LyrArc Article Gist
Bret Stephens of the WSJ puts the -question what is Pakistan? And looks at possible answers. Starting with Mohammed Ali Jinnah, who he says had aquite different idea from that of the Taliban. He quotes Jinnah 'you will find that in the course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus, and Muslims cease to be Muslims , not in the religious sense, because this is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State." His idea was of religion as apolitical identification of the state as opposed to asecular idea like that of India, not of a religious state in a religious sense.This Bret Stephens says is why a majority of Pakistanis have rejected religious parties at the polls but still find the idea of political religion identification appealing. He sees these aims as immodest or overreaching in the modern world of technology, mass communications and economic deveopment. Only by remaining backward can such aspirations be supported because economic development, technology and mass communications can only supplant such religious politcal identification with aspirations for higher standards of living. Witness the current general elections in India with 730 million people voters. The common driving force for all parties is how they can deliver on the economic aspirations of people for better living standards, better infrastructure, and better services such as health care and education. And communal parties like the BJP also have to shift their focus to delivering on these aspirations to get support. So Bret Sephens makes the point quite effectively when he says that the threat to Pakistan is existential, so he would like to put the point existentially - just accept simple countryhood, or face nothingness. ...
