Female feticide should be stopped, it is more common in urban population and among prosperous states, and Punjab is leader in this. After 20 years we will be in crisis situation. Problem in India is enforcing law to stop this menace.
GS, - True incidence
In Merrut when somebody asked his muslim tailor, why you have so many kids when you canât even feed them. His reply was one or two will be used in riots (they will die in riots), two or three will help me in tailoring work and reproduction.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Female feticide should be stopped, it is more common in urban population and among prosperous states, and Punjab is leader in this. After 20 years we will be in crisis situation. Problem in India is enforcing law to stop this menace.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yep. Guru Gobind Singh kicked out Virk and Brar jutts out of Sikhism since they were practicing female infanticidie. They were only allowed after they promised to not do it ever again. (Muslim Virk Jutts still practice female infanticide) but today people have no shame and with turbans on their heads are seen inquiring about ultra sound machines in hope of a male child. <!--emo&  --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Bengali Psec laments over not doing population exchange
-----------
It would have been different if there had been some means of exchanging populations, as between Greece and Turkey. That being impossible and since 150 million Muslims cannot be wished away, we seem doomed to increasing communal tension erupting every so often in bloody conflagration.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1040117/asp/...ory_2793676.asp
BACK TO THE HEARTH
- Congress would gain most if Sonia Gandhi were not PM-in-waiting
SUNANDA K. DATTA-RAY
Mother and child
As election frenzy sends the unspeakable in full pursuit of the uneatable in the hunt for alliances, Sonia Gandhi might reflect that the best service she can render her murdered husbandâs country is to make a firm commitment on the hint she dropped last month about the prime ministership being an open question.
India needs an alternative to the ruling party. Parliamentary democracy becomes elective autocracy without the ballast of a vigorous and credible opposition that is also the government-in-waiting. In spite of considerable erosion of confidence, the Congress, as the oldest and largest party, for decades the party of governance, is best equipped for this necessary role. Its inherent advantages must not be squandered.
This is not to deny the obvious fruits of Bharatiya Janata Party rule. India has prospered. Economic success has mitigated discontent and earned prestige abroad; diplomatic finesse promises to counter the security challenge from Pakistan. But no amount of glib propaganda by smart alecky publicists who find it profitable to clamber aboard the Hindutva bandwagon can obscure the fact that these achievements are largely the culmination of processes over the last half a century.
Jawaharlal Nehru went to Pakistan to build bridges with a gift of water. Indira Gandhi made the first overture to the United States of America at Cancun. Rajiv Gandhiâs obsession with the 21st century initiated the technological revolution. P.V. Narasimha Rao opened up the economy with Manmohan Singhâs pioneering budget. Indiaâs forgotten prime minister, Chandra Shekhar, half in and half out of the Congress, set the precedent for military collaboration with the US before the first Iraq war. Even the term ânatural alliesâ is not original. Sunit Francis Rodrigues, the army chief, coined it in 1990.
Atal Bihari Vajpayeeâs sound management has enabled India to benefit from the prescience of this succession of Congress leaders. A bounteous monsoon and the altered global equation after the Twin Towers attack have helped him. But his stewardship has also brought strife and terror such as we have not known before. Great play was made last year of the BJP sweeping the polls purely on its economic record. That is utter rubbish. The present claim that Hindutva stands for âall-round progress of Indiaâ is as much a myth. Certainly, roads, irrigation, potable water, electricity, jobs and schools â which any government is expected to provide â win votes. That is why the Lok Sabha poll will be held ahead of time amidst Jaswant Singhâs bonanza. But apart from disarray in the opposition ranks, the BJPâs particular emotive appeal is especially potent in the rural orthodoxy of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.
That statement deserves expansion. India and Bharat are not two geographically separate worlds. They overlap and interlink. There is a residue of Bharat even in the most modern among us. Speaking in more mundane terms, Bharat lingers, nay, flourishes, in the bustees and jhuggi jhopris just round the corner from fashionable bungalows and smart condominiums in every one of Indiaâs cities. When Bombay was set to clear out urban slums, the cry went up that the maids, chauffeurs and bearers of the rich would have nowhere to live. While they are on duty, India and Bharat actually mingle under the same roof.
Like any successful political party, the BJP straddles both entities. But while sophisticated men of the world like Jaswant Singh, Arun Shourie or Arun Jaitley beguile India, the BJPâs affiliated organizations pander to Bharat. When Indiaâs communists still had something to say, they whipped up the egalitarian urges of Bharatâs deprived denizens with the promise of bread. The sangh parivar feeds their cultural and religious hankering with the circus of superstitious ceremony.
As a result, fear and suspicion stalk the land. Mathura and Kashi may not be on the agenda, but, thanks to Ayodhya, even in unadventurous daily life, one nowadays hears casual comments, both hostile and contemptuous, indicating that the chasm between Indiaâs two great religions is deep and growing. It would have been different if there had been some means of exchanging populations, as between Greece and Turkey. That being impossible and since 150 million Muslims cannot be wished away, we seem doomed to increasing communal tension erupting every so often in bloody conflagration.
No hands are clean in this respect. Partisan though he is, M. Venkaiah Naidu may have hit on the truth when he derided âthe non-existent divide between the âcommunalâ BJP and the âsecularâ partiesâ. Congress leaders are as much slaves to religious rites and rituals. But the BJP and its assorted affiliates are most guilty for bestowing respectability on prejudice and obscurantism. They have infected the Hindu with a sense of being under siege. Even if they do nothing further to exacerbate relations, the wounds they have inflicted on national harmony will not easily heal. They never will if Bal Thackeray continues to call the shots in Maharashtra, and if the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh is the power behind a Madhya Pradesh chief minister whose presence and practices recall the Dark Ages.
J.M. Lyngdoh reportedly says no leader is committed to democracy. Sonia Gandhi is probably no better â or worse â than other contenders for power. But Hyderabad confirmed that she is the BJPâs trump card. It is no criticism of her to repeat that for reasons beyond her control, she cannot be taken seriously as prime minister in waiting. Her pretensions to the job make Indian democracy the laughing stock of the civilized world. At home, it leaves the field wide open for sycophants, opportunists and operators to intrigue and conspire. Her humourless sallies and tours, telephone calls and tea parties to woo trite men who can muster a few votes and cunningly play hard to get do nothing to enhance either her or her partyâs prestige.
Of course, Pranab Mukherjeeâs five-member committee to investigate the electoral debacle would not dream of reporting that she is Congressâs greatest liability. S. Jaipal Reddy, as eloquent now for the Congress as he was once against it, makes out she is the best thing that could ever have happened to the party and country. Ambika Soni and her colleagues resign and unresign at her whims. Amarinder Singh swallows his pride and accepts a rival. M. Karunanidhi has gladly proved the truth of Harold Wilsonâs old dictum that a week is a long time in politics.
All this in the name of secularism. And yet, and yet, secularism is what matters most today. It is the mood of the country that has been vitiated; it is the temper of the people that must be restored. Sonia Gandhi with her stilted Hindi and amused half-smile, understanding little beyond the numbers game, does not have the vision, grassroots base, organizational skills, appeal across all community divides or ability to command respect at home and abroad. Itâs a tall order. P.A. Sangma thinks Narasimha Rao âis the only man to match Vajpayeeâ. Sharad Pawar remains a formidable power broker. Manmohan Singh would bring dignity and integrity to any job. P. Chidambaram lurks in the wings. No doubt, Mukherjee and Mulayam Singh Yadav would at once throw their hats in the ring.
Perhaps, Sonia Gandhi does not crave to rule after all. Perhaps she is only dragging out a charade until her daughter is ready. That, too, is an insult to the worldâs largest democracy. But even if she is, she should hurry up. Otherwise, some joker like Laloo Prasad Yadav might sneak in and snatch the crown. That would serve us right for allowing her to gamble with the future of one-sixth of the human race. Legend has it that she was a good daughter-in-law, a good wife and a good mother. A return to some worthy domestic role would earn her the grateful respect of millions of people as well as an honoured position as the revered Congress mata.
I have a question - and I am guessing that this is the right thread to ask:
For how many years after independence was it OK for a Muslim in India to opt out and move to Pakistan? Was there ever a cut off date?
Anyone with info on this, or any links to this info?
<!--QuoteBegin-shiv+Jan 21 2004, 09:12 PM-->QUOTE(shiv @ Jan 21 2004, 09:12 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> I have a question - and I am guessing that this is the right thread to ask:
For how many years after independence was it OK for a Muslim in India to opt out and move to Pakistan? Was there ever a cut off date?
Anyone with info on this, or any links to this info? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i thnk its 1950. (or is it 1965) 
In theory, the Nehru-Liaquat pact of 1950, stopped population exchange
In west bengal, the Congress CM was BC.Roy who was a follower of Sardar Patel
and encouraged low level hindu retaliation in west bengal
WB had low level anti-muslim riots in retaliation for massive atrocities in east bengal, took place until 1964
The commies of WB are imports from BD
Jyoti Basu, Amartya Sen had their houses siezed and got kicked out to India by their muslim neighbors
The ex-mayor of Kolkata, Prasanta Sur was from Noakhali and his father was made to dig his own grave before being beheaded by muslims
Until 1971, the Indian govt gave official refugee rehabilitation for BD hindus
and often there was property exchange with muslims of WB who wanted to go to east bengal
Low level muslim migration to pakistan took place until 1971
Thanks for the answers. I would appreciate some more info to confirm that one of the dates is correct, or if there were some exceptions.
I have felt for a long time now that there are at least two ways in which Indian muslims are looked at by non-musilms in india.
One set openly considers them as Pakistanis
Another set wants to give them great concessions in the worry that they may run off to Pakistan.
Oh yes I am sure there are more viewpoints than these two - but I have singled out these two viewpoints because I think they can be explained on the basis of the issue of population exchange.
Actually, "concessions" was what the Muslim league wanted in India - perhaps from a sense of "entitlement" and when they discovered that democracy would not entitle them to special treatement they said bugger off we want our own country. But having a system of allowing people to migrate after that screwed up the issue furher. It left the door open for Muslims to hedge their bets and decide whenever that Pakistan may be better. But all it did was put a bamboo up the backsides of non-muslim Indians who had no nation other than India.
Imagine yousrself in the shoes of a Police officer in India in 1947. Suddenly - half your men - all Muslims, have gone to Pakistan. A few remain. They are just as good as any others - but over the next few years a few more migrate to Pakistan.
What are you supposed to think about the issue of the remaining Muslim personnel in your force and new recruits:
a) That they are just like anyone else and must not be treated differently
b )One never knows if they will opt to go to Pakistan next month, or next year.
c) Assume that they might all be Pakistanis at heart.
Your problem (as senior officer) becomes more actute if your department is dealing with sensitive information - so what the hell are you supposed to think?
This thought process has affected India more than Pakistan. Pakistan of course had no problem in gradually eliminating its minorities.
01-22-2004, 10:40 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-22-2004, 10:41 AM by Hauma Hamiddha.)
I know of at least two Moslems who went and settled in TSP after their marriage in the 1980s. We have an TSPian woman acquaintence, who though a Moslem by birth has rediscovered her Hindu roots and has returned to live in India and is actually very well versed in Sanskrit and hindu lore and identifies with the dharma.
.....
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->One set openly considers them as Pakistanis
Another set wants to give them great concessions in the worry that they may run off to Pakistan.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While these grades exist, this is some kind of wierd politically correct caricature. What concerned Hindus feel is that many of them are serious practicing Moslems- it is not very material whether they are from Pakistan or India. This whole idea of differentiating Indian and TSPian Moslems is attractive and appealing to weak-minded Hindus, and a certain grade of secularists who fear being called "communal" or "Hindutvavadis". There is some truth to the fact the number of Indian Moslems engaging in international terrorism is small and many are devoted in their service to India. But let us face the plain truth- all this is <b>inspite</b> of Islam and not some peculiar figment called "Indian Islam".
Truth is irrespective of whether they are Indians or Pakistanis the serious Moslems are a security concern for India due to the fundamental aspects of the theory and practice of Islam. And let us face it, even if you do not like it, India IS defined by the Hindu dharma and temples and religious rituals. So any threat to the dharma from Moslems is a threat from Moslems (more precisely Islam) and not Pakistanis as far as lay Hindus go. During a communal riot few Hindus are obsessed with Pakistan as some people seem to be. Please read up on the history of Moslem soldiers in the army of Hindu Kings to see how the matter of India Moslem loyalty has little to do with Pakistan.
One word: -
<b>The present day 'Pakistani Muslims' were Indian Muslims just 50 years ago.</b>
<b>The problem with Indians dealing with Islam is to bring in the Pakistani angle which confuses the whole issue, derails it, and takes the discussion towards geo-political directions, ultimately arriving at some conclusion which places the blame squarely on certain entities such as madarasas and elites and military of Pakistan. This is a comfortable conclusion, for the feeble Indian mind cannot contemplate accepting that a religion can be root cause, while all other factors are only the symptoms exacerbating the disease caused by the original root cause.</b>
The partition of India and creation of Pakistan was a blow to the Hindu psyche. Indians never recovered from this blow. They are fatally wounded by this entity called Pakistan.
While Indians blame Pakistanis of being obsessed with Pakistan, the truth is that the Pakistani Muslims have a wider pan-global community to identify with.
Individually, Pakistani muslims can identify themselves with the whole world. They passionately feel when Albanians are killed by Serbians. They are aroused when the Russian fight the Chechens. They hate the Great Satan and the Yahoodis.
Hatred of India is only a larger part of their hatred. (While Indians think out of vanity that the Pakistanis hate them and them alone!)
But Indians are the ones who are obsessed with Pakistan. Islamic terrorism is Pakistani terrorism. Islamic Bomb is Pakistani Bomb. Islamic fascism is Pakistani nationalism. Islamic intolerance is Pakistani intolerance, Islamic army is not Islamic, but Pakistani. Islamic Mujahideen are Pakistani state sponsored terrorists.
For Indians, there CANNOT be Islamic Terrorism, There can only be a Pakistani terrorism. A Mujahideen who thinks he dies for Islam is not an Islamic Mujahideen but only a person of Pakistani sponsorship.
Indians are cowards who run from truth. Especially if the truth is as bitter a fact that they have been at the receiving end of Islam ever since 1500 years.
Today the Indians are psychologically being brainwashed that the Islamic threat is no more. Only a Pakistani threat exists. <b>That the Republic of India is strong now. It has an army, navy, nukes and aircraft carrier to thaw the efforts of every external enemy from Pakistan to China!! They never discuss about the possibility of internal conflict. They forget that the Pakistanis were Indians too, just 50 and odd years ago.</b>
They think that the worst has gone, emigrated to Pakistan. They want Pakistan to be identified not with the manifestation of the best of Islamic teachings, but instead, they want Pakistan to be seen as the product of some selfish elite Muslims of North India whose only aim was to secure their superior positions and wealth. NAY, nothing can be further than truth. Pakistan is a genuine product of Islamic thought, of its best modern thinkers and statesmen.
Pakistan, many narrowly think is only the army. Nothing else. Just an army that lives off the Pakistani comman man with the only aim of destroying India.
They call the state of Pakistan, the Terrorist State of Pakistan.
What folly!
If Pakistan is a true âISLAMIC republicâ, it would do exactly what it does NOW.
Therefore, there is no use of calling Pakistan, a Terrorist State.
Call it an Islamic State. Is there a difference?? Islamic State and Terrorist State?
As an Islamic state, its Islamic duty is to uphold the superiority of the Islamic ideology over all other religions. Just as the aim of communist USSR was to defeat Capitalism and usher in global communism.
Calling it a terrorist state only serves to clean Islam. As if Islam has nothing to do with the terrorism that Pakistan indulges it. As if it is just a bunch of misguided fanatic army generals who control Pakistan and direct its terrorism activities. As if the public of Pakistan are brainwashed by the army . NAY. The comman man of Paksitan does not want anything, but the superiority of Islam established over India. To regain the ârightfulâ place of Islam as the superior ruling religion in India.
Indians do not realize this, for they donât want to. They cannot fight Islam.
They instead want to prop up strawmen like the Pakistani Army and accuse them of all responsibility of the terrorism that emanates from across the border.
The Indian Elite has successfully downloaded the Marxist and Leftist argument that the Mullahs and the Pakistani Army âUSESâ Islam to ascertain their own legitimacy and source of power.
This is a typical leftist view. That the bourgeois use religion as a opium to suppress the proletarian. That religion is an invention of the priestly class (read mullahs) to gain a livelihood without working, receiving power from their intermediate position between the faithful and God. The ruling class (read Army) joins the priestly class, uses the priestly class to confer a divine leave and right to rule upon themselves, and thus gains acceptance of the ruled.
---------------------------
A Hindu Indian would probably see loss of Kashmir as yet another defeat to his idea of Mother India, a Goddess of the pantheon.
A Indian muslim would problably see it as a loss of territory. His sense of loss does not share the same profound grief of a Hindu, although they both might be very sad. To deny this difference is in fashion however.
There is a lot of truth in what you say Hyagriva. It is the software that is the problem. In fact were it not for the software, the majority of the members of the Ummah are agreeable people. It is the theology that turns them into irrational human beings.
We in india think that by asserting that we are a secular nation (whatever that means) that we have solved the problem and convinced the IM that we mean to have an egalitariian state. Little do they realize that the last thig the Ummah wants is a secular state.
01-22-2004, 12:25 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-22-2004, 12:47 PM by Hauma Hamiddha.)
Exactly, K!
We can blame either the Pakistani people or the ideology that drives them.
We chose to blame real people, like Musharaff and Zia, the whole Army, the ISI and the Mullahs, THAN to blame Islam.
Why not try the other way, like you say,
Musharaff is as patriotic as any other India. He is a honourable man, of ideas, motives and emotions. Kargil is not perfidity of his, but only a strategic game.
All the Mullahs are plain men, just as us. They believe in their cause, they are God fearing, they do exactly as their religion teaches them to be.
The Pathans and the Afghanis were once really nice Buddhists. Today, they are savage people who can never feel at peace with peace. What transformed them?
Have they become sub-human some how? any evolutionary process?
Nay, simply, they got Islam downloaded into their minds. Thats all.
-----------
Some say, Islam is a nice religion, a religion of peace, only some mullahs and terrorists have hijacked it. The blame is on some people.
A minority recognises the truth and is brave to say: that the Ideology of Islam is the culprit and all these Mullahs and terrorists are but ordinary people, tempered and corrupted by that ideology.
<b>Blame the Ideology and leave the people alone!</b>
Fight the ideology, not the people.
Indian Muslims are our brothers whom we shall respect as our very own.
But their ideology, we reserve the right to fight it. And fight it we Should. Not shy away.
Or else, a few misguided among us will fight the Indian muslims instead of fighting the ideology. Just as Gujarat demonstrates.
This is the lesson of Gujrat. That either demonise the people instead of the ideology, or we fight the ideology by peaceful means without bloodshed.
The Christians have now mastered this secret of invading India not through force of arms, but by conversion and battle of ideologies.
Sadly, we are loosing both ends.
01-22-2004, 01:01 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-22-2004, 11:49 PM by rhytha.)
My brother once explained this software download phenomenon through the below flow chart. Sadly some of that software can be really hard to delete from the hard drive,
<img src='http://www.geocities.com/somasushma/reprog.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
reprogramming
Viren, the image URL has an extra forward slash in the end.
Amway is a commercial variant of such software. If you replace a few words the sermons and mktg pitches of Amway-ites are replaceable - verbatim. Other examples - retro-viruses, computer viruses, email-chains, etc..
u can't attache images directly from geocities
Came to this thread rather late.
Agree completely with HH and Hygriva. At a basic level, Muslims (be they from anywhere) are no different from anyone else. It is the constant brainwashing five times a day from birth that makes them different. It is indeed a software download that is so virus imbued that it corrupts the entire machine the moment a particular input called 'religion' comes in.
I very strongly feel that any self-respecting Hindu should begin by educating himself. The best place to start is the Koran. It is not so much a religious book as is a civil code, clearly not to be doubted (the opening sentence,literally) and to be followed to the letter. The faithful cannot but toe the line as it is drawn.
There is no country but the Ummah. You can see that amongst the south asian muslims here. They have nobody in their social circle but other muslims, with no distinction being made between Indians and Pakis. A Paki is far more welcome to an Indian Muslim's home here in NY than an Indian Hindu.
It is true that the biggest challenge we face is our own apathy. In all my years I have not been able to make my own wife understand the gravity of the threat posed by the enemy next door and the one within. Funny, but my long time friend and erstwhile room-mate (Shiv knows him) too was a Wagah Kandle Kisser right upto 9/11. It is sad that it has taken an event of that magnitude to wake some people up. Sadder still is the fact that most are still asleep.
<b>Hundreds await Indian citizenship</b>
Manoj Raut and Sidharth Pandey
Monday, February 2, 2004 (Mammera village):
For more than 20 years, hundreds of Pakistanis who crossed over to India have been living as second-rate citizens because the centre is yet to decide on their request for citizenship.
While many such people have their lands and relatives in neighbouring states like Rajasthan and Punjab, they have been living in other states because their visas and the local police do not allow them to move about freely.
Out of Karachi
Twelve years ago, Deeko Ram had to flee Pakistan along with his family after violence broke out in Karachi in the wake of the demolition of the Babri Masjid.
His family took refuge in Ellanabad in Haryana. Today Deeko and his sons earn their living by supplying shoes in the local market.
"We do not have citizenship and the CID and the police follow us wherever we go. We cannot get proper jobs," said Ghuma Ram, another person who fled from Pakistan.
Their plight is similar to hundreds of others who have crossed over into India in search of a new home.
While many of these families were lucky to settle in their ancestral villages in Rajasthan and Punjab, those in Ellanabad couldn't because the government had reduced the number of visas to these states in order to curb this influx.
"All my relatives are in Rajasthan. The sarpanch has also written to say that our lands are all there and have asked us to come there and lay claim to these lands. But we cannot go as there is a fear that we will get arrested and they will put us in jail," said Puran Ram.
"Our problem is that we stay here but all our relatives are in Rajasthan. Once we get nationality, we can move more freely and I can go there and start working in our fields. We can earn something also," said Tula Ram.
Police gaze
The local administration says that it has only managed to process applications of people who crossed over two decades ago. Those that came later are still to be verified by the police.
"The CID and the police have to keep a watch as they are from Pakistan. It is obvious that there will be hardships as there will be some restrictions as the matter is between the state and centre," said D Suresh, DC, Sirsa.
Many families are also worried about the status of their relatives and friends who were unable to make the journey to India.
But they now hope that the thaw in Indo-Pak relations will allow them to establish links with the estranged
http://www.ambedkar.org/pakistan/pakistan.pdf
This is the URL for Dr.Ambedkar's masterpiece
I will slowly start posting it chapter by chapter
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION
The problem of Pakistan has given a headache to everyone, more so to me than to anybody else. I
cannot help recalling with regret how much of my time it has consumed when so much of my other
literary work of greater importance to me than this is held up for want of it. I therefore hope that this
second edition will also be the last I trust that before it is exhausted either the question will be settled
or withdrawn.
There are four respects in which this second edition differs from the first.
*[f1] The first edition contained many misprints which formed the subject of complaints from many
readers as well as reviewers. In preparing this edition, I have taken as much care as is possible to
leave no room for complaint on this score. ,The first edition consisted only of three parts. Part V is an
addition. It contains my own views on the various issues involved in the problem of Pakistan. It has
been added because of the criticism levelled against the first edition that while I wrote about
Pakistan I did not state what views I held on the subject. The present edition differs from the first in
another respect. The maps contained in the first edition are retained but the number of appendices
have been enlarged. In the first edition there were only eleven appendices. The present edition has
twenty-five. To this edition I have also added an index which did not find a place in the first edition.
The book appears to have supplied a real want. I have seen how the thoughts, ideas and arguments
contained in it have been pillaged by authors, politicians and editors of newspapers to support their
sides. I am sorry they did not observe the decency of acknowledging the source even when they
lifted not merely the argument but also the language of the book. But that is a matter I do not mind. I
am glad that the book has been of service to
Indians who are faced with this knotty problem of Pakistan. The fact that Mr. Gandhi and Mr. Jinnah
in their recent talks cited the book as an authority on the subject which might be consulted with
advantage bespeaks the worth of the book.
The book by its name might appear to deal only with the X. Y. Z. of Pakistan. It does more than that.
It is an analytical presentation of Indian history and Indian politics in their communal aspects. As
such, it is intended to explain the A. B.C. of Pakistan also. The book is more than a mere treatise on
Pakistan. The material relating to Indian history and Indian politics contained in this book is so large
and so varied that it might well be called Indian Political What is What.
The book has displeased both Hindus as well as Muslims though the reasons for the dislike of the
Hindus are different from the reasons for the dislike of the Muslims. I am not sorry' for this reception
given to my book. That it is disowned by the Hindus and unowned by the Muslims is to me the best
evidence that it has the vices of neither and that from the point of view of independence of thought
and fearless presentation affects the book is not a party production.
Some people are sore because what I have said has hurt them. I have not, I confess , allowed
myself to be influenced by fears of wounding either individuals or classes, or shocking opinions
however respectable they may be. I have often felt regret in pursuing this course, but remorse never.
Those whom I may have offended must forgive me, in consideration of the honesty and
disinterestedness of my aim. I do not claim to have written dispassionately though I trust I have
written without prejudice. It would be hardly possibleâ1 was going to say decentâfor an Indian to
be calm when he talks of his country and thinks of the times. In dealing with the question of Pakistan
my object has been to draw a perfectly accurate, and at the same time, a suggestive picture of the
situation as I see it. Whatever points of strength and weakness I have discovered on either side I
have brought them boldly forward. I have taken pains to throw light on the mischievous effects that
are likely to proceed from an obstinate and impracticable course of action.
The witness of history regarding the conflict between the forces of the authority of the State and of
anti-State nationalism within, has been uncertain, if not equivocal. As Prof. Friedmann*
[f2] observes:â
" There is not a single modem State which has not, at one time or another, forced a recalcitrant
national group to live under its authority. Scots, Bretons, Catalans, Germans, Poles, Czechs, Finns,
all have, at some time or another, been compelled to accept the authority of a more powerful State
whether they liked it or not. Often, as in Great Britain or France, force eventually led to co-operation
and a co-ordination of State authority and national cohesion. But in many cases, such as those of
Germany, Poland, Italy and a host of Central European and Balkan countries, the forces of
Nationalism did not rest until they had thrown off the shackles of State Power and formed a State of
their own . . . . . "
In the last edition, I depicted the experience of countries in which the State engaged itself in
senseless suppression of nationalism and weathered away in the attempt. In this edition I have
added by way of contrast the experience of other countries to show that given the will to live together
it is not impossible for diverse communities and even for diverse nations to live in the bosom of one
State. It might be said that in tendering advice to both sides I have used terms more passionate than
they need have been. If I have done so it is because I felt that the manner of the physician who tries
to surprise the vital principle in each paralyzed organ in order to goad it to action was best suited to
stir up the average Indian who is complacent if not somnolent, who is unsuspecting if not
ill-informed, to realize what is happening. I hope my effort will have the desired effect.
I cannot close this preface without thanking Prof. Manohar B. Chitnis of the Khalsa College,
Bombay, and Mr. K. V. Chitre for their untiring labours to remove all printer' sand clerical errors that
had crept into the first edition and to see that this edition is free from all such blemishes. I am also
very grateful to Prof. Chitnis for the preparation of the Index which has undoubtedly enhanced the
utility of the book.
1st January 1945,
22, Prithviraj Road,
B.R.AMBEDKAR
New Delhi.
|
