^Porus. Does an example have to include all permutations and possibilities?
Yes, it becomes almost mandatory when you demand the proof of loyalty from two other ethnic groups.
Fine, include the Punjabis too. But the problem you'd get is that a lot of them do see themselves as Pakistanis first and Punjabis second, so that wouldn't help my argument,
A lot of them also consider themselves to be more Pakistanis then the others but it still doens’t make them one. Pakistan has become synonym to Punjab for many Punjabis (just my observation), maybe due to their overwhelming majority in the armed forces and bureaucracy and they also make up almost 60% of the whole population of Pakistan. Punjabis voluntarily gave up their mother tongue in favour of Urdu (many even don’t own their mother tongue, they call it the language of Saradaran) and accepted the cultural hegemony of the immigrants from India. Therefore, I am not surprised IF “a lot of them “ supersede their national identity over their ethnic identity.
and if you noticed the argument was limited to the Sindh sarzameen and I gave AZ one outside one he could easily recognize.
Does it make any difference? And I have also pointed out towards the obvious fallaciousness in your fanciful claim in which you said that “waht the poor son-of-the-son-of-a-muhaajir would say if enquired about his ethnicity”.
And if you could pay more attention, I have already explained that composite identities need not be antagonistic. I can be a Pakistani and a Urdugo and a Sindhi and a man all at the same time. Do you see a problem with that?
No, not me, its you who seem to have a problem with it. You better read again what you wrote in your previous post:
You have no idea how pervasive is anti-Pakistanism in Pakistan. Let's talk of identity. Ask any Sindhi how he identifies himself and the answer is invariably "Maan Sindhi aahyaan", close to home you'd get the reply "Za Pukhtun yam" but the poor son-of-the-son-of-a-muhaajir invariably says "I'm a Pakistani". That is an inflammatory statement in much of Pakistan. Fine, I totally understand that for many people being a Sindhi/Punjabi/Pukhtun is not antagonistic to being a Pakistani. But for many it is. The latter also carry guns and believe 'the other' can be killed without remorse.
I can’t tolerate the megalomaniac attitude of some ethnic chauvinists, ironically most of them belong to one certain ethnic group. You are accusing Sindhis and Pathans for taking pride in their ethnicity and exonerating another ethnic group whose ethnocentric politics is its hall mark. Youre opinion is biased and prejudiced against "the latter" ones and it is quite obvious in your posts.