Pakistani media is supra-liberal: Talat Hussain - Page 2 - PakMusic - The Pure Pakistani Forums | Pakistani Music Movies Dramas Desi Forums

Lahoriii · #16 (**permalink**) 07-31-2012, 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyborg909

LoL thats exactly why ppl call pakistani liberals fake liberals and other names LOL

I wana know on this forum how many pakisatni subscribe to these views would be fun to know how many on this forum alone thinks these is what liberalism is

Talat has spoken the truth Ahmed/ here is the shinning example LOL

Wtf is a fake liberal? How come you always jump the point and grab at people's throats?

Who said that alone is liberalism? In fact, that alone is a very tiny contingent of what a few people hold as being liberal, in the category of social liberalism alone. And that is essentially my point: what is considered liberal is subjective. Liberalism is a broad category of people that fundamentally believe in equality and liberty, who can have conflicting views on many issues.

This is my view on social liberalism, fiscal liberalism is a whole another issue...

Lahoriii · #17 (**permalink**) 07-31-2012, 06:46 AM

Off topic, who here remembers 'Jolie ka Thappar'?

cyborg909 · #18 (**permalink**) 08-02-2012, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lahoriii

Wtf is a fake liberal? How come you always jump the point and grab at people's throats?

Who said that alone is liberalism? In fact, that alone is a very tiny contingent of what a few people hold as being liberal, in the category of social liberalism alone. And that is essentially my point: what is considered liberal is subjective. Liberalism is a broad category of people that fundamentally believe in equality and liberty, who can have conflicting views on many issues.

This is my view on social liberalism, fiscal liberalism is a whole another issue...

So lets take ur so called Social liberalism nude beaches, abortions, euthenesia etc etc and temme what percentage of pakistanis agree with these values and if they don't then ofcoz they are narrow minded, right wing, religious fundos who don't know jack, right?

Thats the whole point, when ppl like you accuse of right of being intolerant you also show ur own intolerance and name calling. So it doesn't make you any better then zaid hamid.

The so called social liberalism is alien to most countries, if you so want this values (which btw is ur right) then i guess, say for example you would have no object to polygymy or say all illicit drugs? right?

maverick86 · #19 (**permalink**) 08-02-2012, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyborg909

So lets take ur so called Social liberalism nude beaches, abortions, euthenesia etc etc and temme what percentage of pakistanis agree with these values and if they don't then ofcoz they are narrow minded, right wing, religious fundos who don't know jack, right?

Thats the whole point, when ppl like you accuse of right of being intolerant you also show ur own intolerance and name calling. So it doesn't make you any better then zaid hamid.

The so called social liberalism is alien to most countries, if you so want this values (which btw is ur right) then i guess, say for example you would have no object to polygymy or say all illicit drugs? right?

you know why I think the majority of Pakistan is not liberal? because there are large swathes of this country where women are still considered second class citizens, they are not allowed access to education, they are not allowed to venture out of their homes, choose their spouses, choose their way of life....if they are in violation of an arbitrary code of 'social behaviour' they are punished by being killed. Next, we do not really practice egalitarianism we just preach it. A young Hindu or Christian or Ahmadi child cannot aspire to lead our country no matter how qualified or competent he or she may be. Our lack of liberalism lies in the fact that we cannot comprehend any questioning any critical thinking about axiomatic ideals we consider to be self-evident and unbending. If you do question those, you get shot at point blank range 27 times by a deranged maniac who is supposed to guard you...he is then celebrated by the JUDICIARY!!!! of this country. People live in so much fear of questioning things that the man who was murdered is not even afforded the courtesy of having a proper cleric lead his funeral because of the fear that any association with a 'pariah' may lead to his own shunning...even death...
So lets not even begin talking about more evolved secular ideals such as euthanasia etc...I think lahorii mentioned that to make a point that the media may not be as 'liberal' as you think. Now that we are debating this, I never called into question talat's journalistic integrity but I don't even know what the point is of the term 'supra-liberal'...is he trying to say all of the media is 'liberal'? was he trying to say that the media is 'extremely liberal'? in both cases that is not true at all....hamid mir, javed chaudhry, meher bokhari, kashif abbasi to name a few, and shahid masood are centrists at best....what liberal media are we talking about here?

Lahoriii · #20 (**permalink**) 08-02-2012, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyborg909

So lets take ur so called Social liberalism nude beaches, abortions, euthenesia etc etc and temme what percentage of pakistanis agree with these values and if they don't then ofcoz they are narrow minded, right wing, religious fundos who don't know jack, right?

Thats the whole point, when ppl like you accuse of right of being intolerant you also show ur own intolerance and name calling. So it doesn't make you any better then zaid hamid.

The so called social liberalism is alien to most countries, if you so want this values (which btw is ur right) then i guess, say for example you would have no object to polygymy or say all illicit drugs? right?

Woah woah woah. I have no clue where you are taking this discussion.

First off, those views don't necessarily represent my own views, most of them do, but that's not the point. I was giving an example of what I would personally consider "supra" liberal to show that the whole argument is subjective and just stupid. This is basically the only point I had to make.

Nowhere have I said that right wingers are uneducated or don't know jack shit. Ever. I do have my problems with them, and I'm extremely opinionated and defensive of liberal ideology, but at the end of the day, the rift is due to personal opinions and philosophy which are both subjective. If the majority of Pakistanis don't agree with my values: that is their right. I will criticize them, sure, but I'm not going to shove my values down their throats.

I actually think I am a lot better than Zaid Hamid. I don't think I've ever done anything to suggest otherwise?

cyborg909 · #21 (**permalink**) 08-02-2012, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maverick86

you know why I think the majority of Pakistan is not liberal? because there are large swathes of this country where women are still considered second class citizens, they are not allowed access to education, they are not allowed to venture out of their homes, choose their spouses, choose their way of life....if they are in violation of an arbitrary code of 'social behaviour' they are punished by being killed. Next, we do not really practice egalitarianism we just preach it. A young Hindu or Christian or Ahmadi child cannot aspire to lead our country no matter how qualified or competent he or she may be. Our lack of liberalism lies in the fact that we cannot comprehend any questioning any critical thinking about axiomatic ideals we consider to be self-evident and unbending. If you do question those, you get shot at point blank range 27 times by a deranged maniac who is supposed to guard you...he is then celebrated by the JUDICIARY!!!! of this country. People live in so much fear of questioning things that the man who was murdered is not even afforded the courtesy of having a proper cleric lead his funeral because of the fear that any association with a 'pariah' may lead to his own shunning...even death...
So lets not even begin talking about more evolved secular ideals such as euthanasia etc...I think lahorii mentioned that to make a point that the media may not be as 'liberal' as you think. Now that we are debating this, I never called into question talat's journalistic integrity but I don't even know what the point is of the term 'supra-liberal'...is he trying to say all of the media is 'liberal'? was he trying to say that the media is 'extremely liberal'? in both cases that is not true at all....hamid mir, javed chaudhry, meher bokhari, kashif abbasi to name a few, and shahid masood are centrists at best....what liberal media are we talking about here?

Lets take women rights for starter, lets start with religion, does Islam prescribe that? The answer is emphatic no, then lets talk abt cultural norms, Razia sultana was queen of india, these are not cultural norms, Pakistan revered fatima jinnah, begum rana liaqut ali kha, qudsia bano, bajya and elected 1st muslim PM Benazir Bhutto. So what happens is perversion of culture not cultural norms. Which is subcontinent problem not confined to a particular religion, race or caste.

When we talk abt liberal values it always start in Pakistan with having woman nude, that is the issue, Pakistanis are liberal enough if some one tries to see without tainted glasses.

The so called liberal values that are purporated are the issues, ask pakistanis and they would overwhelmingly say they want social justice (a cornerstone of liberalism) overwhelmingly pakistanis rejects theocracy (evident by contunous rejection of religious parties in electoral process) at same time religion and cultural values are big issues for pakistanis. Just like they are for lot of other countries, we simply forget that it was hardly 50 yrs ago that US passed civil rights law. The push for gay rights is a no no considering cultural and religious background, I will gve u an example of abortion law in US, SC in 60's legalize it what is the status on ground u know better then this. So signaling out only bad is wrong one has to take into consideration the ground realities.

The argument was media is supra liberal, I can't even sit with my sisters and watch Pakistan TV Dramas, (may be I am old fashioned but its embarrassing) look at fashion shows the dresses being paraded hell just look at lawn ads

. U name kashif abbasi whose wife mehar bukhari and others what fundamentalism they been preaching? As you conceded yourself that they are centrist so whats wrong with being centrist? There are self professed libereals having thier own voice heard take all 3 leading english dailies, Dawn, ET and Daily Times they all are liberal voices, The most read urdu daily is Jang which have all voices liberals and conservative being represented. So if its 3:1 then yes media is liberal.

I think this debate is getting nowhere, the basic qts we have to answer 1st and foremost is what one consider liberal, conservative and fundamentalist. Its funny when ppl get mad at terms like fake liberal or liberal fascist, why? Same ppl who getting mad has no issue calling the other side fundamentalists, right wng extremists, whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

What is fundamentalist? Who defind it, I pray 5 times a day, I believe Islam is perfect way of life, I believe in fundamentals of Islam i,e Tauheed, risalat, fasting, hujj and zakat and I believe in Jihad so I am fundamentalist? If thats the criteria then shouldn't i be calling liberals fundamentlists too?

Plz donot take as an attack I would genuinely like to know the views and debate them, my objection is to slogans of seularism and the implied contention that Pakisatn cant progress (another debatable point i.e progress is defined by what? what is progress) unless we have nude beaches, abortion, gay rights etc etc,

maverick86 · #22 (**permalink**) 08-02-2012, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyborg909

Lets take women rights for starter, lets start with religion, does Islam prescribe that? The answer is emphatic no, then lets talk abt cultural norms, Razia sultana was queen of india, these are not cultural norms, Pakistan revered fatima jinnah, begum rana liaqut ali kha, qudsia bano, bajya and elected 1st muslim PM Benazir Bhutto. So what happens is perversion of culture not cultural norms. Which is subcontinent problem not confined to a particular religion, race or caste.

When we talk abt liberal values it always start in Pakistan with having woman nude, that is the issue, Pakistanis are liberal enough if some one tries to see without tainted glasses.

The so called liberal values that are purporated are the issues, ask pakistanis and they would overwhelmingly say they want social justice (a cornerstone of liberalism) overwhelmingly pakistanis rejects theocracy (evident by contunous rejection of religious parties in electoral process) at same time religion and cultural values are big issues for pakistanis. Just like they are for lot of other countries, we simply forget that it was hardly 50 yrs ago that US passed civil rights law. The push for gay rights is a no no considering cultural and religious background, I will gve u an example of abortion law in US, SC in 60's legalize it what is the status on ground u know better then this. So signaling out only bad is wrong one has to take into consideration the ground realities.

The argument was media is supra liberal, I can't even sit with my sisters and watch Pakistan TV Dramas, (may be I am old fashioned but its embarrassing) look at fashion shows the dresses being paraded hell just look at lawn ads

. U name kashif abbasi whose wife mehar bukhari and others what fundamentalism they been preaching? As you conceded yourself that they are centrist so whats wrong with being centrist? There are self professed libereals having thier own voice heard take all 3 leading english dailies, Dawn, ET and Daily Times they all are liberal voices, The most read urdu daily is Jang which have all voices liberals and conservative being represented. So if its 3:1 then yes media is liberal.

I think this debate is getting nowhere, the basic qts we have to answer 1st and foremost is what one consider liberal, conservative and fundamentalist. Its funny when ppl get mad at terms like fake liberal or liberal fascist, why? Same ppl who getting mad has no issue calling the other side fundamentalists, right wng extremists, whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

What is fundamentalist? Who defind it, I pray 5 times a day, I believe Islam is perfect way of life, I believe in fundamentals of Islam i,e Tauheed, risalat, fasting, hujj and zakat and I believe in Jihad so I am fundamentalist? If thats the criteria then shouldn't i be calling liberals fundamentlists too?

Plz donot take as an attack I would genuinely like to know the views and debate them, my objection is to slogans of seularism and the implied contention that Pakisatn cant progress (another debatable point i.e progress is defined by what? what is progress) unless we have nude beaches, abortion, gay rights etc etc,

Secularism is translated into urdu as ladeeniyat....at the inception, the translation is wrong. Secular means egalitarian, everyone is free to believe and practice as they choose. You may believe in the things defined in bold, but I or someone else may not feel tha tthey are as important as you consider them to be. The question is, should I be free to express my opinion and practice my beliefs without fear of bodily harm? Pakistan Zia sai pehlay bhi musulmaan tha.....but the 'islam' became very very militant during those years and us kai baad sai to its been a slow spiral into more chaos.

Yaar centrist is not liberal...that is what we are trying to say, liberal is not just limited to kapray....ali azmat ganay gata hai, larkiyan pasand hain, namaz pata nai parhta hai nai parhta, sharab peeta hai aur chars bhi peeta hai....(ya at least tha)....does that make him liberal? HELL NO!!...that is social liberalism....the moron follows the edicts of zaid 'trakker' hamid....the basic problem we are encountering here is distinguishing between social liberalism and liberal ideology......again the crux is....the media of our country is nowhere near as liberal ideologically as is the norm...some of them may be socially liberal...but....that doesnt mean they are liberal ideologues...

cyborg909 · #23 (**permalink**) 08-02-2012, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maverick86

Secularism is translated into urdu as ladeeniyat....at the inception, the translation is wrong. Secular means egalitarian, everyone is free to believe and practice as they choose. You may believe in the things defined in bold, but I or someone else may not feel tha tthey are as important as you consider them to be. The question is, should I be free to express my opinion and practice my beliefs without fear of bodily harm? Pakistan Zia sai pehlay bhi musulmaan tha.....but the 'islam' became very very militant during those years and us kai baad sai to its been a slow spiral into more chaos.

Yaar centrist is not liberal...that is what we are trying to say, liberal is not just limited to kapray....ali azmat ganay gata hai, larkiyan pasand hain, namaz pata nai parhta hai nai parhta, sharab peeta hai aur chars bhi peeta hai....(ya at least tha)....does that make him liberal? HELL NO!!...that is social liberalism....the moron follows the edicts of zaid 'trakker' hamid....the basic problem we are encountering here is distinguishing between social liberalism and liberal ideology......again the crux is....the media of our country is nowhere near as liberal ideologically as is the norm...some of them may be socially liberal...but....that doesnt mean they are liberal ideologues...

to yehi to hum farma rahe hain instead of kapre concentrate on liberal values more ppl will be incline to listen and follow but pakistani liberals ki taan kaproon se agay nahi jatee.

So we didn't have religious secretarian violence b4 zia? I seriously doubt it but we had intolerance and violence all the same, give u 2 examples, bangaldesh and 70's race riots in pakistan.

Lahoriii · #24 (**permalink**) 08-02-2012, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyborg909

Lets take women rights for starter, lets start with religion, does Islam prescribe that? The answer is emphatic no, then lets talk abt cultural norms, Razia sultana was queen of india, these are not cultural norms, Pakistan revered fatima jinnah, begum rana liaqut ali kha, qudsia bano, bajya and elected 1st muslim PM Benazir Bhutto. So what happens is perversion of culture not cultural norms. Which is subcontinent problem not confined to a particular religion, race or caste.

When we talk abt liberal values it always start in Pakistan with having woman nude, that is the issue, Pakistanis are liberal enough if some one tries to see without tainted glasses.

The so called liberal values that are purporated are the issues, ask pakistanis and they would overwhelmingly say they want social justice (a cornerstone of liberalism) overwhelmingly pakistanis rejects theocracy (evident by contunous rejection of religious parties in electoral process) at same time religion and cultural values are big issues for pakistanis. Just like they are for lot of other countries, we simply forget that it was hardly 50 yrs ago that US passed civil rights law. The push for gay rights is a no no considering cultural and religious background, I will gve u an example of abortion law in US, SC in 60's legalize it what is the status on ground u know better then this. So signaling out only bad is wrong one has to take into consideration the ground realities.

The argument was media is supra liberal, I can't even sit with my sisters and watch Pakistan TV Dramas, (may be I am old fashioned but its embarrassing) look at fashion shows the dresses being paraded hell just look at lawn ads

. U name kashif abbasi whose wife mehar bukhari and others what fundamentalism they been preaching? As you conceded yourself that they are centrist so whats wrong with being centrist? There are self professed libereals having thier own voice heard take all 3 leading english dailies, Dawn, ET and Daily Times they all are liberal voices, The most read urdu daily is Jang which have all voices liberals and conservative being represented. So if its 3:1 then yes media is liberal.

I think this debate is getting nowhere, the basic qts we have to answer 1st and foremost is what one consider liberal, conservative and fundamentalist. Its funny when ppl get mad at terms like fake liberal or liberal fascist, why? Same ppl who getting mad has no issue calling the other side fundamentalists, right wng extremists, whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

What is fundamentalist? Who defind it, I pray 5 times a day, I believe Islam is perfect way of life, I believe in fundamentals of Islam i,e Tauheed, risalat, fasting, hujj and zakat and I believe in Jihad so I am fundamentalist? If thats the criteria then shouldn't i be calling liberals fundamentlists too?

Plz donot take as an attack I would genuinely like to know the views and debate them, my objection is to slogans of seularism and the implied contention that Pakisatn cant progress (another debatable point i.e progress is defined by what? what is progress) unless we have nude beaches, abortion, gay rights etc etc,

because those terms make little sense...

What is a 'fake liberal'? I'm not sure a lot of people understand what you are trying to get at with that term.

What is a liberal 'fascist'? Fascism conflicts with liberal ideology on some very basic, fundamental levels (and with conservative ideology as well). Fascism is an odd ideology that doesn't fit with liberalism or conservatism.

cyborg909 · #25 (**permalink**) 08-02-2012, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lahoriii

because those terms make little sense...

What is a 'fake liberal'? I'm not sure a lot of people understand what you are trying to get at with that term.

What is a liberal 'fascist'? Fascism conflicts with liberal ideology on some very basic, fundamental levels (and with conservative ideology as well). Fascism is an odd ideology that doesn't fit with liberalism or conservatism.

How fundamentalism levels with conservatism? How do u define what is fundamentalist? Going by the shallow definition anyone who believe in any fundamentals is a fundementalist, so a conservative is fundamentalist conservative, a liberal is fundamenalist liberal and so on?