Taliban

[Rival]

I mean...I could have a crack in an academic sense (never been there, basing it on my reading).
But I'll hold off a short while in case someone has a more personal understanding (plus it will take a while, and I've pretty much burned my break time now...lol)

Assuming you mean in a holistic sense? Politically, socially, etc?

Yes, I mean, what was the overall culture, religious makeup, political system etc. and what happened to make it such a powder keg.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Yes, I mean, what was the overall culture, religious makeup, political system etc. and what happened to make it such a powder keg.

I shall give you my hot take at some point today. If you want the one word version, chaos comes to mind, but it's a super, super interesting country, from a historical perspective, and I am a history-geek (amongst my other geekiness).

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yes, I mean, what was the overall culture, religious makeup, political system etc. and what happened to make it such a powder keg.

One word answer: Pakistan. No Pakistan aid, no Taliban.

 

[Rival]

Pakistan. No Pakistan aid, no taliban.

This is true.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Then you have not understood people.

Living in fear is not peace.

 

[firedragon]

Yes anarchy is one of the quicker paths to totalitarian subjugation.

No, subjugation is not equivalent to "peace".

In my opinion.

Maybe if you try to understand a bit better, you would understand a bit better.

 

[F1fan]

Isn't the main issue here that one can't easily fast-forward a culture that is mainly patriarchal and misogynistic, and expect such to be shoe-horned into our concepts of the modern democratic society? And especially so when the major belief system of said country is one that tends to encompass all aspects of life like Islam. Hence a struggle that is not easily won without giving up several things that tend to make up the lives of so many. Besides all the tribal bit. it took many other countries a lot longer than a few decades to achieve such.

Right. This is why to change a culture you have to occupy for at least three generations so the old-timers die off and the new generation is settled in the new way. There have been protests against the Taliban by younger folks and this illustrates how the old ways need to be made extinct to not be tolerated.

 

[firedragon]

Can anyone explain to me, and possibly others, what Afghanistan was like pre-Soviet etc?

Before the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, it was a republic which happened due to a coup d'etat that took place in 1973. The Durrani monarchy was toppled by a man called Daoud. This is when Afghan revenue from foreign employment started to increase. Daoud was ousted in 1961 with western support and he came back and took over in 1973. During this time there were many political problems with uprisings and foreign boycott and trade squeezing with severely unfair trade deals. Daoud was against Pakistan from a long time and Pakistan tried to aid these militant Islamic uprisings through radicalisation from Sufi/Deobandi groups that started from India. The Indian/Pakistani British/American pressure only increased because Daoud secured aid from the Soviets and Iran signed a deal for aid, although the money never came because of the political climate in Iran. The U.S defeat in the Vietnam war had reduced their influence immensely, thus the political support Afghanistan looked for didnt come. The Soviets were supporting Afghanistan, but Daoud was against the left and was always suppressing the left. Afghanistan then looked for support from India because the communist pressure is huge. They were surrounded by the communists and the communists wanted communism everywhere. Daoud thought that because India and Pakistan were murderous enemies of each other and since Daoud was an enemy of Pakistan indian would support them. At least in military training.

The country was in constant turmoil. Constantly. The geographical location was one of the reasons for it. Every tom, dick, and harry had to intervene. The communists in India and Iran somehow put pressure by reuniting two big factions in Afghanistan to conduct another coup to topple the then government I believe in 1978. All this while, the CIA is always there and were blamed for the Parcham leader in the same year. That began the Anti US movement as a demonstration by his people. 30,000 people took to the streets with anti U.S slogans. The women all over Afghanistan didnt like the outcome with communism in 78 because of one major issue. The Mahr or Dowry was abolished. Now unlike India the dowry was given by the man to the woman at the time of marriage. Its a sum of money given for women to keep and they can use it as they will. A lot of women banked this money just in case they lose their husband, which is not that uncommon in this war trodden country. Also, when the value of the bride goes down, the value of the woman goes down. Until then, the women had a different dignity level. So there was mass rejection of communism. Women wanted the Islamic law to prevail (ironically).

It was more of a liberal society with cinemas, education for women etc. It was a nice place in some sense. The Russian invasion happened 1979.

 

[firedragon]

Living in fear is not peace.

Great. Thanks.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Firedragon, it seems you are the 'silent majority' supporting Islamic extremism.

 

[firedragon]

Firedragon, it seems you are the 'silent majority' supporting Islamic extremism.

I generally expect that kind of cheap tricks from people mate. Nothing new.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The general public will any day, anytime, escape to the west. Out of fear or not.

Well, true. But if they did not have problems in their own country, there wouldn't be too many of them wanting to scape to the west.

 

[firedragon]

Well, true. But if they did not have problems in their own country, there wouldn't be too many of them wanting to scape to the west.

Lol. Of course. Is not that a given?

India has the biggest emigration in the world.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The Qur'an does not specify a democracy, nor does it specify a monarchy. There are some scholars who argue for democracy and they say the early khalifs were elected until Muawiah.

But that's a whole different topic.

I think so. The Quran was written in the culture of Arabs who live nearly 1500 years ago. So, it won't mention democracy. But does it ask people to establish an Islamic government?

I mean, it is always possible to interpret Quran to suit one's purpose. So, if one was to ask Taliban this same question, for sure they could quote some verses.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Lol. Of course. Is not that a given?

India has the biggest emigration in the world.

So, I mean, if a Country is managed by a divine holy Book, one expect that country to be the best place to live. Something does not add up I guess.

 

[firedragon]

I think so. The Quran was written in the culture of Arabs who live nearly 1500 years ago. So, it won't mention democracy. But does it ask people to establish an Islamic government?

I mean, it is always possible to interpret Quran to suit one's purpose. So, if one was to ask Taliban this same question, for sure they could quote some verses.

Different topic.

 

[firedragon]

So, I mean, if a Country is managed by a divine holy Book, one expect that country to be the best place to live. Something does not add up I guess.

Maybe it is not managed by a divine book.

 

[danieldemol]

Lol. Of course. Is not that a given?

India has the biggest emigration in the world.

India has one of the largest populations in the world, so of course they will have more people leaving, but I'm doubtful that Pakistan is a better place to live than India just cause their smaller population means a smaller number of people living abroad.

ETA see the net migration rates for India compared to Pakistan;

List of countries by net migration rate - Wikipedia

 

[firedragon]

India has one of the largest populations in the world, so of course they will have more people leaving, but I'm doubtful that Pakistan is a better place to live than India just cause their smaller population means a smaller number of people living abroad.

Of course. Who said Pakistan is a better place to live? I didnt say that. Maybe it is, maybe it is not. But Pakistan and India are definitely better places to live than Afghanistan in my opinion. One of the main reasons would be that people have more freedom to live the way they want. But migration is not so simple. If you to some places in India, like Kerala, some children are brought up with migration as one of their main aims in life. Same goes to Pakistan. Some Pakistani families name their children with names that would be easier to call or pronounce or relatable in an English speaking or even another western country.

 

[danieldemol]

Of course. Who said Pakistan is a better place to live? I didnt say that. Maybe it is, maybe it is not. But Pakistan and India are definitely better places to live than Afghanistan in my opinion. One of the main reasons would be that people have more freedom to live the way they want. But migration is not so simple. If you to some places in India, like Kerala, some children are brought up with migration as one of their main aims in life. Same goes to Pakistan. Some Pakistani families name their children with names that would be easier to call or pronounce or relatable in an English speaking or even another western country.

No one said it, I just thought it would add to the conversation to say that even if the premise that higher emigration means it is a worse place to live, India still has a lower net emigration per thousand people than a number of other places even if it tops the list in sheer number of emigrants due to its overall population size.