What's new

Pakistan First ! The case for Pakistani Nationalism.

Aug 15, 2015
14,228
-3
23,052
Country
United Kingdom
Location
Pakistan
Mine and @Baibars_1260 's conversations are our own.

A Karachiite Muhajir does not have to agree with the worldview of someone from the landowning "martial race" families of Sialkot, Bagh and Mardan.

We didn't bifurcate the country. You guys are masters at gaslighting. If we talk about some of the consequences of your actions such as fall of Dhaka and the blowback of the Afghan war, it becomes a national security issue. You Punjab-Potohar-urban Pashtun trifecta continue to hog the space with your Kashmir and Afghanistan issue but ignore the Hazaras and Baloch and numerous problems plaguing our country. You'll never give the same attention to a Thar famine victim.

You Azad Kashmiris go off to Britain and suddenly become Kashmiris and talk shit about Pakistan. Yahan baray saggay ban rahay ho. The most ardent well wisher of Pakistan. Stfu.




So says the indian false flagger who worships and supports extremist hindu/sanghis on PDF................. :azn::


1611320749705.png
 

lafete

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Jul 19, 2015
69
0
80
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
There is a need of cultural reform. Our religion teaches us that there will always be a group of Muslims who will be rightly guided. IMO, the people who are rightly guided are the Muslims by choice in the west, particularly in north America - the converts. What has this got to do with Pakistan?

The knowledge Allah gave to those folks who reformed the Persian Culture, the Turkish culture, the folks who created Pakistan is the same. Allah is giving the same knowledge to these new Muslims by choice at this very moment and for everyone to see.

My grandparents studied at the sir syed university at aligarh. Sir syed Ahmad khan had sections of the Al Ihya Al Alum ud deen translated. It was mandatory back then for students to read the sections before starting their education.

These books are now being translated by these new Muslims and are being analyzed at Berkley (zaytuna institute), Cambridge Muslim College and numerous Muslim learning centres which are popping up in the west.




Here is the list of books which were required at sir syed and abandoned right after Pakistan was created. Then they were banned when the Gulf arabs and the ayatullahs in iran made Ghazali their enemy number one. We are their pitthu, so we did the same.

Volume 1: The book of knowledge
Volume 2: The principles of creed
Volume 21: The exposition of the wonders of the heart
Volume 22: Training the soul, refining the character and treating the ailments of the heart
Volume 23: Over coming the Two desires
Volume 24: The bane of the tongue
Volume 25: The censure of Anger, Malice and Envy
Volume 26: The Censure of this world
Volume 27: The censure of Greed and the love of wealth
Volume 28: the censure of Fame and Hypocritical Ostentation
Volume 29: The Censure of Pride and vanity
Volume 30: The Censure of Deceit
Volume 37: On intention, Sincerity and Truthfulness
Volume 38: On Vigilance and Accounting.
Volume 40: The remembrance of Death and the hereafter.
Volume 11-17 on Properties of how to: Eat, Marry, Earn a living, travel, retreat and make friends.

Go through the whole list of all 40 volumes. See how quickly these books start blowing holes through the older foundations of the Persian and Turkish cultures.

The Book has 40 volumes. They say that if All the books in Islam were destroyed except for the quran, the sahih sitta, and this 40 volume master piece, it will not be a big loss.

If you ask any honest Turk, he will say that this book was the constitution of the Ottoman empire. Iqbal, Rummi, etc, use the term "proof of Islam" whenever they refer to him.

We started this cultural reform process - Allah re-warded us with a country. We abandoned it and he abandoned us.

Now, as he threatened in the Quran "I will replace you with a group of people who will not be like you", He is creating a new group of people - in the west.


Watch this short video to see who these new Muslims are and what type of knowledge Allah is giving them

 
Last edited:

achhu

BANNED
Jun 26, 2020
797
-19
228
Country
India
Location
India
We are Pakistan's First ....

It is necessary now as never before to emphasize our identity.

We are Pakistanis, dwellers of Sindh, Baluchistan, KPK, Gilgit, Baltistan, Punjab and Azad Kashmir. We are defined by a common cultural thread of Saraiki linking our provinces and our peoples.
Ours is an ancient culture going back to the dawn of civilization established in the Indus River Valley 5400 years ago. We have evolved over the centuries absorbing other cultures and religions.

Over the last 50 years our cultural and national identity has been transformed and redefined.
We are redefining our cultural traditions to as they were centuries back with deep roots to Central Asia and the Middle East. In dress, language, and cuisine we are now different than we were 50 years back. Few nations in the world have culturally transformed so rapidly.

To further redefine it is necessary to emphasize who we are NOT...
Pakistanis are Not :

1. "Indian" Muslims - We are not part of "India", and yes a majority of our
population is Muslim, but religion is not the only defining feature of our national
identity.
We have no connection with the Muslim population of "India" as defined by its
territory today.

2. "West" Pakistanis - There is no "East" or "West" Pakistan but simply Pakistan.


3. "South" Asians- Pakistanis are Asians and our population similarity is with West or Central
Asia.

What do PDF members think?

Are the other South Asian populations at all relevant to us?
a pakistani is going to fill charge of nationalism in pakistanis . pakistan was made for muslims only .
keep it up . hindus are requested to come to their motherland .
 
Last edited:
Nov 18, 2014
1,139
0
1,389
Country
United States
Location
United States
There is a need of cultural reform. Our religion teaches us that there will always be a group of Muslims who will be rightly guided. IMO, the people who are rightly guided are the Muslims by choice in the west, particularly in north America - the converts. What has this got to do with Pakistan?

The knowledge Allah gave to those folks who reformed the Persian Culture, the Turkish culture, the folks who created Pakistan is the same. Allah is giving the same knowledge to these new Muslims by choice at this very moment and for everyone to see.

My grandparents studied at the sir syed university at aligarh. Sir syed Ahmad khan had sections of the Al Ihya Al Alum ud deen translated. It was mandatory back then for students to read the sections before starting their education.

These books are now being translated by these new Muslims and are being analyzed at Berkley (zaytuna institute), Cambridge Muslim College and numerous Muslim learning centres which are popping up in the west.




Here is the list of books which were required at sir syed and abandoned right after Pakistan was created. Then they were banned when the Gulf arabs and the ayatullahs in iran made Ghazali their enemy number one. We are their pitthu, so we did the same.

Volume 1: The book of knowledge
Volume 2: The principles of creed
Volume 21: The exposition of the wonders of the heart
Volume 22: Training the soul, refining the character and treating the ailments of the heart
Volume 23: Over coming the Two desires
Volume 24: The bane of the tongue
Volume 25: The censure of Anger, Malice and Envy
Volume 26: The Censure of this world
Volume 27: The censure of Greed and the love of wealth
Volume 28: the censure of Fame and Hypocritical Ostentation
Volume 29: The Censure of Pride and vanity
Volume 30: The Censure of Deceit
Volume 37: On intention, Sincerity and Truthfulness
Volume 38: On Vigilance and Accounting.
Volume 40: The remembrance of Death and the hereafter.
Volume 11-17 on Properties of how to: Eat, Marry, Earn a living, travel, retreat and make friends.

Go through the whole list of all 40 volumes. See how quickly these books start blowing holes through the older foundations of the Persian and Turkish cultures.

The Book has 40 volumes. They say that if All the books in Islam were destroyed except for the quran, the sahih sitta, and this 40 volume master piece, it will not be a big loss.

If you ask any honest Turk, he will say that this book was the constitution of the Ottoman empire. Iqbal, Rummi, etc, use the term "proof of Islam" whenever they refer to him.

We started this cultural reform process - Allah re-warded us with a country. We abandoned it and he abandoned us.

Now, as he threatened in the Quran "I will replace you with a group of people who will not be like you", He is creating a new group of people - in the west.


Watch this short video to see who these new Muslims are and what type of knowledge Allah is giving them

I have nothing to do with the topic, but I second your opinion. In the west Islamic learning as in back to the basics is being pursued with intent and vigor. Something lacking in Muslim world, where people are lost in their creeds, madhabs and syncretism. Watching historic sites and their ruins is a painful sight in much of Muslim world but especially so in Pakistan...
where it seems it went through a second invasion during which all was left to waste. Dilapidated castles and Masajid paying homage to the dead and not serving the living. Two ancient Masajid in Lahore could make excellent higher learning centers like Al-Azhar... with dorms and adjacent libraries, departments etc... students and scholars from world over will earnestly join in... it can revive the Lahore old city and perhaps the old fort can be salvaged again and become a sought after real estate with old charm and warmth. It has already successfully been applied in many states in the west. Similar case can be made for Peshawar in reviving the old however a new and modern setting in Gwadar. University towns thrive on the backs of their youth, the up and coming bright minds who can either be ruined or set on path to chart a new course.

Though another topic altogether but other forts can also be rehabilitated and partly incorporated into functioning building as administration, hotels, campuses, precincts or resorts/retreats.
 

Azadkashmir

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 10, 2012
6,418
0
7,486
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
Mine and @Baibars_1260 's conversations are our own.

A Karachiite Muhajir does not have to agree with the worldview of someone from the landowning "martial race" families of Sialkot, Bagh and Mardan.

We didn't bifurcate the country. You guys are masters at gaslighting. If we talk about some of the consequences of your actions such as fall of Dhaka and the blowback of the Afghan war, it becomes a national security issue. You Punjab-Potohar-urban Pashtun trifecta continue to hog the space with your Kashmir and Afghanistan issue but ignore the Hazaras and Baloch and numerous problems plaguing our country. You'll never give the same attention to a Thar famine victim.

You Azad Kashmiris go off to Britain and suddenly become Kashmiris and talk shit about Pakistan. Yahan baray saggay ban rahay ho. The most ardent well wisher of Pakistan. Stfu.
That is because likes of you talk sh it about us. Such as mirpuris/Potoharis are backwards, oh they are drug dealers oh they are giving pakistan bad name . When we come over to pakistan for holiday to meet relatives we get harassed by security at airport for bribes. Then you wonder why we have bad things to say. We Pakistanis do a lot for pakistan wether its charity/ or human rights etc.
 

tkmd

FULL MEMBER
Aug 24, 2013
332
0
357
@lafete ; @Itachi @tkmd @Apprentice

My question to those questioning "nationalism " is then why did we need a nation?
Why couldn't we be good Muslims within a united India?
If personal piety, adherence to the faith and unity with the Ummah is concerned then the Muslims of the subcontinent had been doing that for 1000 years in India.

This is EXACTLY the argument that the Congress Bhartiya Muslims, led by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad. Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan, Dr.Syed Mehmood, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai, Gani Khan Chaudhuri, Zakir Hussain, and the mullahs of the Jamait Ul Ulema e Hind make.
This is EXACTLY the argument that is sold to Indian Muslims by the RSS brand of Muslim leaders like Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi.
Why Pakistan?
We are ALL brethren of the Ummah, So be steadfast in your faith as Muslims of the greater Ummah who merely reside in India.
By the argument of Jamait Ul Ulema e Hind, and Owaisi:

Why should Pakistan exist at all!

Did we all suddenly become Muslims on 14th August 1947?


"Indian" Muslims?

So far as we know most Indian Muslims still remember the ayats to say their namaz, pray on Fridays, some can read Arabic, they try to fast during Ramadan, offer zakat, observe the two Eids, and still manage to perform Hajj in sufficient numbers to warranty a special Hajj Terminal in Delhi. Some can still read and write Urdu, and the four main centers of the Islamic schools of thought in the subcontinent are all located in India. As far as we know they are steadfast in the belief of Tauheed and can recite the kalma e shahada. So the 5 pillars of Islam are maintained in the personal individual lives of Indian Muslims.

We were all Indian Muslims 73 years back.

So why Pakistan?


Would like to have an answer to this argument.
Iqbal said it best....Mullah Ko Jo Hai Hind Mein Sajde Ki Ijazat,, Nadan Ye Samajhta Hai Ke Islam Hai Azad.

Please tell me where I wrote that Islam is a personal religion. Islam is a way of life. It is the sum total of an ideology meant to govern our society, transactions and personal behavior. It is not something to be hidden away in one’s home. It is not a faith meant to be trampled on by others. Pakistan was envisioned as a homeland for Muslims to establish a state that protects our faith, heritage, culture and interests. And it shall remain as such. And Islam is integral to it and the concerns of the ummah are included in that. Whether oen likes it or not.
Ummah can ONLY exist when ALL Muslims want and accept it. Ummah can NOT exist by Pakistanis continuely harping on about it. Virtually ALL modern day non-Pakistani Muslims are against the idea of the Ummah.






The races and ethnicities that make up india are different to those that make up Pakistan. The Persianized Nomads and Pushtoons who make up 40% of Pakistan have NO connection to india in ANY way whatsoever. In fact they have racial and genetic connections to Iran and Afghanistan as well as Pakistan. AT MOST the 2% of indians who have minor connections to Pakistan are irrelevant and meaningless. It means that AT LEAST 98% of indians have NOTHING in common with 100% of Pakistanis. It's like saying the White Western European English have racials connections to modern day Africa because 2% of the British population are black.






Like the millions of Muslims in Europe who are leaving Islam as you previously claimed?.......... :disagree:


If what you say is true then remember to post the links here...........:azn:
It is not for you to tell us what the Ummah is. The Prophet, Companions, and scholars have defined it. By your silly argument if the whole world became Atheist than we too should become Atheist and accept the erasure of our holy sites. Indeed, our stance is let the whole world abandon Islam we will not leave the rope of Allah and the cloak of His Rasul.
 

Baibars_1260

FULL MEMBER
Sep 12, 2020
1,671
0
1,468
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Thanks for your post.
Largely agree with your views. I would like some clarification
On this oft quoted couplet from Iqbal:
Iqbal said it best....Mullah Ko Jo Hai Hind Mein Sajde Ki Ijazat,, Nadan Ye Samajhta Hai Ke Islam Hai Azad.
So if we are to understand the sentiment, mere personal piety
(tauheed, salat, saum, hajj , zakat ) doesn't make a complete Muslim but there is an additional duty which is an effort to "free" Islam ( azad ).
Unless "azad" ( free) defines a nation state, ( which in my opinion it does ) the meaning is unclear. But then this again raises the question of 20% of the Ummah which resides as a minority in different nations in the world today. How would they achieve nation hood and have an azad ( free ) Islam? A Muslim in France today would have the same status by virtue of his/her faith as a Muslim who is a resident of the territory of India today.

But we can leave this aspect of the topic aside as we are only discussing Pakistani Nationalism.

Please tell me where I wrote that Islam is a personal religion. Islam is a way of life. It is the sum total of an ideology meant to govern our society, transactions and personal behavior. It is not something to be hidden away in one’s home. It is not a faith meant to be trampled on by others. Pakistan was envisioned as a homeland for Muslims to establish a state that protects our faith, heritage, culture and interests. And it shall remain as such. And Islam is integral to it and the concerns of the ummah are included in that. Whether oen likes it or not.
I absolutely agree with every word above. Islam is not just a personal religion but a "way of life".

In addition:

- I put Pakistan First
- Not all Pakistanis are Muslims and Pakistan is their homeland too.

In the past, and recently, a distorted version of the Ummah is being foisted on us where Pakistan and it's people are exploited, abused reviled and insulted in the name of the Ummah. Worse, tens of thousands of Pakistanis have been massacred by our so called brethren of the Ummah and we have been impoverished in civil wars and acts of terror.
The very Islamic way of life for which we struggled is under threat. The so-called Ummah (not the Ummah as was envisaged by our Prophet (S.A.W ).and his Companions) is using the concept of the Ummah as merely a tool to enfeeble us.
Remarkably every other Muslim majority enemy nation in this region is attempting to destroy us through collusion with our mortal enemy on our eastern border.

We will however succeed as we did before..

Best regards,

Baibars
 
Last edited:

Baibars_1260

FULL MEMBER
Sep 12, 2020
1,671
0
1,468
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
First of all understand that Arabic culture existed long before Islam. It was a primitive culture, much more primitive than the cultures of the sub continent (burying daughters alive, shooting arrows and running after birds before making important decisions - act of divination, etc.). Arabs were the joke of the world, called gypsy's and lizard eaters. Islam had a reforming effect. It removed the primitiveness in the culture and gave it an Islamic soul. It is the strength of a culture that makes a people rise. Arabs became the leaders of the world.
Yes, I agree and you are correct. There was an Arab ( generic ) culture before Islam and there is an Arab North African culture that is outside Islam. There are Arabs ( Chaldeans, Levantine Christians, Coptic Christians, Ibadis, Druze, Yazidis, Alawites ) who are Arabs (or Arabic speaking); but not Muslims. Arabs though bonded by a generic Arabic language and common script are highly diverse in other ways in terms of dialect, dress, cuisine, religious sects, tribal affiliations and generally culture. A Gulf Arab is very different from a Levantine Arab.

For the Arabs Islam was a great unifier, ending the earlier tribal conflicts based on the perceived supremacy of pagan deities of individual tribes. Arabs became the leaders of the world from the 7th Century to the 13th Century because they observed the directive of our Prophet ( PBUH ) to seek knowledge wherever it was available. Their minds were open which is why they translated documents from India, Greece, Persia, Rome, China and built libraries such as in Baghdad and Timbuktu. They also set up universities such as Al Hazar and Cordoba.

Arab culture regressed after two cataclysmic events. The sack of Baghdad by the Mongols (1258 C.E.) and the destruction of the Moorish presence in Spain by the Spanish Christian Reconquista ( 1482).
In the 220 odd years between these events, the Arabs suffered a huge population depletion from massacres at the hands of the Mongols, deaths due to plague and pandemics, forced conversions, enslavement and expulsions by the Christians in much of Europe especially Spain, and Portugal, and heavy losses defending themselves from Crusades.
The Arabs regressed to a tribal status pretty much the way they were before the advent of Islam. Their famous centers of civilization and academic excellence , that bred scholars like Ibn Sina, Ghazali, Ibn Rushed, and Maimonides ( an Arab speaking Jew ).were gone forever.


Islam did the same with Turkish and Persian cultures. These are all cultures with an Islamic soul now - the west calls them Islamic cultures. Valima's are celebrated everywhere. Egyptians were people who were written off. Their golden days were considered to be during the pharaohs. Islam made them a force again, giving them an empire the pharaohs could not have even dreamed off. Same story with the Persians and the Turks, who were both given second chances and large empires.
Yes, I agree. The advent of Islam was a remarkable catalyst in unifying the Oghuz Turkic tribes into a one entity that resisted the Mongols and the Crusaders and founded the Ottoman Empire.
Likewise, Islam was a huge factor in uniting the different factions in old Persia, and like the Turks the Persians were able to provide a robust resistance to the Mongol occupation.

Much before the Mongol onslaught the Persian culture had joined the Turko Afghan culture in a synthesis that proved resilient and vibrant. Farsi speaking Turko Afghans conquered most of Northern and North Western India.


Why Islam did not have the same effect on sub continent cultures? Why did we not get a chance to become top dog? Or get our moment in the sun and shine? During the periods of Islamic golden age, 6th century to 17th century, the Persians, Arabs, Turks contributed enormously to human intellect. They revived philosophy, science and arts - even the non Muslims agree that Islam ended the European dark ages (primarily due to Almighty's assistance in: Iqra bismi rabikalazi khalaq). During this period, when Islam was ruling the sub-continent also (7th century to 17th century) what contribution did the folks in the sub continent provide to the human intellect. Why were we not as successful as the Turks, Persians and Arabs?
Actually here is where I will differ. The advent of Islam in India via Arab traders, conversions through the efforts the Sufi mashaiks and the aulia , the presence of the Muslim led ruling alliances for 1000 years changed the Indian subcontinent forever. Muslims brought into India all the scientific knowledge of the European and Chinese civilizations ( via translated documents ) that an insular pre-Islamic India would never have acquired. The good part is that this knowledge was retained and developed in India, while much of it was lost in the rest of the Islamic world due to Mongol and Crusader invasions. Merely retaining this treasury of knowledge in the various madarsas, kutubkhanas, Dar-ul-ulooms was a feat .
Muslims brought both the art of war ( gun powder, chain mail armor, steel swords, compound bow, canons, small arms, cavalry, metallurgy) ;and peace ( stitched clothing, cuisine, polo, painting, lithograph, textile dyeing, and printing, silk, hydraulics and lift irrigation , architecture, brassware,etc.,) to name a few. Muslims learned Sanskrit, and translated a very large number of documents into Farsi including the religious Hindu epics such as Mahabharata, Gita, and Ramayana. Muslims compiled the first biological study of India's environment meticulously documenting the Indian fauna and flora. These are jusr a few of the contributions that Muslims brought to the Indian heritage.

You did not answer the question I asked: "Now, the question for you is what is the added benefit from Allah for those pious people living in an Islamic state - What does Allah give them which he does not give others? What worldly benefit do you gain from living in an Islamic state?"
Answers to the above:
Allah ( SWT) gives no added or worldly benefits to people living in an "Islamic" state merely because they live in an "Islamic" state . We haven't even defined what an "Islamic" state is.
"Added or worldly benefits" of a people ( any people Muslim or other ), are granted to them because of collective patriotism, nationalism and service above self to their nations. Thus people comprising a nation with a sense of nationalism whether Muslim, Christian or whatever will prosper. Their fate ( taqdeer) will be determined by their effort
(tadbeer) . A so-called "Islamic state" ridden with corruption, nepotism and selfish desire of groups to loot their fellow countrymen for personal will never prosper. This axiom holds true for all peoples, Our ally China is an atheistic state but the basic values of honesty and nationalism have been restored after a "century of humiliation". The results are there to see.
There doesn't necessarily have to be a conflict between Faith and Nationalism.
Faith and piety guarantees an individual bondage with the Creator for the life hereafter. Basic values common to all major faiths ( or even secular nationalism), such as honesty when applied to the benefit of a nation eventually delivers worldly benefits.

What did we do so wrong, that the the one who gives knowledge, didn't give us anything? And we remained in the 5000 year long state of humiliation?
We got more than we ever dreamed we would get when the first few hundred muhajirun fled to Yathrib along with the Prophet ( PBUH ).
Few of those would have believed, that the Faith they carried in their hearts would spread from that dusty oasis village to every corner of the planet; growing from a few hundred followers to 1.8 billion believers today.
Few would have imagined the military power the Almighty would grant them in every era, as they adapted from age to age, from wooden bows to firearms, to aircraft, missiles, and finally nuclear weapons. Islam has been around for only 1440 years (roughly) . Where did 5000 years of humiliation come from?
@peagle
Now can we discuss Pakistani Nationalism and why we should be Pakistanis first ?
 
Last edited:
May 7, 2012
18,608
185
53,707
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
Pakistani territorial nationalism
In case you missed the memo Pakistan is a territorial entity. It is not a religion spread across the globe like Islam or Christianity. Pakistan has defined provinces, these provinces federate into Pakistan which has defined teritorial boundaries. Pakistan has defined concept of citizenship and religion is not a qualfier. You can be Christian, Hindu, Parsi but still be Pakistani. On the other hand most Muslims are NOT Pakistani. Most are found across the globe across 30 plus countries.

This is map of Muslims.


1612661595444.png


This is map of Pakistan.

1612661684335.png
 

Old School

SENIOR MEMBER
Apr 16, 2010
2,450
1
3,121
We need to build our republic which is the most difficult thing to achieve. A true republic creates accountability for everyone , be it a general citizen or a policy maker. On the other hand nationalism is just a 19th century ideology born in Europe and died in Europe.
 

Baibars_1260

FULL MEMBER
Sep 12, 2020
1,671
0
1,468
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
You say this again and again, but what does it even mean? Both India and Pakistan are multiethnic countries. Bengalis? India has those. Punjabis? India has those too. Sindhis? India has many Sindhis. Even many Afghans. Neither India nor Pakistan are ethnic states (unlike Bangladesh).
Agree that Pakistan and India are multi-lingual, multi-ethnic states ( unlike mono-ethnic monolingual Bangladesh).

Here are differences between Pakistan and India on ethnicity:

1. Pakistan has no resident "son of the soil " Bengali population.
India has a territory of West Bengal so the linguistic and cultural
connection is there.
Pakistan therefore has no linguistic or cultural connection with any
Bengali speaking population in South Asia.

2. Unlike India which shares borders with all South Asian countries
( including maritime borders) Pakistan shares a border with only one
South Asian country which is India. Only two of Pakistan's provinces
border India ( excluding Kashmir). The ethnic similarities are only in a
two border districts of South Punjab and two border districts of
Sindh. In South Punjab the opposite population in Indian Punjab is
Sikh so the cultural similarities with the Pakistani population is on
language only, and that too over the years has drifted apart as the
Indian Punjabi has a different script using Sanskrit words. The
populations in the border districts of Sindh speak dialects
( Thari, Parkari) , which are different from the Rajasthani spoken
across the border.
The Sindhi spoken by the expat Sindhi diaspora in India is different in
script and vocabulary as compared to the Sindhi spoken in Pakistan.

3. Indian Muslims: This is the vaguest term of all. There are
Tamil, Telugu, and Malayalam speaking Indian Muslims as
well as Muslims in India from every one of the 21 states each
group speaking its own language. Nothing links these
Muslims to Pakistan.
If India had a population of Punjabi, Hindko, Pahadi, Darri,
Pashto, Sindhi, Sheena,Baluchi speaking Muslims, there would
have been a connection but there isn't.
One might argue that a tiny population of descendants of
Muslims who migrated from India ( third generation) living in
Karachi have a connection to India, but in-fact the current
generation has even less of a connection to India than a
second or third generation South Asian living in the UK or
Canada.

So by conclusion: Indians and Pakistanis are two distinct
sets of peoples with completely different, and unique cultural and ethnic identities,
 
Last edited:

New Recruit

Dec 19, 2020
76
-1
77
Country
India
Location
India
Agree that Pakistan and India are multi-lingual, multi-ethnic states ( unlike mono-ethnic monolingual Bangladesh).

Here are differences between Pakistan and India on ethnicity:

1. Pakistan has no resident "son of the soil " Bengali population.
India has a territory of West Bengal so the linguistic and cultural
connection is there.
Pakistan therefore has no linguistic or cultural connection with any
Bengali speaking population in South Asia.

2. Unlike India which shares borders with all South Asian countries
( including maritime borders) Pakistan shares a border with only one
South Asian country which is India. Only two of Pakistan's provinces
border India ( excluding Kashmir). The ethnic similarities are only in a
two border districts of South Punjab and two birder districts of
Sindh. In South Punjab the opposite population in Indian Punjab is
Sikh so the cultural similarities with the Pakistani population is on
language only and that too over the years has drifted apart as the
Indian Punjabi has a different script using Sanskrit words. The
populations in the border districts of Sindh speak dialects
( Thari, Parkari) , which are different from the Rajasthani spoken
across the border.
The Sindhi spoken by the expat Sindhi diaspora in India is different in
script and vocabulary as compared to the Sindhi spoken in Pakistan.

4. Indian Muslims: This is the vaguest term of all. There are
Tamil, Telugu, and Malayalam speaking Indian Muslims as
well as Muslims in India from every one of the 21 states each
group speaking its own language. Nothing links these
Muslims to Pakistan.
If India had a population of Punjabi, Hindko, Pahadi, Darri,
Pashto, Sindhi, Sheena Baluchi speaking Muslims there would
have been a connection but there isn't.
One might argue that a tiny population of descendants of
Muslims who migrated from India ( third generation) living in
Karachi have a connection to India, but in-fact the current
generation has even less of a connection to India than a
second or third generation South Asian living in the UK or
Canada.

So by conclusion: Indians and Pakistanis are two distinct
sets of peoples with complete different and unique cultural and ethnic identities,
India is the centre of South Asia. Literally no country except India shares a border with more than one South Asian country. This doesn't make any of them any less South Asian. The Punjab and Sindh region, are without a doubt in South Asia. That aside, the arguments you make are still meaningless. You can divide any multiethnic country and claim that the two parts have "no connection". What connection does Xinjiang have with the rest of China? Tibet used to be vassal state a long time back, but otherwise has no connection to China. If you divide South India from North India, they can also claim that they're culturally, linguistically different. A Pakistani Punjabi or Sindhi is as unique to an average Indian as some other Indian from some other part of India. You put together a group of four contiguous provinces that happened to have a common religion and then retroactively declare them to be one nation that are somehow completely different from the neighboring group of provinces. So no, Pakistanis aren't meaningfully different from Indians in any way expect through a history that has involved lots of unnecessary pain due to shitty colonial borders.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom