Yes and no...*I will show you how others see it very much like how you see it*
I am probably the first person to link them together with voting rights and lack of education to sustain a system that is broken maybe even dead and stubbornly being called democracy! MANY who have raised this issue have raised it as a provincial disease or a arty venom spitting contest!
You see, if this is what you think, then you are not the first, and even so, you and I both know it's a gross over simplification as to why the system is still dysfunctional.
So before I say anything further, let me make my stance clear. I do believe the system needs deep change, from the bottom up, it is not quite broken, but very dysfunctional, 'broken' implies that it worked before and now does not. I argue that Pakistan has never reached that state, and if it does so even once, it will achieve the stability needed to stay that way for a very long time.
However, what I don't agree with, is abrupt and careless calls for 'anything-but-this kind of revolution', here our countrymen are asking for a bloody revolution and civil war, do you agree with that?
I argue that this rhetoric one liner only implies one thing by its own definition; blood and change. Blood part is fairly obvious, the change part of these calls is ambiguous and is change for change sake and no indication of how, why, and for what purpose, better or worse.
You are not denying it but like the 1st bit of your quote, you are putting it just like every other person putting it as a disease of the area/ politics of South Asia instead of putting it out as a catastrophe worthy to discuss!
Like I said, it's very easy to oversimplify a problem like this, and draw up lines, to say... he supports democracy therefore he supports the status quo and no change forever.
This is wrong, as Pakistanis we are all fully aware of the problems, how we chose to change this is where the disagreement lies.
1st thing 1st....Change is needed is everyone's dream but no one wants to move towards the channel of change! As for real reforms....It isnt going to come out of a broken system that only backs broken people to break the nation
And you dont see it necessary is just like the 1st part of your post I quoted: no one does!
Okay so now this, I agree with the gist of what you're hinting at, but note how I worded the last past of this sentence.
You've mentioned 'channel of change', what exactly is this? I could say 'the virtues of change are the best route' and then simultaneously mention democracy, but that is very vague! Of use to none of us.
Clarify what you mean here. If we are to move on to a path of change, specify where it lies, so far, all I've heard ITT is not specifics from you, but specifics from other revolutionaries and their specifics start and end with rhetoric and calls for civil war and brutality.
Why do you equate millitary with national revolution? NOT all REVOLUTIONS REQUIRE BLOOD BATHS! BTW, how are we not already bathing in blood? Just coz it is minorities, different sects and NOT US doesnt mean there isnt a blood bath already taking place!
Because, you've said nothing specific on the matter, yet your calls here are echoed by folks like
@AZADPAKISTAN2009 who is calling for blood, military and even civil war.
If you were to specify your own stance and make it independent of other, then I wouldn't even need to go there.
I wouldnt mind a blood bath, but the blood should be of those who are taking loans with no vision on how to pay it
This is where I view this as madness. You don't mind a bloodbath? What kind of joke to people think this is?
Your calls are with the assumption that you will not bleed and people power will somehow make the establishment keel over, and then you call get together with pitchforks and then band round the establishment types and destroy them.
Here's a few facts for you to know, the above is the definition of treason, the establishment may be deeply unpopular among many, but so are most revolutionaries, take IK's failed attempt for example, the military backed the government to whom it is meant to be subordinate, it was clear that overthrowing a government with a huge mandate would be harder than they thought, and if they caused blood to spill it would be to the detriment of all.
Lastly, do you honestly believe that cutting the head of the establishment will fix all your troubles? That after this day dream revolution becomes real, somehow Pakistan will be like Switzerland? Deep change, decades of slow and stable progress would still be needed. And note the mention of the word 'stable' there's no country on earth that became successful while fighting on-going civil wars, where one government was uprooted by dictatorship, was uprooted by another government.
Those who are lotay and keep changing parties like babies change diapers
Those who raise their hands while unaware what they are voting for but raise their hands coz the person presenting the bill will pay for their next ticket in assembly!
Those who own sooo much land but die when they need to pay tax!
Those who benefit their pitless stomach instead of the country!
For me their blood needs to spill and it's worth is less than Pakistani soil!
Although the problems are real, but in response to what I'm talking about, this is cheap rhetoric that I've heard now from every man, woman and child.
And what about fake democracy? How is the success of 2 parties in a repeated cycle not shame on you?
Not a fake democracy but just a dysfunctional one. You do get what you vote for, if people are voting like fools, then they have to learn not to vote like fools, that is how democracy works. People put pressure on their representatives to do better or face elimination. And granted, this is a slow and painful process, but it works, and it takes a while.
Also, a two-party system is bad, but it doesn't need to be called a 'fake democracy' for example, here in the UK, the two main parties Labour and Conservatives have won every election since 1945, without exception, yet these two represent people very well. But recently, the SNP in Scotland swept in and now represents the VAST majority of all seats there. Several other parties have also been in and out of government and popularity. Yet no-one can say that the UK is a fake democracy or even a dysfunctional one.
And this is where you'll say Pakistan isn't the UK, I agree, it isn't, it is decades behind. decades of struggle it needs to have before it gets there. The UK didn't become the way it was overnight, there was a time where only wealthy land owners could vote for the elections, then wealthy business owners and aristocrats and then only white men could vote over a certain age, and then only men, and now just about everyone can vote who is of age. It took hundreds of years to get there, and it worked well, and it was slow, painful, yet no revolution, or bloodbath made it happen.
Pakistan if it uses people power through democracy, makes changes to the system can achieve this. Political stability will be important in all this. Uprooting the system via revolution is starting from scratch, and it would take us back to 2008, where the top guys have had a shake up, the backward people are still backward and will not let themselves progress.
All change, societal upheaval, wherever successful in history, was done by people, the little guys, all progress depends on when the working men and women evolve and prosper, just changing the scenery and some politicians at the top will give you nothing on its own, except satisfaction and some Neanderthal fulfilment of revenge and justice.
If Pakistan is diseased, then the politicians are nothing by symptoms, real long term treatment is needed, no violent attacks on the symptoms will work.
We tried this before, every dictator we had uprooted the system and did nothing, but bring us back to square one at the end.
Take musharraf, when he kicked NS out, many people were overjoyed that he kicked out the politicians. He sat a while, and it was his good fortune that 9/11 bailed him out on the hole he dug for us all, and that we became allies of the US and he brought us some progress and short term change. But nothing concrete or long term.
What happened when he left? Back to square one, back to Jiye Bhutto, and back to NS. He failed to change anything, all we got was a small glimmer of progress, and then intense political instability, and then back to where we were.
Right now the only viable alternative is just shoot the scums at sight! Seriously they do more damage alive than dead! There should be an undercover organization that cleans these leeches ....Just them who is in power and hasnt devliered a cent but eaten and grown too fat to fit in their own clothes!
How is this is a fix? You sound crazy here, I'm sure Taliban types say the same about us before they commit their crimes.
And again zero substance and detail for what comes after.
Fix right now in all honesty is dissolve all parties and allow ONLY middle class to form parties anyone owning above a certain threshold (average middle man salary) shouldnt be allowed for politician as they arent a representative of anything...No one who hasnt earned his own bread with his own sweat (family heirs are a no no) should be allowed ....
This is easier said than done, so about those party workers and leaders, thousands of them, you kill or banish? Correct?
This is assuming they put up no fight and your hands aren't already drenched in the blood of innocents, of your own and the establishment types.
What then do you do with the millions that voted for these people that do not agree with your revolution? Your bloody revolution? Kill them? Silence them? Pretend they don't exist?
Let me tell you what happens when something like this goes down, take Afghanistan as a good example, when the communists overthrew Kabul with the help of the Soviet, you know what happened? Every writer, scientist, doctor, professor, educated individual and cultural leader fled, to Pakistan, to Iran, to the West. Leaving Afghanistan a wasteland, void of many types of people who weren't even establishment types but still the lifeblood of progress and the economy.
Scrape out most of the shit which allows them stay order or allows them pre-bail whatever not and all VIP status should be flushed off! Any dept that goes in deficit by even 5000 Rs the head and his whole cabinet who are capable of signing something should be fired and replaced within a day! Because you should sign ONLY when you have read! So if your signature is there and you have no idea what you signed for = empty your office!
This is possible within the framework of democracy, no revolution necessary, use your people power, make it happen, people voted for the status quo, that is their fault. If you want to change the top dogs, change the people that vote them in every time.
And if you do that, there will be no need of revolution, and that is truly the most perfect solution.
Scrape off the safarish for govt offices...All officers should have masters degree and any fake degree holder proven cant be "re entered" as a politician
Again, see above.
No extra VIP status for family trips or private personal BS! The state shouldnt pay for the bills of the homes of PM / President or any minister! They should live like the people to know what the people want! Not live in palaces and raise their hands for WHAT THEY THINK the people want!
Ditto.
And no none of this is idealistic...I can tell you a few countries already imposing these rules ....Heck many countries impose these BASIC rules! We are still living in a colonial mindset if we have knights/ lords/ counts and shits! (Not by title but by wealth and VIP protocol)....
I agree.... and these countries got those rules... a fortnight after a bloody revolution? No! After decades of REAL change through democracy, the people used their own worth to change the system, not uproot it and hope for the best.
Every criminal, thief and litterbug in Pakistan complains about the same things we do, yet we don't ever look inward to change ourselves first. IF every Pakistani did that rather than change everyone else, we'd be better off, there'd even be no sectarianism.
Any politician in any position who made a loss of even 5k Rs should pay 2x back to the nation...Both in cash and in community service!
Judges - even caught in 1 biased ruling should be thrown out, license revoked because this is 1 of the most important post and no BS should be tolerated!
Again, all possible without a revolution. In fact, 30 years from now, if the political stability is there, and if people use their power wisely, the above is likely to happen by then.
We dont need this and we dont have a anyone with a vision to follow....We might end up killing the innocents while the filhty still live!
it is different alot of things are different fin practice than on paper!
Here's the problem. You're saying you have no leader to aspire to, no vision to follow, I must say these are the ramblings of blind men.
If you want real change, make your own vision, enforce it on those at the top. God will not gift Pakistan one a Messiah who will change the county for us, who will change us ourselves.
We always ask for God to bestow upon us a Messiah like leader, who will make us like Switzerland, while we sit back and relax. This is not how the world works, you earn for what you work can your a** off for. No-one will do it for us.
No not a silly question at all...it is a question not many ask! Why? coz they are satisfied with what they are living with...Change wont come if you are satisfied with the current situation....
It seemed silly to me. I simply asked the poster to list examples of where progress was achieved:
Immediately after a revolution, coup, bloodbath, civil war. etc.
Or... After decades or centuries of slow change through democracy, and political stability.
To which you said: 'Can you also list where democracy has worked and the poeple have not suffered 1 drop of headache?'
Which is unreasonable and odd, there's been no progress without suffering, or hard work. The basic laws of physics demand, that all actions have a cost. For democracy the cost seems high and prolonged, yet the end result is usually very good. Revolutions on their owns are no ends to a mean.
If Democracy in UK worked soo well why did some get up and leave to join ISISI/ If their rights were met they were happy with democracy they wouldnt leave to kill themselves or prostitute themselves to pimps! (Sorry I have no better words to describe what some fools were doing)
This is weird. If you think that such a perfect world is possible without its problems, ups and downs.
Then I question not your judgement but your sanity.
There will always be problems so long as humans remain and their nature remains and so long as the world is finite.
The UK is one of the greatest places in the world right now, you deny this because we also have our fair share of societal issues? Really?
Is this your argument, democracy here didn't work, because the UK has a handful of ISIS volunteers and prostitutes?
Mind I remind you it was these DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY screaming countries that were feeding ISIS just as well as Afghanistanis feed Taliban and tribal people feed BS in Pakistan! How was it that even in a democratic society these people did not find peace? Why didnt it work out for them if democracy is the solution for everything? and also if it is working soo greatly in UK? Questions people fail to ask and call silly to anyone asking
Now our debate becomes philosophical, if you think perfect systems and utopian societies are possible. Then you and I aren't even on the same planet.
Something you cant understand is not a rant! Learn the meaning of the word first! You people call anything different from your way of thinking as a rant..It is not something to be proud of and def not a 1st world thinking process!
Rant = speak or shout at length in an angry, impassioned way.
I am neither angry nor am I overwhelmed with emotions!
I am disgusted by the way of thinking of people soo proud to be British and yet fail to question some basic questions while bombarding a nation who ALSO doesnt ask these questions...how do you differ yourself from them than?
It felt like a rant to me. You see, I get that you and every other Pakistani is angry and frustrated. Therein is the time to use your head and not let emotions chose for you.
A revolution is no solution, it's such a vague proposition that it is in fact dangerous. I know you mean well, but I am certain what you call for may be just, but what you're proposing to get it done is incomplete, vague and possibly dangerous, and above all a wasted exercise that will go in vain unless followed up by what should be done anyway under democratic progress.
