Comments on: The Power Of History http://greatbong.net/2009/08/20/the-power-of-history/ Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:38:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Rishi Khujur http://greatbong.net/2009/08/20/the-power-of-history/#comment-748452 Rishi Khujur Thu, 10 Sep 2009 21:00:51 +0000 http://greatbong.net/?p=1412#comment-748452 @ Saika Most Muslims who actually voted for Pakistan did it based on their belief, but they never intended to leave and most actually stayed back. Muslims of UP, Bihar, Bengal...add up. However that doesnt mean that their children or grandchildren hate India. @ Saika
Most Muslims who actually voted for Pakistan did it based on their belief, but they never intended to leave and most actually stayed back.

Muslims of UP, Bihar, Bengal…add up.

However that doesnt mean that their children or grandchildren hate India.

]]> By: Bengal Voice http://greatbong.net/2009/08/20/the-power-of-history/#comment-748369 Bengal Voice Thu, 10 Sep 2009 16:09:09 +0000 http://greatbong.net/?p=1412#comment-748369 Dear UI, I too would like to believe you and become complacent, but the harsh reality in India is different from what you would like to portray, my friend. I profusely apologize, in advance, to GB for presenting a well-known security expert’s article on GB’s blog.....If my quote below is not appropriate or irrelevant to the point you have raised, I request GB to please delete my points. Mr.Maloy Krishna Dhar is a former Joint Director, Intelligence Bureau (IB). Dhar has seen actions in the North East, Sikkim, Punjab, and Kashmir, and handled important political, counterterrorism, counterinsurgency and counterintelligence operations. Even a staunch secularist like former IB Chief Mr. Maloy Krishna Dhar admits that 60% of India's 150 million Muslim population are fundamentalists. Here are some relevant excerpts from Mr.Dhar’s blog: http://maloykrishnadhar.com/indian-fault-lines-perception-and-reality “The other cancerous reality check pertains to unbiased appreciation of the growth of Islamic fundamentalism, contamination of Indian Muslim minds with the poison of jihad and revival of the isolationist separatist tendencies. Let us be clear at the outset that all Muslims are not separatists and jihadists. Most of them are not even fundamentalists. In case a comparative study is made between the 80+ crore Hindus and 15+ crore Muslims it would appear that about 5% Hindus strongly believe in Hindutwa and Hindu fundamentalism. Only a fraction, may be 0.01% think of taking up weapons against the Muslims. Compared to this <b>about 60% of Muslims can be rated fundamentalists, 35% believe in Islamic resurgence, 30% believe in isolationist separatism and nearly 15% believe that armed jihad, as practiced by Pakistani and Bangladeshi tanzeems can alone retrieve the lost glory of Islam in India. This figure is worrisome. </b>” Dear UI,

I too would like to believe you and become complacent, but the harsh reality in India is different from what you would like to portray, my friend.

I profusely apologize, in advance, to GB for presenting a well-known security expert’s article on GB’s blog…..If my quote below is not appropriate or irrelevant to the point you have raised, I request GB to please delete my points.

Mr.Maloy Krishna Dhar is a former Joint Director, Intelligence Bureau (IB). Dhar has seen actions in the North East, Sikkim, Punjab, and Kashmir, and handled important political, counterterrorism, counterinsurgency and counterintelligence operations.

Even a staunch secularist like former IB Chief Mr. Maloy Krishna Dhar admits that 60% of India’s 150 million Muslim population are fundamentalists.

Here are some relevant excerpts from Mr.Dhar’s blog: http://maloykrishnadhar.com/indian-fault-lines-perception-and-reality

“The other cancerous reality check pertains to unbiased appreciation of the growth of Islamic fundamentalism, contamination of Indian Muslim minds with the poison of jihad and revival of the isolationist separatist tendencies. Let us be clear at the outset that all Muslims are not separatists and jihadists. Most of them are not even fundamentalists. In case a comparative study is made between the 80+ crore Hindus and 15+ crore Muslims it would appear that about 5% Hindus strongly believe in Hindutwa and Hindu fundamentalism. Only a fraction, may be 0.01% think of taking up weapons against the Muslims.

Compared to this about 60% of Muslims can be rated fundamentalists, 35% believe in Islamic resurgence, 30% believe in isolationist separatism and nearly 15% believe that armed jihad, as practiced by Pakistani and Bangladeshi tanzeems can alone retrieve the lost glory of Islam in India. This figure is worrisome. ”

]]> By: UI http://greatbong.net/2009/08/20/the-power-of-history/#comment-746427 UI Sat, 05 Sep 2009 17:17:15 +0000 http://greatbong.net/?p=1412#comment-746427 Jinnah was truly a great hero. His creation of Pakistan was truly a great favor to India and Indians. Can you imagine what our condition would have been with Bangladesh, the NWFP, Waziristan et al as part of our nation, Afghanistan as our neighbour, and the Kasabs and Behtullah Masuds as Indian citizens, having the right to travel freely through India? Despite the few bad apples like the Indian Mujahideen, we are also better of as Indian muslims are self selectedly more secular than those who went to Pakistan. Jinnah was truly a great hero. His creation of Pakistan was truly a great favor to India and Indians. Can you imagine what our condition would have been with Bangladesh, the NWFP, Waziristan et al as part of our nation, Afghanistan as our neighbour, and the Kasabs and Behtullah Masuds as Indian citizens, having the right to travel freely through India? Despite the few bad apples like the Indian Mujahideen, we are also better of as Indian muslims are self selectedly more secular than those who went to Pakistan.

]]> By: Saika http://greatbong.net/2009/08/20/the-power-of-history/#comment-742598 Saika Wed, 26 Aug 2009 07:58:13 +0000 http://greatbong.net/?p=1412#comment-742598 'We treat them as aliens, somewhere inside, because we continue to ask even after Partition you still want something? These are citizens of India–it was Jinnah’s failure because he never advised Muslims who stayed back.' Did Muslims in India want Jinnah's advice? If they had heeded it, they would not have chosen to stay in this side of the border. Jaswant Singh does not know what he says, that's all. ‘We treat them as aliens, somewhere inside, because we continue to ask even after Partition you still want something? These are citizens of India–it was Jinnah’s failure because he never advised Muslims who stayed back.’

Did Muslims in India want Jinnah’s advice? If they had heeded it, they would not have chosen to stay in this side of the border. Jaswant Singh does not know what he says, that’s all.

]]> By: Jinnah, Pakistan and some thoughts « Kite in the Wind http://greatbong.net/2009/08/20/the-power-of-history/#comment-742582 Jinnah, Pakistan and some thoughts « Kite in the Wind Wed, 26 Aug 2009 07:22:34 +0000 http://greatbong.net/?p=1412#comment-742582 [...] The power of history Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Mohammad Ali Jinnah as The Hindu saw himJinnah was [...] [...] The power of history Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Mohammad Ali Jinnah as The Hindu saw himJinnah was [...]

]]> By: Rohit http://greatbong.net/2009/08/20/the-power-of-history/#comment-742548 Rohit Wed, 26 Aug 2009 05:38:08 +0000 http://greatbong.net/?p=1412#comment-742548 Bengal Voice, That reference is from Guha's book. Also see this post on my blog for voting figures during the 1946 elections.. http://retributions.nationalinterest.in/weekend-reading-who-voted-for-partition/ Bengal Voice,

That reference is from Guha’s book. Also see this post on my blog for voting figures during the 1946 elections..

http://retributions.nationalinterest.in/weekend-reading-who-voted-for-partition/

]]> By: greatbihari http://greatbong.net/2009/08/20/the-power-of-history/#comment-742334 greatbihari Tue, 25 Aug 2009 18:56:12 +0000 http://greatbong.net/?p=1412#comment-742334 I think too much weight has been accorded to Jaswant's opinion and thought process. He seems ill informed (Jinnah was poor?) and very opinionated. His convictions are not deep seated - merely superficial whims and figments of imagination from a senile mind. The anti-Congressism may be a fallout of his royal lineage but I find the connection with Jinnah's marginalization in the congress too far fetched.. This is the same man who accompanied terrorists to safe passage as India's external affairs minister and seems to have a fascination for the ludicrous. Lets give him his due - the man is an idiot. I think too much weight has been accorded to Jaswant’s opinion and thought process. He seems ill informed (Jinnah was poor?) and very opinionated. His convictions are not deep seated – merely superficial whims and figments of imagination from a senile mind. The anti-Congressism may be a fallout of his royal lineage but I find the connection with Jinnah’s marginalization in the congress too far fetched..
This is the same man who accompanied terrorists to safe passage as India’s external affairs minister and seems to have a fascination for the ludicrous. Lets give him his due – the man is an idiot.

]]> By: greatbong http://greatbong.net/2009/08/20/the-power-of-history/#comment-742328 greatbong Tue, 25 Aug 2009 18:35:58 +0000 http://greatbong.net/?p=1412#comment-742328 @Jyotsna, "politically incorrect (i.e., non-Marxist, non-Congress) lenses" You may not be aware but what JS is doing is analyzing partition and the idea of India with among other things "Marxist" lenses. In terms of academia, it may be argued that he is doing something extremely politically correct. @Jyotsna,

“politically incorrect (i.e., non-Marxist, non-Congress) lenses”

You may not be aware but what JS is doing is analyzing partition and the idea of India with among other things “Marxist” lenses. In terms of academia, it may be argued that he is doing something extremely politically correct.

]]> By: Jyotsna http://greatbong.net/2009/08/20/the-power-of-history/#comment-742325 Jyotsna Tue, 25 Aug 2009 18:33:22 +0000 http://greatbong.net/?p=1412#comment-742325 As for apportioning blame for partition, you have passingly mentioned Gandhiji’s canvassing for the pan-islamic khilafat movement which was opposed by Jinnah. Well, once you start playing identity politics, it is a river of no return – you can’t do it and limit it to an issue which works for you politically and say that’s it! Once you create and legitimize such politics, either you or someone else it going to come back and harness it for their own political gains. Also, as for Gandhi and Nehru, they were great visionaries but also hard nosed politicians seeking to protect their turfs and play favorites. That’s the reason why people like S.C. Bose (and to some extent, Jinnah) who were initially greatly attracted to Gandhi turned away disillusioned and in Jinnah’s case, became totally cynical (there was an undeniably interesting transformation there). I don’t agree with J.Singh but I do believe there’s nothing wrong in analyzing history with politically incorrect (i.e., non-Marxist, non-Congress) lenses. These were all extremely complex, intelligent, politically ambitious men who were on-again, off-again playing footsie with the Brits. As for apportioning blame for partition, you have passingly mentioned Gandhiji’s canvassing for the pan-islamic khilafat movement which was opposed by Jinnah. Well, once you start playing identity politics, it is a river of no return – you can’t do it and limit it to an issue which works for you politically and say that’s it! Once you create and legitimize such politics, either you or someone else it going to come back and harness it for their own political gains. Also, as for Gandhi and Nehru, they were great visionaries but also hard nosed politicians seeking to protect their turfs and play favorites. That’s the reason why people like S.C. Bose (and to some extent, Jinnah) who were initially greatly attracted to Gandhi turned away disillusioned and in Jinnah’s case, became totally cynical (there was an undeniably interesting transformation there). I don’t agree with J.Singh but I do believe there’s nothing wrong in analyzing history with politically incorrect (i.e., non-Marxist, non-Congress) lenses. These were all extremely complex, intelligent, politically ambitious men who were on-again, off-again playing footsie with the Brits.

]]> By: McKalra http://greatbong.net/2009/08/20/the-power-of-history/#comment-742135 McKalra Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:49:48 +0000 http://greatbong.net/?p=1412#comment-742135 I am not convinced with the premise that Hindus and Muslims had to stick together as envisioned by Nehru and company. Apart from Jinnah, the whole Muslim feudal classes were convinced of being sidelined by a Hindu majority. It was this class led by Agha Khan and other notables like Nawab of Mehmoodabad and others created the Muslim League to counter the Congress. Nehru had vision of a centralised Soviet Russia kind of state which would cater to his socialistic ideals. This was unacceptable to rich Muslim landlords who supported the Muslim League to protect their interests. Essentially, it was Nehru who couldn't convince this influential group of Muslim elite who had visions of erstwhile Mughal India as their ideal. Jinnah was first opposed to this group but was isolated by them and rejected by Gandhi who saw him as a Muslim first (in their first meeting) and this set the tenor of their future relation which got more and more complicated. Jinnah was no saint and used his exile in Britain in the 1930s to reinvent himself and return with a vengeance as most of our current-day politicians do. He mastered the game to isolate his community by playing on their worst fears and gambled his future on it. The Congress did what it did to most leaders opposed to the Nehru-Gandhi faction; witness Subhaschandra Bose, Ambedkar, Purshottamdas Tandon, etc but here the player opposite to them was a master manipulator resistant to all moves to checkmate him. Agreed the Congress-BJP will not unite but in case of Congress and the Muslim League it was the country which was ripped apart. But, the moot question in this whole exercise is can't populations determine their own choices as Jinnah did? Did Hindus and Muslims coalesce together in India as a joint population? Why are we creating fairytales to please the 'secular' lobbies in the media? Why is truth not openly discussed? I am not convinced with the premise that Hindus and Muslims had to stick together as envisioned by Nehru and company. Apart from Jinnah, the whole Muslim feudal classes were convinced of being sidelined by a Hindu majority. It was this class led by Agha Khan and other notables like Nawab of Mehmoodabad and others created the Muslim League to counter the Congress. Nehru had vision of a centralised Soviet Russia kind of state which would cater to his socialistic ideals. This was unacceptable to rich Muslim landlords who supported the Muslim League to protect their interests. Essentially, it was Nehru who couldn’t convince this influential group of Muslim elite who had visions of erstwhile Mughal India as their ideal. Jinnah was first opposed to this group but was isolated by them and rejected by Gandhi who saw him as a Muslim first (in their first meeting) and this set the tenor of their future relation which got more and more complicated. Jinnah was no saint and used his exile in Britain in the 1930s to reinvent himself and return with a vengeance as most of our current-day politicians do. He mastered the game to isolate his community by playing on their worst fears and gambled his future on it. The Congress did what it did to most leaders opposed to the Nehru-Gandhi faction; witness Subhaschandra Bose, Ambedkar, Purshottamdas Tandon, etc but here the player opposite to them was a master manipulator resistant to all moves to checkmate him. Agreed the Congress-BJP will not unite but in case of Congress and the Muslim League it was the country which was ripped apart. But, the moot question in this whole exercise is can’t populations determine their own choices as Jinnah did?
Did Hindus and Muslims coalesce together in India as a joint population? Why are we creating fairytales to please the ‘secular’ lobbies in the media? Why is truth not openly discussed?

]]>