Has anyone here read Ambedkar's book "Pakistan, or, The Partition of India"?

[Futurist]

Also, if so, what were your thoughts on it?

For the record, this book is available for free online here:

Pakistan, or, The Partition of India, by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar

 

[Aupmanyav]

No, Ambedkar is not important for me though I appreciate what he did. I have read excerpts from his writing, particular why he opted for Buddhism instead of Christianity or Islam. He or Nehru/Gandhi are history now, even Indira.

 

[Devdas]

What is theme of this book. At the end partition was the good thing for India.

 

[Futurist]

What is theme of this book. At the end partition was the good thing for India.

The theme of this book is to argue in favor of a partition of India.

 

[killerargo]

I have read excerts of it. some of it is very forward looking and straight forward when it comes to muslims of south asia. If you are interested in partition and sub continent politics, i suggest you read koenraad elst.
Koenraad Elst: The British were not guilty of Partition; somebody else was

 

[Devdas]

I too agree British are not be blamed for partition, they just exploited historical Hindu-Muslim fissure in their favour. Partition was the outcome of the complete waning of Muslim power of India and rise of Hindu dominance. The recognition of Hindi as provincial languages in UP and Bihar didn't go well with Muslims elites while partition of Bengal was supported by Muslims while opposed by Hindus. In Punjab and Sindh, Muslims resented Hindus being far more educated and controlling most of the business. Jinnah had a intense hate against Hindus because some wealthy Hindu merchant of Karachi didn't hire on demanded fee, all narrative of a secular Jinnah is just a propaganda.

 

[Devdas]

The theme of this book is to argue in favor of a partition of India.

I am aware of Ambedkar's view on partition. He preferred conversion to Buddhism and he was a staunch opponent of Aryan invasion theory.

 

[Futurist]

I am aware of Ambedkar's view on partition. He preferred conversion to Buddhism and he was a staunch opponent of Aryan invasion theory.

Why are either of the two things in your second sentence here actually relevant, though?

 

[Futurist]

I too agree British are not be blamed for partition, they just exploited historical Hindu-Muslim fissure in their favour. Partition was the outcome of the complete waning of Muslim power of India and rise of Hindu dominance. The recognition of Hindi as provincial languages in UP and Bihar didn't go well with Muslims elites while partition of Bengal was supported by Muslims while opposed by Hindus. In Punjab and Sindh, Muslims resented Hindus being far more educated and controlling most of the business. Jinnah had a intense hate against Hindus because some wealthy Hindu merchant of Karachi didn't hire on demanded fee, all narrative of a secular Jinnah is just a propaganda.

It's quite interesting that, as a result of partition, the Muslims in Sindh replaced their Hindu overclass with a new Muhajir overclass.

 

[Devdas]

It's quite interesting that, as a result of partition, the Muslims in Sindh replaced their Hindu overclass with a new Muhajir overclass.

Yes but Mujahirs were educated elites, not entrepreneurs like Sindhi Hindus, their forced displacement had a huge impact on the economy of the newly independent Pakistan.