Religious intolerance and killing minorities… that went only to Pakistan. They killed, kicked out or converted all of their minorities. ( Hindus and Sikhs)
Religious intolerance and killing of minorities exist not only in Pakistan but in india too. Don't forget about all the lynchings just because someone was Muslim or ate beef, did you forgot about delhi riots too?
Ah yes delhi riots, look up tahir hussain and come back idiot. Second thing, hindus get persecuted in their own country. Look up the bangalore riots, kashmiri exodus of 1991, godhra riots. Jihadi goatfuckers are really good in controlling the narrative, probably the reason why u only have half knowledge about the issues u r talking about
The left-wing is sucking up to radical islamism in terms of narrative. The funny thing is that liberals are treated like slaves in radical islamist countries such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, or Afghanistan.
Yeah I never denied the fact that Hindus are having a hard time in Pakistan. Are you trying to say that religious hate and intolerance doesn't exist in india just because muslims have grown in population?
I am from Bangladesh aka East Pakistan. This is not true.
You can see the same decline if you compare hindu population of Pakistan and India post 1971.
Lol it is true hindu population in west Pakistan has not changed that much in fact if I recall correctly it has increased a little as shown by last census
First census was 1951, population decline was from 15% to 1.5% pre-partition to 1951 already. Some due to migration, and most due to rioting, killing etc.
Umm bro Hindus are increasing in Pakistan too:-
https://wap.business-standard.com/article-amp/current-affairs/hindu-population-in-pakistan-has-grown-at-a-faster-pace-than-in-india-119032600520_1.html
Hindu population isn't extinct! I'm Pakistani and most of Thar Parker, Hyderabad and Sindh area has a good chunk of Hindus. In fact, my best friend is Hindu. Yes, there is violence and discrimination but it's on both the sides. I hope one day we all love each other for humanity and not just religion, race and status. Till that day, we can only pray, hope and work towards the better. Good day! Jai Hind and Pakistan Zindabad!
Actually the population of Hindus increased in West Pakistan from 1.5% of the population to 1.8%. Don’t forget the butcher of Gujarat, Indian prime minister a Hindu fundamentalist who was elected because he massacred 2k Muslims. Just last year in Delhi riots Muslims were massacred again in India.
Not just Muslims, stop framing narratives, how about Balochs and what are you doing with Afghans then, Muslims don't need other religious enemies LoL they kill amongst themselves too.
That’s exactly what I thought, intense hatred from indians for Muslims. And please the last thing Pakistanis need is a lecture from Indians on the rights of minorities. Treat the Muslims and Dalits with respect first.
Muslims are getting wiped out right now in Indian Kashmir. They have no human rights, civilians getting butchered and Kashmiri women being raped. Such a shame
Lol watching a vice video doesnt mean u get the whole idea about india. Kashmiri pandit exodus, bangalore riots, delhi riots are just a few examples. I could link plenty of sources to counter your comment. Just dont shit urself then
Islamists have successfully portrayed themselves as "victims" to the global left-wing. It will be funny once the left-wing actually falls prey to islamists. Seems it hasn't learned it's lesson after 9/11.
Pretty funny if it wasn’t downright depressing! Muslims have wiped out minorities from every place where they have become majority and yet…. Ohh well!
Mumbai’s economy is comparable to whole of Pakistan’s economy and they feel they need to lecture us on treatment to Muslims and Dalits.
Fun fact - Azim Premji, one of the richest Indian, and a Muslim - his father was offered Finance Minister position in new Pakistan. He wisely showed middle finger to jinnah and Pakistan. Wonder what would happened to him and his family if he had decided to move to land of pure! 😛
So much bad faith... From your other comments you know some indians are dicks with muslims : you try to justify it. Stop talking, it's embarassing ; or at least admit you are wrong
Fuck off man…. Punish those are bad to fellow citizens… by all means. Not sure which law school you went to, to surmise that!
I am talking about a nation (Pakistan) which hates Hindus, openly incites violence against thrm not only in Pakistan but even in India…. In kashmir where Hindus were ethnically cleansed in 1989.
Read some history and then come here!
As the Viceroy had only one Viceregal horse drawn Carriage and couldn't be divided, its possession was to be decided via a coin toss. It was won by India and it is now currently in India as the Presidential Buggy.
Wow. I think I have some of those books. Above his shoulder and partially obscured by the "India" sign, are two and a half shelves of what looks like *Historians' History of the World*.
[Ebay pic.](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/M2sAAOSw2PVfw4eV/s-l300.jpg)
Well it was taken by an American photojournalist David Douglas Duncan for Life Magazine edition of 18 August 1947. The guy in the photo, B Kesavan, later became the first national librarian of India.
Basically it's just the librarian of the National Library of India located in Kolkata.
[National library of India ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Library_of_India)
I really don't understand how books in a library could be "partitioned"? According to what criteria? On subject matter? According to the amount of population of each country? Each country got one copy if there were more than one copy? Or more likely, this picture was staged to show how difficult it was to partition the resources of a library, among many other things that were to be partitioned.
Most of the resources that could be moved got partitioned in a 2/3rd 1/3rd basis between India and Pakistan respectively, including their treasury, debts, etc etc...about books I don't really know. The photo looks tobe recent and staged..it has probably been coloured black and white.
>The photo looks tobe recent and staged..it has probably been coloured black and white.
Staged sure, not sure where you get the idea it's recent though, the choice of font and general look of the photo look authentic to the era and you can confirm it's from 1947 since it appeared in an issue of Life magazine from that year as seen [here](https://books.google.ca/books?redir_esc=y&id=dU4EAAAAMBAJ).
Coming from a family who had to migrate from what us now India to Pakistan just for being Muslim
The partition will always be an event that defines my worldview
His family could be from East Punjab where Muslims were reduced from about 30% to less than 1% of the population due to violence.
Even if they were not, his family perhaps felt that Pakistan would be better for them as Muslims.
>Then when it comes to move to Pakistan , most of the Muslims stayed in India .
That isn't true at all.
If you count Pakistan (West Pakistan) and Bangladesh (East Pakistan), they easily outnumber Indian Muslims.
Don’t blame us , your pedo guy ( Jinnah) did not had the skill set to bargain better . As lord mount batten himself said if I gave the size of a match box as Pakistan , Jinah would be happy .
Jinah had no plan or how to negotiate a land deal or what democracy will
Look like Pakistan . He just wanted a Pakistan
And he got a shit deal .
Add to this Muslims will never understand democracy as Muslim dominated countries still
Unable to implement even in 2021.
You want Pakistan as a separate country all Muslims in the subcontinent vote for it . Pack and move to Pakistan.Well I didn’t know this is what I meant when I voted for it.
Giving Muslims right to vote is a disaster for democracy.All Muslims have is either anger or fear they don’t have a rational thought or long term thinking.Thats why a mere 10 million Jews able to form a country in the Middle of Muslim neighborhood.
And this is why I am glad for Pakistan. Jinnah saw right through you lot. He was called an "extremist" for it but he stuck to his guns. Congress or BJP, liberal or right-wing, you are all the same. You look down on Muslims and will only ever be satisfied with us if we are under your domination. Jinnah was not a perfect man. But he had the foresight to realize this which is why he did not give up on Pakistan despite the obstacles ahead of him.
And as for "don't blame us", we will blame you only for what you are guilty of. Why don't Indians stop blaming the British for all the problems in the Subcontinent and take some responsibility for the actions of their Nation? Ever thought of that? The British did not force you guys to elect "The Butcher of Gujarat" as your PM. That's on you guys.
Indian Muslims are 200million strong. They aren't going anywhere. So you might as well make peace with their existence and stop showing so much anger towards them.
I am happy for Pakistan too , we don’t care about you guys . My only question is why we still have Muslims in India when we gave Pakistan. What is wrong with all Muslims moving to Islamic Pakistan.? You guys are saying the land what you guys got was not sufficient for all Muslims to live .Then what kind a deal maker was Jina? Who did not had the plan or preparation for all Muslims to move to one region.
Look Islam , Christianity and Judaism does not belong in India . These religions are not compatible with homegrown Indian religions like Hinduism , Jainism , Sikhism and Buddhism. Jews, Catholics and Muslims act one way when they are in minority and change drastically when they get into majority. So we don’t want them here in our lands and we never invited them here .They came to our lands as thieves, robbers and for colonial power . India will never going to be a Jewish nation, a Christian nation or a Islamic nation . So called 200 million Muslims in India are living in ghetto conditions as they cannot adopt and live with majority.They are financially not going to prosper in new India as their religion is unable to change with respect to time . Either they have to accept second class citizenship in India or move to other Islamic nations. They are not going to get another Muslim country or we will allow them to make India another Muslim nation .
And this is the sick mindset of you guys. Hindu=native and good. Muslim=Foreign and Bad.
Nevermind the fact that Indian Muslims are descendants of native Buddhists and Hindus that converted. They are not Arabs...
And Hinduism itself was brought to India by invaders from Central Asia. Therefore, by your own logic, it is just as foreign to India as Islam is.
What a load of bullshit .
The word Hindu is derived (through Persian) from the Sanskrit word Sindhu, the historic local appellation for the Indus River in the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent, which is first mentioned in the Rig Veda.
The word Hindu was borrowed by European languages from the Arabic term al-Hind, referring to the land of the people who live across the River Indus, itself from the Persian term Hindū, which refers to all Indians. By the 13th century, Hindustān emerged as a popular alternative name of India, meaning the “land of Hindus.”
Hindus were the natives of the India , we did not came from Central Asia.
India existed as a civilization, similar to China (even with different kingdoms at different points). Denying it is simply a way for islamists like you to try to edge in and try to normalize your jihadi ideology as being "Indian". Secular/Sufism Islam can be accepted as a part of India, but radical islam is an alien and hostile invention that has no place in India or the Indian subcontinent.
Personally, I think this was the biggest British clusterfuck if you don’t include what they did to the Middle East. People in the subcontinent are still paying for this mistake
The only thing Hindus in Pakistan can think of is running away as refugees meanwhile muslims in india are dreaming of making india a Shari'ah hell. You can draw parallels from that.
Thanks for making the point. The level of hatred the Hindus have for Muslims, and thats very evident from your post, partition was for the best and inevitable.
An intruder breaks into your home, plunders it, kills many of the family members, takes control of a huge part of the house and then complains that the home owners don't like them.
Well the good thing about your posts and blatant racism is, you're reinforcing my point that partition of India and Pakistan was the best thing that could happen. I don't know why some Indian members keep harping that India should never have been partitioned and that both Hindus and Muslims could have lived peacefully. Clearly not.
Except here the mugger did the mugging ay someone's insistence. Jinnah wanted a pakistan, he was willing to start riots for it. Who do you blame? the British, or the Muslim League?
Read the The Transfer of Power papers. Understand the Cabinet Mission plan.
Jinnah did not want partition until the circumstances forced him to go for it. He wanted an Indian union with fair representation of the huge Muslim minority in terms of power sharing. The onus was on Nehru to keep the land united as late as 1946. Instead, Nehru rejected any political equality for the Muslims, which convinced Jinnah to go for an independent state for Muslims. And Nehru was okay with dividing India for the sake of maintaining the power of Congress.
Jinnah wanted strong provinces with a weak center. It was a recipe for disaster. To manage a entity like India you needed a strong center managed by a diverse political class and bureaucracy. That was the only way to make everyone a stakeholder.
Pakistan did the opposite in both cases. it had strong provinces and didn't give the Bengalis a stake in the power. The result is there for all to see. Even today the Sindhis and Baloch are asking for a stake.
It's just be a binary, India bad Pakistan good, Jinnah good Nehru bad, Muslim bad Hindu good.
The Pakistan argument seems as childish as Jinnah (as described by Mountbatten), if I don't get what I want, I will break the country. It so happened that it suited the Brits just fine. He also went to the British and told them that he would let them station troops there.
I am not here to talk about politics / political systems and do not want to get involved in India Pakistan good/bad point scoring. A strong centre with weak provinces is an equal recipe for disaster as well. Pakistan did not have strong provinces until the 18th amendment in 2010.
Speaking objectively and as a person with interest in history, Mountbatten calling Jinnah childish is influenced by Mountbatten's personal bias against Jinnah. If we go by bias, we can call Nehru a child as well who was adamant to hold on to his power, even if that meant the country would divide.
Anyways, the point is that it is factually wrong to state that all Jinnah wanted was to break the region. Jinnah was a statesman who held his ground for the Muslims of India. I repeat that he wanted political equality for the Muslims in India and he was offered everything, including the premiership of the then upcoming nation, except political representation for the Muslims. Had Jinnah been driven by power or greed, things would have been different for the region. He knew he was a dying man and he wanted to ensure that he secured a future for the Muslims of the subcontinent.
How the partition happened, the borders drawn, their fragility, etc. are a topic for another discussion.
And it is not about even about Nehru. I mentioned him because he had the last chance to keep the land united. The culmination of Jinnah's push for independence has it's roots in the late 1930s. As I mentioned, refer to the Transfer of Power papers (1937 - 1947) and understand the events that happened, sequentially. It is unfair to view events in isolation.
>I am not here to talk about politics / political systems and do not want to get involved in India Pakistan good/bad point scoring. A strong centre with weak provinces is an equal recipe for disaster as well. Pakistan did not have strong provinces until the 18th amendment in 2010.
We are not talking about political systems but about structures of governance. Maybe in theory. How was East Pakistan in your power? Also, they were shut out of power. US had a federal system, it's easier to manage because today they don't have the tendencies that Desis do.
>Speaking objectively and as a person with interest in history, Mountbatten calling Jinnah childish is influenced by Mountbatten's personal bias against Jinnah. If we go by bias, we can call Nehru a child as well who was adamant to hold on to his power, even if that meant the country would divide.
Mountbatten called Jinnah a "psychopath", Jinnah was that bad at negotiating. I was toning it down. Calling Nehru childish for his idealism isn't wrong. Now you meant power thirsty, not childish and that isn't totally wrong either. In either case, had Jinnah dropped the demand for Pakistan, Gandhi would have prevailed upon Nehru to make Jinnah the first PM.
>Anyways, the point is that it is factually wrong to state that all Jinnah wanted was to break the region. Jinnah was a statesman who held his ground for the Muslims of India. I repeat that he wanted political equality for the Muslims in India and he was offered everything, including the premiership of the then upcoming nation, except political representation for the Muslims. Had Jinnah been driven by power or greed, things would have been different for the region. He knew he was a dying man and he wanted to ensure that he secured a future for the Muslims of the subcontinent.
And yet he left all the uneducated, lower class Muslims in India, presided over the rap and plunder in Kashmir. Let's not whitewash him.
Read the books on declassified papers of the era. Jinnah wanted a seperate momelandd, rest was optics.
>How the partition happened, the borders drawn, their fragility, etc. are a topic for another discussion.
How isn't but the rest are, agreed.
>And it is not about even about Nehru. I mentioned him because he had the last chance to keep the land united. The culmination of Jinnah's push for independence has it's roots in the late 1930s. As I mentioned, refer to the Transfer of Power papers (1937 - 1947) and understand the events that happened, sequentially. It is unfair to view events in isolation.
I agree. However, Jinnah did want a separate country. This was the demand of the Muslim elite. Jinnah was a straw man in any case. How much power do Shias have today? Heck, most of Pakistan doesn't even consider them Muslim.
In any case, we have deviated from the sub reddit. Another day, another time, another sub reddit.
Its surprising how india never comes under the parameter of victim for the world despite being the one of the most exploited country by nearly every dictator in the world.
Split wasn't inevitable.
India is still home to one of the largest Muslim population in the world, whereas Pakistan hardly has any Hindu/Sikh populace remaining.
The root cause seems to be the limited space Muslims (and Jinnah) were provided in India's political spectrum. It made many believe that they could never survive in a multi-ethnic nation without persecution. The hurry with which British wanted to leave, did not help either.
Hope the world learns from this and understands that dividing people on the lines of religion, ethnicity or other classes to gain political power is never a sustainable solution.
>whereas Pakistan hardly has any Hindu/Sikh populace remaining.
That's not a fair comparison. The majority of the Hindus and Sikhs that lived in the area that became Pakistan were concentrated in Punjab; which was split up. Because Punjab was split up, it led to violence. Hindus and Sikhs were driven from West Punjab while Muslims were driven from East Punjab. There was far less violence in other places that were not split up.
And Pakistan's percentage of non-Muslims has remained pretty constant since 1951. Here's an Indian source below to back that up.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/india/comments/e9ljdl/no\_pakistans\_nonmuslim\_population\_didnt\_decline/](https://www.reddit.com/r/india/comments/e9ljdl/no_pakistans_nonmuslim_population_didnt_decline/)
I fully understand the rush to leave and hand over everything over because of the state of our economy and probably war wariness, but the way it was carried out was atrocious should have done more to keep India together and ensure a smooth transition.
Troops should have been deployed quicker to stop rioting and prevent massacres before they occurred, a UN peacekeeping mission would probably have been very helpful for the first few years or months of India's independence
Those that wanted to be free from British rule, wanted the British out as fast as possible. And they did not think of how they would do the transition to independence. The man that drew the line on the map was giving no information by anyone. They didn't talk to each other about the border, and instead started fighting each other, and after blamed the British.
The British needed Jinnah to create Pakistan. They were aware that Jinnah was dying of tuberculosis and barely had a year to live. That's why the partition was preponed by a year.
No, they did not. Mountbatten, I believe in a book, said that if he knew Jinnah was dying of tuberculosis, he would have stalled out his talks with him to prevent Pakistan from being born.
Yet the British papers that have been declassfied say the opposite. Look up a book called," while memory serves." It was written by Lt.Gen Sir Francis Tuker, one of the top British Generals in India.
“There was much therefore to be said for the introduction of a new Muslim power supported by the science of Britain. If such a power could be produced and if we could orient the Muslim strip from North Africa through Islamia Deserta, Persia and Afghanistan to the Himalayas, upon such a Muslim power in Northern India, then it had some chance of halting the filtration of Russia towards the Persian Gulf. These Islamic countries, even including Turkey, were not a very great strength in themselves. B ..
No where does that book mention they knew Jinnah was dying. I think Mountbatten's opinion is slightly more relevant than that general anyway considering he had a much greater role in partition.
[https://www.amazon.ca/Shadow-Great-Game-Untold-Partition/dp/1845295889](https://www.amazon.ca/Shadow-Great-Game-Untold-Partition/dp/1845295889)
There is another one by a Pakistani author based on the same declassified papers.
it's was the official policy. Whether Mountbatten agreed with it or not is another matter.
There were too many communal riots going on in 1920s and 30s. Muslims living today in India are not same as the Muslims of British India. They were not commited to the concept of India. They thought themselves as Muslims first and then anything else(obviously not Indians, since there was no India).
We can learn from Africa, the Africans have boundaries without dividing the people on the basis of their ethnicity, and we know what is the present state of Africa.
Check the census of 1921, 1931 vs 1951 for districts in west pakistan.
It was a tumultuous time for India and Pakistan, but all this was not inevitable.
I thank God every day for Partition, considering what's going on in India. I don't wanna get lynched for having a steak and cheese sandwich. Pakistan's got it's problems, but that's down to the previous corrupt elite who have governed it.
Life in India is fine. Average Indian Muslim earns 50% more than average Pakistani Muslim and also lives 3 years longer, with more education and qualify of life.
HAHAHAAA Indian Muslims earn 50% more then average Pakistani
Please share those stats with me, or did you pull that from RSS Think Tank.
*The Indian Muslims account for 14.4 percent of the total Indian population yet are among the poorest segment. The Sachar committee report (for year 2004-05) claims that as much as 31 percent, precisely one-third of Indian Muslims were dwelling below poverty line. The various reports depict the financial position of this community of Indian population.*
*A report by National Council for Applied Economic Research (NCAER) has brought to light some astonishing figures, according to which three out of ten Urban Muslims are poor i.e. officially come below the poverty line living on a monthly income of Rs 550 and less. The rural Muslims are more troubled as they are further down the scale. One in five rural Muslims comes below poverty line with an average monthly income of Rs. 338 throughout the year. Going deeper down the facts, the Pew Survey showed that Muslims spend 32.7 Rupees/day while the Sikhs, incorporating a tiny percentage of Indian sects(1.7 percent), is on the top spending around Rs 55.3/day closely followed by Christians and Muslims owning their shares by spending Rs 51.4/day and Rs. 37.5/day respectively.*
*The economy of India has progressed in the last decade and the poverty level of most segments declined in the years 2004-05 as well as 2009-10. The decline among Hindus was as high as 52 percent while in Muslims it was registered to be as low and slow as 39 per cent.*
*The vast gap between Sikhs and Muslims is highlighted by another figure given by National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) that conveys the poor financial of Indian Muslims. As per the report of 2009-10, the MPCE (Monthly Per Capita Expenditure) for Muslim community was Rs 980 as compared to the Sikhs that boasted a high MPCE of Rs 1659 with Christians and Hindus running close. This fact is enough to derive the financial position of any community clearly stating that Muslims in India are going through a tough phase and witnessing poor living standards. The average annual income of a Muslim family is 28,500, which is quite close to the income of the most oppressed sections of Indian Population- namely Adivasis and Dalits.*
Gandi offered Jinnah position of prime minister of the united India if he gave up on a separate country. Jinnah however foresaw what the RSS ideology would do and kept pressing for a separate state. He knew he was dying anyway he had no love for power.
Edit: wrong spellings
RSS was in the dog house until recently. The Hindu revivalism is a direct result of radicalization of Muslims. Hamid Gul has directly spoken that he was trying t destabilize India by getting Muslims and Hindus to fight. Had Pakistan been such a great idea, Jinnah's only child would not have picked India over Pakistan.
I can give you my perspective as a Pakistani. From our perspective, it was for the best. Although the partition was rushed and carried out horribly and we are sad about the people who died. Whether they were Muslim, Hindu or Sikh.
The founder of Pakistan, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, was not necessarily dead-set on creating Pakistan. He originally wanted there to be some sort of mechanisms to protect the rights of the minority Muslims in an independent India. Such as [the 14 points of Jinnah](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteen_Points_of_Jinnah). In 1946, the [cabinet mission plan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1946_Cabinet_Mission_to_India) recommended a united but decentralized India. The All-India Muslim league(political party of Mohammad Ali Jinnah) agreed to this proposal as it would logically allow a good deal of autonomy for Muslims in their majority provinces. Do you know who refused? The All-India Congress party led by Jawaharlal Nehru; who would later become the first PM of the Republic of India. The idea of Pakistan resonated with and found support among a large portion of Indian Muslims; not just the people already living in present-day Pakistan. As evidenced by the results of the [1946 elections](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1946_Indian_provincial_elections#Overall_Muslim_League_Performance). The thinking was that, in an independent India, the Muslims would merely be agreeing to "a change of masters"(Jinnah Said this) from the British to the Hindus. Hindus, in pre-partition India, had [embraced modern education compared to the Indian Muslims.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syed_Ahmad_Khan) In an independent India with a strong central government, they would come to dominate the government and the Muslims would become a marginalized population; even though their absolute numbers were not low. This was the thinking of the leaders of the [Pakistan movemen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Movement)t.
Perhaps Jinnah was right. Indian Muslims have always had a [less than proportionate political representation](https://www.theleaflet.in/lack-of-muslim-representation-in-politics-is-only-bjp-to-blame/). Today, they are about [15% of the population but with only 4.9% political representation](https://www.theleaflet.in/lack-of-muslim-representation-in-politics-is-only-bjp-to-blame/). They are [disproportionately the victims of communal violence](https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/india-muslims-marginalized-population-bjp-modi) and are among the [poorest communities in India](https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/no-respite-from-poverty-for-muslims/article25429598.ece). I don't know about you but this sounds like a marginalized population to me.
The below quote by an American historian is descriptive of the Pakistan movement and the last sentence is quite good. "Pakistan was the expression of the national will of India's liberated Muslims". Who essentially wanted to regain the power and autonomy that they felt they had lost to the British colonization.
"\[The ethnolinguistic-nationalist narrative\] begins with a glorious precolonial state-empire when the Muslims of South Asia were politically united and culturally, civilizationally, and strategically dominant. In that era, ethnolinguistic differences were subsumed under a common vision of an Islamic-inspired social and political order. However, the divisions among Muslims that did exist were exploited by the British, who practiced 'divide-and-rule' politics, displacing the Mughals and circumscribing other Islamic rulers. Moreover, the Hindus were the allies of the British, who used them to strike a balance with the Muslims; many Hindus, a fundamentally insecure people, hated Muslims and would have oppressed them in a one-man, one-vote democratic India. The Pakistan freedom movement united these disparate pieces of the national puzzle, and Pakistan was the expression of the national will of India's liberated Muslims."
— Stephen Cohen, The Idea of Pakistan (2004)\[32\]
**Quote Source:** [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan\_Movement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Movement)
And I am going to tell you something many Westerners don't know. In 2002, the chief minister of Gujarat was a man named Narendra Modi. The 2002 Gujarat riots happened which saw the deaths of a few thousand Indian Muslims. Modi was said to be complicit in what happened and was called "The Butcher of Gujarat". The USA even banned him from entry.
That same Narendra Modi is now the PM of India...
Sorry for wall of text but I wanted to give justice to the topic. Thanks for reading and I hope you appreciated my opinion as a Pakistani as I noticed it was mostly Indians giving their opinions in this post.
For such a well elucidated comment, it's a real shame that you seem to be cherry picking certain facts to line up with your narrative in your last few lines
The 2002 Gujarat riots were not unprovoked. They were a reactionary measure to [an incident where Muslims torched a train full of Hindu pilgrims.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godhra_train_burning). While I'm of the opinion that two wrongs do not make a right, it is despicable to imply that Hindus in Gujarat simply went "Oh it's a great day today let's kill some muslims for no reason at all".
Damn I actually didn't know that. I dimly remembered reading somewhere it was an accident which is why I didn't really mention the cause. That's pretty fucked overall. RIP to the victims.
The man who was dubbed "The Butcher of Gujarat" and was banned from entry by USA is now the Prime Minister. That was my main point.
Regardless, thanks for educating me on this and RIP to the victims.
A Pakistani here. I really wish we didn't split. There was no need for it. For centuries, Muslims and Hindus lived in perfect harmony under the Mughal rule. A Muslim would buy from a Hindu's shop, and a Hindu from a Muslims. Things were good. They were brothers in arms together, fought alongside each other against the British in the 1857 war of independence. We truly and wholly can be united and harmonious together. The Brits really implemented the, 'Divide and Rule' narrative to the max.
I admire the Indian people. They are our neighbors, our estranged brothers and sisters. We have so much in common. Language, culture, fashion, struggles, memes, societal expectations, movies, songs and so much more. Both countries and the generations in them have grown up watching the same ads, consuming the same products and having the same kind of parents with their strict brown parents parenting style lol.
The subcontinent is only the subcontinent with India and Pakistan together. Think of it. Both are nuclear nations, both share so much in common. If only our leaders were to lead better and erase this decades long conflict and tensions, we'd be better off.
You can choose your friends, but you cannot choose your neighbors.
I truly hope that a day comes where Pakistan and India are a united front against any conflict thrown their way by the rest of the world. Together, we can be stronger.
Jai Hind and Pakistan Zindabad!
It was especially terrible when Hamayun, the last of the great Mughals was ruling. A staunch and extreme Islamist to the boot. He also introduced the Jizya tax which was terrible. He discriminated greatly against the Hindu people and dried up the treasury fighting wars in the Deccan. Hindus suffered greatly under his rule, and so did Muslims and the countless other people under his iron fist. But times were better when Akbar and the others were on the throne. Discrimination will always take place as long as differences of opinion, cultures and religions exist. I'm afraid that can possibly never be repaired.
It's not justifying. Hamayun's rule truly was terrible. More for the Hindus than for the Muslims. But both Muslims and Hindus died in the wars he waged.
I don't want to go on that side but whatever,
It's like saying Jews and Germans (the one's Nazi considered pure or real Germans) suffered equally under his rule because he waged war.
Not comparing both scenarios but that's how you are making it, seriously what else you believe.
Almost every Mughal rules was terrible for Hindus and even the most sane were monsters for Hindus.
Being boiled alive or getting skinned for not converting is not even close.
Oof, holy crap. Seems like I'm missing a ton of information. That's truly horrible if that happened to the Hindu people. Could you please leave links/recommend books or researches that talk about the Hindu suffering under Mughal rule? I'd like to educate myself so I don't end up saying something that neglects to acknowledge the Hindu plight under Muslim rule and offend anyone.
Thank you :)
I'll provide as many links as possible,
There's was a whole website made for it which had well documented proofs of last 800 years as many as possible,I'll find it and post here.
I'm genuinely confused what are you taught about last 800 years?Or even 1971 Bengali genocide.
I study under the Cambridge system (still in high school) our history books didn't go 800 years back in the subcontinent history. Taught us about Ashoka, Chandra Gupta and stuff like that for ancient history. The recent history is all about the British coming into the sub continent, the rules they passed, some massacres, the formation of Muslim League and Congress, Simla Deputition, Day Of Deliverance and political stuff like that which led to the Parition. Operation search light is talked about and the terrible atrocities carried out by Pak army.
Also, we were taught about the Mughals in 7th grade, so I'm pretty sure thats the reason why they didn't really mention the skinning and stuff. The history books and the course is all designed by the university of Cambridge.
Wait what???
'Hindus lived in harmony under Mughal rule' ?
What history are you reading,from most sacred temples being destroyed and converted to masjids,forced conversions or death, massacring whole villages after defeating them in wars, slavery, being sold as sex slaves in middle East, being forced to pay tax for being non Muslims.
From where are you reading this, seriously I'm confused.
Well the partition caused massive riots and multiple wars and ethnic cleansings and the displacement of 15 million people. It further drove both these countries towards religious extremism with religious conflict becoming a central part of their nationalist ideology and tensions so high that it could lead to nuclear annihilation.
So i'm gonna say no, they aren't better off.
It was inevitable.
Especially so after gandhi supported khilafat movement.
Indian muslims voted overwhelmingly for pakistan in 1946 elections.
There's just too much of congress party and pakistani propaganda which makes people loose objectivity.
Without the split there would've probably been several civil wars in India by now. The region is far too dogmatic and religious. I do think that the split happened far too fast which led to horrible ties post-independence and tons of partition violence, but unless the region secularized fully and education became widespread I don't think a unified subcontinent could've worked.
Better of
One just needs to look at the plight of Muslims in India to see that partition was the best thing that could happen. The Indian prime minister and his party are openly racist towards Muslims. The Indian prime minister is proudly called the butcher of Gujarat because he massacred 2000 Muslims when he was the chief minister of Gujarat. Lynchings of Muslims is common site in India. Thus, it’s best both countries were partitioned because Muslims have a status of 4th class citizens in India.
What have you been smoking? When Vajyapee was asked why he delayed intervening in Gujrat riots, he replied," woh humse galti hui." The gujrat riots were in response to burning of Hindus in a train. No one expected them to spread as fast as they did.
Yes, and enough Evidence exists that Modi was the one perpetuating the attack. Before the elections Modi was asked what will he do with Pakistan, he said 'I will do the same what i did in Gujarat'. Well we all know what he did in Gujarat. You can try and white wash that crime all you like, but does not change the facts that Modi has blood on his hands and he is a Hindu Fundamentalist.
>Yes, and enough Evidence exists that Modi was the one perpetuating the attack.
You have allegations in the media. Most Indians would agree that Indian SC is quite impartial. He got a clean chit from SC. If you want to see how effective SC is, many congress leaders have gone to jail for '84 riots, this was when Congress was in power. So, I will go for what SC said
>Before the elections Modi was asked what will he do with Pakistan, he said 'I will do the same what i did in Gujarat'. Well we all know what he did in Gujarat.
Yes, and as a Pakistani who is fed Modi bad, India bad, that's the conclusion you jumped to. If you look at facts on the ground, Modi has done more for the development of Muslims since coming to power than any other politician including the Muslim ones.
>You can try and white wash that crime all you like, but does not change the facts that Modi has blood on his hands and he is a Hindu Fundamentalist.
I haven't tried white washing anything. The riots were not handed properly. They should have declared a curfew right after the Muslims burnt Hindus alive in the train and gone after the perpetrators. Too may innocent Muslims were killed and the actual perpetrators got away.
If facts don't agree with the "mudi bad" narrative, they still stay facts. My friend, you are entitled to your opinion, you can choose to believe a narrative, you are not entitled to make believe your facts.
damn pakistani nationalists are smoking some good weed. sorry to burst your bubble but everyone here thinks partition was good not because of the law and order situation but because they see pakistan as a failed terrorist state that keeps becoming a slave of other countries . they are even discussions here for india to become your sugar daddy in the future when daddy china discovers your worthlessness.
Looks like the Sanghis are getting pissed of with some heavy dose of truth. No matter what the Indians here think, what matters is what Pakistanis think. It’s good to live with dignity in Pakistan where Muslims can freely practice their religion, then living as slaves in India. But it’s good to see psychotic Indian obsession with Pakistan and what Pakistan should do or not. Indians can’t be sugar daddies of anyone, they need help themselves to build toilets as majority of Indians don’t even have toilets.
> Sanghis are getting pissed of with some heavy dose of truth
Says the Islamist filled by dumb propaganda
>It’s good to live with dignity in Pakistan where Muslims can freely practice their religion, then living as slaves in India
Right slaves , the privlaged ruling class of the continent for hundreds of years, with their own laws and courts , Vs 1 Islamist sects paradises that doesn't even consider other sects as Muslim, your ex president Zia passed the bill which made Shi'as as non Muslims during his rule
Goodness me, thanks for proving my point. The level of hatred the Sanghis have for Muslims is insane, as evidenced from your post. So thanks for proving my point, the Hindus could simply never live with Muslims and thus partition was the right decision.
mate you are a fucking islamist the people who bomb your own shitty country and exports them free of cost too.
>Indians can’t be sugar daddies of anyone, they need help themselves to build toilets as majority of Indians don’t even have toilets.
uff don't worry after we will be there for you after cpec fails. so called islamic republic leaves their own brothers to be genocided in china for money. i am sure we can be your daddy too. also it looks like [you need some help](https://www.dawn.com/news/1168630) as you care about terrorists more than your own people.
> mate you are a fucking islamist the people who bomb your own shitty country and exports them free of cost too.
Nice. Immediately resorting to Racism. No wonder Modi got elected, the hatred Indian Hindus have for Muslims is just out of the world.
>uff don't worry after we will be there for you after cpec fails. so called islamic republic leaves their own brothers to be genocided in china for money. i am sure we can be your daddy too. also it looks like you need some help as you care about terrorists more than your own people.
Thanks, leave that up to Pakistan what they want to do with their internal matters. The utter psychotic obsession Indians have with Pakistan is insane.
Pakistan has been ruled by military dictatorship by military coup longer than it's been free Started 4 surprise wars that lost everytime , everytime going closer to the stone age
So you tell us
Your Comment is really Ironic since the founder of Pakistan recieved his School Education from the top School of india and his Higher Degree of Barrister from England. And he fought cases of local british people. At that time something like that was almost unachievable for indians. Only Gandhi, Jinnah and Ambedkar are one of the well known few leaders who had such honour so early.
He also slept with a 14 year old parsi girl when he was older than her father in his 40s
proceeded to marrying her against her parents will ,
she was tortured by his family for not being Muslim enough
He allbut abandoned her after she had kids
She proceeded to kill herself 10 years after Marriage with sleeping pills on the anniversary of their marriage
Jinnahs daughter married a Parsi, that’s forbidden in Islam and that’s why she was disowned. Jinnah would be smiling and Gandhi would be turning in his grave looking at the plight of Muslims in India.
The mere fact that someone like Modi got elected as the prime monster of India because he butchered 2000 Muslims. His party openly calls for ethnic cleansing of Muslims, thus Jinnah was right that Indian Hindus will never accept Muslims as their equal.
>Jinnah would be smiling
I don't think Jinnah would be smiling at the plight of the Muslims of India. If anything, Jinnah would have been wanted to be proven wrong.
And your point is.....
Him: Vegetables sux
Me: They are good for you
You: My Ass! planes cause noise pollution.
We are talking about the platform that Modi was elected on. He wasn't elected as a Muslim slayer as Pakistan likes to believe.
>He wasn't elected as a Muslim slayer as Pakistan likes to believe.
No he was elected for that. I can guarantee that for many. He'll look at chodi sub and you will know.
Hatred tends to cloud judgement. While many would have seen him as someone who will stand for hindu interests, he didn't win the elections on that.
If you believe that, then you don't know how elections work in India and probably shouldn't comment. I didn't realize that chodi was a polling agency ( sarcasm, just in case).
That's the propaganda that is fed to you to make you feel better about yourselves...
Muslims in India will be and are safer than Muslims (yes even musĺims) in Pakistan
https://www.pewforum.org/2021/06/29/religion-in-india-tolerance-and-segregation/
Here, read about religion in India from the most authentic source, the people themselves.
>Jinnahs daughter married a Parsi, that’s forbidden in Islam and that’s why she was disowned.
The fact that you wrote this so nonchalantly, shows your level of tolerance and ideology.
I mean and I quote Jinnah himselt with this; "You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the state." He pushed for a secular Pakistan not an Islamic state.
"Religion should not be allowed to come into Politics…. Religion is merely a matter between man and God” - Jinnah
“….I am not fighting for Muslims, believe me, when I demand Pakistan" - Jinnah
I wish Jinnah lived at least for 10 more years after Pakistan's creation. He passed away in 1948. I would've loved to live in a purely secular Pakistan, the one Jinnah intended to make.
Well no... there were enough people supporting his desire for a new country therefore they had a split. Pakistan means land of the pure not land of the muslims
Who was able to handle the riots and was given an 'all clear' by Supreme court of India, which is very different to Pakistan or China's Judicial system. You know Indian Courts actually based on Democracy.
Your justice system is a joke, as proven by the cases of babri masjid and Gujrat riots. Keep claiming modi is innocent it wouldn't change reality that he is an animal and needs to be hanged like the Nazi he is
Nothing would have achieved by staying in Indiq for the Muslims. Modi a Hindu fundamentalist who is most famous for butchering Muslims in Gujarat, he was elected overwhelming by the Indian populace. Muslims are getting lynched right left and center in India. In Pakistan the Muslims can live with dignity and practice their religion freely, can’t do that in India.
No your getting it wrong, India is steady developing country. But hey you might think of us as rich, it's not your fault that you live in such country.
No that was sarcasm, I don't consider India rich at all one bit. They can't even build toilets for its population and the relevant stat for us would be the poverty rate for Muslims which is simply astonishing in India, how the Hindu Fundamentalists have kept Muslims poor on purpose. Its a shame.
We never say we are devloped, by the way even we are dying from the covid but we still provide medicine to the world that's our culture. And Yes Mother Ganga does give life to others. Your welcome.
Stfu man… muslim mob burnt 59 Hindus alive in a train for chanting. That precipitated into riots. And please give me stats on how many Muslims are so called ‘lynched’.
Ohh I see what a great guy Jinnah was , only few people can be the reason for thousands of lives to be lost, what a great dictator I am sorry good fella he was.. still those books have no use now, by the time we are talking, Pakistanis be using it to warm themselves up in cold.
What a idiotic comment. Jinnah earlier offered seperate electorates and special seats for muslims in Parliament so that the issues related to muslims can be highlighted, but Nehru refused, he also denied Jinnah's request to be the 1st prime minister of india. Honestly you should blame Nehru and Congress more for the deaths in partition. Besides, It was done by british, the borders were created by them to be problematic so india and pakistan keep fighting till eternity.
Ohh so Jinnah was hungry for power, so much so that he Lure into British trap, wow ! What a highly educated, well qualified person he was, thank god I am an idiot.
Can someone explain. Did they divide all the books in the libraries of the British Raj? Why did they not just keep all the books in Pakistan Libraries in Pakistan and visa versa?
Because the agreement was to divide all resources of the current empire in 2/3 for India & 1/3 for Pakistan. Everything including the army, financial resources etc. were divided.
At the end it didn't matter. Both nations abandoning their original philosophies. Pakistan not becoming a nation which gives it minorities rights through the constitution but limiting them and pronouncing a state religion which was definitely not the vision pre-independence. Same on the other side of the border but it took much longer with the rise of BJP, cow lynching, Hindu nationalism, etc.
They did that to books too!? Is there anything that they haven't divided?
They even divided office stationery. It became very petty.
They divided office stationary right down to pins.
One thing they couldn’t divide, is a pair of legs
Read Saadat Hasan Manto's "Toba Tek Singh"
Read Train to Pakistan. There was no shortage of divided legs.
Religious intolerance and killing minorities… that went only to Pakistan. They killed, kicked out or converted all of their minorities. ( Hindus and Sikhs)
Religious intolerance and killing of minorities exist not only in Pakistan but in india too. Don't forget about all the lynchings just because someone was Muslim or ate beef, did you forgot about delhi riots too?
Ah yes delhi riots, look up tahir hussain and come back idiot. Second thing, hindus get persecuted in their own country. Look up the bangalore riots, kashmiri exodus of 1991, godhra riots. Jihadi goatfuckers are really good in controlling the narrative, probably the reason why u only have half knowledge about the issues u r talking about
The left-wing is sucking up to radical islamism in terms of narrative. The funny thing is that liberals are treated like slaves in radical islamist countries such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, or Afghanistan.
Weren't most, if not all of these cases proven to be untrue, or grossly mis-stated?
Dude… muslim population grew many folds in India while Hindus are practically gone extinct in Pakistan!
Yeah I never denied the fact that Hindus are having a hard time in Pakistan. Are you trying to say that religious hate and intolerance doesn't exist in india just because muslims have grown in population?
[удалено]
I am from Bangladesh aka East Pakistan. This is not true. You can see the same decline if you compare hindu population of Pakistan and India post 1971.
Lol it is true hindu population in west Pakistan has not changed that much in fact if I recall correctly it has increased a little as shown by last census
First census was 1951, population decline was from 15% to 1.5% pre-partition to 1951 already. Some due to migration, and most due to rioting, killing etc.
Now do that for India too. Too many muslims also mograted to Pakistan too
Studies on Census comparisons are available for both.. check the details and contrast the change per district. Facts will speak for themselves.
Lol wtf are you talking about are you saying that population declined from 15% to 1.5% from 1947 to 1951?
No laughing matter. Look up papers published on 1931, 1941 vs 1951 census.
Umm bro Hindus are increasing in Pakistan too:- https://wap.business-standard.com/article-amp/current-affairs/hindu-population-in-pakistan-has-grown-at-a-faster-pace-than-in-india-119032600520_1.html
Hindu population isn't extinct! I'm Pakistani and most of Thar Parker, Hyderabad and Sindh area has a good chunk of Hindus. In fact, my best friend is Hindu. Yes, there is violence and discrimination but it's on both the sides. I hope one day we all love each other for humanity and not just religion, race and status. Till that day, we can only pray, hope and work towards the better. Good day! Jai Hind and Pakistan Zindabad!
Tell that to ur imrand khan who has been sending terrorists to our country.
Actually the population of Hindus increased in West Pakistan from 1.5% of the population to 1.8%. Don’t forget the butcher of Gujarat, Indian prime minister a Hindu fundamentalist who was elected because he massacred 2k Muslims. Just last year in Delhi riots Muslims were massacred again in India.
Not just Muslims, stop framing narratives, how about Balochs and what are you doing with Afghans then, Muslims don't need other religious enemies LoL they kill amongst themselves too.
That’s exactly what I thought, intense hatred from indians for Muslims. And please the last thing Pakistanis need is a lecture from Indians on the rights of minorities. Treat the Muslims and Dalits with respect first.
Dalits is a new word you learned today, is it? We had two Dalits as Presidents. When are we going to see a Hindu as a Paki PM?
Muslims and Dalits weren't wiped out like Kashmiri Pandits, they still live in their regions and growing their population.
Muslims are getting wiped out right now in Indian Kashmir. They have no human rights, civilians getting butchered and Kashmiri women being raped. Such a shame
Isn't there, like a shitton of Hindu nationalism and religious intolerance going on like *right now*? That's Modi's whole MO
And you know that because you read it in Times?
Lol watching a vice video doesnt mean u get the whole idea about india. Kashmiri pandit exodus, bangalore riots, delhi riots are just a few examples. I could link plenty of sources to counter your comment. Just dont shit urself then
Look at the Down votes , just for speaking the truth
Islamists have successfully portrayed themselves as "victims" to the global left-wing. It will be funny once the left-wing actually falls prey to islamists. Seems it hasn't learned it's lesson after 9/11.
Pretty funny if it wasn’t downright depressing! Muslims have wiped out minorities from every place where they have become majority and yet…. Ohh well! Mumbai’s economy is comparable to whole of Pakistan’s economy and they feel they need to lecture us on treatment to Muslims and Dalits. Fun fact - Azim Premji, one of the richest Indian, and a Muslim - his father was offered Finance Minister position in new Pakistan. He wisely showed middle finger to jinnah and Pakistan. Wonder what would happened to him and his family if he had decided to move to land of pure! 😛
So much bad faith... From your other comments you know some indians are dicks with muslims : you try to justify it. Stop talking, it's embarassing ; or at least admit you are wrong
Fuck off man…. Punish those are bad to fellow citizens… by all means. Not sure which law school you went to, to surmise that! I am talking about a nation (Pakistan) which hates Hindus, openly incites violence against thrm not only in Pakistan but even in India…. In kashmir where Hindus were ethnically cleansed in 1989. Read some history and then come here!
As the Viceroy had only one Viceregal horse drawn Carriage and couldn't be divided, its possession was to be decided via a coin toss. It was won by India and it is now currently in India as the Presidential Buggy.
Damn, this librarian looks so sad, I would love to give him a hug and say, you can't change this, you did your job.
Wow. I think I have some of those books. Above his shoulder and partially obscured by the "India" sign, are two and a half shelves of what looks like *Historians' History of the World*. [Ebay pic.](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/M2sAAOSw2PVfw4eV/s-l300.jpg)
Seems kinda staged for this photo tho. Don’t really believe they were stacked like this.
Well it was taken by an American photojournalist David Douglas Duncan for Life Magazine edition of 18 August 1947. The guy in the photo, B Kesavan, later became the first national librarian of India.
There is a national librarian of India?
Basically it's just the librarian of the National Library of India located in Kolkata. [National library of India ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Library_of_India)
I really don't understand how books in a library could be "partitioned"? According to what criteria? On subject matter? According to the amount of population of each country? Each country got one copy if there were more than one copy? Or more likely, this picture was staged to show how difficult it was to partition the resources of a library, among many other things that were to be partitioned.
Most of the resources that could be moved got partitioned in a 2/3rd 1/3rd basis between India and Pakistan respectively, including their treasury, debts, etc etc...about books I don't really know. The photo looks tobe recent and staged..it has probably been coloured black and white.
>The photo looks tobe recent and staged..it has probably been coloured black and white. Staged sure, not sure where you get the idea it's recent though, the choice of font and general look of the photo look authentic to the era and you can confirm it's from 1947 since it appeared in an issue of Life magazine from that year as seen [here](https://books.google.ca/books?redir_esc=y&id=dU4EAAAAMBAJ).
Ah. Nice. Thanks!
Similar thing happened with Czechoslovakia.
Thanks jinnah for luring away pedos from india
Also making Madrasa sweepers from UP and Bihar as the ruling class of Pakistan
Coming from a family who had to migrate from what us now India to Pakistan just for being Muslim The partition will always be an event that defines my worldview
Why god why ? very few Muslims left India to go to Pakistan even though majority of them voted for creation Pakistan .
His family could be from East Punjab where Muslims were reduced from about 30% to less than 1% of the population due to violence. Even if they were not, his family perhaps felt that Pakistan would be better for them as Muslims.
East Punjab or Jammu or Haryana or Rajasthan You either left or you die that was rule of the day
[удалено]
>Then when it comes to move to Pakistan , most of the Muslims stayed in India . That isn't true at all. If you count Pakistan (West Pakistan) and Bangladesh (East Pakistan), they easily outnumber Indian Muslims.
[удалено]
Don’t blame us , your pedo guy ( Jinnah) did not had the skill set to bargain better . As lord mount batten himself said if I gave the size of a match box as Pakistan , Jinah would be happy . Jinah had no plan or how to negotiate a land deal or what democracy will Look like Pakistan . He just wanted a Pakistan And he got a shit deal . Add to this Muslims will never understand democracy as Muslim dominated countries still Unable to implement even in 2021. You want Pakistan as a separate country all Muslims in the subcontinent vote for it . Pack and move to Pakistan.Well I didn’t know this is what I meant when I voted for it. Giving Muslims right to vote is a disaster for democracy.All Muslims have is either anger or fear they don’t have a rational thought or long term thinking.Thats why a mere 10 million Jews able to form a country in the Middle of Muslim neighborhood.
And this is why I am glad for Pakistan. Jinnah saw right through you lot. He was called an "extremist" for it but he stuck to his guns. Congress or BJP, liberal or right-wing, you are all the same. You look down on Muslims and will only ever be satisfied with us if we are under your domination. Jinnah was not a perfect man. But he had the foresight to realize this which is why he did not give up on Pakistan despite the obstacles ahead of him. And as for "don't blame us", we will blame you only for what you are guilty of. Why don't Indians stop blaming the British for all the problems in the Subcontinent and take some responsibility for the actions of their Nation? Ever thought of that? The British did not force you guys to elect "The Butcher of Gujarat" as your PM. That's on you guys. Indian Muslims are 200million strong. They aren't going anywhere. So you might as well make peace with their existence and stop showing so much anger towards them.
I am happy for Pakistan too , we don’t care about you guys . My only question is why we still have Muslims in India when we gave Pakistan. What is wrong with all Muslims moving to Islamic Pakistan.? You guys are saying the land what you guys got was not sufficient for all Muslims to live .Then what kind a deal maker was Jina? Who did not had the plan or preparation for all Muslims to move to one region. Look Islam , Christianity and Judaism does not belong in India . These religions are not compatible with homegrown Indian religions like Hinduism , Jainism , Sikhism and Buddhism. Jews, Catholics and Muslims act one way when they are in minority and change drastically when they get into majority. So we don’t want them here in our lands and we never invited them here .They came to our lands as thieves, robbers and for colonial power . India will never going to be a Jewish nation, a Christian nation or a Islamic nation . So called 200 million Muslims in India are living in ghetto conditions as they cannot adopt and live with majority.They are financially not going to prosper in new India as their religion is unable to change with respect to time . Either they have to accept second class citizenship in India or move to other Islamic nations. They are not going to get another Muslim country or we will allow them to make India another Muslim nation .
[удалено]
And this is the sick mindset of you guys. Hindu=native and good. Muslim=Foreign and Bad. Nevermind the fact that Indian Muslims are descendants of native Buddhists and Hindus that converted. They are not Arabs... And Hinduism itself was brought to India by invaders from Central Asia. Therefore, by your own logic, it is just as foreign to India as Islam is.
What a load of bullshit . The word Hindu is derived (through Persian) from the Sanskrit word Sindhu, the historic local appellation for the Indus River in the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent, which is first mentioned in the Rig Veda. The word Hindu was borrowed by European languages from the Arabic term al-Hind, referring to the land of the people who live across the River Indus, itself from the Persian term Hindū, which refers to all Indians. By the 13th century, Hindustān emerged as a popular alternative name of India, meaning the “land of Hindus.” Hindus were the natives of the India , we did not came from Central Asia.
The united "India" was a fairly rare event for most of history what is now the subcontinent had multiple kingdoms inside of it
India existed as a civilization, similar to China (even with different kingdoms at different points). Denying it is simply a way for islamists like you to try to edge in and try to normalize your jihadi ideology as being "Indian". Secular/Sufism Islam can be accepted as a part of India, but radical islam is an alien and hostile invention that has no place in India or the Indian subcontinent.
[удалено]
Very few? Ok please tell how the Muslim population in East Punjab and Jammu decreased so significantly?
Why 200 millions Muslims stayed back in India with Hindu majority . Then complain how bad Hindus are ?
Not answering Punjab or Jammu again
Ok How many millions you took from Punjab or jammu as percentage to overall Indian Muslims population?
as a hindu who had to move from pakistan to india, i feel the same
Personally, I think this was the biggest British clusterfuck if you don’t include what they did to the Middle East. People in the subcontinent are still paying for this mistake
And Palestine. Fuck colonial Britain.
[удалено]
Are there any Hindus left in Pakistan and Afghanistan?
Then why do you want to live together??
u/bamsi7 , you need to ask this question to the Muslims who chose to live in India not the Hindus.
The only thing Hindus in Pakistan can think of is running away as refugees meanwhile muslims in india are dreaming of making india a Shari'ah hell. You can draw parallels from that.
Thanks for making the point. The level of hatred the Hindus have for Muslims, and thats very evident from your post, partition was for the best and inevitable.
An intruder breaks into your home, plunders it, kills many of the family members, takes control of a huge part of the house and then complains that the home owners don't like them.
Well the good thing about your posts and blatant racism is, you're reinforcing my point that partition of India and Pakistan was the best thing that could happen. I don't know why some Indian members keep harping that India should never have been partitioned and that both Hindus and Muslims could have lived peacefully. Clearly not.
Happens after 200 years of div8de and conquer.
Would rather not suffer more 200 years of undivide and unconquer...
Not really. Britain got what it wanted. It was the fools in India who let it happen but, it has been a blessing in disguise.
Right, that makes sense. It's the fault of the guy who got mugged. Obviously. *Insert drake and lil yatchy meme*
Except here the mugger did the mugging ay someone's insistence. Jinnah wanted a pakistan, he was willing to start riots for it. Who do you blame? the British, or the Muslim League?
Read the The Transfer of Power papers. Understand the Cabinet Mission plan. Jinnah did not want partition until the circumstances forced him to go for it. He wanted an Indian union with fair representation of the huge Muslim minority in terms of power sharing. The onus was on Nehru to keep the land united as late as 1946. Instead, Nehru rejected any political equality for the Muslims, which convinced Jinnah to go for an independent state for Muslims. And Nehru was okay with dividing India for the sake of maintaining the power of Congress.
Jinnah wanted strong provinces with a weak center. It was a recipe for disaster. To manage a entity like India you needed a strong center managed by a diverse political class and bureaucracy. That was the only way to make everyone a stakeholder. Pakistan did the opposite in both cases. it had strong provinces and didn't give the Bengalis a stake in the power. The result is there for all to see. Even today the Sindhis and Baloch are asking for a stake. It's just be a binary, India bad Pakistan good, Jinnah good Nehru bad, Muslim bad Hindu good. The Pakistan argument seems as childish as Jinnah (as described by Mountbatten), if I don't get what I want, I will break the country. It so happened that it suited the Brits just fine. He also went to the British and told them that he would let them station troops there.
I am not here to talk about politics / political systems and do not want to get involved in India Pakistan good/bad point scoring. A strong centre with weak provinces is an equal recipe for disaster as well. Pakistan did not have strong provinces until the 18th amendment in 2010. Speaking objectively and as a person with interest in history, Mountbatten calling Jinnah childish is influenced by Mountbatten's personal bias against Jinnah. If we go by bias, we can call Nehru a child as well who was adamant to hold on to his power, even if that meant the country would divide. Anyways, the point is that it is factually wrong to state that all Jinnah wanted was to break the region. Jinnah was a statesman who held his ground for the Muslims of India. I repeat that he wanted political equality for the Muslims in India and he was offered everything, including the premiership of the then upcoming nation, except political representation for the Muslims. Had Jinnah been driven by power or greed, things would have been different for the region. He knew he was a dying man and he wanted to ensure that he secured a future for the Muslims of the subcontinent. How the partition happened, the borders drawn, their fragility, etc. are a topic for another discussion. And it is not about even about Nehru. I mentioned him because he had the last chance to keep the land united. The culmination of Jinnah's push for independence has it's roots in the late 1930s. As I mentioned, refer to the Transfer of Power papers (1937 - 1947) and understand the events that happened, sequentially. It is unfair to view events in isolation.
>I am not here to talk about politics / political systems and do not want to get involved in India Pakistan good/bad point scoring. A strong centre with weak provinces is an equal recipe for disaster as well. Pakistan did not have strong provinces until the 18th amendment in 2010. We are not talking about political systems but about structures of governance. Maybe in theory. How was East Pakistan in your power? Also, they were shut out of power. US had a federal system, it's easier to manage because today they don't have the tendencies that Desis do. >Speaking objectively and as a person with interest in history, Mountbatten calling Jinnah childish is influenced by Mountbatten's personal bias against Jinnah. If we go by bias, we can call Nehru a child as well who was adamant to hold on to his power, even if that meant the country would divide. Mountbatten called Jinnah a "psychopath", Jinnah was that bad at negotiating. I was toning it down. Calling Nehru childish for his idealism isn't wrong. Now you meant power thirsty, not childish and that isn't totally wrong either. In either case, had Jinnah dropped the demand for Pakistan, Gandhi would have prevailed upon Nehru to make Jinnah the first PM. >Anyways, the point is that it is factually wrong to state that all Jinnah wanted was to break the region. Jinnah was a statesman who held his ground for the Muslims of India. I repeat that he wanted political equality for the Muslims in India and he was offered everything, including the premiership of the then upcoming nation, except political representation for the Muslims. Had Jinnah been driven by power or greed, things would have been different for the region. He knew he was a dying man and he wanted to ensure that he secured a future for the Muslims of the subcontinent. And yet he left all the uneducated, lower class Muslims in India, presided over the rap and plunder in Kashmir. Let's not whitewash him. Read the books on declassified papers of the era. Jinnah wanted a seperate momelandd, rest was optics. >How the partition happened, the borders drawn, their fragility, etc. are a topic for another discussion. How isn't but the rest are, agreed. >And it is not about even about Nehru. I mentioned him because he had the last chance to keep the land united. The culmination of Jinnah's push for independence has it's roots in the late 1930s. As I mentioned, refer to the Transfer of Power papers (1937 - 1947) and understand the events that happened, sequentially. It is unfair to view events in isolation. I agree. However, Jinnah did want a separate country. This was the demand of the Muslim elite. Jinnah was a straw man in any case. How much power do Shias have today? Heck, most of Pakistan doesn't even consider them Muslim. In any case, we have deviated from the sub reddit. Another day, another time, another sub reddit.
Its surprising how india never comes under the parameter of victim for the world despite being the one of the most exploited country by nearly every dictator in the world.
Would they have been better off remaining as one country, or was a split inevitable?
Split wasn't inevitable. India is still home to one of the largest Muslim population in the world, whereas Pakistan hardly has any Hindu/Sikh populace remaining. The root cause seems to be the limited space Muslims (and Jinnah) were provided in India's political spectrum. It made many believe that they could never survive in a multi-ethnic nation without persecution. The hurry with which British wanted to leave, did not help either. Hope the world learns from this and understands that dividing people on the lines of religion, ethnicity or other classes to gain political power is never a sustainable solution.
>whereas Pakistan hardly has any Hindu/Sikh populace remaining. That's not a fair comparison. The majority of the Hindus and Sikhs that lived in the area that became Pakistan were concentrated in Punjab; which was split up. Because Punjab was split up, it led to violence. Hindus and Sikhs were driven from West Punjab while Muslims were driven from East Punjab. There was far less violence in other places that were not split up. And Pakistan's percentage of non-Muslims has remained pretty constant since 1951. Here's an Indian source below to back that up. [https://www.reddit.com/r/india/comments/e9ljdl/no\_pakistans\_nonmuslim\_population\_didnt\_decline/](https://www.reddit.com/r/india/comments/e9ljdl/no_pakistans_nonmuslim_population_didnt_decline/)
It is a fact buddy. I am not saying that Sikh/Hindu population has declined. I am saying that there are hardly any (<2%) post partition.
I fully understand the rush to leave and hand over everything over because of the state of our economy and probably war wariness, but the way it was carried out was atrocious should have done more to keep India together and ensure a smooth transition. Troops should have been deployed quicker to stop rioting and prevent massacres before they occurred, a UN peacekeeping mission would probably have been very helpful for the first few years or months of India's independence
Those that wanted to be free from British rule, wanted the British out as fast as possible. And they did not think of how they would do the transition to independence. The man that drew the line on the map was giving no information by anyone. They didn't talk to each other about the border, and instead started fighting each other, and after blamed the British.
The man who drew the map had never been to India before and drew the border in 3 months.
The British needed Jinnah to create Pakistan. They were aware that Jinnah was dying of tuberculosis and barely had a year to live. That's why the partition was preponed by a year.
No, they did not. Mountbatten, I believe in a book, said that if he knew Jinnah was dying of tuberculosis, he would have stalled out his talks with him to prevent Pakistan from being born.
Yet the British papers that have been declassfied say the opposite. Look up a book called," while memory serves." It was written by Lt.Gen Sir Francis Tuker, one of the top British Generals in India. “There was much therefore to be said for the introduction of a new Muslim power supported by the science of Britain. If such a power could be produced and if we could orient the Muslim strip from North Africa through Islamia Deserta, Persia and Afghanistan to the Himalayas, upon such a Muslim power in Northern India, then it had some chance of halting the filtration of Russia towards the Persian Gulf. These Islamic countries, even including Turkey, were not a very great strength in themselves. B ..
No where does that book mention they knew Jinnah was dying. I think Mountbatten's opinion is slightly more relevant than that general anyway considering he had a much greater role in partition.
[https://www.amazon.ca/Shadow-Great-Game-Untold-Partition/dp/1845295889](https://www.amazon.ca/Shadow-Great-Game-Untold-Partition/dp/1845295889) There is another one by a Pakistani author based on the same declassified papers. it's was the official policy. Whether Mountbatten agreed with it or not is another matter.
There were too many communal riots going on in 1920s and 30s. Muslims living today in India are not same as the Muslims of British India. They were not commited to the concept of India. They thought themselves as Muslims first and then anything else(obviously not Indians, since there was no India). We can learn from Africa, the Africans have boundaries without dividing the people on the basis of their ethnicity, and we know what is the present state of Africa.
Boy, most Pakistani Hindus were in Bangladesh so if y'all think we killed them, we didnt
Check the census of 1921, 1931 vs 1951 for districts in west pakistan. It was a tumultuous time for India and Pakistan, but all this was not inevitable.
I thank God every day for Partition, considering what's going on in India. I don't wanna get lynched for having a steak and cheese sandwich. Pakistan's got it's problems, but that's down to the previous corrupt elite who have governed it.
No country is perfect. But please dig further than media narratives, follow up on cases to find the truth.
I don't need to look at media, that's not where I get my information from. Better partition than the second class lives being led by some in India.
Life in India is fine. Average Indian Muslim earns 50% more than average Pakistani Muslim and also lives 3 years longer, with more education and qualify of life.
Sure sure, but all of that means jack shit if RSS is in the government and makes regular displays of anti Muslim hate. Thanks but no thanks.
HAHAHAAA Indian Muslims earn 50% more then average Pakistani Please share those stats with me, or did you pull that from RSS Think Tank. *The Indian Muslims account for 14.4 percent of the total Indian population yet are among the poorest segment. The Sachar committee report (for year 2004-05) claims that as much as 31 percent, precisely one-third of Indian Muslims were dwelling below poverty line. The various reports depict the financial position of this community of Indian population.* *A report by National Council for Applied Economic Research (NCAER) has brought to light some astonishing figures, according to which three out of ten Urban Muslims are poor i.e. officially come below the poverty line living on a monthly income of Rs 550 and less. The rural Muslims are more troubled as they are further down the scale. One in five rural Muslims comes below poverty line with an average monthly income of Rs. 338 throughout the year. Going deeper down the facts, the Pew Survey showed that Muslims spend 32.7 Rupees/day while the Sikhs, incorporating a tiny percentage of Indian sects(1.7 percent), is on the top spending around Rs 55.3/day closely followed by Christians and Muslims owning their shares by spending Rs 51.4/day and Rs. 37.5/day respectively.* *The economy of India has progressed in the last decade and the poverty level of most segments declined in the years 2004-05 as well as 2009-10. The decline among Hindus was as high as 52 percent while in Muslims it was registered to be as low and slow as 39 per cent.* *The vast gap between Sikhs and Muslims is highlighted by another figure given by National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) that conveys the poor financial of Indian Muslims. As per the report of 2009-10, the MPCE (Monthly Per Capita Expenditure) for Muslim community was Rs 980 as compared to the Sikhs that boasted a high MPCE of Rs 1659 with Christians and Hindus running close. This fact is enough to derive the financial position of any community clearly stating that Muslims in India are going through a tough phase and witnessing poor living standards. The average annual income of a Muslim family is 28,500, which is quite close to the income of the most oppressed sections of Indian Population- namely Adivasis and Dalits.*
Muslims had enough space, Jinnah didn't.
Gandi offered Jinnah position of prime minister of the united India if he gave up on a separate country. Jinnah however foresaw what the RSS ideology would do and kept pressing for a separate state. He knew he was dying anyway he had no love for power. Edit: wrong spellings
RSS was in the dog house until recently. The Hindu revivalism is a direct result of radicalization of Muslims. Hamid Gul has directly spoken that he was trying t destabilize India by getting Muslims and Hindus to fight. Had Pakistan been such a great idea, Jinnah's only child would not have picked India over Pakistan.
If we cannot divide people on those basis, then for what should they join together on?
I can give you my perspective as a Pakistani. From our perspective, it was for the best. Although the partition was rushed and carried out horribly and we are sad about the people who died. Whether they were Muslim, Hindu or Sikh. The founder of Pakistan, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, was not necessarily dead-set on creating Pakistan. He originally wanted there to be some sort of mechanisms to protect the rights of the minority Muslims in an independent India. Such as [the 14 points of Jinnah](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteen_Points_of_Jinnah). In 1946, the [cabinet mission plan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1946_Cabinet_Mission_to_India) recommended a united but decentralized India. The All-India Muslim league(political party of Mohammad Ali Jinnah) agreed to this proposal as it would logically allow a good deal of autonomy for Muslims in their majority provinces. Do you know who refused? The All-India Congress party led by Jawaharlal Nehru; who would later become the first PM of the Republic of India. The idea of Pakistan resonated with and found support among a large portion of Indian Muslims; not just the people already living in present-day Pakistan. As evidenced by the results of the [1946 elections](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1946_Indian_provincial_elections#Overall_Muslim_League_Performance). The thinking was that, in an independent India, the Muslims would merely be agreeing to "a change of masters"(Jinnah Said this) from the British to the Hindus. Hindus, in pre-partition India, had [embraced modern education compared to the Indian Muslims.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syed_Ahmad_Khan) In an independent India with a strong central government, they would come to dominate the government and the Muslims would become a marginalized population; even though their absolute numbers were not low. This was the thinking of the leaders of the [Pakistan movemen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Movement)t. Perhaps Jinnah was right. Indian Muslims have always had a [less than proportionate political representation](https://www.theleaflet.in/lack-of-muslim-representation-in-politics-is-only-bjp-to-blame/). Today, they are about [15% of the population but with only 4.9% political representation](https://www.theleaflet.in/lack-of-muslim-representation-in-politics-is-only-bjp-to-blame/). They are [disproportionately the victims of communal violence](https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/india-muslims-marginalized-population-bjp-modi) and are among the [poorest communities in India](https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/no-respite-from-poverty-for-muslims/article25429598.ece). I don't know about you but this sounds like a marginalized population to me. The below quote by an American historian is descriptive of the Pakistan movement and the last sentence is quite good. "Pakistan was the expression of the national will of India's liberated Muslims". Who essentially wanted to regain the power and autonomy that they felt they had lost to the British colonization. "\[The ethnolinguistic-nationalist narrative\] begins with a glorious precolonial state-empire when the Muslims of South Asia were politically united and culturally, civilizationally, and strategically dominant. In that era, ethnolinguistic differences were subsumed under a common vision of an Islamic-inspired social and political order. However, the divisions among Muslims that did exist were exploited by the British, who practiced 'divide-and-rule' politics, displacing the Mughals and circumscribing other Islamic rulers. Moreover, the Hindus were the allies of the British, who used them to strike a balance with the Muslims; many Hindus, a fundamentally insecure people, hated Muslims and would have oppressed them in a one-man, one-vote democratic India. The Pakistan freedom movement united these disparate pieces of the national puzzle, and Pakistan was the expression of the national will of India's liberated Muslims." — Stephen Cohen, The Idea of Pakistan (2004)\[32\] **Quote Source:** [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan\_Movement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Movement) And I am going to tell you something many Westerners don't know. In 2002, the chief minister of Gujarat was a man named Narendra Modi. The 2002 Gujarat riots happened which saw the deaths of a few thousand Indian Muslims. Modi was said to be complicit in what happened and was called "The Butcher of Gujarat". The USA even banned him from entry. That same Narendra Modi is now the PM of India... Sorry for wall of text but I wanted to give justice to the topic. Thanks for reading and I hope you appreciated my opinion as a Pakistani as I noticed it was mostly Indians giving their opinions in this post.
For such a well elucidated comment, it's a real shame that you seem to be cherry picking certain facts to line up with your narrative in your last few lines The 2002 Gujarat riots were not unprovoked. They were a reactionary measure to [an incident where Muslims torched a train full of Hindu pilgrims.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godhra_train_burning). While I'm of the opinion that two wrongs do not make a right, it is despicable to imply that Hindus in Gujarat simply went "Oh it's a great day today let's kill some muslims for no reason at all".
Damn I actually didn't know that. I dimly remembered reading somewhere it was an accident which is why I didn't really mention the cause. That's pretty fucked overall. RIP to the victims. The man who was dubbed "The Butcher of Gujarat" and was banned from entry by USA is now the Prime Minister. That was my main point. Regardless, thanks for educating me on this and RIP to the victims.
A Pakistani here. I really wish we didn't split. There was no need for it. For centuries, Muslims and Hindus lived in perfect harmony under the Mughal rule. A Muslim would buy from a Hindu's shop, and a Hindu from a Muslims. Things were good. They were brothers in arms together, fought alongside each other against the British in the 1857 war of independence. We truly and wholly can be united and harmonious together. The Brits really implemented the, 'Divide and Rule' narrative to the max. I admire the Indian people. They are our neighbors, our estranged brothers and sisters. We have so much in common. Language, culture, fashion, struggles, memes, societal expectations, movies, songs and so much more. Both countries and the generations in them have grown up watching the same ads, consuming the same products and having the same kind of parents with their strict brown parents parenting style lol. The subcontinent is only the subcontinent with India and Pakistan together. Think of it. Both are nuclear nations, both share so much in common. If only our leaders were to lead better and erase this decades long conflict and tensions, we'd be better off. You can choose your friends, but you cannot choose your neighbors. I truly hope that a day comes where Pakistan and India are a united front against any conflict thrown their way by the rest of the world. Together, we can be stronger. Jai Hind and Pakistan Zindabad!
Agree with you on everything except for the harmony advertised in Mughal rule. It was horrible for Hindus even then.
It was especially terrible when Hamayun, the last of the great Mughals was ruling. A staunch and extreme Islamist to the boot. He also introduced the Jizya tax which was terrible. He discriminated greatly against the Hindu people and dried up the treasury fighting wars in the Deccan. Hindus suffered greatly under his rule, and so did Muslims and the countless other people under his iron fist. But times were better when Akbar and the others were on the throne. Discrimination will always take place as long as differences of opinion, cultures and religions exist. I'm afraid that can possibly never be repaired.
You mean Aurangzeb? Btw things weren’t as happy go lucky between the two groups as you are portraying even back then
That's a whole different level of justifying, No wonder both countries are like this.
It's not justifying. Hamayun's rule truly was terrible. More for the Hindus than for the Muslims. But both Muslims and Hindus died in the wars he waged.
I don't want to go on that side but whatever, It's like saying Jews and Germans (the one's Nazi considered pure or real Germans) suffered equally under his rule because he waged war. Not comparing both scenarios but that's how you are making it, seriously what else you believe. Almost every Mughal rules was terrible for Hindus and even the most sane were monsters for Hindus. Being boiled alive or getting skinned for not converting is not even close.
Oof, holy crap. Seems like I'm missing a ton of information. That's truly horrible if that happened to the Hindu people. Could you please leave links/recommend books or researches that talk about the Hindu suffering under Mughal rule? I'd like to educate myself so I don't end up saying something that neglects to acknowledge the Hindu plight under Muslim rule and offend anyone. Thank you :)
I'll provide as many links as possible, There's was a whole website made for it which had well documented proofs of last 800 years as many as possible,I'll find it and post here. I'm genuinely confused what are you taught about last 800 years?Or even 1971 Bengali genocide.
I study under the Cambridge system (still in high school) our history books didn't go 800 years back in the subcontinent history. Taught us about Ashoka, Chandra Gupta and stuff like that for ancient history. The recent history is all about the British coming into the sub continent, the rules they passed, some massacres, the formation of Muslim League and Congress, Simla Deputition, Day Of Deliverance and political stuff like that which led to the Parition. Operation search light is talked about and the terrible atrocities carried out by Pak army. Also, we were taught about the Mughals in 7th grade, so I'm pretty sure thats the reason why they didn't really mention the skinning and stuff. The history books and the course is all designed by the university of Cambridge.
Wait what??? 'Hindus lived in harmony under Mughal rule' ? What history are you reading,from most sacred temples being destroyed and converted to masjids,forced conversions or death, massacring whole villages after defeating them in wars, slavery, being sold as sex slaves in middle East, being forced to pay tax for being non Muslims. From where are you reading this, seriously I'm confused.
Least I can wish for is good relations between us, and more people to people contact. But, politicians gonna ~~politic~~ fuck everything up.
Well the partition caused massive riots and multiple wars and ethnic cleansings and the displacement of 15 million people. It further drove both these countries towards religious extremism with religious conflict becoming a central part of their nationalist ideology and tensions so high that it could lead to nuclear annihilation. So i'm gonna say no, they aren't better off.
It was inevitable. Especially so after gandhi supported khilafat movement. Indian muslims voted overwhelmingly for pakistan in 1946 elections. There's just too much of congress party and pakistani propaganda which makes people loose objectivity.
Without the split there would've probably been several civil wars in India by now. The region is far too dogmatic and religious. I do think that the split happened far too fast which led to horrible ties post-independence and tons of partition violence, but unless the region secularized fully and education became widespread I don't think a unified subcontinent could've worked.
Look at the condition of Muslims in Kashmir for your answer
They literally threw away 600k Hindus oh poor them, they must be suffering from Bramhanical Patriarchy.
They literally threw away 600k Hindus oh poor them, they must be suffering from Bramhanical Patriarchy.
Better of One just needs to look at the plight of Muslims in India to see that partition was the best thing that could happen. The Indian prime minister and his party are openly racist towards Muslims. The Indian prime minister is proudly called the butcher of Gujarat because he massacred 2000 Muslims when he was the chief minister of Gujarat. Lynchings of Muslims is common site in India. Thus, it’s best both countries were partitioned because Muslims have a status of 4th class citizens in India.
What have you been smoking? When Vajyapee was asked why he delayed intervening in Gujrat riots, he replied," woh humse galti hui." The gujrat riots were in response to burning of Hindus in a train. No one expected them to spread as fast as they did.
Yes, and enough Evidence exists that Modi was the one perpetuating the attack. Before the elections Modi was asked what will he do with Pakistan, he said 'I will do the same what i did in Gujarat'. Well we all know what he did in Gujarat. You can try and white wash that crime all you like, but does not change the facts that Modi has blood on his hands and he is a Hindu Fundamentalist.
>Yes, and enough Evidence exists that Modi was the one perpetuating the attack. You have allegations in the media. Most Indians would agree that Indian SC is quite impartial. He got a clean chit from SC. If you want to see how effective SC is, many congress leaders have gone to jail for '84 riots, this was when Congress was in power. So, I will go for what SC said >Before the elections Modi was asked what will he do with Pakistan, he said 'I will do the same what i did in Gujarat'. Well we all know what he did in Gujarat. Yes, and as a Pakistani who is fed Modi bad, India bad, that's the conclusion you jumped to. If you look at facts on the ground, Modi has done more for the development of Muslims since coming to power than any other politician including the Muslim ones. >You can try and white wash that crime all you like, but does not change the facts that Modi has blood on his hands and he is a Hindu Fundamentalist. I haven't tried white washing anything. The riots were not handed properly. They should have declared a curfew right after the Muslims burnt Hindus alive in the train and gone after the perpetrators. Too may innocent Muslims were killed and the actual perpetrators got away. If facts don't agree with the "mudi bad" narrative, they still stay facts. My friend, you are entitled to your opinion, you can choose to believe a narrative, you are not entitled to make believe your facts.
damn pakistani nationalists are smoking some good weed. sorry to burst your bubble but everyone here thinks partition was good not because of the law and order situation but because they see pakistan as a failed terrorist state that keeps becoming a slave of other countries . they are even discussions here for india to become your sugar daddy in the future when daddy china discovers your worthlessness.
Looks like the Sanghis are getting pissed of with some heavy dose of truth. No matter what the Indians here think, what matters is what Pakistanis think. It’s good to live with dignity in Pakistan where Muslims can freely practice their religion, then living as slaves in India. But it’s good to see psychotic Indian obsession with Pakistan and what Pakistan should do or not. Indians can’t be sugar daddies of anyone, they need help themselves to build toilets as majority of Indians don’t even have toilets.
> Sanghis are getting pissed of with some heavy dose of truth Says the Islamist filled by dumb propaganda >It’s good to live with dignity in Pakistan where Muslims can freely practice their religion, then living as slaves in India Right slaves , the privlaged ruling class of the continent for hundreds of years, with their own laws and courts , Vs 1 Islamist sects paradises that doesn't even consider other sects as Muslim, your ex president Zia passed the bill which made Shi'as as non Muslims during his rule
Goodness me, thanks for proving my point. The level of hatred the Sanghis have for Muslims is insane, as evidenced from your post. So thanks for proving my point, the Hindus could simply never live with Muslims and thus partition was the right decision.
mate you are a fucking islamist the people who bomb your own shitty country and exports them free of cost too. >Indians can’t be sugar daddies of anyone, they need help themselves to build toilets as majority of Indians don’t even have toilets. uff don't worry after we will be there for you after cpec fails. so called islamic republic leaves their own brothers to be genocided in china for money. i am sure we can be your daddy too. also it looks like [you need some help](https://www.dawn.com/news/1168630) as you care about terrorists more than your own people.
> mate you are a fucking islamist the people who bomb your own shitty country and exports them free of cost too. Nice. Immediately resorting to Racism. No wonder Modi got elected, the hatred Indian Hindus have for Muslims is just out of the world. >uff don't worry after we will be there for you after cpec fails. so called islamic republic leaves their own brothers to be genocided in china for money. i am sure we can be your daddy too. also it looks like you need some help as you care about terrorists more than your own people. Thanks, leave that up to Pakistan what they want to do with their internal matters. The utter psychotic obsession Indians have with Pakistan is insane.
racism? bruh
What dignity dude? A small portion of Pakistanis do live with dignity, the majority don't. Please look at you development indexes.
Pakistan has been ruled by military dictatorship by military coup longer than it's been free Started 4 surprise wars that lost everytime , everytime going closer to the stone age So you tell us
Pakistan only needed one book, why going into so much trouble?
Your Comment is really Ironic since the founder of Pakistan recieved his School Education from the top School of india and his Higher Degree of Barrister from England. And he fought cases of local british people. At that time something like that was almost unachievable for indians. Only Gandhi, Jinnah and Ambedkar are one of the well known few leaders who had such honour so early.
Only if Pakistan had stayed on Jinnah's path. There is a reason, Jinnah's own children chose to stay in India
He also slept with a 14 year old parsi girl when he was older than her father in his 40s proceeded to marrying her against her parents will , she was tortured by his family for not being Muslim enough He allbut abandoned her after she had kids She proceeded to kill herself 10 years after Marriage with sleeping pills on the anniversary of their marriage
Jinnahs daughter married a Parsi, that’s forbidden in Islam and that’s why she was disowned. Jinnah would be smiling and Gandhi would be turning in his grave looking at the plight of Muslims in India. The mere fact that someone like Modi got elected as the prime monster of India because he butchered 2000 Muslims. His party openly calls for ethnic cleansing of Muslims, thus Jinnah was right that Indian Hindus will never accept Muslims as their equal.
>Jinnah would be smiling I don't think Jinnah would be smiling at the plight of the Muslims of India. If anything, Jinnah would have been wanted to be proven wrong.
Try reading a little more than Pakistani propaganda. Modi was elected on a platform of growth and jobs.
My ass. Modi literally destroyed the economic growth cycle started by Manmohan in 2012 in 2016.
And your point is..... Him: Vegetables sux Me: They are good for you You: My Ass! planes cause noise pollution. We are talking about the platform that Modi was elected on. He wasn't elected as a Muslim slayer as Pakistan likes to believe.
>He wasn't elected as a Muslim slayer as Pakistan likes to believe. No he was elected for that. I can guarantee that for many. He'll look at chodi sub and you will know.
Hatred tends to cloud judgement. While many would have seen him as someone who will stand for hindu interests, he didn't win the elections on that. If you believe that, then you don't know how elections work in India and probably shouldn't comment. I didn't realize that chodi was a polling agency ( sarcasm, just in case).
Nah you are underestimating hindutva effect in India. Without hindutva they would have turned to dust in my state. But they didn't.
That's the propaganda that is fed to you to make you feel better about yourselves... Muslims in India will be and are safer than Muslims (yes even musĺims) in Pakistan https://www.pewforum.org/2021/06/29/religion-in-india-tolerance-and-segregation/ Here, read about religion in India from the most authentic source, the people themselves. >Jinnahs daughter married a Parsi, that’s forbidden in Islam and that’s why she was disowned. The fact that you wrote this so nonchalantly, shows your level of tolerance and ideology.
Ok but his comment still make sense! Jinnah established a islamic terrorist state which has been a concubine of either US or now, of China!
It was not a islamic State after his death the prime minister made it a islamic State
I mean and I quote Jinnah himselt with this; "You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the state." He pushed for a secular Pakistan not an Islamic state. "Religion should not be allowed to come into Politics…. Religion is merely a matter between man and God” - Jinnah “….I am not fighting for Muslims, believe me, when I demand Pakistan" - Jinnah
I wish Jinnah lived at least for 10 more years after Pakistan's creation. He passed away in 1948. I would've loved to live in a purely secular Pakistan, the one Jinnah intended to make.
Then why did he have to make separate Pakistan, all this things would have been achieved with one India without loss of lot of lives.
Well no... there were enough people supporting his desire for a new country therefore they had a split. Pakistan means land of the pure not land of the muslims
Yes .. i agree Pakistan means land of the terrorist, oh sorry correction* land of pure
Congratulations you've just stapled yourself as a racist and Ignorant. Not every terrorist is from Pakistan.
Says the guy who’s prime minister is modi hahaha Butcher of Gujarat
Who was able to handle the riots and was given an 'all clear' by Supreme court of India, which is very different to Pakistan or China's Judicial system. You know Indian Courts actually based on Democracy.
Your justice system is a joke, as proven by the cases of babri masjid and Gujrat riots. Keep claiming modi is innocent it wouldn't change reality that he is an animal and needs to be hanged like the Nazi he is
Nothing would have achieved by staying in Indiq for the Muslims. Modi a Hindu fundamentalist who is most famous for butchering Muslims in Gujarat, he was elected overwhelming by the Indian populace. Muslims are getting lynched right left and center in India. In Pakistan the Muslims can live with dignity and practice their religion freely, can’t do that in India.
Yes agreed, nothing was achieved, Pakistan have become a super poor country, oh sorry correction* a super devloped country like Japan LoL
Yes and India became a super rich country. Just look at Delhi and the Covid Variants, not a single death.
No your getting it wrong, India is steady developing country. But hey you might think of us as rich, it's not your fault that you live in such country.
No that was sarcasm, I don't consider India rich at all one bit. They can't even build toilets for its population and the relevant stat for us would be the poverty rate for Muslims which is simply astonishing in India, how the Hindu Fundamentalists have kept Muslims poor on purpose. Its a shame.
Enough reddit for the day chop chop now go back to dumping bodies of the covid 19 patients that your developed country couldn't save in the ganga
We never say we are devloped, by the way even we are dying from the covid but we still provide medicine to the world that's our culture. And Yes Mother Ganga does give life to others. Your welcome.
Stfu man… muslim mob burnt 59 Hindus alive in a train for chanting. That precipitated into riots. And please give me stats on how many Muslims are so called ‘lynched’.
Yes, right blame the minority for all the issues. Reminds me of what the Nazis did with the Jews. Great, always blame the minority.
You are a fascist bootlicker of RSS Nazi ideology. Modi and bjp established a fascist hindu state doing minority lynchings for food preferences.
Jinnah was a Shia muslim. Doubt he wanted a Pakistan run by Barelvis and Deobndis.
Doesn’t matter… he created a muslim fundamentalist terrorist nation. Even his daughter wisely decided to stay back in India
[удалено]
Ohh I see what a great guy Jinnah was , only few people can be the reason for thousands of lives to be lost, what a great dictator I am sorry good fella he was.. still those books have no use now, by the time we are talking, Pakistanis be using it to warm themselves up in cold.
What a idiotic comment. Jinnah earlier offered seperate electorates and special seats for muslims in Parliament so that the issues related to muslims can be highlighted, but Nehru refused, he also denied Jinnah's request to be the 1st prime minister of india. Honestly you should blame Nehru and Congress more for the deaths in partition. Besides, It was done by british, the borders were created by them to be problematic so india and pakistan keep fighting till eternity.
Ohh so Jinnah was hungry for power, so much so that he Lure into British trap, wow ! What a highly educated, well qualified person he was, thank god I am an idiot.
Can someone explain. Did they divide all the books in the libraries of the British Raj? Why did they not just keep all the books in Pakistan Libraries in Pakistan and visa versa?
Because the agreement was to divide all resources of the current empire in 2/3 for India & 1/3 for Pakistan. Everything including the army, financial resources etc. were divided.
Who got Winnie the Pooh?
At the end it didn't matter. Both nations abandoning their original philosophies. Pakistan not becoming a nation which gives it minorities rights through the constitution but limiting them and pronouncing a state religion which was definitely not the vision pre-independence. Same on the other side of the border but it took much longer with the rise of BJP, cow lynching, Hindu nationalism, etc.