Pak Tea House » Uncategorized » Are India and Pakistan ideological enemies?
Are India and Pakistan ideological enemies?
By Dr. Niaz Murtaza (murtazaniaz@yahoo.com)
This article is motivated by the recent TV discussion between Raza Rumi and others posted on PTH. Some of the people in the program essentially argued that India is our ideological enemy and therefore we should cut off cultural contacts with them, especially Indian films. The parameters laid down by the anchor were that the discussion is about secular issues and to keep religion out.
Clearly, there is enmity between us, but is it ideological enmity? What is ideological enmity? For example, America and USSR were considered ideological enemies, while though Chad and Sudan are enemies, no one calls them ideological enemies. So what defines ideological enmity? An ideology is generally defined as a unique and fundamental set of ideas about doing or viewing things or a way of life. Viewed so, ideology could be about economic (e.g., capitalism vs. communism), political (e.g., democracy vs. totalitarianism), religious (e.g., monotheism vs. polytheism) and perhaps cultural issues. However, ideological enmity is not the same as having ideological differences. For example, Swaziland practices a monarchical system and USA democracy but they are not ideological enemies, just ideologically different. Ideological enmity arises when you compete for spreading your ideology with another ideological group regionally or globally, as were America and USSR.
So, first of all, are India and Pakistan even ideologically different? There is no ideological difference in the political and economic sense-both follow democracy and capitalism. Are we religio-ideologically different? Yes, but then the program was essentially about secular issues. Are we culturo-ideologically different? Take religion out of culture and there are hardly any differences between us on cultural issues. Perhaps the biggest cultural difference then would be that they are vegetarians and we are meat-lovers. But is this really the stuff of grand ideological differences or enmity? Clearly not. In fact, I don’t think it makes sense to talk about culturo-ideological differences or enmities in the same way as in the religious, political or economic sphere simply because cultures are less so starkly in clash. Perhaps you could more meaningfully talk about culture-ideological differences between the west and other cultures with the west being highly individualistic and others less so. However, while there may be some cultural differences here and there between indians and Pakistanis, they are not so stark to be considered culturo-ideological differences let alone enmity. They are just cultural variations which exist to some extent even inside pakistan or india, they both being so diverse (again when keeping religion out of the equation).
So the only sphere where there are ideological differences is in the religious realm, just as pakistan is ideologically different from a Buddhist majority, Christian majority country or any officially secular country. More importantly these religio-ideological differences are not the reason for the enmity between us. As I said, ideological differences are not the same as ideological enmity. The latter occurs when you compete to spread your ideology. India and pakistan are not competing to spread islam vs. Hinduism, say for example in Afghanistan where we do compete but for purely political influence. We are not even fighting on the merits or demerits of the two religions. We are basically fighting about Kashmir and some other minor political issues. So our enmity is purely political, not ideological.
There was also a discussion about why we decided to split, with some arguing that it happened because our way of life was so different (i.e., ideological differences), the main examples given being that we didn’t drink or eat each other’s stuff or married each other. True, but then almost every other thing we did do together. Additionally, these limited segregations existed since the very beginning. If the factors that caused this limited segregation were of so much importance to the musilms, why did they come to india in the first place or once they had come there and if they found those factors so important, why did they not go back? Simply because they did not consider the factors producing this limited segregation to be sufficiently important to opt for a deeper segregation, i.e., of having a different country. Muslims opted for a different country only once they felt, rightly or wrongly, that hindus would dominate in india because of their sheer numbers and more advanced education and not because they could not put up with the hindu way of life. Such political/economic domination fears exist in a lot of countries, for example, Bengalis felt the same way about west pakistan and opted out. so are they our ideological enemies? Clearly not. So, overall, there is little merit in the argument that we are ideological enemies. We are just political enemies based on territorial issues.
However, one could argue that even so there are justifications for cutting off linkages with India. The first one could be just egotistical, i.e., that they have grabbed Kashmir, so we should not talk to them, just as children behave when one grabs the toy of the other. I think the world is moving away from that stand point. More and more countries are realizing that territorial disputes should not come in between cultural and economic exchange as such exchanges could even help resolve the territorial disputes. China talks to india even though it claims himachal Pradesh, so do Russia and japan, china and japan, though all of them have some territorial disputes. Eritrea and Ethiopia don’t talk to each other because of territorial disputes. so it is now up to us whose approach we follow: China’s or Ethiopia/eritrea’s. I prefer the Chinese one as it is based on today’s realities while the other one is increasingly out of fashion.
The other justification given for cutting off relationships was that we are experiencing cultural hegemony from India, especially by bringing in Indian movies. Are we really? In what way is our culture getting threatened? Are we becoming increasingly vegetarian? I wish we were, for we would then be more healthy and environmentally friendly. But no, that is not happening. Are people in Pakistan converting to Hinduism due to cultural contacts? No. Yes, ladies copy some fashion from india, but then I think it is two-way and is that something that really threatens our culture that ladies copy each other’s shalwar qameez designs? We watch their movies a lot, true, but many Indians like Pakistani TV dramas. Lot of our artists perform over there. Yes, Indian movies are increasingly having vulgar scenes which we may not like (and even many Indians don’t), but that is true more for English movies and there is a simple remedy for that—the censor person’s scissors.
If one is really worried about cultural hegemony then the main threat is not india, for our cultures are so similar, but the middle east in the form of fundamentalism which is alien to pakistan with its sufi traditions and which is now destroying pakistan. Secondly, there is some cultural hegemony threat from the west. There are a lot of good cultural aspects about the west like fairness, work ethics. But others are less attractive such as over-individualism, over-materialism and over-rationalism. We should guard against those. And certainly we could do without unhealthy macfood and coke drinks. But I don’t see much in the Indian culture that is different and threatening for us.
The last argument could be just based on simple economic arithmetic—their films are destroying our industry (as the scope of justifications shrinks further and further!). So, we now come into trade issues. Overall, there are studies that show that pakistan will benefit more from free trade with india than india, for our industries in Punjab could supply northern india more cheaply than Indian industry since it is mainly located in south india. Then there is the specific issue about films. Was pak film industry destroyed by Indian films? Our industry was doing fine in the fifties and sixties when Indian movies were openly shown in pakistan and continued to do so for a few years more but then started failing in late 70s. but then that was because of the cultural wars waged by Zia. Why were Pakistani cinegoers preferring to see pirated, poor-copy-quality Indian movies cramped in a room on VCR at a neighbour’s house (for those born after the DVD age, this is how Indian movies used to be initially seen in pakistan in 1970s)? its because the quality of our movies went down. So should we attempt to support this industry by banning Indian movies? The main argument against that is that it is counterproductive and impossible to do so in today’s digital age. Better to make it legal and let govt and theater owners make some money and let people watch on large screen rather than driving it underground and letting smugglers benefit.
So I see little merit in the arguments in that show. This does not mean that the basic reason because of which there is enmity between us is superfluous. No, I clearly think that the basic Indian position on Kashmir is wrong. But I also think that we should resolve those differences maturely by dialogue and not by breaking cultural linkage and sending in terrorists. Do we send in terrorists? I think we used to although I believe the trend has gone down now but is not completely finished. Is RAW sending in terrorists to balochistan? Perhaps, and if it is the same argument applied to it.
Filed under: Uncategorized · Tags: India, Indian, Pakistan
195 Responses to "Are India and Pakistan ideological enemies?"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- JB
said Here is the reality and the sooner Pakistanis and... - AKB
said DAMN THESE LIBERAL MULLAHS!!
.
Dharun Ravi Sen... - AKB said @ ahem
I have never seen a bigger idiot than y...
- RajTOO
said Tajender,
you copy and paste machine, do you even... - tajender
said rajtoo like anyother brhmnst u have nothing except... - RajTOO said Tajender is a pure Paki. Just because he copies an...
- ahem
said to rex
Monotheism is inherently totalitarian an... - ahem said tajender reveals himself as a tamilian muslim....
- RajTOO said Rex Minor wrote:
And I was under the...
- Rex Minor said PS
sorry for the wrong spells! I must not miss th...
This is a strange hypothesis. Here in the US I hear a perennial lament about the decline of technical education. Ditto for Europe. Yet no one disputes the growth of Islamophobia in West and in the US. In fact, one can argue the opposite: that the supposed “liberal” education makes people even more intolerant of an opposing point of view from the perceived superiority of their education. You may want to hear the comments of judges who gave the Ayodhya verdict. They were scathing in their criticism of these “liberal” scholars. If superior grammar and a liberal dose of Wagner could be a panacea for all our ills, Germany would never have fallen under the sway of Hitler. Consider this: south Delhi, a hub of the liberated folks has one of the worst sex ratios in the whole country. Jyoti Basu, the quintessential comrade and a flag bearer of the bhadralok found no contradiction in his Marxists exhortations and then taking an annual holiday in the capitalist bastion of London. Merely quoting Homer doesn’t make anyone a cultural sophisticate. It just shows that the person is capable of rote. The unlettered country bumpkin and small town folks of Bihar have just delivered a stunning rebuke to these theories. How could you miss that. I guess now I understand what NC means by seeing and hearing dead people.
@lal
Among us,that is “neoliterate technician”, it is more common among upper castes,city people..Whatever else may be the basis of this,it has a little bit to do with the competition we face.Right from my school,i have always had muslim class mates,some of them who were close friends.As there is an intense competition for all the courses you mentioned-medicos,engineers,MBA-the little benefit that is given by reservation is frowned upon.I have seen people who had no political beliefs through out there undergraduate course suddenly talking about “others” when the time of post graduate entrance comes.
I think we have a divergence of opinion here, but one that just might reward a discussion.
To me, a small-town background and ‘middle-caste’ provenance was important, and formed a group of four character attributes:
small-town,
middle-caste,
neo-literate in English,
specialised in mathematics and science
that form a personality profile. But then, after reading your account, I was reminded about the recent spate of violence against women, based on ‘khap’ issues, gotra issues, which broke out in Delhi. It was confined to lower middle-class trader–dominated vernacular-oriented people, but in an entirely urban, big-city milieu. One clue was offered by the media, when they pointed to the insular nature of these settlements, almost like villages within the big city.
Even this, however, is not quite the same thing as your observation that it was among the upper-caste, inner city supposed elite that this adversarial feeling was to be seen.
My conclusion from this is that our hypotheses are too anecdotal, too loosely framed and as yet not subjected to rigorous methodical testing in the field, hence, in fact, your guess is as good as mine.
I await your comment with interest.
Vajra,
My earlier post was meant for your following comments:
“For one thing, I believe that the neo-literate technician or professionally-trained person more prone to these views than the older, humanities oriented citizen; that means today’s doctors, lawyers, MBAs, software and computer science graduates are more inclined to go along with the Troll Chorus’ visceral hatred of Muslims and by derivation Pakistan. “
In my opinion Vajra is wrong on several counts. I shall write more when I have more time. But here are just a few examples where he has gone completely off the mark, possibly because of his inexperience with today’s youth.
First, the unfortunate dislike that many Hindu/Sikh display towards Muslims almost surely has its genesis in Calcutta/Noakhali/Bihar/UP and the partition riots (and also the numerous military and extremist attacks thenceforth). A comparative analysis of how many Hindus and Muslims were killed in these riots is pointless, because the fact is that they wouldn’t have happened without the dogged insistence on “separateness”. In fact where is another group of a billion people which has withstood so many numerous attacks and still has not had a mass scale ethnic cleansing (the one in Gujarat is an aberration, not the norm). The rising phobia in the US and Europe is a case in point, and they have had relatively very few attacks of this kind. Before you attribute the unfortunate dislike for Muslims in some Indians to some sort of organic intolerance in today’s Hindus, keep in mind these very same folks will not speak ill of a Moulana Azad or a Nazrul Islam. Or that A.P.J. Abdul Kalam remains the most popular President of India ever in this very same crowd. Therefore the dislike for Muslims is almost surely a reflection of the dislike for Pakistan on Indian Muslims, and not the other way round.
I also disagree with the notion that the small and medium town technically-educated folks are the primary career of this virus. In my experience, they are the more assimilative more integrative kind. They may also be the more faithful kind, but mere faith itself has never been an unbridgeable barrier in the Indian context. In fact it is the city folks, the so-called elite, who has always emphasized the differences, has always in history used these differences for ideological and political purposes. Otherwise how do you explain that the Communist Party of India actually supported the Two Nation Theory and partly shares the “blame” for leading all of us to where we are now. It is the city-bred kind who also supported the separate electorate for Dalits, and are still supporting the Maoist movements in various degrees. Assimilation is good, one of the biggest assimilator of the adivasis is the Ramakrishna Mission, an organization Vajra, by his own admission, supports for charity work.
This is all for now. I shall write more on the pitfalls of Vajra’s logic later.
Bin Ismail – Were I to write what Vajra wrote but replace “trolls” with muslims, would you still feel the same.
Or, did you miss the venomous bile he spewed at the hundreds of millions of Indians who are just coming into the middle class. Did you not notice this impotent person’s barely concealed abhorrence for millions of his compatriots solely because they did not attend the right schools and belong to the the right country clubs. Or do you agree with him?
Btw, Vir Sanghvi and Barkha Dutt’s involvement in the recent great Indian telecom robbery offer a good insight into how the Vajras of India manage to gain entrance to elite schools and exclusive clubs.
NC,
Of course, the author has also failed to explain why Yosuf Khan needed to be Dileep Kumar in a supposedly gilded age of Indian liberalism but another Dileep Kumar(?) could happily change to AR Rehman with no effect on his popularity in an age dominated by these small town uneducated fools. Liberalism is a state of mind. After all, the greatest king of this subcontinent, Jalaluddin Mohammad Akbar, couldn’t read and write. Liberalism is under attack in India because of the crusty and fossilized old poseurs that dominate its landscape. Arundhati Roy is criticized not because her liberalism but because she peddles self-aggrandizement at the cost of logic and facts. Better to have a wise enemy than a foolish friend, says a celebrated story of Panchtantra. So true.
@vajra
i will be the first to agree that my views are probably biased as they are loosely based on my own observations.
We can leave out the Khap panchayaths and honour killings out of this discussion.Though they are pointers to the general culture of an intolerant society,they are hardly new,and”existed from the time of King ashoka”
For the first part we have to agree that there is a rise in right wing rhetoric in India in the last 20-25 years,or the ramayana generation as you call them.I will submit to you on this,for me being a part of that generation cant really appreciate the change.
Regarding the profile of this rising intolerance,we have to agree to differ.I have to agree that it is a rather wasteful exercise,as such sort of generalisation wont work in such a serious issue.In that big city/small town,i totally disagree with you.I have found casteism less of a problem as we go from village to town to city,and communalism more so(biased as charged).Regarding the middle caste,i am not exactly sure whether we are disagreeing here,for i included all who does not get the fruits of reservation in the upper class.The real upper class ,if you meant the brahmins,also raise suspicions towards muslims,espicially when they to talk to us,err middle castes,ofcourse i am not preview to what they converse in between.The rest of the profile I believe,we broadly agree with.
But rather than profiling them,I believe it will be a better exercise if we help each other to understand why such a phenomenon is occuring right now.We have of course,the oft repeated example of the rise of Nazism,its relation to economic depression and rise of unemployment and various such theories.But it hardly holds true in the current Indian situation.I t will be helpful if somebody looks into the demographics of India,and whether a rising youth population is often succeptable to disruptive influences.There is a general theory that ‘youth bulge ‘ often lead to revolutions and challenges to existing social order,and i await your response to that. Related ,but more interesting are the reports of rise of anti immigrant attitude among the populace of europe/australia/america.They often talk about a phenomenon of “relative deprivation’. ……”Relative Deprivation occurs where individuals or groups subjectively perceive themselves as unfairly disadvantaged over others perceived as having similar attributes and deserving similar rewards (their reference groups). It is in contrast with absolute deprivation, where biological health is impaired or where relative levels of wealth are compared based on objective differences….”.There is a very good review in swedish economic review 2000,where they discuss anti immigrant views of the populace of Europe.
I too believe this ‘percieved deprievation of resources’ helps us to better understand our attitudes vis a vis muslims.we may be a part of a rising Islamophobia,that is prevalent across the globe,(the world always had a villain,it was the nazis,then the communists,and now the muslims).But the rising intolerance that you notice in us,medicos,engineers and MBAs may disappear once more and more opportunities arise in the education sector and a diversification of the education system occurs(Every body wants to be a doctor,engineer or MBA)
PS
1)Is there another place you blog on india related issues.You know we are often accused of……
2)PTH requires the regular presence of a head master figure like you to keep the India Brigade in check
@no-communal
February 17, 2011 at 10:12 pm
I note with interest the number of places in which I have gone wrong so far, and am surprised that such a leaky set of arguments should ever have been seen by me as fit to publish. More as a gesture of despair than a defence before a masterful attack, might I submit a few points of justification?
possibly because of his inexperience with today’s youth.
Considering that over the last fifteen years, I have had to handle an approximate three to four thousand youngsters averaging between 25 and 35 years of age, this comes as a severe lesson to me. Perhaps I should try for ten thousand before bothering to pretend I know anything about young Indians.
First, the unfortunate dislike that many Hindu/Sikh display towards Muslims almost surely has its genesis in Calcutta/Noakhali/Bihar/UP and the partition riots (and also the numerous military and extremist attacks thenceforth). A comparative analysis of how many Hindus and Muslims were killed in these riots is pointless, because the fact is that they wouldn’t have happened without the dogged insistence on “separateness”. In fact where is another group of a billion people which has withstood so many numerous attacks and still has not had a mass scale ethnic cleansing (the one in Gujarat is an aberration, not the norm). The rising phobia in the US and Europe is a case in point, and they have had relatively very few attacks of this kind.
That in no way explains the visceral hatred displayed by south Indians, none of whom have been exposed, except in Nizami Hyderabad, to this kind of communal frenzy. This is not convincing; the set of bigots ranges far beyond the geographies affected by partition killings. And there is not much excuse offered by the killings of people by the ISI’s hired assassins; the south still doesn’t have the scars to show which would account for its snarling rejection of the other.
If you read through my posts, I have already referred to this sharp divide between north and south; this is not an afterthought born in a need to counter your argument.
Before you attribute the unfortunate dislike for Muslims in some Indians to some sort of organic intolerance in today’s Hindus, keep in mind these very same folks will not speak ill of a Moulana Azad or a Nazrul Islam. Or that A.P.J. Abdul Kalam remains the most popular President of India ever in this very same crowd. Therefore the dislike for Muslims is almost surely a reflection of the dislike for Pakistan on Indian Muslims, and not the other way round.
Straw man arguments? As in, assigning me arguments which are not mine, have never been mine and then triumphantly trashing them, as being equivalent to trashing my position? It does look like that a bit.
I am NOT suggesting some kind of organic intolerance in Hindus. On the contrary, I believe that the organic tolerance in Hindus, not the organic tolerance in the hoodlums collected by some politicians, is great. It might just be the reason for no pogroms having happened, except Gujarat and Kondapara.
On the other hand, I am suggesting a systematic campaign to brainwash these specific segments of society, in areas where western education had not penetrated, and where therefore the bigots were free to set up their own networks of schools, with suitable texts to match, with a careful redrawing of history, for example, to suit the hypernationalistic programmes that they had in mind. I do not put much faith in the lip service paid to prominent trophy Muslims by the Sangh Parivar, because that is a tactical weapon, a method of dividing the enemy.
I also disagree with the notion that the small and medium town technically-educated folks are the primary career of this virus. In my experience, they are the more assimilative more integrative kind. They may also be the more faithful kind, but mere faith itself has never been an unbridgeable barrier in the Indian context.
Against this definitive statement, replete with direct information and experience, I can only say meekly that just a post or two before, I invited an interlocutor to consider that neither the small town nor the big city seemed decisively one or the other. It is still a matter for exploration.
Perhaps these demurrals sit uneasily with the picture sought to be drawn of an intransigent old – Commie? Muslim? – well, whatever.
I shall leave the rest of my comments until you have presented your other thoughts on the matter. It seems most logical.
This constant refrain of western education begs a very important question: Wasn’t tolerance prevalent in India before the advent of western education?
Isn’t Subramaniam Swamy educated in western sense?
In my view, a persistent hate of Muslims and Koran is due to the repeated high profile terrorist attacks that are carried in the name of Islam. Very few who have watched the Channel 4 documentary on the Bombay attacks can come back without feelings of disgust and revulsion. Muslims elsewhere who find this phenomenon hard to understand need to just look in their backyard for a veritable treasure trove of hate literature about Jews due to accumulated “sins” of Israel. Therefore, to expect that there would be nothing like that in India, which has faced a multitude of terrorists attacks, is just frivolous. Let’s not forget that Hafiz Saaed is still out in open and none of the guilty has been brought to book. I know there are thousand other reasons. But it doesn’t seem to matter when it comes to Iran or any other Islamic country.
“I have had to handle an approximate three to four thousand youngsters averaging between 25 and 35 years of age, this comes as a severe lesson to me. ”
30 years ago, you would have had a few hundreds.
@ BM
NC,
Of course, the author has also failed to explain why Yosuf Khan needed to be Dileep Kumar in a supposedly gilded age of Indian liberalism
Yosuf Khan became Dileep Kumar for the same reason Syed Musa Raza became Santosh Kumar …..
BM,
Though a big surprise, you still have Indian mind and blood and has not yet become full Muslaman in search of Muhamadan Arabic glory and taking pride in being shot in the dark by carvamen’s short stay in India. There is still hope. Muhammadan- Macaulay enamored folks need to look into their own “greban” to find out that indians are tired of their ususal shenanigans. The same is the case with now in Europe, Australia and North America . The doctrine of exclusiveness will only result in natural booting out of so called big tent. If the children born out mental rape of Macaulay and physical rape by Carvamen cant find any good about India and its kuffar value based civilization then door must be opened for them to get out and go to their natural habitats away from India .Kalam, Azad, Rehman ets are loved and respected becuase they are Indian to the core. Vajra-Khusra kind of willing Dhimmis are dying breed and we must thank Almighty for this favor. These resident Paki living in india would like to keep us blind to the fact that Pakistan is a perfect ripe fruit of Islamic deeds by perfect Islamic people but now fearful of swallowing it though eager to serve it to Kuffar. The game is up and coming to the end.
Kalket,
I am not sure if I have become a mussalman or not but you have become a complete ass. Just shut up and read carefully. I have mentioned Subramaniam Swamy as well.
“The trolls themselves desist from overuse of “literary skills”, and they say it as it is, for literary skills” are the tools the PTH Jirga Indians use to cover up their paucity of wisdom. The Trolls know that they may not have the “gifts of the literary skills” but at least they have Indian hearts, minds and souls…”
Don’t flatter yourself with this patriotic self delusion or the ‘they hate us for our wisdom’ line.
It is that values that count; and that is where we differ.
What you call ‘Indian hearts, minds and souls is in fact what the average people call fascism. I don’t mean it in the loosely used sense but in the exact specific definition of the term. In 2003 political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt recently wrote an article about fascism after studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they many elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. They are:
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
4. Supremacy of the Military
5. Rampant Sexism
6. Controlled Mass Media
7. Obsession with National Security
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
9. Corporate Power is Protected
10. Labor Power is Suppressed
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Check for yourself and see how many of these apply to the Indian nationalist brigade here. Pay a special attention to points 1, 3, 7, and 8 they will warm your heart.
Another thing; nationalism comes in all colors; it is not the preserve of the saffron alone even if they specialize in wearing it on their sleeve.
In some cases those whom they despise have shed more blood for the same nation; only they choose not to make a show of it.
When are you moving out of India Mr Ghorki?
Only a Commie traitor will not worry about national security when country is surrounded by mortal enemies. Your Chariman Mao is Chinesee and your friends ar Muslamans ,mainly of Pakistan . What part of you is indian?
“What part of you is Indian?…”
The part that does not consider 130 million Indians as ‘aliens’
And you?
Kaalket, perhaps one day you will understand this. We hope.
Hamdardi
Tehni Pe Kisi Shajar Ki Tanha
Bulbul Tha Koi Udaas Betha
Kehta Tha Ke Raat Sar Pe Aai
Urney Chugney Mai Din Guzara
Pohchun Kis Tarah Aashiyaan Tak
Har Cheez Pe Chaa Gaya Andhera
Sun Ke Bulbul Ki Aah-O-Zaari
Jugnu Koi Paas Hi Se Bola
Hazir Hun Madad Ko Jaan-O-Dil Se
Keera Hun Agarcha Mai Zara Sa
Kiya Gham Hai Jo Raat Hai Andheri
Mai Raah Mai Roshni Karonga
ALLAH Ne Di Hai Mujh Ko Mashal
Chamka Ke Mujhe Diya Banaya
Hain Log Wohi Jahan Mai Ache
Aate Hain Jo Kaam Dosron Ke
(Allama Iqbal)
Guru\Gandhi\xyz-g:
The name Ernst Julius Röhm comes to mind.
You may want to hear the comments of judges who gave the Ayodhya verdict. They were scathing in their criticism of these “liberal” scholars.
Bade Miyan, I have only looked at some pages of verdict, but I got the impression they were scathing in the criticism of all the “scholars” who had not read primary sources, or examined for themselves the archaelogical digs and so on, and had simply relied on hearsay and newspaper accounts to render their opinion. This criticism held for the witnesses on both sides of the case.
Identity debates are still going on. Falsified identities are just like a dry thin low-quality lacque peeling off.
History comes in many narratives. If you read just one or two of them or accept just one or two of them as true then you end up becoming a nuisance to the next generation.
The islam-glorifying version of history that brooks no criticism of kuran, Mohammad and muslim leaders has resulted in fascism.
The criteria of fascism assembled by Gorki are ALSO applicable to ALL muslim states since the times of Mohammad (included).
Hindu fascism of today is a reaction to the successes of islamic fascism-imperialism-arrogance of the past 1400 years. The hindu brigadist manifests the defender’s fascism and the muslim manifests the aggressor’s, invader’s and conqueror’s fascism. Hindu fascism generally does not justify itself by using any god-concept whereas the muslims’ fascism repeatedly invokes allah and kuran (a book containing many internally contradictory declarations and claims).
If Dr. Britt had investigated Mohammad’s rule, there too he could have found the basics and foundations of islamic fascism, arrogance and inability to practise or allow (self-)criticism. In fact all the 12 criteria can be summarized as just that.
If allah is the one and only god and all-knowing and all-powerful and just – then why did Mohammad, supposedly the final, perfect and exemplary prophet, raise (or have to raise) an army?
Can a muslim answer this question without being emotional or manipulative or insincere?
A prophet who raises or has to raise an army ends up becoming the eternal source and cause of a fascist militarist ideology. Did this allah not realize this?
It’s ironic that Tagore of all people should be cited by Kaalket.
“Our mind has faculties which are universal, but its habits are insular. ”
—Rabindranath Tagore
And regarding chauvanistic nationalism:
“The Sunset of the Century” – written on the last day of the 19th century
“The last sun of the century sets amidst the blood-red clouds of the West and the whirlwind of hatred.
The naked passion of the self-love of Nations, in its drunken delirium of greed, is dancing to the clash of
steel and howling verses of vengeance.
The hungry self of the Nation shall burst in a violence of fury from its shameless feeding.
For it has made the world its food.
And licking it, crunching it and swallowing it in big morsels,
It swells and swells
Till in the midst of its unholy feast descends the sudden shaft of heaven piercing its heart of grossness. ”
Several wars later, Europe learnt it’s lesson… we have learnt very little in this part of the world. Our day will come too.
to tilsim
We (but not all) have learnt our lesson.
We now know with certainty (which was lacking earlier) that this ideology from Arabia is fascistic in its core spirit and intention.
Earlier we were tolerant towards the agents and quislings of this ideology and they misused this tolerance with glee.
It was N. Chamberlaine’s appeasement (tolerance) of A. Hitler that brought on the war. We have learned that.
Listen friend,
I don’t know what your childhood was like but whatever it was, I can only empathize with you.
Abuse during childhood is common in India but is poorly recognized and manifests in various ways. Abusive environments in which children experience physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse or neglect can later produce adults with mental disorders an important one among these is a borderline personality disorder. (BPD)
According to one specialist, Dr. John Groholl, a borderline personality disorder as “…a pervasive pattern of instability in interpersonal relationships, self-image and emotions.”
A child who has suffered a traumatic event, such as physical abuse by a parent, has difficulty coping with the event and later on significant pressures in life. As a child, he or she felt the discord and observed an environment where there is constant fighting. As an adult, there develops this intense anger that becomes difficult to manage. This person can develop low self-esteem, fears of abandonment and have difficulty sustaining relationships. A personality disorder develops – a borderline personality disorder.
Early childhood physical abuse can also result in a variant of this; an antisocial personality disorder. The Internet Mental Health defines an antisocial personality disorder as a “…condition characterized by persistent disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood.”
Here below are some of the major traits of such disorder. One need not have all of them; only a majority to make a diagnosis:
o Need to be the center of attention with self-dramatization
o Inappropriate sexual seductiveness references
o Speech lacks detail but abusive
o Aggrandizing but insincere relationships
o Narcissistic behavior includes grandiosity, need for admiration, and lack of empathy.
o Exaggeration of achievements, talents, and uniqueness
o Envy, arrogance, and lack of empathy
o Preoccupation with fantasies of success
o Aged 18 years or older
o Conduct disorder before age of 15 years
o Disregard for the law
o Reckless, aggressive, deceitful, and impulsive behavior
o Lack of remorse
o Failure to sustain consistent work
o Frantic avoidance of abandonment
o Intense and unstable interpersonal relationships and moods
o Identity disturbance
o Chronic empty feelings and transient paranoia
Specialists feel that verbally abusive behavior such as yours is in fact a ploy to seek attention and that in turn is often a cry for help. I am assuming that is the case and therefore has posted the above information. I hope you find it useful and seek help.
Unfortunately most of the patients remain in denial and refuse to do so and continue their aggressive behavior with renewed vigor. That is usually a defense mechanism of an individual who is actually very insecure and afraid internally.
Best of Luck.
Gorki:
Some of our Indian correspondents have been schooled in a pedagogy of hate. PTH traumatizes them because it undermines their foundation of their world in which the Muslim is the other, a violent bigot sustained by alien Arabian ideology.
Such folk may well be perfectly well adjusted members of the societies they live in but like a stage hypnotist’s dummy the word ‘Muslim’ detonates some deep neuroses. Every time then they must go through the full episode of foam and froth. Visiting PTH where they come into contact with liberal Muslims and non Muslims is a trigger that brings on the symptoms typical of these cases, and that is why they go into such frenzies here. The cure is simple; they should stop visiting this site where their condition is likely to be aggravated.
@Gorki
@Hayyer
I hadn’t realised that it was PTH itself that was triggering these misfits’ bouts of passion, and thought mistakenly that this was their normal, daily behaviour – a very disturbing thought.
Think of these characters, some of whom seem to be doing nothing but compose barbed little epistles dipped in scorpion serum all day long, behaving in real life the way they behave here.
Thanks to your posts, it is easier to understand and in a sense, to sympathise, and to see that these creatures may be crypto-normal in other contexts.
Most enlightening.
Gorki,
Somene suggested that his wife ran away with an Arab and hence this manic obesession, especially with the word quisling. An event like that can cast a particularly pernicious shadow on an acutely sensitive mind. I am sure you would agree that he needs our sympathy more than anything else.
Samachar,
The intellectual bankcruptcy of the right, barring a few examples, has never been in question. We were discussing the other side here. As for how our standards of political correctness have changed, I will offer two examples. It is also instructive for some of us here who always get misty eyed when they recall the liberalism of a hoary past.
“If the present Hindu outlook does not change radically, I am quite sure that India is doomed. The Muslim outlook may be and, I think, is often worse. But it does not make very much difference to the future of India”
“If there is anyone who thinks that he can interfere in the personal law of the Muslims, then I would say to him that the result will be very harmful…They will have to face the iron wall of Muslim determinaiton to oppose them in every way.”
Your guess is as good as mine about the tag these two gentlemen would have to wear in the present times. The pig-headedness of the left is no less than that of the right. The entire left is prescribing solutions to the problems that don’t merit our attention, or worse, don’t even exist. To say that somehow growth in scientific knowledge has led to lesser appreciation of nuanced history is just horse manure. What has definitey changed is the masses’ blind acceptance of fatuous theories from someone speaking with a queen accent. Such irreverence should be celebrated not derided.
Vajra
I reread your posts from this morning. There is nothing more we disagree on. I share your views on some of the obnoxious Indians here. They are like the worst nightmare that refuse to go away. Look at them, if you have to, like you look at a bad car wreck. But it would be wrong to assume that they represent the majority and the Sangh Parivar is proving on a daily basis that those who left home were right.
And one more thing. I agree with BM that liberalism is a state of mind. He gave the example of Akbar who was illiterate. I think he is right. Decency, compassion, love, kindness cannot be acquired by a western education. At best a such an education can give you the means to camouflage your true feelings. None of the Indian scumbags seem to be small town folks who were educated in the vernacular. They take a sadistic pleasure in ridiculing the already distressed. Vernacular folks are usually kinder, gentler, and more compassionate.
@no-communal
February 18, 2011 at 9:53 am
But it would be wrong to assume that they represent the majority and the Sangh Parivar is proving on a daily basis that those who left home were right.
I have no dogmatic need to adhere to the hypotheses proposed earlier. Without seeming defensive, if these had not been put to the readers, and put to them in strong terms, we would not be discussing these differences and the anomalies in my analysis, nor what should take its place.
However, there is a problem of bigotry; it is associated in a significant number of cases with religious fanaticism, both on the Hindu, Sikh and Muslim sides (the Christians are too few in number to group together like the others); the combination is as damaging to the country as is the foul corruption of the Congress; the combination has been working systematically to capture younger generations; I find more and more of the younger people to toe their line, far more than there were before; many of these are technicians (not scientists, as has been erroneously proposed) of a particular shallow background.
Up to this point, there is some agreement.
The rest of it, regarding their geographical base, their occupational background, their specific caste, is all speculation, and as my brief exchange with lal will indicate, anecdotal; it has no value without methodical and rigorous examination.
However, sitting tight and hoping that some explanation will spring out of the bushes and surprise us is not an option.
Perhaps this will clarify what it is all about from my personal point of view.
And one more thing. I agree with BM that liberalism is a state of mind. He gave the example of Akbar who was illiterate. I think he is right. Decency, compassion, love, kindness cannot be acquired by a western education. At best a such an education can give you the means to camouflage your true feelings. None of the Indian scumbags seem to be small town folks who were educated in the vernacular. They take a sadistic pleasure in ridiculing the already distressed. Vernacular folks are usually kinder, gentler, and more compassionate.
There is nothing in this passage that I contest.
However, as far as BM is concerned, I expect nothing consistent or valuable and feel no need to respond to anything. Quoting him is not the best way to attract my attention. I will be happy to respond to any views that you might hold and express.
Hayyer,
I did read the article that you referred to. I must admit that my knowledge of techicalities of music is sparse thought I had had a long and abiding interest in the Hindustani Classical Music. When I mentioned my skepticism about the origins of Sitar, I was thinking on the use of the harmonium or the violin in the Indian Classical music. We can’t say the same thing about Sitar. The Chinese lute sounds very similar to the setar but I am not sure if they originate from the same place. What I meant to say was that it’s quite possible that a variant of lute developed into Sitar. A big difference between the sound of a sitar and other more traditional lutes is the presence of graceful “meends”, which has traditionally been a feature of “been” like instruments. I would encourage you to sample heavy meend of Zia Mohiuddin Dagar on rudra veena. Without the freedom to indulge in meend, Sitar loses its essential beauty. Also, it’s use of sympathetic or tonal(?) strings is closer to the instruments of the been family. You may be surprised to know that Jimi Hendrix(if I remember correctly) experimented with the same technique and his inspiration was the sitar.
The same idea about tabla as well. That tabla is a two piece drum unlike most Indian drums and, therefore, the foreign influence theory misses the essential point that the sound of tabla or most Indian drums is different from other drums because of the use of concentric circles on the playing skin that gives a much richer sound. We cannot say the same thing about sarod where the rabbab’s influence is palpable.
You are absolutely right about the fact there was a host of new trends coinciding with the Turkic invasion. Yet you missed an important point that the high point of such innovations, at least in music, was reached during the reign of Akbar, or even more, in the reign of lesser known, Mohammad Shah “rangeela”. I will detail the reasons which I think were behind these, but you may want to know the ancient Dhrupad didn’t come into its modern form till the reign of Man Singh Tomar, the raja of Gwalior.
I apologize for the typos but I am typing on the remote terminal. For some idiotic reasons, my home ip address is being blocked on this site. r
Bade Miyan,
Somene suggested that his wife ran away with an Arab and hence this manic obesession, especially with the word quisling.
A dear friend on chowk, Hamza Yusufzai (aka Abu safwaan) had a rather more colourful explanation for such behaviour. It revolved around what someone’s pardaada allegedly did with someone’s pardaadi.
Regards
Vajra
Have you thought about why it is much easier to disagree with you? I was hesitating awhile to say it, but the last few lines of your comment are unwarranted and are in poor taste.
@ no-communal (February 18, 2011 at 9:53 am)
“…..the obnoxious Indians here. They are like the worst nightmare that refuse to go away…..”
I believe, what you imply by “here” is at PTH. On the larger canvas, however, we have another “worst nightmare” on our side of the fence, in the form of the Mulla. If “Liberalism” is a state of mind, then “Bigotry” too, is as much a state of mind. Unfortunately, the one thing to which our borders are porous to, is “Bigotry”. Bigotry of one side inspires and kindles that of the other. Religious intolerance, hatred and meanness have become, sadly, a trans-subcontinental feature, fueled and aroused by the “Bigots sans frontiers”.
Interesting, maybe ominous development :
We have maulana diesel -Maulana Fazlur Rehman of Pakistan, visiting India, uniting the 2 factions of Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind, to fight against the newly appointed progressive vice chancellor at Darul-Uloom Deoband in UP. That is all we need – Pakistani mullahs, not satisfied with wrecking Pakistan, wrecking Indian muslims as well.
The Lucknow correspondent of Rediff.com has reported as follows on February 17,2011:
” The two-day India visit by Islamic hardliner and Pakistan’s Jamiat-ul-Islami chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman is believed to be aimed at reinforcing the anti-Vastanvi forces at the Darul-Uloom Deoband seminary in Uttar Pradesh , where the recently appointed vice chancellor Ghulam Mohammad Vastanvi had drawn much flak for praising Narendra Modi’s governance in Gujarat.
“Ostensibly, Rehman was in Deoband and New Delhi earlier this week to broker peace between the two warring factions of Indian Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind led by rival Madnis — uncle Arshad Madni and nephew Mahmood.
“However, informed sources at Deoband suspect that the Pakistani cleric’s ‘real intent behind bringing the Madnis together was to strengthen the anti-Vastanvi lobby.’
“Vastanvi’s fate is to be decided at a meeting of Deoband’s ‘Majlis-e-Shoora’, the highest decision making body of the institution on February 23.
“Considering that Mahmood Madni was responsible for mobilising support for Vastanvi against whom Arshad was known to have fuelled all the trouble, unity between the duo was aimed at weakening the seminary chief’s case.
“The proximity between Pakistani cleric Rehman and Arshad Madni was always an open secret. And even during his 17- hour long stay in Deoband, the two were seen together every minute.
“Sources in Deoband claimed that Rehman’s visit was planned by Arshad, who was clearly worried about his hold over Deoband.
“Rehman was therefore called to convince Mahmood to sink his differences with his uncle Arshad in the larger interest of maintaining the undisputed hold of the undivided Madni power over the seminary.
“Who does not know that the Madnis whose family has called the shots at the seminary for decades, were responsible for appointment of the previous vice chancellor Maulana Maghrubur Rehman who passed away last year,” a senior faculty member told rediff.com over telephone from Deoband.
“Yet another young lecturer, who had hailed the appointment of a computer savvy and MBA qualified Vastanvi as the new vice chancellor felt, “Members of the Arshad Madni lobby were busy impressing upon all north Indians at the seminary that they must not allow Vastanvi to continue as he was the first non-north Indian to head the Deoband seminary.”
“He went on to add, “Evidently, the whole idea was to prevent any progressive Muslim to take over the reins of this historic institution; and that was the reason that a Pakistani Islamic hardliner had come down all the way.”
“The last time Rehman flew down to Deoband in similar circumstances was in March 2007, when he succeeded in bridging the divide between the Madnis.”
@no-communal
February 18, 2011 at 11:11 am
Vajra
Have you thought about why it is much easier to disagree with you? I was hesitating awhile to say it, but the last few lines of your comment are unwarranted and are in poor taste.
I could not care less.
You must understand that I do not write to please others or to satisfy others’ criteria of good taste or what is warranted. I have sufficient discrimination to make these decisions for myself, and to form my views according to my tastes. So disagree with me by all means. It really doesn’t matter, either when I am flattered without reason, or when anyone carps and cribs about what I write without reason.
I don’t think, by the way, that what I wrote was in poor taste. Why should it be? If I don’t value anyone’s opinions and his positions, that is my business and nobody else’s, and there is nothing wrong with saying so. On the contrary, while it was precise, it was also perfectly polite. There is nothing of value to add to what I have said earlier and here.
The way “bigotry” is used on PTH, one would think all the raped are bigots because they develop a hate of the rapists.
Of course the Indian-Commies here are those who have fallen in love with the rapist, and they say, “Please, once more!”
@Raj (The Other One)
February 18, 2011 at 2:15 pm
The way “bigotry” is used on PTH, one would think all the raped are bigots because they develop a hate of the rapists.
Of course the Indian-Commies here are those who have fallen in love with the rapist, and they say, “Please, once more!”
No, that is not so. The word bigot is used here on PTH, by those of us who are engaged in honest conversation about issues relating to Pakistan, or to relations between Pakistan and India, or to issues relating to India which have a universal bearing including often a particularly relevant bearing referring to Pakistan, about others who have no interest in those subjects, and only wish to denigrate Pakistan, Pakistanis, the belief and faith systems of Pakistanis, and through them, Indian Muslims and/or Muslims the world over.
You are one of the bigots; a dishonest scoundrel and a knave engaged in nothing of use, and with no agenda but to slander the objects and targets defined above: Pakistan, Pakistanis, the belief and faith systems of Pakistanis, and through them, Indian Muslims and/or Muslims the world over. I will add one more; in your rage and frustration when you are exposed for being the small-minded creeps that you are, you take on those people as well, even if they do not fit your original objects of bigotry, merely because they happen to have interposed themselves between you and your objects of hate.
You talk of being raped; you are safe, more than safe, as none of any discrimination or self-esteem would contemplate any social relationship with you and your pack, leave alone an intimate one, any more than they would contemplate an act of bestiality with a dog. That is the only kind of rape you might fear, and for reasons amply expressed, the sensibility of those concerned, you therefore need have no fear.
If you wish to test all your past writings and posts for bigotry, use the leading paragraph or the definition below interchangeably; you will find you fit into both.
You are especially despicable because in spite of having been told, again and again, to the point where any decent person with any dignity or self-respect would have got the message, that you and your comments are not appreciated and not wanted, you still come back like a cur and whine and snarl at the fringes of every discussion. You are entirely dependent on the charity and the goodwill of the moderators, but perhaps you think that your bold views and frank expressions are what keep you alive here. Nothing could be more untrue. Scum you are and scum you will remain, and as I have said, only the desire of the forum administrators, the misplaced, Quixotic desire, I may add without fear of contradiction, to offer the widest, most free platform, an enlightened forum for free exchanges, even from dregs of society such as you, keeps you going.
I had great pleasure writing this frank description of what you are and what your bigotry stands for. I now await your currish return with your spurned whinings.
A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.
The predominant usage in modern English refers to persons hostile to those of differing race, ethnicity, nationality, inter-regional prejudice, gender and sexual orientation, homelessness, various medical disorders particularly behavioral disorders and addictive disorders, religion or spirituality and reality creation beliefs. Forms of bigotry may have a related ideology or world views.
Dada,
except that I believe that under the Muslim identity lie other identities which will some day find expression, probably, if suppressed for too long, violent expression.
I am aware of that. Muslims are no more homogenous than Hindus are- if Indian Hindus are more heterogenous than SA Muslims it is simply becuase there are some Hindus than Muslims in SA. The same can be said about Pakistan and India.
In 1947, British India broke into two Big Tents- an Indian tent which was bigger and a Pakistan tent which was smaller. But both tents and not monolithic nations, nonetheless. That the Indian tent didnt sunder further as compared to Pakistani tent which did was partly an accident of history and geography and partly becuase India did a few things right which Pak didnt. I dare say had Pakistan remained an uninterrupted democracy post 1947, Pak wud have remained united, notwithstanding its unusual geography.
So today we are left with India which is one large tent, Pakistan which is one smaller tent and BD alone corresponds to the classic European nation state with 90% of the population sharing the same langauge and religion. Thus, BD alone may survive as a single nation state in that sense almost automatically (unless global warming swallow it whole) while both Pak and India will rupture further unless they do quite a few things right (which you, Girish and Gorki sb have alluded to).
Regards
Vajra wrote: You are one of the bigots; a dishonest scoundrel and a knave engaged in nothing of use, and with no agenda but to slander the objects and targets defined above: Pakistan, Pakistanis, the belief and faith systems of Pakistanis, and through them, Indian Muslims and/or Muslims the world over.
161 million Indian Muslims don’t bother me. 145 million Bangladeshis don’t bother me. 180 million Pakistani common people don’t bother me. Cultural and Spiritual Islam as has taken root in the Indian Subcontinent doesn’t bother me.
But the couple of hundred thousand Pakistani Elite in Pakistan and their Pakistaniyat does bother me.
They who pray at the alter of Uzbek-Turkmen racial supremacy, they who pray at the alter of Persian Cultural Exclusivism for Muslims of the Subcontinent, they who pray at the alter of monopoly over the mosques for claimants of Arab genealogy, they bother me.
They who talk the genetically Indian stock of Pakistani masses into segregating from the rest of the Indians on the basis of religion and non-existing minority issues, they bother me.
They who use their hold over the Muslim masses, which they instill through fear of the majority, in order to further their own selfish interests of influence, power, business and land, they bother me.
The Pakistani Elite who start wars with India and who have Indian blood on their hands, they bother me.
The Pakistani Elite who have been pushing terrorists into India to maul down Indians in cold blood, they bother me.
The Pakistani Elite, who instill hate into the Pakistani masses against the Hindus and Indians, to distract them from their corruption, their land deals, their privileges, their hold on power, they bother me.
So yes, there is a lot that bothers me about Pakistan, especially the Pakistani Elite.
As far as hate for Indian Muslims and Muslims all over the World is concerned, that is a product of your own fantasy – a need to be able to categorize the world in nice clean silos. Your intellect, if you have any that is, your ideology, is simply incapable of squaring such differentiated thinking, which comes naturally to any thinking person, with your coarse and shallow theories on India and Pakistan, on Hindus and Muslims.
Vajra wrote: those of us who are engaged in honest conversation about issues relating to Pakistan, or to relations between Pakistan and India, or to issues relating to India which have a universal bearing including often a particularly relevant bearing referring to Pakistan
Don’t fool yourself or the others. You are not engaged in any conversation with any Pakistanis, who want to solve issues. All you do is confer respectability to the Pakistani Elite using the good name of India and Indians, the same Pakistani Elite who have ensured that the two parts of the Indian Subcontinent remain in conflict, for their own selfish interests; the same Pakistani Elite, who have tried their best to strain the relations between Hindus and Indian Muslims; the same Pakistani Elite, who hide their nikamaahpan behind hate for India; the same Pakistani Elite who deride India, so that they need not be required by the Pakistani Masses to perform and deliver.
What you do is to take the culpability from Pakistanis and pass it on to India, in name of equitable sharing and balancing blame, and try to cook up reasons, why India needs to share blame. This just gives Pakistani Elite all the more leeway for more terrorism, more conflict with India, for guys like you, help murderers to go scot-free in the court of world opinion.
All you are doing is prolonging the conflict between India and Pakistan, by sucking up to the Pakistani Elite.
And if you want to suck up, because your inferiority complex, does not give you any other options, then please do it without using and sullying the name of India or Indians.
Vajra wrote: A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.
The word bigot suits you well, because there is nothing you hate more than India and being Indian. I am sorry you don’t like your skin but does your self-hate have to extend to all other Indians. I think psychologists would have a heck of a time with a dinosaur like you, a white Brit trapped in an Indian’s body. Just be careful with all the operations. Sometimes the nose jobs can go pretty ugly. Just ask Michael!
@Majumdar
February 18, 2011 at 4:08 pm
That was as neat and effective a summation as I have read in a long, long time. Your economy of words in putting across this complex concept is most admirable. It was a pleasure to read it; thanks.
This is a repeat post – but even Jamaat-i-Islami people can rethink:
Irfan Ahmad, in “Islamism and Democracy in India”, narrates:
In Pakistan he [Maududi] opposed the League leaders because they were also trying to establish an “infidelic system [kafirana nizam]“, the only difference being that it would be presided over “by an Abdullah [meaning a Muslim] rather than a Ram Prasad [meaning a Hindu]“. In India the Jamaat interpreted Maududi’s words to mean that even Hindus could run an Islamic state if it were based on the principles of submission to God, humanism and the sovereignty of God.
In the 1960s, Syed Hamid Husain (1920-1985), a prominent Jamaat[-i-Islami] leader, visited AMU [Aligarh Muslim University]. A scion of a feudal family, Husain, before converting to the Jamaat, was a Communist, was Westernized, and was an avid filmgoer. Under the Jamaat’s influence, he resigned from his job with the British Army, considering it haram. Because he had a Western education, the Jamaat regarded him as its star preacher for AMU. In his lectures to students, Husain attacked secularism, nationalism, and democracy, presenting Islam as an alternative system based on submission to God, humanism and the sovereignty of God. Describing Husain’s alternative as “foolish” and “reactionary”, an agitated student asked Husain how an Islamic system was possible in India. Intizar, a retired AMU professor who was a student at the time and attending the lecture, told me that Husain replied, “Yes, it is [possible]. If Hindus accepted the three Islamic principles, India could become an Islamic system.” When asked if he meant that Hindus had to convert to Islam, he answered no. At that, Intizar and his friends laughed at Husain’s “foolishness” [be-vaqufi] and “irrationality” [pagalpan].
NC,
“At best a such an education can give you the means to camouflage your true feelings. ”
Well said. You could have added doublespeak too. People have spoken something here and then laid out a totally contradictory position on some other site. The example of Laxman Sena comes to my mind. For my part, I find it extremely distasteful to run down the hard working and less fortunate folks whose only fault is that they didn’t enjoy the privilege that my parents afforded me. Of course, I don’t have the consistency of plucking theories out of thin air that has no merit except blithely deriding someone without any rhyme or reason. No reasoning is offered, no explanations, only worn out platitudes.
Vajra
“I could not care less.
You must understand that I do not write to please others or to satisfy others’ criteria of good taste or what is warranted. I have sufficient discrimination to make these decisions for myself, and to form my views according to my tastes. So disagree with me by all means. It really doesn’t matter, either when I am flattered without reason, or when anyone carps and cribs about what I write without reason. ”
Vajra
So you *are* full of yourself. I always suspected this, but couldn’t quite place my finger on it. Vajra, you amuse me. How many times have you been exposed back-biting/sabotaging through your underworld connections?
“I don’t think, by the way, that what I wrote was in poor taste. Why should it be? If I don’t value anyone’s opinions and his positions, that is my business and nobody else’s, and there is nothing wrong with saying so. On the contrary, while it was precise, it was also perfectly polite. There is nothing of value to add to what I have said earlier and here.”
So you can’t see why the world is unjust to you. Let’s see. Your trivializing others (quite unjustifiably but that’s not the point), but not directly to him, to another person. Typical of a back-biting Calcuttan, might I add? And the show of arrogance, “quoting him is not the best way to attract my attention”. Vajra, you are a bag-ful of humor. Have you ever tried an amusement park? The list is not long enough? There’s another reason. Take it as a home work problem of self-introspection.
You probably think you are God’s gift to humanity. Here’s what you are. You are just a wedge issue, a wedge to divide otherwise perfectly agreeable people. Sounds familiar?
Now, please, no obscenities. I have better, more fruitful, things to do.
BM
There are people in this world who are full of gas. Gas balloons float in the air and think they are airplanes. All gas balloons think they are made for war, for a great great purpose. As you must know yourself gas balloons burst at a mere pin prick. The right place for a gas balloon is an amusement park not war.
Don’t worry about gas balloons.
Thank you for everyone who read my piece. I would like to address two comments/questions raised:
There was a question about what the implications of the one nation vs two nation theory are for my argument. neither contradicts my arguments. keep in mind again that ideological difference is not the same thing as ideological enmity. The two nation theory just asserted that there are religio-ideological differences between hindus and muslims and these religious differences mean they constitute different nations. but nowhere did it say that muslims should hate, or work to destroy hindus or hinduism. so, the two-nation theory just assrted ideological differences and not ideological enmity. Similarly, the one nation theory did not deny that there are religio-ideological differences between muslims and hindus-it just asserted that despite these religious differences the cultural similarities mean that they are one nation. Now my post was not about whether hindus and muslims constituted one nation or not or whether india or pakistan should have split or not (i will perhaps cover that issue later in a separate post). it was just saying that we are religio-ideologically different but not ideological enemies. Neither theory contradicts this assertion.
it was also pointed out that indians are not necessarily vegetarian. this is true. however, i think it is still safe to say that vegetarianism is a much stronger trait in indian culture than in pakistani culture and vice versa for carnivorism.
if any one still has any questions for me, pls write directly to me
thanks again
NC,
Sometimes I feel that Vajra and NC Choudhary went to the same school.
Vajra,
Thanks for answering my question. I understand your position better as a result of the detailed answer, though I disagree with several parts of it. Unfortunately, I cannot respond in detail right away as I am traveling and using a mobile device to access the internet.
Reading all of these exchanges took me back to Probyn’s original lament.
I just had to read it again, but this time while listening to my copy of Issac Stern playing Sarsate’s Zigeunerweisen. As Stern’s violin sobs plaintively in its descending scale, I can imagine the rich 7.1 dolby-dts sound of a table being violently upturned and hitting the floor with great angular velocity. The camera cuts to a slow motion closeup of a glass ashtray falling slowly and shattering to a thousand pieces. The waitress, a prepubiscent Pashtun boy of 10 or 11 years in age, with a complexion like that of a white translucent porcelin vase filled with pomagranate juice, looks on helplessly as this miasma from across the border rampages through the august setting. Another cut to the horrified visage of a monocled, dapper stern looking gentleman of pure Persian, Turkish, and a smidgen of Tajik ancestry, as unplayed cards fly out of his manicured hands into the air, again in slow motion, and mingle vulgarly with already banked tricks in..in..in, why the same grotesque manner as the hideous spidery legged, shrunken penis endowed stinking hindoos of hindoostan squat in their bounty of domed architectural marvels with nary an acknowledgement or gratitude to the glorious musalman.
It is a scene of such exquisite pathos.
Now before some langoti and chappal wearing, overly earnest Indian shrieks about this being a good project for a Bollywood movie, perish the thought! No, the limp-wristed melodramatic vulgarians of Bollywood are hardly fit for a project like this. It requires the vastly superior culture and treatment of a Central Asian film maker, a Turkoman, or Kazakh, or dare I say, Uzbek (even though “they nosy people with bone in their brain”). Of-course, my beloved track of Sarsate played by Stern would have to go as we cannot have a dirty jew defiling things. I am sure there is a greater Central Asian or Turkish folk song that can serve as the soundtrack. What a scene it will be!
K K
That was a work of genuine imagination-aided by a few puffs of the magic weed surely.