PAK::AFFAIRS blog discusses and showcases articles and reasearch by various authors that deal with Southeast Asia and Pakistan in general.
Everyone is welcome to contribute their work as long as discussions and research have the element of this particular region and has some relationship to issues originating from South Asia.
At times we also provide AUDIO files embedded in text which you can play and listen to on your computers. If you need to utilize this feature in your articles, please let us know about it and also provide the file(s) in MP3 format. And as always make sure you have all the proper rights and permissions to broadcast the submitted material.
Welcome and read on….
Nasir Aziz
Editor
editor@pakaffairs.com
P.S. If the search engine brought you here regarding Pakistan Hydrogen Economy, here is the article: BIO/AGRO FUELS HOAX – Pakistan needs a new energy policy…
June 3, 2008 at 4:27 am
Dear Nasir Aziz
Your comments about Shahid Masood’s plagiarism has inspired me to write few words on a very important issue which I raised two years ago in different literary journals. The plagiarism issue has not attracted as much response as was required from the literary people of Pakistan. Although it motivated many people in India to take the issue seriously. They have written many letters which can be read in book 1o and 11 of Jadeed Adab.
You have said “It appears that plagiarism is not uncommon in Pakistan, a recent post by Adil Najam referring to a story from The Daily Times, Pakistan shows that a couple of Physics professors from the Punjab University were charged with plagiarism on their “research papers”. I would like to draw an attention of all the readers towards an other literary plagiarist who has plagiariazed many books of western postmodern writers and eventually became successful in achieving an award from Indian authorities.
I believe that plagiarism has now its firm roots in Urdu literature. In previous essays the author of these lines have substantiated the claim of Gopi Chand Narang’s plagiarism in his book, “Sakhtiyat, Pas-e-Sakhtiyat and Mashriqi Sheryat” with all crucial references, which are now documented in an Urdu literary journal “Jadeed Adab” published from Delhi, India. All the references can be found on the following links:
http://jadeedadab.com/archive/2007july/mazameen6.php
http://www.jadeedadab.com/taza_shumara/mutala3.php
Mr Gopi Chand Narang, without any hesitation and giving a second thought, has plagiarised whole chapters from the books of following Western structuralist and post-structuralist theorists, Robert Scholes, Catherine Belsey, Christopher Norris, Raman Seldon, John Sturrock, Terence Hawkes, Anthony Easthope, Elizabeth Freund and so on. The point must be taken into account that Narang has plagiarised many chapters from the books of these writers not just the ideas but words. Narang’s literary crime has not established a new tradition in Urdu literature or criticism. Narang’s plagiarism is an essential outcome of a deeply rooted ‘scholarly’ tradition in Urdu. Many so-called modern Urdu poets have plagiarised the metaphors and images of the Western poets; pseudo philosophers and many other so-called literary critics and scholars subvert western critical theories. They have seized the philosophical ideas without even separating essential from the unessential. They unswervingly acknowledged the educational supremacy of the so-called First World. The repetitive crime of Urdu scholars, which is an apparent sign of their inferiority complex and speculative disabilities have also convinced the new generation for a long time to bow too before the Western bourgeois theories as an obligation. However it seems absolutely unviable at this stage to adhere to these sorts of tendencies of Urdu plagiarists.
In a technological and scientifically advanced society, it is being realised desperately by the young generations that the literary proclivities of the plagiarists can not be followed any more (we know there are still many defenders of this dishonest tradition). These sorts of absurdities should have been condemned by the subsequent Urdu writers long ago, but these writers also attempted to fortify such a dishonourable tradition because they themselves desired to be named as an exceptional scholars and theorists. Now it is a right time to denounce extensively the contemptible approach so that it may not be followed in the future as a holy scripture. It will also encourage the posterity to create their own original work both in theory and literature while understanding the inner contradictions of their own society and meeting the requirements of real creativity. The social conditions of Pakistan and India require a different solutions of both literary and cultural issues. Derrida and Foucault have nothing to say about the shameful conditions of the people of the Third World. Urdu theorists, if they really are, should not call them for help. Western models can only destroy the aesthetic and cultural heritage of the Third World as we have witnessed in the sixties in the form of “New World Information and Communication Order” when under the leadership of Russia a campaign was launched to defend the cultural heritage of the Third World because of the one sided information flow which we by mistake or deliberately following Western Capitalist call globalisation.
Aesthetic experience of a writer and even a reader must be contextualised, literary theorists need to learn how people response to literary products in their own societies. German philosopher Immanuel Kant analysed the ‘determinate’ judgement while referring to the ‘universal’ in the second Critique and examined the nature of ‘reflective judgement’ taking into consideration the particular in his third Critique. Kant’s absolutely disinterested reflective judgement, which he considers necessary for the ‘pure aesthetics’, is related to the natural object. Kant’s theory represents the ideological aspects of his age which is hugely inspired by the christened beliefs. The people who have an in-depth knowledge of Western philosophical tradition are aware of the fact that the christen terrorists have slaughtered many scientists and philosophers, even Kant was harassed by the religious terrorists because Kant in his theory of knowledge logically demonstrated the impotency of “thing in itself” in the human affairs. Despite that Kant was under an immense influence of christen beliefs which led Kant to develop an abstract aesthetic theory which, despite that abstraction, had a decisive impact on the subsequent German philosophical tradition and also on the aesthetic theory of his age. Kant’s aesthetic theory is deeply related to the German philosophical and aesthetic tradition even in the post-modern era. When the Urdu plagiarists completely ignore the social and philosophical backgrounds of the Western theories which are deliberately targeted on the readers then eventually Urdu plagiarists cry frantically when they can’t find a reader for their own work; they never understand the nature of their own society. They are more worried about what happens in the West rather than concentrating on their own backgrounds.
The problems identified in the Third World can definitely lead the theorists of the Third World to theorise the situation in the wake of their own problematic background, for that the problems must be conceived sincerely with a collective spirit. The theorists of Europe and America are divided into different ideological schools; the bourgeoisie have their own mercenaries whose job is to rationalise the heinous acts of the ruling elite in accordance with the interests of the bourgeoisie. Ruling class pay these bourgeois intellectuals to concoct arguments to sanctify their transcendentally authorised act of brutality on the basis of ridiculous thesis such as “the end of history” or “clash of civilisation.” The innovators of these sorts of ideas are both financially and speculatively supported by the extremist bourgeoisie. Literary and cultural theory is also a part of the bourgeois rational project which is to provide bourgeoisie with a weapon to appease their own public so that they could ensure their interests without putting them in peril. Apart from these mercenaries there are some Marxist scholars of academic background, although they are not radical Marxists, they do not look for a fundamental change in the society; eventually they become conformists or reformists just like a social theorist Anthony Giddens in Britain who was a special advisor to Mr Blair.
I will emphasise that a theory emerge within Europe or America has its own peculiar characteristics and aims which can vividly be identified if they are rationally put in their own context. Western bourgeois theory can not make any sense, even it can become a nonsense, in the context of Third World. It will not be futile to refer to a linguistic idealist Jacque Derrida here; Derrida argues that “every day language is not innocent or neutral. It is the language of Western metaphysics and it carries with it not only a considerable number of presuppositions of all types, but also presuppositions inseparable from metaphysics” (Positions, 1981, P,19). Are the Urdu writers or ‘critics’ willing to emancipate themselves from their own superstitious metaphysical propensities, if not, then what is the point to preach the non metaphysical theory of Derrida. Derrida is, to a certain extent, right here, when his whole speculative struggle is to engage with the philosophy of presence or metaphysics, how can he just imitate the language of “Western metaphysics” blindly? A clear echo of Marxist conceptions about the tactics of bourgeoisie can be heard in Derrida’s arguments. Marxist dialectics is related to the consciousness, but that consciousness is a reflection of the real world. Derrida is not worried about the ‘praxis’, he is just a passive idealist who intentionally creates theoretical implications to justify his “Jewish Mysticism.” However his own idealist theory goes against the conception of an abstractly adopted theory.
But as we noted, for a plagiarist and a mystic, theory always consists of abstract ideas, therefore the abstractive nature of theory relieves them as an alternative to dogma. The question before us which needs an answer is why Mr Narang – a winner of Padham Shree and many other awards, has fallen a victim of plagiarism? One thing is clear that Narang has neither a philosophical background nor an analytical mind, therefore he found himself completely incapable to comprehend complex philosophical propositions. If the themes and propositions are incomprehensible, Narang, being an honest interpreter, could have worked hard to understand at least few abstract aspect of post-modern theory, however he preferred a short cut; the desire for self appreciation and recognition – or we can say miss-recognition as a scholar led him to commit a plagiarism. He could have rather put his name on the book as a translator but he did not desired to do so. What led him astray? It will remain an important question. If Narang had declared that he is a translater, it would have been a great service to Urdu literature, but still he had to elaborate accurately, in the preface, the causes of the emergence of the post-modern theory in the Western context.
Many thanks
Sincerily
Imran Shahid Bhinder
United Kingdom
July 21, 2009 at 10:53 am
Dear Mr Bhinder,
I’ve read your two essays re: Narang with much interest. A fine job, admirably objective. I’m in the process of writing a piece in English for an India magazine on the subject. I’d like to run it by you to make sure I do not misrepresent you, I also need your correct affiliation. Please write me at the following:naim@uchicago.edu
Best regards,
c m naim
July 25, 2009 at 5:25 am
Dear Naim saheb,
Thank you very much for writing a detailed and analytic response to my articles. I am immensly pleased to read your honest article which is based on a comparative study and certaily supports my claim I made against Narang’s plagiarism few years ago. This is the first article, I can say, which is the outcome of an indepth study and thorough understanding of my essays.
Most of the criticism made aggainst me in response to my articles about Narang, was not the outcome of a comparative study, Narang’s supporters and “Urdu critics” do not need to indulge themselves in serious literary or philosophical issues. The purpose of their criticism is to defend Narang at any cost. That is why their “articles” seems to me an outcome of a telephonic conversation with Narang. they don’t read my articles, whatever Narang tells them they follow all that. Narang is not even capable to defend himself.
My argument is if Narang gives the correct page numbers, still he is not the author of the book. He must be called a translator.
I appreciate that you spend your valuable time in order to dig out the reality which Mr Narang and his so-called literary friends were trying to conceal for a long time.
Kind regards
Imran
July 27, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Mr Bhinder,
I am an Indian journalist based in London and would like to interview you on the Gopi Chand Narang issue. My email is danish.khan@gmail.com. Can you please let me know your email.
Regards,
Danish
July 28, 2009 at 3:22 am
Dear Danish,
I have just received your message regarding Gopi Chand Narang’s plagiarism. Please let me know how you intend to conduct this interview?
Imran
ibhinder@yahoo.co.uk
August 23, 2009 at 1:20 am
Gopi Chand Narang: An Esteemed Plagiarist
By
Imran Shahid Bhinder
Following the publication of Prof C M Naim’s article, a debate has started on different websites including “Outlook” magazine, where Naim’s article was first appeared. The debate has been going on, as I have noticed later today, for past few weeks. The subject is extremely interesting and vitally important as far as the future of Urdu literature and criticism is concerned. I am pleased to mention that despite my extreme busy schedule I had another chance to write about a plagiarist not targeting at the older people but at the new generations whom I consider the real upholder of Urdu literature and culture. I can imagine the severity of the damage that these old slapstick comedians of literature have caused to the standards, norms and ethics of Urdu literature. It is entirely up to the new generation to clean up the mess, which these hoodlums of Urdu literature and poetry have been multiplying constantly for approximately past four decades. I know very well that strange things occur in the Urdu world in both Pakistan and India. Just a few years back, when earthquake caused a huge damage in Muzaffar Abad, I witnessed some astonishing facts on Pakistani media. I watched expert scientists and cosmologists were examining the causes of earthquake on the Western channels, however on almost every Pakistani television channel, the Mullahs were thrashing out the matter. Similarly the implication the “test tubes babies” could create both on the sociological or medical level, had been discussed by the scientists again on the Western television channels. On the other, Mullahs like a real crown of all creations sitting like experts and discussing a fourteen hundred years old society. No wonder this time Zafar Iqbal, a Pakistani (poet) expressing qualitatively no different opinion from Mullahs on such an important issue of literary and philosophical scholarship in his few lines newspaper column.
Although the issue of plagiarism is of extreme importance, nevertheless it has not been addressed with the integrity, sincerity and honesty, which are required for such a serious issue. We cannot expect from a vast majority of old hooligans to display some sort of honesty as these one way or the other have always flattered the issue. I am immensely grateful to these hooligans that they motivated me once again to undertake a huge task of writing a detailed essay in English, of approximately forty pages, about Narang’s plagiarism and forward a copy of that to the relevant publishers.
I accused Narang of colossal plagiarism that appeared to me one of its unique kinds in the history of Urdu literature. All the views produced as a defense of Narang, I understand, are completely hostile and irrelevant. Most of the contributors pose themselves as preservers of literary ethics but unfortunately, they seem to me completely deprived of honesty and devotion that lies at the heart of literary ethics. The style of their comments demonstrate that no one has read any of my original articles. These people are guided properly by their mentor Mr. Narang, but how can a plagiarist, who himself needs some fundamental guidance about literary ethics, can guide others? On the contrary, most of the participants are more interested about irrelevant issues such as, the religion I practice, about my education, weather I am an Indian or Pakistani, what does “Bhinder” mean and so on. Interestingly someone is talking about an analysis based on “objective assessment” of Narang’s plagiarism. How sarcastically one day a person agreed with C M Naim’s ‘objective assessment’ and few days later he contradicts again with himself because according to his understanding of objective assessment Naim says he has not read a certain paragraph which is available in ’Akkaas’ where Narang defends himself. How closely his sense of objectivity is attached with Naim saheb’s increasing curiosity about Narang’s plagiarism that take a new turn as the investigation brings new facts in. That malicious act demonstrates the real intention behind the person’s claim of objective assessment. These sorts of deaf literary characters are only available in the world of Urdu. Western philosophers must be lamenting on their unique understanding of ‘objectivity.’ If Derrida had come across such a definition of objectivity, he would certainly have not in a position to deconstruct the objectivity of these objectivists.
Likewise, another ambitious or confused character ignoring Narang’s plagiarism is trying to put me in the category of “ideological” people. What a ridiculous defense of Narang’s plagiarism. Astonishingly, I did not understand what he meant by the term “ideology.” Does he live in such a world where ideology persists no longer? Perhaps he has been living in a fantasy world since his birth or in the world of post-modern extremist Jean Buadrillard. Nevertheless, who says fantasy world is not ideological? Has this great anti-ideological person stopped using his senses, understanding and ‘reason’ (if he has one) to discover the essence of things? I think he does not need to discover the truth because truth was not only already discovered for such kinds of people, but had revealed to them a long time back too. May I ask these “writers” “scholars” and “objectivists” to adopt a rational approach and explain to me that who is not ideological among them? Should a person who starts his day with the name of God be called anti-ideological? Ironically these sorts of questions are posed by those confused people who have been writing “Naatein” and Hamdein” since they started writing poetry. Let me explain to these literary comedians few things in the Western context and according to the post-modern epistemology that their mentor claimed to have introduced to the Urdu world. Derrida, a Jewish philosopher, argues, “Deconstruction, I have insisted is not neutral. It intervene (Positions, P, 93). He further states that “The irreducibility of spacing is the irreducibility of the other….That “spacing designates not only intervals, but a “productive”, “genetic”, “practical” movement… (ibid, P 94). Let us see what Norris says about ideological aspect of Derrida. “It was always a fiction, Derrida maintains, this belief in keeping philosophy pure and preventing it from any admixture of practico-political interest. (Derrida, P, 151). Derrida, in his Specters of Marx, has absolutely smashed the radical view of Fukuyama, which he developed in his controversial book The End of History to serve the interests of American Capitalists slaughterhouse, by fallaciously synthesising Hegelian-Kojevian philosophical interpretation. I know Foucault and Lyotard abandoned the project of historical subject which was put forward by Marx and developed further by Lenin, however it does not mean that both Foucault and Lyotard deserted minoritarianism or micro politics. Being persuaded by perhaps the post-modern fascinations and theological narcissisation, these ideological impotents could just desire an eternal life.
Apart from plethora of such gauche points, Narang fostered defenders are curious to know about myself, perhaps for their inner satisfaction. Before I take a slight critical glance on Narang’s plagiarism again, I am going to give my short introduction here. If it is not enough, don not hesitate to contact me. Here are some of my details anyway:
Imran Shahid Bhinder
Birthplace: Gujranwala Pakistan
(Advocate High Court, Lahore Pakistan)
MA in International Broadcast Journalism, Birmingham City University England
MA in English Literature, Birmingham City University, England
Certificate in Teaching, Solihull College, Birmingham, England
Certificate in Information Technology, City College Birmingham England
(References are available on request)
I suppose that all these facts are beside the point; it has nothing to do with the actual issue of plagiarism. The real issue is Narang’s plagiarism. Everyone must as an honest student of Urdu literature must adhere to the real issue and develop our opinion following the evidence it has brought forward so far.
My main concern has always been to unearth the facts about Narang’s plagiarism. I undertook a difficult task of comparing several books by the Western interpreters of structuralist theory with Narang’s award-winning (as an author not translator) Sakhtiyat Pas e Sakhtiyat aur Mashriqi Sheriyat. It was not such an easy task that anybody can undertake by ordering a book today and exactly after few hours pronounce an ‘objectivist’ fatwa. It is not even a matter of following the principles of any subjective idealist philosophy. We could not even take advantage of some transcendental principle that could only be revealed to an Indian mystic who has been following Nagarjuna, Sankara or Aurobindo, In addition, if the pursuer of some ‘Reality’ says, after some meditation, that he has viewed the Ultimate Reality he is not required to produce some evidence to prove his experience. Everybody should believe that what he says is correct. Neither is it related to some sort of twentieth century Saussurean abstract objectivism that means to believe what the proponents of Narang attempt to construct. Unfortunately, I am not a great admirer of Derrida, Saussure, Nagarjuna or Aurobindo. I still need to examine the actual nature of the subject-based rationalism, logocentrism or ‘metaphysical’ reference, which is gravely rejected by these so-called postmodernists and their interpreters. That leads the human subject to construct meaning while referring to the signified or concept. Certainly, we do not live in language, we live in a real world where billions of people are exploited and brutally murdered by the champions of Western capitalism, or I would say to the Urdu jokers who indirectly support Zionist’s terrorism and the acts of terrorism by the Western terrorists indirectly. However, the point I need to bring forward is to challenge Narang’s and his exponents to produce references to negate my claim, not a plethora of articles by some mentally incapable people in Narang’s favour is required, who needs promotion or award by an academy or ten rupee pay rise as a lecturer. Have they something rational to say so far about Narang’s plagiarism as they have been repeating themselves since the very beginning of this plagiarist controversy three years back? Could anybody take the trouble of going through all the articles, published so far in support of Narang, and indicate just one different aspect that has not been repeated before?
I state my point explicitly and emphatically now; I need a reference or evidence that proves that Narang is not a plagiarist. Evidence, here does not mean what different people utter about Narang, but what documentary evidence they provide to refute the evidence I have already provided. For instance, if I produce twenty pages and claim that they are word for word translation, Narang or his well-wisher in order to invalidate my claim, must reveal the reference of those twenty pages within the text or page reference in the bibliography that is not literally the exact translation.
To explore the reality about Narang’s plagiarism, irrespective of what I have already stated, at least three months are required to carry out a subtle investigation. However, there is another condition, which cannot be ignored; an investigator must be a stupid. He must be an intelligent and impartial person; on the one hand, he or she should investigate the actual nature of the arguments to comprehend the inherent ideological aspects in the theoretical debates, on the other to discover the similarities between the words in its original as well as translated form. Is anybody willing to undertake the task to prove Narang innocent? It is my challenge to Narang and to all his collaborators including all the members of Sahitya Academy to come up with twenty original pages that are not word for word translation. Could anybody indicate 20 pages from Narang’s book and claim that these pages are not plagirised? Will Sahitya Academy, in order to maintain the integrity of its awards, can prove my claim wrong. Let me make the matter more accessible for everybody. Give Narang a call, this time not for devising new conspiracies, for a noble cause this time however, and ask him to indicate twenty pages that are not accurate translation of western interpreters. In Narang’s book (if this book really his) structuralist theory has been introduced between pages 29-329. Could anybody come up and show the readers of these lines 20 pages, which are not exact translation.
Let me challenge here all the dumb and deaf literary comedians by examining carefully certain facts. As I have understood by now the limits of their intellectual capabilities, therefore I will give them an extremely easy task to analyse here. I hope they will undertake this easy task as an honest investigator. This is my first lesson to them in English, which I have prepared while keeping in view their potential to discover reality. If they become successful then systematically we will move forward and eventually know how Narang has plagiarised the whole part on Western structuralism.
Narang has discussed “Marxism Structuralism and Post-Structuralism” in the fifth chapter of his award-winning book. The fifth chapter consists of 27 pages. This list of the books on chapter five is available in the bibliography on page 332. I claim that the whole chapter that includes the discussion of Lucien Goldman, Pierre Macherey, Louis Althusser, Terry Eagleton and Fredric Jameson is a word for word translation of Raman Seldon’s A Readers Guide to Contemporary Literary Theory, (1985). I will not discuss here other plagiarised books by the Western theorists because I know the matter will become complicated as I am aware that how mentally capable these old hooligans are. Seldon has discussed Eagleton on page 92 onwards. I claim that Narangs has just translated the whole section on Eagleton between pages 264-265 and failed to acknowledge the actual sources. Could any member of Sahitya Academy or anybody else show me the exact page numbers in Narang’s award-winning book?
Before I finish this week’s lesson here, let me draw the attention of the pupils to chapter six in Narang’s book, which is again an exact translation of Seldon’s book. For instance, Narang has plagiarised the Seldon’s interpretation of French semiotician Michael Riffaterre on pages 316-318. Again, Narang dishonestly tries to keep it a secret. Seldon discusses Riffaterre between pages 60-61. Could anybody come forward to show the reader of these lines the pages Narang has not plagiarised? I hope this lesson will be enough for today. Gradually if someone responds to my allegations with equally stable evidence, then I will certainly teach a common reader and plagiarists supporters about each plagiarised page in Narang’s book.
Narang got awards as an author not as a translator; it means all the awarding bodies consider Mr. Narang an ‘author’. Could these awarding organizations or Narang’s supporters prove that Narang really is the author of Sakhtiyat Pas-e-Sakhtiyat and Mashriqi Sheriyat? Another extremely important point is that if Narang or someone on his behalf makes a false claim that Narang has given page numbers. Still they will not be in a position to consider Narang an author of the book. If somebody x or y translates eight different chapters of different books, should the person consider himself a translator or author?
A group of Narang’s well-wishers has come forward so quickly to criticise Dr Khan, it seems to me an act of extreme disappointment. Did Khan plagiarise the words? He had an in-depth comprehension of the formula. If you do not believe, ask Mr. Bush or Mr. Mush about the importance of the man. First, he conceived and then logically utilised the theoretical material and emerged as one of the most important scientist in the history of Pakistan. It is not a right attitude to criticise Dr Khan and ignore all subsequent Christianised scientists. Should we spare Jewish hardliner Einstein who has been a sole ruthless mind behind the terrorizing invention? If the Christian terrorists or Jewish terrorists sell the product to Christian nations or their fellow of the book, then these literary hooligans have no objections. In order to defend a third rate plagiarist how irrationally they go to such an extent?
I would only say here that anybody can understand a piece of literary criticism and can explain it in his or her own words. That is a process of learning. Have you forgotten that Aristotle believes learning occurs through imitation? That is what happens here in England on undergraduate level. For an interesting study of how learning occurs read David Kolb’s Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Although it is considered hugely influential in the western Academics, however, I do not appreciate this book much because Kolb has monopolised Hegelian philosophy of concrete objectivity. Here it is just to give the so-called Urdu Academic scholars an idea about how learning occurs through various ways.
The “poets” who use other people’s ‘Zameen’ to write a ghazal can never understand the tangible meaning of plagiarism. However, on a scholarly level you have to take an original angle and explore it from different dimensions while relating it to the concrete aspect of society so that the theoretical process could move forward. I still remember few years back a prominent contemporary poet and a lecturer came to England to attain a degree in English literature, but failed to write an original essay. I can assure you here in Britain a sixteen years old kid thinks more imaginatively and creatively that these literary hooligans. He or she does not need the permission of some superior entity to criticise revered entities. They just do it spontaneously because the system understands that this process is vitally required to move on rather than remaining stuck to the old absurd notions, which has so badly polluted the Urdu scholars and students alike.
July 15, 2008 at 7:21 am
I agree with Imran Shahid Bhinder what he wrote about Gopi Chand Narang’s plagiarism. He is also right when he criticises the tendency of Urdu critics and the so called intellectuals. All the cultural, political and literary crises which we are facing now-a- days is because of our ignorance and senselessness to our own social and economic conditions. These so-called intellectuals are responsible for the miserable condition of Urdu literature. They do not try to develop theories in their own social, literature and economic context, therefore they are misguiding the new generations. We are the people whose Pen must condemn the propaganda tendencies strongly in Urdu literature and also highlight the importance of social and political process.
To remove all these obstacles we should honestly try to acquire philosophical knowledge. Education can make us a good nation. We should warmly welcome the writings of those people who are struggling to reveal truth, create originality and fairness in literature.
Shabana Yousaf
December 6, 2008 at 5:24 am
A Fake War On Terror
By
Imran Shahid Bhinder
After seven years of attack on World Trade centre, it can now explicitly be seen that the terrorist attacks has risen in that region where American forces launched its so-called “war on terror”. And also the religious fundamentalism seems to be on the increase. The question needs to be answered by the American bourgeoisie that why terrorism is firmly besieging the whole region? Now the people of the affected countries started thinking that the real agenda of the American bourgeoisie is not to eradicate terrorism but to use it as an influential means of propaganda in order to gain its imperialist objectives in the region. The American imperialists are not tackling the problem seriously while utilizing the right resources to uproot the causes of terrorism which certainly are generated by the tyrant regimes like America herself. The root cause is not poverty which we can say is leading towards terrorism but the American imperialism which has thrown the entire world into poverty and terrorism.
The people of Pakistan firmly believe that the American imperialist forces using “war on terror” as a toll to stay in the region and after fulfilling all the aims which American imperialists has set for themselves will eventually target Pakistan’s nuclear arsenals. This issue has certainly raised concerns among all the factions of Pakistan. The fundamentalist religious organisation are attracting public support in the name of defending Pakistan against American terrorism or you can say in other words Christian terrorism. Terrorism which was a very vague term just seven years ago, American terrorism in Afghanistan and in certain part of Pakistan has made it difficult to identify the actual nature of terrorism.
Now the change which was required and which could have affected the rigid religious identities is once again reviving. The people who thought themselves enlightened are looking for their “original” religious identities. The fundamental Islamists organisations are now benefiting from the changing situation.
The people of India are also being dragged towards their “real” identities by the fundamentalist organisation and irresponsible media. The problem with India is that the Hindu fundamentalist political organisations such as BJP or Shive Sina and some elements in the media are not willing to understand the real issues being faced to the whole region. After sixty years of independence it is still difficult for them to digest Pakistan as an independent country. Their real concern is to launch a decisive war against Pakistan with the help of other world powers. Now it is a question that why Americans are quiet about “Hindu terrorism“? Is it because “Hindu terrorism” is not being carried out against the Americans? It could be a reason, but the most important thing is that terrorism which used to be considered an ideology of religious fundamentalists has now become an ideology of about all the imperialists
The situation now has become very complicated and the people of Pakistan first of all are worried about the security of the country. “Hindu terrorists” have their own anti Pakistani agenda. They don’t loose a chance to tarnish the reputation of Pakistan all over the world. They have nothing to do with terrorism because they themselves use terrorism as a weapon against the minorities. How can these fundamentalist political organisations be serious in tackling the problem of terrorism as it is well known that Hindu fundamentalist regime have been involved in slaughtering approximately two thousand Muslims in Gujrat and killing about eighty thousand Kashmiris, which is the worst example of state organised terrorism.
American have been trying to create an impression that the terrorists are the enemies of America, but why? It is not answered. Similarly there is a general impression in Pakistan that American regime is their worst enemy. They bomb innocent people whenever and wherever they want. That is why it has become a huge concern for the majority of the people to save the country from American oppressive forces by using all means.
In the wake of recent Mumbai attacks Taliban leader, while speaking to the foreign media has offered their full support to the armed forces. This move by the Taliban leader has earned a lot of sympathies of the people. Now the people of Pakistan think that the Taliban are not the enemies, the real enemy is American forces which is killing the innocent civilians and its puppet Pakistani regime.
July 28, 2009 at 11:57 pm
Dear Imran
You have hit the nail of the head now. Gopi Chand Narang, a dedicated Urdu lover, is basically a compiler.
Those who take him as an authority on any sinf of Urdu Adab are grossly mistaken. He is neither an original author nor an original thinker.He is a compiler and good presenter of ideas. Thats all.
Dont worry what people say against your article. Time is not far when you will be felicitated for the same.
With regards,
Khalid Bin Umar
New Delhi.