Two Nation Theory 2.0

[INDIC]

@my2cents and @ares Well to be fair to Pakistanis, the TNT was working fine for them for about 35 years in which they were doing better than India (not counting 1971 as BD was never meant to be a part of them) until the Soviet jihad started..It was the Islamisation funded by Wahhabi money that actually started this

Or, or, if BD is to considered, then in that case the TNT was abandoned right in 1951, when vissa restrictions were imposed on the migrating Indian muslims to prevent further migration.

The visas were stopped because tensions started to brew up between Muhajirs and Sindhis. Sindhis initially thought by selecting Pakistan, they will get rid of Sindhi Hindu dominance but to their surprise Muhajirs replaced Sindhi Hindus and Sindhi Muslims remained the same and lost their capital Karachi to migrants.

 

[ares]

Nor do I want it. We are fine the way we are. TNT whether valid or not, was good for India in hind sight.

Anything that divides the people can never be good for them, rest is just solace.

At best, one can argue, we have been spared the same fate as, what befell Pakistan and what still awaits them, because we seek unity despite diversity in what is left of united India.

Our refusal to adopt their nonsensical theory of "dividing a nation based on religion" is the best we got from the partition.
Because division will not end on religion alone, one you plant hatred for anything that is 'different from you'.

People will sought division not just for religion but for language, ethnicity(as we saw in 1971) even sect(as is happening now) and much more.

 

[Manas]

No man is an island , he is a nation.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Anything that divides the people can never be good for them, rest is just solace.

At best, one can argue, we have been spared the same fate as, what befell Pakistan and what still awaits them, because we seek unity despite diversity in what is left of united India.

Our refusal to adopt their nonsensical theory of "dividing a nation based on religion" is the best we got from the partition.
Because division will not end on religion alone, one you plant hatred for anything that is 'different from you'.

People will sought division not just for religion but for language, ethnicity(as we saw in 1971) even sect(as is happening now) and much more.

Oh my dear dear dear poster.

I see so many here who have no idea of the politics and they come here and f@rt against Pakistan.

Anyone who brings up two nation theory in 2013 is an idiot of nth degree, and complete ignoramus of the tumultuous years of 1900-1940s.

Total and utter ignoramus. dare I say.

Those Indians who use 5th grade chalta maal history to disprove this theory do a great disservice to modern India

Those Pakistanis who use 5th grade chalta maal history to prove this theory do a great disservice to modern day Pakistan


Do you ever wonder who talked about Muslims being separate in British Indian politics?

Do you know?


Was he a Hindu or a Muslim

Was he a Pundit or a Mullah

First learn this and then talk about the politics of those years.


otherwise this thread is just like others, being used to throw $hite on each other.

and that is sad.

So much education

So great command of English language

and

yet

all this being wasted on shovling $hite.


Sadly!

 

[Joe Shearer]

Oh my dear dear dear poster.

I see so many here who have no idea of the politics and they come here and f@rt against Pakistan.

Anyone who brings up two nation theory in 2013 is an idiot of nth degree, and complete ignoramus of the tumultuous years of 1900-1940s.

Total and utter ignoramus. dare I say.

Those Indians who use 5th grade chalta maal history to disprove this theory do a great disservice to modern India

Those Pakistanis who use 5th grade chalta maal history to prove this theory do a great disservice to modern day Pakistan


Do you ever wonder who talked about Muslims being separate in British Indian politics?

Do you know?


Was he a Hindu or a Muslim

Was he a Pundit or a Mullah

First learn this and then talk about the politics of those years.


otherwise this thread is just like others, being used to throw $hite on each other.

and that is sad.

So much education

So great command of English language

and

yet

all this being wasted on shovling $hite.


Sadly!

At the end of that rant, it is amusing that we are left wondering if you know!

Given your high standards, it is highly probable that you might have the correct answer, but it cannot be discovered in your answer.

Take it easy. If we take out the pejoratives from this rather minatory last post, there is no substance left. Quite the opposite of what you have trained us to expect.

 

[FaujHistorian]

At the end of that rant, it is amusing that we are left wondering if you know!

Given your high standards, it is highly probable that you might have the correct answer, but it cannot be discovered in your answer.

Take it easy. If we take out the pejoratives from this rather minatory last post, there is no substance left. Quite the opposite of what you have trained us to expect.

Off course I don't want to spoon feed anyone in the presence of my dear dear and highly respected joe. How could I?

My post was an appeal, a request to Indian posters to quit this blind quest for putting Pakistan down at every chance (few exceptions like yourself remain. Thankfully).

We ought to accept each others as two good neighbors and move on as much as we can. Hopefully!

My questions are directed towards OP and the group supporting OP.

are you in that group. If so. That will be sad. really sad to see a smart and balanced Indian being pushed through blind follower-ship.

Thus my questions remain.

Who was the esteemed leader to propose kicking out Muslim majority provinces. Who?


peace

 

[illusion8]

@my2cents and @ares Well to be fair to Pakistanis, the TNT was working fine for them for about 35 years in which they were doing better than India (not counting 1971 as BD was never meant to be a part of them) until the Soviet jihad started..It was the Islamisation funded by Wahhabi money that actually started this

Or, or, if BD is to considered, then in that case the TNT was abandoned right in 1951, when vissa restrictions were imposed on the migrating Indian muslims to prevent further migration.

But wasn't the US funding Pakistan right from it's early days? and even if they had this 35 years in which they did better - where are the industries, the universities, the infrastructure?

Pakistan is an agrarian and a thekedaari society and has been till date.

 

[notsuperstitious]

So how does the source of Idea, hindu or muslim, make the idea bad or good, particularly when the idea was chosen by majority of people in pakistan by vote.

I do not want to ''put down'' pakistan, but the idea that people who lived together for thousand years can suddenly not live together when the hindus may ''rule'' because of their nos sounds like an intolerant cry baby idea. And thats without considering the millions dead, wars, loss of progress focus, prostituting for foreign powers etc etc that followed.

 

[KS]

Off course I don't want to spoon feed anyone in the presence of my dear dear and highly respected joe. How could I?

My post was an appeal, a request to Indian posters to quit this blind quest for putting Pakistan down at every chance (few exceptions like yourself remain. Thankfully).

We ought to accept each others as two good neighbors and move on as much as we can. Hopefully!

My questions are directed towards OP and the group supporting OP.

are you in that group. If so. That will be sad. really sad to see a smart and balanced Indian being pushed through blind follower-ship.

Thus my questions remain.

Who was the esteemed leader to propose kicking out Muslim majority provinces. Who?


peace

Well Pakistani books credit the Two Nation Theory with Shah Waliiullah in the 18th century and if I am not wrong Jinnah is believed to have said that "Pakistan became a reality the day the first hindu became a muslim".

 

[FaujHistorian]

Well Pakistani books credit the Two Nation Theory with Shah Waliiullah in the 18th century and if I am not wrong Jinnah is believed to have said that "Pakistan became a reality the day the first hindu became a muslim".

Yes my dear poster. Yes off course.

this is what I say "Chalta maal", 5th grade sarkari school history.

I hope you are now grown up to a point to challenge that low-grade stuff.

I hope!

....when the idea was chosen by majority of people in pakistan by vote.

.

Any statistics my dear dear poster, any statistics to prove your assertion?

Anything?

Any year?

Any election?

How many votes?

How many seats?

provincial assembly vs. federal?

Anything?


Thank you

 

[Joe Shearer]

Off course I don't want to spoon feed anyone in the presence of my dear dear and highly respected joe. How could I?
K
My post was an appeal, a request to Indian posters to quit this blind quest for putting Pakistan down at every chance (few exceptions like yourself remain. Thankfully).

We ought to accept each others as two good neighbors and move on as much as we can. Hopefully!

My questions are directed towards OP and the group supporting OP.

are you in that group. If so. That will be sad. really sad to see a smart and balanced Indian being pushed through blind follower-ship.

Thus my questions remain.

Who was the esteemed leader to propose kicking out Muslim majority provinces. Who?


peace

Well Pakistani books credit the Two Nation Theory with Shah Waliiullah in the 18th century and if I am not wrong Jinnah is believed to have said that "Pakistan became a reality the day the first hindu became a muslim".

I believe that my record will speak for me: I do not believe in 'putting down' Pakistan at every chance, or even at any chance. That sort of one-upmanship is not my style. However, it is refreshing and good to see more and more Pakistanis taking brutally Frank positions on past history and on past positions taken by the rulers and administrators of Pakistan. The OP has taken a brutally frank view of that sort, and to that extent, I endorse his views. Does that amount to triumphalism? No, not on my part, although admittedly there are Indians who are inclined to gloat.

To make things clear beyond the possibility of any misconceptions about my position, I have always in these columns opposed the Two Nation Theory, and also opposed the poisonous One Nation Theory of the Congress.

You still haven't gone on record with your own answer, although KS has, much to my surprise.

BTW, I do not think that he was right.

 

[batmannow]

So how does the source of Idea, hindu or muslim, make the idea bad or good, particularly when the idea was chosen by majority of people in pakistan by vote.

I do not want to ''put down'' pakistan, but the idea that people who lived together for thousand years can suddenly not live together when the hindus may ''rule'' because of their nos sounds like an intolerant cry baby idea. And thats without considering the millions dead, wars, loss of progress focus, prostituting for foreign powers etc etc that followed.

people who lived together for thousand years can suddenly not live together !
ask any israeli about it, you will be enlightened?

I believe that my record will speak for me: I do not believe in 'putting down' Pakistan at every chance, or even at any chance. That sort of one-upmanship is not my style. However, it is refreshing and good to see more and more Pakistanis taking brutally Frank positions on past history and on past positions taken by the rulers and administrators of Pakistan. The OP has taken a brutally frank view of that sort, and to that extent, I endorse his views. Does that amount to triumphalism? No, not on my part, although admittedly there are Indians who are inclined to gloat.

To make things clear beyond the possibility of any misconceptions about my position, I have always in these columns opposed the Two Nation Theory, and also opposed the poisonous One Nation Theory of the Congress.

You still haven't gone on record with your own answer, although KS has, much to my surprise.

brutally Frank positions cant be found on KASHMIR by any indian or indian govt, that is what is called sad?

 

[illusion8]

I believe that my record will speak for me: I do not believe in 'putting down' Pakistan at every chance, or even at any chance. That sort of one-upmanship is not my style. However, it is refreshing and good to see more and more Pakistanis taking brutally Frank positions on past history and on past positions taken by the rulers and administrators of Pakistan. The OP has taken a brutally frank view of that sort, and to that extent, I endorse his views. Does that amount to triumphalism? No, not on my part, although admittedly there are Indians who are inclined to gloat.

To make things clear beyond the possibility of any misconceptions about my position, I have always in these columns opposed the Two Nation Theory, and also opposed the poisonous One Nation Theory of the Congress.

You still haven't gone on record with your own answer, although KS has, much to my surprise.

I suspect @FaujHistorian is probably trying to point us towards Nehru and Sardar Patel.

 

[Joe Shearer]

people who lived together for thousand years can suddenly not live together !
ask any israeli about it, you will be enlightened?



brutally Frank positions cant be found on KASHMIR by any indian or indian govt, that is what is called sad?

And what does that gibberish mean, in simple language?

 

[notsuperstitious]

Yes my dear poster. Yes off course.

this is what I say "Chalta maal", 5th grade sarkari school history.

I hope you are now grown up to a point to challenge that low-grade stuff.

I hope!



Any statistics my dear dear poster, any statistics to prove your assertion?

Anything?

Any year?

Any election?

How many votes?

How many seats?

provincial assembly vs. federal?

Anything?


Thank you

The legislative assembly in 1945 and provincial in 1946 both saw ML win almost all muslim seats.

I suspect @FaujHistorian is probably trying to point us towards Nehru and Sardar Patel.

I suspect he means ambedkar or savarkar. @Joe Shearer