What's new

Liberal democracy core ideology of Pakistan "Reclaiming the idealogy"

pak-marine

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
11,639
Reaction score
-22
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Reclaiming the original ideology
ZAHID HUSSAIN — UPDATED ABOUT 4 HOURS AGO

5654c4a78039a.jpg

The writer is an author and journalist.


Nawaz Sharif is under intense attack by the religious lobby for calling for making Pakistan a ‘liberal’ democratic nation. The chief of the Jamaat-i-Islami wants the prime minister to withdraw his comments, which were made at an investment conference. Though Sharif actually used the term in the context of the economy, it has nonetheless triggered a renewed debate on the ideology of Pakistan.

Islamic parties gathered under the umbrella of the Milli Yakjehti Council (MYC) have threatened to launch nationwide protests against what they describe as a ‘conspiracy’ to turn Pakistan into a secular state. “We cannot compromise on the basic ideology of Pakistan,” they have vowed. This squabbling lot that never agrees on any religious issue now appears united in defending the country’s ‘Islamic identity’.

Such a strong reaction to the mere mention of the term ‘liberal’ does not come as a surprise given the ignorance and narrow outlook of our religious elite. More shocking, however, are the views of some supposedly moderate political leaders on the concept of liberal democracy and secularism. One wonders how these political philosophies clash with the basis on which this country was founded.

Nothing could be more ludicrous than the claim by Sirajul Haq that the remarks by the prime minister are contrary to the Constitution, the philosophy of Allama Iqbal and the principles laid down by the Quaid-i-Azam. How do concepts of political and civil liberties and religious freedom come into the conflict with Pakistan’s original ideology and the vision of the nation’s founding fathers?

Liberal democracy was the core ideology of Pakistan’s founding, as articulated by the Quaid himself.
In fact, it is an attempt to redefine Pakistan’s ideology that has harmed the country the most by widening the religious divide within its polity. The Islamist groups gathered under the banner of the MYC have been instrumental in fuelling sectarian differences and religious extremism in the country. One of the participants in the group’s recent meeting was Jamaatud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed whose organisation is on the UN list of terrorist organisations.

Liberal democracy was the core ideology of the foundation of Pakistan, something that was clearly articulated by Mohammad Ali Jinnah in an interview to Reuters in 1946. “The new state,” he said, “would be a modern democratic state with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of the new nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of their religion, caste or creed.”

Pakistan was never supposed to be, in the words of Mr Jinnah, a “theocratic state” that these religious groups strive for. In fact, the country has long deviated from this core principle. Theocracy is anathema to the modern democracy that the Quaid had envisaged.

The country drifted from its ideals when the state got involved in religious matters, and with deciding who was and wasn’t a true Muslim. It went from bad to worse when the religious groups, many of whom are part of the MYC, took it upon themselves to determine the Islamic credentials of different sects. This has also been the major cause for the deaths of thousands of Muslims in sectarian violence in Pakistan.

Rising religious extremism and intolerance have led to escalation in violence against religious minorities and their systematic persecution. The mob attacks on Christian colonies and the lynching of Ahmadis in the name of faith has given the country the dubious reputation of being among the most intolerant nations in the world. What happened in Shantinagar, Gojra, Joseph Colony, etc and more recently in Jhelum is testimony to that.

Many of these religious groups have been directly and indirectly patronising militant organisations such as the banned Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan. They rationalise terrorist attacks that have killed thousands of innocent people including young children and also provide religious sanction to suicide bombings. Is that the country that our founding fathers had envisaged?

Not surprisingly, the MYC has criticised the recent Supreme Court ruling upholding the death sentence of Mumtaz Qadri, the police guard who murdered Salmaan Taseer. Most of those comprising it have publicly condoned the killing of the former governor of Punjab in the name of alleged blasphemy. They have reserved their harshest criticism for that section of the ruling that said that calling for the reform of the blasphemy law is not blasphemy.

The misuse of the blasphemy law both against Muslims and non-Muslims has increased in recent years, in that it is being used as a licence to kill. Many of the mob attacks are instigated by clerics associated with these groups. The latest such example is the burning of an Ahmadi-owned factory and an Ahmadi place of worship in Jhelum last week sparked by allegations that some employees of the factory had committed blasphemy. Announcements from area mosques instigated the crowd to violence.

One wonders why the law has not come into action against Hafiz Saeed for making inflammatory statements. Although the media is barred from reporting the activities of his organisation, his remarks against the prime minister were widely covered. It is highly ironic that he is projecting himself as the protector of Pakistan’s ideology.

Liberalism is the essence of modern democracy. It is a philosophy that believes in progress, religious tolerance, the essential goodness of the human race, the autonomy of the individual and protection of political and civil liberties. How are these values in conflict with our religion as these self-styled guardians of Islam claim? For this country’s stability and progress we need to go back to the ideals of our founding fathers.

The country has suffered hugely as a result of religious bigotry and the wrong interpretation of Pakistan’s ideology. Pakistan was created to be a modern democratic state with freedom of belief and religion. It was not supposed to be an obscurantist state as the country is now being portrayed by assorted so-called Islamic groups. We must reclaim the original ideology of Pakistan if we really want to move forward and establish a tolerant society. Liberal democracy is the only answer to violent extremism and religious bigotry.

The writer is an author and journalist.

Published in Dawn, November 25th, 2015
 
The core ideology of Pakistan is whatever the majority of the population wants or is willing to accept. If majority of population wants Talibanization and draconian fake Shariat laws that enslave them then that is their core ideology and not this ideal that the gentleman wants to paint under liberalism and that other nonsense.
 
Reclaiming the original ideology
ZAHID HUSSAIN — UPDATED ABOUT 4 HOURS AGO

5654c4a78039a.jpg

The writer is an author and journalist.


Nawaz Sharif is under intense attack by the religious lobby for calling for making Pakistan a ‘liberal’ democratic nation. The chief of the Jamaat-i-Islami wants the prime minister to withdraw his comments, which were made at an investment conference. Though Sharif actually used the term in the context of the economy, it has nonetheless triggered a renewed debate on the ideology of Pakistan.

Islamic parties gathered under the umbrella of the Milli Yakjehti Council (MYC) have threatened to launch nationwide protests against what they describe as a ‘conspiracy’ to turn Pakistan into a secular state. “We cannot compromise on the basic ideology of Pakistan,” they have vowed. This squabbling lot that never agrees on any religious issue now appears united in defending the country’s ‘Islamic identity’.

Such a strong reaction to the mere mention of the term ‘liberal’ does not come as a surprise given the ignorance and narrow outlook of our religious elite. More shocking, however, are the views of some supposedly moderate political leaders on the concept of liberal democracy and secularism. One wonders how these political philosophies clash with the basis on which this country was founded.

Nothing could be more ludicrous than the claim by Sirajul Haq that the remarks by the prime minister are contrary to the Constitution, the philosophy of Allama Iqbal and the principles laid down by the Quaid-i-Azam. How do concepts of political and civil liberties and religious freedom come into the conflict with Pakistan’s original ideology and the vision of the nation’s founding fathers?

Liberal democracy was the core ideology of Pakistan’s founding, as articulated by the Quaid himself.
In fact, it is an attempt to redefine Pakistan’s ideology that has harmed the country the most by widening the religious divide within its polity. The Islamist groups gathered under the banner of the MYC have been instrumental in fuelling sectarian differences and religious extremism in the country. One of the participants in the group’s recent meeting was Jamaatud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed whose organisation is on the UN list of terrorist organisations.

Liberal democracy was the core ideology of the foundation of Pakistan, something that was clearly articulated by Mohammad Ali Jinnah in an interview to Reuters in 1946. “The new state,” he said, “would be a modern democratic state with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of the new nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of their religion, caste or creed.”

Pakistan was never supposed to be, in the words of Mr Jinnah, a “theocratic state” that these religious groups strive for. In fact, the country has long deviated from this core principle. Theocracy is anathema to the modern democracy that the Quaid had envisaged.

The country drifted from its ideals when the state got involved in religious matters, and with deciding who was and wasn’t a true Muslim. It went from bad to worse when the religious groups, many of whom are part of the MYC, took it upon themselves to determine the Islamic credentials of different sects. This has also been the major cause for the deaths of thousands of Muslims in sectarian violence in Pakistan.

Rising religious extremism and intolerance have led to escalation in violence against religious minorities and their systematic persecution. The mob attacks on Christian colonies and the lynching of Ahmadis in the name of faith has given the country the dubious reputation of being among the most intolerant nations in the world. What happened in Shantinagar, Gojra, Joseph Colony, etc and more recently in Jhelum is testimony to that.

Many of these religious groups have been directly and indirectly patronising militant organisations such as the banned Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan. They rationalise terrorist attacks that have killed thousands of innocent people including young children and also provide religious sanction to suicide bombings. Is that the country that our founding fathers had envisaged?

Not surprisingly, the MYC has criticised the recent Supreme Court ruling upholding the death sentence of Mumtaz Qadri, the police guard who murdered Salmaan Taseer. Most of those comprising it have publicly condoned the killing of the former governor of Punjab in the name of alleged blasphemy. They have reserved their harshest criticism for that section of the ruling that said that calling for the reform of the blasphemy law is not blasphemy.

The misuse of the blasphemy law both against Muslims and non-Muslims has increased in recent years, in that it is being used as a licence to kill. Many of the mob attacks are instigated by clerics associated with these groups. The latest such example is the burning of an Ahmadi-owned factory and an Ahmadi place of worship in Jhelum last week sparked by allegations that some employees of the factory had committed blasphemy. Announcements from area mosques instigated the crowd to violence.

One wonders why the law has not come into action against Hafiz Saeed for making inflammatory statements. Although the media is barred from reporting the activities of his organisation, his remarks against the prime minister were widely covered. It is highly ironic that he is projecting himself as the protector of Pakistan’s ideology.

Liberalism is the essence of modern democracy. It is a philosophy that believes in progress, religious tolerance, the essential goodness of the human race, the autonomy of the individual and protection of political and civil liberties. How are these values in conflict with our religion as these self-styled guardians of Islam claim? For this country’s stability and progress we need to go back to the ideals of our founding fathers.

The country has suffered hugely as a result of religious bigotry and the wrong interpretation of Pakistan’s ideology. Pakistan was created to be a modern democratic state with freedom of belief and religion. It was not supposed to be an obscurantist state as the country is now being portrayed by assorted so-called Islamic groups. We must reclaim the original ideology of Pakistan if we really want to move forward and establish a tolerant society. Liberal democracy is the only answer to violent extremism and religious bigotry.

The writer is an author and journalist.

Published in Dawn, November 25th, 2015
No it never was and never will be. All speeches of Jinah from 1940 till his death make it clear he never wanted the liberalism or secularism. Finally what matters is what ALLAH and his RASOOL SAW want from Muslims.
 
No it never was and never will be. All speeches of Jinah from 1940 till his death make it clear he never wanted the liberalism or secularism. Finally what matters is what ALLAH and his RASOOL SAW want from Muslims.
You can pick a line or few words but its a lost case .. QA never wanted sharia law he wanted a liberal democratic coutry .. That why We were initially named Republic of pakistan !! So save it and implment your sharia at home or cousins or alternatively u can visit the ISIS caliphate in Iraq and Syria
 
You can pick a line or few words but its a lost case .. QA never wanted sharia law he wanted a liberal democratic coutry .. That why We were initially named Republic of pakistan !! So save it and implment your sharia at home or cousins or alternatively u can visit the ISIS caliphate in Iraq and Syria
He wanted Shariah Law in his speech on occasion of Eid Miladun Nabi at Karachi he took on those who say Pakistan law would not be based on Shariah Law. He clearly stated that Pakistan Law would be based on Shariah Law.
 
The core ideology of Pakistan is whatever the majority of the population wants or is willing to accept. If majority of population wants Talibanization and draconian fake Shariat laws that enslave them then that is their core ideology and not this ideal that the gentleman wants to paint under liberalism and that other nonsense.

interested in genuine shariat laws?

You can pick a line or few words but its a lost case .. QA never wanted sharia law he wanted a liberal democratic coutry .. That why We were initially named Republic of pakistan !! So save it and implment your sharia at home or cousins or alternatively u can visit the ISIS caliphate in Iraq and Syria

Than you people can also visit europe/america for your secular/liberal values.
 
Liberal democracy was the core ideology of the foundation of Pakistan, something that was clearly articulated by Mohammad Ali Jinnah in an interview to Reuters in 1946. “The new state,” he said, “would be a modern democratic state with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of the new nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of their religion, caste or creed.”

Pakistan was never supposed to be, in the words of Mr Jinnah, a “theocratic state” that these religious groups strive for. In fact, the country has long deviated from this core principle. Theocracy is anathema to the modern democracy that the Quaid had envisaged.

Look who's talking, Mr Zahid Hussain, who spent his whole life trying to prove that Quaid'e Azam wanted a liberal democratic state and as a proof in 2015, he has quoted Jinnah where there's no mention of Mr Zahid's word " liberal" --- Mr Zahid Hussain believes modern democratic state = liberal democratic state, this shows Mr Zahid's level of intellect.

Mr Zahid rightly pointed out that Mr Jinnah didn't wanted a theocratic state, but again, Mr Zahid doesn't know the difference between an Islamic state and a theocratic state ; and these are our so called "intellectuals".

Mr Zahid Hussain & co aren't tired of quoting Mr Jinnah's couple of speeches (which have, BTW, no word Liberal) and than giving some mirch masala to these speeches but they always fail ( a deliberate attempt) to produce these speeches in their articles/talks:

"The Quran is the general code for the Muslims, a religious, social, civil, commercial, military, judicial, criminal and penal code. It regulates every thing, from the ceremonies of religion to those of daily life, from the salvation of the soul to the health of the body, from the rights of all to those of each individual from morality to crime; from punishment here to that in the life to come, and our Holy Prophet Mohammad (Peace by upon Him) has enjoined on us that every Musalman should posses a copy of the Quran and be his own priest. Therefore, Islam is not merely confined to the spiritual tenets and doctrines or ritual and ceremonies. It is a complete code regulating the whole Muslim society, every department of life, collective and individual"

Jamil-ud-Din Ahmed, Speeches and Statements of Mr. Jinnah, Lahore M. Ashraf, 1968, pp. 208-209.

Hey Zahid! do you understand what it means to be "a complete code regulating the whole Muslim society" ?



 
Than you people can also visit europe/america for your secular/liberal values.

pakistanis like to keep mosque and religion separate this is clearly reflected in voting patterns from decades ... so any one who would like to enforce their views on every one should leave and join caliphat. And they shouldnt find it offensive its a chance for one to find out how great is life under the sharia laws
 
pakistanis like to keep mosque and religion separate this is clearly reflected in voting patterns from decades ... so any one who would like to enforce their views on every one should leave and join caliphat. And they shouldnt find it offensive its a chance for one to find out how great is life under the sharia laws

At-least read your own constitution and regarding voting pattern, our voting pattern reflects that we vote for the chor/lucha/lafangas ----- have other thoughts, just look into the recent on going local body election pattern.

Your other part of the post isn't worth responding.

and you can post here Quaid'e Azams speeches/talks where he has called for liberal democracy, Mr Zahid Hussan has failed to do so, you can try your Luck.
 
At-least read your own constitution and regarding voting pattern, our voting pattern reflects that we vote for the chor/lucha/lafangas ----- have other thoughts, just look into the recent on going local body election pattern.

Your other part of the post isn't worth responding.

and you can post here Quaid'e Azams speeches/talks where he has called for liberal democracy, Mr Zahid Hussan has failed to do so, you can try your Luck.

Voting pattern says it all there is no support for religious parties as far as politics / state is concerned , .. if Quaid wanted he would have named it Islamic Republic of Pakistan however he decided to name it Republic of Pakistan it later changed almost a decade after his death .. btw where does it says in our constitution that one should vote for chores ??
 
He wanted Shariah Law in his speech on occasion of Eid Miladun Nabi at Karachi he took on those who say Pakistan law would not be based on Shariah Law. He clearly stated that Pakistan Law would be based on Shariah Law.
logo.20150511103944.png


Religious bigotry
ZAHID Hussain in his column ‘Reclaiming the original ideology’ (Nov 25) writes: “Islamic parties, gathered under the umbrella of the Milli Yakjehti Council (MYC), have threatened to launch nationwide protests against what they describe as a ‘conspiracy’ to turn Pakistan into a secular state. ‘We cannot compromise on the basic ideology of Pakistan,’ they have vowed.

This squabbling lot that never agrees on any religious issue now appears united in defending the country’s ‘Islamic identity.’ What mockery! Quaid-i-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah in his struggle for the creation of Pakistan said in an interview to Reuters in 1946: “The new state would be a modern democratic state with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of the new nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of their religion, caste or creed.”

Pakistan was never supposed to be, in the words of Mr Jinnah, a “theocratic state,’ that these religious groups strive for.” He says this country has deviated from its core principle. Theocracy is anathema to modern democracy that the Quaid had envisaged.

Mr Hussain says: “The country drifted from its ideals when the state got involved in religious matters…” In fact, it is an attempt to redefine Pakistan’s ideology that has harmed the country the most by widening the religious divide. Rising religious extremism and intolerance have led to escalation in violence against religious minorities and their systematic persecution.

What happened in Shantinagar, Gojra, Joseph Colony, etc, and more recently in Jhelum is testimony to that. Many of the religious groups that form MYC are directly or indirectly patronising militant organisations like the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan.

Pakistan was created to be a modern democratic state with freedoms of beliefs, and religion. He says, ‘We must reclaim the original ideology of Pakistan if we really want to move forward and establish a tolerant society.’

Wg Cdr (r) Sardar Ahmed Shah Jan
Peshawar


Published in Dawn, December 1st, 2015
 

Back
Top Bottom