. But the realities of India or Pakistan are driven not just by the constitution but also by the temprament of the people - in Pakistan, the reality is that peole are at least as tolerant and even protective of other religions as people are in India.

re:Reply #: 230

Romair,

That is only your opinion. There is always a bias in reporting. CNN was very biased about US role in Afghanistan. MSNBC with Ashley Banefield reporting from the same place, was a lot more balanced in its reporting. The question is, are essential items being reported? There may be bias in interpretation of reports or facts but the news is not suppressed.

Are you denying that Musharraf is not under any pressure? What is your objection to the news item i quoted from ``The Hindustan Times``? I also read NYT, watch CNN and other channels and i am getting the same impression after Pearl`s murder. The media and politicians here seem to say that Mushy is the best bet but he is under tremendous pressure. Pearl`s murder and the church killings are viewed here as an attempt by the fudos to destabilse Musharraf.

Sridhar

sir, all of that doesnt make it influential in pakistan which is the statement i was referring to

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

arjun m

thanks for posting that..i cudnt find it on the web..just one thing

``...Three weeks ago, I resigned as editor of Pakistan`s most influential English daily, the News...``

the leading statement is one big fat load of bakwaas..the news is anything but the most influential daily in pakistan..it is know for its sensationalism...its investigative reporting cell is sometimes on the mark but they have very shady charactors(read ISI) as well as contacts in funny places (read kamran khan, also read the UNITED STATES of AMRICCAA)

every major news story is covered by dawn in a certain way and the news in a certain way..coming from someone who has poured over the two for comparison all night long many a nights for assignments that in the final analysis just dont matter :(, the news likes to attract attention but there is a lot of dead skin within the stories..they are definitly not the most influential and not even close to the most respectable

this is not to take away from what sehbai says

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

Reply Romair #227

``If you want to read up on Pakistan, please don`t read the Indian press. It is biased to the core, when it comes to Pakistan. And has successfully brainwashed most Indians (I am being serious here). Read the international press, Amnesty International reports, etc.``

I don`t know how true that is. India`s press is quite free thank you very much. I hardly think you can call an India Today or Star News partisan. If anything, they lean the other way oftentime. If you ask the VHP to name ten ``pseudosecularists`` eight of them would be from the vocal and influential English-speaking press.

From an ``Indian`` point of view, Pakistan has been the country that has attacked us four times in 55 short years. It is the country that drains our resources and kills our young men in Kashmir and Siachen, it is the country that has formed a strategic nexus with another country that has invaded us in the recent past,even gifting parts of our sovereign territory to their newfound friends; it has pumped in money, drugs and a bunch of international thugs that go around murdering innocents in the name of God; it has sheltered and protected our underworld dons and aircraft hijackers, has supported and housed

the worst kind of fundamentalist organisations that talk openly of converting the land of infidels into the land of the faithful and actively recruit impressionable young men from the already confused Indian Muslim fold. So forgive us for being slightly ``brainwashed.`` Can you deny even one of the above has actually happened? Or that a Pakistani growing up has a completely different point of view on the very same issues? Who says that your truth is greater than my truth? Why the moral righteousness?

It`s really interesting this prevalent Pakistani way of thinking: my nation does a particular thing, it`s not my fault, it was Jinnah/ Bhutto/ Zia /Sharif`s fault (take your pick). But anything the ``Indians`` did, they did as some sort of monolith, a massive plot against Pakistan/ Muslims/ rest of South Asia/ world (take your pick again). Do you realise how stupid that sounds?

`` Musharraf`s intentions about India are quite sincere. It is India which has piled up 1 million troops on Pakistan`s border``

How the hell are you so sure of the good General`s ``intentions``? The problem with Pakistanis is you are so used to having idiots in power, that when one decent egg comes along you treat him like some sort of Messiah. Listen to the sane ones within yourselves, make a sincere effort to reform your country on your own, don`t wait for some sort of Biblical (Koranic?) saviour to drop from the skies.

Scepticism is good, Romair. Can you at least accept that?

Reply tahmed321:

``arjun_m: You say you are not a hindutva because you are an atheist tells me that you have no clue about hinduism. You can be an atheist and a hindutva at the same time, but you cannot be a true hindu and a hindutva at the same time.``

tahmed-saab,

For someone who claims to be such a level-headed scholar, do you even have any idea what you`re talking about?

``Hindutva`` is an abstract noun not much different in usage from ``Islam`` or ``communism`` or ``Christianity``. You cannot BE a Hindutva, you can merely be a propounder/ follower of it.

There`s been so much bandying about of the word ``Hindutva``, I had assumed people knew what they were talking about. Apparently not.

tahmed-saab, Hindutva for your information as envisioned by the VHP is not very different from Islam. It actually expands the scope of Hinduism (the religion) beyond the confines of faith and into ALL aspects of life: legal, political, economic. I personally think that sux: a religious tenet should never be a replacement for a constitution, at most it can be a guiding principle or a mild influence. I am happy to say that India has never had a ``Hindutva``-driven constitution, something that your own nation cannot boast of. And the way things stand, I seriously doubt this ``Hindutvisation`` will ever be possible. Bully for us I say. The last thing we need is the Islamicisation of Hinduism.

Do we really need the prophet or Lord Krishna or whoever to tell us how to build our houses, treat our criminals, manage our banks for God`s sake? The sooner we realise how stupid that is the better. What the prophet said about killing non-believers might have been a fact of life in the seventh century, what Manu said about subjugating women might have been acceptable thousands of years ago when he lived but are we so stupid that we let those principles ``guide`` us even today?

I hope the concept of Hindutva is clearer in your mind now. I have a feeling lots of people have no idea what the term means equating it mistakenly with a hardline aggressive brand of Hindu fundamentalism. Well, that is of course what it has become but this was the genesis. You are welcome to disagree.

I hope you see how it is impossible to be a Hindutvawadi without being a Hindu through and through, not just superficially like most of us are comfortable with being, but in every aspect of life. In fact the comfortable schizophrenia that Hinduism allows me is what I like most about my religion. There`s even room for atheists, you know!

Hindutvawadis are hindus who want everyone around them to be the kind of hindus they are. And that is not acceptable because to define a Hindu is an exercise in futility. (No such problems in Islam. Ask Banatwala and get his ``there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim`` spiel.)

Regards,

SM

rsidhar #227: Let me give you a piece of advice:

If you want to read up on Pakistan, please don`t read the Indian press. It is biased to the core, when it comes to Pakistan. And has successfully brainwashed most Indians (I am being serious here). Read the international press, Amnesty International reports, etc. Musharraf`s intentions about India are quite sincere. It is India which has piled up 1 million troops on Pakistan`s border.

Musharraf had attempted to set up joint military/civilian courts to handle terrorism cases. These were shot down by the Supreme Court. Here is Cowasjee`s (a big fan of Musharraf) take on it:

``So much for Karachi. What are the figures for the rest of Pakistan? Such killings in the name of religion will continue as blind faith cannot reason. Musharraf heads a military government, yet he and we suffer opprobrium as he does not use it to advantage. The judiciary has shot down the establishment of military tribunals. Justifiable fear motivates their thinking. The democratic world, the US and UK, have adjusted their laws to deal with terrorists. The only counter to draconian acts are draconian measures. The general must put his foot down and keep it down - promulgate a PCO and establish military courts.`` (Cowasjee, Dawn)

Romair

The Bhuttos and Sharifs have had their day and good riddance. I agree that the vote of the people is but one aspect of democratic governance, institutional and personal accountablity is equally important - otherwise you get elected dictators. I`m looking forward to today`s ``DAWN`` and Burki`s article - as incredible as it seems, looks like persons such as us are at least being heard - Burki identifes the same structural problems we have and has identified the same reasona and method of competing for state resources that we have - I wonder if his prescription will include constitutional changes, to include proportional representation and a mechanism to disengage the state from direct economic

activity, corporatize tax collection, standardize property laws and documentation and to provide a rationale for the creation of 20 - 30 more provinces or doing away with provinces and increasing representation in the Majlis.

By the way, besides Imran`s Tehreek, do any of the other parties actually have a manifesto or platform?

hobbytv #225: There is nothing wrong with the PPP and or PML getting into power (or the MQM or ANP, etc.). After all, they are the most popular parties. They will again form the govt., in my opinion. If the basis of democracy is the vote of the people, then one has to believe in it.

The problem is that in 2/3rd of Pakistan, the voters live in a slave-like existence, and have no choice of voting for their feudal masters. It is this system that needs to be changed, so that the voters in places like Larkana can vote one of their own people into power, rather than voting for the Bhuttos and their off-springs, again and again (please read Eric Margolis` article on the Bhuttos. He goes into great details to highlight their evil ways).

I am not concerned about the military. It is too disciplined to do anything outside its traditions (fighting India, and carrying out a coup, every now and then). It is easy to promote and demote powerful officers in the military. Infact, on the whole, Musharraf has probably already done this. The military does not fluctuate too far from its traditional median. Zia-ul-Haq was able to socially reorient Pakistan towards Islamism, but he was not able to make too big of a dent in the social tradtions of the Army (I was in the military at that time, so I know).

The current complete set of Lt. Generals and Maj. Generals is new, and handpicked by Musharraf. So I am quite sure, he had picked people like himself.

The main problem is keeping the top leadership of the PPP and PML and MQM out, so that the second layer of the leaderships can come in and lead these parties. Contrary to popular belief, there are some good people in these parties. This is why BB and NS never hold elections in their own parties. BB is the chairperson for life of the PPP, which makes her the de-facto Prime Minister of Pakistan for life, everytime the PPP gets elected (I wish all of us enjoyed such luxuries). She will, no doubt, pass on these, ``for life`` titles to her kids, at some stage.

I think Musharraf wants to keep out the very top PPP and PML leadership, in the hope that the second layer can come in and take over these parties. This has the BBs of the world very scared. If others take over, ``her`` party, then she will be completely sidelined.

I am hoping that the more urban/educated members of these parties (the Aitezaz Ahsans) can step up to the plate and kick out their corrupt leaders. And that parties like Tehrek-i-Insaaf can win some seats, at least in urban Pakistan. All these urban/educated leaders will support Musharraf. They like him and advise him regularly. It is the feudals, the corrupt and the maulvis (i.e. Benazirs, Nawazs and Qazis of Pakistan) who hate his guts, because he is about to close down their corrupt and hypocritical shops.

However, what scares me more than anything else is to see educated people on this site asking for the Bhuttos and the Shahbaz Sharifs to return to power. I don`t know what the motivation of such supporters is, but they are either extremely naive and/or extremely dangerous for Pakistan.

re:Reply #: 222

Romair,

The news that caught my attention today in ``The Hindustan Times`` was about men of Jaish and Laskker who were initially arrested, were to be freed now. No doubt, Musharraf is under tremendous pressure from fundamentalist elements to keep the fire of Kashmiri Jehad burning. He also does not seem to be fully in control of these jehadi elements (note the killing of Pearl that has been a source of embarassment for him). Even if his intentions are truely good vis-a-vis India (which i doubt), it will be hard for him to turn away from supporting Kashmiri extremists. If he does that, he will not have any peace with India. And without peace with India, Pak cannot hope to be prosperous.

Sridhar

Romair

My worry is not so much the PPP and others - Mr General Musharraf will be advised to resign his commission and stand for elections or referendum. I think it goes against his instinct, his gut feeling - He`s on record having stated he did not want any part of being a politician.

What will happen to the institutions of the armed forces, if Mr. Musharraf`s hand is removed before some necessary structural adjustments are made in the armed forces? What will happen a year from now?

Side note - March issue of ``Air Forces Monthly`` has pictures and writeup of J10 - like a mix of F16 and Viggen - but bigger. Also new Wopen engine rated at 26,000lbs thrust.

.#221

Babu

#221

``Also the rape victim is punished for adultery in some states that have ``Islamic law``. It is not clear why women would come forth and level baseless allegations.``

Thank you for the long post .

May be ill reply more later .In Islamic country ,i dont think INNOCENT woman is punished.Social stigma may be ,but no legal punishment .The punishmnt whatever ... is ONLY IF SHE IS FOUND TO BE NOT SO INNOCENT.

Yes a woman who is of the profession in which she is accustomed to selling her sexuality either as porn star ,or exotic dancer or lap dancer or escort service etc. & WHO ALREADY HAVE PROVED HERSELF AS NOT CARING ABOUT HER REPUTATIONS ...why wont she ,for good some of money defame a person like ADVANI.I hope i was talking hypothetically & nothing like that happened to Advani .But you can get woman to conspire just as you can ge hit man to kill anyone ....<

Romair # 222:

As long as Pakistan is locked in a confrontation with India Pakistan will economically under-perform.

What is your beef with the ulta-liberal fringe in Pakistan ? It is not like they force you to follow them. If someone wants to lead a ``Western lifestyle``, what is your problem ?

The basic problem with militant Islamic fringe is not their beliefs. It is their insistence upon using violence to impose their beliefs upon others.

I care less about your support of Musharraf. Don`t complain 5 years from now about how the evil West imposed Musharraf upon Pakistan.

There is an article by Shaheen Sehbai in WSJ on the politcial machinations of Musharraf.