There are quite a number of differences. First and major one is the population, an increased population means increased burden on existing resources and increased diversity. Increased population carries with it the advantage of new ideas which can give many benefits and increase resources for production, but if you're ideologically locked in the past then new ideas will not be used and resources will remain the same. This is exactly happening in Pakistan. Back in Quaid's era traditional agriculture was the major source of production and it had an impact on the entire nation and the values and culture and how it organized itself, whereas today traditional agriculture is being crushed under modern agriculture but we as people are not ready to accept that . This is changing the way people lived life and the way they saw the world, and once that perception is changed you no longer have the same old time . Back then cars and televisions were 'luxury items' but today they have become a necessity for every one.

There are quite a number of differences. First and major one is the population, an increased population means increased burden on existing resources and increased diversity. Increased population carries with it the advantage of new ideas which can give many benefits and increase resources for production, but if you're ideologically locked in the past then new ideas will not be used and resources will remain the same. This is exactly happening in Pakistan. Back in Quaid's era traditional agriculture was the major source of production and it had an impact on the entire nation and the values and culture and how it organized itself, whereas today traditional agriculture is being crushed under modern agriculture but we as people are not ready to accept that . This is changing the way people lived life and the way they saw the world, and once that perception is changed you no longer have the same old time . Back then cars and televisions were 'luxury items' but today they have become a necessity for every one.

this may be your personal opinion but facts are otherwise. war tribunal proceedings in bangladesh are widely criticised across the western world and its manifest that the executions are politically motivated. there was no targetting of secular people, the real motive was to topple the democratic govt and to re-install dictatorship.

__________________
Be the change you want to see in the world.

pakistan acquired at the name of islam, and it is not a secular state. quaid e azam was a straight forward man. and not opponent of ideology of the state. you are not wrong

Well!
That's the basic difference we find in ideology definition actually...!!!

ISLAMIC --> govt. of Allah, by people for the people
SECULAR --> govt. of people, by people for the people

Quaid, in my opinion , wished to have an Islamic state otherwise its name wouldn't have been Islamic Republic of Pakistan...
secondly, the very first speech on 14th AUG 1947 contained words," the demand of pakistan was not for a peice of land but it was to make a laboratory where people could examine the rules created by ALLAH...
that speech, in my view, defines completely Quaid's view towards the state...