TV drama series about the Pakistan Movement

[ranjeet]

I'll show what I want to show. I might even show a vision where a character sees the future and there's loads of people taking dumps on train lines. That inspires the character to support the idea of Pakistan.

In all seriousness, it'd have to be historically accurate, but would probably have a gloss over it. The victor writes history after all.

Would that character be seeing the relationship between USA and Pakistan? or the Kashkol? or the Military coups? Partition was a dark epsidoe for the subcontinent, we can't honestly showcase the reality without ruffling some feathers here and there.

 

[313ghazi]

Not really. I am looking at from the prism of Pakistan. If of course you want to give lustre to the British project called the Raj, go ahead by all means. It is not neccessary to be trapped in the 'British' narrative for eternity.

No. Sorry. European colonialsm in South Asia started in Kerala by the Portugese and later Goa. The British were late entrants to South Asia.

There would have been no 'movement' if the British had not freed us from Sikh servitude.

And contrary to what you have been told the region that is today Pakistan remained largely at peace in the so called Indian Mutiny. Indeed the British relied on men from what is now Pakistan [Muslim/Sikh] to supress the mutiny which was primarily centred around the Ganga basin.

The Pakistan movement was never limited to the "prism" of West Pakistan as it is today. It is a complex and multifaceted history and all parts should be included in the story.

Also the Raj, is a big factor in Pakistan. They were ultimately the power brokers who determined what would be Pakistan, and part of the reason the creation of Pakistan began.

The Portuguese and French presence didn't have the same lasting legacy that the British one did.

Would that character be seeing the relationship between USA and Pakistan? or the Kashkol? or the Military coups? Partition was a dark epsidoe for the subcontinent, we can't honestly showcase the reality without ruffling some feathers here and there.

I think there are loads of great shows which could be made. I think this particular show would have to conclude at the creation of Pakistan.

I don't think we have the artistic freedom or the maturity in society to tolerate and accept different narratives to tackle coups, or the mega corruption of our politics, or even bigger the events that led to 1971.

 

[ranjeet]

The Pakistan movement was never limited to the "prism" of West Pakistan as it is today. It is a complex and multifaceted history and all parts should be included in the story.

Also the Raj, is a big factor in Pakistan. They were ultimately the power brokers who determined what would be Pakistan, and part of the reason the creation of Pakistan began.

The Portuguese and French presence didn't have the same lasting legacy that the British one did.

I thought Pakistan was an acronym.

 

[GHALIB]

Let the drama begin .

 

[ranjeet]

I think there are loads of great shows which could be made. I think this particular show would have to conclude at the creation of Pakistan.

I don't think we have the artistic freedom or the maturity in society to tolerate and accept different narratives to tackle coups, or the mega corruption of our politics, or even bigger the events that led to 1971.

I would blame maturity, we people lack that as a group. I have seen few Pakistani comedy shows, and I would say the artistic liberity they take at few issues is more something unimaginable here in India.

It's a good idea and every nation has a right to present their point of view, narration but such issues do tend to raise few very uncomfortable questions.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Would it be depeciting how Fata and Balochistan were reluctutn to join Pakistan? Or would you guys be whitewashing that part of the story?

That is true. But please don't use that to think they wanted to join 'Mother India'. That concept did not exist. These regions had been annexed by the British. It was not like there was a plebicite that they wanted to be part of British Raj.

Further, the truth is even Punjab and Sindh were not interested in supporting Muslim Leaque. It is also erronous to call it Pakistan Movement at this stage because that name had not been invented/used at the formative stage.

The fact was the minority Muslims in Bengal and other parts of what is now India feared that when they [British] left they would becoms a oppressed minority. This fear of Hindu domination was not visible in what is today Pakistan and that includes Punjab/Sindh. That is why ML failed to gain much traction in this region. The support it got was from those who feared Hindu domination. Since the Indus region was Muslim dominant there was no fear. Indeed it was the other way around.

Punjab for instance was ruled by a secular Unionist party that drew it's support from all faiths. As we move forward somebody broke the enigma code. Why not use the "Islam" card. As we can see in 2018 that card can be even used today by TLP/Rizvi types to bring the masses out. Thus began the use of 'Islam' card by ML and sure enough it paid dividends. First in Sindh when te assembly there became first to pass the Pakistan Resolution.

Be that as it may one fact cannot be denied. ML was not primarily about making Pakistan. It was primarily about arranging constitutional architecture that would secure the Muslim minorities. This is exactly what was discussed in 1946 Cabinet Mission Plan that would have India divided into three equal zones. Jinnah accepted this. It was Nehru's refusal that gave birth to Pakistan.

Of course one 1947 happened history has been carved to suit the agenda of various vested interests.

 

[313ghazi]

I would blame maturity, we people lack that as a group. I have seen few Pakistani comedy shows, and I would say the artistic liberity they take at few issues is more something unimaginable here in India.

It's a good idea and every nation has a right to present their point of view, narration but such issues do tend to raise few very uncomfortable questions.

This is where I think artist should be given near free reign. Yes sometimes people will be offended, but unless the intention to offend or provocate was not deliberate - it should be tolerated.

Nationalism has it's place - but the different narratives should not be quashed. I think and important part of any series on Pakistan should be the motiviations behind those opposed to the idea too.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Would it be depeciting how Fata and Balochistan were reluctutn to join Pakistan? Or would you guys be whitewashing that part of the story?

When Pakistan was established in August 1947, it was constitutionally composed of only those areas of British India which had opted for it.

The British allowed the Muslims to establish a separate homeland for themselves, but only on the basis of the will of the people and through democratic channels.



In Balochistan, the Shahi Jirga and the members of the Quetta municipality voted to join Pakistan on behalf of British Balochistan. It was decided to hold a referendum in Balochistan on June 30, 1947 in Shahi Jirga excluding the Sardars nominated by the Kalat state and non-officials members of Quetta Municipality. That would decide the future affiliations of Balochistan. An extraordinary joint Session of the Shahi Jirga was held on 30 June 1947 to decide the crucial issue. To the dismay of the Congress, 54 members of the Shahi Jirga and Quetta Municipality, voted en-bloc to join the new Constituent Assembly to be set up in Pakistan.



In Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), the British allowed for a referendum on the issue of Pakistan.. Polling began on 6 July 1947 and the referendum results were made public on 20 July 1947. According to the official results, there were 572,798 registered voters. 289,244 (99.02%) votes were cast in favor of Pakistan. Only 2874 (0.98%) were cast in favor of India. The resulting referendum in July 1947, showed overwhelming support for the new country and so KPK was included in Pakistan.

Punjab and Bengal legislatures voted for partition.

The Sindh assembly was the first British Indian legislature to pass the resolution in favour of Pakistan.


Before that, General elections were held in British India in 1945 to elect members of the Central Legislative Assembly and the Council of State

The Muslim League participated in the elections with a clear cut agenda –

1) Pakistan is the national demand of the Muslims of India and
2) The Muslim League is their sole representative organization.

The turnover was extra ordinary. Leagues performance was even more impressive as it managed to win all the 30 seats reserved for the Muslims. The results of the provincial election held in early 1946 were not any different. Muslim League captured approximately 95 percent of the Muslim seats.



So, Pakistan was "democratically" created in accordance with the the will of the people.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Would it be depeciting how Fata and Balochistan were reluctutn to join Pakistan? Or would you guys be whitewashing that part of the story?

Evidence that they were reluctant to join Pakistan please.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Bizzare fact: Muslim League managed to secure Muslims of NWFP, Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan [present Pakistan] that actually did not need protection given that they formed typically 70% plus majority. It was the Hindu/Sikhs who would feel under threat in these regions.

But the very people that needed protection. The Muslims in Hindu dominant provinces like Utter Pradesh, Bihar, Assam in what is now India were left even more weaker by Muslim League then they would have been. You can see them being screwed in India today. I guess this is what is called law of unintended consequences.

 

[MBT 3000]

agree patriotic shows, dramas are needed instead of crap dramas on geo etc

 

[ranjeet]

That is true. But please don't use that to think they wanted to join 'Mother India'. That concept did not exist. These regions had been annexed by the British. It was not like there was a plebicite that they wanted to be part of British Raj.

Further, the truth is even Punjab and Sindh were not interested in supporting Muslim Leaque. It is also erronous to call it Pakistan Movement at this stage because that name had not been invented/used at the formative stage.

The fact was the minority Muslims in Bengal and other parts of what is now India feared that when they [British] left they would becoms a oppressed minority. This fear of Hindu domination was not visible in what is today Pakistan and that includes Punjab/Sindh. That is why ML failed to gain much traction in this region. The support it got was from those who feared Hindu domination. Since the Indus region was Muslim dominant there was no fear. Indeed it was the other way around.

Punjab for instance was ruled by a secular Unionist party that drew it's support from all faiths. As we move forward somebody broke the enigma code. Why not use the "Islam" card. As we can see in 2018 that card can be even used today by TLP/Rizvi types to bring the masses out. Thus began the use of 'Islam' card by ML and sure enough it paid dividends. First in Sindh when te assembly there became first to pass the Pakistan Resolution.

Be that as it may one fact cannot be denied. ML was not primarily about making Pakistan. It was primarily about arranging constitutional architecture that would secure the Muslim minorities. This is exactly what was discussed in 1946 Cabinet Mission Plan that would have India divided into three equal zones. Jinnah accepted this. It was Nehru's refusal that gave birth to Pakistan.

Of course one 1947 happened history has been carved to suit the agenda of various vested interests.

To be honest fear of Hindu domination was overplayed or rather well played by ML at that time of uncertainities, but it was more of fear of losing land holdings by the top honchos of unionist party which got them into supporting Jinnah than anything else. I could be wrong here but that's what I feel.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

To be honest fear of Hindu domination was overplayed or rather well played by ML at that time of uncertainities, but it was more of fear of losing land holdings by the top honchos of unionist party which got them into supporting Jinnah than anything else. I could be wrong here but that's what I feel.

Indeed. It ws classic case of Islam being used in the most cynical, selfish way. The tiny sliver of Muslim elite in what is today India knew that post British rule their economic position would change for the worse. So they began to use religion to garner support so that they could bend the constitution post British rule in a manner that would secure their economic privilages. We can see that it never was some noble project about a citadel of Islam. To began with how the fcuk were they going to build their citadel in middle of UP or Bihar? Further we have the proof that ML agreed to Cabinet Mission Plan in 1946. This dismantles the idea of having a citadel of Islam as even as late as 1946 Jinnah was agreed to united India but with constitutional veto against Hindu majoritarinsm. It ws Nehru who rejected it and gave birth to Pakistan by default leaving Jinnah with his "moth eaten Pakistan".

The sliver of eite of course now caught up in this drama then legged it to Pakistan but that left the millions of cannon fodder behind India who to this day carry the stigma that they helped in making Pakistan. The cannon fodder [the nearly 200 million Muslims in India] never thought about what exactly this was all about? I mean were they all voting to leave their homes and end up in Sindh? All 200 million????

Wtf?

 

[ranjeet]

Indeed. It ws classic case of Islam being used in the most cynical, selfish way. The tiny sliver of Muslim elite in what is today India knew that post British rule their economic position would change for the worse. So they began to use religion to garner support so that they could bend the constitution post British rule in a manner that would secure their economic privilages. We can see that it never was some noble project about a citadel of Islam. To began with how the fcuk were they going to build their citadel in middle of UP or Bihar? Further we have the proof that ML agreed to Cabinet Mission Plan in 1946. This dismantles the idea of having a citadel of Islam as even as late as 1946 Jinnah was agreed to united India but with constitutional veto against Hindu majoritarinsm. It ws Nehru who rejected it and gave birth to Pakistan by default leaving Jinnah with his "moth eaten Pakistan".

The sliver of eite of course now caught up in this drama then legged it to Pakistan but that left the millions of cannon fodder behind India who to this day carry the stigma that they helped in making Pakistan. The cannon fodder [the nearly 200 million Muslims in India] never thought about what exactly this was all about? I mean were they all voting to leave their homes and end up in Sindh? All 200 million????

Wtf?

Not the just cannon fodder, I believe even those who were rescued from Brahmin/Baniya wrath were given a rough deal too. I don't think there have been many land reforms in Pakistan post independence. These zamindars now roam around as "electables" AKA "lotas". Gora Sahabs have been replaced by the Brown Sahabs with religious sessioning.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Not the just cannon fodder, I believe even those who were rescued from Brahmin/Baniya wrath were given a rough deal too. I don't think there have been many land reforms in Pakistan post independence. These zamindars now roam around as "electables" AKA "lotas". Gora Sahabs have been replaced by the Brown Sahabs with religious sessioning.

I think that only applies to interior Sindh and Southern Punjab. Rest of Pakistan does not have a problem with 'zamindars'. Most of the electables are not huge landowners but patriarchs of biradaris and other clan/tribal structures.

And jusy to make ot clear NWFP, Punjab, Balochistan or Sindh would never have been under "Brahmin" servitude for long. Simple maths. With 70% plus majority it would have been the biania who would be at risk. You can even see that in Kashmir with Pandits. Majority always has a impact. Even if ML had never existed our destiny would not be with India.