Bengali Hindus in Muslim-majority Bangladesh

[livingdead]

Practical difference none.

However history of Bangladesh necessitates the need to highlight the role of Islam as the base upon which the national identity rests.

I thought bangladesh was born more out of bengali nationalism(1971) than religious identity(1947) and even then it will be redundant to mention bengali in name of nation.... and it would be rather offputting to bihari and tribals without any real gain...
In most islamic countries, islam (and quran) is the guiding force in enacting laws, are you suggesting bd should be such a country?
If it is about recognizing majority of population are muslims, well its true and nothing can take away that fact. But you dont need to mention white christian in UK's name...

 

[mb444]

I thought bangladesh was born more out of bengali nationalism(1971) than religious identity(1947) and even then it will be redundant to mention bengali in name of nation.... and it would be rather offputting to bihari and tribals without any real gain...
In most islamic countries, islam (and quran) is the guiding force in enacting laws, are you suggesting bd should be such a country?
If it is about recognizing majority of population are muslims, well its true and nothing can take away that fact. But you dont need to mention white christian in UK's name...

There is no such as Bengali nationalism that excludes Islam as the central cannon on national identity. There would be no 1971 without 1947.

The former was a struggle for rights of east Pakistan that subsequently became an independence movement. This does not violate the need for Pakistan and thus east Pakistan in any shape or form as a nation created as a homeland for Muslims. The issue of religion was irrelevant as both east and west Pakistan was Muslim.

Bangladeshi identity is bigger than Bengali identity.... The latter is narrow cultural narrative whilst the former is a wider description that encapsulates all people of the nation.

It is irrelevant how other countries model themselves. BD identity is born of its particular history and its narrative must follow suit.

 

[bongbang]

There is no such as Bengali nationalism that excludes Islam as the central cannon on national identity. There would be no 1971 without 1947.

The former was a struggle for rights of east Pakistan that subsequently became an independence movement. This does not violate the need for Pakistan and thus east Pakistan in any shape or form as a nation created as a homeland for Muslims. The issue of religion was irrelevant as both east and west Pakistan was Muslim.

Bangladeshi identity is bigger than Bengali identity.... The latter is narrow cultural narrative whilst the former is a wider description that encapsulates all people of the nation.

It is irrelevant how other countries model themselves. BD identity is born of its particular history and its narrative must follow suit.

Its okay to have Bangladeshis nationalism. As Bengali nationalism given birth to it. You have to understand what it means. Bangla Deshi or the People lives in Bangla. Which is same narrative as Bengali. Bengali nationalism propagated by Sheikh Mujib he wasnt from cultural background or his disciples. By definition of Bengali they meant exactly that what you are talking. So Bengalis who created Bangladesh feels both are same and respect these. And Indian Bengali means different.But some have different Bangladeshi nationalism than the rest of Bangladeshis. Who are disguise in nature and wants destruction and annihilation of Bengalis by propagating Bangladeshi nationalism deception.

 

[mb444]

Its okay to have Bangladeshis nationalism. As Bengali nationalism given birth to it. You have to understand what it means. Bangla Deshi or the People lives in Bangla. Which is same narrative as Bengali. Bengali nationalism propagated by Sheikh Mujib he wasnt from cultural background or his disciples. By definition of Bengali they meant exactly that what you are talking. So Bengalis who created Bangladesh feels both are same and respect these. And Indian Bengali means different.But some have different Bangladeshi nationalism than the rest of Bangladeshis. Who are disguise in nature and wants destruction and annihilation of Bengalis by propagating Bangladeshi nationalism deception.

mujibs did not have a view that can be termed Bangali nationalism. His struggle composed correctly of establishing equal rights for Bangalies ( denomination irrelevant) or east Pakistanies within the context of an United Pakistan.

As this struggle for rights within a federation evolved to a struggle for sovereignty, so must the defining terminologies such as Bengali.

Following independence such a term would be too narrow. Bengali as a block identity within Pakistan is fine as it would be similar to Punjabi, Sindhi etc.

However in the context of Bangladesh the term Bengali is simply majotarian one that excludes minorities. The inclusive term is Bangladeshi not Bangali. You don't have to be culturally a Bengali to be a Bangladeshi.

How Indian bengalies defines themselves is up to them.... It has no relevance for Bangladesh.

 

[bongbang]

mujibs did not have a view that can be termed Bangali nationalism. His struggle composed correctly of establishing equal rights for Bangalies ( denomination irrelevant) or east Pakistanies within the context of an United Pakistan.

As this struggle for rights within a federation evolved to a struggle for sovereignty, so must the defining terminologies such as Bengali.

Following independence such a term would be too narrow. Bengali as a block identity within Pakistan is fine as it would be similar to Punjabi, Sindhi etc.

However in the context of Bangladesh the term Bengali is simply majotarian one that excludes minorities. The inclusive term is Bangladeshi not Bangali. You don't have to be culturally a Bengali to be a Bangladeshi.

How Indian bengalies defines themselves is up to them.... It has no relevance for Bangladesh.

BD constitutionally declares Bangladeshis, generally Bengali and citizenship wise Bangladeshi. Bengali which is a state of mind maintaining thousand years of tradition of people who are defining themselves Bengali. And in history at some point this land is named Bengal. Its not what god defined. So if some land is lost or some land added they dont have problems to rename themselves. And its not about Bengali ethnicity. There is nothing similar or exclusive about Bengalis. I dont see any problems paharis calling themselves Bengali. Who can define next their thousand sub tribes.

 

[mb444]

BD constitutionally declares Bangladeshis, generally Bengali and citizenship wise Bangladeshi. Bengali which is a state of mind maintaining thousand years of tradition of people who are defining themselves Bengali. And in history at some point this land is named Bengal. Its not what god defined. So if some land is lost or some land added they dont have problems to rename themselves. And its not about Bengali ethnicity. There is nothing similar or exclusive about Bengalis. I dont see any problems paharis calling themselves Bengali. Who can define next their thousand sub tribes.

If the hill Tracy people or the Burmese tribals or the Manipuris suddenly starts to call themselves bengalies .... So be it.

You do not consider Bengali to be an exclusive terminology.... That's fine.... But minorities may not agree and from shanti behini experience we have seen that they do not agree.

Whatever Bengali means and it can mean a lot of different things to different people it is surely better to create a new identity to go with a new nation.

We have thousands of years of history that won't disappear with a new definition. Defining Bangladeshi as an identity that embraces all strands of the diverse population of Bangladesh aids national cohesion. The term bengali is outdated and no longer sufficient for the needs of Bangladesh.

 

[livingdead]

There is no such as Bengali nationalism that excludes Islam as the central cannon on national identity. There would be no 1971 without 1947.

The former was a struggle for rights of east Pakistan that subsequently became an independence movement. This does not violate the need for Pakistan and thus east Pakistan in any shape or form as a nation created as a homeland for Muslims. The issue of religion was irrelevant as both east and west Pakistan was Muslim.

Bangladeshi identity is bigger than Bengali identity.... The latter is narrow cultural narrative whilst the former is a wider description that encapsulates all people of the nation.

It is irrelevant how other countries model themselves. BD identity is born of its particular history and its narrative must follow suit.

explain why there wont be any 1971 without 47. We have seen in India many time such instance of regional nationalism giving rise to secessionism. Its a a historical happenstance(that division based on religion preceded that based on ethnic identity), it did not have to be that way. Bengali, marathi and tamil nationalist are among the most open regionalists in India.
And if both islam and bengali are part of the identity that makes bangladesh will you also add bengali to the name of your country(like I said earlier).

 

[bongbang]

The term bengali is outdated and no longer sufficient for the needs of Bangladesh.

Bangladeshi means, People of Bangla land
Bengali means, People of Bengal
There goes your argument. Do you see any difference? For 2% other sub tribes 98% will leave their identity what a joke. Its better to teach those people some knowledge. As a Manipuri is a migrant from Manipur or a Marma is migrant from Myanmar. Next time if any of those cry out loud time to take baton.

 

[mb444]

explain why there wont be any 1971 without 47. We have seen in India many time such instance of regional nationalism giving rise to secessionism. Its a a historical happenstance(that division based on religion preceded that based on ethnic identity), it did not have to be that way. Bengali, marathi and tamil nationalist are among the most open regionalists in India.
And if both islam and bengali are part of the identity that makes bangladesh will you also add bengali to the name of your country(like I said earlier).

Without Pakistan there would not have been a Bangladesh.... I am not sure how else to explain historical linearity.

Bengalis could have been a sovereign entity outside of India/Pakistan and this was certainly on the cards however religious chauvanism killed that idea.

I do not have sufficient knowledge of Marathi or Tamil nationalism to contextualise and comment.

Islam was the primary identity in the creation of Pakistan. I would contend as in my earlier post that independence movement of Bangladesh was not the original intended goal. Post independence of Pakistan the struggle was to attain parity between East and West, economically, politically and culturally ( language movement).

This rights movement became an independence movement the moment army crackdown was ordered following mujibs election victory.

I would not add Bengali to the name of the nation, see earlier post as this definition does not serve current and future national cohesion.

 

[livingdead]

Without Pakistan there would not have been a Bangladesh.... I am not sure how else to explain historical linearity.

Bengalis could have been a sovereign entity outside of India/Pakistan and this was certainly on the cards however religious chauvanism killed that idea.

I do not have sufficient knowledge of Marathi or Tamil nationalism to contextualise and comment.

Islam was the primary identity in the creation of Pakistan. I would contend as in my earlier post that independence movement of Bangladesh was not the original intended goal. Post independence of Pakistan the struggle was to attain parity between East and West, economically, politically and culturally ( language movement).

This rights movement became an independence movement the moment army crackdown was ordered following mujibs election victory.

I would not add Bengali to the name of the nation, see earlier post as this definition does not serve current and future national cohesion.

if adding bengali to the name slightly takes away ownership from ethnic minorities like hill people and biharis(not really as you want everybody to be equal but just want to recognize reality of bd as well) would not adding islam to the name be against religious minorities like hindus.(although in practical term it will have no effect as you asserted).

I thought you mean formation of pakistan was essential for formation of bd(which I would argue against, as seen by assertive regional identity in few places in India even giving rise to terrorism).. if it was about how it happened.. its like saying 2016 cant happen without 2015, I cant argue with that.

 

[mb444]

Bangladeshi means, People of Bangla land
Bengali means, People of Bengal
There goes your argument. Do you see any difference? For 2% other sub tribes 98% will leave their identity what a joke. Its better to teach those people some knowledge. As a Manipuri is a migrant from Manipur or a Marma is migrant from Myanmar. Next time if any of those cry out loud time to take baton.

Turn the argument around if it means the same thing why the issue with the change. What harm does a more inclusive term cause.

It will also serve to strengthen the separate identity that Bangladesh has from West Bengal.

As you can tell I do not subscribe to the apar-opar Bangla crap. To be sovereign one needs to be unique and must define themselves as such.

You went back to mujib which is fine ...... But the term Bengali has different meaning and connotation pre and post independence.

 

[bongbang]

Turn the argument around if it means the same thing why the issue with the change. What harm does a more inclusive term cause.

It will also serve to strengthen the separate identity that Bangladesh has from West Bengal.

As you can tell I do not subscribe to the apar-opar Bangla crap. To be sovereign one needs to be unique and must define themselves as such.

You went back to mujib which is fine ...... But the term Bengali has different meaning and connotation pre and post independence.

Indian Bengalis or whatever Bengalis in the world they dont have constitutional Bengali identity. They are different and holds something like state of mind identity. BD constitution declares people Bengali and Bangladeshi same time. Chose your pick means same. And he is Indian Bengali you are Bangladeshi Bengali (which is a repeat of words anyway). Apart from BD only country treats people as Bengali is Myanmar as those rohingyas are also Bengali. And people of Assam, WB, Bihar was/is named as Bengali. So you can see a Bangladeshi is a narrow identity where a Bengali is a world wide broad identity. Bhanga the real Bengal is in BD not in WB so its our duty to preserve it.

 

[mb444]

if adding bengali to the name slightly takes away ownership from ethnic minorities like hill people and biharis(not really as you want everybody to be equal but just want to recognize reality of bd as well) would not adding islam to the name be against religious minorities like hindus.(although in practical term it will have no effect as you asserted).

I thought you mean formation of pakistan was essential for formation of bd(which I would argue against, as seen by assertive regional identity in few places in India even giving rise to terrorism).. if it was about how it happened.. its like saying 2016 cant happen without 2015, I cant argue with that.

I would not wish to add Islam to the name of the country in any way. Islam is beyond narrow nationalism.

Indian regionalism is somethings as I said I do not have knowledge enough to positively add anything to the discussion.

All I can add is my personal view without prejudicing the multiplicity of other Bangladeshi narrative.

I see BD identity as a linear culmination of the process of islamisation and development of a Islamic identity from the formation of the Delhi Sultanate. It went through various phases but the central to it had been religion as opposed to regionalism. Bengal sultanates were more or less independent and outside of the Mughal empire in most part. In the British Raj the Bengal parliament reinforced the arms length nature of Bengal from the rest of the subcontinent. Muslim/Hindu rivalries within the the context of Bengal was primary point of contention rather than an anti British agenda that ultimately birthed the Muslim league.

So my soft contention would be that Bengali nationalistic assertion is not a product of regionalism but rather that Bengal has been separate from the centre for a long time as you would define it. Add to it Bengal also had religious divisions and the Muslims of Bengal always aspired sovereignty. It is not regionalism but rather caused by new "national" consciousness.

Are bengalies of Indian province of bengal regionalist? If so what do they want exactly?

Indian Bengalis or whatever Bengalis in the world they dont have constitutional Bengali identity. They are different and holds something like state of mind identity. BD constitution declares people Bengali and Bangladeshi same time. Chose your pick means same. And he is Indian Bengali you are Bangladeshi Bengali (which is a repeat of words anyway). Apart from BD only country treats people as Bengali is Myanmar as those rohingyas are also Bengali. And people of Assam, WB, Bihar was/is named as Bengali. So you can see a Bangladeshi is a narrow identity where a Bengali is a world wide broad identity. Bhanga the real Bengal is in BD not in WB so its our duty to preserve it.

We would have to agree to disagree. I see the term Bengali as obsolete although I do use it every day.

 

[Riyad]

Bengali Hindus have Indian state West Bengal. Why do they flock into Bangladesh which is theoretically for Muslim Bengalis? Hindus residing in Bangladesh are actually Indians from heart and soul.

Muslims from West Bengal should move to Bangladesh and Hindus from Bangladesh should go to India. What is the significance of the partition if they don't move to their respective country?

 

[livingdead]

I would not wish to add Islam to the name of the country in any way. Islam is beyond narrow nationalism.

Indian regionalism is somethings as I said I do not have knowledge enough to positively add anything to the discussion.

All I can add is my personal view without prejudicing the multiplicity of other Bangladeshi narrative.

I see BD identity as a linear culmination of the process of islamisation and development of a Islamic identity from the formation of the Delhi Sultanate. It went through various phases but the central to it had been religion as opposed to regionalism. Bengal sultanates were more or less independent and outside of the Mughal empire in most part. In the British Raj the Bengal parliament reinforced the arms length nature of Bengal from the rest of the subcontinent. Muslim/Hindu rivalries within the the context of Bengal was primary point of contention rather than an anti British agenda that ultimately birthed the Muslim league.

So my soft contention would be that Bengali nationalistic assertion is not a product of regionalism but rather that Bengal has been separate from the centre for a long time as you would define it. Add to it Bengal also had religious divisions and the Muslims of Bengal always aspired sovereignty. It is not regionalism but rather caused by new "national" consciousness.

Are bengalies of Indian province of bengal regionalist? If so what do they want exactly?




We would have to agree to disagree. I see the term Bengali as obsolete although I do use it every day.

I am not denying history.. and I think we agree almost on everything... dont feel the need to argue on minor details.
yes bengalis, assamese, nagas, marathis and tamils are among prominent regionalists.. in some places its muted only reflecting on political representation and in some it has given rise to violent extremism.. I dont see regionalism as wrong or anti-national as such..