Pakistan First ! The case for Pakistani Nationalism.

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

The term "south Asians" was first used by the British during the raj to describe the inhabitants of "British united india". However, the term "south asian" is inaccurate as Pakistanis, indians and others from so called "south asia" are ethnically and racially different.

Also, "south asia" has the least amount of interconnectivity than ANY other region in the world:

‘India cannot afford to think of permanent friends anymore in its neighbourhood’: Constantino Xavier

An interview with the Foreign Policy Studies Fellow at Brookings on India’s relationship with its South Asian neighbours – and China.

www.google.co.uk

 

[peagle]

Religion or identity what came first?, I was a Khilji before Islam & I am still a Pakistani Khilji after Islam.

I don’t see a none Pakistani Muslim as my brother, no sir no, watan comes first everything else comes after.


Says a man who hails from the most nationalist ethnic group.

Firstly, you are being unfair to @khansaheeb , whatever your personal views, you cannot hold him to account for the views you have regarding his grouping, he is only answerable for his own belief and opinions, not of others.

Second,
Religion is part of the formula that creates identity, which includes a whole host of other factors, ethnicity, language and various other personifications.

It just depends, that on individual level, the calculation varies from person to person, people may hold on to certain aspect more, and others aspect less, it just depends on person to person.

For me, Pakistan mean more then anything, but other aspects are also strongly present, ethnicity, the region and so on, it is all about accepting the collective part of who you are, and that creates the singular you.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

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?

As always, I find myself agreeing in essence with everything you say, but there are important technical points to be raised that I feel would otherwise work against our interests if ignored.

1) the WHOLE of Jammu and Kashmir is Pakistani by rights. Indeed, Jammu has undergone a brutal genocide such that it may no longer be a sustainable claim for us, but justice MUST still be exercised with regards to Jammu's 20th century history, as a minimum. The whole of Kashmir is Pakistani, and several other regions require our ongoing territorial claim to fulfil the mandate of the original vision of Pakistan (e.g. junagadh). It is vital that we do not forget these ground realities, lest the essence of Pakistan be diluted over the coming decades.

2) We categorically ARE SOUTH ASIANS as well as being Pakistani. In the last ten years, a major incident occurred in a USA education institution where sanghees attempted to declare IVC history as " Indian" while more balanced analysts pushed back and declared it "south Asian". We cannot declare pre-1947 history as "Pakistani" in a strict literal sense, hence "south Asian" is perfectly acceptable. The problem here is with Nehru's appropriation of "India". Jinnah was enraged for this precise reason. He felt the hindu successor state to the British Raj should be termed "Bharat" or something else PRECISELY IN ORDER TO DISSOCIATE THE MODERN HINDU NATION FROM PAKISTAN'S HERITAGE. JINNAH KNEW THAT BY THESE FKERS CALLING THEMSELVES "INDIA", THEY COULD MANIPULATE OUR HISTORY INTO THEIR OWN ABRIDGED AND FALSIFIED VERSION.

3) We are connected to Indian Muslims and there is no issue with this. We share their heritage through the Mughal empire. The historical record of our empires are being eroded by hindutva and Pakistan must push back alongside Indian Muslims. Certainly, we have many differences and plenty of Indian Muslims will betray these shared interests. But similarly, plenty of Pakistani Muslims would betray our interests, so the perceived "loyalties" of Indian Muslims should not automatically lead to a single broad brush stroke being applied.

I hope the above points make sense to you as in its current format, your original post has missed the mark on several key issues and would actually erode our interests if it were adopted as a subconscious mission statement.

The last issue you touched on is a genetic issue and I would again advise some further research in this regard. Our genetic history cannot be simplified as you have done.

 

[peagle]

True, and we are never going to fall again.
I believe the younger population born after 1971 ( and the majority of members on this forum feel that way), which is why this thread will be a good measure of how we feel. The pre-1971 population will soon pass on.



I understand Bangladeshi's ( the proper term, not "Bengali brothers" ) far more than most of them understand Pakistan or Pakistanis.
I have intermittently lived and worked in Bangladesh and though I can't read or write Bengali, I do speak a tiny bit of street Bengali that I picked up from my stint in Kolkata. I adore Bengali patriotic music, and poetry, theater, and movies. I appreciate Bengali nationalism as distinct from rabidly parochial linguistic nationalism directed solely and only at Pakistan which is my nation. I am sorry but I have to draw the line here.

I do make room for you, and take your comments very seriously which is why I changed my OP on this thread. I simply enjoy reading your posts, and admire your secular stance. If it is all the same to you I am a non-practicing pork eating liquor drinking half Muslim but I will raise my glass to toast Pakistan's health and prosperity till my last breath.

Well, then we almost stand in the same group, I take my whiskey neat, lol

I wasn't asking for space for me per say, but space for my Bengali brothers and sisters. Besides the emotional feelings, I have had Bengali girlfriend, and very close Bengali friends. The closest among whom actually supports the Awami League. I do not see them nowadays, you know life moves on and you move along with it.

We have had a turbulent history, so animosity will take time to go away, but, once you scratch the surface, there is plenty of love and respect. And, maybe it could be the case you came across the ones who are negative, and I came across the ones who were willing to show me the positives, sometimes who we meet by virtue of chance can also effect how we feel about things.

I'm just saying, there is also positives, and from your experience I recognise there is also lot of negativity. But surely, we us a nation, can display a big heart. Remember, recently when modi took action against Kashmiris, one of the largest demonstrations in the world was in Bangladesh, all I am asking is just don't close the door. They are a decent lot. I have my bad experiences also, but bro, they are good, and they honestly do care about us.

Just taking this chance to share the positive side.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Or the word sub continent , still used by our journalists, writers etc, mind you they are still mentally enslaved.
The word desi is another one, usually Indians & homosexuals are called desi.

For many thousands of years right up until the middle of the 19th century, the area that is now modern day Pakistan had most of it's regional connectivity to what is now modern day Iran and Afghanistan. It's only in the last 200 years or so that changed but now things are reverting back to the old successful order.

The term "south asia", "south asians" and "indian subcontinent" were first coined by the british colonialists to justify their colonial rule. It was to justify the British conquest and creation of a "united india", the "british raj". They lumped all their conquered peoples in to one empire in which those conquered subjects didn't want to be a part of.

When someone says Pakistan and Pakistanis are a part of the "indian subcontinent" and are "south asians" it means they believe in british racist colonial propaganda against Pakistan and the Pakistani people. That is a sign of insecurity and an inferiority complex.

 

[peagle]

The term "south Asians" was first used by the British during the raj to describe the inhabitants of "British united india". However, the term "south asian" is inaccurate as Pakistanis, indians and others from so called "south asia" are ethnically and racially different.

Arry meray ghusay walay bhai,
I don't know younger or older, so I'll just make you older then lol

BTW, I absolutely love your pure patriotism, even though I cannot match your energy.
But, no matter who it was used by, South Asian is a geographical term, lets not confuse facts with politics. Stay blessed.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

@Baibars_1260 I am happy to elaborate on the genetic angle some other time but essentially we Pakistanis are actually the fathers of those goodfernothings lying to our east. Why should we deny or dissociate from this harsh reality?

The IVC was around 90% Iranian, and up to 75% of modern inhabitants of the secular republic of India are descended substantially from the IVC.

We need to flip their bullshiit appropriated history around and reveal the truth - Pakistan is India's father, as per genetic evidence that those dumb halfwits themselves keep "uncovering" at Rakhigiri. It's quite comical really if you read it all - but another time.

Without ancient Pakistanis and Aryans from the pontic steppe, they would still be andamanese tree dwellers.

Why should we abandon this reality? Alternatively, why should we allow these dumb "out of India" fools to invert reality and act as though the Ganges civilised the Indus??

When someone says Pakistan and Pakistanis are a part of the "indian subcontinent" and are "south asians" it means they believe in british racist colonial propaganda against Pakistan and the Pakistani people. That is a sign of insecurity and an inferiority complex.

Nomenclature issue. Geographically we are south Asian. Our problem is that the Hindu rashtra has usurped the whole of south Asia in common discourse. It is the misappropriation of the term that must be pushed back against, not the term itself, which is perfectly acceptable geographically.

 

[The Accountant]

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?

Brother if we are defined by indus valley civilization then what balochistan and KPK are doing in Pakistan ? They have nothing to do with Indus valley civilization as most of them were part of Khurasan and sistan region.

You agree or not but we are the muslim majoirty areas of sub continent. This is and will remain our identity as this is the uniting force of Pakistan otherwise a person living in KPK do not even understand what a person living in Sindh speaks.

Please dont try to change history as it will make us weak and will divide us.

 

[peagle]

Brother if we are defined by indus valley civilization then what balochistan and KPK are doing in Pakistan ? They have nothing to do with Indus valley civilization as most of them were part of Khurasan and sistan region.

You agree or not but we are the muslim majoirty areas of sub continent. This is and will remain our identity as this is the uniting force of Pakistan otherwise a person living in KPK do not even understand what a person living in Sindh speaks.

Please dont try to change history as it will make us weak and will divide us.

He is presenting an alternate history, but at least he is making a cultural argument,
but, I'm afraid you are also presenting a alternate history, but, your version is much worse.

Please allow me to explain why.
Indus Valley Civilisation is among the 4 oldest civilisations in the worlds,
A civilisation does not spring up out of the earth in one go, it has a starting point, the mature phase, the end, and the lingering after effect, where it leaves influence even after it demise.

The oldest recorded settlement linked to the Indus Valley Civilisation is in Mehgarh, which is in Baluchistan. There are also sites near Gwadar, and in all the regions of modern day Pakistan, including KPK and Kashmir. It just happens that during its mature phase its cente was concentrated along modern day Punjab and Sindh, it does mean other regions were not part of it.

The regions constituting modern day Pakistan, have always had links with each other throughout history, Gandhara civilisation is another example, it included modern day KPK, Punjab and Kashmir, there are endless examples.

History of Pakistan, and all its peoples goes back further into history then most nations around the world, even further then India, India did not exist when people of Pakistan lived as a single nation.

Khurasan is merely few hundred year old entity, links between the people of Pakistan go back thousands of years. So, the two cannot be compared.

 

[tkmd]

Comical how a handful of atheists and ill bred desis gather under threads like this to bash Islam and find strength in each other’s idiocy. Meanwhile in the real world millions gather to bury a Maulana they all use as an insult. And in reply to this we will hear “this is why Pakistan is backwards, why its a failure”. A nation 73 years old that has been called failing by these people since its inception. I have a suggestion. Go to Reddit and join Ex muslims. You will find many more people of the same murtad jaahil thought than you will here.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Arry meray ghusay walay bhai,
I don't know younger or older, so I'll just make you older then lol

BTW, I absolutely love your pure patriotism, even though I cannot match your energy.
But, no matter who it was used by, South Asian is a geographical term, lets not confuse facts with politics. Stay blessed.

It's a false construct. A false abstraction created by the British colonialists during the British raj. Pakistan shares a border with Iran but we are not a part of the Middle East. Apart from india, Pakistan shares NO other border with ALL other south asian nations yet we are supposed to be a part of the same region as bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka etc...............

Comical how a handful of atheists and ill bred desis gather under threads like this to bash Islam and find strength in each other’s idiocy. Meanwhile in the real world millions gather to bury a Maulana they all use as an insult. And in reply to this we will hear “this is why Pakistan is backwards, why its a failure”. A nation 73 years old that has been called failing by these people since its inception. I have a suggestion. Go to Reddit and join Ex muslims. You will find many more people of the same murtad jaahil thought than you will here.

I'd rather kill myself than not be a Muslim. But that doesn't mean to say I also want to be a slave for non-Pakistani Muslims.

@Baibars_1260 I am happy to elaborate on the genetic angle some other time but essentially we Pakistanis are actually the fathers of those goodfernothings lying to our east. Why should we deny or dissociate from this harsh reality?

The IVC was around 90% Iranian, and up to 75% of modern inhabitants of the secular republic of India are descended substantially from the IVC.

We need to flip their bullshiit appropriated history around and reveal the truth - Pakistan is India's father, as per genetic evidence that those dumb halfwits themselves keep "uncovering" at Rakhigiri. It's quite comical really if you read it all - but another time.

Without ancient Pakistanis and Aryans from the pontic steppe, they would still be andamanese tree dwellers.

Why should we abandon this reality? Alternatively, why should we allow these dumb "out of India" fools to invert reality and act as though the Ganges civilised the Indus??

Nomenclature issue. Geographically we are south Asian. Our problem is that the Hindu rashtra has usurped the whole of south Asia in common discourse. It is the misappropriation of the term that must be pushed back against, not the term itself, which is perfectly acceptable geographically.

Pakistan shares a border with Iran but we are not a part of the Middle East. We share NO border with bangladesh, SriLanka, Nepal, Bhutan etc. So how how can we all be south asians in a geographical sense?

 

[peagle]

I'd rather kill myself than not be a Muslim. But that doesn't mean to say I also want to be a slave for non-Pakistani Muslims.

well said.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

every Arab, Iranian and even Afghan is allowed to have a nationalistic identity but Pakistani is not allowed. he cant even openly declare it out of fear from Ummah brigade. unless if you pickup arms , divorce the religion and curse all other ethnicity you never get the legitimacy or attention.

as long as Iranians and Saudis will keep funding our religious thugs they will never allow Pakistani nationalism. Arabs even laugh and question our faith saying how can a non Arab speaking can be a true Muslim and be their equal? Iranians consider every non Iranian below them.

I know its over simplification since there is xenophobia, hatred and suspicion among the different ethnicities as well that has prevented a strong Federation ideology. case in point, the speech by Mehmood Achakzai (in Urdu) declaring that Urdu is imposed and is not our language, this is a contested territory where one extreme view of plush elitist picks up a coffee cup and puts the entire blame on our military establishment while another extreme puts entirely on our political system and lack of leadership.
truth is somewhere in the middle.
everyone (Mullah , Military, Politician) has contributed in keeping us confused and rudderless nation.

summary?

we are dependent (on scrapes from others), leaderless (in morality, competence and wisdom) and lack confidence (domestically and internationally) to be taken seriously and to bring up Nationalism as a unifying force and its all hollow as well in the presence of our challenges that our citizens face everyday.

 

[hussain0216]

Why must we choose,
lets just be honest with our history, we are the children of the incus, I am happy with that.
But don't tear away East Pakistan, it was once part of our body, at least for me, it will always have a special place in my heart, I have no wish for unification, but, neither do I wish to reject them.

Yaar they chose ethnic nationalism over faith and unity and you are saying we shouldn't?????

How can Bengali complain about Pakistani nationalist hatred of them when they went down the path of ethnocentric nationalism first

 

[Baibars_1260]

As always, I find myself agreeing in essence with everything you say, but there are important technical points to be raised that I feel would otherwise work against our interests if ignored.

Thanks, As always your posts make very educative reading.

1) the WHOLE of Jammu and Kashmir is Pakistani by rights. Indeed, Jammu has undergone a brutal genocide such that it may no longer be a sustainable claim for us, but justice MUST still be exercised with regards to Jammu's 20th century history, as a minimum. The whole of Kashmir is Pakistani, and several other regions require our ongoing territorial claim to fulfil the mandate of the original vision of Pakistan (e.g. junagadh). It is vital that we do not forget these ground realities, lest the essence of Pakistan be diluted over the coming decades.

I agree about the legal and traditional basis for Pakistan's claim. Political events, even over a short time, result in dramatic population changes ( like the change in Pakistan's constituent population after 1971). Jammu is majority Hindu area, and the Hindu population is extremely hostile to Muslims and Pakistan. In the remote and hypothetical event of a union with Pakistan this population would be as hostile as the population of our former eastern wing.
I was considering populations also from an identity angle, not just geographical. That is identifying as Pakistanis or Pakistaniyat for want of another word.
Even the Kashmiris in the valley talk about Azadi rather than Pakistan.
An Indian Marxist friend of mine said that if he was incharge he would hand Kashmir over to Pakistan on a platter and watch the fun. Like the East Bengali Muslims before the Kashmiri Muslims are on a centuries old quest for self determination and are riding piggyback on Pakistan. Once free of Indian / ( Hindu) domination it won't take them long to turn their guns on Pakistan.

Are we making the same mistake as in East Pakistan here?

2) We categorically ARE SOUTH ASIANS as well as being Pakistani. In the last ten years, a major incident occurred in a USA education institution where sanghees attempted to declare IVC history as " Indian" while more balanced analysts pushed back and declared it "south Asian". We cannot declare pre-1947 history as "Pakistani" in a strict literal sense, hence "south Asian" is perfectly acceptable. The problem here is with Nehru's appropriation of "India". Jinnah was enraged for this precise reason. He felt the hindu successor state to the British Raj should be termed "Bharat" or something else PRECISELY IN ORDER TO DISSOCIATE THE MODERN HINDU NATION FROM PAKISTAN'S HERITAGE. JINNAH KNEW THAT BY THESE FKERS CALLING THEMSELVES "INDIA", THEY COULD MANIPULATE OUR HISTORY INTO THEIR OWN ABRIDGED AND FALSIFIED VERSION.

Agree, but are we not transforming? India can manipulate any history they want, should we care? The Mongols tried to manipulate history too, and much of the history of the pre-Mongol population of Central Asia has been lost forever. Even the demographic and genetic make up of the population changed. But enough of the Oghuz Turks survived the Mongol onslaught to populate Turkey today, where some of their heritage and genetic pool was preserved. Do we know what Pakistan will be 100 years hence? Unlike our former Eastern Wing which is locked into an insular mono-cultural pocket, we are a dynamic evolving society with an outreach to China, Iran, Central Asia and Middle East. No nation in the so-called "sub-continent" has the geographical and cultural connectivity of Pakistan. Post 1947 and post 1971 we cannot be tied to our former political and geographical status and as we transform we will hopefully ( hopefully ) appropriate the heritage of Central Asia as our own. So studying Jalaluddin, the Tiger of Khwarzim would be more relevant to us than Rajendra Chola III of Tamil Nadu of roughly the same era.
So the question is should we carry the historical baggage of studying the Chola dynasty because we are "South Asians"?

3) We are connected to Indian Muslims and there is no issue with this. We share their heritage through the Mughal empire. The historical record of our empires are being eroded by hindutva and Pakistan must push back alongside Indian Muslims. Certainly, we have many differences and plenty of Indian Muslims will betray these shared interests. But similarly, plenty of Pakistani Muslims would betray our interests, so the perceived "loyalties" of Indian Muslims should not automatically lead to a single broad brush stroke being applied.

On the question of Indian Muslims I will continue to differ with you.
The Indian Muslims fought for Pakistan in the 1940s, and the generation that did so is gone. The Indian Muslims fought for Pakistan realizing that they would pay fearful price for their actions, and the vengeance would be exacted on them by the majority Hindu community for two to three generations till they were finally annihilated.
Like the Oghuz Turks against the Mongols in the 1200s they did this so that a portion of the Muslim population may survive the Hindu fundamentalist onslaught. Their mission was accomplished within the lifetime of those who fought for Pakistan. India was broken and the Muslim majority regions comprise Pakistan and Bangladesh today. The generation today is in a survival mode and they will say anything to delay their doom at the hands of the fascists. If 5 opportunists out 200 million silent Indian Muslims make a statement "betraying " Pakistan ww should not make a big deal out of it. Indian Muslims have not massacred Pakistani armed forces personnel and raped their spouses and they haven't targeted isolated pockets of Pakistani civilians and massacred them. On the contrary IMs have deteriorated to the bottom of the socio-economic ladder. They are raped, lynched, burnt, hounded, dispossessed, masasacred all the time. They are also starved into submission and hounded into ghettos. What this sorry mass of humanity says ( or does) to "betray" Pakistan is of little consequence.
My question: Must we as Pakistanis continue to associate ourselves with a doomed population?
Our connection with Indian Muslims ended on 14 August 1947. They did their duty, and as our Founding Father himself indicated we should only pray for those left behind the Radcliff line.

I hope the above points make sense to you as in its current format, your original post has missed the mark on several key issues and would actually erode our interests if it were adopted as a subconscious mission statement.

The last issue you touched on is a genetic issue and I would again advise some further research in this regard. Our genetic history cannot be simplified as you have done.

Liked your post.Please do keep interacting.