Bangladesh’s example: Give secularism, tolerance a chance in Pakistan

[King Solomon]

I believe there should be limited secularism and not complete secularism, otherwise i see no difference between secular bigots and religious bigots, having one is the same as having the other.

Of course you are right. Secular bigots are basically atheists.

True secularism is endorsed by Quran itself. However i would prefer not going in any religious debate.

 

[King Solomon]

You cant explain that to neither PK bigots nor BD Bigots. We have so much commonality in both the country, only difference that we have bigot who are minority and in PK its majority.

Yes I can see that. Everyone seems to be polarized in either side. Those who are islamists tend to hold intolerant and extremist viewpoint. Those who are left wing, tend to have atheistic views.

Very few who considers the situation objectively.

 

[DRaisinHerald]

Very few who considers the situation objectively.

Want logic?

Suppose Pakistan becomes a secularised nation. Answer: What's the point of "Pakistan"'s existence? Might as well join India, as Pakistan is essentially India, but running on Islam.

See how stupid that is? Secularism isn't for us.

Another way of looking at it: is secularism going to solve any problems for us? Is it gonna kick Americans out of our land? Is it gonna eliminate provincialism/ethnicalism?

 

[notsuperstitious]

So Hindus did not like to live in Muslim state and how these people are considered "secular".

Duh!!!

The choice was between a secular state and islamic state, what should a secular person choose???

Sheesh you can't even put 2 and 2 together LOL!!!

@ topic- bangladeshis are naturally quite tolerant people, and I admire that about them. Jmaaatis like idune are truly a minority, and keeping such people a minority is a good formula for all countries including India and Pakistan. I say tha because its impossible to completely get rid of such people.

 

[King Solomon]

Want logic?

Suppose Pakistan becomes a secularised nation. Answer: What's the point of "Pakistan"'s existence? Might as well join India, as Pakistan is essentially India, but running on Islam.

See how stupid that is? Secularism isn't for us.

The point of pakistan's existence is not to engage in religious bigotry and extremism like it is doing now, but to provide freedom, democracy (not fish-market), justice, good standard of living, economy, prosperity etc. to its populace.

The above can only be achieved if hypocrisy is prevented. Secularism is the only way to prevent it.

As for separate country, why is bangladesh and india separate country? Aren't they both secular? Come on, you people speak different language, are different ethnic groups, have different modes of thinking etc. Yes, for some reason, migration took place and you are a majority muslim country now. That is one of the reason for you being separate, but not exclusive.

Passing judgment like "stupid" is not something to be appreciated in a civil debate.

 

[DRaisinHerald]

As for separate country, why is bangladesh and india separate country? Aren't they both secular?

Frankly I'm gonna be honest, no offence to BDeshi bros, but even Pakistanis don't know why BDesh exists. The partition happened on religious lines, once BDesh opted out of this theory, it might have as well "joined back" with India. Most BDeshis also love India and their Bengali bros, even they would love this move if it happened

The point of pakistan's existence is not to engage in religious bigotry and extremism like it is doing now, but to provide freedom, democracy (not fish-market), justice, good standard of living, economy, prosperity etc. to its populace

Pakistan was doing exactly that until the USA dragged us into their war genius.

 

[Armstrong]

Whatever happened in '71 was most unfortunate and the dream of what the largest Muslim Country in the world could be...died ! Having said that we, Pakistanis, by and large, wish Bangladesh the very best of luck but comparing a country like Pakistan with Bangladesh especially when our respective dynamics and challenges are very different, doesn't make for a very good comparison. Bangladesh hasn't fought a single war or even a significant border conflict since '71, BD doesn't have any significant problems with any of her neighbours and consequently BD has had the time to focus their resources on their economy and their people. Pakistan on the other hand is an ethnically, linguistically and religiously diverse country which is sandwiched between Afghanistan with their Pukhtoonistan bs and a traditional rival in India. Additionally Pakistan has suffered 10 years of Afghan Jihad, 10 more years of a Civil War in Afghanistan and our poor attempts at containing the situation and 12 years of a farce of a War on Terror...thats 30 years of continuous conflict; throw in Kargil, Siachen, the occasional border skirmishes and stand-offs with India and an insurgency in Balochistan and a militancy in KP and parts of FATA - I think Pakistan and Bangladesh's problems aren't remotely comparable.

Moving onto Secularism ! If by it a complete disassociation of religion from politics is implied...then I'm afraid we can't do that because we're Muslims. And certain injunctions are made incumbent upon Muslims when they constitute a community with enough a presence to justify a political voice. Those injunctions, depending upon one's interpretation, range from everything like Family Laws to Laws of Inheritance to the formulation of a Financial System in which Ri'bah is taken out of the equation etc. Pakistan, as I have understood it to be, wasn't supposed to be a Secular state but a religiously and legally plural state with complete impartiality in its Governance....which is to say that unlike a Secular state where one cannot table a resolution in the Parliament with a religious connotation i.e a resolution demanding the formation a committee to formulate a Financial System that conceptualizes and institutes an alternative to the Ri'bah riddled one that we currently do have with the raison detre of the resolution being because Islam prohibits Ri'bah, would be unconstitutional. The religious and legal pluralism implies that there will be no discrimination on the basis of religion and one may have their own religiously derived family laws. The impartiality implies that because a Muslim has the prerogative of tabling a religiously inspired resolution in the Parliament then so shall a Hindu, a Sikh, a Christian etc. and that the President and the Prime Minister of the country will be eligible for election on the basis of his competency, patriotism and his adherence to the ideology of the State (i.e Pluralism and Impartiality) not on his religious affiliations. In essence what Pakistan was supposed to be was a democratic state with freedom for all and favours for none and that the Muslim Majority will exist by virtue of their numbers to safeguard our Muslim Ideology ! In my understanding of Jinnah, I found this to be the most suitable explanation as to why he talks about equal rights and obligations for all on one hand and yet mentions over and over again on how the vast majority of us are Muslims and we must evolve a system of our own as per our Islamic Ideology, on the other hand !

Frankly, Pakistan hasn't achieved an iota of what it was supposed to be but Secularism, in my humble opinion, would be taking a step-back ! We should instead aspire towards Pluralism and Impartiality as Jinnah wanted us and the preservation of Islamic Ideology as Iqbal wanted us whereby Ijtihad (or Human Reasoning to form a legal opinion) would be conducted by the Parliament to reinterpret Islam in the light of Human Evolution and the changing dynamics of the world we find ourselves in.

However the current woes of Pakistan aren't because of the religiosity or the secularity of the State because most of our laws are a hybrid of the two and provide more than enough of a working framework to run the country successfully. The reason why it isn't going so well is because of a collapsing system of Governance because of unbridled corruption, nepotism and war ! And besides Secularism or Islamism aren't a bunch of magic wands whose one flick would put everything else in order as soon as we adopt either...take care of the Governance and the rest will take care of its self ! So...talking about whether Pakistan should be more Secular and less Religious or the other way around is just a moot point because, to use a generic example, neither religion nor secularity condones the ill-treatment that is meted out to that widow who stands hours in the line, at the bank near my place, to collect her deceased husband's pension...something that is lawfully hers !

Just my two cents !

 

[DRaisinHerald]

Come on, you people speak different language, are different ethnic groups, have different modes of thinking etc. Yes, for some reason, migration took place and you are a majority muslim country now. That is one of the reason for you being separate, but not exclusive

Yes, and we're proud of that too. But the principal reason Pakistan exists is not to accommodate "Punjabis" "Sindhis" "Pashtun" "Mohajir" etc. but to accomodate Muslims.

 

[King Solomon]

Pakistan was doing exactly that until the USA dragged us into their war genius.

Really?


.

 

[DRaisinHerald]

Really?

Yes really. You're in the mood for trolling today it seems

 

[King Solomon]

Moving onto Secularism ! If by it a complete disassociation of religion from politics is implied...then I'm afraid we can't do that because we're Muslims. And certain injunctions are made incumbent upon Muslims when they constitute a community with enough a presence to justify a political voice. Those injunctions, depending upon one's interpretation, range from everything like Family Laws to Laws of Inheritance to the formulation of a Financial System in which Ri'bah is taken out of the equation etc. Pakistan, as I have understood it to be, wasn't supposed to be a Secular state but a religiously and legally plural state with complete impartiality in its Governance....which is to say that unlike a Secular state where one cannot table a resolution in the Parliament with a religious connotation i.e a resolution demanding the formation a committee to formulate a Financial System that conceptualizes and institutes an alternative to the Ri'bah riddled one that we currently do have with the raison detre of the resolution being because Islam prohibits Ri'bah, would be unconstitutional. The religious and legal pluralism implies that there will be no discrimination on the basis of religion and one may have their own religiously derived family laws. The impartiality implies that because a Muslim has the prerogative of tabling a religiously inspired resolution in the Parliament then so shall a Hindu, a Sikh, a Christian etc. and that the President and the Prime Minister of the country will be eligible for election on the basis of his competency, patriotism and his adherence to the ideology of the State (i.e Pluralism and Impartiality) not on his religious affiliations. In essence what Pakistan was supposed to be was a democratic state with freedom for all and favours for none and that the Muslim Majority will exist by virtue of their numbers to safeguard our Muslim Ideology ! In my understanding of Jinnah, I found this to be the most suitable explanation as to why he talks about equal rights and obligations for all on one hand and yet mentions over and over again on how the vast majority of us are Muslims and we must evolve a system of our own as per our Islamic Ideology, on the other hand !

Frankly, Pakistan hasn't achieved an iota of what it was supposed to be but Secularism, in my humble opinion, would be taking a step-back ! We should instead aspire towards Pluralism and Impartiality as Jinnah wanted us and the preservation of Islamic Ideology as Iqbal wanted us whereby Ijtihad (or Human Reasoning to form a legal opinion) would be conducted by the Parliament to reinterpret Islam in the light of Human Evolution and the changing dynamics of the world we find ourselves in.

However the current woes of Pakistan aren't because of the religiosity or the secularity of the State because most of our laws are a hybrid of the two and provide more than enough of a working framework to run the country successfully. The reason why it isn't going so well is because of a collapsing system of Governance because of unbridled corruption, nepotism and war ! And besides Secularism or Islamism aren't a bunch of magic wands whose one flick would put everything else in order as soon as we adopt either...take care of the Governance and the rest will take care of its self ! So...talking about whether Pakistan should be more Secular and less Religious or the other way around is just a moot point because, to use a generic example, neither religion nor secularity condones the ill-treatment that is meted out to that widow who stands hours in the line, at the bank near my place, to collect her deceased husband's pension...something that is lawfully hers !

Just my two cents !

I always like your long posts. Very well stated!

Whatever happened in '71 was most unfortunate and the dream of what the largest Muslim Country in the world could be...died ! Having said that we, Pakistanis, by and large, wish Bangladesh the very best of luck but comparing a country like Pakistan with Bangladesh especially when our respective dynamics and challenges are very different, doesn't make for a very good comparison. Bangladesh hasn't fought a single war or even a significant border conflict since '71, BD doesn't have any significant problems with any of her neighbours and consequently BD has had the time to focus their resources on their economy and their people. Pakistan on the other hand is an ethnically, linguistically and religiously diverse country which is sandwiched between Afghanistan with their Pukhtoonistan bs and a traditional rival in India. Additionally Pakistan has suffered 10 years of Afghan Jihad, 10 more years of a Civil War in Afghanistan and our poor attempts at containing the situation and 12 years of a farce of a War on Terror...thats 30 years of continuous conflict; throw in Kargil, Siachen, the occasional border skirmishes and stand-offs with India and an insurgency in Balochistan and a militancy in KP and parts of FATA - I think Pakistan and Bangladesh's problems aren't remotely comparable.

I would disagree somewhat here. Pakistan has so many things Bangladesh does not have. Pakistan has vast reserves of gold, coal, oil and other natural resources. It is very strategically positioned and its coastal cities have chance of being like Hong Kong or Dubai if land route to Russia and China can be ensured.

As God declared, "for every problem there is a solution". For each of pakistan's problem there was, is and there will be solutions. Only if Pakistan learns to set its priorities right will there be any progress. And that can be achieved with secularism

 

[DRaisinHerald]

Frankly, Pakistan hasn't achieved an iota of what it was supposed to be

Really now? Not an iota?
You forgot really the Ayub Era? Poverty was in fact on the decrease all the way until Benazir can in, economy doing quite good until last few years of Musharraf era etc. I don't know if you're being sarcastic

 

[King Solomon]

Yes really. You're in the mood for trolling today it seems

Looks like civil debate with you is impossible. Think whatever you want to think.

 

[DRaisinHerald]

Looks like civil debate with you is impossible. Think whatever you want to think.

Yeah? How about explaining you're question or actually making a comment instead of saying "really?"?

 

[Armstrong]

The point of pakistan's existence is not to engage in religious bigotry and extremism like it is doing now, but to provide freedom, democracy (not fish-market), justice, good standard of living, economy, prosperity etc. to its populace.

The above can only be achieved if hypocrisy is prevented. Secularism is the only way to prevent it.

All of the above is intrinsically linked to Governance not the religiosity or the secularity of the state ! Had any one of those things been a boon of anything other than Governance then we wouldn't see a country like NK in such a bad state, secular countries all over the world in Africa and the rest of the developing world suffering ! Look around you in every one of the success stories, whether its China or Brazil or Turkey their fortunes didn't turn because they were Secular, because that part was achieved at the inception decades ago, but when they improved their law and order situation, their economy and by bringing in people with integrity to run the country - or Governance as its called in normal parlance !