Everyone’s got the right to hold their peculiar views about politics… and it’s a pity that Pakistan has a clogged-up policy when it comes to discussing its founding leaders – I for one wouldn’t be able to talk about Mr. Jinnah the way I do outside Pakistan.
Religion on the other hand is more rooted in history, society and traditions, and I feel uncomfortable talking about anyone else’s faith, let alone take a stab at an interpretation of an adherent’s beliefs and practices… and I suppose that’s my major beef with most discussions on this BB which often start sound like pseudo-proselytization attempts.
Faisal Bhaijan, what you fail to understand is that Pakistan was carved out of India so their resentment is understandable. Similarly, you will never see Mujeeb-ur-Rehman being praised as a leader in Pakistan. You know what they will do to you if you try doing that?
Mujeeb and Jinnah can be compared to one another, there’s no contest between Jinnah and Gandhi.
AJ, Gandhi is revered for his non-violence stance. Not because he was a communal sihthead. He is known around the world for adopting that strategy.
Jinnah is recognized as a leader that leveraged communalism successfully to create a country that became home to people who didn't want to live in India. Many left, many stayed. Success of the strategy depends on the outcomes. JInnah successfully created Pakistan. A tremendous feat. Now whether those principles of initial separation result in a long term success for those people, I sure hope so.
I was simply talking about the future ...and I didn't even mention India..I said look east a 1000 or so miles ot places like SK, SIngapore and Malaysia
Well Madhanee.. I know you are just trying to irk the readers with tangential and contra-mainstream ideas thrown in, and waiting to see what sticks.
Anyway, the other day I was watching an interview of Rasool Baksh Palejo on Geo TV. He is a Sindhi separatist and a very senior politician. He is over 70 years of age. On national tv, he was openly calling Musharraf governement as terrorists, our constitution as federal terrorism, wants to rename our country as "Punjabistan" and a whole host of other ideas that are dear to his heart. While I disagree with everything he said, it was refreshing to note that such political statements can be made on our national tv, without any censorship. Point is not that Pakistan is the flag-bearer of openness in society, rather the point is that you can speak freely about Mujeeb in Pakistan, praise him, criticize him or whatever, and you are not likely to end up on a seekh.
India, that our Pinstripe uncle so glamorizes as the epitome of openess, has still ways to go. Over the last few years, she has taken many steps forward, but every once in a while takes a few backwards, just to show it is not easy to break free from years of closed culture that is heavily tilted to censorship.
Faisal, thus is the bane of emerging countries. The momentum for global leadership is clearly there in favor of India. I would reiterate, my comments are wrt what AJ posted initially, re: "what the future holds when discussing Pakistan"
No where I said that India is the epitome of openess, as you suggested.
I don’t quite follow this part. Didn’t Jinnah want a secular state? I wasn’t aware he was ever reverred for his religiously fanatical leanings. Indeed wasn’t this why many potential Pakistanis themselves hated him?
Once you die like that, you just can’t win can you. I say assasination is the way to you, you become a martyr for your casue and then you have automatic respect.
Future people, future! It doesn't matter what Gandhi, Jinnah, Nehru did ... maybe only for a historical text book but what matters is if the two countries can live together as good peaceful neighbors or not, no matter how insignificant. Wouldn't it be great to spend that huge defense budget on something else, like actual drama schools near Bolly/Lollywood?
Faisal Bhaijan, I am really surprised to read your post. You have such low expectations of our nation? For crying out loud, if after 60 years of independence if someone needs God permission to say a thing or two about the dictators, then we don’t deserve a country, but deserve to live in a pile of poope – and we can call it Poopistan.
You started by calling Bush a jackass, and went on to make a point about political leaders defined by their ideals, and living beyond their mortal lives. And now you want to reduce the whole lofty discussion to friggin' budget allocations?
You could have said this earlier and saved Madhoo uncle from a lot of heart burn. And in your whole discussion about budget allocation in Pakistan and India, the only person who got name-called is Bush. Poor bugger! He can’t escape being called a jackass in any discussion.
gandhi’s ‘non-violence’ was the reason Jinnah separated from Congress…two measly years from '37-'39 of congress govt proved what was in store for Muslims in future…
seriously gandhi was a joke…the brits were already leaving india, they had the world wars to handle than listen to bleating indians from an already milked india… dhoti pehan kai duniya bhar mai naach liay toa kia kar lia…
the bigger challenge was only to show the Muslims that Hindu-Muslim unity was possible in united India…
leagacy makes no leader, it only makes murtis…the man was a walking murti when he was alive, so no big deal he got one after he is dead..
foresight is what makes a political leader…and Jinnah had it…we got our pakistan right after '39 when jinnah left congress…
While non-violence struggle influenced the civil rights movement and MLK’s m.o… Pakistan was severed in two based on the foundations of jinnahs foresight. quite a robust foresight.
