By X.T.M | Acting Editor, Brown Pundits
“Qureshi” has glibly informed me that caste doesn’t exist in Pakistan, and that had I not deleted his comment, I would have seen his thoughtful explanation on why his ancestors would (or wouldn’t- tough to follow) have “embraced caste.”
Let’s address both claims.
I. Denial, and the Geography of Amnesia
First: the deletion. The reason I removed Qureshi’s comment was simple—it referred to “when the Hindus left Pakistan in 1947.” As if they left. As if it were a long vacation. That turn of phrase is emblematic of a deep, disturbing historical erasure—a civilizational amnesia that’s not just inaccurate, but actively offensive.
To phrase the violent dislocation of millions as “leaving” is a textbook case of internalized Hinduphobia—a posture so normalized in Pakistani elite discourse that it barely registers as cruelty.
This is not about word policing. It’s about confronting the inherited violence buried in euphemism.
II. The Caste Glasshouse
Second: the denial of caste. Pakistan—especially in its Hindu half (Punjab, Sindh, and Hindko-speaking NWFP regions)—is deeply caste-stratified. Whether it’s the biradari system, zaat, qabila, or ashraf-ajlaf dynamics, caste is alive and operative but even more pernicious in its invisibility.
In the Turanian-half, whether you’re Pathan or Baloch, tribal structures substitute—but they map structurally onto the same social hierarchies caste enforces. To deny this is either propaganda or profound self-deception.
For instance, when my (Muhajir) best friend’s sister married her Punjabi Muslim boyfriend, her prospective mother-in-law asked on their zaat—to the general amusement of my friend’s entire clan (one generation removed from UP, three generations from Afghanistan).
Qureshi & Kabir are the white liberals who “don’t see race.” And ironically, it’s the same caste-afflicted English-speaking elite who throttle reform, gatekeep discourse, and sit atop the bureaucracy and academia (as Hillary Clinton said the way to buy the Pakistani elite is get their kids into US colleges & a greencard)—much like the very Brahminical classes they publicly disdain. It’s not caste they reject. It’s only caste without their name at the top.
III. The Muslim Commentariat and the Culture of Evasion
This, sadly, isn’t confined to Pakistan. It’s become a pattern among large swathes of the Muslim commentariat—whether discussing Pakistan, the ongoing tragedy in Palestine, or broader global affairs:
-
Constant calls for minority rights in the West or India.
-
But no interrogation of minority rights within Muslim-majority states.
-
Outrage at Modi, but silence at Saudi beheadings or Iranian repression.
-
A blind spot when it comes to the structures they uphold.
And when pressed, the response is often glib: “It’s an Islamic republic.” Yes. That’s the problem. Meanwhile, they operate like a silent pack. Kabir absorbs the outrage, and I instinctively sympathize—until I realize, as xperia2015 rightly pointed out, that many of our Indian commenters must remain anonymous just to speak freely. That’s the very point of Brown Pundits: to allow truth to surface, even when names cannot.
IV. Triggering as a Tactic
And so, as moderator, I sometimes get played. The Pakistani bloc pleads injury and offense—while trafficking in the kind of casual Hinduphobia (“Modi evil,” “we’re Islamic,” “we’ll nuke you Indians back”) that even the most unhinged Hindutva accounts would hesitate to post in public.
The fact that Hindutva-leaning Indians must anonymize their identities, while Pakistanis can speak openly, reveals the stark asymmetry in what qualifies as “respectable opinion.” In Pakistan, near-genocidal rhetoric often passes without consequence. In India, by contrast, the Hindu citizen is expected—rightly—to navigate public discourse with care, distinguishing between political critique and communal harm.
What we see—again and again—is a rhetorical pattern designed not for dialogue, but for deflection. Commenters microaggress, poke, trigger—and then, when the other side finally reacts, they fall back on outrage:
“See? You’re the uncivilized ones.”
This is not an accident. It’s a strategy. A learned habit of asymmetric discourse, where aggression is cloaked in cleverness, and reform is throttled in the name of victimhood.
V. The Diaspora Lens: Who’s Really Better Off?
Let’s state the obvious:
Even under Modi, most Indian Muslims are materially and educationally better off than Pakistan’s general population. Honey Singh’s critiques of Pakistan are often devastating—and difficult to dismiss—when not derailed by his own lapses into abuse.
If Pakistan is such a sanctuary, why is there no mass migration of Indian Muslims across the border? Why do they aspire to London, not Lahore?
It’s not rhetorical. It’s a lived verdict.
VI. What South Asia Exports, and What It Keeps
And here’s the twist: many of these elite South Asian voices live in the West or are Western. They wrap themselves in Western liberalism when convenient, but remain structurally aligned with a South Asian feudalism they’ve never truly confronted.
Take the recent comment from our esteemed resident Pandit, who I know fairly well for nearly a decade, implicitly calling Dr. V a “self-respecting woman.”
That’s not praise. It’s a gatekeeping label, framed in patriarchal norms. Dr. V’s accomplishments speak for themselves—citations, publications, scientific rigour. She needs no badge of gendered approval.
To use such language is to expose the gap between performative modernity and internal reform. You can take the Desi bloke out of South Asia, but you can’t always take South Asian patriarchy out of the Desi.
VII. A Final Note
I’ve always been anti-war. I don’t support escalatory state violence—not post-Pahalgam, not post-Uri. But let’s not deny what Pakistan is—a hub for guerrilla insurgency and destabilization across its borders.
India, for all its flaws, is a civilizational state with a coherent national identity. Pakistan, by contrast, is a post-colonial improvisation—whose very elites are now mimicking the same colonial structures they claim to have overthrown by troubling ancient nation-states like “India that is Bharat”, “Afghanistan that is Turan” & “Iran that is Persia”.
That’s not resistance. That’s repetition.
wowza. Where the heck did this truthbomb of a post come from.
I just thought about how Dr. Lalchand’s family had to flee Sindh and that was triggering..
I get it, some of our ‘Amreeki Citizen’ comments were like that for me. We’ve all been there.
X.T.M shows his consummate skill at summing up a flame war.
I don’t know how much patriarchy you can attribute to the comment when it is in reference to not visiting an extreme patriarchy.
No self respecting person would like to be forced to change their appearance/attire when visiting a country, it just isn’t applicable to men in Iran / islamic world.
India has some Matriarchal culture (Nairs in Kerala and many north east tribes). I don’t have lived experience but the dynamics aren’t particularly better.
Also we need a map on the HDI of states.
It’s really like the Indian union is irrelevant to HDI. TN + Kerala = SL = Maldives. Bhutan = Sikkim, WB = Bangladesh, Nepal = UP, Burma = Northeast.
Only western India <> Pakistan. I think we all have very strong feelings about why that is and I don’t want to get into it.
The question is why are all the others the same? None of the small countries did a Singapore, and none of the regions in India utilised the advantages of the union to forge ahead.
Northeast is actually a lot higher than Myanmar simply due to westernization due to Christianity.
A lot of the NE states have HDI 0.7+. Assam, them most Indic of the NE states is the lowest and even that is higher at 0.653.
Also you asked this before but TN was way poorer than SL. Now they have a higher pci and growing at a faster rate.
And this is due to being part of the union as I don’t think so many factories would pop up in TN if TN was a country. Those factories serve the entirety of India, a 1.4 billion population as well as international exports.
And Western India > Pakistan is obviously there simply due to land reforms etc.
I did ask it before, must have missed your answer, the map on the post reminded me. I find it baffling as to why India or these regions don’t have more variation. TN is only now pulling ahead but not so much yet on the HDI. I guess northeast vs myanmar has the greatest variance ignoring the PKN sector.
I would speculate that communism and radical Islamization throws off progress in some sectors, (the effects seem to offset in WB.vs.BanglaD)
I’m beginning to feel as long as you don’t really do something stupid with the govt like full blown communism or debt spirals or a budget draining Junta then your geography and culture contribute much more to your progress than anyone you elect. So how much of this growth can Modi & the BJP truly claim.
Needs some looking into.
Yeah, I didn’t reply there.
Fair—and I recognize that you are reflecting on someone else’s phrasing, not endorsing it directly. Still, I think it’s worth pausing to unpack why “self-respecting woman” struck a nerve—especially in reference to someone like Dr. V.
She’s not simply “a woman”—she’s a senior scientist with a global reputation, published work, and citations across fields. To frame her—however casually—in terms of moral respectability rather than intellectual stature risks reducing her to a gendered archetype. That kind of language might pass unnoticed in the moment, but it flattens a whole person into a single, familiar silhouette.
And to be candid: if the comment had referred to a male academic—especially one well-established in the sciences—I doubt the phrase “self-respecting man” would have surfaced. There’s a certain rhetorical ease some take when speaking about women in public life—particularly women of color—that doesn’t always cross gender or ethnic lines. It’s not malicious. But it is structural.
This space—Brown Pundits—is entirely male in tone and rhythm. That’s not a flaw. But it does require awareness. How we speak, who we center, and what assumptions slip in when we’re trying to be casual—those things matter.
You’re right that Iran’s policies are patriarchal and coercive. But for me, this wasn’t just about the substance of those policies. It was about how easily the logic behind them seeps into our language—even when we’re trying to critique them.
Appreciate the thoughtful exchange—as always.
—X.T.M
Due respect to Dr V and her many accomplishments, I was a bit unclear in making my point.
Suppose I said no self-respecting man like Xerses would want to live in a matrilineal society where the parentage from the father is often left unknown.
I could very well have used neutral language and said “self-respecting person”, but that feels less appropriate in context.
In the context of not travelling to Iran “self-respecting woman” sounds very reasonable to me.
We react to ingrained anathemas even though they are not intended by the person voicing them. Your article about Brahmin excellence provoked the revulsion of caste based comparison in me instantly, there was a good point in there but I had to first recognise my internal block and your intent.
I’m not sure why you would use the analogy of a man in a matriarchal society where the male parentage is unknown. Its almost like the male parentage somehow needs more acknowledgment and importance. Why? Women biologically have children, yet there is no way to connect the child to the mother via a name or any other identifier in a patriarchal society. Would it be appropriate to phrase this the other way?
Iran is an extreme like other similar societies where there is a complete erasure of the female gender. Afghanistan is the nadir.
I do not think there is an example of the shoe being on the other foot except maybe of the fabled Amazons.
Just arguing the semantics and logic of why the line seemed fine.
Self-respecting person would be appropriate in most situations.
Self-respecting
insert genderwould not go to a place whereinsert same genderare oppressed.Since men are mostly doing the oppressing, the counter example was a bit of a stretch to find. You have something better? Did you really find the original line inappropriate? Maybe my counter example was.
Much is made of ‘The Patriarchy’. As a product of one, the thought experiment of what a Matriarchy would have felt like, is interesting. Your own kids are unknown (not just unnamed) to you and you take on the fathers role for the sisters child. I have to admit it felt quite uncomfortable and concluded that I was too ingrained in the current system to desire a switch.
Unfortunately, the closest example I could think of was of the Amazons. To my limited knowledge they just used men as sperm donors and had a preference for female children.
Yes, self-respecting person is the most appropriate because no self-respecting person would want to put/ see their spouse in a situation like in the Iran example; gender notwithstanding.
I think we’re all conditioned in the patriarchal set-up to different degrees. I’m no different either, but conditioning takes time to shake off; if not parental, definitely societal. Not easy to change what has been the set-up for centuries if not more. Many times it’s the women who are more up in arms at any attempt to modify the status quo. It’s quite a struggle at times to find suitable examples to even show the inherent disparity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosuo, the closest I’ve found to the amazon style matriarchy.
The Indian ones like Nairs and Khasi in meghalaya are known as matriarchies but it is more to do with inheritance, the men are still largely in power.
Interesting, thanks for sharing. Ultimately, it’s the power structure that matters! So even if its a matrilinear or matrifocal structure, if the power rests with the men, then it’s lopsided despite certain concessions being given to the women.
A very basic online course on the Vedas I had taken long back spoke of matrilocality in Ancient India. It was not as common as patrilinearity of course, but societies clearly evolved with time to becoming firmly more patriarchal except clearly in the NE states and Kerala.
Thank you for this thoughtful aside. As a woman of colour, I very much appreciate addressing the subtle structural sexism whether inadvertent or not. It’s a reality women face every day. It also makes us self-censor more and tone down our responses in a male dominated space. Thus far I had refrained from commenting on any gender based comments, despite those being red flags for me and you can probably appreciate why. I therefore prefer complete anonymity as a result especially on the internet.
oh amazing! I had no idea you were a women.. Apologies I wrote an all male space; we definitely would love to hear your contributions and thank you ..
No apologies please, I certainly was happy to mask any identifier. I just did not bother to correct any assumptions either way 🙂
I just responded to your message because I deeply appreciated the thoughtfulness of your message. It is a rare and fantastic trait in a man to be proud of his lovely and accomplished wife. Best wishes always to you both.
Sister Nivedita should have given me a clue.
Sister Nivedita born Margaret Elizabeth Noble; 28 October 1867 – 13 October 1911) was an Irish teacher, author, social activist, school founder and disciple of Swami Vivekananda.She spent her childhood and early youth in Ireland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sister_Nivedita
Sharp observation, the name I post under is inspired in part by her indeed.
Both xperia and Kabir assumed correctly that I’m a woman based on their responses to me.
I don’t think it is controversial to say that in Islam caste doesn’t have the religious sanction that it does in Hinduism. Muslims are considered equal in the eyes of Allah. They pray together in the same mosques.
Yes, “biradri” exists. But this again has no religious sanction. It’s not an Islamic thing. It’s a feature of South Asian culture.
Second, “Modi evil” (which is not something I’ve said, it’s much more nuanced) is not “Hinduphobia”. It’s a criticism of a particular leader not of an entire religion.
“In India the Hindu citizen is expected to distinguish between political critique and communal harm”– Really? That’s why the BJP politician called Colonel Qureshi “the sister of terrorists”? That’s a blatantly offensive thing to say about a Muslim army officer.
Finally, “why is there no mass migration of Indian Muslims across the border”? One reason is that Pakistan closed the doors on that in the 1950s ( I could have the date wrong). Indian citizens en masse have no claim to refugee status in Pakistan. We have 240 million people of our own.
Also, X.T.M it’s good that you are sensitive about Hinduphobia. Please apply the same standard to Islamophobia.
It’s completely unacceptable to accuse a Muslim commentator of “taqiyya”. Call out your right-wing Indian friends. Otherwise, you have basically stated that on BP bullying the few Pakistani commentators is fine, but the minute a Pakistani responds in kind, suddenly the tone policing starts.
Kabir,
I trust you understand—and I hope you fully acknowledge—the importance of calling out Hinduphobia. On that, we’re in complete agreement. We must apply the same standard to Islamophobia. That’s non-negotiable.
But let’s be clear about what’s actually unfolding here.
Your message reads less like a principled appeal and more like a performance of moral offense. That’s your prerogative—sometimes. But let’s not mistake personal irritation for structural imbalance.
You’ve often referenced your U.S. and U.K. education, and you participate here as a Western (dual?) citizen. And yet, you speak with sweeping authority on Pakistan—a country you no longer functionally inhabit. You may spend time in Lahore, yes—but if there were a real war tomorrow, you’d be on the first flight out. That’s not a disqualification. But it does raise an eyebrow when diaspora privilege is used to critique Indian voices while offering selective silence on dysfunctions within your own ancestral polity.
You’re articulate. At times, deeply thoughtful. But what concerns me is your selective deployment of progressive language. Terms like taqiyya, triggering, gaslighting—they carry weight. But when wielded solely to shield your own side, and never as tools for mutual clarity, they become rhetorical armor—not bridges.
And meanwhile, someone like Qureshi—openly nationalist, often inflammatory—is allowed to say what he likes without comment. Did Hindus “leave” in 1947? Did the Pandits “leave” in 1987? These are not slips of the tongue. They are symptoms of denialism and bigotry. Yet from you? Not a word. Where is your outrage then?
This is the danger: when liberal vocabulary becomes a mechanism of factional defense, not ethical introspection. When Islamophobia is invoked as a shield but never weighed against the very real Hinduphobia—or the systemic erasure of minorities in Muslim-majority states, including Pakistan.
True liberalism isn’t about defending your “team.” It’s about centering justice, equity, and wisdom—even when it’s uncomfortable. Especially when it’s inconvenient. It means holding your allies to the same standard you demand of your adversaries.
That’s the standard I aim to uphold—for this forum, and for myself.
— X.T.M
Acting Editor, Brown Pundits
“A country you no longer functionally inhabit”– No, I’m sorry. I live in Pakistan. That is my home. Yes, I’m a dual citizen. So are many many Pakistanis. The US allows dual citizenship.
I didn’t see Qureshi’s comment. Obviously Hindus didn’t “leave” in 1947. Neither did Muslims “leave”. They were pushed out as refugees.
Glad we’re clear that people here are not allowed to accuse Muslims of “taqqiya”. Hopefully that will be enforced going forward.
I’m happy to critique Pakistan. But that is an internal conversation. I’m not going to do it when any concessions I make are going to be thrown in my face by right-wing Indians.
Also, I only brought up my credentials as a foreign citizen from an upper-class background when Honey Singh threw out comments about Pakistanis riding motorbikes and not being able to afford flour. Yes, many Pakistanis are poor. So are many Indians.
There are many fewer Pakistanis on this site than there are Indians. So while sensitivity towards Hinduphobia is fine (though criticism of the BJP or Modi cannot be equated with Hinduphobia), the same standards must be upheld when it comes to Islam. If people can call me an “Islamist”, I can certainly call them “Hindutvadi”. Otherwise, you are really saying to the Indians “Go on and bully the Pakistanis.” And to the Pakistanis, you say “Don’t you dare respond”.
Its always fascinating when the aspiring bullies simultaneously affect such a victim complex.
But the fact remains that India has a higher HDI/pci than Pakistan and has a lower poverty rate.
These are reported by the UN and the World Bank.
No one has any interest in bullying Pakistanis who speak with rationality and logic.
But Pakistanis who are out of touch with reality and who overestimate what their country is need to brought down a few notches.
Fact is Pakistan is behind India in every socioeconomic statistic (all verified by bodies like IMF, UN, WB etc).
Nothing wrong with that. India is also behind many countries.
But when you pretend otherwise and say outright lies, there needs to be a correction.
Kabir,
If there were a war—with existential and apocalyptic consequences—would you, or would you not, invoke your American citizenship and return to the United States?
If the answer is yes—and let’s be honest, it should be—then you must concede a simple truth:
You do not share the same stakes as the vast majority of Pakistanis.
And yet, I see you routinely raise the war-cry for a conflict that, in all likelihood, would not cost you your life.
That’s not analysis. That’s indulgence—made possible by distance, privilege, and the safety net of a second passport.
What’s your point? Most of the Indians who comment here also don’t live in India.
You seem to be implicitly saying that your right wing Indian friends can bully Pakistanis all they like but how dare we respond.
If you truly aim for neutrality (and i will take your word for it that you do) you must stop them from ever accusing a Muslim of “taqiyya” or calling someone an “Islamist”. Otherwise, we know which side you are on and it’s clearly not Pakistan’s.
You can turn your site into an echo-chamber for right wing Indians. That’s fine. No self-respecting Pakistani will comment on a site where it is OK to bully us.
I live in India.
India is not Pakistan where one has to be from abroad to speak English.
The most damning indictment of the Pakistani educational system is that their elite take the British O/A levels while Indian elites study in the Indian CBSE/ICSE board.
Even the diaspora schools have this gap.
We have all seen that “Sacrifice my life for Pakistan” video. That is apparently a Pakistani school in Saudi. If English level proficiency is that bad in an international school, I don’t know what to say about local Pakistani schools.
In fact in the middle east, lots of Pakistanis go to Indian schools.
What’s your point?
“One has to be from abroad to speak English”. My parents went to elite schools in Pakistan where they were taught English by Irish nuns. Ever heard of “Convent of Jesus and Mary”?
That was back in the day when Pakistan still had the benefits of Indian institutions after partition (same with the cricket and hockey teams which have declined as well). Zia’s Islamization finished that.
I doubt you would have Irish nuns in Pakistan now lol.
Contrast that to India. Goa where I live has plenty of British, Americans, Russians, other Europeans living permanently here.
“Self-respecting Pakistani” is a bit of an oxymoron.
Yet you expect Indians to engage in a “neutral” manner when you critique India.
You are free to critique Pakistan. I don’t have an issue with that. I do have an issue with the tone sometimes which comes off as extremely hateful.
Celebrating the deaths of Pakistani women and children and labeling them “terrorists” is not critiquing Pakistan. It’s deeply offensive.
Naah, there were terrorists there. The funerals and who attended them prove it.
Go ahead and believe your Indian propaganda.
According to your media, the Indian flag was flying in Lahore and we were about to surrender. None of that happened.
That is hyperbolic media. Even Pakistanis were talking of bombing Bangalore port and hitting Delhi.
But the terrorist funerals attended by army and terrorists were broadcast by YOUR news channels, not ours.
Bangalore port lol. That was too funny seriously. People were laughing their heads off. Bangalore is landlocked!!! The Pakistani media clearly does not know geography!
You do make it difficult Kabir. In this message, your first para is lucid and one I would broadly agree with. Its hard to convey tones via written media unless the tone is obviously snarky.
The second para is just completely off tangent!
“True liberalism isn’t about defending your “team.” It’s about centering justice, equity, and wisdom—even when it’s uncomfortable. Especially when it’s inconvenient. It means holding your allies to the same standard you demand of your adversaries.”
Love this. We should all aim for this.
Brahmos of a post!! 👏
Dhanyavaad 🙏—and yes, I do have a soft spot for the name Brahm. 🙂
XTM will delete or edit my posts to change the entire content and then pretend I am Hinduphobic.
Clearly you cannot have open discussions on Hindu religion and society but you can make generalizations about Muslims ( I am fine with whatever generalizations you guys want to make as long as it’s civil and not at thr elementary school level)
Here to reiterate:
1) Indians love to be “sem2sem” with Pakistans. Their entire religion, racial complex and center of civilization lies in Pakistan. Cannot be a “civilizational state” without the civlization you are we wuzzing about.
2) Hindus are clearly not that attached to their land. Maybe you think this is insensitive but its true They leave at the first sign of trouble. Yes they left without any violence agaisnt them in Sindh. Even left Hindu majority cities without any threats or violence. Same goes for Kashmiri pundits fleeing their homeland. Even Wikipedia cannot be manipulated to suit the narrative, but then Indians get their history from Bollywood.
In contrast Muslims stay put, no matter how many mosques and seminaries you bulldoze in UP and Bihar, no many how much genocidal rhetoric you spew and no matter how many Muslims you lynch. They will stay and propagate. Clearly there is a difference.
3) Indians know the caste system is an abomination that has kept the land and its people weak and ripe for foreigners to rule. To cope with that history and feel better about it, they want to claim that other forms of hierarchies are the same as caste. No they are not. Caste system was marginally practiced in Pakistani Punjab due to its Hindu and Sikh populations but it has mostly been destroyed after 75 years of Muslim rule because now that the Dharmics are gone, caste is irrelevant.
I have lot of criticisms on other Muslim countries as well, I won’t become Islamophobic for stating those criticisms, and neither do I become Hindu phobic for pointing out its weaknesses.
Open discussions provoke thought, if you just want flame wars then I don’t have the time.
Qureshi,
Let’s be clear: this isn’t an “open discussion.” It’s a carefully staged performance—dressed up as critique, but functioning as provocation. You accuse me of editing your comments to frame you as Hinduphobic. I haven’t needed to. Your own words do the job.
1. Partition Denial Isn’t Debate
To say Hindus “left” Sindh or Kashmiri Pandits “fled” their homes without coercion is not historical commentary—it’s trauma erasure.
These weren’t migrations. They were cleansings—often violent, often final. To reduce them to choices is to mock the dead and gaslight the living.
You invoke “Wikipedia” as a standard. But even the most sanitized versions of Partition history acknowledge the mass scale of ethnic violence and dispossession. If Hindus in Pakistan had truly left without threat, why have they never returned?
2. Caste Isn’t Eliminated by Erasing Hindus
Claiming that caste no longer exists in Pakistan because the Hindus are gone is a startling admission. It suggests that the problem wasn’t hierarchy—it was the people who reminded you of it.
And it’s factually false.
Pakistan is stratified by biradari, zaat, tribal status, sect, and ethnicity. The ashraf-ajlaf distinction, the contempt for “chooras” and “kammis” in Punjabi society, the separate seating for janitorial staff in schools—all of it is caste. You may not call it that, but the structure persists.
3. Diaspora Superiority & Soft Chauvinism
Your claim that Muslims “stay and propagate” while Hindus “flee” is not just inaccurate—it’s supremacist. It positions demographic endurance as civilizational virtue, and implies that rootedness is the exclusive domain of Muslims.
And let’s be honest: many of the Muslims you refer to aren’t staying out of patriotic defiance—they’re staying because they don’t have second passports.
You, however, write from diaspora safety—mocking South Asian minorities while enjoying Western protections. That’s not bravery. It’s keyboard nationalism with no personal cost.
4. The Weaponization of “Open Dialogue”
You say you’re open to criticism of Muslim countries. But in your posts—none of it appears. All the venom is reserved for Hindus, India, or this platform’s moderators. That’s not balance. It’s factionalism posing as free speech.
And when your provocations are flagged, you pivot: “It’s just discussion. It’s just truth.”
But truth without compassion is cruelty. And debate without ethics is performance.
.
Sometimes you gotta just leave the provocations alone. When the desire is for a response by provoking you with lies just have to ignore it. The troll dies not in response but in neglect.
or you can void them, which works fairly well..
.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
As far as the talks of returning goes –
Qurratulain Hyder, one of the most famous Urdu writers went with her family to Pakistan in 1947 but returned to India 12 years later and stayed there.
Salman Rushdie, the most famous Indian novelist actually migrated to Pakistan for a few years before going to England but still considers himself Indian.
Adnan Sami, son of a Pakistani ambassador embraced Indian citizenship.
The reverse never happens.
Danish Kaneria, the only prominent Hindu Pakistani cricketer has become fully anti-Pakistan and tells of the discrimination he faced at the hand of the Inzy gang (Only Shoaib Akhtar was good to him).
I forget the name of the dalit activist who ‘chose’ Pakistan in 1947 only to run away screaming back to India in horror due to the bigotry he endured there.
Jogendra Nath Mandal
Chuhra christians in Pak should just use CAA and migrate to India.
Even Yousuf Youhana, one of their greatest batsmen was not spared.
Naah, the ones who wish to be “sem2sem” are Pakistanis.
Why would Indians want to be “sem2sem” with a country poorer and more backwards than them.
Many famous Pakistanis have mentioned they want the countries to be “sem2sem” cause a rich India would make a poor Pakistan look really bad.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/aug/14/india.features116
The countries India looks up to and wants to be “sem2sem” with and emulate are the other Asian powers who rose up from third world status to first world status.
It is Pakistanis who are a “fatherless” people.
They claim to be Mughals while the vast majority of the Mughal’s castles, tombs etc lie in India as do their descendants in UP and Bihar. Almost all Pakistanis will never get to see the Taj Mahal, the apex of Mughal culture while random Hindus will be making TikToks and Instagram reels there.
They claim to be Afghans (Ghori, Ghazni) while the real Afghans hate them and keep killing them off via TTP.
They claim to be Arabs but the Arabs keep denying them visas and some like Libya (Gaddafi stadium remember) have outright banned them.
You are one of the chief people on this forum that bullies Pakistanis. And when it doesn’t go well for you you resort to dick measuring (what’s your obsession with that)?
Or you start talking about the price of atta. You have no idea how wealthy my family is.
I don’t bully Pakistanis.
I bully Islamists and terrorist sympathizers.
You might be wealthy by “Pakistani standards” but considering Pakistan is poorer than a lot of sub-saharan African countries that ain’t much.
GDP pci
Ah yes, “Islamist”.
X.T.M. You going to let this right-wing Indian get away with this shit?
Don’t take this the wrong way Kabir but for someone who claims to be bullied you have, mocked multiple users english, insisted that you’ve had the best education, that you’re American, that you’re very rich, that you live in a mansion, that you’ve been chauffeur driven all your life. These sort of declarations don’t make you look good but invite more mockery.
You’ve called people names (dumb, stupid, enemy, hindutvadi) yourself and then asked X.T.M to censor others on your behalf.
Instead of arguing semantics, deflecting, repeating quotes you like and overall rabidly defending what you have defined as your side, you can try to be genuine about what you feel. It is nice to hear an opposing view, the theatrics are unnecessary.
There just aren’t enough English speakers in Pakistan so he has to come here amongst Indians.
Couldn’t hack it in the USA, so fled back to Lahore and now he realizes he doesn’t really gel with the local populace there so he comes here to get abused.
You’re enjoying this too much. I’m beginning to feel like I’ve ganged up against the upset poor little rich kid.
No one “fled” anywhere. The quality of life is much higher in a country where one has servants and doesn’t have to do dishes etc.
Once again you have no idea who you are speaking to.
Hahahaha, so you finally admitted it.
You couldn’t hack it in the USA “where you have to do your own dishes” never mind the thousands of other stuff which compensates for that.
So moved to Lahore to lord it over your salwar wearing 70cc riding brethren.
Considering Pakistan will remain perpetually poor, keep enjoying the servants.
Again with the obsession with “shalwars” and motorbikes.
Meanwhile so many of your own countrymen live on the streets and don’t have toilets. Grow the hell up.
Again, the Pakistani denial which I was talking about and why you need to be taken down a peg.
You are not from Japan. You are from Pakistan.
It’s your countrymen who don’t have access to toilets and are on the streets.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.STA.BASS.ZS?locations=PK-IN
And this is 2022 data. 2025 it must have diverged further.
There is NOT a SINGLE socioeconomic indicator where Pakistan outdoes India.
Now, don’t go saying World Bank is Indian propaganda.
I will move you to spam if you don’t apologise to Kabir for what you wrote.
Note to all – Qureshi is in temporary suspension so Kabir is on his “own” so I would people don’t “gang up” on him for his opinions.
Also if Kabir says something OTT, as he can, then commentators can *flag* that for voiding etc
If Kabir is who he says is – an actual Pakistan resident, who’s had the benefit and exposure of living abroad for at least a few years, that’s the type of person I’d expect to get along with, even find common ground with. Its….disturbing that given the benefit of education and exposure, he still chooses to embrace a combative narrative riddled with falsehoods.
If I were a “rightwing” Pakistan hater, I’d say let more of his tribe grow, because it would doom any slim Pakistani chances of climbing out of the hopeless morass it finds itself in.
But at the end of the day, I…. do not wish to see conflict between the people of Ind-Pak. Like the good Dr has pointed out, the day where we might see rapproachement and ‘peace’ has been pushed quite a bit further down the road at this point. Which is unfortunate.
And if one were to think from that perspective, if even the self-proclaimed educated elite of Pakistan have such massive blind spots and find it preferable to engage in anti-India hostility instead of honest discussions, then how the eff do we get there? The post-Pahalgam conflict and its aftermath has actually raised this question in mind, and its not just about one misguided Kabir. I was actually thinking of contributing a post on these lines – about why there is so much willingness in the educated elites of Pak to embrace PakMil narratives that only serve the PakMil’s interests, and that too at Pakistani expense.
We always welcome more contributors and authors; so let me know when. I just don’t want a whole load of “inactive” so as long as people can make a commitment (monthly, weekly, yearly, quarterly, daily) then we can tailor the right permissions accordingly.
It’s a fluid space but certain parameters
ok, I think I can manage monthly. will work on a quick draft. should I email it? address?
I’ll upgrade your permissions
I chalk it down to Tribal Islamism. I think most of us here (outside Pakistan, on this forum) seem to be Atheists or Agnostic or not deeply religious. It is difficult to establish common ground with the Hindu orthodox too and I find the whole dietary impositions placed on others pretty appalling.
There is some degree of nationalistic pride but not to the point where I would condone any morally dubious activity by the Indian Govt.
You scoffed at me claiming to be center-left and accused me of engaging in “taqiyya”. I think you can see from this forum that Qureshi is more right wing than I am. God forbid you come across an actual right-wing Pakistani who believes in “Ghazwa-e-Hind” or argues that Muhammad bin Qasim was the first Pakistani.
But even the most liberal Pakistanis will not be OK with Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity being violated. That’s not liberalism. That’s national suicide.
You argue that Pakistanis find it preferable to “engage in anti-India hostility”. Probably at this time there are many many Indians who find it preferable to engage in anti-Pakistan hostility. Certainly India’s Prime Minister is appealing to those instincts in his core constituency. Even post ceasefire, he’s been going around making quite a lot of warmongering statements.
Like I’ve said many times on this forum already, Hindutva in India only makes the Two Nation Theory more powerful in Pakistan.
Yes you have a right to say what you have to say; I have put Qureshi & Honey Singh on temporary suspension. They can find ways to get in touch and apologise but until then..
I could see they had attitudes and were deliberately lowering the tone.
Everyone should just do what you did; if there is something they found offensive, flag it don’t respond to it.
Flame threads add quantity but destroy the quality of the site
I’ll try once again to engage with you. I don’t know why you insist on describing yourself as ‘center-left’. Being slightly less rightwing than an extremist doesn’t make one ‘center-left’. The views you’ve espoused are still solidly right-wing. I am trying to disagree with you without setting off your personal triggers for ‘taking offense’.
On Indians and attitudes towards Pakistan – please try and understand that 30+ years of terrorism incidents – over and over, and over, have taken a serious toll. You cannot simply wish that away as ‘past history’, or some sort of false equivalency. Facts have to be taken into account, honestly, if there is to be an honest discussion. It is not partisan,to point out, that the historical track record on terrorism between India-Pakistan is overwhelmingly skewed in terms of Pakistani culpability. And in spite of this, there are multiple documented instances of Indian government outreach – starting with Vajpayee’s pre-Kargil Visit to even Modi’s multiple attempts in 2014 and later. Even after Pathankot was attacked, Modi let a Pakistani investigative team access a secure Indian base, only for Pakistani accusations of ‘false flag’.
Given this consistent, conclusive history, there is simply no basis for Pakistani protestations about ‘evidence’ for Pahalgam. Not from India, and not from most of the planet.
On ‘Hindutva’, I personally detest extremism or even political weaponizing of religious beliefs whether its for the ‘green’ team or ‘saffron’. I find it distasteful. But even there, any attempts to draw false equivalencies are intentionally dishonest at worst, ignorant at best. You cannot compare nail-scratches to a gunshot wound. There are no RSS Ajmal Kasabs. Never have been.
The Pakistan People’s Party is a center-left party. Yet even the PPP is solidly behind the Pakistan Army when it comes to Indian attacks on Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. If you describe Benazir Bhutto as “right wing”, than you have a very skewed definition of right wing. Nawaz Sharif believes in making peace with India. That’s why he was removed from power by General Musharraf.
I’m center-left because I want peace with India. I would accept the LOC being the international border. I would accept the Musharraf-Manmohan plan. However, India’s position currently is that there is nothing to talk about with Pakistan except the “return of POK”. That is a complete non-starter.
Also, right wing Pakistanis hate Hindus and not just India. I have Hindu friends from when I lived abroad (of course they are all the types of Indians who would support Congress). I have studied Hindustani classical music. No right wing Pakistani would be caught dead singing bhajans.
If you are honest, I think you will have to admit that anti-Pakistan rhetoric plays well with Modi’s core constituency. Every time there is an election, he says that victory for the opposition would be victory for Pakistan. Not just anti-Pakistan, but anti-Muslim rhetoric is a core feature of Modi’s politics. He spoke about “1000 years of slavery” which basically is a complaint about the period of Muslim rule in India. This also explains his animus against the Mughals. Modi was the Chief Minister during an anti-Muslim pogrom in Gujerat. The point is that the hatred is not all on Pakistan’s side. The RSS and BJP hate Muslims–not just Pakistan.
It’s not just Pakistan that argues that there is no evidence Pakistan was involved in Pahalgam. The international community did not condemn Pakistan by name because they have not seen any actual evidence that Pakistan had anything to do with it. Starting a war with a nuclear-armed country without conducting any kind of investigation is not justifiable.
I have no issues if you disagree with me. But there is no excuse for accusations of “taqiyya”. That is completely unacceptable.
you seem to be fixated on ‘taqiyya’ – there wasn’t any malice intended – it was just a synonym for ‘dissembling’ and obfuscating your position. Like using ‘masala’ instead of saying ‘spicing it up’. Not sure why you choose to take so much offense over it.
Regardless, its a waste of every one’s time to be stuck on such an inanity. So I’ll apologize for it if it helps.
Moving on, I think Pakistani ‘observers’ massively overstate the importance of ‘election rhetoric’. Its like valuing a Korean won at 1:1 to the Dollar, or more like an Indonesian Rupiah.
And its completely inaccurate to make blanket assumptions about any and all Indians with a harsh viewpoint on Pakistan/PakMil and dump them in this supposed ‘Modi core costituency’. Which you do, early and often. Not only is it inaccurate, its hinduphobic. The constant refrain of the BJP/RSS/ “nazi” talking point is …..for lack of patience, utterly retarded.
By the way, in the 1990s when Pakistani terrorists bombed my city and killed thousands of Indians, BJP/RSS were a blip on the national electorate, nowhere near the current dominant stage. And still you saw Pakistani Islamist terrorism unleashed by PakMil, and enthusiastically endorsed and openly supported by the Pakistani mainstream society. So please spare us the ridiculous false equivalency bullshit of “there’s hate on both sides”. Sure bigotry and prejudice exists on either side of the border. But Pakistan has institutionalized it, normalized it to a far, far greater extent than India. And that holds true, even today. Until an educated Pakistani can be honest about this basic fact, I do not think things can move forward. And this is the crux of my question. Why is the educated Pakistani so willing to delude himself about not just India, but their own dismal state of affairs?
I gave you a whole long explanation. You chose to ignore most of it. You’re not interested in honest dialogue.
The PM of your country is someone who presided over an anti-Muslim pogrom. There is no getting around that fact. Shahbaz Sharif (for example) has not presided over a pogrom on minorities.
I am extremely offended by your use of “taqiyya”. It’s a Hindu Right talking point. For your all the offense you take at so-called Hinduphobia, apparently you are alllowed to go full on Islamophobic.
Frankly you are a bigot.
Kabir, you are sitting in an Islamic State where any other religious minorities are de facto second class citizens. Mithoo Mian regularly kidnaps young Hindu and Christian girls and forcibly marries them off to older Muslim men after forceful conversion. A fate worse than death.
I need not remind you that the Gujarat riots were a direct result of the Godhra incident. And PM Modi has gone through multiple inquiries on that by those who hate him.
You will again call me a bigot. But consider this a sincere request; look inwards as well.
Ah yes, downplaying the Gujarat pogroms (NOT riots).
Textbook move of a Hindutvadi. Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt.
The fact remains: The PM of Pakistan did not preside over an anti-minority pogrom. The PM of India did. And yet you people vote for him….
Your response is along expected lines but very disappointing.
I find it very triggering when people downplay the Gujarat pogroms.
Your call for introspection is good but it applies to your side as well.
“Your side?”
India
“You people”, seriously Kabir tone down.. I’m all for your right to free speech but calm
There’s no winning here. No matter how objective you are.
The reason we try / tried to reason with Kabir was to see if there is anyone rational to have an honest conversation with. Clearly not and frankly it’s disappointing.
The RSS / BJP bogeyman / bigot is just that. To throw in our faces because the truth is too bitter to swallow. And will likely completely shatter the whole premise of their existence as an Islamic State if they actually accepted it. Hence the cognitive dissonance.
The RSS came into existence before Pakistan. A RSS supporter killed Mahatma Gandhi just a few months after Pakistan came into existence. But I guess that’s Pakistan’s fault somehow?
Your pretensions to “rationality” and “objectivity” are threadbare.
If you really wanted to have an “honest” conversation, you would “introspect” as well. Hindutva strengthens the Two Nation Theory. It’s a feedback loop.
Again the same inanities.
“You don’t know what a real right winger looks like”
Those “actual” right-wing Pakistanis are too busy going to their blue collar jobs on their 70cc bikes and have no say in the running of Pakistan.
The fact is that even “leftist” Pakistanis espouse the PakMil line. And the reason for this is existential angst. Pakistan’s entire formation was on a very bigoted right-wing premise and to recognize that would mean these leftist Pakistanis going into an existential crisis.
You can already see that fact in the post where he mentions “Two Nation Theory more powerful”.
Partition happened 70 years ago. The TNT theory is irrelevant now. It becoming “less powerful” will not negate Pakistan’s existence. India even if asked will not take over Pakistan.
Thing is Pakistanis want to justify their existence and thus go through all sorts of coping. A newer breed of Pakistanis know that Bin Qasim theory doesn’t hold up and is now trying to build some “Indus nationalism”.
Right wing Pakistanis have no say in the running of Pakistan? Seriously? The Chief of Army Staff is arguably the most powerful man in the country. He definitely has a say in the running of Pakistan.
The irony is that the RSS and the Pakistan Army completely agree on TNT. It is the Congress party which has historically believed in an India that belongs to all of its citizens.
If you really want to weaken the hold the Pakistan Army has over Pakistan, you need to weaken Hindutva in India.
why does anything in India, justify kleptocracy and bigotry in Pakistan. That’s BS. And a bluff that has to be called.
The reason is one of “existential angst”.
The thing is that the formation of Pakistan was based on a flimsy premise in the first place.
After partition most Indian Muslims did not leave and almost all of the important sites of Indo-Islamic heritage remain in India. And then in 1971, their coreligionists collaborated with the “kuffars” and created their own country.
To adopt logic and reason would have to embrace that the formation of their country was a mistake. Nothing wrong with this admittance as it would not negate Pakistan – not like India would take over. But it would hurt egos and lead to a sort of existential crisis. Like say finding out you were adopted.
And this is why even English educated Pakistanis peddle lies and are right wingers. That demographic in India would be extremely left liberal and anti-Modi.
You also see some English speaking Pakistanis trying to nowadays create a fake “Indus nationalism”. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Like you said, this is actually good cause that means Pakistan will remain where it is while the rest of the subcontinent (and the world – African countries are also having massive economic growth) leaves it behind.
Sorry Kabira
Stick to a proper name; otherwise I will simply send all your comments to spam.
I have written many posts on commentator etiquette and protocol, which I expect adhered to.
Like I said, I’m respectful when people are respectful to me. But if someone tries to troll me, I can troll them right back. I don’t stand for bullies. People who try to attack me personally must be prepared for personal attacks in return.
Why is it unacceptable for me to call someone a “Hindutvadi” but perfectly fine for me to be called an “Islamist”? What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
I eat beef so I am not a Hindutvadi.
Do you eat pork?
The point is that if “Hindutvadi” is an insult than so is “Islamist”. You can’t be allowed to call people “Islamist” if you are not prepared to be called “Hindutvadi”.
I don’t care either way, Islamist.
I’m done with you. Not going to feed the troll any further.
X.T.M: Flagging this comment for homophobia and misogyny.
Yes
Stop
Kabir says: I don’t think it is controversial to say that in Islam caste doesn’t have the religious sanction that it does in Hinduism.
Kabir Makes a very important point. Caste does not have Religious sanction in Islam (and Buddhism).
I see this in play in SL. Sri Lankan Tamil politicians (many protestant) will never hug the average voter.
The Sinhalese politicians born after Independence hug and embrace all and sundry (eg Rajapakses)
On a more serious note, the prevalence of caste in subcontinental muslims can literally be seen in India.
Many Muslim castes come under OBC (Ansari, Arain, Gurjar, Jat etc) in either the central or state lists and they get affirmative action.
These are literally the same “biradiris” present in Pakistan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_Other_Backward_Classes_communities_in_India
I have encouraged you re high quality comments but if you disrespect BP forums again even your high quality comments will be voided.
It was a very disgusting thing you wrote and you will need to apologise.
As mentioned I have put Qureshi, on temporary suspension (for obnoxious behaviour, so Kabir is on “his own” now. So I don’t want a pack circling him and it seems you are the one who goes quickest to insult.
If you want to continue posting comments you will have to apologise to Kabir. Enough is enough
Thank you. The homophobia just came out of nowhere. Completely randomly.
Be honest now. I thought you were all for the semantics. It wasn’t homophobia at all. It was an ugly insinuation but it doesn’t imply that he has a prejudice against gay people. His aim was to insult you, not mocking homosexuals.
If you are actually gay, he could not have possibly known that.
Not condoning the post, but as an offender yourself I find the switch to victim galling.
Kabir is not playing victim. HoneySingh is going beyond the pale like Qureshi.
You might very well judge it to be so. He wasn’t being homophobic. Kabir has placed a tremendous emphasis on the proper use of word meanings. I expect him to adhere to his own rules for others.
Even if I grant you that it wasn’t homophobic exactly, it was certainly transphobic.
In either case, it was completely uncalled for. Commenting on someone’s sex life (even if what you say is completely false) is unacceptable.
Qureshi is an Islamist supremacist.
I am an atheist, born Hindu though and I realize the faults in Hinduism like the caste system and support things like affirmative action/reservations.
I just reply to Islamist/terrorist sympathizing nonsense sprouted by Kabir.
While Kabir isn’t as bad as Qureshi, he does sprout some inanities.
I apologize Kabira if you felt offended.
There was nothing homophobic or even offensive about that post imo.
Just stated a reason because of which you might have moved to Pakistan. Never said it was wrong or bad.
I’ll stick to using facts/statistics to show you how Pakistan is so far behind India.
You might not like those as well but at least you can’t cry wolf.
This is the most non-apology apology ever. “If you felt offended”. Bringing up someone’s alleged sex life is completely beyond the pale. The “k” word you used is a curse word in Punjabi and I think you know that very well.
You just called me an “Islamist” again which is also extremely offensive.
At this point, I’m just going to ignore you. Peace out.
I only learnt that word from your own movie – Joyland
Well it’s still a curse word. Trans people prefer to be called “khawajsara” but I don’t think you really care about that.
Sorry Kabir
Thank you
His name is Kabir don’t do a word play and it was offensive, he didn’t feel offensive.
You are straddling a tight rope; reissue the apology please.
I don’t want to feel like a school teacher
Pasmandas who are roughly 80% of the Muslim population in India. Amana Begum Ansari who writes eloquently in The Print is one. I like her writing a lot, even if I may disagree with her at times. She’s balanced so she’s earned the privilege (I do not mean this in a condescending manner) to her subconcious biases if they do show up in her writings.
Pasmandas?
Lower caste muslims (I think only in India, not 100% on that).
Pasmanda Muslims (in India) are the converts from the “so-called” lower caste Hindus. Primarily ended up converting since they were unable to pay jaziya (based on what I’ve read). The Ashrafs (upper caste converts) discriminate against the Pasmandas on the basis of their pre-conversion caste.
The movement has caught on a lot in India: https://pasmanda.com/
I too was unaware of this until a couple of years back honestly.
That’s a great movement – should be encouraged
“I sometimes get played”.”This is not an accident. It’s a strategy. A learned habit of asymmetric discourse”.”
This, sadly, isn’t confined to Pakistan. It’s become a pattern among large swathes of the Muslim commentariat—whether discussing Pakistan, the ongoing tragedy in Palestine, or broader global affairs:
”
One must congratulate enlightenment whenever it comes. So you finally got to see the point of asymmetry, that there is no interrogation, no confronting demons on their own side. I hope you graduate further to see the likes of pervez hoodboy and his likes also for it always was about. Denialism is structural, and one should understand the structure that makes it happen like you did here, it wouldn’t work without ponyshows to showcase around whose objective is to mislead by giving false hopes when its aim was always to engage in false comparison , to take the advantage of liberalism, secularism when it suits them to engage in false equivalence. Remove the bandage and the pain killers and let the pain overwhelm you and you will not see the truth but feel it through the searing obvious pain
. Some of us predicted the islamist turn in bangladesh, even someone as knowledgeable as razib doubted that.Why is it that the most rightwing predictions of islam turn out to come out to be true again and again?> Maybe you will graduate further and realize that the real problem is that islam isnt capable of conjuring any moral example or framework where non muslims can have equal dignity and worth of life. so you cant appeal to any moral shame or engage in any real genuine guilt. The very design is psychopathic .And i hope the costs the many people have to bear will not be so high before people realize it. The only moral framework that works in islamic countries is due to the self-interest of their elites like in arab countries to not let the fanatics take over and cause ruin to their self-interests. But that depends too much on assumption of self-interest of their elites leading to such balance, but when those elites themselves indulge in supremacist delusions, the society collapses to fanatics taking over. Final point is this, the most natural form of morality is reciprocity. The parasitic behavior requires shells to confound and mimic the liberal language to continue to fool. It does not please me one bit to say i was right, but here i am, i have been right for over a decade and it does not please me one bit for it reveals something very ugly about human nature.
Calm – how have the RW discourses on Islam become true. Gaza is an ongoing travesty
When it comes to islam, i have off days and on days. On RW discourses coming true, The OG is savarkar , he became mainstream in India now, he predicted muslims would want to create their own state about 20 yrs before pakistan as a word or even a movement came to exist, geert wilders as pointed out now has become mainstream. We went from ISIS to Taliban in 10 yrs. And no muslim country does anything material about taliban, bangladesh was predicted to go islamist way,after sheik hasina leaves the stage, this would happen and it has already materialised. I seriously predicted that we would have AI before any islamic reform. Gaza is an ongoing tragedy because the hamas wont wave the white flag and surrender, even if their own population is devastated, and the people themselves have not led any rebellion against hamas.The suicidal jihadist strategy is so bizarre that the only reason it is waged is because they bet on the fact that International community will put an end to this and hamas will be bolstered with more recruits. It is quite curious that people demand Israel to care more for the people of palestine than hamas and palestinians care for themselves ,when it is they who voted for hamas. For all the talk of reforms, we did indeed have reforms, iranian theocracy, boko haram, ISIS, Taliban. If these things existed in any other religion today, we would actually be horrified. The fact is that we are so conditioned to seeing these things now that we think we need more evidence than meets the eyes. That animals have more rights than women under Taliban does not horrify us at all? . An alien coming to earth would see the bizarre distinction more easily than most humans now.
Israeli ex-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (who belonged to the Likud Party) has come out and said Israel is committing war crimes in Gaza.
But sure, go ahead and place all the responsibility on Hamas.
That is a measure of them being civilized unlike you who wont accept genocide in bangladesh by pakistan even now. The more you engaged in such shameless hypocrisy the more i feel disgusted.
You want to compare what Israel is doing in Gaza to the civil war in former East Pakistan? Not taking the bait.
You seriously have issues.
you cant admit it was a genocide can you?. It wasnt a bait, it was to reveal your utter lack of morality and your manipulative behavior.
The Gulf States are probably one of the most advanced places on the planet.
yes, precisely, they are not democratic, they are elite royals, who dont let riffraff make decisions.They atleast for now seem to value self interest. But one should not forget, mughal empire collapsed after aurangzeb took to power, long enough turns, it becomes likely they end up with a bad emperor and it becomes a problem. If pakistan had self interested elite royals controlling it, it might end up better, i said this of palestine as well. I actually pointed this out in my earlier post, the best solution thats moral and viable is that these places be taken over by some self interested elites, but the problem is , while royals automatically have legitimacy for their rule, these non royal eliltes dont and are prone to give into fanatics to shore their domestic support and problems start. This is what jinnah did, later the pak army as well and so did many pak civilian leaders. Look at yunus, he doesnt have own base, so he is borrowing islamist base, freeing criminals of 1971 crimes, releasing islamists etc.
Calm, mate. Take a breather before you post.
expressing concerns , that is all.
They have made something which was thought to be impossible – make Europeans vote for far right parties.
People who were on the fringe like Geert Wilders and Nigel Farage ten years ago are now mainstream.
You have to understand the existential crisis that Pakistanis face that even English speaking Pakistanis become right wing Pak patriots.
In most countries, the more educated you are, the more liberal you are.
Anyone in India who is foreign educated and has had access to good education would be extremely liberal and would be found marching in Anti-CAA protests and the like.
Pakistan’s entire formation was based on an extremely bigoted right-wing premise which already shattered when:
An now that India is economically growing and Indian muslims have a better life than Pakistani muslims, this crisis has grown stronger.
It’s like – “If Muslims have a better life in India, then what was the point of partition in the first place”.
That’s why all the focus on “TNT”, “Thank you Jinnah” etc which are things from 70 years ago.
The mentality Pakistanis should have is “Who cares how our country got formed. It exists. And now we should work hard to develop and industrialize so we no longer remain a poor country”.
India’s economic growth should be seen as inspiration not envy.
But alas, Pakistanis wallow in their own misguided set of ethics and maintain a confrontational stance with regards to India which only increases the economic gap.
“Anyone in India who has had access to good education would be extremely liberal”– Really? So there are no foreign-educated people who support the Hindu Right? That’s hard to believe.
“Indian Muslims have a better life in India”– That depends on your criteria. There’s something to be said for being a majority in a smaller country rather than being a minority in a larger one. At least in Pakistan, a Muslim can be Prime Minister. India hasn’t yet had a Muslim PM and most likely will not have one in the foreseeable future. In Pakistan, we can eat beef all we want without fear of being lynched. Can’t say the same for Indian Muslims.
You have an obsession with economic growth. Economic growth doesn’t make up for worsening civil rights.
The Prime Minister of your country is someone who presided over an anti-Muslim pogrom in 2002. He has been voted into power three times now. Thank God for Pakistan!
Naah, Muslims have been president and considering a Sikh, an even smaller minority has become Prime Minister nothing stopping one from becoming PM.
Non-Muslims are disallowed to become PM by law in Pakistan. No such thing in India.
Nothing wrong with economic growth. Economic growth leads to better civil rights. Homosexuality is legal in India remember (although you might not take that as a positive considering your homophobia).
Indian Muslims have no worries about being bombed in their mosques during the Prophet’s birthday. Can’t say the same for Pakistani Muslims (see Mastung).
Indian Muslims have no worries about being considered a fake Muslim and not being allowed to pray and being arrested/murdered for doing so. Can’t say the same for Pakistani Musims (see Ahmadis).
Pakistani Muslims get lynched/murdered in far greater numbers than Indian Muslims do. Might not be for being a Muslim but for being Shia, Baloch, Ahmadi, blasphemy etc etc.
And of course no Pakistani Muslim can be as big as Shahrukh Khan or Azim Premji or AR Rahman.
Thank Allah for India where Muslims can live a far better quality of life than in Riasat-e-Pudina Pakistan!
I remember when a Kabir-type twitter user was expressing gratitude for the existence of Pakistan saving its ‘muslims’ from Hindu majoritarianism, in a conversation with Dr Saab, a few years ago. I asked the question, whether Indian muslims were actually saved by Hindu majoritarianism in what was left of India after Partition.
Think about it. Bengali muslims post-partition had to endure a genocide unleashed by their ummah brethren. Millions died, many more millions suffered greatly. Look at present-day west Pakistan – From the heights of Gilgit to the sands of the Thar, from Khyber to Gwadar – just so many muslims are enduring ethnic cleansing, ‘forced disappearances’, shia persecution, Ahmadi murders, fake blasphemy murders, systemic discrimination, you name it.
For all the propaganda vitriol that Pakistani propagandists love to espouse about muslims ‘difficulties’ in India, arguably, the average muslim’s life expectancy, quality of life, HDI indicators, even on the standards of religious freedom – a muslim in India has much better prospects and expectations – from personal to economic, than in Pakistan.
Faced with such reality, denial really isn’t just a river in Egypt, as the author of the post on this page has said.
The response then, is to double down on the BJP = RSS = Nazi = evil rhetoric. Exaggerate the level of communal friction in India, to somehow, anyhow, justify the formation of Pakistan.
The thing is as the economic gap widens, they don’t even have the old excuses like “India has more poverty than Pakistan” or “Indians don’t have toilets” etc because India is now better than Pakistan in all of these metrics.
So they cope with these things.
Check out this line from 2007 by a Pakistani writer.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/aug/14/india.features116
Guess what, India’s poverty rates are lower than Pakistan’s.
Check out this World Bank report (so that Kabir can’t claim it is propaganda)
https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/5d1783db09a0e09d15bbcea8ef0cec0b-0500052021/related/mpo-sar.pdf
Pakistan’s poverty rate actually went up post the 2022 floods.
As they get to see the gap widening, expect more insane reactions.
I’m not a homophobe. I don’t believe in alluding to people’s alleged sex lives in a public forum. Even X.T.M agreed you crossed the line. Is he a homophobe?
Pakistan is an Islamic Republic. India claims to be a secular state. Secular states are usually held to higher standards.
“Riaisat-e-Pudina”: Once again, I’m not an Imran Khan supporter and I don’t believe in the Riasat-e-Madina project (a right wing project). So this is not the flex you think it is.
Since you’re constantly claiming that Indian Muslims are doing better than Pakistani Muslims and cherrypicking famous film stars or billionaires to prove your point, I’ll just mention that India’s own Sachar Committee Report argued that Indian Muslims were worse off than Dalits.
Ee saala cup naamde.
The greatest cricketer of our time King Kohli finally wins the IPL.
Jinnah’s great-grandson (owner of the other team in the IPL final) congratulating Kohli.
Like I have said, such a damning indictment for Pakistan that their own Quaid-e-Azam’s family decides to live in India.
The Quaid’s daughter married a non Muslim. Why would she have chosen to live in Pakistan?
This is not the big flex that you think it is.
That’s a pretty scary description of Pakistan tbf ..
Why? She didn’t agree with her father’s ideology. That’s OK. It happens.
Dina married Mr. Wadia in 1938 long before there was any sign that Pakistan was on the horizon.
The choices of one particular family (even if it is that of the descendants of the founder of the nation) don’t serve as a generalization about anything.
So Pakistan isn’t a safe place for the children of intermarried Muslims..
Kabir, you seem to be technical when you choose to be; don’t you find it askance about some aspects of Islamic custom?
My point was only that Dina Wadia’s decision not to migrate to Pakistan is not some great indictment of the nation as Mr. Honey Singh tried to imply.
Dina’s choices were her own. She got married before there was any idea of Pakistan and even before the Muslim League had come up with the Lahore Resolution of 1940. She was raising her children as Parsis. Her own mother was a Parsi before she converted upon marriage to the Quaid.
Why would this Parsi family uproot themselves from Bombay and choose to move to a country that was clearly meant as a homeland for Muslims?
X.T.M: I was reading the Wiki article on Dina Wadia and apparently she separated from Mr. Wadia in 1943 and moved to New York City.
Why would she leave NYC to go live in a country that she didn’t identify with?
Actually you admitting to it is a bigger flex.
Btw her husband wasn’t even a Hindu.
Still they are living (and thriving) in “Hindutva” India.
I knew Mr Wadia was Parsi. Dina’s mother was Parsi though she converted to marry the Quaid.
Some of us are well-read in history.
17 Year old Tiktoker Sana Yousaf killed in Islamabad by a 22 year old Pakistani man for rejection.
Still think Pakistani Muslims are safe in Pakistan, Kabir?
50% of Pakistan’s Muslims are women and they live in an insane patriarchal setup.
The likes of Nikhat Zareen and Sania Mirza are impossible amongst Pakistani Muslim women.
Seriously? You can find random killings in any country.
[…] Posts: Denial Isn’t Just a River in Egypt—It’s a Dammed Indus Too | Flame Thread Protocols: Honey Kabir | Jet Lag: India, Pakistan, and the Theatre of the Air […]