A good point by Bernard Lewis on Independence of 3rd world countries.
“Independence and freedom are very different, and all too often attainment of one means end of the other, and the replacement of foreign overlords by domestic tyrants, more adept, more intimate, and less constrained in their tyranny.”
Do you concur.
Absolutely Pakistan has been dominated post 1947 by Brown Sahibs, people like Ghulam Mohammed and Iskandier Mirza's contribution to the creation or even opposition to Pakistan was virtually zero. The story in the Arab world was even worse, the exceptions to that quote are countries like Turkey, Iran and Afghanistan to which foriegn domination has always been brief..
Ps: I don't like Bernard Lewis
Re: Indepence and Freedom
Don't know much about him but i am reading his book, "Crisis in Islam", holy war and unholy terror.
He does seem to possess obvious but subtle bias. Have you read the book?
What do you think about it?
Re: Indepence and Freedom
yeah i have ..his work was essential reading for many of the neo-cons. I agree the bias is subtle , but also very harsh
Re: Indepence and Freedom
With complete lack of knowledge of his political affiliations, when i started readng the book i was impressed, but as i went thru i found that he completely ignores the atrocities comitted by Israel and west and just keeps stressing that conflicts among muslims have been more intense and bloody. And then at end it exposes him when he goes on to claim that conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are an attempt to bring democracy to these regions.
A good point by Bernard Lewis on Independence of 3rd world countries.
"Independence and freedom are very different, and all too often attainment of one means end of the other, and the replacement of foreign overlords by domestic tyrants, more adept, more intimate, and less constrained in their tyranny."
Do you concur.
What's the context of this statement?
I have read some of his other books, not this one. In the context of Pakistan, India and BDesh yes we got independence but we got into a stranglehold of dynasties who turned the very concept of political parties on its head.
In Pakistan we got Bhutto clan., Sharif Clan, chaudhri clan, and Mohajir clan
In India we got Gandhi clan, and RSS clan + sundry socialist leftitst clans.
In BDesh we got Mujib clan and zia clan.
Once these clans got hold of a party (or made a party) they turned it into personal fiefdom, jagir, or worse a slave girl.
Political parties were supposed to implement democracy in the society. Thanks to the slavish mentality of the subcontinent people, these parties became dictatorships.
And now we exchange one dictatorship with another every so often. And yes in case of Pakistan and BDesh we have an added dimension. These two "Islamic" countries' civilian dictatorships are frequently interspersed with military dictatorships.