South Asia Tribune Discussion Forums
Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition
Home » Forums » South Asia Tribune Forum

Replies: 119   Pages: 8  

Welcome, Guest
Login / Register
Guest Settings

 Reply to this Topic  Post New Topic  Search Forum
 
  Back to Topic List
 
Replies: 119   Pages: 8   [ Go: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8  » ]
#1
Administrator
forumsadmin@satribune.com


Posts: 2,250
Registered: Dec, 1969


Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 1:35 AM
Reply
Discuss the story Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition at

http://www.satribune.com/archives/200506/P1_nam.htm

- Your message will be posted unedited, but we reserve the right to edit or remove any message.
- Please:
- Do NOT use indecent or abusive language.
- NO personal attacks.
- NO communal or religious bigotry.
- Stay on the subject
- Report abusive language to the Admin


#2
Avinash
avinashchopra@hotmail.com


Posts: 121
Registered: Apr, 2005
Disabled

Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 2:49 AM
Reply
Ms. Mehjoor,

Thank you for trying to set the record/history straight. But I can only imagine how viciously you will attacked by the cyber-Hindutva-pack. They will undermine you, belittle you, thrash you, try to assassinate your credibility, and do their best to intimidate you. They didn't spare even their one-time Hindutva poster-boy, i.e. Advani, as soon as he dared to call Jinnah a secular leader, so you shouldn't expect my from the cyber-hyenas either.

If it's any consolation another well respected and world renowned journalist Praful Bidwai also has been attacked and abused by the pro-Hindutva cyber bandits. He writes, "Pro-Hindutva non-resident Indians in North America are among those spearheading this campaign of intolerance, especially on email circuits. Driven by their long-distance or 'Green Card' hyper-nationalism, they take extremely illiberal positions. They target individuals and assassinate their character, abuse them, and try to intimidate them. Among their targets are journalists, including myself."

For whatever its worth, I think the following sentence of yours should solve the mystery, hence put an end to the debate, "For him Muslims were a 'cultural group.'"

I am sure a well respected forum member Mr. Baloch will also agree with your (above) statement.

Thanks and good luck.

#3
Indian
indian@aol.com


Posts: 533
From: post
Registered: Sep, 2003


Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 3:44 AM
Reply
Advani's message was meant for Pakistanis as well - the man is 77 years, but exceptionally sharp. This was not an off the cuff remark. An exceptionally good analysis in the NYT last week.

At least he has started a debate both in Pakistan and India.

As regards, Jinnah, by all accounts he was a brillaint lawyer, an exceptional speaker and in most of his speeches he favoured a united India. He was a secular at heart - that is all that he could be, he eloped and married a girl of 18, not a muslim.

In later years, after trying to get a special place for muslims in a free India, at which he did not succeed, he became disgruntled with the Congress party, and started his campaign for a separate state for the muslims. Whether he seriously believed that muslims would be complete outcastes in India is anybody's guess. Was he motivated by his ambitions - may be.

For an excellent analysis, there is an article by M J Akabar titled Demystifying Jinnah - do not necessary agree with all his analysis, but still does not detract from the fact that it is an excellent piece.

Exactly what transpired at that hyperactive time - it may just have been a quirk of history. Not a major plan on anyones part, but that is how things happened.

Unfortunately, the legacy of that event still lingers on, in that there in animosity in South Asia,. However, the twist of fate and irony is such that the Muslim League which fought for creation of Pakistan, effectively is not even allowed to fight elections in that country.

Could Advani's remarks have a much greater purpose?

#4
Kamal
kam_bhar@yahoo.com


Posts: 97
From: Coventry UK
Registered: Jun, 2003


Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 3:58 AM
Reply
I guess id be classified as a Hindutva cyber bandit by avinash not from north america but the UK,

"Pro-Hindutva non-resident Indians in North America are among those spearheading this campaign of intolerance, especially on email circuits"

To take you comment above, so in the name of intolerance should the Jews gloss over the deeds of lets say Hitler for instance (please Im not trying to compare Jinnah with hitler biut using it to illustrate a point)

Take a look at the article below.

http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20050613&fname=kps&sid=1

Jinnah's Harvest Of Hatred
That Jinnah was neglected or marginalised in the Congress, and this 'forced' him to an extreme position is no more a justification than is claimed by other groups that commit communal carnage in the name of present 'neglect' or past wrongs.

Somewhat closer to the truth I'd say to the revisonist Pakistan view

Kam

#5
nadeem
mnadeemakram@yahoo.com


Posts: 18
From: sweden
Registered: Dec, 2004


Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 5:15 AM
Reply
I agree with the author of this article. Please also note that Jinah agreed to the Cripps Plan to keep indian united. And Congress especialy Nehru rejected it, hence created Pakistan. Otherwise we could have United States of India (USI). Jinah wanted to preseerve Indian Muslims rights in the United States of India, and opting for Pakistan was a second choice.

#6
SC Gupta
scgupta5@indiatimes.com


Posts: 283
From: India
Registered: May, 2005


Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 5:33 AM
Reply
Suddenly everything about Jinnah looks so positive to Indians.

I wonder why?

Was Jinnah really a secularist or just a shrewd advocate/lawyer? (just like Pt J. Nehru.)

Was there really a threat to Muslims in India, or was creation of Pakistan it a greater part of proving oneself a better Muslim than those `original' ones in Palestine & Saudi Arabia.

In case Pakistan was not formed, would there have been so much of blood-shed?

Or would non-Muslims in India become a victim of another phase of `Islamisation' because of presence of a larger number of fanatic Muslims (not referring to common Muslim)?

#7
C P Madhusudan
cpmadhusudan@hotmail.com


Posts: 12
From: UK
Registered: May, 2005


Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 7:18 AM
Reply
I would be very grateful if the writer would explain how Mr.Jinnah considered Muslims to be a separate cultural grouping and hence needed their separate space. Mr.Jinnah may well have been secular but definitely did practice communal politics to partition India in 1947. His claim that Muslims would be marginalized and hence he had to strike first falls in the category of Pre emptive strikes. Please note that there was no way that all of the Muslims of India could be a part of Pakistan, hence this was a pre emptive strike on the part of the Muslim elite who wanted their own playground.

.

#8
Jack
dgill45083@yahoo.com


Posts: 1,251
From: US
Registered: Dec, 2003
Disabled

Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 7:38 AM
Reply
So Mr. Advani has said Jinnah wanted a secular Pakistan. Fine. Is Pakistan today a secular country and did indeed Jinnah want a secular Pakistan?

These questions first need to be answered by Pakistanis themselves before a debate could take place. There is no need for re-writing history. History is witness to division of a country on religious lines. Another Partition of recent times has been Yougosalavia post Cold War. Chechnya as well.

What finally needs to be re-written is Pakistani history and present. If Jinnah was indeed secular, then Pakistan today is far from it. What went wrong? If Jinnah was not secular, then Mr. Advani has made a mistake. Anyways, this was another Advani bombshell which wil have its effect in coming elections, for Pakistan, it has already put the pundits there on a defensive mode.

Gill

#9
bilrak
bilrak@hotmail.com


Posts: 10
From: India
Registered: Dec, 2004


Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 7:58 AM
Reply
Here is another viewpoint on Jinnah's "secularism" -

http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=73100

Jinnah, said Ambedkar, was “too self-opinionated, an egotist without the mask”, with a degree of arrogance “not compensated by any extraordinary intellect or equipment”. And, possibly for that reason, he was unable to reconcile himself to a second place and work with others in that capacity for a public cause even though he was neither a tool of the British nor a soldier of fortune”.

#10
san
i_m_sans@yahoo.com


Posts: 204
From: India
Registered: May, 2005


Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 8:21 AM
Reply
There is no need to "rewrite" the History of the subcontinent. Vested interests will again twist it to their selfish goals.

The history of the sub-continent is to be "relooked" into for the future.

#11
mirror-image
icecandyman25@yahoo.com


Posts: 58
Registered: Jun, 2005


Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 8:52 AM
Reply
USER SUSPENDED FOR 48 HOURS FOR ABUSIVE LANGUAGE

ADMIN

Jack et al

Jithey di khoti, othey i aan khaloti

hinduvta historians need to get their act together and need to start behaving like historians rather than cummunal dogs

[Edited by: admin on Jun 23, 2005 2:40 PM]

#12
Fatin Khan
aliencynic@yahoo.co.uk


Posts: 661
From: Germany
Registered: Jun, 2004


Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 9:03 AM
Reply
Let us agree for a couple of minutes that Jinnah was a monstrous devil. Moreover he was the most narrow-minded mulla, the world had ever seen. Fine.

The country he founded is a stark reality, for well over more than half century. I dont think Advani is the first person having admitted this. Former prime minister from his own party, at the very place in Lahore, where idea of Pakistan (though not with this name) was hatched, had already said similar things in 1999.

Let us try to forget the crap about this "destruction" of indian unity. India was never united into one single entity. Not even under Mughals. At best it has remained an empire for short whiles, and for most of the time a decadent rubble of left-overs of those empires.

When the british raj united this subcontinent under one adminstration, with the aid of such modern ideas and technology which was unknown to best of indian rulers/emperors, and afterwards when age of empires gave way to nation-states, suddenly we tend to believe that India was a one nation-state throughout its history.

#13
Jack
dgill45083@yahoo.com


Posts: 1,251
From: US
Registered: Dec, 2003
Disabled

Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 9:20 AM
Reply
Well mirror image the question still stands:

Do Pakistanis say Jinnah was secular? Did he want Pakistan as a secular nation? If so what went wrong? Or did he vision the Pakistan of today, an Islamic Republic? Only you can answer the dog I guess :)

Gill

#14
Khalistan
tobataeksingh@gmail.com


Posts: 88
From: Toronto
Registered: May, 2005


Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 9:32 AM
Reply
Mr. Khan

In complete agreement with your post. Indians have to get this superstitiuos stuff out of their heads that India was always a one nation state. We Sikhs have our own identity and our own culture. Therefor an indpendent Sikh nation is the only answer. This is must so the incidents like the destruction of Akal Takht Sahib and shameless murder of Sikhs by Hindu fanatics will not be repated again.

#15
Jack
dgill45083@yahoo.com


Posts: 1,251
From: US
Registered: Dec, 2003
Disabled

Re: Advani's Stand on Jinnah Asks for Re-Writing History of Partition Posted: Jun 23, 2005 9:38 AM
Reply
Mr. Fatin Khan,

Greatness of this man is again relative. To Pakistanis he is father of their country, fine. To me he is responsible for deaths leading to Partition, fine?

Mr. Advani's statement is highlighted but a forgotten fact, this is the second time he has made this statement. And he has posed a valid question for educated Pakistanis, was he secular or not?

Now regarding India never as a nation, fine I agree with your assessment, but neither was USA a nation in 1776. Point is after independence the idea of India, a union based on secular laws and abolishing the princely states was the objective. Today India is so. Is it wrong to suggest and implement this idea? I say no.

You are right, Industrial Revolution was brought to South Asia by the Brits, thank them. But again, it wasnt a favor. Simply put, what India is today is exactly what Jinnah advocated in Congress pre-Gandhi days. The power struggle that he felt by resurgence of Hindu ideas and Gandhi's mass appeal was too much for Jinnah. Prior to Gandhi, Congress was a elite group, Gnadhi brought Congress to the real Indians, hungry, deprived, exploited poor Indians, both Hindu and Muslim.

Jinnah saw the shift of influence and needed a platform for his power center. he could not have asked for another state on basis of secularism, democracy or anything, since the new emerging India was offering all that. So he harped on age old issue of Hindu Muslim divide. And yes Brits did not create this divide as it always existed, the expolited it and now Jinnah did.

For a minute, think different, imagine as Mr. Rabb has highlighted on more than one occassion, if India was undivided, wouldnt that have served Muslim aspirations better? Whether India was a nation ever is the same as asking what exactly makes a nation? Religion, society, laws, culture, mountains, rivers, what? All these variables were present in South Asia prior to coming of Islamic invasions.

Now a further debate from Pakistani elites is required into what exactly was Jinnah and what did he want to do with Pakistan? Did he require Pakistan secular or present type of Pakistan? Please answer.

Gill
PS: Today India cannot be equation to anything Pakistan. We must discuss only Jinnah and his Pakistan, his reasons for Pakistan have been validated and proven to be incorrect, I dont say this, Indian Muslim citizens say so, and further echoed by Bangladeshi Muslims. Of course lets not forget the stranded Pakistanis in Bangladesh since 1971.

Replies: 119   Pages: 8   [ Go: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8  » ]
 
  Back to Topic List      Top of the page