A View about India Written by Pakistani Journalist Dr. Farrukh Saleem

[thesolar65]

Imagine, 12 percent of all American scientists are of Indian origin; 38 percent of doctors in America are Indian; 36 percent of NASA scientists are Indians; 34 percent of Microsoft employees are Indians; and 28 percent of IBM employees are Indians.


A View about India Written by Pakistani Journalist Dr. Farrukh Saleem | Faithfreedom.org


This thread was posted in good faith. I sincerely request all and sundry not to turn it into a hate or troll fest.

Cheers

I am afraid in distant future there is going to be war between Eastern India and Western India!!

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Propaganda article,mukesh ambani getting richer doesn't help the average indian.

 

[kurup]

I am afraid in distant future there is going to be war between Eastern India and Western India!!

For what ??

 

[Mike_Brando]

Hi,

Here is what has happened in india---the state has realized that it does not have the resources to take care of the poor---but it will support those who have made it thru to the promised land.

Now here is the catch that the average joe has not caught onto----india is now depending on you the successful people to help and assist those who are left behind. The indian govt out of reason, by default or just by shear luck has created a situation that will help some of the poor that they could not----by challenging your MORAL OBLIGATION TO YOUR SOCIETY---if you helped them---well and good---the numbers of better offs increase.

Pakistan otoh---is digging up foundations setup by those before them and start anew everytime---thus slipping backwards.

It does not make any difference if the movement crashes---. Once the seed has been sown---once the haves have decided that they are going to help the have not---there is no stopping to it. They will find a way to make the life of one person better and that is all it takes.

Sir,it's very sad to see the present condition of the people in India.our country neither has the will nor the resources required to feed a population which is growing at the rate of the entire Australian population each year.the GoI has made a serious mistake by not introducing proper family planning in the lines of China.we have already dug up our own graves and the sad part is that we have only ourselves to blame for this population explosion.
sometimes i wonder whether Democracy has been a curse instead of a boon in case of India because according to my personal opinion we Indians don't deserve to be a Democracy as we are yet to understand the true meaning of the word "Democracy".i know my own countrymen will now attack me for posting this but this is the sad reality for India......

 

[Secur]

Propaganda article,mukesh ambani getting richer doesn't help the average indian.

Precisely , I may happen to agree a bit on the religion thing being more prominent and unnecessarily involved in many things , but the comparison and premise of that based on individual wealth is childish to say the least . It makes no difference to a country , how many billionaires are there , it may indicate a certain remote economic progress but it doesn't contribute to anything , otherwise we can all start by taking into account " the politicians " on both sides . It will do wonders then .

 

[banvanaxl]

Sir,it's very sad to see the present condition of the people in India.our country neither has the will nor the resources required to feed a population which is growing at the rate of the entire Australian population each year.the GoI has made a serious mistake by not introducing proper family planning in the lines of China.we have already dug up our own graves and the sad part is that we have only ourselves to blame for this population explosion.
sometimes i wonder whether Democracy has been a curse instead of a boon in case of India because according to my personal opinion we Indians don't deserve to be a Democracy as we are yet to understand the true meaning of the word "Democracy".i know my own countrymen will now attack me for posting this but this is the sad reality for India.....

Mike before you launch your tirade against democracy consider this. The reason you are being able to access a Pakistani forum from India and post against the democratic principles is because you ARE in a democracy.

You would have the police knocking on your door tomorrow morning had you been in China.

And anyway pray in which parallel universe is family planning directly proportional to not having a democracy ?

Switzerland, Germany and Sweden have one the fastest aging populations where there is negative population growth. Are they communist or facist countries ?

Or will you argue that "third world and poor" countries not entilted to be democratic.

Sir, we had a chap like you at the helm of our country at one time. His name was Shri Sanjay Gandhi.You know what we did to him.

We as Indians DO NOT tolerate autocrats. PERIOD.

 

[Contrarian]

Ethnically, our diversity is much different from India. As an example India does not have the number of ethnic Pakthuns and Balochies that we have and taking Paksitan = Punjab + Sindh which has been historically been a part of South Asia is not correct.

Why not.
Do you know the percentage of population that Punjab+ Sindh have both geographically as well as population wise.

While Baloch and Pakhtun are a significant presence, they are not comparable to the dominating presence of Punjabi's and Sindhi's.

Secondly, the demographics of developement in Pakistan were and still are very different: the number of urbanised people that Pakistan had was very low (with Lahore and Karachi being the only major cities in '47) where as India had about 15 or so major urban hubs and thus a vibrant 'middle class' that has been the true tipping point in the balance of power in social, economic and political terms. Pakistan's middle class rose in the late 70s and early 80s, thus, development in all terms would naturally be different.

Again, while India had more urban cities compared to West Pakistan it correspondingly had a much bigger population.
Also the locals of India were poor, while those living historically in Punjab et all in Pakistan were rich. Poverty was far lesser there.

Secondly socialistic policies of India till the late 80's, early 90's did not allow Indians to move up the economic ladder and become middle class.

Pakistan had a higher per capita income than India till 2006!

Lastly, Pakistan did not enjoy the fruits of British administrative hold which India did. Infrastructure wise, India got the better part of British legacy whereas Pakistan got the fringe regions which were underdeveloped for the most part and had to put in resources that it did not have in not just social/political development but also infrastructure.

So, the original premise is faulty.

I would disagree again.
Pakistan inherited the most fertile land in India and an extra ordinary irrigation system. These two things alone kept Pakistanis out of famine and severe poverty like situations that are still common in many places in India.

I think Pakistan got a different set of advantages and India got a different set.
The people were/are the same, but given different cards with different benefits.

 

[jaibi]

This is not a correct: PPP which has ruled Pakistan for near 2 decades has it's power centered in Sindh (not urban Sindh, mind you, they have separate quota called rural sindh for most seats). Though Punjab is half of Pakistan, it is the most divided, ethnically, we share only 50% of the open seats in the bureaucracy and that's not accounting for the women's quota and so on. Sindh, Balochistan and KPK regularly feature in our politics for example, PTI the third power in our politics is centred in KPK, which is of Pakhtuns.

Why not.
Do you know the percentage of population that Punjab+ Sindh have both geographically as well as population wise.

While Baloch and Pakhtun are a significant presence, they are not comparable to the dominating presence of Punjabi's and Sindhi's.

Having cities enables an entrepreneur class to exist, this class is what gave rise to 'middle class' as a term, these people are those who work and invest for their business and do not depend on production as a primary source of their earning. In most studies internationally, this class represents the most moderate element of the society and their number is not what is important it's their level of influence. Pakistan did not have this class as urbanisation here was confined to two major cities.

Again, while India had more urban cities compared to West Pakistan it correspondingly had a much bigger population.
Also the locals of India were poor, while those living historically in Punjab et all in Pakistan were rich. Poverty was far lesser there.

Your isolationist policies led to a market perseverance whereas we have been forced to be consumers. Our manufacturing power has gone nill. In the long run, as was the plan, it was beneficial.

Secondly, the presence of a left or socialist was another important milestone, in our political fabric the left was vehemently oppressed this has allowed a synthesis of your societal polarisations whereas we have had to deal with repetitive oppressions of political opinions, again because the middle class did not emerge until the early Zia period.

Secondly socialistic policies of India till the late 80's, early 90's did not allow Indians to move up the economic ladder and become middle class.

Pakistan had a higher per capita income than India till 2006!

Again, I answered this again, though in terms of natural resources we are gifted the system, in a modern sense, that would enable the use of such resources is absent and this problem is not just unique to Pakistan but to most of the third world, take for example Africa. It also illustrates that unless societal problems are not dealt with the economic problems won't be addressed either, something we are a victim to this day.

I would disagree again.
Pakistan inherited the most fertile land in India and an extra ordinary irrigation system. These two things alone kept Pakistanis out of famine and severe poverty like situations that are still common in many places in India.

I started my post with this premise: we share history but we are different nations with different challenges and strengths. The author had suggested that we were identical twins or something, I negated that.

I think Pakistan got a different set of advantages and India got a different set.
The people were/are the same, but given different cards with different benefits.

 

[Mike_Brando]

Mike before you launch your tirade against democracy consider this. The reason you are being able to access a Pakistani forum from India and post against the democratic principles is because you ARE in a democracy.

You would have the police knocking on your door tomorrow morning had you been in China.

And anyway pray in which parallel universe is family planning directly proportional to not having a democracy ?

Switzerland, Germany and Sweden have one the fastest aging populations where there is negative population growth. Are they communist or facist countries ?

Or will you argue that "third world and poor" countries not entilted to be democratic.

Sir, we had a chap like you at the helm of our country at one time. His name was Shri Sanjay Gandhi.You know what we did to him.

We as Indians DO NOT tolerate autocrats. PERIOD.

mate you got me completely wrong.i am an utmost supporter of my country and the GoI and above all the Indian Democracy.i will the first one to jump with all my guns blazing against anyone deframing my country and my people in this forum.i am not questioning the legality of the Indian democracy,on the contrary i feel that we Indians still haven't understood the true potential of our Democracy.Democracy to us means not to be ruled by some autocrat or by an oligarchy but in reality our Democracy has brought us a great gift which is none other than the power of electing someone competent to rule our Motherland,but sometimes i feel that we haven't been able to use that gift to it's true potential as of yet........

 

[M. Sarmad]

actually the billionaires list goes to 65 now
this is link
India's 100 Richest People - Forbes

You have 65 billionaires in your country along with hundreds of millionaires and yet 70 % Indians live on less than US$ 2 per day ...



In Africa , 91 % of total population has a net wealth worth less than 10,000 USD, whereas

94.4% of Indians have a net wealth worth less than 10,000 USD

97.9 % of Bangladeshis have a net wealth of less than 10,000 USD

90.8 % Pakistani adults have net wealth worth less than USD 10,000
9.0 % Pakistanis have net wealth b/w 10,000 & 100,000 USD

58.4 % of Chinese adults have net wealth worth less than 10,000 USD

Only 9.2% of Japanese adults have net wealth worth less than USD 10,000

https://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/?fileID=1949208D-E59A-F2D9-6D0361266E44A2F8

So my friend there is nothing to be proud of when you have a lot of billionaires but still have one billion poor in your country ...

 

[banvanaxl]

mate you got me completely wrong.i am an utmost supporter of my country and the GoI and above all the Indian Democracy.i will the first one to jump with all my guns blazing against anyone deframing my country and my people in this forum.i am not questioning the legality of the Indian democracy,on the contrary i feel that we Indians still haven't understood the true potential of our Democracy.Democracy to us means not to be ruled by some autocrat or by an oligarchy but in reality our Democracy has brought us a great gift which is none other than the power of electing someone competent to rule our Motherland,but sometimes i feel that we haven't been able to use that gift to it's true potential as of yet........

But you see mate, that is the real beauty and strength of democratic institutions. One mans food is another mans poison. While I am going gaga over AAP, the Modi brigade is throwing everything including the kitchen sink at it and the Congress wants to see us both in hell. We allow different thoughts notions and ideals to co-exist in this system. There is always a voice of dissent. The alternative is unthinkable.

To expect every elected leader or official to have a crystal clear image would be akin to living in an utopian world. Following that logic mate no country in the whole wide world has been truly democratic till date.

Cheers

 

[M. Sarmad]

Rajput is a sanskrit word meaning Raj- king Putra- sons. So basically Royal lineage.
It is not an exclusive ethnic identity mate. The Rajputs hail from three clans viz Suryavanshis, Chandravanshis, and the Agnikulas.

The Suryavanshis were Surya or sun worshipers.
The Chandravanshis were the Chandra or moon worshipers and
The Agnikulas were the Agni or fire god worshipers.

Go figure ... :-/

The glorious Pratiharas of Kannauj were one of the Agnikula clans of Rajputs , and they were Gurjars (or Gujjars ) ethnically ... Rajput is not a ethnic identity ,

 

[banvanaxl]

The glorious Pratiharas of Kannauj were one of the Agnikula clans of Rajputs , and they were Gurjars (or Gujjars ) ethnically ... Rajput is not a ethnic identity ,

Yup, thats what I said....

banvanaxl said: ↑
Rajput is a sanskrit word meaning Raj- king Putra- sons. So basically Royal lineage.
It is not an exclusive ethnic identity mate. The Rajputs hail from three clans viz Suryavanshis, Chandravanshis, and the Agnikulas.
The Suryavanshis were Surya or sun worshipers.
The Chandravanshis were the Chandra or moon worshipers and
The Agnikulas were the Agni or fire god worshipers.
Go figure ... :-/

 

[timetravel]

Its not the lack of resources or manpower that has kept either India or Pakistan back. So the whole point of comparing who got more in 1947 is not that worthy.

we had enough resources to be successful much more then we are now. I don't buy that lack of resources is the reason.

But its nice to see someone in Pakistan praising India But still there is lot to be done, what we have achieved is only modest but nothing extraordinary.

But overall frankly India and Pakistan has achieved a lot lot less then what they should have as per the resources they have. The primary reason of failure is bad governance and bad leadership and relatively high dose of religions fanaticism (compared to West, Europe, China, East Asia, Japan etc).

 

[banvanaxl]

frankly India and Pakistan has achieved a lot lot less then what they should have as per the resources they have.

True.

he primary reason of failure is bad governance and bad leadership.

We need to stop blaming the "Haath". We blamed "bhagwan ka haath" or "Bahari takaton ka haath" or just "the haath" for all our miseries and misfortunes. Arey bhaiya .. tell me something why did it take 60 years to bring about RTI ?
Government tab bhi nahi maan rahi thi, abhi bhi kitna papad belna padha. Public sota rahega, will maintain a relaxed "chalta hai" attitude and you'll blame bad leadership for it ?
Leadership bhi to public sey hi aata hai na, aasman sey to nahi tapakta ..