A Theory On Partition

[xeuss]

You're welcome.

The more you ask, the more you'll get.

One thing I am not convinced of, is the opinions offered on why Jinnah was never arrested. Most members have opined that it was because of his legal skills and strict adherence to the constitution.

Having said that, the British era sedition laws were very vague and were used to suppress dissent. Surely, couldn't the British has used this law to arrest him simply for his expressions?

@masterchief_mirza @Goenitz @Shahzaz ud din

 

[AfrazulMandal]

Currently what we require is to draft a partition plan for India NOW.

If a genocide is to be averted that is...

 

[Goenitz]

One thing I am not convinced of, is the opinions offered on why Jinnah was never arrested. Most members have opined that it was because of his legal skills and strict adherence to the constitution.

Having said that, the British era sedition laws were very vague and were used to suppress dissent. Surely, couldn't the British has used this law to arrest him simply for his expressions?

@masterchief_mirza @Goenitz @Shahzaz ud din

It could be mix of that. British brought sedition laws in 1920? or 1890?
Anyway, Quaid was not a prominent leader till 1930s. ML was not a popular party until after 1940.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

After 1 million dead and 14 million refugees, East Punjab was free of Muslims.

This was a war crime IMO.

Jammu was ethnically cleansed of Muslims to form a forward base of loyal Hindus and Sikh immigrants.

As was this.

It was too early to discuss implementation. His theorem was simple; those with no extra-territorial loyalties were 'Hindus', a term he used without religious inflection, including Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains in that category. Those with extra-territorial loyalties - Christians, Muslims - were not. The two could not live together as equals; those who were not 'Hindus' (in his sense of the term) should live as subordinates to the Hindus.

This is precisely the agenda followed by the RSS and the Sangh Parivar today: one state, but non-Hindu communities subordinate to the Hindus within that. No partition, no cleansing; retention as a minority with less than complete citizenship.

PS: An afterthought - it is significant that one of his greatest followers resigned as Vice-President and left the Hindu Mahasabha due to his policy of Akhand Bharat - no partition. It was this former follower, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, who had formed an alliance with Sher-e-Bangal Fazlul Haque's Krishak Praja Party when the Congress ministries resigned. It was the same Shyama Prasad who torpedoed the proposal by Sarat Bose, Netaji's brother, Kiron Shankar Roy and Suhrawardy to keep a united Bengal out of both India and Pakistan. Jinnah reluctantly consented, more in exasperation than anything else, but Shyama Prasad demanded of the Congress leadership - largely Nehru and Patel at that point - that Hindu-majority western Bengal should be allowed to separate out and stay within India, rather like Punjab's bifurcation, and got his demand.

Savarkar was insistent on Akhand Bharat. So today we have weather forecasts leading the charge, not to mention a blob of lard stating that there are war plans for taking over Pakistan Administered Kashmir when the time goes.

The Sanghis were the ones to come up with the Two Nation Theory.

Why do they then blame us for it?

 

[Cliftonite]

Currently what we require is to draft a partition plan for India NOW.

If a genocide is to be averted that is...

You're asking for an even bigger genocide if the Hindus find out about this partition plan. They're still hung up over 47.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

You're asking for an even bigger genocide if the Hindus find out about this partition plan. They're still hung up over 47.

It is a necessity.

Muslims are not safe if non Muslims rule the roost - at least in India.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

One thing I am not convinced of, is the opinions offered on why Jinnah was never arrested. Most members have opined that it was because of his legal skills and strict adherence to the constitution.

Having said that, the British era sedition laws were very vague and were used to suppress dissent. Surely, couldn't the British has used this law to arrest him simply for his expressions?

@masterchief_mirza @Goenitz @Shahzaz ud din

I completely agree with your position of confusion. Jinnah alone could never have resisted the machinations of the occupying power. He must have offered something - knowingly or unknowingly - that genuinely interested the British enough to keep him a free man.

Compare his case with that of Mandela, who was no less an icon of his own freedom movement. Yet he was quickly snapped up and sent to Robben Island (more than once) until public pressure finally weighed in.

Jinnah could - perhaps should - have ended up the same if British leaders were keeping their eye on the ball. Hence I maintain that it is at least plausible that in post-WW2 Asia, in fact a weak and hamstrung Pakistan was better for the British interest than no Pakistan at all, if only to keep the new nation state of Hindustan preoccupied.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

One thing I am not convinced of, is the opinions offered on why Jinnah was never arrested. Most members have opined that it was because of his legal skills and strict adherence to the constitution.

Having said that, the British era sedition laws were very vague and were used to suppress dissent. Surely, couldn't the British has used this law to arrest him simply for his expressions?

@masterchief_mirza @Goenitz @Shahzaz ud din

To dissuade Muslims from fighting the British during WW2. That was the deal he made.

In exchange for loyalty, British were obliged to hear the demands of Muslims post-war.

British were very fearful of a Muslim revolt, as it would spread like wildfire throughout the Muslim World.

 

[Cliftonite]

I completely agree with your position of confusion. Jinnah alone could never have resisted the machinations of the occupying power. He must have offered something - knowingly or unknowingly - that genuinely interested the British enough to keep him a free man.

Compare his case with that of Mandela, who was no less an icon of his own freedom movement. Yet he was quickly snapped up and sent to Robben Island (more than once) until public pressure finally weighed in.

Jinnah could - perhaps should - have ended up the same if British leaders were keeping their eye on the ball. Hence I maintain that it is at least plausible that in post-WW2 Asia, in fact a weak and hamstrung Pakistan was better for the British interest than no Pakistan at all, if only to keep the new nation state of Hindustan preoccupied.

The British did not want a Frankenstein in the form of a united India biting it's own Anglo masters. That's the reason they agreed to Pakistan.

It is a necessity.

Muslims are not safe if non Muslims rule the roost - at least in India.

Yes but how the fook will you get an independent country? You think sanghis are in any mood to reason with you?

 

[AfrazulMandal]

Yes but how the fook will you get an independent country? You think sanghis are in any mood to reason with you?

Wait for a time/create a time where the Indian State is forced to come to a negotiating table.

Foreign intervention, foreign sanctions, etc can be effective tools.

Hindu unity should be weakened where possible by exploiting caste and any other differences.

Nations who obsess about Kashmir alone should also recognize that Muslims in the rest of India also matter.

It will take time but it will happen.

 

[Cliftonite]

Wait for a time/create a time where the Indian State is forced to come to a negotiating table.

Foreign intervention, foreign sanctions, etc can be effective tools.

Hindu unity should be weakened where possible by exploiting caste and any other differences.

Nations who obsess about Kashmir alone should also recognize that Muslims in the rest of India also matter.

It will take time but it will happen.

I doubt the Western world will apply foreign sanctions against India. It's their golden child that's going to take on China (loool). Believe it or not, but Pakistanis care more about you than your Hindu friends and neighbors. You'll find that out in due time. I've had literal fights with my 'liberal' Indian friends because they said the Delhi riots were both communities' fault and the media was making a big deal out of it. For Pakistan or the Islamic world to help you out, you need to be consolidated rather than scattered all over India. Think of strategic migration during the next 2 decades, preferably closer to Pakistan or Kashmir. If not that, then the southern states which will give you access to sea. I would say east but Bangladesh doesn't seem to be in a position to help you, they're too dependent on India. Sooner or later you will have to take weapons against India, I hope it doesn't come to that.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

I doubt the Western world will apply foreign sanctions against India. It's their golden child that's going to take on China (loool). Believe it or not, but Pakistanis care more about you than your Hindu friends and neighbors. You'll find that out in due time. I've had literal fights with my 'liberal' Indian friends because they said the Delhi riots were both communities' fault and the media was making a big deal out of it. For Pakistan or the Islamic world to help you out, you need to be consolidated rather than scattered all over India. Think of strategic migration during the next 2 decades, preferably closer to Pakistan or Kashmir. If not that, then the southern states which will give you access to sea. I would say east but Bangladesh doesn't seem to be in a position to help you, they're too dependent on India. Sooner or later you will have to take weapons against India, I hope it doesn't come to that.

Thanks. I know you mean well.

But anyway, nations have agendas. You know that.

I fear this the most - the fear of genocide, CAA, NRC, etc and greed of social standing will entice many Muslims to leave Islam in the coming years. That way there won't be any mass murders but it will still be a genocide. Only silent. And it will ensure there is no backlash against the Indian Govt.

To dissuade Muslims from fighting the British during WW2. That was the deal he made.

In exchange for loyalty, British were obliged to hear the demands of Muslims post-war.

British were very fearful of a Muslim revolt, as it would spread like wildfire throughout the Muslim World.

I doubt this may be the reason.

Otherwise they would not have extinguished the Khilafat.

There must be other reasons.

 

[Cliftonite]

Thanks. I know you mean well.

But anyway, nations have agendas. You know that.

I fear this the most - the fear of genocide, CAA, NRC, etc and greed of social standing will entice many Muslims to leave Islam in the coming years. That way there won't be any mass murders but it will still be a genocide. Only silent. And it will ensure there is no backlash against the Indian Govt.

Pakistan's agenda is to disarm India. And that is very much China's agenda too. There you have it. Potential allies. The only thing I would say is play a little realpolitik. Beat the baniyas at their own game, by duplicity. The more you rebel right now, the more they'll clamp down on you. I don't keep stressing unity- national level unity for nothing. The VHP Bajrang Dal people are able to target a few poor Muslims families who are already vulnerable, they can't target entire Muslim districts like Malda or Mallapuram. Imagine if you guys were concentrated in a whole state like Kashmiris. You'd be so much more powerful.

 

[Pakistani E]

If it weren't for the British, there would be no such country as India, Pakistan, Bangladesh etc. What there would have been is dozens of competing small states vying with each other for control of resources.

I am not sure when this fantasy of there being an "India" that was partitioned and ruined by the Brits arose, whilst in reality there never was such a thing. I guess people always need a fantasied nostalgic view of the past to fall back to, because they have done little to make their present and future better.

The only reason why there was a partition of "British India" is because British administration and military united a disparate group of people together, so they could better exploit the resources of this land. They were under no obligation to integrate as conquerors, you should be thankful that they left you half functioning countries that still rely on British era institutions to function.

P.S. This is not an apology of the crimes British colonists committed. I just have an abhorrence towards deluded people who blame others or live in some misinformed glorious past.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

If it weren't for the British, there would be no such country as India, Pakistan, Bangladesh etc. What there would have been is dozens of competing small states vying with each other for control of resources.

I am not sure when this fantasy of there being an "India" that was partitioned and ruined by the Brits arose, whilst in reality there never was such a thing. I guess people always need a fantasied nostalgic view of the past to fall back to, because they have done little to make their present and future better.

The only reason why there was a partition of "British India" is because British administration and military united a disparate group of people together, so they could better exploit the resources of this land. They were under no obligation to integrate as conquerors, you should be thankful that they left you half functioning countries that still rely on British era institutions to function.

P.S. This is not an apology of the crimes British colonists committed. I just have an abhorrence towards deluded people who blame others or live in some misinformed glorious past.

Indian Congress and Hindu rightwing groups did not want Muslims to be independent, but wanted to rule over large swathes of Muslim territory bordering Afghanistan and the other in Bengal.

This is what raised alarm bells among the leaders of the Muslim League, including Quaid e Azam and Allama Iqbal.

Alhamdulilah for us, Islam remains strong and continues to enrich our lives in our homeland.