Opulence is the word that symbolized moguls. If Mohd of Ghazanavi looted, Moguls settled down to build an empire and bashed in riches. Modern Indian history celebrated a  "tolerant"  Akbar, and apparent romantics [ I am tempted to re-evaluate after reading stories of  of existence of  sealed underground rooms, and intrigued by the secrecy sorrounding on such a silly matter ]. This image of opulence replaced the viciousness of Aurangzeb and attacks of Babar, in modern history.
     Late and Post colonial decades, most likely aided by London literati, however seem to have transformed it,  vicious Aurangzeb has become  a Zinda pir - From revisionist twists to KBC questions.  An economist article, published from London,  is discussed by Raman, in the context of Aurangzeb model.  This transformation could more likely quest of a reclusive gold standard for Pakisthani idenity, and  more of an aspiration than  anything to do with history. The interest of British leftists in these affairs has been a long one,  VS Naipaul writes of his young days in London, when it was hippy for the London revolutionaries to go to the North west Pakisthan. The revolution indeed happened there years later as breeding ground of Taliban. The disconnect of this revolution at this point  is about the question of  religion introduced by taliban. But there seems to be a lot of simillarities beneath this apparent disconnect.

 

  When Taliban took over swat valley, the invaders were not dealing with kaffirs - not a religious issue. It was the Pakisthani landowners who in their blind faith were sponsoring the Kashmir Jehadis for decades. Taliban  were not attacking a state, swat was part of the Islamic state of Pakisthan. If these two reasons don't hold, then did the taliban see itself  as pirates and docaits attacking citizens of Pakisthan ?  Of course the taliban didn't see itself as pyrates! They saw towards an utopian world, just as revolutionaries of london saw it, they worked through Jehad and revolutions as brutal maoists work through. Therefore the taliban means is not disconnected from leftist means.

 

 A NY Times article says one of the first things taliban did was to drive out the Pakisthani landowners from swat and appropriate their lands, just as the Pakisthani Jehadis did to the Kashmir pundits a decade ago. The land was given to the peasants. This is ridiculously simillar to the acts of Mao, stalin, it doesn't have much to do with the Mogul opulence or Afgan tribal wars, rather it could be one of the first  implementation of the "egalitarian" and ideological Islam, that leftists have been relentlessly talking about. This activity  seems consistent with  the re-branding of the most virulent and vicious emperor Aurangzeb as a jinda "fakir" . fakir is a poor man, not a super duper wealthy mogul. Fat  Pakisthani elites misunderstood re-branding of Aurangzeb in terms of civilization.Most of them  are now out of swat valley.

 

Reformation :

 

  The swat valley was moderately educated place.Part of education in colonial days were about instilling european supremism - justifiably about the then contemporary europe, unjustifiably about the civillization. English educated people of colonial India generally had contempt  for the natives or at best a hopeless  despair and a massive plan to lift up the peasants. Colonial administration needed this to sustain itself. Most of these people got westernized, culturally or religiously. The fault or despire of natives were supposed to be aboundant. For some hindus, it included religious reformation - about a dozen reformers of colonial west bengal became prophet equivalents, missions were focussed upon spreading words, ideals were considered independent and words based on these ideals - It  looked simultaneously confirming east and  west. While ideals looked attractive, the premise of a perfect or better and independent ideal had its leg supported mostly on completeness on nature of history as assumed and described in dominant schools of western narratives . The quest for this variant goes on till.

 

   Islam has gone reformation in these days too. Jinnah was in part anglicized.  The Mogul opulence is just one narrative, that was satisfactory to many. This was not good enough for Pakisthan,  That Aurangzeb as a Zinda Fakir, is possibly outcome of further quest for an ideal story that people searched to get an Pakisthani identity. This story is attempt at giving makeover in leftist revolutionary moral terms, away from mogul opulence and riches. An extreme effort of  this makeover, aided by european revolutionaries of early sixties, most likely has morphed to taliban. Asides organizational capabilities and recruitment tactics,  Taliban using similar techniques as the communist revolutionaries, to gain power they take away money and land  from one and give to another to gain loyalty.

 

   The talibani revolutionary Islam and  revolutionary left also share simillar visions, they look world dominion, and call it would be state of the utopia.