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

veeresh #189

[quote]
4) Finally, please try to understand the power of ``assimilation by democracy`` when you refer to Pakistan Today.
[end-quote]

I want to support this and also say that you are putting this far too gently. Not being a gentle person, I will put it more crudely in way that gujjubania might understand.

The strengths of indian society is its diversity, support for democracy, its large and growing middle-class, which includes vast numbers of minorities. These values need to be communicated to our neighbors, most particularly Pakistan. Not because it will do anything to deter the jehadis; on the contrary it will only inflame them. But it because it speaks to a constituency much more important than the jehadis

---

the educated, the striving and the working classes of pakistan. In the long run, it is these people who are determine whether India and Pakistan remain trapped in a cycle of violence, or whether imaginative ways are found to break through the problems.

Regrettably, certain sections of indian society are unable to see their own strengths in this regard. The strength of having a free and open society are more important than having an overlarge army and an obsession with aggressive power/force/technology.

#208 by vertex on April 28, 2004 9:20pm PT

You said *Sigh* to that query by Sadna. It is indeed understandable that pan Islamism is good for religious reasons- but political pan Islamism is a creation of OBL types. If it was so good then Bangladesh and Afganistan would not have seen all that bloodshed. So it is good to see people across the border are sympathetic- but please do not try to send help with your jehadis!!
Any way, read this editorial form TOI in order to understand why ABV would be retiring soon...............and why Advani and Murli Joshis would be losing the elections due to their stupid understanding of IMs and their adherence to the TNT.......



TODAY`S EDITORIAL
Green Saffron

[ TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 12:00:01 AM ]

Wooing minorities, PM confuses Muslims with Pakistan


Though it is desperately trying, the BJP will find it hard to change its spots. The initial euphoria that they would romp home in the elections having been dispelled by increasingly gloomy forecasts for them, party bosses are rethinking fundamental strategies. The most significant of these is the BJP’s recent efforts to woo the so-called Muslim vote. This is a historic volte-face for the party, which has always treated the minorities, particularly Muslims, as necessary adversaries. Now, however, the penny seems to have dropped that it is electorally unwise to antagonise nearly 12 per cent of the population. Indeed, in some areas, including in politically crucial Uttar Pradesh, the percentage of this major minority is as high as 20 to 30 per cent. In belated recognition of this, the BJP’s vision statement included a special economic package for the uplift of the minorities. All this might indicate a welcome change of heart on the part of this mainstream party, which could help to bridge the many schisms in our society caused by the politics of communalism. Indeed, it might be tempting to see this as an extension of the BJP’s earlier experiment in social engineering by which it successfully increased its vote base by incorporating the OBCs and dalits. So is the BJP becoming truly inclusive today?


Unfortunately, some remarks made by no less a person than the prime minister suggest that the party has a long way to go before it can shed its innate categorisation of Muslims as the archetypal ‘other’. First, the PM and the deputy PM had been quoted as saying that the peace process with Pakistan was good for Hindu-Muslim relations in India. By extension of logic, would this imply that if hostilities broke out between the two countries, Muslims in India would suffer the consequences? More recently, addressing a rally in Muslim-majority Kishanganj, the PM once again referred to the peace initiative as proof that his “government has never discriminated against anybody on communal lines”. In effect, what he was saying was that the BJP equated Muslims with Pakistan — even if those Muslims happened to be born and raised in India. This sounds suspiciously like a reiteration of the two-nation theory from this side of the border. This is all the more ironic in that India’s foundation is based on explicit repudiation of such a concept. For all that it has recently sought to appropriate national icons — from Mahatma Gandhi to Bhim Rao Ambedkar — the BJP still tends to view this country through saffron-tinted spectacles. The greening of the lotus remains an unfulfilled promise of a distant garden

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

vertex #208
If, as you insist, Indian Muslims support Pakistan on Kashmir, apart from my previously-expressed hopes for them, I wish them good luck as well. Being a Hindu, clearly there is nothing more I can say on this subject, when confronted by differing opinions of any random Muslim from anywhere in the world.

...yaar ballu khan....wah wah.. kia mian ki malhar aur kya mian ki toRi... subhan allah..i hope you have a sherwaani..if not get one stitched and quickly....;)

sadna,

`I didnot say one was worse or better, I said someone on this board was equating collecting bricks for a temple which was not built with collecting money to kill Indians. `

Oh dear...are you for real?

You clearly disapproved of the equivalence, the tenor of your message clearly indicating that money to `kill Indians` was not the same as collecting bricks for a temple that was not to be completed for some period of time...not the same means it is either better or worse. What was I to assume?

My point (which WILL be lost on you) is that who the hell cares what money is being collected for, the underlying mindset is the same...money is collected (taxes) to defend `mother India` (or so the politicians say) and money is collected to `liberate occupied kashmir` (or so the politicians say).

No collecting bricks is not the same, but the people who are sending those bricks and their mentality is what is really important.

``I wasn`t speaking on anyone`s behalf except mine``

No? You weren`t speaking on `behalf` of Pakistanis by asserting they claim something?

...for whose sake Pakistanis claim to be fighting the scourge of Indian nationalism and Hindutva. - #161

Fine, mistake is mine...I should have said `putting words in the mouths of...`` instead of `speaking on behalf of..``. Whatever.

I`ve actually never heard Pakistan’s quarrel with India being framed in exactly those terms...it`s always Kashmir this, or Kashmir that. Hindutva and Indian (or rather `Hindu`) nationalism is primarily a concern with Indian Muslims, to which Pakistanis rather unsympathetically respond with `I told you so...`

It wasn`t until India`s recent chest-beating and emergence as an economic force in the region that has gotten Pakistan all uptight about Indian nationalism, which is seen as an assertion of it`s regional ambitions...which may not be all too well meaning (or so the paranoid Pakistani thinks...).

---

ballu,

``I think this is more obfuscation from some one claiming to represent IM.``

I don`t claim to represent `Instant Messaging`. However, I did hazard a guess at the temperament and political leanings of Indian Muslims. If that involved arrogating myself the privilege of `representing` Indian Muslims, then so be it. Of course, I really had no such illusions...

``On the issue of Paki Muslims as a counterfoil to RSS Hindutvadis I think...``

a) Shouldn`t you be spazzing out on Mantolives?
b) Who cares what you think...
c) Never claimed the two were linked...
d) Is it really that difficult to swallow that Indian Muslims want to see good relations between India and Pakistan? Is it really that difficult to swallow that Indian Muslims want to see the nonsense in Kashmir END! Jihad this, Jihad that...Pakistan this, Pakistan that. It`s laughable...
e) You got me...infact I`m neither a Pakistani, nor an Indian Muslim...I`m a Taoist Eskimo. Happy?

vertex #196
``Never made the comment that jihadis are fighting scourge of anything...just saying Indian right wing and hawkish policies not any better.``

I didnot say one was worse or better, I said someone on this board was equating collecting bricks for a temple which was not built with collecting money to kill Indians.

I wasn`t speaking on anyone`s behalf except mine - I said that I hope Indian Muslims are suitably grateful for Pakistanis devout funding of jihad against India for whatever reason. You have serious comprehension problems.

#187 by gujjubania on April 28, 2004 9:12am PT

Thanks for the info, I have already contributed to that fund. Every patriotic Indian worth his salt should be doing so.

As to being a ``representative`` of IM, in my opinion no one person or a group of persons can claim to represent a community in politics by shouting against other groups- and it is for this reason that India had decided to follow the democratic principles of deciding who represents its citizens- that the representation of the aspirations of a geographical constituency of people can only be decided through a process of concensus through ballot process (however defective the process is) and not through some theocratic process decided by the Ulema (howsoever perfect it may be).

kaurasach #199 Thanks for the interesting write-up on the role of the sikhs in the mutiny. I would certainly very much like to read up more on this at some point, and will look up the Khushwant Singh book you mention. As I said, my knowledge of the mutiny is not very good. Having said that, I would say that just saying that sikhs who sided with the brits were chamchas does not really shed much light and no doubt does injustice to them. The interesting thing is WHAT led them to side with the brits: I was told recently by someone who is better read up on this history than I am (which is not saying much) that the the brits promised the sikhs extra payment if they overran Delhi. So it seems the good old dollar sign (or rupee sign in this case) was one motivation. You mention settling of some old scores being another one.

It is true that no one knows what would have happened if the sikhs had not sided with the brits. My only point was that had the brits been routed, that would have been very bad in the long run for the subcontinent. Because instead of leaving behind a large middle class and a parliament, in 1857 they would have left behind india as it had existed for ages: with warring rajas and emperors and what nots.

pankaj,

``However what impressed me the most was the kind of care Yasser and Aisha, NHK, semi, sobia et al took of Dost-Mittar and his family. The soul of Lahore resides in the heart of such people. Ask yourself this question- Would anyone in Delhi/Bombay, who you know only through a public site, take such good care of you or show such mehmaan-nawazi.``


…thank you:) but you give us more credit than is due…we enjoyed it all every bit as mittarsaab did...i would like to think this would def. be reciprocated if i were to visit india…esp. when it has ppl like you…

#196 by vertex on April 28, 2004 1:36pm PT

I think this is more obfuscation from some one claiming to represent IM. On the issue of Paki Muslims as a counterfoil to RSS Hindutvadis I think that is exactly the trap that BJP has been trying to lay on IM- by linking the issue of Muslim assimilation in Indian democracy with the issue of good relations with Pakistan and the resolution of Kashmir issue. ABV has been harping on the `good` relations with Pakistan as one the `achievements` of his gevernment to the IMs. Are these issues linked- Heck, No! And only those Paki Trolls who subscribe to the `strategic depth` into the Indian territory would gladly accept ABVs linking of the issues before IM with the relations with Pakistan. And I can only say that those so called IM who agree that the two are linked are either trolls or are actually Pakistani Muslims masquerading as Indian Muslims on this board.

#196 by vertex on April 28, 2004 1:36pm PT

I think this is more obfuscation from some one claiming to represent IM. On the issue of Paki Muslims as a counterfoil to RSS Hindutvadis I think that is exactly the trap that BJP has been trying to lay on IM- by linking the issue of Muslim assimilation in Indian democracy with the issue of good relations with Pakistan and the resolution of Kashmir issue. ABV has been harping on the `good` relations with Pakistan as one the `achievements` of his gevernment to the IMs. Are these issues linked- Heck, No! And only those Paki Trolls who subscribe to the `strategic depth` into the Indian territory would gladly accept ABVs linking of the issues before IM with the relations with Pakistan. And I can only say that those so called IM who agree that the two are linked are either trolls or are actually Pakistani Muslims masquerading as Indian Muslims on this board.

vertex:

{Paki `Jihad` has been exposed as a farce, and cheap thuggery. Despite this, of the two countries, I would dare think that many Indian Muslims think Pakistan`s `official` line (no matter how insincere) is the most sensible: let the Kashmiri`s have their way - }

you may dare think that, but do you really believe that? do you honestly believe that the `official` line really is let the Kashmiris have their way? it is difficult for me to believe that quite honestly. musharraf has wavered and swung like a pendulum on this issue. how can this then be the most sensible? and how can a line no matter how insincere be the most sensible anyway?

Dear Farzana: (is that better?)
I think I`ll stick to those three; they are on distinct topics. If the chowk publishes them, they will be on Pakistani Feudals, Khyber Pass and Pak. heritage sites. I hope you read them, and if you dont:
hum haal-e-dil sunaayenge
suniye ke na suniye!
:-)

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

re:#173 by ahmedmadani
Madani Sahib,
Hope u get better. I will pray for your recovery.
sridhar