Mr. Chakrabarty has little sense of history. He has not learned that Jinnah was hand picked by the British years after he left India voluntarily to lead the League. He received regular instructions from his masters from England on how to create dissent. The ruling parties in the Muslim majority areas were coerced to join the league and thus came the Lahore resolution. Pakistan was not created by the mass movement of the Muslims. It was created to sustain the British business interest in India. One should read Wali Khan's 'Facts are Facts' to understand the genesis of Pakistan. Lord Mountbatten, the last Viceroy of India, said during the uproar created by the genocide in Bangladesh, " If we could forecast the fast rise of China as a regional power, we would have left India undivided". This single sentence speaks volumes. The British rulers left eighteen months ahead of planned departure. Because, "If they waited that long, there would be no power to hand over" to paraphrase Raja Gopalacharya.
Among the achievement of 'independent' Bangladesh, notable is the fact that more minority property has been confiscated under 'the vested property act' than under 'the enemy property act' as it was known during the Pakistani rule. The majority religious community has been given preference to settle in minority areas like Chittagong Hill Tracts. No nation can be both secular and retain adherence to a religion. Ours is no exception. The mushroom growth of religious schools could lead us only to another dark age. In 1947, undivided India had 2500 madrassahs, now Bangladesh alone has about twenty times as many.
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 4:20 AM, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:
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,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,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,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"
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"
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"
From: qar <qrahman@netscape.net>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: a video: "HINDU BASHING IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL BOOKS"
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, April 24, 2012, 3:50 AM
While I agree with most of what you said about "Pakistani politics", I think many Indian politicians are "Play" with religion frequently. Even today Muslim bashing goes on unabated when the time is right. Frequent riots in India says a lot about the problem in "Modern India". The major difference in early India and Pakistan was India was blessed with Gandhi (Nehru, Indira, Rajiv etc) family and Pakistan did not have such seasoned leadership. In reality many Muslims also suffered for lack of good leadership in Pakistan. The "Maharani of Tripura" wanted to join the then East Pakistan and patiently waited almost two years to get some invitations (Around that time India swallowed Hyderabad and Kashmir with VERY different excuses) but our leaders back in Pakistan did not have the skills required to show statesmanship with people of Tripura. Specifically leaders of Bengali origin (Mostly Muslims) were pathetic in negotiations and lost (To newly founded India) more of "Undivided Bengal" and Pakistani Punjab gained more land as a result. Murshidabad was a Muslim majority state but somehow it stayed with India, defying all logic!! We can certainly criticize and "Bash" criminals but harassing people for their religion is unacceptable. Those of us blessed with some education have to stand united against all faith based bashing. It does not diminish anything from any faiths but exposes ignorants and cowards among us. Shalom!====================================================-----Original Message----- From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Tue, Apr 24, 2012 8:27 am Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: a video: "HINDU BASHING IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL BOOKS"
From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: a video: "HINDU BASHING IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL BOOKS"
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, April 23, 2012, 9:27 PM
Well, Tarek Fatah's thesis is dead wrong; an over simplification by just blaming one dictator. Without honestly identifying the real problem of anti-Hindu and anti-non-Muslim socio-political culture of Pakistan, no real solution could come; does not matter who Tarek Fatah may be.==============================From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 8:34 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fwd: a video: "HINDU BASHING IN PAKISTANI SCHOOL BOOKS"
I simply made a comment on 2-minute speech by Tarek Fatah. I still believe that Tarek Fatah is generally right. Please listen to the speech and re-read my post. You have gone beyond what Fatah is emphasizing on. I do not think neither Fatah nor I will disagree with you on the communal and anti-Indian politics of the Pakistani rulers. But using text books to antagonize the innocent minds against Hindus started with Ziaul Huque--that is Fatah's thesis. Do not overreact without understanding the point. Sent from my iPhone=============================On Apr 22, 2012, at 10:18 AM, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:As I wrote before, blaming America is an easy, cheap and irresponsible way of shifting the culpability from where it really belongs; in this case, Pakistan itself. Mr. Subimal Chakrabarty's assessment below is seriously flawed.In a school textbook in the 1960s, in the then East Pakistan, there was a story where a cow wanted to be sacrificed for Allah in order to go to heaven. In my tender mind, I wondered, how hateful, cow is like a god to the Hindus, yet this is in the textbook that all children have to read! In another history narrative in a textbook, occupation and plundering of the Somnath Temple by Muslim invaders were described as Somnath Bijoy (winning of Somnath). Do these sound like American foreign policy in Afghanistan?I would like to ask people like Mr. Chakrabarty to search their memory for facts like the following:1) The resignation of Jogen Mandal in 1950 from the position of Minister of Law, Justice and Labor in Liaquat Ali Khan's cabinet due to atrocities on Hindus in East Bengal. The government of Pakistan was hostile to religious minorities, not eager to uphold their rights – forcing Mr. Mandal to take a permanent shelter in India.2) The colossal scale atrocities on Hindus in Pakistan in 1965, during a war with India.3) The regular military of Pakistan killing Hindus, irrespective of political affiliations, in 1971.Ayub Khan was the dictator of Pakistan from 1958 to 1969. It would be foolish to suggest that he had nothing to do with the 1965 atrocities, or with the mindset of the Pakistani military that methodically killed innocent and non-violent Hindus in 1971. It would be absurd to think that the character of Zia-ul-Haq sprouted out all of a sudden like a weed from a civilized/innocent Pakistan.FYI: Jogen Mandal's Resignation Letter, if the hyperlink above does not work: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Resignation_letter_of_Jogendra_Nath_MandalMr. Chakrabarty really needs to do some reading, recalling his memory, and thinking, before making the kind of comments that he made below. If we can not speak truthfully and honestly, let us keep silent, let us just enjoy our life away from talking in the public forums.Sukhamaya Bain=======================================================
__._,_.___
****************************************************
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
__,_._,___