From: sjayanth@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Satyanand V. Jayanthi)
Subject: hyderabadi muslims, patriotism, etc.,.
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 23:06:07 GMT

From Chukka Sinivas....

:
:
:   First, this kind of categorization is too naive and simplistic.
:   Look into Indian history how Indian nation was formed,
:   how at different times different groups got identified with or
:   fought against the Indian State. That's another issue.
:   Anyhow, to not to divert the issue here, for the time-being
:   let's use your own classification.
:
:    A majority of Indian people, be it Hindu or Muslim, belong
:    to the first category.
:    On the top of it, Indian muslims have an added burden
                                              ^^^^^^^^^^^
:    of being a poor and illiterate minority among a constantly
:    suscipicious majority. Naturally, they feel much more
:    insecure than Hindus.
:

Poor illiterate minority. Poverty and illiteracy are common to other 
religious groups also. And there are other religious minorities too. As to
the suspicion of majority, I think the very cause of this suspicion is these
demonstrations of extraterritorial loyalities. Not the other way round.

:    I am tired of repeating this -- People identify with the
:    nation only when they feel that it addresses thier interests.

Do you mean to say that, a section of muslims identify themselves with pakistan
because they feel that it addresses their interests? Or that they are not 
"high" up in the evolutionary scale of patriotism so as to aprreciate the
idea of nationality of being the basis of one's attachment rather than
religion?..(and please dont get exasperated..please bear with this dumbo..)

    If that is the case, then the people who are that way ought to do the 
following.

    1. Reside in the country which appeals to them.
    2. Try and create conditions in their native places which would resemble
their "favourite" country.

    We have spoken a lot about (1). About (2), this in equivalent terms is
to make their native place an islamic place, assuming that their love for
pakistan is because of it being islamic, whatever it might mean. Now when
this philosophy is in direct confrontation to the majority of the populace,
it will be a cause of lot of friction and animosity and  this is what
is happening.

   Please consider that pakistan was created to accomodate chaps who were 
those, to say in your words..at that stage where they could identify themselves
only by the religion and not by,  say, what the rest of country identified 
themselves with. Now, again we have another section (now) which does the same. 
Now my question is, can you gaurentee that this section would not demand
another piece of land for itself? If you say that this demand by itself is not
improper ( because of some of the reasons you have listed below..)then there
is no point continuing the debate further as I am among those whose notions of
countries and nations is, to put it so, "victorian". I dont think any group or
minority has a right to seccede from the country, unless there is a threat to
the existance of the minority as a group.


:>People in the category three are not the kind of people who do not have any
:>"incentive" to identify themselves with the country. They are not the "common
:>men" who are basically tending to themselves, with no time for some abstract
:>notions like loyality to the nation, patriotism etc. They are well capable
:>of loyality to the country, and they chose not to be for a variety of reasons.
:>And, when they are not loyal to the country, either they should leave the
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
:>country or stay as say people belonging to category one do- lead their
:^^^^^^^^^^
:>own lives. At the present stage of our civilisation, with the present 
:>understanding of the notion of nation-state, that is how it is supposed to be.:
:
:
:
:   I strongly object to this statement. As people born
:   in that place, they are as native as any other person.
:   Nobody, be it State or majority or minority, have this
:   right to ask somebody, irrespective of thier views, to
:   stay in or leave the country.

I will explain myself. A person is born at a place and is native to that. Fine.
He does not like the place, the system prevalent in that place. He longs for 
a different place, or a system prevalent there. Then, he should either go to
that place and stay there, or, change his native place to his liking. When the
second possibility is not accepted, there is only one.....


:>And the distrust of many hindus about many muslims is not that they are in
:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
:>category 1, but that they are in category 3. If, due to whatever reasons a
:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
:>section of muslims feel loyal to pakistan, why do they stay here? Why cannot
:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
:                                       
:>they go to pakistan? The problem is not that they are more attached to another
:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
:>country, the problem is that inspite of that loyality, they continue to stay
:>here. I hope i made myself clear. If they are loyal to another country, go to
:>that country..do not stay back and keep expressing loyality to the other
:>country.
:>


:I have several objections to this statement.
:
:1. Your perception that many muslims belong to category 3
:   is far-fetched and unsubstantiated so far. I do not


Could be. my experiences substantiate it for me. What more does one
need? could be that fewer that i perceive belong to category three.

:   know whether you realise this - you are being very
:   offensive to a majority of Indian muslims and many
:   others. 

I dont see how. My "ire" is directed to those who are pakistani. I am
not accusing *all* indian muslims, only those who are that way.

:   Show me a single statement in the last 40 years by
:   any Indian muslim leader that they do not want to
:   be Indians.
:   Show me a single demonstration by Indian muslims
:   demanding that.

Statement? Do you want someone to pass another pakistan resolution? You
would'nt want to be that late this time too...

:   I do not deny the stray incidents you point out to.

That helps..

:   But DO NOT present these incidents as any kind of
:   evidence.

That depends on one's perspective I guess. As a person who is still stuck
at that stage where one believes loyality on the basis of nationality I fret
and fume...about the loyalities of different religious groups to different
countries.

:   Either you substantiate it with proper evidence or
:   else withdraw this statement.

What evidence do you want? A proper statement signed by all the muslims in
country? For me repeated demonstrations of the type that occur, which even
you would'nt deny, are reasons enough to feel apprehensive. Compare the history
of india before partition to that after it. There is no difference between the
communal relations. It is the same "music before masjid" which causes riots..
We have these parties claiming to be champions of islam winning elections in
areas with substantial muslim populations. Nothing has changed..including those
who have argued as you have done below. 

:2. Let's for a minute assume that what you say is true.
:   Even then, what extra rights you or Hindus or anybody else
:   have to ask them to leave the country?
:
:    IF a majority of muslims (or any other group X) feel that India
:    is not serving thier interests, they have as much right as you
:    to demand and fight for thier own country and decide what they
:     want to do.

This was what i was referring to above...I think in this case it is 
slightly different. Muslims have already been given a separate country. I
might, accepting your logic for a moment, accept the rights of other religious
groups, but not muslims.

Anyhow, had you inserted this statement at the start of the debate, I would
not have debated this issue at all with you. There is a fundamental difference
in our approaches to the concept of "country". Yours probably is a more
humane approach, for a later age may be. But i cannot accept your theory of
partition when desirous. Going by your logic, Abraham Lincoln was a "great
dictator"

:     (Different other groups on different grounds did
:     make this demand whenever they felt unhappy with the
:     Indian Govt...be it in Tamilnadu...Goa..Punjab..Mizoram..
:     Nagaland..Kashmir..)

:     I hope you realise that country is not a piece of land.
:     It is made up of people.
:
:
     [deleted]

While i agree that i might be reading too much.. i  however state that
pakistan was created to accomodate those who cannot grow beyond religious
nationalism, all these guys can go there.

:I repeat this again..without change in lot of other socio-economic
:conditions a Hindu or Muslim cannot really identify with this
:concept of India or Pakistan.....

:And this question of disloyality to India and loyality
:to Pakistan is meaningless......

:Unlike Indian Hindus and Pakistani Muslims, Indian muslims
:and Pakistani Hindus are asked to address this question.
:This is what is unfair.

I dont know about pakistani hindus, but i am suspicious about some
sections because they have demostrated their "liking" not the other way round.


:So, if you want people, be Hindu or Muslim or for that matter
:anybody, to really identify with this concept of India address
:bigger issues which effect thier day to day lives. 
:And not mosques, temples and flags.
:
:Our superficial perceptions and communal myths
:spread by vested interests are not the issues.
:And let's not make a big deal about these.
:


:Again I repeat. I do not want to and I cannot also deny your experiences.
:I have observed similar ones. But I differ in what's we want deduce
:from that.
:i) we cannot generalize this to the whole of Indian muslim population,

Even i cannot. I am not. Sorry if i used the terms "they", "muslims" etc.,
too loosely.

:ii) it does in no way implies disloyality to India and loyality
:to Pakistan

What will then?

:iii) This issue cannot be discussed in isolation from the existing
:socio-economic conditions in the country.
:
:-srinivas.
:

I dont understand these socio-economic conditions which would induce in some
muslims allegiance to pakistan. Infact, you are discussing the issue in 
isolation with the history of the country.
 
I find the following sequence of reasoning in you..

1. The demonstrations that you claim do not occur.
2. Even if they do, they are not representative of the majority
3. Even if they do, it does not mean anything as far as loyality, disloyality
   is concerned.
4. Even if disloyal, they have a right to be.

All i can say is hmmmmmm...........

-Narain.



Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian