partition was good
Why is partition considered itna kharab? 
phir se pathan raj karte, muslim would have added to their numbers aur bhi dange phasad hote.
partition was great.
In mid-1930s, when it became clear to JInnah that he could never call the shots in an undivided India, he bought fully into the Pakistan dream. After that, he did everything to encourage communal polarisation, erasing his previous secular credentials. When a thinking man cynically abandons all cherished beliefs and embraces what he abhorred earlier, how can this act be judged positively?
Jinnah's communal politics stretched all over his whole life from the 1930s till his death in 1948. He sparked off full-scale communal carnage with his call for a Direct Action Day in August 1946. After that, there was regular bloodshed in eastern India and Kolkata, which only Gandhi's fast and Partition finally ended. Looking at the things in same perspective, both Jinnah and Narendra Modi were guilty of the same crime -- seeking power by stoking communal hatred. So why is Jinnah a secular hero and Modi a communal?
Jinnah wanted a Muslim veto everywhere and he demonstrated this in the interim government where League ministers opposed everything the Congress proposed, resulting in deadlock. Partition prevented this deadlock from becoming the future of undivided India. It allowed Pakistan to experiment with its Muslim identity and India with its Hindu-dominated, but secular, ideology. Today it is more or less clear which approach is right. It is also significant that
Jinnah, who was so insistent on a Muslim veto in undivided India, did not give the same veto to minorities in Pakistan. His stand was thus totally hypocritical and self-serving.
An undivided India on Jinnah's terms would have reduced the whole of the region to Pakistan-like chaos. We would have had not just three countries, but more than 20 of them, allowing none to survive as secular nations. By agreeing to Partition, Nehru and Patel saved the rest of the nation from the mess Jinnah created. They did the right thing.
Like Satan, Jinnah believed that it was better to reign in hell than serve in heaven. He managed to convert Pakistan into hell and realised his foolishness before he died. Whatever their other faults, Nehru and Sardar Patel dragged India back from that precipice. They prevented the whole of undivided India from being a part of Jinnah's hell.
Many of our politicians wrongly believe that
the keys to India's Muslim vote bank lie in Jinnah's Pakistan. Hence the need to call him secular. The good reason for re-evaluating Jinnah is that historical figures must not be judged by their darkest hours.
