Jinnah is not definitely a villain as indians generally perceive him to be.DQ wrote:Comming to Jinnah, today is day one since I have started viewing him out of the villanous role I had perceived him to be and this statement has made me think about and read about him even more,
'Few individuals significantly alter the course of history. Fewer still modify the map of the world. Hardly anyone can be credited with creating a nation-state. Mohammad Ali Jinnah did all three.'
when he gave voice and strength to the demand for a seperate muslim majority homeland (note: he did not want an Islamic Country as pakistan exists today), he did what he thot was right, based on the situation in those days.
thanx to the Brits, the pre-independence era saw the hindu-muslim relation reach a nadir in most parts of the country. the demand for a seperate homeland was there since long, but no one took it seriously, incl Jinnah who was a staunch congress-wallah (but oppossed to Gandhi). Jinnah himself was a non-religious liberal muslim who followed a western life style, never prayed, ate pork etc.
when he was humiliated in the Congress's annual conclave in the 20s, that was the last straw, plus the dangerous communal situation, convinced him that the community woudnt get a fair deal politically in a hindu majority india. this situation also convinced many muslim intellectuals like poet Iqbal (remember that Iqbal wrote the song "Sare Jahaan Se Achcha" and he is respected in india too. his memorial also exists in hydbad as the "Eagle" statue at the junction near AG's Office).
in hindsight what Jinnah and other muslim intellectuals demanded seems to be an error, but if u look at it from the point of view of those times, i think they were justified.
)
Jinnah, nehru, bose etc are ok... but Zia ul huq? gimme a break.
