What If Attlee Hadn’t Partitioned India?

[dray]

It was close to 15%-20%.

Think about how all Muslim majority countries gradually become devoid of any minorities. Almost all of them when they started off with 0% Muslims. Almost all of them.

Think about what is going on there.

Can you spot a pattern?

Country/Region[3] Muslim population Muslim percentage (%) of total population
Morocco 32,381,000 99.9
Somalia 9,231,000 98.6
Tunisia 10,349,000 99.8
Afghanistan 29,047,000 99.8
Iran 74,819,000 99.6
Western Sahara 528,000 99.6
Mauritania 3,338,000 99.2
Yemen 24,023,000 99
Tajikistan 7,006,000 99
Iraq 31,108,000 98.9
Jordan 6,397,000 98.8
Mayotte 197,000 98.8
Turkey 74,660,000 98.6
Azerbaijan 8,795,000 98.4
Maldives 309,000 98.4
Niger 15,627,000 98.3
Comoros 679,000 98.3
Algeria 34,780,000 98.2
Palestinian territories 4,298,000 97.5
Saudi Arabia 25,493,000 97.1
Djibouti 853,000 97
Libya 6,325,000 96.6
Uzbekistan 26,833,000 96.5
Pakistan 178,097,000 96.4



That is the key.

We both got rid of each other.

Islam got it's reward in India (in the form of Pakistan) and now we should concentrate on making our Dharmic country great again while they are doing wonders with their fort of Islam.

Plague.

 

[Armstrong]

OK, as a special gesture just for you, I am giving you one more tip.

Have you heard of Will Durant? His "story of civilization" is considered one of the most influential books in history.

For Rousseau and Revolution, (1967), the 10th volume of The Story of Civilization, they were awarded the Pulitzer Prize for literature; later followed the highest award granted by the United States government to civilians, the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Ford in 1977.

This is what he writes:

The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.

Now it is up to you to either get defensive, deny the whole thing, assume that it happened to someone else (and not to Pakistanis' ancestors themselves as well) or to dig a bit deeper.

I am sharing this only because you specifically asked.

And keep me updated on the progress you are making with the topic. You owe me that much now.

Pulitzer Prize in Literature !

 

[Armstrong]

It can tell one what happened to the minorities population share during and after partition though.

And one can also look at the trajectory of minority population after that.

One can also see which country almost completely ethnically cleansed itself during partition and thereafter.

The mass migrations were not always voluntary. They tell a tale by themselves.

No they weren't & that is precisely why we've talked about the harrowing tales of the Muslims who came from Non-Muslim Majority lands & how Non-Muslims left our lands ! If millions are uprooted & leave for the other's land there is bound to be significant changes in demographics of those areas.

Numbers don't lie.

From 20% to 1.5% is a decade surely would be called "prima facie evidence for ethnic cleansing".

But as I said, there is a pattern. It was not unique at all.

No....numbers don't lie at all but numbers do mislead ! The fact that 1941 Punjab has more than 40% of her inhabitants as Non-Muslims would be one of those things that blind chauvunism makes us see past & a Partition of Punjab was bound to lead to demographic changes in that.

In addition - I would very much like to see a source for that '41 Census !

Let's just take a look at what happened to Zoroastrians in Iran, something a little distant from us both and so not very personal.

After the Muslim conquest of Persia, Zoroastrians were given dhimmi status and subjected to persecutions; discrimination and harassment began in the form of sparse violence.

Zoroastrians were made to pay an extra tax called Jizya, failing which they were either killed, enslaved or imprisoned. Those paying Jizya were subjected to insults and humiliation by the tax collectors.

Zoroastrians who were captured as slaves in wars were given their freedom if they converted to Islam.

You can read the whole thing here and look up references if you want to. You can also talk to a few Parsis.

Persecution of Zoroastrians - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And this "dhimmi" thing was not unique to them at all. You can be sure of that.

The Dhimmi Thing wasn't Unique at all & there was nothing wrong with paying the Jizya Tax - it was after all a tax raised from them in lieu of exemption from military service that was compulsory on every Muslim citizen of the State !

 

[ghilzai]

Interesting part is that Afghanistan would have been under the protection of India, hmmm lol one that is some dream, do Indians not ready history, the conquerors have been coming that way to invade them.

If there was no partition and we knew the British were leaving, we would have encouraged Afghanistan to help in attack to take most of the land, after all through history lahore has been our outpost.

 

[Vinod2070]

Pulitzer Prize in Literature !

For writing a history book, should he get a Pulitzer for physics!

No they weren't & that is precisely why we've talked about the harrowing tales of the Muslims who came from Non-Muslim Majority lands & how Non-Muslims left our lands ! If millions are uprooted & leave for the other's land there is bound to be significant changes in demographics of those areas.

No....numbers don't lie at all but numbers do mislead ! The fact that 1941 Punjab has more than 40% of her inhabitants as Non-Muslims would be one of those things that blind chauvunism makes us see past & a Partition of Punjab was bound to lead to demographic changes in that.

In addition - I would very much like to see a source for that '41 Census !

It was never my intention to spoon feed. Just to get you started because you specifically requested me.

As an avid fan of History I can't imagine when I read these assertions spelled out by a credible Historian ! Perhaps you could help me.

As I mentioned earlier:

Now it is up to you to either get defensive, deny the whole thing, assume that it happened to someone else (and not to Pakistanis' ancestors themselves as well) or to dig a bit deeper.

Seems you have made your choice. There is a pattern there as well. So no worries.

A lot of information is now available just by putting the right search term in your favorite search engine.

It is only you who has to muster the courage to put the term in there and press that dreaded enter key.

The Dhimmi Thing wasn't Unique at all & there was nothing wrong with paying the Jizya Tax - it was after all a tax raised from them in lieu of exemption from military service that was compulsory on every Muslim citizen of the State !

A lot of you are under this misconception.

It seems you won't mind Muslims to live under similar conditions in non Muslim majority countries?

Would that be about right?

Hope your wish comes true.

Soon.

PS: You looked past all the murders, slavery, persecution, harassment, conversion part pretty quick! You just saw the tax in the whole post?

 

[Vinod2070]

The fact that 1941 Punjab has more than 40% of her inhabitants as Non-Muslims would be one of those things that blind chauvunism makes us see past & a Partition of Punjab was bound to lead to demographic changes in that.

Again, in your urge to deny quickly without even looking what you are denying, you are forgetting that I quoted you figures for only the parts that became West Pakistan.

So East Punjab population (that became part of India) were not included in the figures shared. There is even a district wise break I gave you.

 

[LURKER]

Jinnah should be given Bharat Ratna by GOI for the biggest service to this nation since the British left. His statue should be erected near India gate with a note "This was a visionary man who saved the nation from chronic civil wars and ultimate destruction by amputating the infected part for the survival of the rest of the nation.

I even propose to replace Gandhiji's pic from the Rupee notes with that of Jinnah.

 

[Vinod2070]

Jinnah should be given Bharat Ratna by GOI for the biggest service to this nation since the British left. His statue should be erected near India gate with a note "This was a visionary man who saved the nation from chronic civil wars and ultimate destruction by amputating the infected part for the survival of the rest of the nation.

I even propose to replace Gandhiji's pic from the Rupee notes with that of Jinnah.

That is quite out of the box thinking.

 

[INDIC]

Interesting part is that Afghanistan would have been under the protection of India, hmmm lol one that is some dream, do Indians not ready history, the conquerors have been coming that way to invade them.

If there was no partition and we knew the British were leaving, we would have encouraged Afghanistan to help in attack to take most of the land, after all through history lahore has been our outpost.

Afghanistan wouldn't have tolerated NWFP ending as the part of India. Even NWFP was reluctant to join Pakistan where Muslim League got little support. Many Empires from India has ruled Afghanistan in the past both non-Muslim and Muslim Empires.

 

[PlanetWarrior]

Jinnah should be given Bharat Ratna by GOI for the biggest service to this nation since the British left. His statue should be erected near India gate with a note "This was a visionary man who saved the nation from chronic civil wars and ultimate destruction by amputating the infected part for the survival of the rest of the nation.

I even propose to replace Gandhiji's pic from the Rupee notes with that of Jinnah.

You are talking from post partition observation and sequence of events. The sad reality is that nobody on this forum gave any thought to the submissions of the author in the article. He was purely postulating a view based on the probability of Gandhi and the anti-Nehru groups joining forces to ouster Nehru and Mountbatten. What would the outcome then have been? Are the scenarios of an India aligned to the USA during the cold war years correct with the assumption that Afghanistan and the rest of the sub-continent would have been much more stable and prosperous? Realistically speaking, over the years a Muslim minority and a Hindu majority have shown themselves to be able to co-exist for the better of both people in current secular India. Sikhs as a minority for example have progressed unabated. What makes the suggestions in the article unfounded when it comes to all of the reasons submitted for those suggestions?

Please, remarks such as "we are better off than them" and vice versa are just plain childish and adds no value to this thread

 

[PlanetWarrior]

Jinnah should be given Bharat Ratna by GOI for the biggest service to this nation since the British left. His statue should be erected near India gate with a note "This was a visionary man who saved the nation from chronic civil wars and ultimate destruction by amputating the infected part for the survival of the rest of the nation.

I even propose to replace Gandhiji's pic from the Rupee notes with that of Jinnah.

You are talking from post partition observation and sequence of events. The sad reality is that nobody on this forum gave any thought to the submissions of the author in the article. He was purely postulating a view based on the probability of Gandhi and the anti-Nehru groups joining forces to ouster Nehru and Mountbatten. What would the outcome then have been? Are the scenarios of an India aligned to the USA during the cold war years correct with the assumption that Afghanistan and the rest of the sub-continent would have been much more stable and prosperous? Realistically speaking, over the years a Muslim minority and a Hindu majority have shown themselves to be able to co-exist for the better of both people in current secular India. Sikhs as a minority for example have progressed unabated. What makes the suggestions in the article unfounded when it comes to all of the reasons submitted for those suggestions?

Please, remarks such as "we are better off than them" and vice versa are just plain childish and adds no value to this thread

 

[LURKER]

That is quite out of the box thinking.

The least we can do for the true visionary leader of India

 

[LURKER]

You are talking from post partition observation and sequence of events. The sad reality is that nobody on this forum gave any thought to the submissions of the author in the article. He was purely postulating a view based on the probability of Gandhi and the anti-Nehru groups joining forces to ouster Nehru and Mountbatten. What would the outcome then have been? Are the scenarios of an India aligned to the USA during the cold war years correct with the assumption that Afghanistan and the rest of the sub-continent would have been much more stable and prosperous? Realistically speaking, over the years a Muslim minority and a Hindu majority have shown themselves to be able to co-exist for the better of both people in current secular India. Sikhs as a minority for example have progressed unabated. What makes the suggestions in the article unfounded when it comes to all of the reasons submitted for those suggestions?

Please, remarks such as "we are better off than them" and vice versa are just plain childish and adds no value to this thread

Please go through the thread right from the first post and see how many posts you can find that add any value to this thread. Yes i base my observations on the post independence events and what has unfolded in Pakistan since then has given credence to my belief that yes 'we are better off without them'. I agree the topic deserves a serious discussion but try discussing it here and hordes of Pakistanis will brand you 'Akhand Bharat delusionalist', so this is not the right place to do so as it will surely lead to useless trolling.

Realistically speaking Hindus and Muslims have peacefully co-existed where hindus are in majority and muslims in minority, when the equations change we saw what happened in Kashmir valley, what's happening in Pakistan and now in Kishtwar. I dont say hindus are saints from above but if you talk about assimilation and level of tolerance, there's no comparison between hindu society and muslim society.

 

[Ayush]

There would have been GPDF (Greater Punjab Defense Forum)

or ABDF(akhand bharat defence forum)

 

[navtrek]

Yes India is good pakistan is Bad so please Quit your ranting. I guess it is a measure of their incompetence that they ripped a country out of india. I have seen how muslims are treated in India and i am glad that my ancestors gave us this land to live free of Hindu oppression.

Exceptions cannot be made out as examples. In a country where Hindus and Muslims lived together for centuries all of a sudden people felt oppressed ? Partition was a cause of a few peoples political ambitions and personal glory the common people just became scape goats.