Can Kaafir Pashtun Nationalist represent Pashtuns in Politics?

[Dust]

The short course is out of question. The growth of the sentiment of Turkey's identity was connected with the movement away from Islamic practice and tradition, and toward Europe. The short course of Ataturk will necessitate a large-scale deliberate attempt to take a whole nation across the frontier from one civilization to another. Afghans will never allow that to happen.

I don't agree with that either. It will hurt too many sentiments.

[Khan Gul]

I don't agree with that either. It will hurt too many sentiments.

Then I am afraid, in your rationalism you understand little of the Afghan people's spiritual concept of Islam. No offense intended

[Badlun]

All this is due to the fact that church and state has been divided.

Yes you are right but the church and state were not divided artificially but in a natural way.When the cruelties and failures of the church were exposed to the people , the consequence was reformation and renaissance. The same will happen if we have some few more lunatic periods of rulers like Taliban and Wahabis.

The modernly educated people may become intelligent in the Muslim world and may not talk against the religion but ask for democracy and modern education. This will indirectly entail into excluding Mullas from politics, culture , society and economy and the educated ones will be at the helms of affairs which is now happening in many Muslim countries including Afghanistan and Pakistan. If we directly talk against the religion, we get negative response which give religious extremists an opportunity to mobilize people against secular and modern ideas. We love Islam as a religion but our politics is democracy and our culture is Pashtunwali.

[Dust]

Then I am afraid, in your rationalism you understand little of the Afghan people's spiritual concept of Islam. No offense intended

I am not for an Ataturk style. I am for a European style.

The emotions and sentiment of the Pashtun can still be protected. Secularism does not take your religion away from you. It just prevents you from using religion to dictate the law of your governmental system

If one was to venture in the West, one would easily see that secularism has in fact allowed the building of religious institutions. So, it has nothing to do with the sentiments of the people.

The question of the thread is whether a "kaafir pashtun nationalist can represent pashtun in Politics" and the answer is yes. Look at Najibullah and look at the Mujahiddeen of 1992-1996 and the Taliban of 1996-2001.


Which one put Afghanistan towards progress?

[Dust]

Yes you are right but the church and state were not divided artificially but in a natural way.When the cruelties and failures of the church were exposed to the people , the consequence was reformation and renaissance. The same will happen if we have some few more lunatic periods of rulers like Taliban and Wahabis.

The modernly educated people may become intelligent in the Muslim world and may not talk against the religion but ask for democracy and modern education. This will indirectly entail into excluding Mullas from politics, culture , society and economy and the educated ones will be at the helms of affairs which is now happening in many Muslim countries including Afghanistan and Pakistan. If we directly talk against the religion, we get negative response which give religious extremists an opportunity to mobilize people against secular and modern ideas. We love Islam as a religion but our politics is democracy and our culture is Pashtunwali.

Well, secularism does not speak against religion. It just does not allow it to meddle in politics. That is it.

[JAMALUDEEN]

I did not know there was a question that I dodged.

I will ask you again.

How is the Muslim Population going to react towards the idea of a secular government in Afghanistan? Come on, take a guess LOL it won't hurt

Iran is not all-together clasped in a non-secular society. It is only recent. Many of their visions existed before the Islamic Revolution. They have a lot of intellectuals who don't particularly care for religion. Further, secularism means to separate church and state. Communism has nothing to do with religion.

Again, we were speaking of Ideologies, and like it or not, these are all ideologies. China has progressed yet it is not secular but a communist state. Remember, we were speaking of Progress and Progress can be achieved not just by a secular state, a communist state but an Islamic state as well. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Hope you understand my point/

Well, that is the problem. You can't bring a change in these of people. Afghanistan is not a secular society and if imaan was all that mattered then we should have progressed.

If Majority rules minority. Why would the Majority Muslim population accept an ideology that opposes their belief? It doesn't sound very logical to me.

What i am proposing is more practical. Yours just sounds good in theory.

Because they don't adhere to a particular faith. Religion does not dictate their governments.

I don't think that communism was the problem of Afghanistan. With the withdrawal of the USSR and its collapse, Afghanistan has not progressed. Further, Afghanistan could not have defeated the Russians without Western help.

So, you have freed yourselves from the shackles of communism just to be used as puppets against your own people by the same people who have helped you.

I am not very fond of the Russians, nor Taliban, nor the Warlords nor the current government nor the Americans. I have never really supported them, but the idea of a secular state in Afghanistan does not just sound absurd but will take Afghanistan towards another war. Religion is part of everyones life in Afghanistan. The People are poor and yet they still have hope because of Religion. On top of their misery, if you bring in western reforms, then chaos will follow.

[Dust]

I will ask you again.

How is the Muslim Population going to react towards the idea of a secular government in Afghanistan? Come on, take a guess LOL it won't hurt




Again, we were speaking of Ideologies, and like it or not, these are all ideologies. China has progressed yet it is not secular but communist state. Remember, we were speaking of Progress and Progress can achieved not just by a secular state, a communist state but an Islamic state as well. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Hope you understand my point/



If Majority rules minority. Why would the Majority Muslim population accept an ideology that opposes their belief? It doesn't sound very logical to me.

What i am proposing is more practical. Yours just sounds good in theory.



I am not very fond of the Russians, nor Taliban, nor the Warlords nor the current government nor the Americans. I have never really supported them, but the idea of a secular state in Afghanistan does not just sound absurd but will take Afghanistan towards another war. Religion is part of everyones life in Afghanistan. The People are poor and yet they still have hope because of Religion. On top of their misery, if you bring in western reforms, then chaos will follow.

The question of the thread is whether a kaafir nationalist can run the government. What is your answer to this? I say yes, and it can only happen if the system is secular. End of the day, if this kaafir loves his people he won't harm them. Whereas, the Pashtun have suffered more at the hands of Muslims that anyone else.

[JAMALUDEEN]

The question of the thread is whether a kaafir nationalist can run the government. What is your answer to this? I say yes, and it can only happen if the system is secular. End of the day, if this kaafir loves his people he won't harm them. Whereas, the Pashtun have suffered more at the hands of Muslims that anyone else.

Dearest Brother,

I apologize if i hurt your feelings. But Afghanistan is in control of Kaffirs (Americans) already, is it working? LOL nope... The reason i say this, is because when you bring Western reforms to a country, you will always need the WEST to support you, with support comes in influence remember that.

So to answer that question, i would have to say no. Since i am a deep thinker.

[Dust]

You are looking at it from the present. You need to look at history in order to substantiate the depth of your thought.

[JAMALUDEEN]

You are looking at it from the present. You need to look at history in order to substantiate the depth of your thought.

I concur, so let's look into our history. What happened to King Amanullah when he brought western reforms to the country? How did the people react to it and remember this, they were just minor reforms. It cost him his throne.

[Dust]

I concur, so let's look into our history. What happened to King Amanullah when he brought western reforms to the country? How did the people react to it and remember this, they were just minor reforms. It cost him his throne.

Beautiful point!

He did not bring secularism. His law was still being dictated by the clergy. So many ethnic and religious minorities suffered at this hands. It is a fact of history.

Had he stuck to his guns, then it would have been different. But he did not. He gave in.

Not only was he disgraced, but he lost everything. He tried to trick the Afghan people.

Real secularism comes by way of education. He left the vast majority of the land uneducated.

[Roshina]

What people don't realize is that they are being subtly subjugated by the West by using Islam as a means to the end.

Dust, this is an excellent point you make and I completely agree. Here's why and how.

The west KNOWS that (most) Muslims will resist westernization in their own countries and fight it even if it means denying themselves their most basic rights (education even. See, many people refuse to educate their daughters because they don't want these girls to grow up and be "westernized"!). There are several examples of this sort of resistance and the studies done on it, by both Muslims and non-Muslims, are very elaborate and extensive. An example would be Egyptian women turning to the veil (entire body-covering including face, not just hair) to make a statement regarding western intrusion of Egypt. What did the women get from this? Nothing. Do we have to discuss how and in what ways the veil prevents you from participating in rebuilding your society? If so, I'll be happy to, but hopefully we already know how much the veil limits women.

You see, the west KNOWS that you're just going to resist it, and that resistance may not be good for you. What better ways might there be for the west to oppress the east? Impose your (western) ideals on them (the east) knowing that the easterners are gonna fight back by sticking to concepts and practices that even many Muslim scholars of Islam claim are NOT Islamic but more cultural, and the east remains far back in the race towards civilization. I highly doubt that the west actually WANTS the east to progress (and many Muslims argue this is the case as well) sine that'd mean competition for the west in many ways -- education, resources, technology, etc. And so ... the best and most convenient thing to do is to make it SEEM like you want the eat to be just like you (the west). I find it rather smart, and I find the easterners' response to westernization rather unwise and naive.

[JAMALUDEEN]

Beautiful point!

He did not bring secularism. His law was still being dictated by the clergy. So many ethnic and religious minorities suffered at this hands. It is a fact of history.

Had he stuck to his guns, then it would have been different. But he did not. He gave in.

You misunderstood, what i meant was that those were minor reforms to modernize the country,and it cost him his throne. So imagine peoples reaction towards a secular state.

Plus, it's not a good idea to impose an ideology onto people with force, and trust me even if he had, sooner or later, he would've lost.

[Dust]

Qrratugai, That is why a secular system is transparent.

[Dust]

You misunderstood, what i meant was that those were minor reforms to modernize the country,and it cost him his throne. So imagine peoples reaction towards a secular state.

Plus, it's not a good idea to impose an ideology onto people with force, and trust me even if he had, sooner or later, he would've lost.

But then you don't propose anything substantial for you yourself know that Islam has been forced down people's throat and people have not had an uprising in the past 20 years. Instead, the sentiments of remorse have been kept deep within, hurting the social fabric of society from within, which is even more dangerous.

A society cannot progress if its morale is damaged.