By Umayr Hassan
I can appreciate, why you don’t want this to be yet another discussion about Zaid Hamid. It is indeed difficult to reasonably discuss a commentator disinclined to cite his sources. (I will underline, though, the constant parading of the “Syed” part of his name: his supposed ancestry does not already make him a better person or citizen). So, let’s focus on the problem of national and religious zeal that seems to concern both you and Zaid Hamid. I’ve appended your original note at the end of this.
1. Your first paragraph vaguely presents diversity as a reason for strife. Which schools of thoughts do you refer to? Assuming them to be limited to religion, ethnicity and politics: one can reasonably argue that diversity in all three pre-existed current conditions. Islam has never been a homogeneous religion with pre-existing axioms for life (even the Quran was revealed piecemeal, according to situational relevance [1]). The political differences within the early Muslim community had started with the election of Abu Bakr to caliphate (ensuring the dominance of Meccan followers over the Medinites), intensified by the murder of Uthman bin Affan, precipitating the formation of a Shia faction. The diversity of religious and political ideology within the early Islam only intensified as the empires of Islam expanded and new ethnicities came into contact with Arab-Islamic culture. Why shouldn’t we connect murder and mayhem with diversity, all the more strongly given the crises of early Islam? The rationale for political differences and the manner of political action are *different* events: e.g. while the elevation without election of Abu Bakr to caliphate may be questionable, that should not necessarily entail a battle to resolve differences. Discussion may be a good alternative. Aisha and Ali eventually ‘resolved’ their differences through dialogue.
Within Pakistan, and in contrast with early Islam, there is much greater diversity within religion (sects and sub-sects based on different sources and interpretations of Islamic law) and perhaps greater ethnic diversity (think of the number of languages and dialects spoken in Pakistan, then clans and sub-clans). In relation to this diversity, some sects may present themselves as authentic, the real deal, the true Islam e.g. the Salafis [3]; some may even force this arbitrary conclusion upon all others e.g. the Khawarijis [4]. Yet diversity within religion may partly be due to the application of scriptures to concrete political problems, which may be different across space and time. Perhaps early Shiaism was a way of asking: Who should succeed the last prophet of (an Abrahamic) faith in (a patriarchal) society, and what exactly is the religious and political significance of ‘his’ role (the problem of Khilafah/Imamah regarding the roles of the king and priest). Finally, this “scriptural reading” [5] isn’t a mere innovation (bid’ah) since the meaning the Quran is already tied to political situations/problem of early Muslim community (rules of war, treatment of women and children, relationship with the Prophet and with the people of the Book, etc).
Our affirmation of diversity is crucial. Without tolerance, based on knowledge and understanding, of other sects and religions; it is more likely that religious differences result in bloodshed (as in the case of Taliban, who impose their version of Islam as always already true) instead of a potentially richer understanding of the religion itself. Finally, this affirmation also cannot be pre-determined by any particular religious discourse as blasphemy laws, or those defining ‘true Islam’, do in Pakistan.
2. What does it mean to love one’s country? If folks start decorating their houses with national flags (potentially wasting money that could have helped the needy), are they really patriotic? If some people organize online 
communities to “Go Green” and blazon national symbols, are they still really patriotic? Anyone, regardless of their real intent, can earn publicity through such blatant patriotism – the former requires some resources and the latter a social networking profile. Thus, one’s “love” for one’s country cannot be judged to be authentic solely by public display of national symbols. But why should one be judged for patriotism and who should be the judge of that? Can loving one’s country mean condoning the burning of Churches and murder of Christians citizens of Pakistan [6, 7] or the state’s terrorizing of Hindus citizens [8] or the Baloch people [9]? Can it mean condoning Islamo-fascism as preached by groups like Tanzeem-e-Islami, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, Sipah Sahaba, Jamaat-ud-Daawa and Jamaat-e-Islami, among others – with their grand delusion of taking over the world on the one hand and fighting US domination of the world on the other? Thus, loving one’s country may entail not only fighting against state institutions (e.g. the government and army) but also fascist-militant organizations that seek to take over our diverse society and impose its own quasi-Arab culture.
Perhaps loving one’s country should first mean making sense of its history and ethno-geography. The history of Pakistan’s formation cannot be reduced to the so-called two-nation “theory” – until unless Pakistani Muslims keep re-applying this theory to allow Christian and Hindu minorities a separate state within the state of Pakistan. As indicated before, Islam is too diverse a religion to easily allow designation of Muslims as one nation. Jinnah probably used “nation” as a rhetorical device to hammer political awareness into the Muslims of the subcontinent. We must also not ignore doubts regarding the reasons for the Partition of the subcontinent [10]. Partition as an event may be a fact, but that does not automatically justify its occurrence. There’s a lot more to be said about the history of Pakistan military’s involvement in politics.
Similarly, many of us need to realize our privileges as urban Punjabi folks who (paradoxically) are mostly unaware of our Punjabi heritage. Many of our privileges – fairly consistent power, water and gas; urban transit and road network, including the motorway; access to some of the best educational/vocational institutes and hospitals; airport; parks; well-preserved historical monuments etc – are simply not available in other parts of Pakistan. The villages around the famous Sui gas reserve do not have access to gas; most people of Baluchistan do not have access to clean drinking water and medical facilities (try reading one of early FASTRising pamphlets on the plight of internally displaced tribes in Balochistan). I say that loving one’s country means, first, acknowledging the presence and extent of these problem and then connecting with the people (e.g. the folks at Bolan Medical College) to help address some of the problems. And these are only *some* of the problems of Pakistan’s richly diverse ethno-geography.
Perhaps I’ll keep updating this note to reflect and help you understand exactly why it is important to oppose the doctrines that hide behind jingoism and zealotry. I think they are dangerous for this country, whose political and economic systems must be based on social justice, which is why I strongly support people who would like to learn from pacifism, secularism and socialism to find more suitable alternatives. Calling for peace between India and Pakistan does NOT make one a traitor: it is all the more necessary now to be able to question the billions that Pakistani military spends every year without ANY accountability to the civilian government. Calling for the separation of religion and politics does NOT make one impious: it is all the more necessary to be able to ensure that all citizens of this country are guaranteed equal rights – Muslims should NOT be more privileged citizens of Pakistan.
Finally, regarding your assertion that people who oppose ZH (?) should instead take action. Clarifying the problems of political economy, in relation to history, is part of that action. You must have heard about FASTRising, Young-Professionals and Student Action Committee, their involvement in the lawyers movement. I encourage you to visit the FASTRising website and check out its past events and activities. Institute for Peace and Secular Studies, too, has been actively participating in or organizing various events regarding non-violence in Lahore. The Lahore Chitrkar and Danka are useful information repositories. If you need any specific information about political activities, let me know and I’ll try my best to help you.
Notes
[1] http://www.islam101.com/dawah/WhatIsQuran.html
From the first verse (“Read in the name of your Lord who created”) to the last (“Today I perfected your religion for you…”), the meaning of the revelation was tied to the biography of the Prophet and that of the nascent Muslim community. Hence the irreducibility of the Quran to a self-evident, self-contained text independent of history of its references as well as its compilation and transmission.
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Bakr
See, in particular, “Election of Abu Bakr to Caliphate”. The history of early Islam focuses and privileges the Meccan converts and companions of the Prophet more than the Medinites, hence it may seem obvious to students of Islamiat that Abu Bakr or Umar should become the khalifah.
[3] http://www.qss.org/articles/salafi/text.html
“The Salafi Da’wah is that of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. It is the Religion of Islam – pure and free from any additions, deletions or alterations.”
[4] http://biphome.spray.se/hyla/wahabia/07.htm
“The Khawarij decreed that if committing cardinal sins become common in a Muslim land then it deserved to be considered dar harb, literally a land of war and those who live in it forfeit their lives and possessions.” Cf. Taliban justification for killing Muslim soldiers.
[5] http://www.continuumbooks.com/Books/detail.aspx?ReturnURL=/Search/default.aspx&ImprintID=2&BookID=131782
Margaret Aymer, Professor of New Testament, describes “scriptural reading” as a way of utilizing the scripture (Bible in this case) to understand the current political problems of a community (e.g. slavery of the Black/African-American people). See her text, “First Pure, Then Peaceable: Frederick Douglass Reads James”.
[6] http://www.pakistanchristianpost.com/viewnews.php?newsid=1462
“9 Christian killed, 100 homes looted , 50 homes burnt by Muslim protestors in Gojra”
[7] http://www.hrsolidarity.net/mainfile.php/1997vol07no01/237/
“On 6 February 1997 at about 9:00 a.m., 30,000 to 35,000 militant Muslims attacked a Christian village, (Chak 72/10 R) called Shantinagar (land of peace), located 10 kilometres south-east of Khanewal city. Attackers were equipped with various types of weapons, in the presence of 400/300 policemen.”
[8] http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/12-hindu+women+cnic+woes–bi-03
“Take the case of Pram Sri Mai, a married Hindu woman, whose application for a computerised national identity card was turned down by the National Database and Registration Authority which even charged her with having an illicit relationship with a man and bearing illegitimate children.”
[10] http://www.boloji.com/analysis2/0478.htm
This is my response to the following note:
Unluckily in our society there are many schools of thought [divide and rule thingy]. People are tuned to different mindsets and have a difference in perception; hence we always end up fighting each other. Consequently, despite the potential, we are far from being a World’s leading country in any domain.
I have been listening to this guy for almost a year now and I found him very patriotic and a true muslim. I admire him for his courage and I respect him for speaking the truth… I agree to most of his statements. I am not here to defend him but to set things straight as enough of this pro ZH and anti ZH naive discussions. Even if he says ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ there are certain people who will have objections to this statement as ZH said that.
Regarding his past, there was a hilarious accusation tagging Zaid Hamid with Yousaf Kazzab. Most people have figured that out but some are still stuck in that. I listened to that audio recording many times and I figured out its FAKE and made to create a doubt in people’s mind. Then there was a war propaganda thing mostly by Indians and also by the selfish people who care nothing but their lives and their cities…who don’t give a damn on a blast in Peshawar or a drone attack in Waziristan…half the country is at war and they want someone peaceful after all Phir Bhi DIl Hai Hindustani . He answered to this clear enough http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGqBkQSgNdc
When I watch his videos and then I look at why many people oppose him. I do not wonder…Jo loag Asif Zardari ko vote de saktey hain wo Zaid Hamid ko galiyan bhi de saktey hain…:/ I don’t know if I should laugh at those people or mourn at my country’s fate. I think I should leave everything. Pakistan can take care of itself if it is supposed to.
To conclude it if somebody thinks Zaid Hamid is fake/agent/crazy then simply don’t listen to him nobody is forcing you. And if you think he’s wrong then why don’t you step up and start doing whats right!! dont you love your country? Khud kuch kerna nahi aur jo ker raha usko bhi nahi kerney dena…now that’s Pakistani. Even if he’s doing it all wrong, he is at least trying to do something for the dead nation.
Secular Pakistan 
MSH
December 2, 2009
Hail Hamid o/
Rajat
December 6, 2009
A tribute to Great Prof Zaid Zion Hamid
http://delhijat.blogspot.com/2009/12/wake-up-pakistan.html
Waris
December 14, 2009
shame on you Ale Natiq!!!!!!!
Nusrat Pasha
January 26, 2010
What started off as the “Objectives Resolution” in 1949, culminated in the most barbaric brand of Mullaism. Our beloved Motherland today, more than ever, stands hostage to Politicized Religion. The entire nation-state today stands hijacked by the very elements who opposed Quaid-e-Azam tooth and nail. His realistic and profoundly wise dream of a Secular Pakistan has been brutally sabotaged by both governments and non-government circles alike, in coalition with those who sided with the Congress before the creation of Pakistan. One is compelled to consider the possibility that these elements may still be serving the same cause. Today, there is murder in the name of Islam. Today there is terrorism in the name of Islam. Today there is rape in the name of Islam. Today there is terrorism in the name of Islam. This is what you end up with when you begin to mix up statecraft and religion. The greatest disservice to Islam imaginable, is today being rendered in the name of Islam.
The nation founded by Jinnah should simply have followed Jinnah’s advice. Jinnah said, “….Religion should not be allowed to come into Politics….Religion is merely a matter between man and God .” [Jinnah, Address to the Central Legislative Assembly, 7 February 1935]
Bin Ismail
February 7, 2010
If you’re religious, then separate State from Religion. If you’re patriotic, then too separate State from Religion.
tipu
February 22, 2010
i happened to be a supporter of islamization of pakistan, but when i read sahi bokhari i realized that it was not not suitable for any human civilization not even 14hundred years back, —they committed lot of humanright violation then. the system was extremely primitive and incapable. Any islamist cannot prove a single successful case of islamization through out the history. even after the death of prophet they were fighting eachouther for their version of islam, abubaker and umer singledout hazrat ali altogather. later there were infightings. except to the two ealiest khalifa(abubakar &umer) all the laters were killed by fellow muslims… the recent example of islamic system are Taliban rule in afghanistan, somalia, yemen, sudan, Saudi arabia….are they really the role model for us???islamists of wahaabi/deobandi are cruelly exploding bombs on the streets and shia mosques in pakistan, and iraq.. does anyone from them deserve to become khalifa in our country???
Justin
March 17, 2010
Way to go Tipu, now all you have to do is to throw off the yoke of religion.
Hira
April 24, 2010
I personally think there is no point in ridiculing Zaid Hamid and people like him; people have genuine grievances, he’s just filling a hole that more sane people have refused to fill.
Average Pakistanis face a lot of issues today; commodity prices rising, load shedding, bills, no access to decent education, low wages, high unemployment, no justice, more and more people descending into poverty each day, workers being laid off as businesses close down and so on and so forth. But they are not aware of the reasons behind this all, which is why they’ll continue to descend into a deeper mire of this religion zealotry (a.k.a Zaid Hamid’s brand of whats wrong with the world). From the little I know the real story, it seems to me, lies in the economy. On the behest of IMF and the world’s financial institutions our governments have been following a strong neo-liberal agenda involving privatization and deregulation back from the time of Benazir and Nawaz Sharif (and of course accelerated during the time of Musharraf). Through IMF’s structural adjustment policies we’ve been made to lessen subsidies and reduce public spending each year. Current PPP’s government isn’t relenting either, our key assets including oil and gas are slowly being auctioned off (Privatization Commission of Pakistan has ‘Sui Gas’ in its list of future projects). We have been sold the privatization narrative, the narrative that privatization and deregulation and everything that goes with it necessarily bring efficiency and development. We have only to look at the free trade battle grounds in Latin America, in Chile in the 70s, in Argentina, Bolvia; in Poland and the free trade experiments in China and Russia that such policies do not work. In all of these countries they made the rich richer and the poor poorer (as the saying goes). In our country things look very bleak when you add to all of that the brazen corruption of our political elite and the corruption of our new corporate military. And of course the ‘war-of-terror’ that we are fighting, and the hundreds and thousands of innocent civilians we’ve displaced through it (and killed some of them too). In short, through all of these years very little has really been spent on the people. Such a society is a fertile ground for fanaticism, as happened in Germany during Hitler’s rise to power. People, understandably, look for reasons of their misfortune. And create phantom ones (in case of Germany, the Jews; in our case the minorities or anyone we disagree with for that matter) if they can’t figure out the real ones. In Pakistan, the religious fundamentalists (even though I am wary of using this term) in the country are the only ones opposing it all, so there should be no surprise if people flock towards them.
IMHO, what is needed is a strong alternative narrative. A narrative which opposes all kinds of American or international multinational intervention (through IMF and the World Bank or WTO or otherwise) in our affairs, and at the same time rejects the corruption of the governmental and the military elite and the intolerant opinions of the religious fanatics. However, it is also important for this sort of a narrative to include what it stands for, instead of just focusing on what it stands against. A huge, anti neo-liberal, anti-corporatist movement is rising up in the world, with its center as the Latin American countries who’ve suffered the most through IMF’s and Chicago School styled free trade policies. What they are focusing on is the construction of a bottoms-up, grassroots, participatory democracy. It’s a decentralized, non-hierarchical struggle, not dependent upon leaders or petty party politics since they’ve have seen their leaders betray them far too often. It is a do-it-yourself kind of a movement, don’t blame the government, go fight for it yourself sort of a thing. They aren’t waiting for any revolution to rescue them, they are creating their own little revolutions in myriad of ways. We will have to link up with this global movement and build up our own local struggles in our communities, amongst our farmers, our workers, all of those who’ve suffered. We’ll have to look for ways to push this sort of a narrative into the mainstream, since at the moment no such alternative exists in terms people can understand and follow. My opinions on all of this are still vague as I am still learning but this seems to me as the only beacon of hope for us.
God, this got a bit long, lol.
Ardis
January 7, 2015
Yesterday i spent 300 $ for platinium roulette system , i hope that i will earn my first cash online