[rayiner]

> It's little reason to justify such division today, and especially not to participate in mass murder to achieve it.

Not at all! To use my Bangladesh example. Bangladesh was founded in 1971 as a secular republic. Pakistan thereafter veered towards theocracy, e.g. adopting Sharia law for criminal proceedings in 1976. Subsequent events have slowly chipped away at Bangladeshi secularism over the years, but had they remained with Pakistan it would have been a lost hope. And as for tribalism being obsolete, I don't agree. There are hundreds of millions of people who think I should be executed for leaving the religion I was born into: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/05/01.... Do you want those folks voting on the laws that govern you? If not, you're not arguing against "tribalism," you're just arguing about where the tribal lines should be drawn.

[mkaziz]

I don't think so. Having the Bengali counterbalance would have significantly reduced Pakistan's veering towards theocracy, imo.

But that's speculation, neither here nor there. Who knows how it would have actually played out.