What If series: Would India have been a better country, had they acknowledged Muhammad Ali Jinnah as their PM?

[The Bald Eagle]

The everyone's favorite India's freedom movement leader Subhas Chandra Bose offered premiership to Jinnah to avert the partition of India. Mahatma Gandhi proposed the same as last ditch effort. But characters like Vallabhai Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru opposed it vehemently and this became the forerunner of partition. Currently India is among top 5 world economies but could have been faring much better had India been a united sub continent nation.

Also India would have been less politically polarized region with great tolerance for minority groups had it been a single united entity. So has Indian leaders of past done right or wrong by denying Jinnah the premiership at the expense of unity of Indian subcontinent or is the current arrangement way better for them.

Also India would have won more accolades in Cricket and Olympics had the former subcontinent countries still be a part of it.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Poll added Guys!

 

[uppercut]

The everyone's favorite India's freedom movement leader Subhas Chandra Bose offered premiership to Jinnah to avert the partition of India. Mahatma Gandhi proposed the same as last ditch effort. But characters like Vallabhai Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru opposed it vehemently and this became the forerunner of partition. Currently India is among top 5 world economies but could have been faring much better had India been a united sub continent nation.

No friggin way .... it would have been the death blow to Hinduism as we know it. Jinnah was spot on when he said that Hindus and Muslims cannot co-exist. The idea of the partition was the best thing to happen. Would have been perfect if there was a total and complete population exchange and the borders sealed permanently thereafter. But our stupid and naive Indian leadership took the "aa-bail-Mujhe-maar" approach. Had the partition been implemented as designed agreed and voted by Muslims India today would be a much much more prosperous nation without a shadow of doubt.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

No friggin way .... it would have been the death blow to Hinduism as we know it. Jinnah was spot on when he said that Hindus and Muslims cannot co-exist. The idea of the partition was the best thing to happen. Would have been perfect if there was a total and complete population exchange and the borders sealed permanently thereafter. But our stupid and naive Indian leadership took the "aa-bail-Mujhe-maar" approach. Had the partition been implemented as designed agreed and voted by Muslims India today would be a much much more prosperous nation without a shadow of doubt.

Wow you have been blunt here rather than diplomatic. Atleast you expressed your actual thoughts.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

From archives​

====

Partition would not have happened had Jinnah become India PM: Dalai Lama​

Exiled Tibetan leader Dalai Lama said on Wednesday that Partition would have been averted had Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah become the first prime minister of India, according to Hindustan Times.

Relevance of Jinnah

The Dalai Lama made the comments while speaking at a Goa educational institute. He made the remarks while responding to a student's query on taking right decisions.

“Now look at India. I think Mahatma Gandhi was very much willing to give the prime ministership to Jinnah. But Pandit Nehru refused,” he said.

BJP minister refers to Quaid-e-Azam as 'mahapurush'

The exiled Tibetan leader went on to add how he thought it was a bit self-centered on part of Jawaharlal Nehru to covet the top post.

“I think it was a little bit self-centred attitude of Pandit Nehru that he should be the prime minister. India and Pakistan would have remained united had Mahatma Gandhi's thinking materialised," he said. "Pandit Nehru, I know very well, (was a) very experienced person, very wise but sometimes mistakes also happen.”

Jaswant praises Advani, stands by book on Jinnah

Earlier in May, Uttar Pradesh Minister Swami Prasad Maurya eulogised Jinnah as a "mahapurush" or great man. The minister made the remarks while admonishing a Bharatiya Janata Party MP for criticising Aligarh Muslim University for displaying a photo of Jinnah at the varsity. "It is shameful for anyone to point a finger on great leaders who contributed towards the country's formation," he had then said.

Partition would not have happened had Jinnah become India PM: Dalai Lama | The Express Tribune

Exiled Tibetan leader says Jawaharlal Nehru coveted top post

tribune.com.pk

Reverent Bose said the same

Subhas Chandra Bose offered Jinnah the first PM post if he withdrew demand for Pakistan

In the book ‘Jinnah’, Ishtiaq Ahmed writes that Jinnah repeatedly dismissed as nonsense the idea that he was using the demand for Pakistan as a bargaining chip.

theprint.in

 

[sweep_shot]

I think partition was good for Muslims in subcontinent. We don't have to deal with BJP lunatics because of partition. Alhamdulillah.

Without partition, we might have had a nasty civil war.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

No. These type of hail marys rarely work.

 

[FearlessRoar]

I don't think a united India would have been a better idea. India already struggles to manage its own issues in Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, Manipur, Khalistan, Nagaland, and other areas. Adding Balochistan and the tribal areas along the Afghanistan border would have been a huge burden. I don't think India has the capacity to handle all those extra challenges.

 

[Champ_Pal]

I think partition was good for Muslims in subcontinent. We don't have to deal with BJP lunatics because of partition. Alhamdulillah.

Without partition, we might have had a nasty civil war.

Feelings are mutual. We avoided major bullets in the form of Lashkars and Jamaats.

Without partition, India would be 60% Hindu and 40% Muslim. Would be a major riot every day. Northwest part of India which was already majority Muslim would have demanded a separate nation anyways. I am glad the partition happened and everyone is happy that they got their dream nation.

 

[Red-Indian]

Even if by some miracle, some kind of prime ministership deal had been stuck at the departure of the British, it wouldn't have lasted.

Jinnah had no popular base so he wouldn't have won the next election. The other ambitious leaders wouldn't have stayed quiet for long. Either the Congress would have a leadership challenge or split.

We'd have been at a civil war within a few years. Worst case - Africa type disintegration.

 

[AamchiMumbaikar]

No.

Partition is good, but it was not done properly, many still want to move to PAk and B'desh, they should be allowed to leave and live peacefully with same religion democracies. India and Nepal as one country would have worked better.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Any credible source saying Netaji Subhash offered PMship to Jinnah?

 

[Slim]

After coming to North America, and seeing Indians in person especially the ones in Canada, im glad partition happened. And honestly i say it without any malice. Pakistanis and indians are different breed altogether, all that muh same people muh same culture thing is just aman ki asha chooran.

India is so diverse that Pakistanis have nothing in common with 80% of India. South India, Bengal, Haryana etc. there is no commonality.

There are of course going to be a few similarities based on belonging from the same region but there are clear differences in accent, way of walking, hygiene etc.

That being said, Jinnah if he became PM would have never been able to retain his seat as he was never a popular “hindustani” leader. He was only a leader of a certain ethnic/religious group masquerading as a national leader ala Jagmeet Singh in Canada.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

After coming to North America, and seeing Indians in person especially the ones in Canada, im glad partition happened. And honestly i say it without any malice. Pakistanis and indians are different breed altogether, all that muh same people muh same culture thing is just aman ki asha chooran.

India is so diverse that Pakistanis have nothing in common with 80% of India. South India, Bengal, Haryana etc. there is no commonality.

There are of course going to be a few similarities based on belonging from the same region but there are clear differences in accent, way of walking, hygiene etc.

That being said, Jinnah if he became PM would have never been able to retain his seat as he was never a popular “hindustani” leader. He was only a leader of a certain ethnic/religious group masquerading as a national leader ala Jagmeet Singh in Canada.

I have seen this as well, Indians in the US don't really share so many traits with Pakistanis.I grew up with Punjabi Indians mostly, and they were very similar to us in mannerisms and obviously language. South Indians were much less where I live, although there does seem to have been a big increase in the last couple of decades. We would have had the same cultural divide as we saw between east and west Pakistan - which is fine until the cultural differences like language start becoming an issue.

 

[Slim]

I have seen this as well, Indians in the US don't really share so many traits with Pakistanis.I grew up with Punjabi Indians mostly, and they were very similar to us in mannerisms and obviously language. South Indians were much less where I live, although there does seem to have been a big increase in the last couple of decades. We would have had the same cultural divide as we saw between east and west Pakistan - which is fine until the cultural differences like language start becoming an issue.

This is because most Indians in US are gujurati who have no cultural commonality with almost all of Pakistan.

I am not too sure about Punjabi Indians, have seen a lot of them in Canada, and i guess we do share some mannerism similarities with Punjabi Hindus (which is a stretch) but Punjabi Sikhs are a whole different beast altogether. I think they have more in common with Black Americans than they have common with us tbh.

That being said, current day India is suffering from this cultural divide already. If you go on indian interwebs, the northies look down on southies for their dark skin, AASI genotype and southies think they are more educated than northies. Alongwith this there is a intensifying feud over Kannada and Hindi. Southies want everyone in South Indian region to speak Kannada which is a terrible sounding language i might add. One of the worst languages in terms of sound aesthetics.

 

[Hitman]

I can't speak for every Indian. But I personally thank Jinnah every day for partition would not have been possible without him. For Muslims who stayed back in India, they are most welcome to live here amongst us. But it would be extremely wrong for them to expect us non Muslims in India to glorify those Islamic invaders of the past in our country.

 

[Mockingbird]

Know this is bait click, but no friggin way partition would not have eventually happened irrespective of Jinnah. Ek mayan mein do talwar nahi reh sakte. Partition was the only right solution, but just implemented shabbily by the Brits who wanted to cut their own losses following WW2.

Already India has enough problems of its own, we don’t want to import issues like military dictatorship and unmanageable tribal areas like FATA, Balochistan etc, do we?

 

[Hitman]

I can't speak for every Indian. But I personally thank Jinnah every day for partition would not have been possible without him. For Muslims who stayed back in India, they are most welcome to live here amongst us. But it would be extremely wrong for them to expect us non Muslims in India to glorify those Islamic invaders of the past in our country.

Must like it would be unwise for anyone in our country to expect us to glorify those British thieves who looted us in the past.

 

[Stewie]

I honestly don't know how the original question of the topic veered towards partition. The question itself is actually a non issue because whether he was offered the PM position or not, he wanted a separate country, so it would not have mattered.


But on a separate point, if India had remain united, it would have faced a lot of problems with the Invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviets. They would have been put in a situation by the Soviets to help them since they were allied and the Americans would have pushed them in the other direction. Either they would have become party to the conflict resulting in a direct head on collision with the US or they would have been forced to ditch USSR and go with the western bloc, either way it would have been a mess and if the same US policies were used, they would have faced extremism and radicalism and terrorism and all those evils with guns and whatnot coming through Afghanistan.

In a way India got shielded from all of that due top Pakistan being there.

 

[JaDed]

No.

Partition is good, but it was not done properly, many still want to move to PAk and B'desh, they should be allowed to leave and live peacefully with same religion democracies. India and Nepal as one country would have worked better.

Nepal has never been under the British.

 

[JaDed]

I honestly don't know how the original question of the topic veered towards partition. The question itself is actually a non issue because whether he was offered the PM position or not, he wanted a separate country, so it would not have mattered.


But on a separate point, if India had remain united, it would have faced a lot of problems with the Invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviets. They would have been put in a situation by the Soviets to help them since they were allied and the Americans would have pushed them in the other direction. Either they would have become party to the conflict resulting in a direct head on collision with the US or they would have been forced to ditch USSR and go with the western bloc, either way it would have been a mess and if the same US policies were used, they would have faced extremism and radicalism and terrorism and all those evils with guns and whatnot coming through Afghanistan.

In a way India got shielded from all of that due top Pakistan being there.

Nope, Indian Intelligence has a more hands off approach to conflicts unlike Pakistani Army dominated approach.

If Pakistan was part of India , the army wouldn't be ruling, Indian civil government would be. Every war Pakistan has got into has happened under establishment's watch.
There is a reason why they move to Europe or US.

 

[Champ_Pal]

I can't speak for every Indian. But I personally thank Jinnah every day for partition would not have been possible without him. For Muslims who stayed back in India, they are most welcome to live here amongst us. But it would be extremely wrong for them to expect us non Muslims in India to glorify those Islamic invaders of the past in our country.

95% of Muslims living in India are related to every Indian. They are all local converts and indistinguishable from the locals. The 5-10% selfish Ashraf ones have a vice like control on the low caste converts and their thinking. Even when riots happen, its always the Dalit and low caste converts that pay the price with their lives. The Ashraf ones then show up to pay lip service and make some bold statements.

IMO, the real reason why we do not see an all out civil war in India in spite of hundreds of smaller skirmishes that happen at street level every year is because the 90% of local converts to Islam are very patriotic. Other than religion, they have nothing in common with any other neighboring Islamic country.

If India had 30% or 40% Arab/Turk population instead of local Muslims, India would've been similar to Yemen or Syria or any other war torn Middle east country.

 

[JaDed]

This is because most Indians in US are gujurati who have no cultural commonality with almost all of Pakistan.

I am not too sure about Punjabi Indians, have seen a lot of them in Canada, and i guess we do share some mannerism similarities with Punjabi Hindus (which is a stretch) but Punjabi Sikhs are a whole different beast altogether. I think they have more in common with Black Americans than they have common with us tbh.

That being said, current day India is suffering from this cultural divide already. If you go on indian interwebs, the northies look down on southies for their dark skin, AASI genotype and southies think they are more educated than northies. Alongwith this there is a intensifying feud over Kannada and Hindi. Southies want everyone in South Indian region to speak Kannada which is a terrible sounding language i might add. One of the worst languages in terms of sound aesthetics.

We have all the issues, but our issues are like generic which happens in Us and Canada too wrt location and politics.

I’m a Punjabi that grew up in Chennai so I can tell you, we all have differences yes, language and culture but we all work together in corporate and Central government offices with the same amount of issues as generally other countries have.
Even on this forum we argue about politics, Kannadigas , Tamizhans, Malayalees, Marathis they all are here but for India there is one voice, politics and culture ofcourse not.


Like Quebec vs Saskwatchen, Cali/Ny vs Texas.. like those.
Yes politicians play those game but until economy is doing well and there is resources and jobs it’s good.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

It was good for both countries especially India as otherwise Ayub, Zia or Musharaf had been their head too.

Nope, Indian Intelligence has a more hands off approach to conflicts unlike Pakistani Army dominated approach.

If Pakistan was part of India , the army wouldn't be ruling, Indian civil government would be. Every war Pakistan has got into has happened under establishment's watch.
There is a reason why they move to Europe or US.

 

[Stewie]

Nope, Indian Intelligence has a more hands off approach to conflicts unlike Pakistani Army dominated approach.

If Pakistan was part of India , the army wouldn't be ruling, Indian civil government would be. Every war Pakistan has got into has happened under Army’s watch.
There is a reason why they move to Europe or US.

I dont think the intelligence or army has anything to do with how things could have gone badly. I don't think USSR invading Afghanistan or Americans creating the extremist elements to fight them, etc none of that had anything to do with the Pakistani army. They just did what they were told. In case of a United India, I am guessing it would have come down to how the elected leader would have handled it but nonetheless it would have been a mess and if that person had given into to the US strategy of weaponizing religion, India would have faced the same level of extremism.

You would not want to believe it but in the whole deal Pakistani army basically played the role of the yes men as always and it was not their brainchild to spread extremism and recruit Mujahideen from far reaches of the Arab world and to use them against USSR.

Those were the people and that was the ideilogy that eventually became the source for Al-QAEDA and Taliban. Maybe India would have dealt with it in a different way, maybe they would have simply handed the warm water ports to USSR for usage, because that's what they really wanted. They wanted to get to warm water ports and Afghnistan was just a pit stop. Either way India would have been stuck between a rock and hard place.

 

[Hikaru]

No sane Indian today would even consider the idea of a United Subcontinent. If anything, I would be happy to give away a few more states their nationhood. Quality over quantity anyday.

 

[JaDed]

I dont think the intelligence or army has anything to do with how things could have gone badly. I don't think USSR invading Afghanistan or Americans creating the extremist elements to fight them, etc none of that had anything to do with the Pakistani army. They just did what they were told. In case of a United India, I am guessing it would have come down to how the elected leader would have handled it but nonetheless it would have been a mess and if that person had given into to the US strategy of weaponizing religion, India would have faced the same level of extremism.

You would not want to believe it but in the whole deal Pakistani army basically played the role of the yes men as always and it was not their brainchild to spread extremism and recruit Mujahideen from far reaches of the Arab world and to use them against USSR.

Those were the people and that was the ideilogy that eventually became the source for Al-QAEDA and Taliban. Maybe India would have dealt with it in a different way, maybe they would have simply handed the warm water ports to USSR for usage, because that's what they really wanted. They wanted to get to warm water ports and Afghnistan was just a pit stop. Either way India would have been stuck between a rock and hard place.

India has never let any country set base in India, there is a reason for that because of distrust, while not all Pakistani Army Establishment were evil but they clearly have massive short term approach.
China and India have always been wary of Super powers, they don’t allow anyone to setup anything.

India has always tried the diplomatic approach everywhere, and India had actually opposed Soviet war on Afghanistan.

 

[JaDed]

No sane Indian today would even consider the idea of a United Subcontinent. If anything, I would be happy to give away a few more states their nationhood. Quality over quantity anyday.

I used to say that about UP, we should give them independence but only as a joke.

 

[Stewie]

India has never let any country set base in India, there is a reason for that because of distrust, while not all Pakistani Army Establishment were evil but they clearly have massive short term approach.
China and India have always been wary of Super powers, they don’t allow anyone to setup anything.

India has always tried the diplomatic approach everywhere, and India had actually opposed Soviet war on Afghanistan.

So in that case, India taking side with the Americans, I don't see how things would have gone any differently. US did not want open conflict with the Soviets. Pakistan of course could not afford it. They ganged up and weaponized religion and created the monster the world is still living with today.

So I wonder how India would have dealt with a threat right at its doorstep with the Americans pushing at them to take action or be party to it. A diplomatic approach would have been to allow USSR access to their warm water ports without actually setting base in India but would that have gone down well with the Americans?

Within less than ten years time, USA would have dealt the killing blow to communism and then become all buddy buddy with Russia (which actually happened in the real timeline) and India may have been left as the uncool child. There are a number of different scenarios that could have played out but all of them would have put India in a spot where they had to make a strategic decision, whether militarily or diplomatically, and it would have made them unpopular with the western block.

See as a Pakistani, I can tell you this much. When you take sides with the western block you are always stuck. They always use the are you with us or against us argument and they don't care about your own national interest because you don't have the position to negotiate with them.

Look at all the NATO countries. There was a lot of internal dissent in their involvement in the Iraq war but eventually they all gave in. It does not matter how first world you are. UK, Australia, Norway, etc, I think France was probably the only country who showed their middle finger to the US but all others fell in line hazar jawab. And they all paid for it with lives and other expenses. I really don't think India would have had a choice.

 

[JaDed]

So in that case, India taking side with the Americans, I don't see how things would have gone any differently. US did not want open conflict with the Soviets. Pakistan of course could not afford it. They ganged up and weaponized religion and created the monster the world is still living with today.

So I wonder how India would have dealt with a threat right at its doorstep with the Americans pushing at them to take action or be party to it. A diplomatic approach would have been to allow USSR access to their warm water ports without actually setting base in India but would that have gone down well with the Americans?

Within less than ten years time, USA would have dealt the killing blow to communism and then become all buddy buddy with Russia (which actually happened in the real timeline) and India may have been left as the uncool child. There are a number of different scenarios that could have played out but all of them would have put India in a spot where they had to make a strategic decision, whether militarily or diplomatically, and it would have made them unpopular with the western block.

See as a Pakistani, I can tell you this much. When you take sides with the western block you are always stuck. They always use the are you with us or against us argument and they don't care about your own national interest because you don't have the position to negotiate with them.

Look at all the NATO countries. There was a lot of internal dissent in their involvement in the Iraq war but eventually they all gave in. It does not matter how first world you are. UK, Australia, Norway, etc, I think France was probably the only country who showed their middle finger to the US but all others fell in line hazar jawab. And they all paid for it with lives and other expenses. I really don't think India would have had a choice.

India had a choice and it got bankrupt in making friends with Soviet but even then never allowed Soviets to set up base.

Economically we have made stupid choices but never on border issues, credit to even Congress for that.

I think Soviet wouldn’t had attacked Afghans , if Indian government was at the center, your assumption here is attack would had happened at any cost but if entire old Indian union was present, Soviet wouldn’t had moved to attack.

 

[Stewie]

India had a choice and it got bankrupt in making friends with Soviet but even then never allowed Soviets to set up base.
I think Soviet wouldn’t had attacked Afghans , if Indian government was at the center, your assumption here is attack would had happened at any cost but if entire old Indian union was present, Soviet wouldn’t had moved to attack.

And why do you believe the Soviets would not have attacked Afghanistan?

If you are suggesting India would have provided a diplomatic solution via some sort of arrangements to have Soviets access to their warm water ports without setting up base, I think you may have missed it but I already addressed that scenario in one of my posts.

Apart from that the Soviets really wanted to assert their presence in the region and to keep check on the american influence through KSA, etc, etc. The attack would have been inevitable.

 

[Hikaru]

I used to say that about UP, we should give them independence but only as a joke.

I was actually of a similar opinion, but Yogi Ji's capable leadership gives me hope for a UP turnaround.

 

[RidiculousMan]

I think the partition was inevitable. It should've happened a decade or so earlier.

Also the way it was done at the end after WWII was very rushed as well. It was not ideal.

But it was coming. The differences, the pain, the loss, the treatment of Bengal and its people. The country was going to divide one way or another.

 

[AamchiMumbaikar]

All Indian, Bengalis and Pakistanis are happy with separate countries. 1 nation would have been a disaster. Happy how things panned out.

I am only unhappy for indian Muslims who could not move to pakistan, bangladesh during partitions.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

All Indian, Bengalis and Pakistanis are happy with separate countries. 1 nation would have been a disaster. Happy how things panned out.

I am only unhappy for indian Muslims who could not move to pakistan, bangladesh during partitions.

Logistic issues, violence and uncertainty regarding financial viability after abandoning of properties were the main reasons holding them back.

 

[Slim]

All Indian, Bengalis and Pakistanis are happy with separate countries. 1 nation would have been a disaster. Happy how things panned out.

I am only unhappy for indian Muslims who could not move to pakistan, bangladesh during partitions.

Im glad they did not, Indian Muslims have more commonality and compatibility with Indian Hindus than Pakistani Muslims. You have to understand that the actual land of Indus which is present day Pakistan is a significantly different ethnic group(s) than the people of Ganges, which is India. Its not a matter of religion but geography.

 

[Red-Indian]

I think the partition was inevitable. It should've happened a decade or so earlier.

Also the way it was done at the end after WWII was very rushed as well. It was not ideal.

But it was coming. The differences, the pain, the loss, the treatment of Bengal and its people. The country was going to divide one way or another.

You're more right than you think. It's too late now of course and purely academic but I don't think religion was the right way to partition the subcontinent.

Religion was very core to people's identities of course but as can be seen from the hundreds of years of history, there are more intrinsic identities which would've created more logical countries.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Jinnah lacked the wisdom and morals to be the leader of a great nation. He was good enough to be Pakistan’s first President however. That much he deserved thoroughly. He fought for a greater role and recognition which he failed to achieve within Congress in Pre Partition Bharat as one by one various hindu leaders like Gandhi, Nehru, Patel surpassed him in stature and popularity. Going to the British to beg for a country in the name of religion was his desperate attempt at get one back at Congress and British were more than happy to join in the conspiracy.

In a way, today Pakistanis find themselves in all this mess foundations of which were laid by Jinnah’s lust for recognition and power

 

[RexRex]

Religion was very core to people's identities of course but as can be seen from the hundreds of years of history, there are more intrinsic identities which would've created more logical countries.

Language is the best way to partition a country. India has huge problems because of its linguistic diversity.

 

[Slim]

Jinnah lacked the wisdom and morals to be the leader of a great nation. He was good enough to be Pakistan’s first President however. That much he deserved thoroughly. He fought for a greater role and recognition which he failed to achieve within Congress in Pre Partition Bharat as one by one various hindu leaders like Gandhi, Nehru, Patel surpassed him in stature and popularity. Going to the British to beg for a country in the name of religion was his desperate attempt at get one back at Congress and British were more than happy to join in the conspiracy.

In a way, today Pakistanis find themselves in all this mess foundations of which were laid by Jinnah’s lust for recognition and power

Lol we thank Quaid every single day, im happy that we got a separate country by any means possible. People of Indus, the Pakistanis, deserved to be separated from the people of ganges. Even the genotype is so different. Pakistan is the perfect carve out. It was great till 1990s as well, an economic tiger which was ruined by incompetent monkeys.

 

[Slim]

Language is the best way to partition a country. India has huge problems because of its linguistic diversity.

India is actually not practical in its current state. I personally think Indian should actually be 4 to 5 countries. It will be much more manageable and prosperous especially the ones who wont have the “bimaru” states. I personally think Khalistan will be the most troublesome country and the least productive and the most useless. Pakistan and other neo indian countries can collectively bully and control them.

 

[Slim]

India is actually not practical in its current state. I personally think Indian should actually be 4 to 5 countries. It will be much more manageable and prosperous especially the ones who wont have the “bimaru” states. I personally think Khalistan will be the most troublesome country and the least productive and the most useless. Pakistan and other neo indian countries can collectively bully and control them.

I must clarify that Khalistan being least productive is in terms of industrial output. Which they can ofcourse compensate by their solid agricultural output. Since they will have their own country, they might try to work and make it even better and stop running to North America and rest of the world.

 

[Slim]

Logistic issues, violence and uncertainty regarding financial viability after abandoning of properties were the main reasons holding them back.

Even then Pakistanis couldnt have been able to bear the South Indian Muslim. Zero relatability. They are good where they are.

 

[Slim]

We have all the issues, but our issues are like generic which happens in Us and Canada too wrt location and politics.

I’m a Punjabi that grew up in Chennai so I can tell you, we all have differences yes, language and culture but we all work together in corporate and Central government offices with the same amount of issues as generally other countries have.
Even on this forum we argue about politics, Kannadigas , Tamizhans, Malayalees, Marathis they all are here but for India there is one voice, politics and culture ofcourse not.


Like Quebec vs Saskwatchen, Cali/Ny vs Texas.. like those.
Yes politicians play those game but until economy is doing well and there is resources and jobs it’s good.

Jaded bhai, your folks have started hiring on castes and ethnicities in Canada let alone India. What are you even talking about? I know your folks too well now tbh and my misfortune lol

Quebec’s issue is definitely quite similar to South India’s kannada feud however the way first world deals with conflict is much different than how third world deals with it.

Indian economy is doing well in overall numbers but youth unemployment is sky rocketing. Village after village in India are getting empty and running to the West. I personally think the Indian union is a disaster in the making. I truly have to appreciate the indian politicians that they have managed to kept it together. Pakistan ruling junta would have lost it by now. But the more practical solution is India dividing itself into managable parts like i have explained above.

 

[Hikaru]

Lol we thank Quaid every single day, im happy that we got a separate country by any means possible. People of Indus, the Pakistanis, deserved to be separated from the people of ganges. Even the genotype is so different. Pakistan is the perfect carve out. It was great till 1990s as well, an economic tiger which was ruined by incompetent monkeys.

It's fascinating how Pakistani awaam has been sold stories of the past. Great and economic tiger till 90s, you guys actually beleive that?

 

[Slim]

It's fascinating how Pakistani awaam has been sold stories of the past. Great and economic tiger till 90s, you guys actually beleive that?

Maybe you have confused me with your fellow low IQ JioJeets. You should look up economic indicators from the 80s and 90s and get back to me.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Lol we thank Quaid every single day,

So do I.

im happy that we got a separate country by any means possible.

So am I

It was great till 1990s as well, an economic tiger which was ruined by incompetent monkeys.

It is always great for everyone as long as someone else pays the bills. Pak gravy train ended in 1988. thing went to crap by 1990

 

[Hikaru]

Maybe you have confused me with your fellow low IQ JioJeets. You should look up economic indicators from the 80s and 90s and get back to me.

I did look it up Slim, tigers indeed.

 

[uppercut]

This is because most Indians in US are gujurati who have no cultural commonality with almost all of Pakistan.

I am not too sure about Punjabi Indians, have seen a lot of them in Canada, and i guess we do share some mannerism similarities with Punjabi Hindus (which is a stretch) but Punjabi Sikhs are a whole different beast altogether. I think they have more in common with Black Americans than they have common with us tbh.

That being said, current day India is suffering from this cultural divide already. If you go on indian interwebs, the northies look down on southies for their dark skin, AASI genotype and southies think they are more educated than northies. Alongwith this there is a intensifying feud over Kannada and Hindi. Southies want everyone in South Indian region to speak Kannada which is a terrible sounding language i might add. One of the worst languages in terms of sound aesthetics.

yeh kab hua bhai ?

PS: An extremely reliable indicator that you have got it just plain and horribly wrong is when Mr. Inverse has endorsed your posts. Trust me on this !!

 

[Hikaru]

So do I.

So am I

It is always great for everyone as long as someone else pays the bills. Pak gravy train ended in 1988. thing went to crap by 1990

Economic tigers in the West, Cricketing tigers in the East, Mr. Jinnah did leave Bharat with two exceptional nations on either side.

 

[Slim]

So do I.

So am I

It is always great for everyone as long as someone else pays the bills. Pak gravy train ended in 1988. thing went to crap by 1990

Pakistan was getting its bills paid from 2001 to 2010 too, didnt help the economy that much. Pakistan’s economy had structural problems which were not fixed and then became a problem in 2000s.

Also on a side note, i see you flying the maple, not a great time to be an indian in canada eh.

 

[Slim]

I did look it up Slim, tigers indeed.

So what did you find?

 

[Hikaru]

So what did you find?

I found generational delusions brother. How about you elaborate on your claim, should be an interesting read. I promise to keep an open mind.

 

[HalBass9]

After partition, Pakistan initially fared better, but today India is leading economically. Sooner or later, Pakistan will also see significant progress.

Was partition the right decision? Absolutely.

India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh are all poised for future economic growth. However, the real question is: will the bigotry of Hindutva against Muslims ever end, and if it does, what will bring about that change? Unfortunately, it seems that not only are openly Hindutva supporters perpetuating this bigotry, but even those who claim to be atheists, yet openly align with Hindutva, often prove to be more staunch proponents of this ideology than Hindutva followers themselves.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Pakistan was getting its bills paid from 2001 to 2010 too, didnt help the economy that much.

It did't help becos was spending like it was still getting the gravy train for 10+ years. problems were bigger. If not for the WOT gravy train and the teh pause in debt payments, Pak would have been where it is now 20 years ago.

Pakistan’s economy had structural problems which were not fixed and then became a problem in 2000s.

newsflash: its never going to happen. Reason: see attached data from UNICEF.

TLDR: Pak has FUBARed it self.

Also on a side note, i see you flying the maple, not a great time to be an indian in canada eh.

Wouldn't know. I put that flag up for the 2024 t20WC.

 

[Romali_rotti]

Partition was needed no one would deny but the blunder made was muslims who wanted to stay in India were allowed to stay and Hindus who wanted to stay in Pakistan were allowed the same.

Partition should have had all Muslims and Hindus relocate..... All Hindus to India and All Muslims to Pakistan.

 

[Romali_rotti]

. Sooner or later, Pakistan will also see significant progress.

If only this was true...

 

[Romali_rotti]

India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh are all poised for future economic growth. However, the real question is: will the bigotry of Hindutva against Muslims ever end, and if it does, what will bring about that change? Unfortunately, it seems that not only are openly Hindutva supporters perpetuating this bigotry, but even those who claim to be atheists, yet openly align with Hindutva, often prove to be more staunch proponents of this ideology than Hindutva followers themselves.

You got Pakistan and Bangladesh for muslims,,, away from the Hindutva bigotry.

So what happened ? Why is Bangladesh and especially Pakistan in the current state without any hindutva influence ?.

 

[Bhaijaan]

The creation of Pakistan was a way of the British to inflict one final blow to the people of the subcontinent. A country founded on the demand by affluent Muslims that they cannot coexist (lazy to compete)with another religion. This same logic saw them split themselves in half in 1971 and till today they fail to have a genuine national identity, the economy is doing poorly and the debt situation is alarmingly bad. It’s a failed state primarily because the foundation was on a very flawed logic and Jinnah is the major culprit for that. If he was a leader with vision and foresight he should have seen this coming.

It was always said but is becoming more and more clear today why Jinnah was sidelined by Gandhi, Nehru, Bose, Patel, Azad etc. Among them all he was the most mediocre and literally bought his way to prominence of some sort. He got literally offered PMs position by Gandhi like parents offer candy to spoiled whinging kids but he knew he just wouldn’t keep power for long after independence. Nehru was inevitable and very soon Jinnah would have been a forgotten figure.

He knew his chances of cementing a legacy for himself and some years of uncontested power would be far better in a newly founded Islamic nation. The man played a selfish game and millions are suffering today in Pakistan as a result.