• Friday, June 22, 2018

A passage to Pakistan: 7 decades after separation, how different does the country feel from India

Discussion in 'Social & Current Events' started by Pluralist, Mar 5, 2018.

  1. VCheng

    VCheng ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    31,633
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Ratings:
    +52 / 27,468 / -4
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Another perspective can be obtained from the diaspora. In the US, one set is increasingly assimilated, thriving economically and growing in influence politically. The other set is failing in its self-imposed walls, struggling economically and nowhere politically. A large part of these patterns is driven by what is happening in the "home" countries.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2018
    • Thanks Thanks x 5
  2. Kambojaric

    Kambojaric SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    4,001
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Ratings:
    +7 / 6,064 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Sweden
    Maybe because other Pakistanis are not guests, they are our people and will live and work in this city like everyone else. Bhartis, Chinese or anyone else meanwhile are foreign guests. Here is an account of an American-Filipina in Lahore and the positive experience she took back with her of Pakistanis.

    https://www.lostwithpurpose.com/tales-pakistani-hospitality-lahore/
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  3. Taimoor Khan

    Taimoor Khan SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    5,864
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Ratings:
    +5 / 7,003 / -6
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    That's for you feel proud that you are carrying on the legacy of slavery. We have moved on.

    The term India was given to this region by the British. Its neither native or indigenous. We reclaimed our lands from the British, not from you. You didn't owe in any shape or form the British raj of India, or dominion of India of her Majesty the Queen. You were her subject. So in context of Pakistan being "carved" out of India, that's non sense if any present day Indian is talking about it. Like many states which came into being after the demise of British empire, Pakistan also emerged.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  4. cocomo

    cocomo FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,005
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,400 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    People living in Pakistan are descendants of people living here longer than Indian history. 80% of Indus Valley Civilization is in Pakistan. We have longer and richer history than you. You people don't belong with us if we go by history.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  5. Joe Shearer

    Joe Shearer PROFESSIONAL

    Messages:
    17,998
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Ratings:
    +106 / 28,906 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Let me cite a bit of history to ease the point home.

    As you know, British India was a founder-member of the United Nations. The question arose about the inheritance of the seat. Pakistan, represented by the redoubtable Zafarullah Khan, handpicked by Jinnah, and proving himself worthy of the choice in everything he did, sought automatic membership, as a legal successor of British India. This was rejected, on the grounds that the (only) legal successor of British India was the Dominion of India, and the Dominion of Pakistan was a creation out of the original Crown Colony.

    With regard to some of your thoughts above:

    [A]
    I believe that the correct wording is

    ".....Subject to the provisions of Sections (3) and (4) of this Section, the territories of India shall be the territories under the sovereignty of His Majesty which, immediately before the appointed day, were included in British India except the territories which, under subsection .(2) of this section, are to be the territories of Pakistan....."

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1947/30/pdfs/ukpga_19470030_en.pdf

    As we may see for ourselves, the references to "British India" were references to the old Crown Colony, NOT the newly formed Dominion of India. @Taimoor Khan is specifically wrong.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Your conclusion from a misunderstood premise is inevitably mistaken, and it is the mistake typical of our regressive right reactionaries, the BJP and its larger family, the Sangh Parivar. They insist on some residual right to the territory of Pakistan, which is wholly misguided, as the India Independence Act itself makes amply clear.

    There is no legal or equitable basis on which the former Dominion of India can propose a residual right to the property of the former Dominion of Pakistan.

    When by statute, the two territories are constituted separately, there can be no reversal, and no residual right of one over the other. [The Sangh Parivar argues without taking into account the point that a nation is formed by its citizens, at a point of time; any contradiction of this by any other body is futile, except in cases of conquest by war, or by voluntary union]. Please note that the exact wording of the India Independence Act is what I am referring to, not the garbled versions that hyper-patriots of the sort that you and I have to fend off like greenflies before Diwali.

    I would like to add something about the Scandinavian analogy you used, but in a separate post, if I may.

    Excuse me, did you not read my post?
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2018
    • Thanks Thanks x 5
  6. TheLahoriGuy

    TheLahoriGuy BANNED

    Messages:
    1,055
    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,177 / -2
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Don't bother with him, he's got issues. To prove it , he's going to either reply and abuse to you or me.
     
  7. Joe Shearer

    Joe Shearer PROFESSIONAL

    Messages:
    17,998
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Ratings:
    +106 / 28,906 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Astonishing!

    Hearty congratulations!!

    Thank you for the revelation.

    And "you" were what? Objects?

    Again, this airy fanfaronade has nothing to do with the legislation, that was initiated due to the nearly hundred years of struggle for independence; it may be the British that did the carving, but they did it out of an existing polity, not out of thin air.

    What does that have to do with the discussion? There are people living in the hills of Tamil Nadu who are older still; what does that have to do with it?

    As for the Indus Valley Civilisation, how did you learn about it? By oracular pronouncement?
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  8. jzeebravo

    jzeebravo FULL MEMBER

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    42
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2017
    Ratings:
    +0 / 67 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    My two cents on this pathetic attempt to sound nice:

    Pakistan was carved out of India. - (There was no India, in its current form before 1947).

    The moment i landed at the small but charming Allama Iqbal International Airport. (the word 'SMALL')

    Lahore, for instance is a liveable place. - (the word 'liveable')

    The traffic is far less chaotic than Amritsar. - (comparison of Lahore with Amritsar.)

    Marriage between cousins is commonplace. - (not so commonplace)

    Women often cover their heads in public.

    No bars and certainly no discos. - (not classy, eh!)

    It has not gone through the kind of mass urbanisation that comes with industrialisation. - (Seriously?)

    Frequent meddling by the army is holding back investments. - (with the most honest politicians in the world)

    While the rest of the world holds al-Qaida responsible for bringing down the twin towers in 2001, most Pakistanis (even the gentrified elite) continue to see a Zionist plot behind it.Conspiracies, real or imagined, are part of the daily diet in Pakistan. - (We didn't say it, read the 9/11 Commission Report or ask people like Michael Moore etc.).

    I found myself trying, in vain, to reason. It just does not work in a place like Pakistan. - (Oh wow! Poor Pakistanis!!)

    Churches protected by armed guards, high walls and barbed wire.

    While reading this I felt as if I was reading the desi version of The White Man's Burden by a brown Rudyard Kipling.
    After these few takeaways, I can only call this douche as a classic narcissist - even the famed Pakistani hospitality couldn't change his twisted superiority complex, ha!!!
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2018
    • Thanks Thanks x 4
  9. Areesh

    Areesh ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    28,581
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Ratings:
    +22 / 45,007 / -30
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Tell wrong address to people from other cities. Go to the doorstep to help a bharati find an address.

    :lol:
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  10. war&peace

    war&peace ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    17,919
    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Ratings:
    +9 / 29,909 / -11
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Sweden
    I tend to agree with @lastofthepatriots on this point that such hospitality is not extended to most of the non-Lahoris moving into Lahore from other parts of Pakistan. My own cousin from south Punjab faced discrimination when he tried to get admission in a famous academic institution in Lahore.

    However, I would disagree with him on generalising it because I think that all of the Lahoris may not be like this however we need to change our attitudes. Most of the Gangadeshis hate Pakistan especially since Modi has taken over. I wish that govt takes step to reduce and ultimately stop the consumption of donkey meat in the city...but that's my wishful thinking because if they do so who will vote for PMLn.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2018
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  11. Verve

    Verve SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    4,781
    Joined:
    May 15, 2014
    Ratings:
    +1 / 4,546 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  12. Kambojaric

    Kambojaric SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    4,001
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Ratings:
    +7 / 6,064 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Sweden
    Actually the British government made it clear with regards to how they perceived the two new dominions, as well as how they interpreted the India Independence Act. I have scrolled through the Hansard over the past half an hour or so and found specific examples of how the India Independence Act was to interpreted. This is what the British Prime Minister Clement Attlee had to say on the matter in July 1947 for example:

    "In reference to the question whether we should call the Dominions "India" and "Pakistan," that is largely a choice of names decided by the Indians themselves. As the hon. Member for The High Peak (Mr. Molson) pointed out, it is a fact that we get a constant difficulty over one name going for a geographical expression and also for a State. We are awfully apt to talk of "Americans" when we do not mean the people of North and South America. We often talk of "Americans" and do not mean the people of the whole of North America. In the same way, I have no doubt that we shall continue to talk of "Indians" although one part is particularly called India. The right hon. Member for Saffron Walden will remember that we had a good deal of talk on this when the 1935 Act was discussed. We always had to distinguish between British India and Indian India. I do not think that this will cause great difficulty in practice.

    An hon. Gentleman opposite raised a point with regard to the status of these two Dominions. The names are not meant to make any difference between them. They are two successor States. They are separate and both of them will be Dominions in the full effect of the term."

    The words of Attlee clearly stated the way in which India and Pakistan were to be perceived once they gained their independence respectively. Both were to be regarded as "successor states" of British India/Crown Colony of India (which ever term we prefer to use). With regards to the question of one successor state inheriting the seat in the United Nations and the other not doing so, this was done merely for the sake of convenience I would deem as one successor state is clearly larger, much in the same way as how Russia inherited the seat of the Soviet Union in the United Nations, even though the other socialist republics such as Ukraine, Belarus, Estonia etc. were all in theory equal members of the USSR and direct successors of this union.

    http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/...the-new-dominions#S5CV0440P0_19470714_HOC_292

    @Kaptaan : I thought you might find the above point interesting.

    For sure, go ahead. It was by no means a perfect analogy but was made rather to highlight the point of irredentism and the tilt towards the right that is a prevailing trend in our part of the world. As a smaller nation, a certain level of empathy has to be afforded to Pakistanis I believe much as the same empathy is awarded to say Ukrainians or Georgians in their dealings with Russia.

    Bhai Lahore is a classic example of massive urbanization gone wrong. If you read books by Charles Dickens painting a picture of London in the 1800s, you would think there was no worse place on the planet to live in. A similar thing has happened in Lahore as the population of the city has ballooned in recent decades and is frankly out of control. My father grew up in androon shehr Lahore in the 50s. The androon shehr he describes is place of gardens and clean streets. When I used to visit relatives there growing up I would laugh at his description of the place as it was in the past because now it was just sewers, trash lying around and a concrete jungle, and half the people there arent even Lahori but rather recent migrants from other parts of Punjab. Maybe there is a minority complex developing amongst the old Lahoris who increasingly feel out of place and a minority within their "own city". However at the end of the day no ethnic ghettos have emerged in the city thankfully like in Karachi. There are no Pashtun areas, or muhajir areas. In fact intermarriages are common and I have members in my family from both of the aforementioned communities and yet it is only in my late teenages that I realized they were not Punjabi or Lahori originally as our parents never taught us to look at them differently.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 4
  13. Kaptaan

    Kaptaan PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    9,097
    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Ratings:
    +153 / 23,429 / -5
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Thanks for tagging me. I have gone over this "carving" business many times. This is a canard that has taken root even amongst many Pakistani's. The fact Indian Republic was not carved. Indian Republic is a product of the carving with Pakistan being the other product. British India was carved. That entity was a colony, a British colony that had it's own flag and was ran by Britain. This crown colony had at it's maximum extent Burma, Aden in Yemen and even Singapore as subsidaries. Furthermore it had been made by Britain. The 1947 partition was from historical standpoint nothing but simple undoing of the integration effected by British military force in 1843 and 1849 when the greater part of the Indus Basin was annexed by Britain at gun point.


    [​IMG]


    The best analogy I can make is John Senior had two children. David and John Junior. Just because John Jr carries the John Sr's name does not place him at higher level or give him greater successor rights then his sibling David. Both are equal successor of their parent. John Jr cannot go around suggesting that David issued from his loins. Or imagine he indeed is the parent. Both are children of the same parent.

    As regards the UN seat I have gone through that before. In any estate some items or legacies cannot be divided. For instance if your parent leaves you a mango tree, a prize horse you cannot chop a tree or horse in half. Other means will have to figured to divide the estate. The mango tree can only go to one sibling.

    Finally the moment British India was dissolved the flags of two dominions arose. Pakistan and India. Both countries have the same independence day. At no stage was Pakistan subject to Indian Republic rule.


    Really? Pakistan is one of the if not the most urbanized country in South Asia. Urbanizations rates for Pakistan is 39% against 33% in India. OP needs to revisit his facts.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 6
  14. Thorough Pro

    Thorough Pro ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,678
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Ratings:
    +5 / 6,909 / -25
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    There was no such thing as a unified india. india was never a country. The land comprised of hundreds of independent princely states.

     
  15. Kaptaan

    Kaptaan PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    9,097
    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Ratings:
    +153 / 23,429 / -5
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    As usual your being too smart by half but either by design or stupidty your overlooking some very important facts. Does the Indian diaspora reflect the Indian demography bsack in India? Or is it a sliver and distilled elite or filtered group from that country. All these factors have to be looked at before you make conclusions.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2