Nationalism as opposed to Religion?

[doppelganger]

The Indian nationalism means agreement to majority Hindu traits thats all.

There is many example to that when Indian Muslims disagree with Hindu practices thats make them NON Indians simple as that.

As long as they bow to Hindu idols then they are true nationalistic Indians.

They slaughter cow then they are asked to go out of India, they are asked to act like a true Indian and stop consuming cows.

there are many other such examples.

and no not at all India had done nothing better for minorities. You cant even come up with any facepalm because you claimed to be secular but still failed to provide your minorities with their rights.

You even failed to bring out own low cast Hindus from the second class citizen mode.

We expect all Indians to owe their primary allegiance to the country. Everything else comes after that. So if there is an Indian who considers something above the country, e.g. their faith, then there is a serious problem. A problem that needs a solution quickly. Because like all problems, it holds within itself the potential to spread, self perpetuate, and become a bigger problem. And that cannot be tolerated from a national viewpoint.

 

[Spring Onion]

We expect all Indians to owe their primary allegiance to the country. Everything else comes after that. So if there is an Indian who considers something above the country, e.g. their faith, then there is a serious problem. A problem that needs a solution quickly. Because like all problems, it holds within itself the potential to spread, self perpetuate, and become a bigger problem. And that cannot be tolerated from a national viewpoint.

primary allegiance to the country does not mean that Muslims will follow Hindu dictation wrg to the faith.

also when hindus do keep faith above the country then why you guys are asking Muslims to prove their nationalism by doing away with their faith.

 

[doppelganger]

primary allegiance to the country does not mean that Muslims will follow Hindu dictation wrg to the faith.

also when hindus do keep faith above the country then why you guys are asking Muslims to prove their nationalism by doing away with their faith.

A Muslim does not have to become a Hindu to be Indian. He or she simply has to be an Indian first, before being a Muslim. Hope you can appreciate the basic issue we have. It is a myth that we want to reconvert all Muslims in some sort of shuddhi karan fantasy.

 

[Beerbal]

When Islam was born/founded/revealed/explored (With all due respect) there was no concept of nation states. Religion was supreme authority. That time even Indians (Hindus) were following religious state, thats why instead of many kings India was one nation (united by religion).

Since birth Islam is same, Islam has not adapted to the changing environment (Thats why they follow arabic culture which hold no value in non arabic environment).

Modern Nation state is fairly new concept, it came with french revolution.


Islam will not change (as it is forbidden) so does there Arabic behavior (Khatna, topi, ankle high trouser, beard, polygamy etc).

 

[doppelganger]

what these secular turks should answer is that where has turkey gone in a 100 years by being extremely secular?
no where!!

Where has the muslim world gone in the last 100 years by being extremely religious? I would say Turkey has done a lot better for itself since they have decided where their priorities lie. They have shown the way. Its not their fault that you and those like you fail to see it. And continue sliding backwards.

 

[RuheTag]

Most Pakistanis are confused in Nationalism and religion. i.e. where comes what,, what should priority where.

And the terrorists benefit from this confusion by making Pakistanis believe that religion comes first of anything.


And with no doubt this is one of reasons of 50,000 death of Pakistanis,, and the killers roaming free and still enjoying respect of the majority.

 

[doppelganger]

Most Pakistanis are confused in Nationalism and religion. i.e. where comes what,, what should priority where.

And the terrorists benefit from this confusion by making Pakistanis believe that religion comes first of anything.

From what I have seen, most Pakistanis here, in spite of being the educated lot, are also confused between secularism and atheism. I guess it comes from constricted exposure channelized in school.

 

[RuheTag]

From what I have seen, most Pakistanis here, in spite of being the educated lot, are also confused between secularism and atheism. I guess it comes from constricted exposure channelized in school.

Yes, that's a fact.

I think it has to do with grooming, openness of both individual and the society. Majorty sees and wants things in black and white.. Good or bad,, against Islam or Pro-Islam.

But here is a another fact.. IMO - Pakistani society can be devided into four categories :-

1). Islamists/Mullahs/terrorist apologists
2). Middle class sitting in cities - mostly pro-islamists - conservative - bigot
3). Lower class - doesn't have much thinking into these complex issues.. usually follows Sufi version of Islam,,, goes to Pirs, graves, like Datta Darbar,, etc. And is NOT bigot usually, mostly lives in villages,, Also their views are not represented by anyone and is silent and economically oppressed. They are one of main reasons, Islamists don't win elections in Pakistan.
4). Upper Class. Mostly Westernized. Usually seen by middle class as 'Modern'.

If I were to make a guess of percentage, I think Lower class would constitute around 60%, middle class 30% and the rest would go to the two other categories.

And I think the majority on PDF belongs to category # 2. i.e. it would be false to assume opinion of PDF Pakistanis as of entire Pakistan.

 

[doppelganger]

Yes, that's a fact.

I think it has to do with grooming, openness of both individual and the society. Majorty sees and wants things in black and white.. Good or bad,, against Islam or Pro-Islam.

But here is a another fact.. IMO - Pakistani society can be devided into four categories :-

1). Islamists/Mullahs/terrorist apologists
2). Middle class sitting in cities - mostly pro-islamists - conservative - bigot
3). Lower class - doesn't have much thinking into these complex issues.. usually follows Sufi version of Islam,,, goes to Pirs, grabes, like Datta Darbar,, etc. And is NOT bigot usually, mostly lives in villages,, Also their views are not represented by anyone and is silent and economically oppressed.
4). Upper Class. Westernized. Usually seen by middle class as 'Modern'.

If I were make a guess of percentage, I think Lower class would constitute around 60%, middle class 30% and the rest would go to the two other categories.

And I think the majority on PDF belongs to category # 2.

There is also the all important 5th category.

The Pakistani who is now living abroad. Hyperpatriotic. Blind to the ills that plague the country of his birth. And aggressively hyperreligious and antiwest, while living off the fat of the land there. The luxury and security of distance providing the rose-hued tint in the goggles.

I see your flag and am not generalizing. But I have been told about this 5th element by a native Pakistani.

 

[RuheTag]

There is also the all important 5th category.

The Pakistani who is now living abroad. Hyperpatriotic. Blind to the ills that plague the country of his birth. And aggressively hyperreligious and antiwest, while living off the fat of the land there. The luxury and security of distance providing the rose-hued tint in the goggles.

I see your flag and am not generalizing. But I have been told about this 5th element by a native Pakistani.

yes, that oversees Pakistanis majority comes from middle class , i.e. bigots, hypocrites. This behavior is same in the majority of middleclass inside Pakistan too.

BTW : I am trying to state facts rather maligning anyone, I also belong to the middle class.

 

[somebozo]

Islam in any case has fared much more poorly in nation building or shall I say nation destroying...

What happened inn 7th century Arabia and what was said about it should not be our concern or dictating principle in 21st century.. Beside that no evidence exists to support the claim and like 99 hadeeths this could be a made up statement as well.

 

[CometMibro]

When Islam was born/founded/revealed/explored (With all due respect) there was no concept of nation states. Religion was supreme authority. That time even Indians (Hindus) were following religious state, thats why instead of many kings India was one nation (united by religion).

Once again I will have to state that this is incorrect. In pre-islamic arabia, tribalism came before religion. Tribes of the same religion often fought one another, and this was not uncommon. Google the "sacrilegious wars".

Since birth Islam is same, Islam has not adapted to the changing environment (Thats why they follow arabic culture which hold no value in non arabic environment).

Not true, the Islamic state has only been toppled in 1924, showing its ability to stand the test of time.

Modern Nation state is fairly new concept, it came with french revolution.


Islam will not change (as it is forbidden) so does there Arabic behavior (Khatna, topi, ankle high trouser, beard, polygamy etc).

This is not 'arabic behaviour'. This is ISLAMIC behavior. You know what pre-islamic arabia behavior was? Burying your daughter alive, and if you were a woman who wanted to get married, you'd take as many men as you could all at once and whoever the baby resembled you would marry. Superstition was rampant, racism was rampant, you were what your tribe was, etc. Prophet Muhammad (saw) brought a HUGE societal reform, which is WHY he was so opposed in the first place.

I like to work with facts. During my very limited time here it seems many of you guys make assertions about the history of Islam without knowing a single thing about it. Do your research rather than making statements like that.

 

[RuheTag]

IMO The the religion itself is not mainly the problem. The problem is with the people as People decide themselves how and where to use the religion.

Turkey has been doing fine despite being majority muslims so is Malaysia as good examples. if Pakistanis can shun off Islamism and just stick to Islam as personal belief .. Pakistan would be a much better place.

The hypocrisy is - majority in the middle class would want Pakistan to become a 100% theocracy,, but hardly few actually know what it feels like to live in a theocracy and they hardly want to live in a theocracy.

 

[CometMibro]

Islam in any case has fared much more poorly in nation building or shall I say nation destroying...

What happened inn 7th century Arabia and what was said about it should not be our concern or dictating principle in 21st century.. Beside that no evidence exists to support the claim and like 99 hadeeths this could be a made up statement as well.

I would implore you to read this concerning hadith authentication:

islamic-awareness. org/Hadith/Ulum/

IMO The the religion itself is not mainly the problem. The problem is with the people as People decide themselves how and where to use the religion.

Turkey has been doing fine despite being majority muslims so is Malaysia as good examples. if Pakistanis can shun off Islamism and just stick to Islam as personal belief .. Pakistan would be much better place.

Uhh, isn't this what is happening though? Not practicing Islam (as dictated by classical scholars) on a political level?

 

[livingdead]

Extreme form of nationalism is also dangerous.. but religion is even not an alternative, at least for India which has people of many religions.
The current way of mild nationalism while accepting people of other nationality as your friend, is a good one.