Mr. Subimal Chakrabarty's comments below have two irrational and untenable balancing acts.
His point #3 sounds like the complete reversal of the Hindu-Muslim ratios in the cities and towns of Pakistan was due to the Hindus leaving their home voluntarily, and that most of them were businessmen, teachers, doctors and lawyers.
The facts were: 1) Pakistan was hostile to the Hindus, that is why the Hindus left involuntarily; and 2) most of the Hindus (95% of the population) in a city like Karachi could not have been businessmen, teachers, doctors and lawyers; Pakistan has uprooted all kinds of Hindus from their home of centuries.
The first part of his point #4 sounds too disingenuous. He really needs to stop his absurd attempts of finding similar trends in India. From India, the Muslim migration to Pakistan happened only during the turbulent time of the partition. India has not been hostile to its Muslims over the last 65 years, and the migration of Muslims from India to Pakistan stopped shortly after the partition in 1947. The Muslim fanatics of Bangladesh, many of them pose as secular, talk about communal riots in India, really to justify what they have been doing in Pakistan and Bangladesh; what they do not talk about is that the system in India has kept the Muslims of that land strong enough even to start riots against the Hindus.
As for the educated people among the so-called schedule caste Hindu people in Bangladesh, Mr. Chakrabarty needs to learn that from among that class of people the ones that migrated to India got the opportunity to produce many more PhDs, doctors, engineers, etc. All indications are that they would have done far better without the partition of India in 1947. In spite of their foolish decision to join Pakistan in 1947, India even had a problem of unduly favoring the underclass, due to which many so-called high-caste Hindus would seek fraudulent means of getting schedule caste certificates for themselves, in order to get admitted to professional schools and in order to get jobs.
Nobody said, 'independence of Bangladesh has done us nothing'. Under any measurement, Bangladesh has been better than Pakistan for all kinds of its citizens. Bangladesh has improved the life of the Muslims of the land tremendously. Even the Hindus, in spite of the hatred and discrimination against them in Bangladesh, have done many times better than what could be expected had the land remained a part of Pakistan. However, as Mr. Chakrabarty seems to have pointed out (not very clearly), so far Bangladesh has failed to deliver the expectations of reductions of disparity, communalism and persecution against the non-Muslims of the land.
Sukhamaya Bain
===========================================================
From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 6, 2012 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Partition: Panorama of the Indian history andhHuman tragedies,
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 6, 2012 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Partition: Panorama of the Indian history andhHuman tragedies,
1. Jinnah was stubborn, Nehru was impatient, and the British were in a hurry and left almost every thing in a mess. Gandhi was helpless and resorted to seclusion. And the greatest blunder in the history of India occurred. Immediately after partition, India was on the verge of being a failed state. Soldiers of South Indian orgin had to be deployed to contain the communal violence that erupted. Good thing is that India survived the turmoil thanks to the secular, efficient, and visionary elements in the party. Gandhi's assassination turned out to be a boon as Hindu fanatics got cornered in Indian politics for a while.
2. I agree that Hindu caste-ism had a lot to do with the panoramic change in India's political geography and demography. Jagajivan Ram wanted to defer independence of India by a decade. Jogen Mondal became the trump card for Muslim League and thereby created his own political death and personal tragedy (a good account has been provided in a recent historical novel titled "Barishaler Jogen Mondal" (about a 1100-page book) by a prominent WB writer named Debesh Roy.
3. As regards complete reversal of Hindu-Muslim population ratios in Pakistan, I think it was generally true for for all cities and towns. The small town I was raised in had only a handful of Muslims (all professionals) even in late fifties. The reasons include the fact that businessmen, teachers, doctors, lawyeras, etc. came from caste Hindus. They started leaving for India creating a big vacuum.
4. Similar trends could be found in the Indian states (Bihar, Nagaland, etc.) which have indigenous people as the majority. That is one of the fruits of independence that less privileged sections of the population enjoyed. I do not have the proper statistics. But I see a huge number of educated people with highest degrees including PH.D among the scheduled caste population in Bangladesh. We sometimes get carried away with frustration and try to believe that independence of Bangladesh has done us nothing. If we look at the statistics, we should be convinced that economically, socially, and culturally, the Bengalis in general have achieved a lot. What has not happened is the reduction of disparity, corruption, communal-ism, persecutions, and injustice. Probably in some areas things have become worse.
=====================================================
From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, May 4, 2012 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Partition: Panorama of the Indian history andhHuman tragedies,
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, May 4, 2012 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Partition: Panorama of the Indian history andhHuman tragedies,
The bottom line really is that the Hindu-Muslim two-nation theory for the creation of Pakistan was probably the second biggest curse in the history of the Indian subcontinent; the first being the Hindu caste system. (I call the Hindu caste system the number one curse, because it has caused the most suffering of humanities in the subcontinent over a long period of time, even though it did not cause any big scale killing of people within any short period of time.)
Now, talking about the 1947 partition to create Pakistan in the subcontinent, just imagine Hyderabad and Junagadh as two other parts of Pakistan, land-locked by India, on top of the eastern and western parts being separated by more than a thousand miles of India. No sensible leadership could ask for such an arrangement of a country at that time.
Looking at Pakistan over the last 65 years, I would say, today no sensible person, Hindu or Muslim, would regret the fact that Hyderabad, Junagadh, Kashmir or Tripura was not part of Pakistan in 1947 or thereafter. Even the innocent Kashmiri Muslims who got wrongful treatments from the Indian security personnel would not want Pakistan; they would probably want an independent Kashmir.
While talking about the creation of Pakistan, we have to look at its after-effect that has been going on over the last 65 years. We can blame the British divide-and-conquer policy for the partition. However, we can not blame that for the reversal of the 95:5 Hindu-Muslim population ratio in Karachi within a few years after 1947, as Mr. Chakrabarty has noted below.
Creation of Pakistan was horrific; worse was the purpose of it, i.e., to do what Pakistan has been doing to the non-Muslims of that land over the last 65 years. It is a shame that too many intellectuals of the subcontinent, both Muslims and Hindus, are callously indifferent to the curse of Pakistan, with too many Muslims on the side of injustice and criminality.
Sukhamaya Bain
========================================
From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 7:29 PM
Subject: [mukto-mona] Partition: Panorama of the Indian history andhHuman tragedies,
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 7:29 PM
Subject: [mukto-mona] Partition: Panorama of the Indian history andhHuman tragedies,
Some facts:
1. The notorious Radcliffe Boundary Award divided the Shikh community almost into two equal groups. The Award was irrational in many other areas also including Bengal.
2. 500,000 were killed in communal riots.
3. Involunary exchange of population caused displacement of 5.5 million each way across the new India-Pakistan border in the Punjab. In addition 400,000 Hindus left Sind and over a million moved from East Pakistan to India. According to one recent NPR reporting, 95:5 Hindu-Muslim population ratio in Karachi was completely reversed in few years.
4. There were 362 states (major ones include Kashmir, Hyderabad, and Junagadh) which did not fall under the jurisdiction of the Radcliffe Boundary Award. British advised them to join either of the two newly created states---India and Pakistan. Both carrot (personal privileges and pensions free of income tax) and stick were used to oblige the princely states to take a decision. All except Kashmir (a mixed state although with majority Muslim population overall and the Hindu King), Hyderabad (Muslim ruler with 85% hindu population), and Junagadh (with Muslim Nawab with Hindu majority) failed to take a decision before independence. The Nawab of Junagadh opted for Pakistan. In a few weeks the Indian troops occupied the state. The Nizam of Hyderabad was stubborn and allowed an extremist organization called the Razakars to seize control. Indian govt. got the excuse and made it a part of India. The Hindu ruler of Kashmir was playing, but decided to join India as soon as a Pathan irregular force attacked Kashmir. With pressure from Pakistan Nehru agreed to a plebiscite which has never been materialized.
5. I do not know when and under what conditions the Maharani of Tripura was negotiatiating with Pakistan for a possible accession to that country. Tripura is a land-locked country. I do not know what were her considerations behind joining Pakistan instead of India. That seems to be really an interesting case. As far as I know culturally the King of Tripura was more connected to Kolkata.
From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: a video: "HINDU BASHING IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL BOOKS"
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: a video: "HINDU BASHING IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL BOOKS"
Responding to QAR's comment, "People of Tripura has historical ties to Bengal and they are comfortable around us."
Could you elaborate on this? What is the basis of their 'historical ties' with the Muslim-majority East Bengal, over the Hindu-majority West Bengal? What have the Muslims of East Bengal done for the Hindu-majority people of Tripura for them to be more 'comfortable around us'?
In reality, the no-caste Hindus, i.e., the Namashudras, had more ties with the grass-root Muslims than any other inter-religion ties. These two communities had pretty much the same occupation, mostly agricultural labor. They both were close to the soil of Bengal. The so-called high-caste Hindus, including the zemindars, treated these two communities about the same, low class.
The Muslims had no logical reason to hate the Namashudras. The Namashudras did not hate the Muslims either, nor did they consider themselves superior to the Muslims. They thought their Muslim brothers would be better than the so-called high caste Hindus. That is why, in 1947, under the leadership of Jogen Mondal, they joined Pakistan over India. And see what they got from the Muslim brothers during Pakistan and during Bangladesh!
Now, let me give two pieces of advice to people like QAR. 1) My conclusions are based upon facts and logic, not upon imagination and nonsense. Trying to belittle them by calling them 'your opinions' is not wise. If you can, come up with additional facts and sounder logic to refute/modify the conclusions that I draw. 2) Academic discussions are necessary for human development, and for a better future; even while we realize that we can not go back in history to change things. Please do not shrug aside academic discussions.
Sukhamaya Bain
===========================================
From: qar <qrahman@netscape.net>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: a video: "HINDU BASHING IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL BOOKS"
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: a video: "HINDU BASHING IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL BOOKS"
In the posting below, he thanked Mr. Q. A. Rahman. Is it for Mr. Rahman's regret that the Pakistani politicians were not smart enough to have a bigger Islamic haven in the subcontinent?
>>>>>>> With due respect, I think you are mixing up too many issue. The "Tripura" example was given to show LACK of leadership of the than Pakistani leaders. Pakistan was a country like most other countries. It did not work very well for the citizens because of bad leaders and greedy opportunists who cared more then their own interest than country or even their religion. It is wrong to think only Hindus suffered, I feel ALL people suffered. Hindus suffered more because of twisted ideology of blaming Hindus for everything bad. Today I strongly blame India for not giving us "Fair share" of water for ALL of our people. Religion has NOTHING to do with it. But you will find most of my people looking at such vital issue through religious prism!!
Aren't she and her people lucky?
I understand it is 'Your opinion" and we'll never know how it would have turned out. If we had few visionary leaders, we could have been in much better shape. I do not know where you live (BD or other country) but last 10 years Bangladesh made a lot of progress. I strongly feel it will continue. If our political leaders were little more tolerant of each others, we could have benefited more but I try to live with what I have not what I wished for.
People of Tripura has historical ties to Bengal and they are comfortable around us. Now it is history and ONLY subject of academic discussion. Nothing more ...
As far as communal problem is concern, it can be lessen by strengthening monitoring institutions (Judicial system, police, education etc) and visionary leaders. Those who are from non-Muslim background are aware of minority persecution but I see oppression of powerful people over powerless continues and it is blind to religion most of the time. The minority persecution is just an ugly extension of that. I bet you those who abuse Hindus (Abusing religion) are mostly ignorant about what Islam says (Or cherry picking verses to fulfill their own darn wishes). Lastly, I'll share a true story. I was taking an interview for a post. One gentleman came with a CV claiming he had a masters degree in Islamic history. I asked him to tell me the meaning of the word "Jihad" and he gave me the wrong answer!! Later he confessed, like secular education system they are given few questions to remember and he just memorized them without understanding most of it. That is why I say, authentic Islamic education can help to lessen hatred among faith communities. The positive part of this story is I also encountered many young men who impressed me with their knowledge. So I am hopeful for a better Bangladesh.
Shalom!
====================================================
-----Original Message----- From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Fri, Apr 27, 2012 1:17 am Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: a video: "HINDU BASHING IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL BOOKS"
I am confused by quite a few postings recently in Mukto-Mona, especially by Mr. Subimal Chakrabarty and Dr. Jiten Roy. Look at Dr. Roy's comments below.
Here, he wrote, "Religion is not the cause of communality." However, only a few days back (April 21, 2012) in the thread "Religion & Communalism, he wrote, "Therefore, religions are at the very core of communalism."
In the posting below, he thanked Mr. Q. A. Rahman. Is it for Mr. Rahman's regret that the Pakistani politicians were not smart enough to have a bigger Islamic haven in the subcontinent? Just read Mr. Rahman's posting below a little carefully. He did not criticize the Pakistani leaders for any other faults.
Mr. Rahman expressed his opposition to "faith based bashing." Well, looks like the Maharani of Tripura was as stupid as Jogen Mandal for the Namashudras and Tridib Roy for the Jumma people. Aren't she and her people lucky? If her wish of 1947 came true, today some non-Muslims intellectuals of Tripura would be exchanging these academic talks with Muslims like Mr. Rahman, just like what Dr. Roy, Mr. Chakrabarty and I are doing. But the people of Tripura would be as sorry as the Hindus and the Jumma people of Bangladesh/Pakistan due to real "faith based bashing."
I do not think a two-nation theorist can be a real challenger of "faith based bashing."
Sukhamaya Bain
=================================================
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: a video: "HINDU BASHING IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL BOOKS"
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: a video: "HINDU BASHING IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL BOOKS"
Thank you. Let me say this. Communalism is a different entity from religion. Religion is not the cause of communality. It's the victim of communality. People exploit religion to foment communality. Those who follow religion correctly are not communal. It's the borderline religious people, many of who has propensity to become communal for their own self-interest. I my youth, we used to play soccer and volleyball with the Moulavi-teacher of our Primary School; he was our buddy. Also, Moulavi-teacher of our high school was my school-hostel super. He was a very strict religious man, but - used to love me like his sons. He used to guide me like my parents. I have written articles about him in Mukto-mona, and elsewhere before. I believe - the trouble is with those who are borderline religious. They do not hesitate to use religion to foment hatred to achieve their political or self interest. Truly religious people will not dare to do so. Mostly, communality has been a tool for political leaders to achieve their goals. In case of Pakistan, it was the military rulers, who found this tool to bring majority population under their control at the expense of religious minority, in this case Hindus. Those military rulers were not religious, but used to act like one in public. There are other batch of people also, who would show their ultra religiosity outside only to exploit religion. These are dangerous people. This is the truth – religion can exist without communality, but communality cannot exist without religion. Jiten Roy =============================== --- On Tue, 4/24/12, qar <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:
|
__._,_.___