Banner Advertiser

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

[ALOCHONA] Re: AL MP Gias of Gafargaon



AL MP Badi



http://www.dailykalerkantho.com/index.php?view=details&archiev=yes&arch_date=27-09-2011&type=gold&data=Islam&pub_no=654&cat_id=1&menu_id=13&news_type_id=1&index=0

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:
AL MP Sheikh Mujibur Rahman of Satkhira

http://www.samakal.com.bd/details.php?news=13&action=main&option=single&news_id=195291&pub_no=825

On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:
AL MP Gias of Gafargaon



http://www.samakal.com.bd/details.php?news=13&action=main&option=single&news_id=193543&pub_no=820




__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?



I like to share my two cents here.

Both Mr. Hannan and Mr. Shubimol are right in some ways. It is clear Mr. Hannan is taking about Islamic concept of nationhood or brotherhood (Based on religion). It is a concept that has been tried and did not work for Bangladesh and Pakistan.

Similarly Bengalee Jaati or Bengalee "Nation" was a popular concept of many leaders but they did not work for our forefathers. Recently we have seen how our Indian brothers from west Bengal blocked our "Natural rights" to international rivers. Therefore, we Bengalees became the international givers to all nations. Both Indians and Pakistanis did not cut any slack when it comes to our right. We should remember that going forward. One of the fundamental problem of Bangladeshi intellectuals is the failure to represent OUR interests in international forum. We easily forget that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman established great relationship with India and joined OIC (Organization of Islamic countries) at the same time.

Also I do not see any conflict in maintaining "Brotherly" relations with Pakistan and have brotherly relationship with India. Right now many Pakistanis are suffering from severe flood. As a flood prone nation our sad history should NOT restrict us from showing compassion and sending help to Pakistani people. As far as religion is concern it is part of faith. Similarly Islam ALSO demands that we take care of our neighbors. India is our neighbor and having good relationship with neighbor should be practiced.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) signed peace treaties with people who rejected him and even fought against him. He protected the very people who wanted to kill him for decades ( After he came back to Mecca). As a forward looking leader, he forgave them and took care of them when they faced danger.

I strongly feel that, we have to be pragmatic in decision making when we lead this nation. We have to seek good relations with both India and Pakistan. Taking sides in it will not solve our real issues.

Islam actually encourage us to seek brotherhood in humanity (The Qur'an address the readers in this form frequently!) and also asks Muslims to take care of each other. Personally it makes sense to me. I mix with people from all faith (Following the example of prophet Muhammad PBUH) and when I talk to a friend, I talk to a friend. Not necessarily as a Muslim, Hindu or Christian.

In 21st century most nations claim to be "Secular" and democratic. The later label (Democratic) forces most nations to show some preferences to the dominant religion. No modern nations admits it but it is a reality. The nice part of Islam is it does not hide it. It deals with reality and speaks about religion without being hypocritical about it. Many 21st century Muslims do not realize that, prophet Muhammad (PBUH) established a pluralistic community in Medina and protected rights of minorities to worship, their rights to their properties and lives. Anyone interested can read the famous "Medina charter" and verify it.

It is failure of Bengali Muslims to represent Islam in total form ( As a Muslim I take full responsibility for this shortcoming of my community) in front of non-Muslims. I have seen good people are scared when we talk about religion. The greatest gift of Islam was establishing peace and fair dealing among all people. Faith is a personal matter and we should encourage everyone to speak about it but should NOT be forced upon anyone.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I reject those who want force me to pick from Rabindranath and Nazrul Islam. I like both of them. Similarly I do not see any conflict in seeking "Brotherhood" in humanity and seeking "Brotherhood" in Muslim ummah (Muslim Jaatee). The Qur'an spoke very passionately how to establish this balance. I'll quote two verses from it.


O ye who believe! stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do. To those who believe and do deeds of righteousness hath Allah promised forgiveness and a great reward.
[ Source: The noble Qur'an 5:8-9]


Bottom line is Islam asks Muslims to be fair and establish justice for EVERYONE. It is part of faith. We are asked to seek "brotherhood" based on these values. Last time I checked these are ALSO universal values. So if Bengalees from west Bengal want to establish "Brotherhood" or special relations based on these values, I encourage it. Same goes for ALL Muslim majority countries (Pakistan, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia,Egypt etc). There is no room to discriminate based on religion. That is what I got from Islam.


Peace.

-----Original Message-----
From: S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wed, Sep 28, 2011 5:56 am
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?

 
 
Mr Shubimol Chakrabarty, yes, religion is the strongest bond of nationhood  compared to other bonds .Mr Jinnah said that Muslim majority areas should form independent state and Hindu majority areas of subcontinent should form another state and in both states  minorities would remain there with all human rights.
Shah Abdul Hannan

From: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of subimal chakrabarty
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 7:17 AM
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
 
Pretty funny! What kind of statement is this? 
What about the bondage between Muslims and Hindus of Bangladesh? Is it "thin"? Do they belong to "Bangladeshi jati"? 
Do Hindus of West Bengal and Muslims of West Bengal belong to "Indian jati"? Is it "thin" or "thick"? 
I think the purpose of Mr. Hannan's statement is to fish in the troubled waters. He is thinking more in terms of religious divide. This reminds me of Jinnah's Two-Nation Theory. Mr. Hannan seems to be talking in the same line. According to Jinnah all the Indian Hindus constituted one nation and all the Indian Muslims constituted another nation. He forgot about other religious groups.
Pretty funny!  
Mr. Hannan should recognize that religion is only one element (it may even be absent) in the structure of a nation. Hindu majority India and Hindu majority Nepal did not form one nation. All the Christian dominated countries in Europe did not form one nation. 
 
From: S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 10:46 AM
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?

 
There is no Bangalee Jati as there is no Gujrati jati or Bihari jati or punjabi Jati  Bond of unity of bangla speaking Muslims of Bangladesh and Banglaspeaking Hindus of West bengal is very thin.They belong to Bangladeshi jati or Indian jati respectively. For becoming jati you require much stronger bond.
 
Shah Abdul hannan
 
From: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Jiten Roy
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 8:44 AM
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
 
 
I do not know if there is a perfect English translation for the Bengali word "Jati." As a Jati - we are Bangalee, irrespective of our religious affiliations, castes, and creeds. Bangalee-Jati is our secular cultural identity. The Bangalee-Jatiotabad consists of certain secular characteristics, such as, we celebrate Pahela-Boishakh, Bashata-Baran, Ekushe-February (February 21st), etc. etc. with cultural, and ritualistic activities. There are other festivities and practices, which used to be celebrated widely, irrespective of religious affiliations, but now mainly scattered fashion. They are Poush-Sangcranti, celebrated with varieties of Cakes (Pithas), Chaitra-Sangcranti, celebrated with cultural activities and fairs, Maghi-Purnima, etc. etc.  Bangalee-Jatiotabad, being above and beyond our religious characteristics, is the glue that can unite the majority under a true secular platform.
 
Closest English word for 'Jatiotabad' is Nationalism; I know it does not completely express the full meaning of the term Jatiotabad, as we mean. That's where the confusion comes from. Bangalee-Jatiotabad or Bengali-Nationalism is not a state entity. But, state has to allow free exercise of those secular rights and characteristics, and state has to nourish it to flourish. Non-Bangalees have their own secular Jatiotabad, and they should be allowed to exercise them freely also.
 
If I have misconception, please let me know.
 
I appreciate all your comments. Thanks.
 
Jiten Roy
 
--- On Sat, 9/24/11, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
To: " mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com " < mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com >
Date: Saturday, September 24, 2011, 7:01 PM
 
"-------------and nationalism is a cultural identity, which reflects majority cultural."----Dr. Jiten Roy
 
Let us take an example to examine Dr. Roy's comment. Nationality of Indians is Indian which indicates that their nationality is Indian. No problem with that. But which group of people constitutes the majority and what is this majority group's culture? Are these the people in the Hindi belt? Obviously not. Even being an Indian by nationality, a Bengali or an Assamese is a Bengali or an Assamese. Even within the subset of Bengal ( West Bengal ), we cannot force a Gorkha to identify himself as a Bengali. If the Gorkhas are culturally, linguistically, and historically distinct from Bengalis, why should we force them to call themselves Bengalis?  
 
"There is no issue of fairness in nationalism."---Dr. Jiten Roy
 
It will be quite unfair to force a Chakma to call himself a Bengali as this very word reflects language, culture, and history. Politically he is a "citizen of Bangladesh " but culturally a Chakma. The majority has no right to force a Chakma to accept a Bengali's cultural identity. This is not only unfair, this is coercive also.
 
"There has been an orchestrated attempt to alter our cultural identity (Bangalee) in this region during Pakistani era, and it is still going on in Bangladesh ."----Dr. Jien Roy
 
I agree. Pakistani regimes tried to redefine Bengalis in East Pakistan as Pakistanis. That was a political game with India . But what is going on now? I would expect some elaboration. Regards.
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
Everybody is missing my point. I am simply asking - what is our cultural identity, not our religious identity or nationality? 
 
Nationality and nationalism are two different things. Nationality is citizenship, and nationalism is a cultural identity, which reflects majority cultural. There is no issue of fairness in nationalism. There has been an orchestrated attempt to alter our cultural identity (Bangalee) in this region during Pakistani era, and it is still going on in Bangladesh .
 
Jiten Roy --- On Thu, 9/22/11, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
Subject: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
To: " mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com " < mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com >
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2011, 10:29 PM
 
Bangladesh is a political entity, as opposed to a cultural one. May be, Najrul Islam's Bangla Desh and Ravindranath's Sonar Bangla were cultural, and those included more than the political entity of Bangladesh ; they also excluded at least the Chittagong Hill Tracts, which is a part of today's political Bangladesh .
 
Citizenship (nationality) is not cultural. I wish the secular politicians and intellectuals of  Bangladesh did not start this non-sense of Bangalee nationalism in 1971-72. It was wrong to ask the CHT people to call themselves Bangalees. Again, Bangalee nationalism was not really the spirit of all movements during 1947-71, and should not have been unless if we wanted to merge with West Bengal and allowed CHT to secede from us. Fairness, respect and dignity for Bangla and the Bangalees should not be considered the same as Bangalee nationalism. Bangalee nationalism would have demanded a separate nation for the Bangalees, even if the western Pakistanis treated the Bangalees with due respect. Our real spirit was no nationalism; it was fairness, respect and dignity for us.
 
Citizenship for anyone who seeks it? It is not done anywhere in the world. All countries have their laws to govern how a non-citizen would be given citizenship.
 
I would not ask Awami League to revive the so-called Bangalee nationalism (citizenship), rather I would ask them to respect all peoples of the land with respect; much like I would not ask them to call all Bangladeshis Muslims, much like I would not ask all Indians to be known as Hindus, much like I would not desire all cultural, linguistic and ethnic groups of the United States to be called Christians or English.
 
Well, so long for now,
 
Sukhamaya Bain
 
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] HAVOC CREATED BY JAMATI'S !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Dr. Bain's comments tells me that, in my last sarcastic comments, I did not clarify my points enough; hence confusions.
I was looking for a cultural identity for the people of Bangladesh . I explored 3 conventional identities (Bangalee, Bangladeshi, and Moderate Muslim), which have been used in the past to represent the people of Bangladesh . But, none of them seemed to encompass all people. As a result, the identity crisis still remains, and we do not know who we are.
After Bangladesh was born, our cultural identity (Jatiota) was Bangalee, and our nationality was also Banglalee. Ershad changed our nationality to Bangladeshi. The motive was to include all the people of Bangladesh , so he told us at that time. Was it really the motive? If that was true – all non-Bangalee Biharis should have been citizen by now, and Father Tim, the former Principal of Notre Dame College, would have been citizen already. If you say that our nationality is Bangladeshi - then we should grant citizenship to any permanent resident of Bangladesh , if they seek one.
In my view, it was done purposefully to defuse pre-independence secular mindset, and neutralize the Bangalee-Jatiotabadi spirit, the spirit of independence movement. As you know, Quranic verses and state religion (Islam) were also introduced in the secular constitution right around that time.
Dr. Bain, Bangalee-Jatiotabadi spirit has been the driving force behind all movements in the East Pakistan since the language movement in 1952. Even though Sheikh Mujib was not seeking independence at the beginning, but his movement was fueled by the Bangali-Jatiotabadi spirit. This is the spirit that still can unite the mjority in Bangladesh . That's why - I have been asking Awami League to revive that spirit for their sake.
 
Thanks for your comments. Love to hear from you. Don't be a stranger.
 
Jiten Roy --- 


__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?



People from all backgrounds can stand in one platform as "Bangladeshi" people. Therefore, Bengali and Bangladeshis are two DIFFERENT things. Regardless of background everyone should be treated fairly with dignity.

Since Ekushey became an international event. It represents the aspiration to protect and preserve our native languages. So Chakmas, Marmas, Garo, Khashias should be encouraged to teach their native languages along with Bangla, English etc.

We are under assault from "International" and global media. Unless we work unitedly we are going to lose our children to cable TV, cocktail culture of FM radio. I am not against free flow of information but we should be supporting our own roots. That is the spirit of "Ekushe".



-----Original Message-----
From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, Sep 27, 2011 6:04 am
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?

 
 
I wish everybody wthin the Bangladesh borders would be happy to call himself a Bengali. Do you really think that a Chakma will from his heart accept this? I don't think so. They have their own language, culture, and tradition quite distinct from ours. Then why should I be so chauvinistic? I am a citizen of Bangladesh and so he is. Both of us are Bangladeshi if we are not allergic to this desgination. But I am a Bengali and he is a Chakma. I don't see any conflict.
Ekushe February is a national event. It has a broader significance. It has been recognized and is every year celebrated by UNESCO. Chakmas should not have any problem in celebrating this along with the Bengalis. The spirit of Ekushey is to respect the mother language of every aspiring national entity however small it may be. 
Similar argument applies to Gorkhas living in West bengal.
 

From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2011 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 

I do not know if there is a perfect English translation for the Bengali word "Jati." As a Jati - we are Bangalee, irrespective of our religious affiliations, castes, and creeds. Bangalee-Jati is our secular cultural identity. The Bangalee-Jatiotabad consists of certain secular characteristics, such as, we celebrate Pahela-Boishakh, Bashata-Baran, Ekushe-February (February 21st), etc. etc. with cultural, and ritualistic activities. There are other festivities and practices, which used to be celebrated widely, irrespective of religious affiliations, but now mainly scattered fashion. They are Poush-Sangcranti, celebrated with varieties of Cakes (Pithas), Chaitra-Sangcranti, celebrated with cultural activities and fairs, Maghi-Purnima, etc. etc.  Bangalee-Jatiotabad, being above and beyond our religious characteristics, is the glue that can unite the majority under a true secular platform.
 
Closest English word for 'Jatiotabad' is Nationalism; I know it does not completely express the full meaning of the term Jatiotabad, as we mean. That's where the confusion comes from. Bangalee-Jatiotabad or Bengali-Nationalism is not a state entity. But, state has to allow free exercise of those secular rights and characteristics, and state has to nourish it to flourish. Non-Bangalees have their own secular Jatiotabad, and they should be allowed to exercise them freely also.
 
If I have misconception, please let me know.
 
I appreciate all your comments. Thanks.
 
Jiten Roy
 
--- On Sat, 9/24/11, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Saturday, September 24, 2011, 7:01 PM

 
"-------------and nationalism is a cultural identity, which reflects majority cultural."----Dr. Jiten Roy
 
Let us take an example to examine Dr. Roy's comment. Nationality of Indians is Indian which indicates that their nationality is Indian. No problem with that. But which group of people constitutes the majority and what is this majority group's culture? Are these the people in the Hindi belt? Obviously not. Even being an Indian by nationality, a Bengali or an Assamese is a Bengali or an Assamese. Even within the subset of Bengal (West Bengal), we cannot force a Gorkha to identify himself as a Bengali. If the Gorkhas are culturally, linguistically, and historically distinct from Bengalis, why should we force them to call themselves Bengalis?  
 
"There is no issue of fairness in nationalism."---Dr. Jiten Roy
 
It will be quite unfair to force a Chakma to call himself a Bengali as this very word reflects language, culture, and history. Politically he is a "citizen of Bangladesh" but culturally a Chakma. The majority has no right to force a Chakma to accept a Bengali's cultural identity. This is not only unfair, this is coercive also.
 
"There has been an orchestrated attempt to alter our cultural identity (Bangalee) in this region during Pakistani era, and it is still going on in Bangladesh."----Dr. Jien Roy
 
I agree. Pakistani regimes tried to redefine Bengalis in East Pakistan as Pakistanis. That was a political game with India. But what is going on now? I would expect some elaboration. Regards.
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
Everybody is missing my point. I am simply asking - what is our cultural identity, not our religious identity or nationality? 
 
Nationality and nationalism are two different things. Nationality is citizenship, and nationalism is a cultural identity, which reflects majority cultural. There is no issue of fairness in nationalism. There has been an orchestrated attempt to alter our cultural identity (Bangalee) in this region during Pakistani era, and it is still going on in Bangladesh.
 
Jiten Roy --- On Thu, 9/22/11, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
Subject: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2011, 10:29 PM

 
Bangladesh is a political entity, as opposed to a cultural one. May be, Najrul Islam's Bangla Desh and Ravindranath's Sonar Bangla were cultural, and those included more than the political entity of Bangladesh ; they also excluded at least the Chittagong Hill Tracts, which is a part of today's political Bangladesh .
 
Citizenship (nationality) is not cultural. I wish the secular politicians and intellectuals of  Bangladesh did not start this non-sense of Bangalee nationalism in 1971-72. It was wrong to ask the CHT people to call themselves Bangalees. Again, Bangalee nationalism was not really the spirit of all movements during 1947-71, and should not have been unless if we wanted to merge with West Bengal and allowed CHT to secede from us. Fairness, respect and dignity for Bangla and the Bangalees should not be considered the same as Bangalee nationalism. Bangalee nationalism would have demanded a separate nation for the Bangalees, even if the western Pakistanis treated the Bangalees with due respect. Our real spirit was no nationalism; it was fairness, respect and dignity for us.
 
Citizenship for anyone who seeks it? It is not done anywhere in the world. All countries have their laws to govern how a non-citizen would be given citizenship.
 
I would not ask Awami League to revive the so-called Bangalee nationalism (citizenship), rather I would ask them to respect all peoples of the land with respect; much like I would not ask them to call all Bangladeshis Muslims, much like I would not ask all Indians to be known as Hindus, much like I would not desire all cultural, linguistic and ethnic groups of the United States to be called Christians or English.
 
Well, so long for now,
 
Sukhamaya Bain
 
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] HAVOC CREATED BY JAMATI'S !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Dr. Bain's comments tells me that, in my last sarcastic comments, I did not clarify my points enough; hence confusions.
I was looking for a cultural identity for the people of Bangladesh. I explored 3 conventional identities (Bangalee, Bangladeshi, and Moderate Muslim), which have been used in the past to represent the people of Bangladesh. But, none of them seemed to encompass all people. As a result, the identity crisis still remains, and we do not know who we are.
After Bangladesh was born, our cultural identity (Jatiota) was Bangalee, and our nationality was also Banglalee. Ershad changed our nationality to Bangladeshi. The motive was to include all the people of Bangladesh, so he told us at that time. Was it really the motive? If that was true – all non-Bangalee Biharis should have been citizen by now, and Father Tim, the former Principal of Notre Dame College, would have been citizen already. If you say that our nationality is Bangladeshi - then we should grant citizenship to any permanent resident of Bangladesh, if they seek one.
In my view, it was done purposefully to defuse pre-independence secular mindset, and neutralize the Bangalee-Jatiotabadi spirit, the spirit of independence movement. As you know, Quranic verses and state religion (Islam) were also introduced in the secular constitution right around that time.
Dr. Bain, Bangalee-Jatiotabadi spirit has been the driving force behind all movements in the East Pakistan since the language movement in 1952. Even though Sheikh Mujib was not seeking independence at the beginning, but his movement was fueled by the Bangali-Jatiotabadi spirit. This is the spirit that still can unite the mjority in Bangladesh. That's why - I have been asking Awami League to revive that spirit for their sake.
 
Thanks for your comments. Love to hear from you. Don't be a stranger.
 
Jiten Roy --- 


__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?



The vicious two-nation theory did not work to keep the east and west wing of Pakistan together. As it appears, it is not working in Pakistan. In this Islamic Republic, Sunnis killed Quadianis and Sunnis and Shiite Muslims are killing each other in places including Mosques. Islamic terrorists named "Al Qaeda-Talibans-Hakkanis" find the Islamic Republic as a safe heaven. What is the destination of this two-nation theory based Islamic Republic? Mr. Hannan wrote, "religion is the strongest bond of nationhood." Why did the Pakistani nationhood fail in Bangladesh in 1971? Did it not fail with the surrender of ninety three thousand armed soldiers of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan?
Shabbir Ahmed

 

From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 10:33 PM
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 


__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

 
Mr. Hannan,
 
Yes, religious bond is so strong that hundreds of innocent Muslims in Pakistan are dying regularly in bomb attaks by Muslims with strong religious convictions.
 
How is that religous bond working in Pakistan?
 
Jiten Roy--- On Tue, 9/27/11, S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com> wrote:

From: S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com>
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, September 27, 2011, 7:48 PM

 
 
Mr Shubimol Chakrabarty, yes, religion is the strongest bond of nationhood  compared to other bonds .Mr Jinnah said that Muslim majority areas should form independent state and Hindu majority areas of subcontinent should form another state and in both states  minorities would remain there with all human rights.
Shah Abdul Hannan
From: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of subimal chakrabarty
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 7:17 AM
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
 
Pretty funny! What kind of statement is this? 
What about the bondage between Muslims and Hindus of Bangladesh? Is it "thin"? Do they belong to "Bangladeshi jati"? 
Do Hindus of West Bengal and Muslims of West Bengal belong to "Indian jati"? Is it "thin" or "thick"? 
I think the purpose of Mr. Hannan's statement is to fish in the troubled waters. He is thinking more in terms of religious divide. This reminds me of Jinnah's Two-Nation Theory. Mr. Hannan seems to be talking in the same line. According to Jinnah all the Indian Hindus constituted one nation and all the Indian Muslims constituted another nation. He forgot about other religious groups.
Pretty funny!  
Mr. Hannan should recognize that religion is only one element (it may even be absent) in the structure of a nation. Hindu majority India and Hindu majority Nepal did not form one nation. All the Christian dominated countries in Europe did not form one nation. 
 
From: S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 10:46 AM
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?

 
There is no Bangalee Jati as there is no Gujrati jati or Bihari jati or punjabi Jati  Bond of unity of bangla speaking Muslims of Bangladesh and Banglaspeaking Hindus of West bengal is very thin.They belong to Bangladeshi jati or Indian jati respectively. For becoming jati you require much stronger bond.
 
Shah Abdul hannan
 
From: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Jiten Roy
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 8:44 AM
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
 
 
I do not know if there is a perfect English translation for the Bengali word "Jati." As a Jati - we are Bangalee, irrespective of our religious affiliations, castes, and creeds. Bangalee-Jati is our secular cultural identity. The Bangalee-Jatiotabad consists of certain secular characteristics, such as, we celebrate Pahela-Boishakh, Bashata-Baran, Ekushe-February (February 21st), etc. etc. with cultural, and ritualistic activities. There are other festivities and practices, which used to be celebrated widely, irrespective of religious affiliations, but now mainly scattered fashion. They are Poush-Sangcranti, celebrated with varieties of Cakes (Pithas), Chaitra-Sangcranti, celebrated with cultural activities and fairs, Maghi-Purnima, etc. etc.  Bangalee-Jatiotabad, being above and beyond our religious characteristics, is the glue that can unite the majority under a true secular platform.
 
Closest English word for 'Jatiotabad' is Nationalism; I know it does not completely express the full meaning of the term Jatiotabad, as we mean. That's where the confusion comes from. Bangalee-Jatiotabad or Bengali-Nationalism is not a state entity. But, state has to allow free exercise of those secular rights and characteristics, and state has to nourish it to flourish. Non-Bangalees have their own secular Jatiotabad, and they should be allowed to exercise them freely also.
 
If I have misconception, please let me know.
 
I appreciate all your comments. Thanks.
 
Jiten Roy
 
--- On Sat, 9/24/11, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
To: " mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com " < mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com >
Date: Saturday, September 24, 2011, 7:01 PM
 
"-------------and nationalism is a cultural identity, which reflects majority cultural."----Dr. Jiten Roy
 
Let us take an example to examine Dr. Roy's comment. Nationality of Indians is Indian which indicates that their nationality is Indian. No problem with that. But which group of people constitutes the majority and what is this majority group's culture? Are these the people in the Hindi belt? Obviously not. Even being an Indian by nationality, a Bengali or an Assamese is a Bengali or an Assamese. Even within the subset of Bengal ( West Bengal ), we cannot force a Gorkha to identify himself as a Bengali. If the Gorkhas are culturally, linguistically, and historically distinct from Bengalis, why should we force them to call themselves Bengalis?  
 
"There is no issue of fairness in nationalism."---Dr. Jiten Roy
 
It will be quite unfair to force a Chakma to call himself a Bengali as this very word reflects language, culture, and history. Politically he is a "citizen of Bangladesh " but culturally a Chakma. The majority has no right to force a Chakma to accept a Bengali's cultural identity. This is not only unfair, this is coercive also.
 
"There has been an orchestrated attempt to alter our cultural identity (Bangalee) in this region during Pakistani era, and it is still going on in Bangladesh ."----Dr. Jien Roy
 
I agree. Pakistani regimes tried to redefine Bengalis in East Pakistan as Pakistanis. That was a political game with India . But what is going on now? I would expect some elaboration. Regards.
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
Everybody is missing my point. I am simply asking - what is our cultural identity, not our religious identity or nationality? 
 
Nationality and nationalism are two different things. Nationality is citizenship, and nationalism is a cultural identity, which reflects majority cultural. There is no issue of fairness in nationalism. There has been an orchestrated attempt to alter our cultural identity (Bangalee) in this region during Pakistani era, and it is still going on in Bangladesh .
 
Jiten Roy --- On Thu, 9/22/11, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
Subject: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
To: " mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com " < mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com >
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2011, 10:29 PM
 
Bangladesh is a political entity, as opposed to a cultural one. May be, Najrul Islam's Bangla Desh and Ravindranath's Sonar Bangla were cultural, and those included more than the political entity of Bangladesh ; they also excluded at least the Chittagong Hill Tracts, which is a part of today's political Bangladesh .
 
Citizenship (nationality) is not cultural. I wish the secular politicians and intellectuals of  Bangladesh did not start this non-sense of Bangalee nationalism in 1971-72. It was wrong to ask the CHT people to call themselves Bangalees. Again, Bangalee nationalism was not really the spirit of all movements during 1947-71, and should not have been unless if we wanted to merge with West Bengal and allowed CHT to secede from us. Fairness, respect and dignity for Bangla and the Bangalees should not be considered the same as Bangalee nationalism. Bangalee nationalism would have demanded a separate nation for the Bangalees, even if the western Pakistanis treated the Bangalees with due respect. Our real spirit was no nationalism; it was fairness, respect and dignity for us.
 
Citizenship for anyone who seeks it? It is not done anywhere in the world. All countries have their laws to govern how a non-citizen would be given citizenship.
 
I would not ask Awami League to revive the so-called Bangalee nationalism (citizenship), rather I would ask them to respect all peoples of the land with respect; much like I would not ask them to call all Bangladeshis Muslims, much like I would not ask all Indians to be known as Hindus, much like I would not desire all cultural, linguistic and ethnic groups of the United States to be called Christians or English.
 
Well, so long for now,
 
Sukhamaya Bain
 
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] HAVOC CREATED BY JAMATI'S !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Dr. Bain's comments tells me that, in my last sarcastic comments, I did not clarify my points enough; hence confusions.
I was looking for a cultural identity for the people of Bangladesh . I explored 3 conventional identities (Bangalee, Bangladeshi, and Moderate Muslim), which have been used in the past to represent the people of Bangladesh . But, none of them seemed to encompass all people. As a result, the identity crisis still remains, and we do not know who we are.
After Bangladesh was born, our cultural identity (Jatiota) was Bangalee, and our nationality was also Banglalee. Ershad changed our nationality to Bangladeshi. The motive was to include all the people of Bangladesh , so he told us at that time. Was it really the motive? If that was true – all non-Bangalee Biharis should have been citizen by now, and Father Tim, the former Principal of Notre Dame College, would have been citizen already. If you say that our nationality is Bangladeshi - then we should grant citizenship to any permanent resident of Bangladesh , if they seek one.
In my view, it was done purposefully to defuse pre-independence secular mindset, and neutralize the Bangalee-Jatiotabadi spirit, the spirit of independence movement. As you know, Quranic verses and state religion (Islam) were also introduced in the secular constitution right around that time.
Dr. Bain, Bangalee-Jatiotabadi spirit has been the driving force behind all movements in the East Pakistan since the language movement in 1952. Even though Sheikh Mujib was not seeking independence at the beginning, but his movement was fueled by the Bangali-Jatiotabadi spirit. This is the spirit that still can unite the mjority in Bangladesh . That's why - I have been asking Awami League to revive that spirit for their sake.
 
Thanks for your comments. Love to hear from you. Don't be a stranger.
 
Jiten Roy ---