Let's ignore on what LAK wanted and focus on that the assasination brought a power struggle. Had he been there, no matter how awful of a person he was or was going to become, there would've been a clear policy. I don't like any Pakistani leader, be it LAK or Bhuttos (I like Ayub as a single man and I have no feelings for Jinnah), but the point is, a policy had to come out during the birth of nation.
totally agree
Preciesly. I don't agree with the path they showed you, but at least your country has a clear path. Which is why it isn't on self destruction like Pakistan is. Another thing, no one could challenge Nehru, he could take on the powerful. If the powerful fought, guess who the side people were going to be on. But we didn't have Jinnah, so if we were to fight the feudals, the feudals will find a replacement. Don't like PM 2? replace with PM 3. But feudals can't replace PM 1, because people will back PM 1 till his death. Hence Stalin, Mao, North Korea, Nehru and many other leaders were supported in some way till their death. These people were able to fight the powerful and the powerful could not change opinion of the massive supporters.
If you read the entire line I wrote, I dislike LAK. But we're focusing on something else. LAK was part of the founding father of Pakistan. Ayub/Bhutto were not (small contributions do not matter). So when they write the meaning of Pakistan, is it the actual meaning what founding fathers envisioned?
Because if Jinnah was to pick a fight with the feudals, who would the public support? Him or the feudal lords? The latter leaders were too weak and had to cut deal to remain in power.
Jinnah was given an opportunity at the right time and he grabbed it. He wasn't as big of a leader as we've seen in history. Not sure why people hold such high values for Jinnah.Mr Jinnah was something more than Quaid-i-Azam, supreme head of the state, to the people who followed him: he was more than even the architect of the Islamic nation he personally called into being. He commanded their imagination as well as their confidence. In the face of difficulties which might have overwhelmed him, it was given to him to fulfill the hope foreshadowed in the inspired vision of the great Iqbal by creating for the Muslims of India a homeland where the old glory of Islam could grow afresh into a modern state, worthy its place in the community of nations. Few statesmen have shaped events to their policy more purely than Mr. Jinnah. He was a legend even in his lifetime.
Mr Jinnah was something more than Quaid-i-Azam, supreme head of the state, to the people who followed him: he was more than even the architect of the Islamic nation he personally called into being. He commanded their imagination as well as their confidence. In the face of difficulties which might have overwhelmed him, it was given to him to fulfill the hope foreshadowed in the inspired vision of the great Iqbal by creating for the Muslims of India a homeland where the old glory of Islam could grow afresh into a modern state, worthy its place in the community of nations. Few statesmen have shaped events to their policy more purely than Mr. Jinnah. He was a legend even in his lifetime.
Policies change. Nawaz was brought into politics by army, and he has been seen fighting army many times. Too bad the public support wasn't with him at any time, hence he lost.
