G-8: RIP?

Romair, that is because Pakistani Punjab and Sind CHOSE to be culturally ruled by North India by adopting a north Indian language their supreme language!

Hyptohetically, take Urdu out of Pakistan completely, and there is nothing common left between someone say from Madhya Pradesh and any Pakistani. NO?

majumdar #: "Barrister sahib's contention is not that IVC people were Muslims....IVC people and that the people and culture of today's India has nothing to do with these IVC people."

...yes that is his theory.....partially correct, if one takes all of india - south and north, and only part of pakistan - punjab and sind.......however, partially incorrect, if one takes into account all of pakistan - sind, punjab, nwfp and baluchistan, and only part of india - north india.......

i think aitezaz hasn't travelled enough in india, nor interacted with a whole lot of indians......there are, in fact, very few people in south asia who have interacted with pakistanis and indians on a large scale level for extended amounts of time (i am starting to realize i am one of the few, who have).....hence all analyses seem to have some holes......

...here is what i have seen.....

take a group of politically neutral south indians, north indians and pakistanis (from its north india side, i.e. sindhis and punjabis (and mohajirs)......and put them in a room.....

....the pakistanis will not float towards south indians, since they have little in common, and most pakistanis don't even know there is such a place like south india.....they think all india is like north india......

......south indians will not float towards pakistanis either....

.......what is interesting to see is where the north indians will float towards (assuming it is a cultural and not a politically charged environment).......

invariably, i almost, always see the north indians float towards pakistanis, more than they float towards south indias.......they find punjabi and sindhi pakistanis, easier to communicate and relate to, then south indians......

the gujurati (or gujjus as they are known in india) and mumbaiwallas can related to pakistani mohajirs......the indian punjabis and dehliwallas can relate to pakistani punjabis.......as can the sikhs.....(i am not including bengal in north india, here)......

primarily because they are culturally, historically (and via dna) part of the same group.....

i am still thinking of a name for this theory......perhaps i will call it my shah rukh khan vs. rajnikanth theory.....i.e. rajnikanth is hugely popular in south india, while shah rukh is not......shah rukh khan is hugely popular in north india and in pakistan, while rajnikanth is not popular in either north india or pakistan.....

romair, according to many people Sindh and Punjab do share more with Northern parts of India than with Baluchistan and NWFP. In that sense Pakistan sits on a basic divide.

But Pakistan will not fall apart. Differences between Baluchistan and NWFP on one hand and Sindh and Punjab will be bridged by Islam, and as people on both sides begin to lead more Islamic lives, any civilizational differences will disappear too.

Why do you see Pakistan falling apart?

majumdar/kaalchakra #: "Same could actually be said about Africa which you lump as one entity.."

...yes, true, which is why i stated, "...i have also used the same term for africa, i.e. africans......because african nations, much like south asian nations, are also artificially created nations, by colonists......"

"an interesting view. Do you count Baluchistan and NWFP as part of that South Asian geographical region?"

...it is quite difficult to define the boundaries of south asia......i suppose one can draw them wherever one wants......since they are geographic boundaries.....

.....if you are talking from a civilizational point of view (i.e. my ashoka vs ghaznavi theory), then south asia is a group of multiple civilizations.......

so, geographically there is no answer to your question......

civilizationally, nwfp and baluchistan are different civilizations......different from the other two civilizations in pakistan, i.e. sind and punjab.......

basically, if we start from an abstract point of view, from pakistan to sri lanka and bangladesh, south asia, perhaps (i need to do more research), can be divided into the following abstract regions (which have, absolutely nothing to do with present-day boundaries of pakistan, india etc.)

1. most of sri lanka
2. south india : northern tamil tip of sri lanka to the narmada river (roughly) in central india)
3. north india : north of narmada river, moving northeastward to indus river in pakistan and northwards to himalaya ranges (passing from pakistan's northern areas to nepal)
4. afghania : northwest of indus to the pushtu speaking regions of afghanistan.....
5. bengal - east of where narmada river stops to the easter edge of bangladesh

these, then, further divide into civilizaitions, based on various criteria.......

pakistan is, thus, quite a bit like belgium.....it is a combination of the edges of two civilizaitons - north india and afghan......punjab, kashmir and sind from the former and nwfp and baluchistand from the later, plus some persian influence on baluchistan........

much like belgium is an artificial country, consisting of a part of netherland (flemish) and a part of france (with a small part of germany thrown in)........

the other theory is the aitezaz ahsan theory that their is enough to distinguish pakistan, civilizationally, from all of north india.......i.e. it is an extension of the historic indus valley civilization......however, he admits, in his book, his lack of knowledge of nwfp and baluchistan's history, and doesn't take these two provinces into account......

in any case, what is a fact is that there is no historical civilization, which maps, in any form or manner, to present day india and pakistan......these are artificial entities created as a by-product of as much land as could be conquered by the british....had they conquered persia and anglicized it, it would be considered a part of this also.....had they not conquered, say, tamil nadu, it would be a separate country today......

had they not come, at all, then south asia would have split into its historical mean - i.e. a group of countries, with their own civlizations - marthas would have had their own country, punjabis their own, nwfp would be a part of afghania, bengal would have been its own empire........etc.

Nkg moshai,

Barrister sahib's contention is not that IVC people were Muslims (although there is a possibility that they cud be proved to be Muslims like Sir Alex was) but that Pakistan's people are descendants of these IVC people and that the people and culture of today's India has nothing to do with these IVC people.

Regards

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

Kaal bhai,

There is of course another POV- the IVC hypothesis- popularised by Aitzaz Ahsan (if I am not mistaken) which basically puts the whole of Pakistan out of South Asia and as a separate civilisation by itself with little to do with "South Asia". The borders of this civilisation by some coincidence is almost identical to the borders of the current Pakistan.

Regards

Kaal bhai,

Do you count Baluchistan and NWFP as part of that South Asian geographical region?

My guess, no.

Regards

Romair, an interesting view. Do you count Baluchistan and NWFP as part of that South Asian geographical region?

Re: # 107
majumder....
africans are divided into large number of tribes ( apart from arab implants)....

Romair,

Same could actually be said about Africa which you lump as one entity. There are actually two Africas- an Arab North and a Black African South/Centre. Although, I dont know enuff about African culture to decide whether there are cultural commonalities among all black African communities, although clearly there is a fair bit of commonality among the Arab Northerners (language, religion, prolly race as well).

Regards

dm...
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/srivastava/default.aspx
watch this guy. he is dave cutler in making...that is the way IT transition is going on (into the hand of indians...)

Re: # 81
chalta...
US model is very successful indeed...but india may find it's own set of processes to excell in making great business/industrial houses.....
initial concept of tata nano was to make it like cottage industry/small industry to keep the cost of production very low....

majumdar #: "You keep harping on "South Asian" rather than let's say Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi. Any specific reasons for lumping all three into one unit."

...yes very specific reason.......

along with my dinosaur vs. cockroach theory, which applies to the future of the whole world, and my indra nooyi vs. paris hilton, which applies to indians and pakistanis as individuals, i have a few more.......

.....i do not consider south asia to be india, pakistan and bangladesh.....based on the thousands of year history of the region, where it has only been one nation-state for 200 out of those five (?) thousand years.......i feel the current boundaries are a temporary phenomenon, which will disappear shortly, and the entities will again split up to their historical mean......

south asia is a geographical region.....not a nation, or two or three nations......it is many civilizations.......perhaps twenty or more.....the only nation which is also a civilization is bangladesh (half of which is in india)......

so south asia is a geographical region - like europe.......and in the future, it will be south asians, who will migrate outwards......i don't know if they will migrate out as indians and pakistanis, or as punjabis and tamils.....

...i have also used the same term for africa, i.e. africans......because african nations, much like south asian nations, are also artificially created nations, by colonists......

Romair,

# 102

....then again, perhaps south asian, african (and chinese) culture and values.....

You keep harping on "South Asian" rather than let's say Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi. Any specific reasons for lumping all three into one unit.

Regards

SR #: "Nation States, as we know them today, are a relatively recent historic phenomenon. Their days are numbered just as are the days of distinct ethnicities.....The world is going to be more and more of a melting pot -- cooking haleem. And if what you are trying to say is this then I agree....."

.....what i am trying to describe is what the world will look like in the future.....based on current statistical trends.....kind of what this article is trying to do.....

.....unless the world becomes one, as in star trek, and earth joins a federation of other planets, more than likely, the world will remain split into various groupings - be it nation states, ethnicities, religions etc......

.....however, it will move towards a pot, in the future.....but this pot will not be a melting pot.....it will be a pot filled with one kind of meat - South Asian and African (and Chinese) - with all the other meats in such small quantities, that they may be insignificant.....

.......up til now, it was industrialization that decided the future of groups.....there are two changing trends: the industrialized countries are, now, demographically, moving in a direction, where they will not have even the bare minimum manpower to support their own growing societies, much less dominate anyone.........the second trend is that technology is becoming ubiquous......something like the Internet would have taken decades to centuries to be adapted in poorer countries, just a few hundreds years ago......now it was adapted within a few years.....everywhere.......

........so the world will be dominated by certain ethnicities......and certain ethnicities and religions will disapper.......unlike before, they will not disappear due to war or disease......they will disappear voluntarily......

........let's say canada ends up with a majority south asian and chinese population.......usa ends up with a majority mexican and central american ethnic population.....uk ends up with a majority south asian population......france with a majority african etc.......let's say japanese, russian, and jewish population becomes so low that they cannot support their own growth......

what happens then......perhaps nothing......perhaps, dost-mittar's grandkids become as canadian as the kids of his neighbor who migrated from ireland......and perhaps hamidm mian's grandkids are as naive and ill-informed as him and most white americans........and perhaps japan and russia function as successful societies with only 13% local population, much like uae does today.......

then again, perhaps south asian, african (and chinese) culture and values become dominant all over the world, much like european/white culture and values are today......

i am not trying to say what will happen when these demographic changes take place.......no one knows that......i am, simply, stating that it will happen.....and people should use this as a major part of their analyses.....