18

For example as claimed here,

A study by the National Commission for Justice and Peace (NCJP) on all ages of state textbooks in Punjab revealed that the instances of hate-speech and indoctrination in such allegedly 'moderate' texts has risen by over 270% in just three years since 2009

And here,

"Hindu pundits were jealous of Al-Beruni” ( Social Studies , Class VIII, Punjab Textbook Board, page 82). Another textbook reads, “The Hindus who had always been opportunists” ( Social Studies , Class VI, Punjab Textbook Board, page 141). Still another one reads, “The Hindus had always been an enemy of Islam” ( Urdu , Class V, Punjab Textbook Board, page 108).

Is it true that Punjab Board of Pakistan textbooks contain hate speech against non-muslims?

nameDisplay
  • 299
  • 1
  • 5
  • 3
    I don't have evidence of the truth or otherwise of this, but it should be noted that the claim as promulgated is only about the Punjab Textbook Board, and not about all textbooks in Pakistan. – DJClayworth May 27 '13 at 21:01
  • 3
    The quoted sections do not seem like hate speech. Being opposed to something does not indicate hate speech. I am not seeing any slurring or advocacy of violenence against the Hindi in the text that would qualify. – Chad May 28 '13 at 13:31
  • @DJClayworth, I completely agree with you. I have edited the question, feel free to edit if you think something still needs to be corrected – nameDisplay May 29 '13 at 09:39
  • 2
    @Chad, Hate speech is, outside the law, communication that vilifies a person or a group based on discrimination against that person or group - Wikipedia – nameDisplay May 29 '13 at 09:40
  • 1
    @kafir Then, wouldn't answering this question simply mean checking page 82 of "Social Studies", to see if it says "Hindu pundits were jealous of Al-Beruni"? –  May 29 '13 at 11:39
  • A little cultural background: The Punjab is a disputed region between India and Pakistan. Prior to 1930 Pakistan and the Punjab were all part of India (under British rule). When the British left (1947) India was split into Pakistan (mostly Muslin) and India (mostly Hindu). The Punjab was a region of real contention. It was both heavily Hindu and heavily Muslim and both groups claimed it as their own (it's a region of great beauty and cultural value to both). It was split into two parts. Its history since is very complicated with ownership and borders changing frequently. Tensions are high. – Ian May 29 '13 at 12:16
  • @kafir - I agree it is bias against the Hindu but I do not think this rises to the level of Hate speech unless you can show how this meets some international standard definition. By this definition the Text books in the US are filled with hate speech... Against the Germans, Russians, English, and anyone else who has through history done anything less than glorious. – Chad May 29 '13 at 12:36
  • @ian, Are you sure you are not confusing Punjab with Kashmir? Punjab has never been a subject of dispute between India and Pakistan, at least in the past 50 odd years. – Vaibhav Garg May 30 '13 at 04:12
  • @VaibhavGarg I agree that things are worse in Kashmir, also the character limit meant I had to take out a lot of the detail I originally wrote; looking at it now it does make it sound worse than it is. From my experience of the Indian side of the border I would say that while there isn't any official dispute any more, culturally the Punjab is often used as a talking point in the on-going Indian / Pakistan mutual hatred. Tensions might not be high enough for political or military action, but they're certainly high enough for institutionalized racism (this is of course, my estimation). – Ian May 30 '13 at 09:18
  • @ian, well, I live in Rajasthan, a state which touches Punjab, India; and am under the impression that Punjab, Pakistan is a non-issue here. I seldom, if ever, hear anyone even mention it, except in contexts where there are some distant relatives living across the border. Also, If you are basing your opinion on the phoney Wagah Border show, that is a carefully choreographed spectacle, nothing more, nothing less. Borders changing frequently!! nope. – Vaibhav Garg May 31 '13 at 03:30

1 Answers1

6

There is a publication Education vs. Fanatic Literature A Study on the Hate Content in the Textbooks in Punjab and Sindh Provinces that lists English translations of quotes with page and line number for the 2012-13 academic year.

Many of the quotes are debatable as to whether they are hateful or not.

One of the supposed examples is:

Hindus worship idols in temples

which is somewhere between factual and an oversimplification of worshipping god(s) as symbolized by the idols.

Many of the other quotes are accusations of Hindus being hateful or harming Muslims, such as:

Hindus got enraged and started genocide of Muslims

Another example, which could easily be considered hateful, is:

Hindus can never become the true friends of Muslims

The book The Footprints of Partition: Narratives of Four Generations of Pakistanis and Indians confirms the "friends" quote above and adds other quotes such as:

Since their belief and culture is different from non-Muslims [sic], therefore cooperation with Hindus in any situation is impossible

DavePhD
  • 103,432
  • 24
  • 436
  • 464
  • 1
    +1 but can you add some context for these quotes? For example in what context does the textbook say "Hindus can never become the true friends of Muslims"? Is it presented as a universal fact or an example of an opinion? – user56reinstatemonica8 Mar 03 '16 at 15:40
  • @user568458 unfortunately, the source doesn't give any further context, except to say that quote is from a social studies book for 5th graders. – DavePhD Mar 03 '16 at 15:51