Whenever I see political discussions and even some cultural ones. I have noticed one thing.
The word used is ‘‘punjab’’ in all contexts. Punjab deprived others, Punjab ruled the country, Punjab discriminated against Bangalis/Balochs/Sindhis etc. Punjab signed the indus water treaty, Punjab steals water etc.
But whenever issues of other provinces are mentioned, you hear specific sub-set of those provinces. Like, the taliban, the tribals, the ANP, Sindhi Wadayra, Baloch Sardar. You never see, Sindh supporting landlords, Baloch killing women, or Pathans blowing things up.
What I want to know is, when commonly Punjab is being referred to , in political as well as historic context, what do you mean by it?
Is it an all encompassing definition, which includes each and everything that is included withiin this geographic boundary?
As far as I see it Punjab (land of five rivers) encompasses all those who live in its geographical boundaries, you will find people of all shades making the province their home throughout history.
There was no country or province with the name of Punjab before Ranjeet Sigh , even he was himself called Maharaja Lahore , later he was given title of Sher e Punjab ,The area between Jhelum and Bias was called as Punjab . However Pothohar , Thal , Multan and Bahawalpur are historically not a part of Punjab , It is Lahore , Gujranwala Faisalabad Sahiwal divisions and rest of this is now in India .
Unfortunately it is mostly true what the others say about us .
Whenever I see political discussions and even some cultural ones. I have noticed one thing.
The word used is ''punjab'' in all contexts. Punjab deprived others, Punjab ruled the country, Punjab discriminated against Bangalis/Balochs/Sindhis etc. Punjab signed the indus water treaty, Punjab steals water etc.
But whenever issues of other provinces are mentioned, you hear specific sub-set of those provinces. Like, the taliban, the tribals, the ANP, Sindhi Wadayra, Baloch Sardar. You never see, Sindh supporting landlords, Baloch killing women, or Pathans blowing things up.
What I want to know is, when commonly Punjab is being referred to , in political as well as historic context, what do you mean by it?
Is it an all encompassing definition, which includes each and everything that is included withiin this geographic boundary?
When they say "Punjab did this/that, deprived others" they are mainly referring to power of Punjab i.e. politicians/establishment/takh-e-Lahore.... my 2c.
There is always resentment against the people who are in majority, in Pakistan's case its Punjab. The operations in all provinces of the country (except Punjab), the armed forces being mostly from Punjab and the suspicions towards others (traitor tags) havent helped either.
The day Pakistan becomes a true federation where all federating units feel they have equal say the views of smaller provinces towards Punjab would change.
There is always resentment against the people who are in majority, in Pakistan's case its Punjab. The operations in all provinces of the country (except Punjab), the armed forces being mostly from Punjab and the suspicions towards others (traitor tags) havent helped either.
You forgot
Our majority was too saying same before 71
The day Pakistan becomes a true federation where all federating units feel they have equal say the views of smaller provinces towards Punjab would change.
Till you give the regional rights to the people , Nothing could be better
I didn't understand the question ... Now I do ... I think it is to do with democratisation ... I think Punjab is the region which is most unlike a tribal set-up - it's power structure does not really take place as families making decisions outside the system although underhanded dealings do still happen. Pakistanis through and through are quite "tribal" but they like to believe themselves to be democratic. I also think that Punjab might be more pluralistic and mixed.
I believe other regions tend to be either more tribally led or they have groups that take decisions independently of a governmental system moreso than Punjab ...
It comes with it pros and cons - when something good happens Punjab takes credit and when something bad happens Punjab gets blame.
Bhai Punjab is now Pakistan ruled by Showbaz Sharif who thinks developing only Punjab is developing Pakistan. He is also ex-Officio PM of Pakistan where actual PM Tattoo $ is dysfunctional. A resolution should be passed in the NA and Senate to change the name from Pakistan to Punjabistan as per wishes of 'Registani Panchi' :)
Bhai Punjab is now Pakistan ruled by Showbaz Sharif who thinks developing only Punjab is developing Pakistan. He is also ex-Officio PM of Pakistan where actual PM Tattoo $ is dysfunctional. A resolution should be passed in the NA and Senate to change the name from Pakistan to Punjabistan as per wishes of 'Registani Panchi' :)
No one is stopping from Dinosaur Ali Shah from developing Sindh. As far as NS is concerned I second your opinion regarding him...
When they say "Punjab did this/that, deprived others" they are mainly referring to power of Punjab i.e. politicians/establishment/takh-e-Lahore.... my 2c.
But the they don't specifically say it out, right? Like they say ''wadairas of sindh'', ''sardars of balochistan''..... this disparity makes me think that people hold all of punjab (including the innumerable poverty stricken and deprived people) responsible for everything. All of Punjab's population gets blamed, whereas in other cases the "powers'' are called out by name.
But the they don't specifically say it out, right? Like they say ''wadairas of sindh'', ''sardars of balochistan''..... this disparity makes me think that people hold all of punjab (including the innumerable poverty stricken and deprived people) responsible for everything. All of Punjab's population gets blamed, whereas in other cases the "powers'' are called out by name.
Yes they don't because the "waderas" of Sindh" or "Sardar's of Balcohistan" only damage local populations, they don't have reach beyond their land-lordism or province.
I see where you are coming from. What i believe is we as a nation always need to come up with an excuse to blame others for our miseries.
Sindhis/Balochis/Pashtuns blame Punjabis for all their sufferings and Punjabis blame America/West for all their miseries. In actual fact, we have weak judicial system (&other institutions) due to which POWERFUL dominate the weak. An average person suffers at the hands of powerful regardless of ethnic background. Majority of population is Punjabi so off course majority of powerful people will belong to Punjab.
Think about it, would the life of average Sindhi/Balochi/Pashtuns be better if Sindh/KPK,Balochistan was an independent country with current resources/judicial system/education levels??