08-30-2004, 05:49 PM
Yaar Pracha sahib
I dont believe that all indian muslims conform to this view. Maybe the past generations used to since they had seen the bitterness of those times, but the new generations certainly dont.
Anyways, coming to the topic of two-nation theory, i believe that however flawed it may seem at times, but time and time again it has been proven that yes it was better to have two-nations based on religious divides in south asia than a single entity. Examples? the religious riots that have plagued india for the last 50 odd years.
My point is that its better to have two or multiple nations in areas of the world where there is searing inner hatred for the other's religion, ehnicity or community like we had over here in South asia. Example, the former Yugoslavia where there was hatred building in between the muslim, orthodox christian and catholic christians for literally centuries and was only held at bay by the iron hand of marshall tito (was that his name, cant remember clearly). So when he was no more we all know what happend, swords were drawn against each other and bloodshed took place at an unbelievabale scale. Same was the case in Rwanda where the hutus and tutsis were although living side-by-side, but kept hatred for the other's community in their hearts and one day it just all came out like a volcano.
Lets just ignore all the factors and wrong-doings of the past of the affairs in the middle east (Israel and Palestine), do we realistically believe that they (Isarelis and Palestenians) can live in a single nation with each other? I dont think so. So the ony solution for them is two have two separate states living side by side. I believe thats where the two-nation theory lies vindicated.
It may be flawed and it might not seem to be morally or politically correct, but it sure is the most practical and logical theory around for places like south asia which are severly divided on racial, religious, ethinic backgrounds.
________________________
Arrrgh... it sure's gonna be mighty rough sailin' today ... mates!
I dont believe that all indian muslims conform to this view. Maybe the past generations used to since they had seen the bitterness of those times, but the new generations certainly dont.
Anyways, coming to the topic of two-nation theory, i believe that however flawed it may seem at times, but time and time again it has been proven that yes it was better to have two-nations based on religious divides in south asia than a single entity. Examples? the religious riots that have plagued india for the last 50 odd years.
My point is that its better to have two or multiple nations in areas of the world where there is searing inner hatred for the other's religion, ehnicity or community like we had over here in South asia. Example, the former Yugoslavia where there was hatred building in between the muslim, orthodox christian and catholic christians for literally centuries and was only held at bay by the iron hand of marshall tito (was that his name, cant remember clearly). So when he was no more we all know what happend, swords were drawn against each other and bloodshed took place at an unbelievabale scale. Same was the case in Rwanda where the hutus and tutsis were although living side-by-side, but kept hatred for the other's community in their hearts and one day it just all came out like a volcano.
Lets just ignore all the factors and wrong-doings of the past of the affairs in the middle east (Israel and Palestine), do we realistically believe that they (Isarelis and Palestenians) can live in a single nation with each other? I dont think so. So the ony solution for them is two have two separate states living side by side. I believe thats where the two-nation theory lies vindicated.
It may be flawed and it might not seem to be morally or politically correct, but it sure is the most practical and logical theory around for places like south asia which are severly divided on racial, religious, ethinic backgrounds.
________________________
Arrrgh... it sure's gonna be mighty rough sailin' today ... mates!
