Secular Pakistan. Liberal Pakistanis.

[Badsha]

It's as bad as Islamic extremists in the west. When will you lot realize that the majority of the country does not want a liberal/secular state? If anything. A lot of Pakistanis believe we're already too liberal.

And I'm talking about the masses who live in villages ect.

So explain to me why you guys want Pakistan to become a secular state? If the population wanted it to be that way but was being forced by the government I would understand but that's not the case.

 

[Inswinger]

It's as bad as Islamic extremists in the west. When will you lot realize that the majority of the country does not want a liberal/secular state? If anything. A lot of Pakistanis believe we're already too liberal.

And I'm talking about the masses who live in villages ect.

So explain to me why you guys want Pakistan to become a secular state? If the population wanted it to be that way but was being forced by the government I would understand but that's not the case.

And how many Pakistanis want to live in a state being run by the Taliban? How many people have come out in their support? How many people have brought religious parties into power?

 

[hafeezrocks]

It's as bad as Islamic extremists in the west. When will you lot realize that the majority of the country does not want a liberal/secular state? If anything. A lot of Pakistanis believe we're already too liberal.

And I'm talking about the masses who live in villages ect.

So explain to me why you guys want Pakistan to become a secular state? If the population wanted it to be that way but was being forced by the government I would understand but that's not the case.

Sure , Secular/Liberals have their own version of TTP and other terrorist groups who are on a killing rampage , targeting sweet and innocent religious Pakistanis.

 

[Badsha]

And how many Pakistanis want to live in a state being run by the Taliban? How many people have come out in their support? How many people have brought religious parties into power?

That's the other extreme.

But plenty of of people want Islam to be an integral part of Pakistan.

 

[Badsha]

Sure , Secular/Liberals have their own version of TTP and other terrorist groups who are on a killing rampage , targeting sweet and innocent religious Pakistanis.

This "injection" of secularism creates a lot of polarity between the villages and cities. The disunity it creates might be as bad then the terrorist groups if not worse.

 

[Inswinger]

That's the other extreme.

But plenty of of people want Islam to be an integral part of Pakistan.

In a secular state people are free to practice their religion of choice. Why would a secular state prohibit Islam from being an integral part of people's lives?

 

[Inswinger]

This "injection" of secularism creates a lot of polarity between the villages and cities. The disunity it creates might be as bad then the terrorist groups if not worse.

That is an absurd statement. How is this as bad as those who slaughter human beings as if they were lambs?

 

[Badsha]

In a secular state people are free to practice their religion of choice. Why would a secular state prohibit Islam from being an integral part of people's lives?

In public areas, people want Islamic laws to be followed besides the state having its own religion.

People are still allowed to practice their religions freely so I don't get your point?

That is an absurd statement. How is this as bad as those who slaughter human beings as if they were lambs?

Wasn't meant to be literal ffs

 

[chacha kashmiri]

The policy of liberalisation was invented by ppp in it's infancy when it gave power to the farmer and the normal people

It has died down since and nowadays just means doing the oppisote to what people in beards do to the point of complete antagonism and futile pursuit

The likes of marx and castro would laugh at these so called 'liberals' manifesto of pakistan and their goals

 

[Badsha]

The policy of liberalisation was invented by ppp in it's infancy when it gave power to the farmer and the normal people

It has died down since and nowadays just means doing the oppisote to what people in beards do to the point of complete antagonism and futile pursuit

The likes of marx and castro would laugh at these so called 'liberals' manifesto of pakistan and their goals

True. So many liberals on here are just Anti-Religion.

 

[hafeezrocks]

These people do not want to practice their religion/Islam in private which is more than sufficient imo. By saying that " Islam should be an integral part of Pakistan " they actually mean that they want the country to be run as a Mullah Regime , bullying those who do not agree with their viewpoint , control the society to live as per what they think is right or wrong, denying freedom to different schools of thought which may challenge their position in the future.

If Islam can be practiced by living in a secular western country then what difference would it make if Pakistan also adopts the secular way of living ? Those who wish to follow their religion can continue to do so , others too will have the option to decide whats best for them.

 

[chacha kashmiri]

These people do not want to practice their religion/Islam in private which is more than sufficient imo. By saying that " Islam should be an integral part of Pakistan " they actually mean that they want the country to be run as a Mullah Regime , bullying those who do not agree with their viewpoint , control the society to live as per what they think is right or wrong, denying freedom to different schools of thought which may challenge their position in the future.

If Islam can be practiced by living in a secular western country then what difference would it make if Pakistan also adopts the secular way of living ? Those who wish to follow their religion can continue to do so , others too will have the option to decide whats best for them.

Thank you for proving my point

 

[BudMarsh]

I wrote this before in some thread..

Most Pak liberals(who can conceivably be called as such) are not those who party when drone strikes occur but rather there is a general trend towards supporting causes such as women's rights(education, birth control etc), minority rights(no need to explain further), censorship, end to hate speech and intolerance, you know the major issues one encounters living in Pakistan.

Also Badsha which survey of yours indicated to you that liberals/secular people in Pakistan necessarily want a secular state as well? Just like some practicising and conservative Muslims in Pakistan don't necessarily want Sharia or Khilafat in Pakistan. Is this concept hard for you to grasp?

Speaking as a liberal Pakistani I have no delusions about Pak being a secular state in the future. Its just as fanciful a dream as the Taliban Shariat being imposed in Pakistan. Knowing the demographics of Pakistan, it is however possible to wish for a more moderate form of Islam to prevail in the country. And that people somehow learn to tolerate each others' sects and religions. What else do you think liberals in Pakistani want?

 

[chacha kashmiri]

I wrote this before in some thread..

Most Pak liberals(who can conceivably be called as such) are not those who party when drone strikes occur but rather there is a general trend towards supporting causes such as women's rights(education, birth control etc), minority rights(no need to explain further), censorship, end to hate speech and intolerance, you know the major issues one encounters living in Pakistan.

You mean the issues only the pti seem to have included in their manifesto and policy thus far

 

[speed]

Pakistani liberals are negligible, they make a lot of noise on internet forums but's that's about it.

 

[BudMarsh]

You mean the issues only the pti seem to have included in their manifesto and policy thus far

lol Pakistani parties and their manifestos. They are all works of fiction no matter which party pens them. And PTI will find it hard to implement these policies when they are aligned with JI and operating in mostly conservative areas.

 

[BudMarsh]

Pakistani liberals are negligible, they make a lot of noise on internet forums but's that's about it.

Yeah the maulvis have us beat on that front.

They are really active in real life endeavours in Pakistan. I have had the (mis)fortune of witnessing many tire burnings/road blockages/riots courtesy braindead madrassa students/religious party members. And who can forget the love dished up by them on the "Love of the Prophet(PBUH) day"?

 

[IJWBS]

It's as bad as Islamic extremists in the west. When will you lot realize that the majority of the country does not want a liberal/secular state? If anything. A lot of Pakistanis believe we're already too liberal.

And I'm talking about the masses who live in villages ect.

So explain to me why you guys want Pakistan to become a secular state? If the population wanted it to be that way but was being forced by the government I would understand but that's not the case.

Stopped reading after this.

 

[chacha kashmiri]

Yeah the maulvis have us beat on that front.

They are really active in real life endeavours in Pakistan. I have had the (mis)fortune of witnessing many tire burnings/road blockages/riots courtesy braindead madrassa students/religious party members. And who can forget the love dished up by them on the "Love of the Prophet(PBUH) day"?

Yes
they stop people celebrating vday or make inflammatory comments to the media
but in terms of grasroot level support and charity work, they did wonders during the earthquake

 

[chacha kashmiri]

lol Pakistani parties and their manifestos. They are all works of fiction no matter which party pens them. And PTI will find it hard to implement these policies when they are aligned with JI and operating in mostly conservative areas.

They already are implementing them
Just have a look at some of the thread titles on timepass section

 

[90MPH]

Pakistan is probably one of the conservative and religious country around the world.

Infact decade by decade the country has gone more and more towards religion.

Looking at photographs of the 1960s it showed what seemed like a fairly vibrant and tolerant country. There were many pictures of famous foreigners who seemed to enjoy themselves. Nowadays no one wants to even think about visiting.

Religious extremism and intolerance has really damaged Pakistan so much in so many ways.

I would be happy even of we get to the mid 90s of tolerance and freedom.

 

[AZulfi]

Liberal is a better word. How many liberals (or brown sahibs) have actually tried to forcibly impose their way of life on the conservative majority let alone harmed or killed anyone in the name of their ideology

It is usu. religious extremist nut heads who want to forcibly impose their own version or brand of Islam on others and are harming or killing people in the name of Islam

So which ideology is more dangerous? Who is more intolerant?

 

[Saeed]

Pakistani liberals must understand liberalism before preaching it.

 

[Saeed]

Liberal is a better word. How many liberals or brown sahibs have actually tried to forcibly impose their way of life on the conservative majority let alone harmed or killed anyone in the name of their ideology

It is usu. religious extremist nut heads who want to forcibly impose their own version or brand of Islam on others and are harming or killing people in the name of Islam

So which ideology is more dangerous? Who is more tolerant?

How many there are in Pakistan or have the power to do so?

 

[sunnykhan]

Pakistan is probably one of the conservative and religious country around the world.

Infact decade by decade the country has gone more and more towards religion.

Looking at photographs of the 1960s it showed what seemed like a fairly vibrant and tolerant country. There were many pictures of famous foreigners who seemed to enjoy themselves. Nowadays no one wants to even think about visiting.

Religious extremism and intolerance has really damaged Pakistan so much in so many ways.

I would be happy even of we get to the mid 90s of tolerance and freedom.

You nailed it!

 

[amax]

Liberalism in basic words can translate to liberty and equality, what is wrong with it.

In Pakistan's context its simple

A secular, liberal , multicultural Pakistan will reap full benefits of its diversity by turning it into its biggest strength; A vibrant, liberal/open society will maximize the collective output of economic, cultural and sporting ingenuity of its diversity. A vibrant society combined with its location will help Pakistan becoming a hub(technological, economical, arts etc) of one of the most important future regions in world.On top of that Pak's population is still within range for such pluralism to be very fruitful. It is that simple and important for Pakistan, Pakistan will be secular/liberal one day, hopefully the things start evolving towards it once the intellectual capital of masses increases over a certain level.

For such a diverse country any sort of faith/ideological/ethnicial etc hegemony/dogma is a killer and will cause constant friction.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

Liberal is a better word. How many liberals (or brown sahibs) have actually tried to forcibly impose their way of life on the conservative majority let alone harmed or killed anyone in the name of their ideology

It is usu. religious extremist nut heads who want to forcibly impose their own version or brand of Islam on others and are harming or killing people in the name of Islam

So which ideology is more dangerous? Who is more intolerant?

Mujib ul rehman bangladesh... Around 30,000 if not more, directly by his death squads and then 1 million from the famine resulting from his policies.....

 

[Saeed]

Liberalism in basic words can translate to liberty(in personal life etc) and equality, what is wrong with it.

How will you explain the word liberalism to an uneducated guy from village? For Pakistan to become liberal society everybody or at least most of the population must be educated and that too without any religious studies in schools. If

 

[ElRaja]

This "injection" of secularism creates a lot of polarity between the villages and cities. The disunity it creates might be as bad then the terrorist groups if not worse.

equating plurality of political views with terrorism, without a doubt one of the most absurd things ive ever read on PP.

 

[RickyG]

It's as bad as Islamic extremists in the west. When will you lot realize that the majority of the country does not want a liberal/secular state? If anything. A lot of Pakistanis believe we're already too liberal.

And I'm talking about the masses who live in villages ect.

So explain to me why you guys want Pakistan to become a secular state? If the population wanted it to be that way but was being forced by the government I would understand but that's not the case.

Then you should have told the Shias, Ahmadis and Christians beforehand that the state would treat them as second-class citizens (considering it will be a Wahhabi run state). They would have stayed in India and would have been far better off.

 

[RickyG]

Liberalism in basic words can translate to liberty and equality, what is wrong with it.

In Pakistan's context its simple

A secular, liberal , multicultural Pakistan will reap full benefits of its diversity by turning it into its biggest strength; A vibrant, liberal/open society will maximize the collective output of economic, cultural and sporting ingenuity of its diversity. A vibrant society combined with its location will help Pakistan becoming a hub(technological, economical, arts etc) of one of the most important future regions in world.On top of that Pak's population is still within range for such pluralism to be very fruitful. It is that simple and important for Pakistan, Pakistan will be secular/liberal one day, hopefully the things start evolving towards it once the intellectual capital of masses increases over a certain level.

For such a diverse country any sort of faith/ideological/ethnicial etc hegemony/dogma is a killer and will cause constant friction.

Don't you liberalism is an extreme and anti-Islam. Equal rights and all that shenanigans goes against the basic principles of Islam.

In Islam, Shariah law is a must which means getting rid of jails and having public executions and other sorts of brutal punishments. It means that any faith that is not Sunni Islam must be persecuted. Women should be treated as adulterers if they are raped and stoned. There should dress codes like in private schools. A typical uniform being Kameez-Shalwar accompanied by untrimmed beards. Finally, the blasphemy law is a must.

 

[Saeed]

Don't you liberalism is an extreme and anti-Islam. Equal rights and all that shenanigans goes against the basic principles of Islam.

In Islam, Shariah law is a must which means getting rid of jails and having public executions and other sorts of brutal punishments. It means that any faith that is not Sunni Islam must be persecuted. Women should be treated as adulterers if they are raped and stoned. There should dress codes like in private schools. A typical uniform being Kameez-Shalwar accompanied by untrimmed beards. Finally, the blasphemy law is a must.

Didn't you claimed to be a brelvi once?

 

[Badsha]

Yeah the maulvis have us beat on that front.

They are really active in real life endeavours in Pakistan. I have had the (mis)fortune of witnessing many tire burnings/road blockages/riots courtesy braindead madrassa students/religious party members. And who can forget the love dished up by them on the "Love of the Prophet(PBUH) day"?

This is my point. You're either a "liberal" or a "maulvi". Anyone who isn't "open minded" according to these Pakistani liberals are maulvis. (i.e those who call Imran Khan a clean shaved Molvi)

 

[LooneyReturns]

They can be whatever they want , the society needs to learn to become tolerant , accept views they may disagree with , show respect .

 

[RickyG]

Didn't you claimed to be a brelvi once?

What does that have anything to do with what I said. My views on the Sharia are pretty clear, it's outdated. Jails are better than cutting off heads and necks for example. Hudood ordinance is a fine example of that garbage. Secondly, are you really going to sit here and deny that minorities in Pakistan are being persecuted without anything being done about it? I'm relaying you exactly the kind of rule of law Pakistan would have if the religious fanatics (read majority) could decide. What that has to do with my faith I don't know.

 

[saadibaba]

This is my point. You're either a "liberal" or a "maulvi". Anyone who isn't "open minded" according to these Pakistani liberals are maulvis. (i.e those who call Imran Khan a clean shaved Molvi)

Actually, it's you who think anyone who isn't an IK supporter or is not in favor of inciting religion in politics, a secular or liberal where he can very easily and most likely be, considering there aren't many seculars in Pakistan, a moderate. So if someone does not support talks with militants like IK, he gets labeled a liberal fascist, if someone does not agree with every aspect of Sharia Law, he gets stamped a dollar khoor. Its your ilk who are fond of putting labels on people and making a caricature of anyone who does not agree with your point of view. That my friend is extremism and not the one you so desperately are trying to shove on others.

 

[Badsha]

Actually, it's you who think anyone who isn't an IK supporter or is not in favor of inciting religion in politics, a secular or liberal where he can very easily and most likely be, considering there aren't many seculars in Pakistan, a moderate. So if someone does not support talks with militants like IK, he gets labeled a liberal fascist, if someone does not agree with every aspect of Sharia Law, he gets stamped a dollar khoor. Its your ilk who are fond of putting labels on people and making a caricature of anyone who does not agree with your point of view. That my friend is extremism and not the one you so desperately are trying to shove on others.

Because I said that... right.


My opening post was regarding the view "Paksitan should be a secular state". If you can stop generalizing people, maybe you'll pay more attention to the actual topic.

I'll return to my question. Why do certain Pakistani liberals want Pakistan to be a secular state when the majority does not?

 

[Andrew Hughes]

The likes of marx and castro would laugh at these so called 'liberals' manifesto of pakistan and their goals

Marx and Castro weren't Liberals

 

[BudMarsh]

Also re: masses who live in villages.

Badsha you do realise these are the same villages that produce people who think polio vaccines are a conspiracy, have "customs" like watta satta/karo-kari, throw acid on women, do honour killings, have decades long tribal feuds, and so on.

 

[Myrmidon]

Are you not a liberal Badsha? :/

The only way Pakistan will prosper is if it becomes a liberal state. You need to make them think with their minds and not their faith. If somebody can name me 3 successful muslim countries (NON LIBERAL) then I will shut up, and no the gulf states that are run by oil do not count, take that away from them and they become bigger savages than those in the subcontinent.

 

[the Great Khan]

Liberal..lol..what does that even mean in Pakistan? The liberals I see and hear on the internet and in the media are simply right wing nutjobs masquerading as so called liberals. They tend to be anti-Islamic athetists (in alot of cases Islamaphobes) secularists who want to sleep as a Muslim but want to wake up ina world where they can do what they like , when they like, without the burden of that awful thing called Islam...

Now you can paint it in fancy ways and talk about tolerance this and "we're not agaisnt you praying bla blah blah" but ultimatley it comes down to the bottom line. Just look at some of the posts above and they clearly prove a point..

In the villages peaople hear this: Liberal " the shariah is outdated, religion is the cause of all our problems, these Mullahs are terrorists and want to convert us all into Talibans"

Translated in villagers brain "we want to take away your Imaan, Islam and Love of the prophet PBUH and turn you into kaffirs"

and that my firends is the way it works..

so to summarise, those who want to take Islam out of the discourse well I have news for you, what ever way you look at it, its not happening..Pakistanis like isrealis and americans (whetehr people agree with this or not) believe in manifest destiny..the black flags from khorasan, and so forth....

so the solution is to accept that islam is a reality but work to help the poor, alleviate injustice and look to reform the archaic British era law we are lumbered with.

 

[the Great Khan]

Are you not a liberal Badsha? :/

The only way Pakistan will prosper is if it becomes a liberal state. You need to make them think with their minds and not their faith. If somebody can name me 3 successful muslim countries (NON LIBERAL) then I will shut up, and no the gulf states that are run by oil do not count, take that away from them and they become bigger savages than those in the subcontinent.

to simply blame all of the problems in the Muslim world on Islam is short sighted, and quite ignorant. WHy ignorant? well because you ignore the historical reality of the Muslim world and why we are where we are. For example Sykes Picot, balfour and partition.

when the christians were in their dark ages (800 odd years almost), the Muslims used to say the same about them..

 

[Gabbar Singh]

From an outsiders point of view, I've always found the half way house approach to Islamic law in Pakistan a bit strange and even counter productive. I mean either you desire a theocratic/shariah state or you don't - why bother picking and choosing and implementing bits here and there whilst ignoring other parts when it suits.

If one truly believes that shariah is the infallible law of God then why wouldn't you want it implemented in it's entirety?

 

[James]

This "injection" of secularism creates a lot of polarity between the villages and cities. The disunity it creates might be as bad then the terrorist groups if not worse.

Complete and utter tosh.

 

[James]

Liberalism in basic words can translate to liberty and equality, what is wrong with it.

In Pakistan's context its simple

A secular, liberal , multicultural Pakistan will reap full benefits of its diversity by turning it into its biggest strength; A vibrant, liberal/open society will maximize the collective output of economic, cultural and sporting ingenuity of its diversity. A vibrant society combined with its location will help Pakistan becoming a hub(technological, economical, arts etc) of one of the most important future regions in world.On top of that Pak's population is still within range for such pluralism to be very fruitful. It is that simple and important for Pakistan, Pakistan will be secular/liberal one day, hopefully the things start evolving towards it once the intellectual capital of masses increases over a certain level.

For such a diverse country any sort of faith/ideological/ethnicial etc hegemony/dogma is a killer and will cause constant friction.

Great post.

 

[BudMarsh]

Liberal..lol..what does that even mean in Pakistan? The liberals I see and hear on the internet and in the media are simply right wing nutjobs masquerading as so called liberals. They tend to be anti-Islamic athetists (in alot of cases Islamaphobes) secularists who want to sleep as a Muslim but want to wake up ina world where they can do what they like , when they like, without the burden of that awful thing called Islam...

Now you can paint it in fancy ways and talk about tolerance this and "we're not agaisnt you praying bla blah blah" but ultimatley it comes down to the bottom line. Just look at some of the posts above and they clearly prove a point..

In the villages peaople hear this: Liberal " the shariah is outdated, religion is the cause of all our problems, these Mullahs are terrorists and want to convert us all into Talibans"

Translated in villagers brain "we want to take away your Imaan, Islam and Love of the prophet PBUH and turn you into kaffirs"

and that my firends is the way it works..

so to summarise, those who want to take Islam out of the discourse well I have news for you, what ever way you look at it, its not happening..Pakistanis like isrealis and americans (whetehr people agree with this or not) believe in manifest destiny..the black flags from khorasan, and so forth....

so the solution is to accept that islam is a reality but work to help the poor, alleviate injustice and look to reform the archaic British era law we are lumbered with.

Healthy dose of nonsense this. At least have the decency to read a few posts on this thread that elucidate the views of Pakistani liberals. Like amax in post # 26. Instead of making up these nonsensical strawmen examples that exist only in your head.

There is no manifest destiny about Pakistan. ) Its already been broken up once, on the verge of losing more territory, some destiny that...

those who want to take Islam out of the discourse well I have news for you

, Literally nobody on this thread wrote anything about taking Islam out of the discourse. Who are you addressing? Just comes across as paranoia.

Why don't you try and try replying to actual peoples' posts here instead of your own khayali liberals?

 

[Badsha]

Are you not a liberal Badsha? :/

The only way Pakistan will prosper is if it becomes a liberal state. You need to make them think with their minds and not their faith. If somebody can name me 3 successful muslim countries (NON LIBERAL) then I will shut up, and no the gulf states that are run by oil do not count, take that away from them and they become bigger savages than those in the subcontinent.

I am a liberal but an actual liberal. The liberals in Pakistan are more anti-religion than being liberal.

Also, it doesn't matter what I am. What does the majority want?


Lastly, I think faith is a very strong thing to have. Unfortunately, it is these mullahs and our population that has made people hate Islam.


As for success these things take turns. There was a time Asia was more successful than Europe (I don't like using terms like Muslims were in power).

 

[Badsha]

From an outsiders point of view, I've always found the half way house approach to Islamic law in Pakistan a bit strange and even counter productive. I mean either you desire a theocratic/shariah state or you don't - why bother picking and choosing and implementing bits here and there whilst ignoring other parts when it suits.

If one truly believes that shariah is the infallible law of God then why wouldn't you want it implemented in it's entirety?

Just to make one thing clear, I'm not a proponent of Sharia law at all. It is an outdated practice that doesn't need to be implemented in terms of Islam anyway.

But I agree. These "half way" laws are really poor.

Complete and utter tosh.

You make a lot of valid points

And maybe take a trip to Pakistan. You'll notice some of the polarity.


Anyway, if liberals focused on human rights, equality and work force I'd be happy. Sadly, most liberals I see here want almost an end to religion being the deciding factor in anything.

If the strictness of Pakistan bothers you, you can always leave the country because guess what, that's what I did. But I can't force my opinion on everyone over there.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

From an outsiders point of view, I've always found the half way house approach to Islamic law in Pakistan a bit strange and even counter productive. I mean either you desire a theocratic/shariah state or you don't - why bother picking and choosing and implementing bits here and there whilst ignoring other parts when it suits.

If one truly believes that shariah is the infallible law of God then why wouldn't you want it implemented in it's entirety?

It's a strange situation. Religious parties that would enforce Shariah 100% barely register a worthwhile vote in the elections, yet there is still this reluctance to separate State from theology in some parts of the legislature.

 

[IJWBS]

Mujib ul rehman bangladesh... Around 30,000 if not more, directly by his death squads and then 1 million from the famine resulting from his policies.....

What the hell are you talking about? He was corrupted with power and eliminated his opponents to stay in power. Had nothing to do with him being a liberal. His opponents included both secularists and conservatives. In fact towards the end of his tenure he became more and more conservative and tried to appease the Islamic parties. The biggest threat to his regime was from the left-wingers and communists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheikh_Mujibur_Rahman

Although the state was committed to secularism, Mujib soon began moving closer to political Islam through state policies as well as personal conduct.[34] He revived the Islamic Academy (which had been banned in 1972 for suspected collusion with Pakistani forces) and banned the production and sale of alcohol and banned the practice of gambling, which had been one of the major demands of Islamic groups.[34] Mujib sought Bangladesh's membership in the Organisation of the Islamic Conference and the Islamic Development Bank and made a significant trip to Lahore in 1974 to attend the OIC summit, which helped repair relations with Pakistan to an extent.[34] In his public appearances and speeches, Mujib made increased usage of Islamic greetings, slogans and references to Islamic ideologies. In his final years, Mujib largely abandoned his trademark "Joy Bangla" salutation for "Khuda Hafez" preferred by religious Muslims. He also declared a common amnesty to the suspected war criminals in some conditions to get the support of far right groups as the communists were not happy with Mujib's regime. He declared, " I believe that the brokers, who assisted the Pakistanis during the liberation war has realized their faults. I hope they will involve themselves in the development of the country forgetting all their misdeeds. Those who were arrested and jailed in the Collaborator act should be freed before the 16 December 1974."

And where did you get the 30,000 number? And what did the famine have to do with liberalism? What an absolutely ridiculous post devoid of any sense.

 

[the Great Khan]

Healthy dose of nonsense this. At least have the decency to read a few posts on this thread that elucidate the views of Pakistani liberals. Like amax in post # 26. Instead of making up these nonsensical strawmen examples that exist only in your head.

There is no manifest destiny about Pakistan. ) Its already been broken up once, on the verge of losing more territory, some destiny that...

, Literally nobody on this thread wrote anything about taking Islam out of the discourse. Who are you addressing? Just comes across as paranoia.

Why don't you try and try replying to actual peoples' posts here instead of your own khayali liberals?

you see youve alraedy highlighted the polarisation. whetehr you believe there is a manifest destiny or whether I do or not is irrelevant. i'm saying that a sizable majority in Pakistan believe in it. Now you can talk about the historical issues with regards to its break up and so forth. But The majority populace who do love their country and are seen as nationalists do believe it.

Actually Islam was implied in nearly every post other than yours. Just read them again, mentions of shariah law, backward Muslim countries and so forth.

The bottom line is the so called liberals are actually right wing anti theist nutjobs. hence why their weird ideas dont make any headway.

A true liberal would accept Islam as being a part of the make up of the nation but would look to work to alleviate hardship, work for justice, and human rights, and try to initiate debates with regards to tolerance and so forth. Instead what they do is start frothing at their mouths when you mention "islam" "Shariah" , "Mullah" and then simply lose whatever perspective they may have started with. why dont so called liberals look at law reforms, workers rights, the fair distribution of wealth, womens rights, health, education?? no its all "taliban this" "Imran taliban khan that" etc etc.."lets run to amreeka.."


where is the so called liberals Edhi? your poster boys/girls are asma jahangir and Bilawal bhutto for goodness sake!!
Ill have a look at your other posts and reply in kind.

 

[Mohsin]

Agree 100% with Badsha...it seems the only liberals that are to be found in Pakistan are in fact pseudo liberals. Pakistan cannot be a secular state, it was created on the basis of the 2-Nation theory (and before anyone suddenly brings up East Pakistan, remember that the original idea of the 2-Nation theory was areas of Kashmir, Sindh, Punjab, Sarhad (KPK) and Balochistan to be bought together as one Nation for the Muslims of the Sub Continent). Liberalism in Pakistan seems to mean 'anti-religion'/'religion is the root cause of the problems'. Only in Pakistan will you find liberals supporting drones...thats not liberalism.

However at the same time i fear people suddenly jump to conclusions when someones talks about Pakistan being an Islamic welfare State/cannot be liberal/secular. Saying such things DO NOT automatically equate to Taliban style Sharia, bans on shaving and 'minorities being discriminated against.

Other posters can obviously say what they think of me/my position politically/ideologically BUT my position against liberalism is a position against 'Pakistan pseudo liberalism'. I see the Hindu's, Sikh's, Christian's of Pakistan as equal citizens, i despise those idiots who try and forcefully convert people thinking theyre doing religion and Pakistan a favor.

Pakistan doesn't HAVE to be liberal/secular to prosper/develop.

 

[boomboomcheema]

With growing economic prosperity and education , Pakistan is already heading towards the path of Liberalism and Secularism. Nothing is going to stop it I'm afraid.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

With growing economic prosperity and education , Pakistan is already heading towards the path of Liberalism and Secularism. Nothing is going to stop it I'm afraid.

That's how it should be, it's why they are called developing nations.

 

[IJWBS]

With growing economic prosperity and education , Pakistan is already heading towards the path of Liberalism and Secularism. Nothing is going to stop it I'm afraid.

No offence but Pakistan's economy is growing at 3.6% and that is a pathetic growth rate for a poor country. And one of the reasons for this is the increasing influence of religion on society which is stifling growth. Compare that with Bangladesh and Sri Lanka (both growing steadily at 6-7% a year) where religion is not as influencial.

 

[boomboomcheema]

No offence but Pakistan's economy is growing at 3.6% and that is a pathetic growth rate for a poor country. And one of the reasons for this is the increasing influence of religion on society which is stifling growth. Compare that with Bangladesh and Sri Lanka (both growing steadily at 6-7% a year) where religion is not as influencial.

One can only hope for things to change for good in the future. BTW, is Bangladesh a Secular country ? In the recent times, the jamatis and other religious parties have been in news for very wrong reasons.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

One can only hope for things to change for good in the future. BTW, is Bangladesh a Secular country ? In the recent times, the jamatis and other religious parties have been in news for very wrong reasons.

Not according to this article:

Rise of Religious Fundamentalism in Bangladesh

http://mainstreamweekly.net/article4651.html

 

[boomboomcheema]

Not according to this article:

Rise of Religious Fundamentalism in Bangladesh

http://mainstreamweekly.net/article4651.html

But most of the Bangladeshis often brag about how their country is a beacon of progress and secularism with no room for discrimination against any of its citizens. And also they cant stop thanking their leaders for breaking away from Extremist Pakistan.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

But most of the Bangladeshis often brag about how their country is a beacon of progress and secularism with no room for discrimination against any of its citizens. And also they cant stop thanking their leaders for breaking away from Extremist Pakistan.

Well I'm sure with their economy growth rate being double that of Pakistan's they must have a much higher standard of living and no need to cross the border and live as illegal immigrants in India.

 

[aashiqmizaaj]

There's a great deal of confusion here.

I think ultimately the problem is the way Islamic law is being implemented and the Pakistani population in general. And if someone thinks that Islamic law = oppression, then sorry I think you have it wrong. Certainly Islam doesn't mean do whatever you want, but if you don't want to follow Islam, then don't. Any interpretations about harassing, persecuting those who don't follow the religion, or forcible adherence, makes no sense and is not part of the religion.

If you look at Islamic history, during the early days of Islam, the Prophet's (SAW) message was focused on changing people's attitudes in so that they become more compassionate, patient - in essence, it was a bottom-up way to transform society - once that transformation happened at the individual level, those same people were able to accept the rulings that followed. A lot of the religious parties, religious segments in Pakistan and for that matter elsewhere have been tackling the problem all wrong. They've gone about the punishments, this is allowed, this is not allowed, you can do this, can't do that, all this without really transforming society first. Case and point, the ban of alcohol in Pakistan. If the 'Muslims' in Pakistan (and I use the quotations deliberately) want to drink, so be it, if in their hearts they have not accepted that alcohol is not something they should consume, no ban, no overt measures will prevent them from sourcing or consuming it - this is proved by certain 'Muslims' gladly positioning themselves as Hindu or Christian so that they can acquire alcoholic beverages. The population needs to accept the principles in their hearts first, and unfortunately, they are nowhere near this as we are fundamentally a nation of hypocrites - one that is keen on killing in the name of the Prophet SAW if he is insulted, but will not make an ounce of an effort to live by the code that he's delivered (you know, the one that instills a sense of compassion to others - humans and animals alike, the one that instills a sense of fairness, and honesty).

Now in a society where people's leanings are more towards how they can earn a quick buck, how they can get their neighbour's wife or any other goodie, how they can get a quick buzz, Islamic principles will be quite the thorn. I can understand that, but the flaw is within the people, not the principles.

Labeling people as secular, liberal etc. is all window-dressing. As a Muslim, I'm a liberal - liberal in that I believe in tolerance (Islam teaches me this), the right for others to say whatever, (Islam teaches me that I should engage in civil discourse to get my point across - and if I fail, so be it), the right for education for all (Islam teaches me this), the notion that all humans are equal (again Islam teaches me this).

Ahh - my rant is done, I really should get back to work.

 

[Markhor]

The right-wing have always tried to equate 'liberal facism' (whatever that is) and the extremist TTP types in their usual display of false equivalency and smear campaigns.

Anyone who dares speak up against the religious right is a 'Jewish agent', 'American agent' etc. The media is dominated with conservative lackeys.

Until liberals/secularists are blowing themselves up in market squares and city centres in the name of an ideology, then the right-wingers may have a point.

 

[IJWBS]

Well I'm sure with their economy growth rate being double that of Pakistan's they must have a much higher standard of living and no need to cross the border and live as illegal immigrants in India.

Wow such sour grapes. No where did I say living standards are higher in Bangladesh than they are in Pakistan. Pakistan may be richer than Bangladesh but the fact is the Pakistani economy has stagnated in recent years whereas the Bangladeshi economy has been growing steadily. Quite amazing when you think about it. All conventional theories would suggest a country that has been forged out of 2/3s of Bengal (the poor, overpopulated part) and is constantly in political strife and faces natural disasters would have no chances of surviving. But not only has Bangladesh survived it has decreased people living in poverty by 26% from 2000-2010 and is on the path of steadying its population, a key factor for incomes to rise. Instead of being bitter you should appreciate what Bangladesh has managed to do and hope Pakistan can follow suit.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Wow such sour grapes. No where did I say living standards are higher in Bangladesh than they are in Pakistan. Pakistan may be richer than Bangladesh but the fact is the Pakistani economy has stagnated in recent years whereas the Bangladeshi economy has been growing steadily. Quite amazing when you think about it. All conventional theories would suggest a country that has been forged out of 2/3s of Bengal (the poor, overpopulated part) and is constantly in political strife and faces natural disasters would have no chances of surviving. But not only has Bangladesh survived it has decreased people living in poverty by 26% from 2000-2010 and is on the path of steadying its population, a key factor for incomes to rise. Instead of being bitter you should appreciate what Bangladesh has managed to do and hope Pakistan can follow suit.

Of course the Pakistan economy has stagnated in recent years, it's pretty hard to encourage growth when the country is suffering the blowback of the war on terror. I would think that it will remain grim for a while as removing this menace won't come cheaply either.

 

[RexRex]

From an outsiders point of view, I've always found the half way house approach to Islamic law in Pakistan a bit strange and even counter productive. I mean either you desire a theocratic/shariah state or you don't - why bother picking and choosing and implementing bits here and there whilst ignoring other parts when it suits.

If one truly believes that shariah is the infallible law of God then why wouldn't you want it implemented in it's entirety?

Christianity had a similiar problem a few centuries ago with the influence of the catholic church.Perhaps that equation collapsed because the people or protestants realised it didn't have the scriptures to back it up.You know , give to caesar and all that.

With islam .. you can't ignore it because it part of doctrine.It is undeniable that there is a political dimension to islam namely no separation of faith and state.On the other hand when u actually put this theology to practice (whether rightly or wrongly) what happens is an absolutist Iran , Saudi , Maldives.So people are confused.

 

[Sitges]

Fantastic post bhai Sahib. The crux of the problem is our hypocrisy.

 

[the Great Khan]

i see the bangladeshis commenting on our pathetic growth rate..its not bad considring we've been fighting a war for ten years. before that it was 7-8% steadily. what was sri lankas growth rate during the war with the tamils? by the way manufacturing has seen a growth rate of around 13%.

 

[the Great Khan]

Christianity had a similiar problem a few centuries ago with the influence of the catholic church.Perhaps that equation collapsed because the people or protestants realised it didn't have the scriptures to back it up.You know , give to caesar and all that.

With islam .. you can't ignore it because it part of doctrine.It is undeniable that there is a political dimension to islam namely no separation of faith and state.On the other hand when u actually put this theology to practice (whether rightly or wrongly) what happens is an absolutist Iran , Saudi , Maldives.So people are confused.

wrong again..when you put it into practice you get golden ages like andalucia.

 

[ElRaja]

people who think secularisation will some how rid pakistan of all its ills are deluding themselves, im not going into details since i cant be bothered but these are the base realities.

feudalism is a far greater weight on pakistani economic development than religion, nothing will change for the better until the political aristocracy that runs pakistan like a collection of personal fiefdoms is broken.

where secularisation plays a role is in freeing the intellectual classes from dogmatic restrictions, which in turns catalyses the technological development of a nation making it a productive and respected member of the international community.

pakistan in economic terms is way behind where it would need to be to avail any benefits of technologically advanced economy. when pakistan is in the position to avail these benefits secularisation and liberalism will take root itself, as it has done in the intellectual and academic class of every secular nation without any need for "injecting" it.

p.s. is there any resident pakistani actually commenting in this thread?

 

[aashiqmizaaj]

p.s. is there any resident pakistani actually commenting in this thread?

LOL

What's the smiley for running away embarrassed? Does this one count?

 

[aashiqmizaaj]

where secularisation plays a role is in freeing the intellectual classes from dogmatic restrictions, which in turns catalyses the technological development of a nation making it a productive and respected member of the international community.

Don't know if it's that cut and dry. I mean historically we have seen societies triumph and dominate and be admired but their governing principles were different.

And again what if Islamic principles put in proper practice accomplished all that? Just because the people implementing it today are doing it wrong, we can't really say it's the Islamic principle's fault can we?

I agree about your stance on feudalism. Which interestingly enough, if Islamic principles were implemented correctly, would not be an issue. We have the example of Hazrat Umar (RA) reign wherein wealth distribution was done on a quite equitable basis.

 

[ElRaja]

Don't know if it's that cut and dry. I mean historically we have seen societies triumph and dominate and be admired but their governing principles were different.

And again what if Islamic principles put in proper practice accomplished all that? Just because the people implementing it today are doing it wrong, we can't really say it's the Islamic principle's fault can we?

you cannot derive accurate historical parallels imho because altho there was very definitely a period of islamic scientific accomplishment in peak around the turn of the 1st millenium, those achievements are judged in relative terms against a christian world which was becoming ever more intolerant, leading to the dark ages and as an eventual reaction the rennaiscence.

today the frontier of technological research is dominated by secular irreligious institutions, not by accident, but because the most cynical and questioning minds are drawn to scientific method. when allowed to express themselves in their own terms the intellectual class gravitate towards secularism and liberalism, this is not an ideology or theory, it is what has happened in most of the developed world regardless of the religiousity of core populous.

the measuring stick is totally different today, why imo it is very hard to draw parallels between the islamic scientific golden age a thousand years ago, and a possible recreation of that today.

I agree about your stance on feudalism. Which interestingly enough, if Islamic principles were implemented correctly, would not be an issue. We have the example of Hazrat Umar (RA) reign wherein wealth distribution was done on a quite equitable basis.

my point on feudalism was based the history of the british peasentry, for whom the basis of the modern british economy was set in the revolts of early 1300 that were the first steps which allowed a decentralised economy to develop.

 

[BudMarsh]

p.s. is there any resident pakistani actually commenting in this thread?

Yes I am. Hence the reason I wrote about Maulvis and madrassa students being a nuisance to me personally from time to time.

And also the reason why concepts that are purely theoretical to foreign based Pakistanis are very real to me. Things like sectarianism for example. I have seen marriages fall apart, people having fights, even death threats etc because of this Sunni-Shia thing.

And I personally have witnessed sectarian/intolerant/extremist khutbas at Juma time. I remember the way Lal Masjid event and the extremists involved shut down life in Islamabad during that period. I have heard blasts and seen charred remains of a madrassa destroyed in the recent Pindi riots.

IN short, in my life so far I have seen first hand the effects of extremism and intolerance on day-to-day life in Pakistan. Zia and Bhutto played with fire and now Pakistan is burning because of it.

Needless to say once I leave Pakistan in a few years time, religion will not hold a prominent position in my life.

 

[Tera Gawaandi]

Whats view of Judiciary on this issue in Pakistan? That will be a good indicator.

 

[sjahmed23]

This whole thing was infused in the 80s where religion became center of everything, it was and it is being used as a tool and nothing more. Go back in time to Pakistan in 50s and 60s and then you will see what the Pakistanis who made Pakistan wanted.

 

[DHONI183]

It's as bad as Islamic extremists in the west. When will you lot realize that the majority of the country does not want a liberal/secular state? If anything. A lot of Pakistanis believe we're already too liberal.

And I'm talking about the masses who live in villages ect.

So explain to me why you guys want Pakistan to become a secular state? If the population wanted it to be that way but was being forced by the government I would understand but that's not the case.

There are a few flaws here: do the liberals of the country take up weapons to have their will imposed? Do they have any militant group who cause terror in the land to have things working their way? No! At the end of the day, it´s their "opinion" and "view" that Pakistan should be a secular state. Are they now even not allowed to voice their thoughts, given that they do not enforce things upon others? Similarly, YOUR VIEW is that Imran Khan and the PTI deserve to be given a go at the federal government, aren´t you to be respected (albeit disagreed with respectfully) as long as you don´t form a militant group to have it imposed?

The comparison with the Islamic extremists is a bad one mind you. From the ones I have known and met, they do not believe in the voting system or the rule of the majority. Their view is that their religion should be imposed upon the western countries once they are in power, once they are strong enough to rule, irrespective of who the majority is. That could just be my experience though, as some respected members might just jump in to rebut my claim and possibly try to prove that such Muslims exist over here who believe in ruling after votes are cast.

 

[Robbie]

Do people commenting here even know what secularism is?? Dont you know secularism is infact a necessity and basic right for the minorities?
Secularism does not promote athiesm. It only means equal rights for all the religions and special privileges to minorities.

 

[Robbie]

There are a few flaws here: do the liberals of the country take up weapons to have their will imposed? Do they have any militant group who cause terror in the land to have things working their way? No! At the end of the day, it´s their "opinion" and "view" that Pakistan should be a secular state. Are they now even not allowed to voice their thoughts, given that they do not enforce things upon others? Similarly, YOUR VIEW is that Imran Khan and the PTI deserve to be given a go at the federal government, aren´t you to be respected (albeit disagreed with respectfully) as long as you don´t form a militant group to have it imposed?

The comparison with the Islamic extremists is a bad one mind you. From the ones I have known and met, they do not believe in the voting system or the rule of the majority. Their view is that their religion should be imposed upon the western countries once they are in power, once they are strong enough to rule, irrespective of who the majority is. That could just be my experience though, as some respected members might just jump in to rebut my claim and possibly try to prove that such Muslims exist over here who believe in ruling after votes are cast.

Top post

Its only in PP you can see words like "Liberal Extremists" being thrown around. What does it means exactly

 

[amax]

p.s. is there any resident pakistani actually commenting in this thread?

Yes I am. Post 26

people who think secularisation will some how rid pakistan of all its ills are deluding themselves, im not going into details since i cant be bothered but these are the base realities.

feudalism is a far greater weight on pakistani economic development than religion, nothing will change for the better until the political aristocracy that runs pakistan like a collection of personal fiefdoms is broken.

where secularisation plays a role is in freeing the intellectual classes from dogmatic restrictions, which in turns catalyses the technological development of a nation making it a productive and respected member of the international community.

pakistan in economic terms is way behind where it would need to be to avail any benefits of technologically advanced economy. when pakistan is in the position to avail these benefits secularisation and liberalism will take root itself, as it has done in the intellectual and academic class of every secular nation without any need for "injecting" it.

No one is deluded that it will produce sudden results; some sort of technological renaissance out of nowhere.

Ideally as Captain Rishwat implied it is an evolutionary process.

Now look particularly at Pakistan's case which is bit different there are some important aspects.

Firstly a new very diverse nation, Establishment thought it can be united under some common faith blanket and tried to "inject" a sense of common nationhood based on particular ideologies of religion.
e,g Maududi having such a big influence on urban middle class that in addition to getting more conservative, it started looking down upon/considering unislamic the brand of religion, it followed during its rural part(before moving to cities as a result of economic progress) e.g. going to shrines, not following Hijab (prevalent in rural areas) etc. This also shows that the point that rural urban divide will be equivalent to conservative/liberal(with rural being conservative) is wrong, its not that simple.

Secondly and importantly, One of major reason for rise of passive/active extremist organisations in Muslim world is a sentiment post/during colonization in Muslim World that decline is not because of lack of progress evolution it is because of not following the religion in true spirit(and renaissance will only be achieved by following religion in true(puritanical) spirit, this school of thought also peddled the hate against anything west). Attaturk prevented this from festering in Turkey by state sanction "injections".(not correct ideally according to liberalism principles but ironically helped in achieving the very thing in Turkish Society, vision is beyond popular sentiment), Considering that Turkey faced the worst decline(from Ottommon empire to....) it was very much prone to face this phenomena most alongwith hatred against west(its culture, Knowledge etc).

Probably you are doubtful of its effect on Pakistan considering India in mind, India's case is different;for such a large population with so big numbers residing in each class/ethnic/economic fault lines it is not possible for pluralism to produce ideal/instant effect.

Now again no one is delusional about "instant revolutionary results" but it will pave the way toward future progress. There is a reason that top brains produced by country from Faiz to Eqbal Ahmad to PerveZ Hoodbhoy emphasized on the matter because the effect of religious conservatism/extremism is very widespread from a small level of Lahore Marathon, tourism resort in a country to intellectual stagnation and pressurising Jinnah.

Therefore I think that notion that it will not change any thing, there are other issues etc is causing confusion and is probably more a part of problem than solution.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

you cannot derive accurate historical parallels imho because altho there was very definitely a period of islamic scientific accomplishment in peak around the turn of the 1st millenium, those achievements are judged in relative terms against a christian world which was becoming ever more intolerant, leading to the dark ages and as an eventual reaction the rennaiscence.

today the frontier of technological research is dominated by secular irreligious institutions, not by accident, but because the most cynical and questioning minds are drawn to scientific method. when allowed to express themselves in their own terms the intellectual class gravitate towards secularism and liberalism, this is not an ideology or theory, it is what has happened in most of the developed world regardless of the religiousity of core populous.

the measuring stick is totally different today, why imo it is very hard to draw parallels between the islamic scientific golden age a thousand years ago, and a possible recreation of that today.



my point on feudalism was based the history of the british peasentry, for whom the basis of the modern british economy was set in the revolts of early 1300 that were the first steps which allowed a decentralised economy to develop.

Excellent insights Raja, couldn't agree more.

 

[ElRaja]

Yes I am. Post 26

cool, i cant argue with the nitty gritty of the situation in pak since i have only been back for 4 weeks in the last 15 years since i left, but since you made the effort to write a decent counter ill reply.

Firstly a new very diverse nation, Establishment thought it can be united under some common faith blanket and tried to "inject" a sense of common nationhood based on particular ideologies of religion.
e,g Maududi having such a big influence on urban middle class that in addition to getting more conservative, it started looking down upon/considering unislamic the brand of religion, it followed during its rural part(before moving to cities as a result of economic progress) e.g. going to shrines, not following Hijab (prevalent in rural areas) etc.

Secondly and importantly, One of major reason for rise of passive/active extremist organisations in Muslim world is a sentiment post/during colonization in Muslim World that decline is not because of lack of progress evolution it is because of not following the religion in true spirit(and renaissance will only be achieved by following religion in true(puritanical) spirit, this school of thought also peddled the hate against anything west).

so how is the secularisation implemented to combat this phenomenon in a way as to be effective, given the lack of education provided by the state and ethnicity based support of political parties who could never pull it off.

compare the apparatus of the state to "inject" this secularisation with the network of religious organisations ready to fight it. if bought into affect it would be quashed in weeks leaving the whole idea of liberalism or secularism as a joke.

for a grass level movement you need thinkers who have the security to voice opinions, for which you need to deal with education, corruption and security, secularisation before the pakistan is ready is a recipe for disaster, imo.

This also shows that the point that rural urban divide will be equivalent to conservative/liberal(with rural being conservative) is wrong, its not that simple.

i agree with you on that, in my experience you are right, as i found out some villagers from my pind are well fond of kronenberg, lol.

Attaturk prevented this from festering in Turkey by state sanction "injections".(not correct ideally according to liberalism principles but ironically helped in achieving the very thing in Turkish Society, vision is beyond popular sentiment), Considering that Turkey faced the worst decline(from Ottommon empire to....) it was very much prone to face this phenomena most alongwith hatred against west(its culture, Knowledge etc).

again, as i said to aashiqmizaaj, you cannot draw such wide parallels to other historical groups of people who just happened to be muslim. the turks were a global super power and force to be reckoned with as a religious imperial state, and when faced with rebuilding the nation, the forged a economically powerful, modern state without islam.

the common denominator is the turkish national identity which is not present in pakistanis, and the pride in identification with that national identity, for many like ataturk even before their religious identity. the turks understand there place in the world, before and after islam, yet in pak people believe mohamad bin qasim was the first pakistani and have heart felt reverence for foreign conquerors.

yes you can force a common identity on a people, but again pakistan simply does not have the educational infrastructure to replace religion with some other commonality, just look at pakistani prejudices, after nearly 70 years people are still arguing about ethnicity and languages.

There is a reason that top brains produced by country from Faiz to Eqbal Ahmad to PerveZ Hoodbhoy emphasized on the matter because the effect of religious conservatism/extremism is very widespread from a small level of Lahore Marathon, tourism resort in a country to intellectual stagnation and pressurising Jinnah.Therefore I think that notion that it will not change any thing, there are other issues etc is causing confusion and is probably more a part of problem than solution.

as i have mentioned before, the intellectual classes will always be drawn to liberalism, secularism, the key is in the developing those classes to the number where they exert political influence, and the evolution and its effects will follow.