Drawbacks
-
rasikararaja — 16 years ago(April 21, 2009 11:08 AM)
As I could not find DVD here in US have to watch this on YouTube. I am from India and decided watch this movie with open mind. I found the script too Nehru-Edwina centric. The director had one point agenda of showing that what ever bad happened it was due to congress and Hindu majority. I found Jinnah to be with impeccable personal quality. If only others who were around him had the same quality, majority of the Pakistan based Hindus would have stayed back in Pakistan and the current state of Pakistan may have been better. Probably, Jinnah thought he could turn Pakistan in to what Akbar did to Mughal India but the he didn't had enough people with the same desire around him to turn it into reality.
-
manibhaai — 16 years ago(April 25, 2009 04:09 AM)
hindus in the pakistani territory did not stay in Pakistan after the partition because of few reasons that people do not prefer to know.
1- hindu population in the Pakistan region was less than 1 % anyway.
2- and out of that 1 % of hindu population 95% lived in the ares which is today the border of Pakistan-india and hence was convenient to migrate.
3- jinnah and ALSO the ppl around him never had the ambition of making Pakistan a secular state (unlike mughal emperor akbar) as the region of Pakistan was demanded and struggled for the homeland for muslims and was worked for in the name of religious independence of muslims.
hope that cleared up few thigns for u.
regards -
rasikararaja — 16 years ago(May 01, 2009 01:41 PM)
Hindu population in the areas which became Pakistan was > 1%. Actually, in some parts it was > 30% . The biggest mistake was the speed at which things were implemented and also the maturity level of both the people and the leaders. This applies to both the Hindus and the Muslims , Congress as well as the Muslim league. They were too fixated about what happens tomorrow and whats happening at that time rather than what needs to be done for the future. The founding fathers of both India and Pakistan lacked the vision which the Founding fathers of USA had. From my personal experience I can say , Nehru laid the foundation for future of India by starting great Educational institutions like IITs and IIMs and also generated employment by starting Huge Public Sector industries that provided jobs to thousands of people who had sacrificed during freedom struggle. My father was one of the beneficiary of such system.
-
manibhaai — 16 years ago(May 24, 2009 10:47 PM)
as i mentioned and clearly wrote beforethe hindu population in the pakistan region as a whole was less than 1%.
punjab had the highest non-muslim population and majority of them were sikhs.
balochistan provice had hindu/non-muslim population virtually 0%.
in NWFP province except the city of peshawar there was no non muslim population anywhere else.
so taking in account the whole pakistan region the hindu/non muslim population was in xtreme minority and it wud be no more than 1% or maybe 2 ?
as far as the implementation of the things are concerned it was being implemented and executed by british and hence leaders of subcontinent cannot be blamed solely.
the founding fathers of USA were being conspired against and even being shot n killedand later the states were fighting and killing each other too and then later different races were beating and slaughtering each other and despite of what they claim extreme racism still exists to this very day so i dont know what vision of the forefathers of USA are u talking about.
Mr Jinnah was a man of vision unfortunately he did not last long enough to lay strong foundations for Pakistan and it fell into the hands of those who did not its vlaue that what a blessing they have recieved.
but the new generation is realising and rising up against it and seeking for the Jinnah's Pakistan which wasnt meant to be secular at all. -
manibhaai — 16 years ago(May 24, 2009 10:51 PM)
ohand by the way there are still plenty of hindus in Pakistan and christians too and sikhs come every year for pilgrimage and as far as i remember there has never been any incident of hindu-sikh-muslim clashes etc.. so i would say maybe the state of Pakistan is not as bad as you think it is.
-
balajiviswanathan — 15 years ago(May 19, 2010 02:05 AM)
- Pakistan is quite steeped with Indian history. Ever bothered to find the origin of names of Lahore (Lavapuri), Peshawar (Purushapura), Taxila (Takshashila) etc?
- The civilization of Indus - in Harappa and Mohenjadaro is as far from Islam as possible. Among its many gods - Pashupathi is still worshipped in India as Shiva, and its script and people have been connected with the Dravidian people of South India.
- Regarding Hindu population, here is history: 7.2 million Hindus migrated from Pakistan to India - 1.4 million of whom were Sindhis. Hindu population in Pakistan was well more than 10% - with major concentration in Sindh.
- The king of Peshawar (Purushapura) who fought the famous battle with Alexander was a Hindu (Porus/Purushothaman).
As the partition of Bengal showed, the two nation theory was a failure. Bangladesh and India have as many muslims and in as good condition as Pakistan. So, what did the separate state get you?
We gave you the fertile, well-irrigated lands of Punjab and Bengal, the mighty waters of Indus, business prowess of Sindh and the prosperous cities of Karachi and Lahore. What did Pakistan do with them?
-
aamirabbas — 15 years ago(August 05, 2010 10:48 AM)
by "We" you obviously mean a mixture of British, nature, Mughals as well as native efforts right ?
Pakistanis wanted their own country and are still happy to have it, with all its problems. They are not rejectionists of Indian or subcontinental history. -
assimilatedsoul — 14 years ago(February 13, 2012 08:24 PM)
I like how we all don't even mention how the British actually segregated the Hindus and Muslims for their own benefit, we just act like it was a part of our history to be separate. Hindus and Muslims lived side by side for 500 years and all of a sudden Imperialist power make us think otherwise. (Remember the Hutu and Tutsi conflict in Rwanda? well we smart Indians and Pakistanis got duped into believing the Europeans too hazaaa)
-
aryavartacnsrn — 14 years ago(November 17, 2011 12:39 PM)
I agree. It also begged the question of what Jinnah would have thought of the future of Pakistan. It's all too easy to be glib over the communal faults of late 20th century India (and I don't for one moment pretend India doesn't have problems in how Muslims live in India, though it is comparatively better than what minorities go through in Pakistan) but what of the problems of contemporary Pakistan? What would Jinnah think of a country still plagued by feudalism, stark poverty, military dictatorship, public floggings, sharia law, blasphemy laws, the genocide in East Bengal and the whole mess with the Taliban and Al Qaeda? Not to mention how it has served as a US client state for over 50 years? Perhaps someone should have shown him a video of all that.
-
Hurry_up_N_buy — 10 years ago(May 31, 2015 11:49 AM)
Yeah, I mean the whole movie was done in an Ebenezer Scrooge and Ghost narration style, can't really say I was a big fan of that. The Independence of India and birth of Pakistan is a very interesting part of history though, watched this movie after first seeing Gandhi and doing a little research. One could learn a lot from the trials and errors.
People hate what's popular and people jump on bandwagons. The rest of us are in the middle. Done.