Talibanization:Exploiting the Feudals
Sunday, April 19, 2009 at 10:06 pm
When Everyone is pumped up and busy in whining about barbaric video(I have yet to write about it!) and Nazim-e-Adil, you will hardly find anyone to comment on such piece in different papers. I do disagree the way these guys trying to handle the situation and bringing the Shariah but there are things which should be apprecited anyway.From NewYork Times:
The Taliban have advanced deeper into Pakistan by engineering a class revolt that exploits profound fissures between a small group of wealthy landlords and their landless tenants, according to government officials and analysts here
NYTimes says further:
The Taliban’s ability to exploit class divisions adds a new dimension to the insurgency and is raising alarm about the risks to Pakistan, which remains largely feudal.
It’s an interesting article which indicates that the how the aggressive movement by bunch of guys in Tribal areas are now targeting the biggest disease in Pakistan, the feudal system which has been sucking this country for last 61 years. I laugh when I read politicians who say that the biggest threat of Pakistan is terrorism. They are right because those feudals cum politicians have been terrorizing the people for decades and now they are being challenged, they are whining.
Those who heavilly criticized these people, they ignorant brains never realize that unlike those so called critiques, these Talibans try to get mingled with locals and try to resolve their issues. Those who usually talk about current situation of SWAT have actually never visited the valley themselves and they babble the desi version of Western media reports.
It is funny that Militant Qaumi Movement(MQM) who always talked about crushing Feudalism never made any attempt to crush it. Instead of that they were in bed with Chudharies of Gujrat and made love for 8 years. I really laughed when I saw a banner in Karachi in which MQM demanded to hang the people who were involved in killing of Akbar Bugti while they do not realize that Bugti was killed by Musharraf rather than by Talibans.
Seeking attention of west by highlighting news like flogging video and ranting against Shariah is not gonna serve American agenda anyway. The right wing of UsoA has really done the blunder that they rely on desi liberals who whine more than toddlers. Though Americnas failed in Afghanistan and now talking directly with them. I hope that US would shift their policy for Pakistan as well and would try to talk concern party directly rather than relying on liberals who can’t come out from their chilled drawing rooms.
Related Posts:
Categories: Secularism Extreemism, Extreemism, Religion, dictatorship, rants, America
on April 19th, 2009 at 11:36 PM
Dr Muzaffar Iqbal writes in his Op-ed in The News: “As soon as words like Islamic laws, Shariah, nizam-e-adl, and qazi courts are mentioned, there is panic. Hearts and minds are seized with fear… The great tragedy inherent in this verdict is obvious: not many people are interested in exploring the underlying fundamental assumptions of these dramatic pronouncements.
Ironically, one of the best, easy-to-understand articulations of what Shariah is has come from the pen of a Jew, a Harvard law professor, Noah Feldman, whose article in The New York Times (March 30, 2008): He acknowledged that Shariah has had a bad press [but] “in the Muslim world the concept of Shariah has undergone an extraordinary revival in recent years. Today, 66 percent of Egyptians, 60 percent of Pakistanis and 54 percent of Jordanians say that Shariah should be the only source of legislation in their countries.” And he pre-empted his explanation by asking a rhetorical question that turned the scales on those who fail to engage with the question: “How is it that what so many Westerners see as the most unappealing and pre-modern aspect of Islam is, to many Muslims, the vibrant, attractive core of a global movement of Islamic revival?”
“Shariah, properly understood, is not just a set of legal rules,” wrote Feldman, “to believing Muslims, it is something deeper and higher, infused with moral and metaphysical purpose. At its core, Shariah represents the idea that all human beings — and all human governments — are subject to justice under the law…Shariah is best understood as a kind of higher law, albeit one that includes some specific, worldly commands.”
“But if Muslims are to survive in a world forced to accept the dictates of secular modernity, then a better understanding of their own religion is the FIRST step toward reconstruction of their societies.”
on April 20th, 2009 at 9:17 AM
Adnan check it out.. before its removing..
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/1700/mqm.jpg
on April 20th, 2009 at 9:32 AM
“Those who usually talk about current situation of SWAT have actually never visited the valley themselves and they babble the desi version of Western media reports.”
Hahaha. You’re hilarious, adnan.
Bye.
(I won’t come back… so please do not reply here. You can email, but I’d rather you don’t.)
on April 21st, 2009 at 10:55 AM
ahahh Rammal! You come or not..I am not bothered!
apni zaban par qaim rahna
on April 22nd, 2009 at 4:48 AM
Salamalaikum
I hope MQM keeps up this fight of theirs. They will be exposed to even more Karachites for what they truly are: Islam-hating, Shia-loving, corrupted hypocritic secularist thugs.
@Shafiq Bhai: Even though the numbers are high (66%, 60%, etc.), I doubt most Muslims truly understand what shariah entails, unfortunately.
on April 22nd, 2009 at 2:04 PM
Ibrahim bhai I agree that many don’t have a broad understanding of what Shariah entails but still prefer it to colonial baggage. Maybe we can blame the masses for the environment and the lack of ingredients or understanding for an Islamic state. Or maybe, the “religious parties” are using it as a ploy for short-term benefit for power or benefits to themselves??
on April 23rd, 2009 at 4:28 AM
Salamalaikum
You can call me Ibrahim only, Shafiq bhai. No need for the honorific ‘bhai’! You’re right, this is better than colonial indignation. Blame can be placed on many things including on our lack of interest to find out what Islam is all about.
Like somebody said that flogging might be ok, but not in front of people!! How ignorant do you have to be to not know that the hadd punishments have to be carried out in front of people, so that they serve as a deterrent (log kay liya ibrat banay).
So, when people say yes we want laws as mentioned in the Shariah without knowing some basic information, they stand to be shocked when they find out things they didn’t know and are at a risk to turn away from Shariah. Education about Islam beyond the basics of huqooq Allah and huqooqul ‘Ibaad is needed.
As far as religious parties are concerned, all of them are mostly ‘political’ only, especially the jamiat-e-ulema-e-Islam. But, I don’t think they are using Shariah as a poly for gains. I would have said so for Fazlur Rehman, but that guy now openly campaigns to win a couple of cabinet ministeries, which is all he desires, so he doesn’t even use Shariah as a poly.
on April 23rd, 2009 at 11:19 PM
Shafiq, thanks for sharing wonderful piece by Dr.Muzaffar. I know such articles in English papers are always ignored by elite class of Pakistan
Ibrahim: well said about intrepetition of Shariah.
p.s: Shafiq bhai ney aap ko BHAI he tu kaha hay..behan thori jo aap ko bura lag raha hay
on April 25th, 2009 at 3:12 PM
A great poet Harivansh Rai Bachan, father or Amitabh Bachan, in one of his poem said:
Mandir masjid hain ladwate,
male karati hai madhushala…
Madhushala literaly means a pub, daru ka adda, ahata, sharabkhana, bar.
I am an outsider here. I am not going to pass any remark on what goes in Pakistan. Like rest of the word, I am also uninformed about Shariah. I even don’t know how to spell it, Sharia or Shariah. But I have to agree to Daddu’s some points. And one more thing, Shariah does carry some weight thats why people like it to be imposed. What I can understand is:
a) No law must restrict a human being from deciding what is good for her or him
b) No law authorises a man to assault a woman in public. I am not pointing to flogging video but an incident that took place in India.
c) No law says put women behind a piece of cloth. Its not women its men who are corrupted. Why not put corrupted men in prison. And what a man is who does’nt understand what is immoral and what is moral?
IMHO, extremesim is bad.
Junoon buri cheez hai…:-)
2nd thing, the point I see in Daddu’s post is very clear. Taliban did what English did. Divide and rule. Taliban didn’t divide, infact they simply used the division that was already present. And yes, no one must have bothered to visit Swat and tried to understand the root cause of this issue. I am sure about that. Politicians on both side of border are same, power hungry and are least bothered about aam aadmi.
on April 30th, 2009 at 3:52 PM
“a) No law must restrict a human being from deciding what is good for her or him
b) No law authorises a man to assault a woman in public. I am not pointing to flogging video but an incident that took place in India.
c) No law says put women behind a piece of cloth. Its not women its men who are corrupted. Why not put corrupted men in prison. And what a man is who does’nt understand what is immoral and what is moral?”
Point a and b show that you are totally unaware of ground realities while point C is the law of ALLAH that women should put on veil.