Nitin gets inside the mind of Londonistan in his most recent writing at the Acorn. The bulk of Nitin’s post is about Aatish Taseer’s interview of Hassan Butt, a 25-year old jihadi from Manchester.
The interview itself is grim and chilling. But Taseer’s attempt to insert his own heritage - “half-Indian, half-Pakistani with a strong connection to this country” - into the discussion is a bit ham-handed. Worse, what Taseer says is often clichéd, a neat little explanation wrapped up with a bow and everything.
To be Indian is to come from a safe, ancient country and, more recently, from an emerging power.
No argument here, although safe could be examined.
In contrast, to be Pakistani is to begin with a depleted idea of nationhood. In the 55 years that Pakistan has been a country, it has been a dangerous, violent place, defined by hatred of the other—India.
A “depleted idea of nationhood?” Talk about over-intellectualizing. The common man on the street - maulvi-types aside - is too busy with the inanities of everyday life to worry about ideas of nationhood, depleted or otherwise. As for being “defined by hatred of the other—India,” I can only respond with my background as a contrast to Taseer’s.
I am Pakistani. I grew up under General Zia, at the height of Islamization and the murder of history. Yet, as a child of immigrant parents/grandparents growing up in the 80s and 90s, the notion of India for me was always tinged with romance. Quite the opposite actually from “hatred of the other” - more like affinity for a cool uncle whom you always heard about but had never seen. If Nitin or Taseer have doubts on this score, I’d be happy to draw maps of Jaipur and Meerut and the other old places for them; lines that will be outdated by half a century, derived from faded, black-and-white photos and third-hand memories that are as vivid in my head as if they were my grandfather’s. So please, spare me the “hatred of the other” bit: for a lot of people, it’s simply untrue.
In my mind at least, the “failure of Pakistan to evolve its own identity” as the cause for the British terrorists’ radicalization is just silly. And how does that explain the Jamaican guy’s motives? I think blame should be put where it’s due - on Islam; specifically radical, political Islam, an ideology of hate, nihilism, and victimhood myths. Ironically, the UK happens to be a far more comfortable home for Islamists than that “dangerous, violent place.”
