Why Pakistan's Mohammed Ali Jinnah Was No Nelson Mandela: Kapil Komireddi

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

Jinnah never advocated partition from the start, he was forced to make that choice in 1946 due to inflexibility of nehru and congress, who were refusing to give autonomy to muslim majority regions...

 

[American Pakistani]

Unsubstantiated/ unprovable tales are dime a dozen.
I called you a Wannabe because despite your limited knowledge on the subject..you try to act like an expert, which is a trade mark of a poser.

Plz read my Post # 44.

Islam or Arabic is not property of any one group, according to Holy Quran e Pak & our Great Prophet Muhammad(P.B.U.H)(S.A.W) Islam & Arabic belongs to every Muslim in the world so i don't really care if you call me wannabe or whatever.

 

[RangerPK]

I remember by this term, one of indian Muslim here in US told me that in india exteremist indian Hindu curse them & tell them to stop being Arab wanabee & give up Islam. There is not one or two things but several things why being a Muslim is exteremely difficult in india.

Only Islam is acceptable religion to God. The idol worshipers will regret and grief on the day of judgement.

 

[American Pakistani]

That is Baqarah not bakr or baqr.

Yes it is Baqarah Eid the correct form.

 

[MST]

Why do some Indian authors need to write these kind of ****. They are seriously a Pain in the ***.

This sentence shows the authors delusions.

We are not and never were one people. Both Pakistan and India make up different ethnic groups, so no we are not the same

I totally agree with you

 

[American Pakistani]

Only Islam is acceptable religion to God. The idol worshipers will regret and grief on the day of judgement.

Please Sir, lets not get into it. We beleive in our religion & it teaches us not to talk bad about anyone's religion.

 

[Android]

Only Islam is acceptable religion to God. The idol worshipers will regret and grief on the day of judgement.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

stupid article i must say....there is no person in the history of pakistan like quaid-e-azam .....

I place allama iqbal above jinnah....allama sahab ki poetry ko parhiye pir aapko andaza ho jaye ga ke main aisa kyun keh raha hun.

 

[airmarshal]

This is the evidence of his utter ignorance, Indians have NEVER been one people,one nation, India always has been a multi cultural society,fragmented into different jurisdictions. Every time they were held together in one unit,it was done by force. This is why Nehru was keen to curb the "right to peaceful secession" claws from the Indian constitution.

Indians think Jinnah divided India. Jinnah was the biggest advocate of Hindu Muslim unity. He was marginalised and looked down by high caste Hindu leader Nehru and other of his associates in Congress.

The reason he created Pakistan was very obvious. Read his 15 October 1937 speech in Lucknow and you will get all answers on why he single-mindedly determined and pursued creation of a separate homeland for Muslims of subcontinent.

I m proud of my leader and my faith in him and his colleagues is irrevocable.

Some exceprts from that speech below


In pursuance of that decision, the Muslim League Central Parliamentary Board was established in June 1936, and also in various provinces Provincial Boards were established, to give effect to the resolution and the instructions of the League. It was not without difficulty, and it was no small task, to be performed in the absence of any previous preparations or any existing efficient organisation and machinery. It was a stupendous undertakmg to contest elections in all the provinces, especially when Musalmans all over India are numerically in a minority and weak, educationally backward, and economically nowhere.

There never had been made any systematic effort for their social and economic uplift. Whereas our sister communities have gone far ahead with their organisations, and the systematic programme supported by a large bulk of people, especially the Hindus, who are not only in a majority but better trained, more disciplined, and far better equipped educationally, economically, and financially.
..

..

The present leadership of the Congress, especially during the last ten years, has been responsible for alienating the Musalmans of lndia more and more, by pursuing a policy which is exclusively Hindu; and since they have formed the Governments in six provinces where they are in a majority they have by their words, deeds, and programme shown more and more that the Musalmans cannot expect any justice or fair play at their hands. Whenever they are in majority and wherever it suited them, they refused to co-operate with the Muslim League Parties and demanded unconditional surrender and signing of their pledges.
..
..

No settlement with the majority community is possible, as no Hindu leader speaking with any authority shows any concern or genuine desire for it. Honourable settlement can only be achieved between equals, and unless the two parties learn to respect and fear each other, there is no solid ground for any settlement. Offers of peace by the weaker party always mean confession of weakness, and an invitation to aggression. Appeals to patriotism, justice, and fair play, and for good will, fall flat. It does not require political wisdom to realise that all safeguards and settlements would be a scrap of paper, unless they are backed up by power. Politics means power, and not relying only on cries of justice or fair play or good will. Look at the nations of the world, and look at what is happening every day. See what has happened to Abyssinia; look at what is happening to China and Spain--and not to say [=not to speak] of the tragedy of Palestine to which I shall refer later.

The Congress High Command speaks in different voices. One opinion is that there is no such thing as [the] Hindu-Muslim question, and there is no such thing as [the] Minorities question, in the country. The other high opinion is that if a few crumbs are thrown to the Musalmans in their present disorganised and helpless state, you can manage them. They are sadly mistaken if they think that the Musalmans can be imposed upon. The All-India Muslim League has now come to live, and play its just part in the world of Indian politics; and the sooner [this] is realised and reckoned with, [the] better it will be for all interests concerned. The third opinion is that there is no light to be seen through the impenetrable darkness; but as the Congress goes on acquiring strength and power, so the past promises of the blank cheques remain unfilled and unsigned.


I want the Musalmans to ponder over the situation and decide their own fate by having one single, definite, uniform policy which should be loyally followed throughout India. The Congressite Musalmans are making a great mistake when they preach unconditional surrender. It is the height of [a] defeatist mentality to throw ourselves on the mercy and good will of others, and the highest act of perfidy to the Musalman community; and if that policy is adopted, let me tell you, the community will seal its doom and will cease to play its rightful part in the national life of the country and the Government.

Only one thing can save the Musalmans and energise them to regain their lost ground. They must first recapture their own souls, and stand by their lofty position and principles which form the basis of their great unity and which bind them in one body-politic. Do not be disturbed by the slogans and the taunts such as are used against the Musalmans--Communalists, toadies, and reactionaries. The worst today on earth, the most wicked communalist today amongst Muslims, when he surrenders unconditionally to the Congress and abuses his own community, becomes the nationalist of nationalists to*morrow! These terms and words and abuses are intended to create an inferiority complex amongst the Musalmans, and to demoralise them; and are intended to be sown in their midst and give us a bad name in the world abroad. This is the standard of propaganda which can only be treated with contempt.

The All-India Muslim League certainly and definitely stands to safeguard the rights and interests of the Musalmans and other minorities effectively. That is its basic and cardinal principle. This is the casus belli ['cause of war']. That is why the Muslim League and those who stand by it have incurred the displeasure of the Congress, for what [=why] else are we doing what the Congress objects to? They [=Muslim League supporters] are doing exactly what we decided two years ago. The League is not going to allow the Musalmans to be exploited either by the British Government or any other party or group, inside the legislatures or outside. The Congress with all its boasts has done nothing in the past for the Musalmans. It has failed to inspire confidence and to create a sense of security amongst the Musalmans and other minorities.

The Congress attempt, under the guise of establishing mass contact with the Musalmans, is calculated to divide and weaken and break the Musalmans, and is an effort to detach them from their accredited leaders. It is a dangerous move, and it cannot mislead anyone. All such manoeuvres will not succeed, notwithstanding the various blandishments, catchwords, and slogans. The only honest and straightforward course is to give the minorities a fair deal. All talk of the hunger and poverty is intended to lead the people towards socialistic and communistic ideas for which India is far from prepared.

Speech by M. A. Jinnah to the Muslim League, Lucknow, 1937

 

[KingMamba]

Mandela's "non-violent" struggle?? The author forgets Mandela was a part of a terrorist organization that had committed numerous bombings all over South Africa, what does the author think he spent 27 years in jail for???

Mandela fought for civil liberties through violence, while Jinnah fought for independence. So yes Jinnah was no Mandela, he was better than Mandela.

 

[INDIC]

Jinnah never advocated partition from the start, he was forced to make that choice in 1946 due to inflexibility of nehru and congress, who were refusing to give autonomy to muslim majority regions...

Partition was inevitable, in 1937 Muslim League lost the election but with Pakistan motto they achieved miracle in 1946.

Congress accepted the partition to save non-Muslim majority East Punjab, West Bengal and Assam from becoming Pakistan otherwise we would be having border of Pakistan till Delhi.Jinnah 33% electorate for 25% of population and weak centre was an unjust demands.

 

[Kompromat]

What force? who was forcing our ancestors to live together? don't mistake me- I am way too glad that we are not from the same country but those people lived together by force or by choice and there had to be some judaai feeling.

India always had never been a union except Orangzaib and Ashoka. Both of them achieved the so called union via force only to be fragmented. There is no such thing as "our ancestors" or "us the people". India was is and will remain a multi cultural place,the very argument of "us" is flawed.

Partition was inevitable, in 1937 Muslim League lost the election but with Pakistan motto they achieved miracle in 1946.

Congress accepted the partition to save non-Muslim majority East Punjab, West Bengal and Assam from becoming Pakistan otherwise we would be having border of Pakistan till Delhi.Jinnah 33% electorate for 25% of population and weak centre was an unjust demands.

And one would wonder "what" lead to that "miracle"

 

[Android]

India always had never been a union except Orangzaib and Ashoka. Both of them achieved the so called union via force only to be fragmented. There is no such thing as "our ancestors" or "us the people". India was is and will remain a multi, cultural place,the very argument of "us" is flawed.

When did Aurangzeb united India???

 

[Ganymede]

While i only read the parts that op highlighted, it has become quite evident to me that the author is trying to compare apples and oranges.A rather rudimentary example that pops in my head would that be of MLK and Malcolm X. While both strove for civil rights, their approach was poles apart. So while MLK had his followers, Malcolm had them too. If you listen to some Malcolm X's speeches, he may come off as a rather unsavory character but he was anything but. It's a manner of how one perceives things. His criticism of the white mindset wasn't specifically aimed towards the white populace but the racist mindset that viewed African Americans as second class citizens, similarly, when Jinnah dispatched that letter to that town in the Himalayas, he was criticizing the mindset that was on display during the time congress wielded power. The reason behind Jinnah's (a major propagator of Hindu Muslim unity) conviction that Hindus and Muslims cannot coexist in the subcontinent was the congress party's predisposition to be leaning more so towards the Hindu populace while somewhat ignoring that of the Muslims as made evident by the 1938 Pirpur report. About what Dr Zakaria's comments about Mr. Jinnah, like Maulana Azad, he was part of the fabric of the congress party and its agenda and therefore viewed anything pertaining to the Pakistan movement with a cloak of bias.
It was not Jinnah that divided the people of the subcontinent, it was the people themselves coupled with certain individuals who let power get to their head and therefore sowed the seeds of discontent amongst the population and the rest as they say is history.

 

[Kompromat]

If it is not unified than why did the name 'India' existed since 500 BC?

Read your own history, India had never been a centrally ruled federation with two exceptions of Ashoka and Orangzaib which lead to further fragmentation. The word India is derived from the word Indus/Sindh and has evolved over time. The ancient name of India is Bhaarat and its inhabitants known as Bhaarti/s.