PDF Poll: What is the Foundational Narrative for Pakistan?

[Riyadh Haque]

What is the Foundational Narrative for Pakistan?

I think all of us as Pakistanis need to get together and work out a common foundational story. This forum would be an excellent place to start this debate to see if we can arrive at some consensus. I have no personal preference. I will go with whatever consensus evolves amongst the people. I just wish that we could find some consensus that would be agreeable to >2/3rd of Pakistanis. Once we have a consensus, then all this intellectual confusion created by the constant contorting would come to an end. This would help reduce the chaos of having to deal with the muddled-clutter of numerous different theories that are now being offered as an answer to the simple question: What is Pakistan?

The way I see it, there are a few leading contenders amongst the numerous theories that seem to be floating about on the issue of what Pakistan is supposed to be. So here they are:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) Choudhary Rahmat Ali: The Indus Valley Civilization Theory. Pakistan in an Indus-based Civilization, while (North) India is a Ganges-based Civilization. These two civilizations are as different & distinct as Nile-based Egypt versus Mekong-based ASEAN.

Choudhry Rahmat Ali - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What are the objections to this theory?

The presence of the Muhajirs from the Gangetic-Plains. They are not Indus-Valley people and are civilizationally Indian and not Pakistani. One way to correct this flaw is by deporting all the 15-million Muhajirs back to their civilizational homeland in the Gangetic-Plains.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2) Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah:The Two-Nation Theory. Pakistan is a separate homeland for "the Muslims of India".

Two-Nation Theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What are the objections to this theory?

(a) The presence of the 200 million Muslims in India who do not have the right to immigrate to the "homeland for the Muslims of India". One way to make this theory whole is by giving all the 200 million Muslims of India the unconditional, undeniable and immediate right to immigrate into Pakistan so that they can also live their lives under the Nur-of-Islam.

(b) The Bengalis divorced us and walked away. The way to overcome this point is to argue that the Bengalis were included by mistake in the first place because of a typographical error. What did we expect? The Quaid once said, "What is this Muslim League? It is just me and my typewriter". Given the overwhelming workload, a typographical error was only to be expected. Another way is to convert the Two-Nation Theory into a Three-Nation Theory in order to resolve this anomaly.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3) Allama Muhammad Iqbal: The Global Muslim Ummah Theory. Nationalism is Kufr; "Pakistan" is merely the revolutionary seed from which the new Global Khilafah will emerge to unite all 1.5 billions Muslims of the World of under the banner of Islam. Ghazwa-e-Hind may follow, but only if we remember to set the alarm and get up on time tomorrow morning.

Chin O arab hamara hindustaN hamara … « Urdu Ghazals
Muhammad Iqbal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What are the objections to this theory?

The fact that people in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, UAE etcetera treat us like dirt because we are not Arab. One way to make this theory whole is by sending out our brave army to conquer Arabia, subdue their arrogance and sieze control of the Two Holy Places and all their oil. Kiyani could then claim the Mantle of the Khalifah and so establish Iqbal's cherished egalitarion Khilafah without the Arab v/s non-Arab racism, the Quraish v/s Non-Quraish tribalism and the Sayyid v/s non-Sayyid casteism.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4) Some Other Theory: Insert your own theory here....If people post their own theories, we can use the "thanks" count to see which ones are popular and then add them here.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What are your thoughts? Which theory do you prefer, and why? What do you think are the pros and cons of each of the listed popular theories? Do you have another theory in mind? What are the justifications for your theory? What are its advantages?

If there is a good discussion on this thread and we get plenty of responses, perhaps someone can add a "VOTE" or "POLL" counter at the head of the thread and we can do a genuine poll to see where people stand?

Just my thoughts. Nothing more....

 

[INDIC]

All of them look contradictory to each other.

 

[Peaceful Civilian]

Some Other Theory:
*Democratic Pakistan in which Muslims have right to choose their own people.
*Rights for minorities.
*Rights for freedom of expression.
*Respect for other religions.
*Security of Muslims and other religions.
*Freedom of Islamic and other activities.
*Muslim power.
*Good relation with all countries.
*No extremism and terrorism.

 

[Last Hope]

Everyone gave their input but without the input and dedicated work by Iqbal, there would have been no Pakistan ever.

 

[Uchiha]

Everyone gave their input but without the input and dedicated work by Iqbal, there would have been no Pakistan ever.

Yeah, Jinnah(RA) was just the personal typist for Iqbal right?

 

[Last Hope]

Yeah, Jinnah(RA) was just the personal typist for Iqbal right?

I never said anything negative about Jinnah. But Pakistan was based on theories by Iqbal which were implemented and acted upon by Jinnah.

Everyone has their own views. I believe Iqbal has greater role than others.

 

[p(-)0ENiX]

Why do we need to pick a single identity for Pakistan? Why can't we have multiple identities? Pakistan can celebrate its Harappan & Vedic past, & simultaneously be proud of its Islamic heritage. Both of these elements aren't mutually exclusive, neither is nationalism forbidden or a sin. In modern times there are countries like the US, Australia, & Canada; each of them consists of different races, languages, religions, & cultures. Yet they are united because of their geographical boundaries, the passports they carry, & the fact that they associate themselves with their nationalities in general. Pakistan should strive to resemble them in this scenario, just like any other nation state.

 

[pak-marine]

We can move on by changing the name from Islamic republic of Pakistan to Republic of Pakistan plain and square , Just like QA wanted it to be Pakistan came into being on two nation theory which was may applicable at that time or was the need of the hour for muslims in the subcontinent however now it becomes null and void and seems flawed.

 

[pk_baloch]

Riyadh Haque is a big troller like "fake imam bukhari "user name ......and atlast he was banned ....

 

[Riyadh Haque]

We can move on by changing the name from Islamic republic of Pakistan to Republic of Pakistan plain and square , Just like QA wanted it to be Pakistan came into being on two nation theory which was may applicable at that time or was the need of the hour for muslims in the subcontinent however now it becomes null and void and seems flawed.

Interesting viewpoint. I am not sure how many people in Pakistan support it though. It would be interesting if you could start a new thread and actually do a POLL in this forum (although it may get contaminated by Indian members voting even if we ask them not to).

You could start this thread by making a sound argument why Pakistan should drop the Islamic tag from its name and get a discussion started on that point. You could also explain which conditions that were existent in 1947 are no longer present and then argue that we should move on..... this could make an interesting new line of discussion in a new thread.

 

[Riyadh Haque]

Why do we need to pick a single identity for Pakistan? Why can't we have multiple identities? Pakistan can celebrate its Harappan & Vedic past, & simultaneously be proud of its Islamic heritage. Both of these elements aren't mutually exclusive, neither is nationalism forbidden or a sin. In modern times there are countries like the US, Australia, & Canada; each of them consists of different races, languages, religions, & cultures. Yet they are united because of their geographical boundaries, the passports they carry, & the fact that they associate themselves with their nationalities in general. Pakistan should strive to resemble them in this scenario, just like any other nation state.

The countries you mention (USA, AUS, CAN) are countries in which the current National Narrative says "We are all immigrants; either we or our ancestors came from somewhere else."

However, if we look at Europe, where the National Narratives are not based on a variety of origins and a strong sense of ethno-linguistic identity does seem to pervade the National Narrative (especially France), the harmony you speak of has not materialized as far as immigrants of various races, religions, cultures & languages are concerned.

All over Europe, Right-wing movements are beginning to flourish with the precise intention of stopping all immigration of ethnolinguistically-unrelated people. In fact, Angela Merkel herself recently expressed alarm at rising non-European immigration and said "Multiculturalism has failed in Germany and Europe".

So the question is this: Is our country like USA, CAN, AUS? Or is our country like the European countries?

To find the answer to this question, we must closely examine our National Narrative. But what is that National Narrative? This is not clear at this time and this is precisely what thread is trying to find out.

You are correct that we can certainly have many, many different narratives, but only as long as they are not mutually contradictory. Multiple narratives of a mutually-contradictory nature will eventually lead to escalting internecine strife and potentially to a Civil War.

 

[p(-)0ENiX]

Riyadh Haque is a big troller like "fake imam bukhari "user name ......and atlast he was banned ....

Sorry I couldn't reply on the other thread Balochi, I left the browser tab open & attended a phone call lol. By the way, I think the word "tharak" means "flirt", but I could be wrong. Anyway, whats up?

 

[KingMamba]

We spend so much time trying to figure out what we were supposed to be, that we forget that we already are and what we should really be focusing on his how to make things better with the hand that we were dealt.

 

[p(-)0ENiX]

The countries you mention (USA, AUS, CAN) are countries in which the current National Narrative says "We are all immigrants; either we or our ancestors came from somewhere else."

However, if we look at Europe, where the National Narratives are not based on a variety of origins and a strong sense of ethno-linguistic identity does seem to pervade the National Narrative (especially France), the harmony you speak of has not materialized as far as immigrants of various races, religions, cultures & languages are concerned.

All over Europe, Right-wing movements are beginning to flourish with the precise intention of stopping all immigration of ethnolinguistically-unrelated people. In fact, Angela Merkel herself recently expressed alarm at rising non-European immigration and said "Multiculturalism has failed in Germany and Europe".

So the question is this: Is our country like USA, CAN, AUS? Or is our country like the European countries?

To find the answer to this question, we must closely examine our National Narrative. But what is that National Narrative? This is not clear at this time and this is precisely what thread is trying to find out.

You are correct that we can certainly have many, many different narratives, but only as long as they are not mutually contradictory. Multiple narratives of a mutually-contradictory nature will eventually lead to escalting internecine strife and potentially to a Civil War.

I should have included Britain in my example, they have an indigenous population & have absorbed immigrants to form a multicultural society. Our country is similar to Europe in that sense. However, US & Australia do have their native populations in spite of the fact that they just happen to be minorities. Nationalism in Europe has been discussed on this forum earlier, & some of us have concluded that it was bound to rise due to the nature of immigrants in European nations. Uncivilized & barbaric people that have no respect for the values & cultures of their adoptive nations are bound to be rejected by the indigenous. Another thing I want to point out is that Pakistan's multiculturalism isn't similar to lets say Britain. In Britain, different cultures were introduced through immigration. In Pakistan, different cultures just happened to exist among people living on their ancestral homeland.

Do you know how Arab countries like Saudi Arabia provide nationalities? Well it's very rare for them to do so, but when they do; the individual being provided the citizenship is similar them. He or she will speak Arabic, dress like Arabs, eat Arabic food, follow Islam, & would have adopted Arab culture. In this manner, it would become easier for this "new member of the society" to integrate. Pakistanis are descendants of all the civilizations that ever thrived on the Indus. Pakistan has cultural & linguistic diversity, but there are a multitude of similarities in our various cultures & origins, & we share the common national language "Urdu". All Pakistanis are bound by their culture, shared language, & national identity. We should build upon the concept of the "nation state", & use the term "Pakistani" & the geographical boundaries of our nation as our shared identity. That in my opinion is one of the most feasible ways of binding our population.

 

[SHAMK9]

We can move on by changing the name from Islamic republic of Pakistan to Republic of Pakistan plain and square , Just like QA wanted it to be Pakistan came into being on two nation theory which was may applicable at that time or was the need of the hour for muslims in the subcontinent however now it becomes null and void and seems flawed.

i agree with this, Jinnah wanted everyone to be equal in Pakistan and im sure he would have never wanted mullah republic