Parihaka

Adux, you're getting dangerously close to trolling here.

Agnostic Muslim

Thnak you for at least attempting to probe the issues in more depth.

You are correct in assuming that if I were to have my ideal world, it would be one where religion had nothin got do with running a country, though it would never approach the extremes of Turkey or France either.

I don't believe that Pakistan was founded to be a theocratic state, but at this point, given everything that has happened, and this "clash of civilizations" narrative that seems to be doing the rounds, I don't really think there is much option but to adopt "moderate Islamic governments". To try and implement anything else would be perceived as selling out to the West, and very easily twisted into rationale for "violent struggle". Attempting moderate Islamic governments serves two purposes:

1. You attempt to provide all ethnic and religious groups with equality under the law by using Islamic tenets that guarantee those rights - an immediate requirement for any nation.

2. Once you are able to establish such governments based on progressive and moderate Islamic law, you can also attempt to move the theologians away from the extreme. The masses will be less susceptible to "Mullah propoganda" and "incitement" (one very important argument of "un Islamic government" will have been taken away) and will gravitate towards the middle.

Its not about being "secular" - its about ensuring "equal rights" - I think that can be accomplished without abandoning religious identities of States.

Its not just my brother. I remember as a child listening to my father and his friends discuss the dismemberment of the Soviet Union, and how the next "target"of the West would be Islam. Over and over again I heard this narrative from acquaintances, friends and family - heck, I probably believed in it before I came to the US.

I was in the Middle East in school when the first Gulf War ocurred. I still recollect how the criticizm of Saddam (for invading Kuwait) turned into cheers for his war against an invading "anti Islam" Super Power.

To simply attribute support for AQ, OBL and the Taliban amongst Muslims to "support for terror and an expression of intolerance" is missing the point. The Muslim narrative has been shaped to inculcate a profound distrust of the US for several reasons, many of which you can guess and far too detailed to go into here, and that distrust distorts perceptions of the US and its intentions.

__________________
Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah

Agnostic Muslim

I disagree with the last statement, and this isn't the thread to get into it, but Western Nations have also sponsored and supported murdering, destructive regimes and personalities in th ename of "national interest". Pakistan did the same - and I would argue that it wasn't so the Taliban could kill people for not growing beards, but so that they could protect Pakistani interests in Afghanistan.

Similarly, support for the Kashmir insurgency was not intended to be directed against innocents (though it could be argued that some religiously extreme ISI officers may not have had any qualms about Hindu civillians being killed), it was done to gain an advantage vs India.

Pakistan's actions/policies gone awry, can be viewed in the same light as those of the US gone awry I would argue - they were flawed, but taken in the desire to further a perceived "just national cause". Its what nations do - it doesn't necessarily reflect upon the beliefs of 1.5 billion Muslims.

Lunatock

How about: Tsar putin and the Chi-Com crackdown on Tibet?

__________________

chankya

I'm beginning to understand your pragmatic desire for movement towards a moderate Islamic state as opposed to a secular state. However I still see a negative aspect of such an association. As things stand today religion is tightly coupled to the state and religious justifications are trotted out for issues which others would, as you rightly point out, use "national interests" to justify. When religion permeates or atleast appears to permeate so much of your govt. and decision making do you see why people attribute actions/policies interchangeably to govt./Islam. As a related question, would this moderate Islamic state of yours stop using the Islamic brotherhood card in dealing with Kashmir?

Second, why is there so much recourse to Islam in public discourse? Or is that a misperception of mine?

I apologize. I didn't mean to single out your brother. I'm interested in hearing what arguments the segment of the population we are talking about .. ie the urban educated people have against the west. I'm also interested in Pakistani views of India.

__________________
"Of all the manifestations of power, restraint impresses men the most." - Thucydides

Agnostic Muslim

Where is the conspiracy heading? If you read some of the posts on the "world wide threat" posed by Islam - the attempts of Muslims to "infiltrate" and "subjugate" Western societies, you should be able to correlate that conspiratorial sentiment to the one on this side of the divide.

The conspiracies imply an eventual dilution of Islamic culture and destruction of the religion - in essence, the Muslim narrative argues that the West is the one "infiltrating and bent upon subjugation". This aspect of it is almost identical to the Western version.

Hostility to India is framed in the context of our historical animosity - "India has never accepted Pakistan, India still harbors ambitions to absorb Pakistan, India supports terrorism and unrest in Pakistan etc." - I gather from forums online that the sentiment in India towards Pakistan is pretty similar.

There is a religious aspect to it for sure, "Hindu India bent upon destroying Muslim Pakistan", and that has its roots in several issues - the refusal to allow Jinnah to lead a United India, refusal to allow Muslim states to have an extremely high degree of autonomy in a United India, the riots etc. etc. But the religious identity of the Pakistani state is not what drives it, it is the history of India and Pakistan and the overwhelmingly Muslim demographics of Pakistan.

IMO, Kashmir does not have the place it does in the Pakistani simply because of religious affiliation. Religion is part of the dynamic, but what also drives sentiment is that Pakistanis view kashmir as legally and rightfully theirs - that certain "Muslim majority districts" were handed over to India under a preplanned conspiracy to allow it access. Support from the Kashmir cause arises from the perceived refusal of India to allow a UN plebiscite, one that Pakistanis believe would end in the Kashmiris choosing Pakistan.

Now I don't want to get into an argument over the finer points of history as it relates to the events above, I'm just trying to present the general sentiment as I observed, and grew up with. This is roughly the official position of the GoP as well, and what is taught - very few people have the time or patience to delve into history and dissect it to determine the truth - so, general, attractive narratives such as the one I attempted to outline above are formed and taken to heart.

I'll attempt to answer the first part of your last post later - gotta finish my project...

Adux

My apologies that was more of a emotional response.

Adux

How can a Islamic state provide equality to its citizens, the very word 'Islamic State' stomps on the minorities, that they dont have much say in the country. As long as non-muslim cant have all the freedoms of that a muslim enjoys , even the right to be elected to the highest office as well as not having to pay something as the zakat. How can there equality, forget secularism, lets not beat around the bush about what an Islamic state is ,An Islamic state catagorically states non-muslims will always remain second class citizens by the doors it has closed for non-muslims. Its just another form of racisim in my opinion.

Expat Canuck

Whoa, I never thought about it that way Adux!

Nice one bro.

brokensickle

Pari, sometimes the sarcasm in the matters of the truth of the situation are biting, but none the less true...This is a important matter to be heard in an age of the PC clap-trap that the man with open eyes becomes as America's own Paul Revere."The red coats are coming!" "The red coats are coming!" Paul yelled. The country folk of his time could have yelled back,"shut up Paul we're sleeping"..."Don't be such an alarmist"..."The red coats aren't all bad"..."Paul, you are dangerously close to trolling here".

Adux does still have the freedom to speak. Doesn't he?

Come on!



Ivan

__________________
"Evil opposes freedom and uses those who pervert it as pawns to destroy it."

brokensickle

So true, so true. Watch it though commonsense and the truth can brand you a troll. I'll probably become a troll just for agreeing you.

Adux, You live in Scotland? Are you Scottish?

You must be Scottish, with commonsense like that.




Ivan

Expat Canuck

Awesome, I got busted at work surfing on this laugh.

Adux

Racisim doesnt have to be on skin colour, we indians are used to this concept especially me; the whole caste system is based on such unethical concept that denies you freedom by your birth and beliefs

Adux

Brokensickle,

Thank you
I do understand why pari, has to do something like that, there are people who use deficincies of current Islam to further their hatered for a certain community or race. They use our legitimate discourse to further their inbred illegitmate agenda. On a online board and me as a person he has never seen, I dont think he can take that chance. Maybe.

I do have a problem with how Islam is in the current generation and their very thought process. My problem with not with Spiritual Islam but rather Socio-Economic and political islam.

Adux

I am an Indian, South India to be precise. I used to live in Scotland, love the place and the people.