Joe Shearer
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
- Messages
- 27,493
- Reaction score
- 162
- Country
- Location
How is this figure of 1310 derived? Enquiring minds would like to know.
Ancient History not Appreciated by Pakistanis?
- Thread starter UnitedPak
- Start date
- Status
How is this figure of 1310 derived? Enquiring minds would like to know.
Ignited Mind
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,772
- Reaction score
- 0
Only Pakistanis would know that. It's a great secret, you know.
Joe Shearer
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
- Messages
- 27,493
- Reaction score
- 162
- Country
- Location
@Ignited Mind
OK, let's work this out.
Right. So 1857 - 1310 = 547.
Hmm. We've been under Muslim rule from 547 onwards. Must memorise this; no other way to remember it, considering there were no Muslims in 547.
Who was the infant genius who posted this, btw? Maybe we can sell him to Gaddafi as a weapons designer, and get rid of multiple problems all at one go.
MadDog
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,920
- Reaction score
- 5
Language/linguistics:
About 99% of languages spoken in Pakistan are Indo-Iranian (sub-branches: 75% Indo-Aryan and 24% Iranian), a branch of Indo-European family of languages. All languages of Pakistan are written in the Perso-Arabic script, with significant vocabulary derived from Arabic and Persian. Punjabi, Seraiki, Sindhi, Pashto, Urdu, Balochi, Kashmiri, etc. are the languages spoken in Pakistan.
About 69% of languages spoken in India are Indo-Iranian (sub-branch: Indo-Aryan), 26% are Dravidian, and 5% are Sino-Tibetan and Austro-Asiatic, all unrelated/distinct family of languages. Most languages in India are written in Brahmi- derived scripts such as Devangari, Gurmukhi, Tamil, etc. Hindi, Bengali, Gujarati, Marathi, Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam, Assamese, Punjabi, Naga, and many others are the mother-tongue languages spoken in each of India's states.
As you can see both countries have distinct linguistic identities. Even in the case of Punjabi, while it is the mother-tongue of a majority in Pakistan, it represents the mother-tongue of only 2% Indians. Besides, Pakistani Punjabi (Western Punjabi) is distinct in its vocabulary/dialect and writing script when compared to Indian Punjabi (Eastern Punjabi). Another thing to keep in mind is that Indian Punjabi is mostly spoken by Sikhs who consider themselves distinct from the rest of Indians and had been fighting for independence. In the case of Urdu/Hindi, while Hindi is the mother- tongue of a majority in India, Urdu is the mother-tongue of only 8% Pakistanis. Besides, they both are distinct languages, Urdu has a writing script and strong vocabulary derived from Arabic and Persian, whereas Hindi has strong vocabulary derived from Sanskrit and is written in Devangari script. Most Pakistanis can understand English and watch American/Brit movies but that does not make them British/American, same is the case with Hindi.
Race/genetics:
About 70% of Pakistanis are Caucasoid by race, 20% Australoid- Negroid, and 10% Mongoloid in their overall genetic composition. Majority of Pakistanis are tall with fair skin complexion, similar to Middle Eastern and Mediterranean peoples. While the racial features of each ethnic group are not uniform, Pashtuns are the most Caucasoid, followed by Kashmiris, Baluchis, north Punjabis, and then Sindhis, Seraikis, Urdu-speakers, etc. The Australoid-Negroid and Mongoloid racial elements are quite infused within the dominant Caucasoid genes among Pakistanis, however there are some that have retained their distinct racial characteristics.
About 50% of Indians are Australoid-Negroid by race, 35% Caucasoid, and 15% Mongoloid in their overall genetic composition. Majority of Indians are darker in their skin complexion, with wider noses, shorter heights, etc. The Australoid-Dravidoid racial element dominates among the lower caste Indians, South Indians, Eastern and Central Indians, etc. The Caucasoid racial element dominates in Northwest Indians and higher caste Indians. The Mongoloid racial element dominates in Northeast Indians and border regions with China.
Obviously, both countries have distinct racial identities. A common international perception based on observance of physical features is that most Pakistanis are lighter skinned than most Indians. Most Pakistanis resemble the looks of peoples inhabiting on its western borders and beyond. Indeed, many Pakistanis also resemble many Northwest Indians or higher caste Indians, but those are a minority in India. Similarly, a few people of Pakistan resemble peoples of South India, lower caste Indians, Northeast India, etc. but they are a minority in Pakistan. And besides, let's say, if some Saudis look similar to the French that does not make them one people, same applies here between Indians and Pakistanis.
Culture/Traditions:
Pakistanis have a distinct culture, traditions and customs. Shalwar kamiz is the dress commonly worn, both by men and women in Pakistan. Pakistani food is rich in meat (including beef), whereas wheat is the main staple. Pashto, Punjabi, Balochi, Sindhi, etc. music and dances are distinctly unique with their own melodies, instruments, patterns and styles. Pakistani arts in metal work, tiles, furniture, rugs, designs/paintings, literature, calligraphy, etc. are distinct and diverse. Pakistani architecture is unique with its Islamic styles. The manners and lifestyles are guided by a blend of Islam and local traditions.
India's commonly worn dress is dhoti for men and sari for women. Indian food is mostly vegetarian, with wheat as the main staple in the north and west, and rice is the main staple in south and east. Hindi, Gujarati, Tamil, Bengali, etc. music and dances are distinctly unique. So are Indian arts in the many areas. Indian architecture is unique in its mostly Hindu styles. The manners and lifestyles of most Indians are guided by Hinduism.
Pakistanis and Indians definitely have distinct cultures of their own. Some Indian women wear shalwar kamiz, but that was introduced by the ancestors of Pakistanis. Many Pakistani food dishes are absent in Indian cuisine and vice versa, and if some dishes are shared, they were also introduced by the ancestors of Pakistanis (like naan, tikka, kabob, biryani/pulao, etc.). There is barely any Hindu architectural influence in Pakistan (Gandhara is Graeco- Buddhist and Harappan is distinct), but significant influences by the ancestors of Pakistanis can be found in India. The lives of most Pakistanis are shaped by Islam, whereas the lives of most Indians are shaped by Hinduism.
History/background:
Pakistanis are a blend of their Harappan, Aryan, Persian, Greek, Saka, Parthian, Kushan, White Hun, Arab, Turkic, Afghan, and Mughal heritage. Waves of invaders and migrants settled down in Pakistan through out the centuries, influencing the locals and being absorbed among them.
Most Indians are a blend of their heritage of Dravidoid-Australoid hunters and gatherers, and Aryans (in north). Northwest Indians have a heritage from Harappans, Aryans, Sakas, and White Huns. Northeast Indians have a heritage based from Mongoloid hunters and gatherers. Also, Turks, Afghans and Mughals ruled north India for centuries.
Pakistan and India have a distinct history and background. The region of Pakistan was never part of India except for 500+ years under the Muslims, and 100 years each under the Mauryans and the British. If any thing, it were the ancestors of Pakistanis who colonized north/northwest India, among them were Harappans, Aryans, Sakas, Kushans, White Huns, Turks, Afghans, and Mughals.
Geography:
Pakistan is geographically unique, with Indus river and its tributaries as its main water supply. It is bordered by the Hindu Kush and Sulaiman Mountain ranges in the west, Karakoram mountain range in the north, Sutlej river and Thar desert in east, and Arabian Sea in the south. The country in its present form was created by the Pakistanis themselves out of the British Raj, the Indus people themselves who are now mostly Muslims.
India is geographically unique, with Ganges river and its tributaries as its water supply in the north, and other river systems in the rest of the country. Himalayas as its northern boundary, Sutlej river and Thar desert as its western border, the jungles of northeast as its eastern border, and Indian Ocean in the south. The mountains in the central-south India are the great divide between Dravidians of the south and Indo-Aryans of the north. The country itself was created by the British, a direct descendent of the remnants of British Raj.
It is evident that India and Pakistan have their own unique geographical environments. Pakistan is located at the crossroads of South Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East. On the other hand, India is located at the core of South Asia.
----- Article contributed by Hayat Khan
About 99% of languages spoken in Pakistan are Indo-Iranian (sub-branches: 75% Indo-Aryan and 24% Iranian), a branch of Indo-European family of languages. All languages of Pakistan are written in the Perso-Arabic script, with significant vocabulary derived from Arabic and Persian. Punjabi, Seraiki, Sindhi, Pashto, Urdu, Balochi, Kashmiri, etc. are the languages spoken in Pakistan.
About 69% of languages spoken in India are Indo-Iranian (sub-branch: Indo-Aryan), 26% are Dravidian, and 5% are Sino-Tibetan and Austro-Asiatic, all unrelated/distinct family of languages. Most languages in India are written in Brahmi- derived scripts such as Devangari, Gurmukhi, Tamil, etc. Hindi, Bengali, Gujarati, Marathi, Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam, Assamese, Punjabi, Naga, and many others are the mother-tongue languages spoken in each of India's states.
As you can see both countries have distinct linguistic identities. Even in the case of Punjabi, while it is the mother-tongue of a majority in Pakistan, it represents the mother-tongue of only 2% Indians. Besides, Pakistani Punjabi (Western Punjabi) is distinct in its vocabulary/dialect and writing script when compared to Indian Punjabi (Eastern Punjabi). Another thing to keep in mind is that Indian Punjabi is mostly spoken by Sikhs who consider themselves distinct from the rest of Indians and had been fighting for independence. In the case of Urdu/Hindi, while Hindi is the mother- tongue of a majority in India, Urdu is the mother-tongue of only 8% Pakistanis. Besides, they both are distinct languages, Urdu has a writing script and strong vocabulary derived from Arabic and Persian, whereas Hindi has strong vocabulary derived from Sanskrit and is written in Devangari script. Most Pakistanis can understand English and watch American/Brit movies but that does not make them British/American, same is the case with Hindi.
Race/genetics:
About 70% of Pakistanis are Caucasoid by race, 20% Australoid- Negroid, and 10% Mongoloid in their overall genetic composition. Majority of Pakistanis are tall with fair skin complexion, similar to Middle Eastern and Mediterranean peoples. While the racial features of each ethnic group are not uniform, Pashtuns are the most Caucasoid, followed by Kashmiris, Baluchis, north Punjabis, and then Sindhis, Seraikis, Urdu-speakers, etc. The Australoid-Negroid and Mongoloid racial elements are quite infused within the dominant Caucasoid genes among Pakistanis, however there are some that have retained their distinct racial characteristics.
About 50% of Indians are Australoid-Negroid by race, 35% Caucasoid, and 15% Mongoloid in their overall genetic composition. Majority of Indians are darker in their skin complexion, with wider noses, shorter heights, etc. The Australoid-Dravidoid racial element dominates among the lower caste Indians, South Indians, Eastern and Central Indians, etc. The Caucasoid racial element dominates in Northwest Indians and higher caste Indians. The Mongoloid racial element dominates in Northeast Indians and border regions with China.
Obviously, both countries have distinct racial identities. A common international perception based on observance of physical features is that most Pakistanis are lighter skinned than most Indians. Most Pakistanis resemble the looks of peoples inhabiting on its western borders and beyond. Indeed, many Pakistanis also resemble many Northwest Indians or higher caste Indians, but those are a minority in India. Similarly, a few people of Pakistan resemble peoples of South India, lower caste Indians, Northeast India, etc. but they are a minority in Pakistan. And besides, let's say, if some Saudis look similar to the French that does not make them one people, same applies here between Indians and Pakistanis.
Culture/Traditions:
Pakistanis have a distinct culture, traditions and customs. Shalwar kamiz is the dress commonly worn, both by men and women in Pakistan. Pakistani food is rich in meat (including beef), whereas wheat is the main staple. Pashto, Punjabi, Balochi, Sindhi, etc. music and dances are distinctly unique with their own melodies, instruments, patterns and styles. Pakistani arts in metal work, tiles, furniture, rugs, designs/paintings, literature, calligraphy, etc. are distinct and diverse. Pakistani architecture is unique with its Islamic styles. The manners and lifestyles are guided by a blend of Islam and local traditions.
India's commonly worn dress is dhoti for men and sari for women. Indian food is mostly vegetarian, with wheat as the main staple in the north and west, and rice is the main staple in south and east. Hindi, Gujarati, Tamil, Bengali, etc. music and dances are distinctly unique. So are Indian arts in the many areas. Indian architecture is unique in its mostly Hindu styles. The manners and lifestyles of most Indians are guided by Hinduism.
Pakistanis and Indians definitely have distinct cultures of their own. Some Indian women wear shalwar kamiz, but that was introduced by the ancestors of Pakistanis. Many Pakistani food dishes are absent in Indian cuisine and vice versa, and if some dishes are shared, they were also introduced by the ancestors of Pakistanis (like naan, tikka, kabob, biryani/pulao, etc.). There is barely any Hindu architectural influence in Pakistan (Gandhara is Graeco- Buddhist and Harappan is distinct), but significant influences by the ancestors of Pakistanis can be found in India. The lives of most Pakistanis are shaped by Islam, whereas the lives of most Indians are shaped by Hinduism.
History/background:
Pakistanis are a blend of their Harappan, Aryan, Persian, Greek, Saka, Parthian, Kushan, White Hun, Arab, Turkic, Afghan, and Mughal heritage. Waves of invaders and migrants settled down in Pakistan through out the centuries, influencing the locals and being absorbed among them.
Most Indians are a blend of their heritage of Dravidoid-Australoid hunters and gatherers, and Aryans (in north). Northwest Indians have a heritage from Harappans, Aryans, Sakas, and White Huns. Northeast Indians have a heritage based from Mongoloid hunters and gatherers. Also, Turks, Afghans and Mughals ruled north India for centuries.
Pakistan and India have a distinct history and background. The region of Pakistan was never part of India except for 500+ years under the Muslims, and 100 years each under the Mauryans and the British. If any thing, it were the ancestors of Pakistanis who colonized north/northwest India, among them were Harappans, Aryans, Sakas, Kushans, White Huns, Turks, Afghans, and Mughals.
Geography:
Pakistan is geographically unique, with Indus river and its tributaries as its main water supply. It is bordered by the Hindu Kush and Sulaiman Mountain ranges in the west, Karakoram mountain range in the north, Sutlej river and Thar desert in east, and Arabian Sea in the south. The country in its present form was created by the Pakistanis themselves out of the British Raj, the Indus people themselves who are now mostly Muslims.
India is geographically unique, with Ganges river and its tributaries as its water supply in the north, and other river systems in the rest of the country. Himalayas as its northern boundary, Sutlej river and Thar desert as its western border, the jungles of northeast as its eastern border, and Indian Ocean in the south. The mountains in the central-south India are the great divide between Dravidians of the south and Indo-Aryans of the north. The country itself was created by the British, a direct descendent of the remnants of British Raj.
It is evident that India and Pakistan have their own unique geographical environments. Pakistan is located at the crossroads of South Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East. On the other hand, India is located at the core of South Asia.
----- Article contributed by Hayat Khan
MadDog
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,920
- Reaction score
- 5
The empires even before the arrival of muslims to this land were situated with centers either to their west or in central asia...
and if u check most of Pak's land was in them while in some instances little bit of present day's india's territory was also included...
come to canada..and check the diff...majority of both ppl look diff from each other...this is wht even indians say themselves...
even a blind person can tell.....throughout history...area to the west of indus was considered persian part and to the east was hind (ie 60-75% of Pak) wasn't even in india......u guys need to be the dumbest ppl on the planet if u wanna debate on this...cuz there can be no debates on facts.
Even if u check the official defination of central asia...two of pakistan's provinces lie in it...i.e Gilgit Baltistan and Pukhtunkhwa while baluchistan as mentioned was part of early persian empires and later the caliphates even area uptill Bolan was under the rashidun caliphates ruled by Hadhrat Ali (R) ...after the rashidun caliphates defeated persians....two provinces lie in south asia..namely punjab and sindh...thus Pakistan is at the cross roads of three major regions just like turkey is at the crossroads of europe and asia...while india is in the center of south asia..so plz read history before countering me.
and if u check most of Pak's land was in them while in some instances little bit of present day's india's territory was also included...
come to canada..and check the diff...majority of both ppl look diff from each other...this is wht even indians say themselves...
even a blind person can tell.....throughout history...area to the west of indus was considered persian part and to the east was hind (ie 60-75% of Pak) wasn't even in india......u guys need to be the dumbest ppl on the planet if u wanna debate on this...cuz there can be no debates on facts.
Even if u check the official defination of central asia...two of pakistan's provinces lie in it...i.e Gilgit Baltistan and Pukhtunkhwa while baluchistan as mentioned was part of early persian empires and later the caliphates even area uptill Bolan was under the rashidun caliphates ruled by Hadhrat Ali (R) ...after the rashidun caliphates defeated persians....two provinces lie in south asia..namely punjab and sindh...thus Pakistan is at the cross roads of three major regions just like turkey is at the crossroads of europe and asia...while india is in the center of south asia..so plz read history before countering me.
Joe Shearer
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
- Messages
- 27,493
- Reaction score
- 162
- Country
- Location
No, we don't want to debate on this. All that we want to say has been said - over and over and over and over again, until some new kid on the block, with less than 200 posts to his credit, comes trotting along, and says, "Now hear this. We are different from you, you know?" And the whole furshlugginer thing starts up again. What goes on here? Is there a cookie cutter that brings you guys out, one after the other? With a bucket of brains and a scoop with holes in it at the end of the line, and a spastic trying to score as you go past him with brain crania open?
We definitely don't want to debate with you geniuses. No way. Like you said, you just need to look at them to make out they're different (we don't mean it the way you do, but so what?). Argument over, facts presented, case proved. Now go home to Canada and stay there. Please. The shining bright light of your intelligence is hurting my tired old eyes.
MadDog
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,920
- Reaction score
- 5
@ Joe Shearer dude i used historical facts...and i have this right to use it to counter an your allegation that whole of my national identity
should not exist....if u don't like it ( and surely u don't like it) then plz let ur fellows know not
to attack my ideology and my nation's ideology cuz this stubborn mindset which doesn't recognizes Pakistan's existence is the only reason for wars
and will continue to be so if both nations don't start respecting each other's identities and ideologies.
For the sake of peace b/w 2 countries i request u and ur fellows to accept the reality and not see hi-fi dreams.
should not exist....if u don't like it ( and surely u don't like it) then plz let ur fellows know not
to attack my ideology and my nation's ideology cuz this stubborn mindset which doesn't recognizes Pakistan's existence is the only reason for wars
and will continue to be so if both nations don't start respecting each other's identities and ideologies.
For the sake of peace b/w 2 countries i request u and ur fellows to accept the reality and not see hi-fi dreams.
twoplustwoisfour
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2010
- Messages
- 1,589
- Reaction score
- 0
No one is attacking your nation's ideology. What we are rediculing is your incredulous claim over a part of history which you yourself had disowned.
Regarding the facts that you have mentioned, the same have already been discussed over the previous 52 pages of this thread. I suggest you go through them.
MadDog
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,920
- Reaction score
- 5
@twoplustwoisfour dude it has not been disowned...this means u didnt read what was written there.
"Pakistanis are a blend of their Harappan, Aryan, Persian, Greek, Saka, Parthian, Kushan, White Hun, Arab, Turkic, Afghan, and Mughal heritage. Waves of invaders and migrants settled down in Pakistan through out the centuries, influencing the locals and being absorbed among them."
"Most Indians are a blend of their heritage of Dravidoid-Australoid hunters and gatherers, and Aryans (in north). Northwest Indians have a heritage from Harappans, Aryans, Sakas, and White Huns. Northeast Indians have a heritage based from Mongoloid hunters and gatherers."
What i said is that majority of both nations is diff from each other, while there might be common shared characteristics..(which pak also shares with afghanistan and iran) but my emphasis was about majority.
Regards
MadDog
"Pakistanis are a blend of their Harappan, Aryan, Persian, Greek, Saka, Parthian, Kushan, White Hun, Arab, Turkic, Afghan, and Mughal heritage. Waves of invaders and migrants settled down in Pakistan through out the centuries, influencing the locals and being absorbed among them."
"Most Indians are a blend of their heritage of Dravidoid-Australoid hunters and gatherers, and Aryans (in north). Northwest Indians have a heritage from Harappans, Aryans, Sakas, and White Huns. Northeast Indians have a heritage based from Mongoloid hunters and gatherers."
What i said is that majority of both nations is diff from each other, while there might be common shared characteristics..(which pak also shares with afghanistan and iran) but my emphasis was about majority.
Regards
MadDog
twoplustwoisfour
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2010
- Messages
- 1,589
- Reaction score
- 0
Majority of Indians might not be similar to Majority of Pakistanis, but Majority of Pakistanis have similar traits as NorthWestern Indians. But this thread is not about racial charecteristics, we were talking about the Harrappan civilization, which is shared by the two nations.
Joe Shearer
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
- Messages
- 27,493
- Reaction score
- 162
- Country
- Location
Majority of Indians might not be similar to Majority of Pakistanis, but Majority of Pakistanis have similar traits as NorthWestern Indians. But this thread is not about racial charecteristics, we were talking about the Harrappan civilization, which is shared by the two nations.
Explain to him in simple language that unfortunately for his silly little theories, internationally reputed scientists (Cavalli-Sforza - he can look up the man and his work on the net) have already examined the genetics of the sub-continent and found uniformity of DNA across all segments, in all geographies (except the Pakhtun). So he can put his little magazine speculations where the monkey put the nuts.
But don't spend too much time.
Why are we bothering to waste time on this half-baked kid who is rehashing the stuff of a hundred discussions past, simply because he is too naive to know that he is coming in at the tail end? Let him have the grace to look at those past discussions before thinking that he is so smart that he is saying things nobody else has thought of and nobody can counter. Don't waste time on these self-appointed champions of what they imagine is their national cause.
Bang Galore
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 10,685
- Reaction score
- 12
- Country
- Location
Actually the only trait Indians like us & Pakistanis like them share is gross stupidity. We, because we waste our time insisting that we are all similar in spite of the fact that would be going for the lowest common denominator and be of no great credit, they because of a strong, unshakable belief that they are transported miraculously from Arabia (or Mars) to be inserted carefully within the borders of their present country & no further.
DESERT FIGHTER
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
- Messages
- 46,973
- Reaction score
- 95
- Country
- Location
To tell u the truth balouch,pashtun,gilgit-baltistan,tajik,hazara,hindko n syeds,qureshis,ghakars,mughals,turkics,aghas,kurds,persians etc dont have no similarity with Northern indians...... The small minority of jats,rajputs,khatri(shiekhs) are of the same blood as their counterparts on ur side........and are very much proud n use the same titles.... n then we have the low castes(only in punjab n sindh) like mochi,darzi etc.
But yes majority has no links with u guys.
N by syeds etc i mean the children of saints n sufis who settled here..... For eg Baba Bullay Shah,Fareed ganj Baksh,waris shah,Shah rukn-e-alam etc....... the children...... r of arab ancestory.
But yes majority has no links with u guys.
N by syeds etc i mean the children of saints n sufis who settled here..... For eg Baba Bullay Shah,Fareed ganj Baksh,waris shah,Shah rukn-e-alam etc....... the children...... r of arab ancestory.
Developereo
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 14,093
- Reaction score
- 25
- Country
- Location
Well, I haven't bothered reading 800 odd posts, but we studied Harappa, Mohenjodaro, Ashoka, Buddha, etc. when I went to school. It was very much considered a part of Pakistan's cultural heritage. Also, I would say that most Pakistanis I know consider us to be more similar to north Indians than Arabs or Turks, both culturally and physically.
There is a full spectrum of views on this subject within Pakistan.
There is a full spectrum of views on this subject within Pakistan.
Manas
BANNED
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2011
- Messages
- 2,059
- Reaction score
- -5
Some thing i read :
The Turks who came down from Central Asia and put up tent in the Indian Subcontinent had only so much culture that they were crazy for watermelons. The Pakistani Turkic "lobby" is quite active in peddling bulls*it about racial superiority over the Subcontinental gene pool. Pakistanis buy into it by thinking about the beauty of the Turks in Turkey. That beauty has little to do with Turks and everything to do with Hittites and other Anatolian ethnicities. The Turks who came down into the Indian Subcontinent looked very much like the Uzbeks. And let's be frank about this, the Pakistanis do not look one bit like the Uzbeks. That is one aspect that is simply brushed over. However still the thing about racial superiority viz-a-viz the Subcontinentals is peddled around as if it was some given fact, just so that one can push for a theory that Pakistanis are somehow genetically different than the rest of the Subcontinent.
Most vociferous on cultural matters is the Pakistani Persian "lobby". The Turks having no real court culture of their own imported Persian court culture. During the course of this royal patronage to the Persian culture, many Persians were able to find a place in the Indian Subcontinent in influential places. This lobby loves to peddle theories that the people of Pakistan are culturally totally different than the people in the rest of the Indian Subcontinent. The Two-Nation Theory too is the work of this lobby. Of course they additionally used the crutches of Pan-Islamism, of Ummah, of Muslim Brotherhood over bonds of blood and ethnicity, to strengthen their message, but it has always been the effort of this lobby to drive a schism between the Muslims of the Subcontinent and the Hindus of the Subcontinent. No effort is spared to show that the Muslims of the Subcontinent somehow all owe their culture, customs and traditions to West Asia, to Islamic Persia only, and that they have no cultural roots in the Indian Subcontinent. In the end, this Pakistani Persian lobby does so only to strengthen their own position in the political landscape of Pakistan, because the more Pakistan moves culturally towards Islamic Persia, the bigger role this lobby can play as intermediaries of this culture.
Then there is the Arab "lobby" active in Pakistan. For them the important thing is ideological proselytization and ideological purification. They similarly use tools of segregation of Muslims from other communities in order to avoid contamination of their sheep by external ideas. This lobby wants to send the children of the Muslims through seminaries where children learn by rote, and their identity as Muslims is fastened as tight as possible. This lobby is a bit confused. In order to proselytize they need to go into alien pastures, but at the same time they want to avoid contamination by the ideologies of the Kufr.
Most Hindus feel at ease with this Arab lobby, though not all. They feel that if this lobby does not use illegitimate tools for proselytization, than they should be allowed to compete - illegitimate tools being intimidation and violence; state patronage towards Muslims and discrimination towards others; death penalties to apostates; abduction of Hindu girls for marriage; coercing marriage partners to convert to Islam, in order to approve marriage; etc..
What Indians do not approve is this hijacking of the Pakistani population by the "Turkic" Racial Supremacists, who want to fool Pakistanis into believing that they somehow are genetically different than the Hindus. Should one really start calculating, one would see that the influx of Central Asian genetic material into the demographics of Pakistan does not make up more than 2% and that too if one is generous. The vast mass of Pakistanis in fact have no genetic influence, in matter of speaking, from Central Asians in Islamic times. This tiny elite of a couple of hundred thousands want to hijack common Pakistanis away from their Subcontinental roots and for what? - To lord over them, to consider them their own personal jaagir. This lie must be countered head-on.
Indians are also not happy about the damage the Pakistani Persian lobby is again trying to achieve - the Partition of India being their first "achievement". They want the Pakistani people to completely discard their roots. In fact they are intensively lobbying to put an end to Indian or one should say Subcontinental influence on the Pakistani masses - Bollywood films, music, language, etc, and since the Pakistani people are showing them the middle finger, they are intent on imposing this through government ordinance.
So who are the fools in Pakistan - the fools are the Muslim Rajputs and Muslim Jats of Pakistan and of Punjab in particular. Regardless of whether there had been a Pakistan or not, they would have always been influential. The Persian lobby made them believe they had grounds to fear Hindu influence. In fact the Persian lobby has been able to impose Urdu as their first language in Punjab. Muslim Rajputs and Muslim Jats have lost not only their pre-Islamic cultural grandeur, but also their post-Islamic pre-Partition roots in the Punjabi language. The Arab lobby would not have minded if the Punjabis had stuck to their Punjabi. But that would not have sat well with the Pakistani Persian lobby.
After the loss of patronage by the Mughals, the Persian lobby looked for some influence by aligning themselves with the interests of the British. Hence Muslim League was born. The Arab lobby was not really in favor of Partition. Neither Maulana Azad nor Maududi approved of Partition. Of course Maududi dreamt of converting Hindus to Islam, but he was not in favor of segregation. In this regard the Arab lobby thought differently.
The last Muslim Punjabi was really Fazli Husain of the Unionist Party of Punjab. The Persian lobby was able to win over Sikander Hyat Khan of Punjab and the rest is history. Punjab lost its Punjabiyat the day Sikander Hyat Khan walked over to the Muslim League. Pakistani Punjab has had Urdu forced down its throat.
Basically Muslim Rajputs and Muslim Jats of Punjab who should have protested have kept quiet. They too have been told that it is in their interest to prolong the India-Pakistan conflict, and only if they do so would they be able to hold sway through the Army. They have been sold the rubbish that mixing of Turkish and Persian blood in their veins has somehow made them into superhumans and each Pakistani is now 10 times stronger than a Kafir Indian. The Pakistani Punjabi Muslim Rajputs and Muslim Jats have bought all this rubbish and frittered away whatever little they had in identity, their old culture, language, etc. They have allowed their traditional identity as Punjabis to be superseded by an artificial word "Pakistan". They have allowed themselves to made into fools. If they want real roots, then they should rediscover their Punjabi roots and history.
The real loss however is to the Pakistani Muslim masses, who have been given high doses from all three lobbies - the Pakistani Turkic lobby, the Pakistani Persian lobby, and the Pakistani Arab lobby.
Even though ideologically the Hindu Civilization has incurred severe damage under the Arab lobby, at least the Hindu Civilization has survived its most brutal attack of mass conversions at the point of a sword. However the Pakistani Persian lobby and the Pakistani Turkish lobby have proven more dangerous to the Indian Subcontinent, because they have achieved partition and now hope to achieve a full reorientation of Pakistan away from the Indian Subcontinent.
So as far as Indians are concerned, we don't mind if the Pakistani Arab lobby consumes the Pakistani Persian lobby, and the Pakistani Pushtun supremacist lobby consumes the Pakistani Turkish supremacist lobby.
So I don't know who in Pakistan is really inclined towards the Indian Subcontinent, but the Pakistani "Liberals", who worship Jinnah, the Muslim League, and belong to Pakistani Elite, are in fact already compromised by the Pakistani Persian lobby. There is also a heavy sprinkling of Pakistanis who tend towards the Pakistani Turkish "supremacist" lobby.
The Turks who came down from Central Asia and put up tent in the Indian Subcontinent had only so much culture that they were crazy for watermelons. The Pakistani Turkic "lobby" is quite active in peddling bulls*it about racial superiority over the Subcontinental gene pool. Pakistanis buy into it by thinking about the beauty of the Turks in Turkey. That beauty has little to do with Turks and everything to do with Hittites and other Anatolian ethnicities. The Turks who came down into the Indian Subcontinent looked very much like the Uzbeks. And let's be frank about this, the Pakistanis do not look one bit like the Uzbeks. That is one aspect that is simply brushed over. However still the thing about racial superiority viz-a-viz the Subcontinentals is peddled around as if it was some given fact, just so that one can push for a theory that Pakistanis are somehow genetically different than the rest of the Subcontinent.
Most vociferous on cultural matters is the Pakistani Persian "lobby". The Turks having no real court culture of their own imported Persian court culture. During the course of this royal patronage to the Persian culture, many Persians were able to find a place in the Indian Subcontinent in influential places. This lobby loves to peddle theories that the people of Pakistan are culturally totally different than the people in the rest of the Indian Subcontinent. The Two-Nation Theory too is the work of this lobby. Of course they additionally used the crutches of Pan-Islamism, of Ummah, of Muslim Brotherhood over bonds of blood and ethnicity, to strengthen their message, but it has always been the effort of this lobby to drive a schism between the Muslims of the Subcontinent and the Hindus of the Subcontinent. No effort is spared to show that the Muslims of the Subcontinent somehow all owe their culture, customs and traditions to West Asia, to Islamic Persia only, and that they have no cultural roots in the Indian Subcontinent. In the end, this Pakistani Persian lobby does so only to strengthen their own position in the political landscape of Pakistan, because the more Pakistan moves culturally towards Islamic Persia, the bigger role this lobby can play as intermediaries of this culture.
Then there is the Arab "lobby" active in Pakistan. For them the important thing is ideological proselytization and ideological purification. They similarly use tools of segregation of Muslims from other communities in order to avoid contamination of their sheep by external ideas. This lobby wants to send the children of the Muslims through seminaries where children learn by rote, and their identity as Muslims is fastened as tight as possible. This lobby is a bit confused. In order to proselytize they need to go into alien pastures, but at the same time they want to avoid contamination by the ideologies of the Kufr.
Most Hindus feel at ease with this Arab lobby, though not all. They feel that if this lobby does not use illegitimate tools for proselytization, than they should be allowed to compete - illegitimate tools being intimidation and violence; state patronage towards Muslims and discrimination towards others; death penalties to apostates; abduction of Hindu girls for marriage; coercing marriage partners to convert to Islam, in order to approve marriage; etc..
What Indians do not approve is this hijacking of the Pakistani population by the "Turkic" Racial Supremacists, who want to fool Pakistanis into believing that they somehow are genetically different than the Hindus. Should one really start calculating, one would see that the influx of Central Asian genetic material into the demographics of Pakistan does not make up more than 2% and that too if one is generous. The vast mass of Pakistanis in fact have no genetic influence, in matter of speaking, from Central Asians in Islamic times. This tiny elite of a couple of hundred thousands want to hijack common Pakistanis away from their Subcontinental roots and for what? - To lord over them, to consider them their own personal jaagir. This lie must be countered head-on.
Indians are also not happy about the damage the Pakistani Persian lobby is again trying to achieve - the Partition of India being their first "achievement". They want the Pakistani people to completely discard their roots. In fact they are intensively lobbying to put an end to Indian or one should say Subcontinental influence on the Pakistani masses - Bollywood films, music, language, etc, and since the Pakistani people are showing them the middle finger, they are intent on imposing this through government ordinance.
So who are the fools in Pakistan - the fools are the Muslim Rajputs and Muslim Jats of Pakistan and of Punjab in particular. Regardless of whether there had been a Pakistan or not, they would have always been influential. The Persian lobby made them believe they had grounds to fear Hindu influence. In fact the Persian lobby has been able to impose Urdu as their first language in Punjab. Muslim Rajputs and Muslim Jats have lost not only their pre-Islamic cultural grandeur, but also their post-Islamic pre-Partition roots in the Punjabi language. The Arab lobby would not have minded if the Punjabis had stuck to their Punjabi. But that would not have sat well with the Pakistani Persian lobby.
After the loss of patronage by the Mughals, the Persian lobby looked for some influence by aligning themselves with the interests of the British. Hence Muslim League was born. The Arab lobby was not really in favor of Partition. Neither Maulana Azad nor Maududi approved of Partition. Of course Maududi dreamt of converting Hindus to Islam, but he was not in favor of segregation. In this regard the Arab lobby thought differently.
The last Muslim Punjabi was really Fazli Husain of the Unionist Party of Punjab. The Persian lobby was able to win over Sikander Hyat Khan of Punjab and the rest is history. Punjab lost its Punjabiyat the day Sikander Hyat Khan walked over to the Muslim League. Pakistani Punjab has had Urdu forced down its throat.
Basically Muslim Rajputs and Muslim Jats of Punjab who should have protested have kept quiet. They too have been told that it is in their interest to prolong the India-Pakistan conflict, and only if they do so would they be able to hold sway through the Army. They have been sold the rubbish that mixing of Turkish and Persian blood in their veins has somehow made them into superhumans and each Pakistani is now 10 times stronger than a Kafir Indian. The Pakistani Punjabi Muslim Rajputs and Muslim Jats have bought all this rubbish and frittered away whatever little they had in identity, their old culture, language, etc. They have allowed their traditional identity as Punjabis to be superseded by an artificial word "Pakistan". They have allowed themselves to made into fools. If they want real roots, then they should rediscover their Punjabi roots and history.
The real loss however is to the Pakistani Muslim masses, who have been given high doses from all three lobbies - the Pakistani Turkic lobby, the Pakistani Persian lobby, and the Pakistani Arab lobby.
Even though ideologically the Hindu Civilization has incurred severe damage under the Arab lobby, at least the Hindu Civilization has survived its most brutal attack of mass conversions at the point of a sword. However the Pakistani Persian lobby and the Pakistani Turkish lobby have proven more dangerous to the Indian Subcontinent, because they have achieved partition and now hope to achieve a full reorientation of Pakistan away from the Indian Subcontinent.
So as far as Indians are concerned, we don't mind if the Pakistani Arab lobby consumes the Pakistani Persian lobby, and the Pakistani Pushtun supremacist lobby consumes the Pakistani Turkish supremacist lobby.
So I don't know who in Pakistan is really inclined towards the Indian Subcontinent, but the Pakistani "Liberals", who worship Jinnah, the Muslim League, and belong to Pakistani Elite, are in fact already compromised by the Pakistani Persian lobby. There is also a heavy sprinkling of Pakistanis who tend towards the Pakistani Turkish "supremacist" lobby.
- Status
Similar threads
- Article
