Role of Indian Muslims in partition

[Naofumi]

But there are many rich Muslims who stayed back too, prominently the family of Jinnah.

The point is of %, 33% of Muslim Army exclusively chosen Pakistan.

It would be same ,systematic exclusion step by step.

No Kashmir, No Pakistan and of course no BD, so no CAA-NRC.

As riots spread to other cities and the number of casualties escalated, the leaders of the Congress Party, who had initially opposed Partition, began to see it as the only way to rid themselves of the troublesome Jinnah and his Muslim League.

1) The clearest signal Muslim league represented Muslims though and through was provincial elections.
2) Your post absolves Nehru of any mistake.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

Of course Only the rich Muslims had the voting rights and they had the resources to migrate & start a life fresh.

So majority of the people who migrated to Pakistan are rich Muslims and majority of the people who stayed back are the poor Muslims, with the exception of the border states.

Now it is debatable if the Muslims who stayed back in India were forced to stay back due to lack of resources or they stay backed because they wanted to continue to live in India. No one wants to leave their birth place. And for Muslims in the south, the difference in language and culture was a big barrier. Also, except for some border areas like in Punjab & Bengal, the relations between Hindus and Muslims were not bad at all in other parts of the country.

But there are many rich Muslims who stayed back too, prominently the family of Jinnah.

Also, you need to consider that India-Pak relations were not bad in the initial years. Heck, Indo-Pak border was not even closed until the war of 1965. People were moving back and forth across the border until then with no visas.

IMO it is more important to do a similar poll TODAY.

 

[Naofumi]

100% from Madras voted for ML.

Muslim reserved seats.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

@Naofumi I hope you are not blaming Muslims for the Partition...

 

[Naofumi]

@Naofumi I hope you are not blaming Muslims for the Partition...

Opposite of that, I am saying 'current' Indian Muslims had no role.

 

[El Sidd]

Of course Only the rich Muslims had the voting rights and they had the resources to migrate & start a life fresh.

So majority of the people who migrated to Pakistan are rich Muslims and majority of the people who stayed back are the poor Muslims, with the exception of the border states.

Now it is debatable if the Muslims who stayed back in India were forced to stay back due to lack of resources or they stay backed because they wanted to continue to live in India. No one wants to leave their birth place. And for Muslims in the south, the difference in language and culture was a big barrier. Also, except for some border areas like in Punjab & Bengal, the relations between Hindus and Muslims were not bad at all in other parts of the country.

But there are many rich Muslims who stayed back too, prominently the family of Jinnah.

Also, you need to consider that India-Pak relations were not bad in the initial years. Heck, Indo-Pak border was not even closed until the war of 1965. People were moving back and forth across the border until then with no visas.

Its very hard to say.

There has been no study to determine the exact migration pattern of the people who moved about during those times.

Most immediate migration however did take place where it was possible in Bengal, Punjab and Greater Sindh. The urban population moved about for economic opportunities while land reform and subsequent politics of it ensured rural migration from areas where Muslims were in abject minority.

With the caste system remnants fusing with leftover British colonial structure, communal segregation was always present in India.

Those who vote did vote with their feet in India on both sides of the border. The chapter is well and truly ended.

Muslims are not even a swing vote anymore in India legally and technically come next elections whenever that may happen.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

Opposite of that, I am saying 'current' Indian Muslims had no role.

Yes. I mean, are you blaming Muslims THEN for having a role?

You do understand that they had no choice... And in retrospect, they are vindicated.

 

[ChennaiDude]

100% from Madras voted for ML.

@ChennaiDude Muslims then knew you could not be trusted even in 1946!!!

I don't mean 'you' as you, of course. General society.

And how wrong were they!-One state where BJP/RSS or Congress dont have a say. The Madras Presidency is doing a pretty good job compared to the rest of the country.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

And how wrong were they!-One state where BJP/RSS or Congress dont have a say. The Madras Presidency is doing a pretty good job compared to the rest of the country.

You are doing a better job - no doubt about that.

 

[ChennaiDude]

The point is of %, 33% of Muslim Army exclusively chosen Pakistan.

No Kashmir, No Pakistan and of course no BD, so no CAA-NRC.

1) The clearest signal Muslim league represented Muslims though and through was provincial elections.
2) Your post absolves Nehru of any mistake.

No no- I provide the link- Nehru was culprit in chief, if only he had given Jinnah the complete authority to be the 1st PM of India- Jinnah would have absolutely made a better Leader in a new independent India that demanded a statesman at the helm.

Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the leader of the Muslim League, and Mohandas Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, the two most prominent leaders of the Hindu-dominated Congress Party.

All three men were Anglicized lawyers who had received at least part of their education in England. Jinnah and Gandhi were both Gujarati. Potentially, they could have been close allies. But by the early nineteen-forties their relationship had grown so poisonous that they could barely be persuaded to sit in the same room.

You are doing a better job - no doubt about that.

Just so I am clear- When you say 'you' as you, of course. General society- Correct?

 

[MayaBazar]

IMO it is more important to do a similar poll TODAY.

What would be the purpose of the poll?

Will India, Pakistan and Bangladesh exchange population based on that poll?

Certainly not. All countries want to maintain status quo.

 

[El Sidd]

No no- I provide the link- Nehru was culprit in chief, if only he had given Jinnah the complete authority to be the 1st PM of India- Jinnah would have absolutely made a better Leader in a new independent India that demanded a statesman at the helm.

Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the leader of the Muslim League, and Mohandas Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, the two most prominent leaders of the Hindu-dominated Congress Party.

All three men were Anglicized lawyers who had received at least part of their education in England. Jinnah and Gandhi were both Gujarati. Potentially, they could have been close allies. But by the early nineteen-forties their relationship had grown so poisonous that they could barely be persuaded to sit in the same room.

Jinnah was never interested in ruling entire of the subcontinent as an authoritarian. He was severely ill by the late 30s and had a target set for him before his time came.

Nor was it for Nehru to give the subcontinent away to anyone and everyone knew that partition was inevitable. Peace man Gandhi thus sought the most peaceful progression to it while Nehru and his constant flirting with fascism led to Direct Action Day

 

[ChennaiDude]

Jinnah was never interested in ruling entire of the subcontinent as an authoritarian. He was severely ill by the late 30s and had a target set for him before his time came.

Nor was it for Nehru to give the subcontinent away to anyone and everyone knew that partition was inevitable. Peace man Gandhi thus sought the most peaceful progression to it while Nehru and his constant flirting with fascism led to Direct Action Day

Mahatma Gandhi wanted Jinnah as PM, but Nehru refused: Dalai Lama

 

[El Sidd]

Mahatma Gandhi wanted Jinnah as PM, but Nehru refused: Dalai Lama

Jinnah appreciated the Maha offer and respectfully declined.

He was not your average Gujju you know that right?

 

[ChennaiDude]

Jinnah appreciated the Maha offer and respectfully declined.

He was not your average Gujju you know that right?

I know that- He was leader of great stature- A secular Human in the true sense. He did not decline the offer Nehru played the spoiler. The question is why Nehru said No and why Jinnah declined the offer.