'The System'-by WAJsal

[Shah01]

Good work so far and very good read @Azlan Haider

One last thing @Shah01 , i cannot accept that we cannot fix the 'system'. When we have completed the biggest hardle, when we have laid the foundation by getting this country, i wonder how we can't build a strong wall. The foundations are surely weekend by this time, not really completely disintegrated. We should have more faith.

Well I am not saying the system cannot be fixed. It will take much longer to fix (maybe a life time). Some of the posts are quite good and will give you an idea why it is difficult task if not impossible. As I have suggested that the elite need to come to terms with the new age and distribute some of the wealth they have amassed, this will only extend their rein. They need to learn from the west......... This will only make them more money and influence with the added benefit of happy populace.

The below quote sums it up nicely: (in order to make a difference the populace need to play their role)

Sir rather rhan complaining about past mistakes of our elders which were witnessed by one .. Memorized by second and documented by third and making our decisions based on those why not we come togather and make a pact that we will be the first one who will make the difference ... Dont you have examples of moulana Tariq Jameel at present ... And Dr. Israr Ahmed in recent past whose teachings are on basics of islam ...

Maybe the general populace can start by cleaning the streets and making queues. One doesn't need government to fix these two things.... everyone cooperate and keep the streets clean. When going to banks/shops then get in a queue and wait for your turn etc....

I do not mean to blame this section alone but I do have a feeling that they have kept themselves away from the decision making process because there's a lack of civil and political liberties, and equality too, especially among the minorities.

Agree with you. The political career is frowned upon in Pakistan. The middle class won't even consider it. Maybe after IKs dharna I see a bit of a change in attitude and youth is joining politics. It will take time to dilute feudals' power.

Pakistanis that he knows, follow certain rituals which are not really part of the religion, albeit he didn't quote examples.
I'm assuming it's a part of the sub continent culture that he was pointing out to.

Couldn't agree more on this. In Pakistan the confused Muslims have mixed culture with Islam and many rituals (at weddings, day to day life etc) are introduced.

 

[VCheng]

As I have suggested that the elite need to come to terms with the new age and distribute some of the wealth they have amassed, this will only extend their rein. They need to learn from the west.

Where is the incentive for them to do that when they have absolute control and total impunity? Human nature would suggest that they will not change unless there is no other option left.

 

[Shah01]

Where is the incentive for them to do that when they have absolute control and total impunity? Human nature would suggest that they will not change unless there is no other option left.

Agree. One will not change unless there is some incentive. The incentive in this case is to keep the power/money for decades if not centuries to come (held by the same families). Otherwise the desperate/frustrated youth could turn to revolution of some sort (maybe I am delusional about this).

 

[VCheng]

Agree. One will not change unless there is some incentive. The incentive in this case is to keep the power/money for decades if not centuries to come (held by the same families). Otherwise the desperate/frustrated youth could turn to revolution of some sort (maybe I am delusional about this).

That incentive is negated by the certainty of belief of power and control not being in danger. And all the claims of revolution and tabdeeli are delusions. Blunt, but true.

 

[Shah01]

That incentive is negated by the certainty of belief of power and control not being in danger. And all the claims of revolution and tabdeeli are delusions. Blunt, but true.

Blunt is good and needed for the current generation. The demographics of Pakistan is changing and urbanization together with a bit of literacy will dilute feudals powers as well with awareness people will vote whoever is better at administration.

 

[VCheng]

Blunt is good and needed for the current generation. The demographics of Pakistan is changing and urbanization together with a bit of literacy will dilute feudals powers as well with awareness people will vote whoever is better at administration.

Please do not confuse literacy with education. There is no awareness to speak of, save for abject acceptance. What happened to the elites who killed Shahzeb Khan in Karachi? Or burnt the couple in a kiln? Or beat a laborer upside down a few weeks ago? (And yes, even abducted and beat cops trying to enforce a speed limit on the motorway?) The evidence is clearly there for all the world to see, and for most in Pakistan to deny.

 

[Shah01]

Please do not confuse literacy with education. There is no awareness to speak of, save for abject acceptance.

Sir hence I said with awareness not literacy.... I am not talking about 5-10 years but one generation (50+ years). And believe me the feudals do not have the same powers as they had maybe 30 years ago..... their land banks are reducing slowly with that their influence.

The evidence is clearly there for all the world to see, and for most in Pakistan to deny

Again the current generation will not make any difference and they will live in denial. The globalization and technology will speed up the process of awareness and the next generation will be a bit more aware....

 

[VCheng]

Sir hence I said with awareness not literacy.... I am not talking about 5-10 years but one generation (50+ years). And believe me the feudals do not have the same powers as they had maybe 30 years ago..... their land banks are reducing slowly with that their influence.


Again the current generation will not make any difference and they will live in denial. The globalization and technology will speed up the process of awareness and the next generation will be a bit more aware....

The land banks do not matter, as the holdings will move on to other types of resource monopolies, not just land. You are a better person than me to look that far ahead. As far as I can tell for the foreseeable future, all the claims of change will come to naught, except as a managed pressure relief mechanism.

Again the current generation will not make any difference and they will live in denial. The globalization and technology will speed up the process of awareness and the next generation will be a bit more aware....

Technology won't really help. After all, look at PDF and the mindset prevailing here.

 

[Shah01]

The land banks do not matter, as the holdings will move on to other types of resource monopolies, not just land.

Agree but there would be winners and losers as I have seen families who's power eroded over the span of couple of decades. Now they only have names left and much less influence.
So these people are replaced by new middle class and business class. So the system evolves (so to speak) again the timeline here is a generation.

Technology won't really help. After all, look at PDF and the mindset prevailing here

Technology will help and it is helping. Pakistani society was fed with one broadcasting channel till the early 2000s with no internet or phones etc.
Now on the other hand the news from across the world are available to average Joe (this is where the literacy comes into play, read/understand English will do wonders). The change of mindset is not like switching on/off light bulb. It will take years/decades before the change is apparent. Hence the current generation's mindset don't really bother me.....It will dilute slowly but surely.

 

[VCheng]

Agree but there would be winners and losers as I have seen families who's power eroded over the span of couple of decades. Now they only have names left and much less influence.
So these people are replaced by new middle class and business class. So the system evolves (so to speak) again the timeline here is a generation.

That is what happens elsewhere. In Pakistan, one set of elites gets replaced by another set while the children of a lesser god remain where they are. You hopes are good and noble, but unrealistic and unsupported by evidence.

 

[Shah01]

That is what happens elsewhere. In Pakistan, one set of elites gets replaced by another set while the children of a lesser god remain where they are. You hopes are good and noble, but unrealistic and unsupported by evidence.

Sir it is OK to be optimistic. A lot has been achieved since 1947 and I am hopeful it will be much more while I am alive. Literacy rates from below 10% to ~58%. I acknowledge the problems but hope is the only thing which make the humans keep going. So for the next 50 years my hopes are not necessarily unrealistic.

 

[VCheng]

Sir it is OK to be optimistic. A lot has been achieved since 1947 and I am hopeful it will be much more while I am alive. Literacy rates from below 10% to ~58%. I acknowledge the problems but hope is the only thing which make the humans keep going. So for the next 50 years my hopes are not necessarily unrealistic.

Of course what you say is great, but more believable only when you decide to move back.

 

[T-123456]

What is the "ideology" of Pakistan anyway ??

The term ‘Pakistan Ideology’ (Nazriah-e-Pakistan’) was nowhere in Jinnah's speeches before or after the creation of Pakistan in 1947. Prof. Khurshid Ahmed, one of the leading members of Jamat e Islami (JI), is said to have first coined the term ‘Nazriah-e-Pakistan’ in 1962 in "response" to Ayub Khan's (a Dictator) policy of evolving Pakistan's nationhood in accordance with progressive dictates of Jinnah. Jamat e Islami, of course, was opposed to Jinnah's vision of a progressive and modern Muslim State, and that's why it had opposed Pakistan Movement during 1940's. JI had it's own vision. JI suggested that Pakistan Ideology should be squarely based on policies constructed on the teachings of the Qu’ran and Sunnah and should strive to turn Pakistan into an Islamic State.


And if you are talking about the "damage" caused by Gen. Zia ul Haq (a close compatriot of Jamat e Islami), I am no fan of Zia, but I think it is Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto who deserves the blame .. It was during his regime that religion became the official legitimizing strategy for all political manoeuvres. In a frenzy to break the momentum of the PNA-led movement, numerous Islamisation measures erupted. Shariat laws were introduced; gambling, horse racing, and alcohol were banned. The PPP manifesto was duly amended, making Friday the weekly holiday, introducing Quranic studies as mandatory for all students, establishing Ulema (clerical) academies and so forth . These moves established the PPP’s dedication to the cause of Islam, which became Bhutto’s most powerful defence to fight the PNA in their own battlefield.


He was the one who made Islam the state religion and set pre-requisites for the head of state to be Muslim.... One of Bhutto’s last desperate bids to buy off religious parties agitating for his overthrow with U.S. backing was to declare the Ahmadiyya Community non-Muslim in 1974 ... The concept of "constitutional kafir" was introduced for the first time, thereby making "official adoption" of sectarianism (as a state policy)...


In 1976, ZAB controversially appointed General Zia-ul-Haq the Chief of Army Staff in another move to appease the JI (of whom Zia was a close compatriot) ... Zia ul Haq was the Pakistan army's most junior Lt. General when Bhutto selected him to be Chief of the Army Staff.... Later regretting his choice, ZAB told the Supreme Court (which sent him to the gallows): "I appointed a Chief of Army belonging to Jamaat-i-Islami and the result is before us." ... Bhutto institutionalized mullahism through constitution, and then he appointed an Army Chief belonging to JI .. !! Who is the 'actual' culprit behind the "damage" then ?? Zia, or the "politician" Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto ?







Now coming to the second part of your statement, "democracy, on the other hand, has never been given a proper chance to grow and prosper", the question arises who was "originally" responsible for this ? Politicians or Military ?

Once Pakistan was created, Jinnah reportedly tried to open the membership of Muslim League(ML) to all citizens of Pakistan (irrespective of religion), or alternatively dissolve it (as it had achieved its goal) .. Unfortunately he was unsuccessful ... Jinnah, who had been a Bombayite, had no similar roots in Karachi (the new Capital) .. Time and again he was made aware that he was an outsider. Similarly, many of his close associates (like Liaquat Ali Khan, Ibrahim Ismail Chundrigar etc. ) had no roots in Pakistan ... This was one of the reasons the ML didn't want to hold general elections in Pakistan... The first General Elections were held in Pakistan in 1970 (i.e. 23 years after the creation of Pakistan), whereas, In India, the first General Elections were held in 1951-52 ..


After the death of Jinnah in 1948, there was not a single person in ML who could effectively replace Jinnah as the undisputed leader of the ML or Pakistan. This was when "Islam" was brought into politics by the Leaguers for the first time (to be used as a political tool) .. "Prostitution of Islam for political ends" as Iskander Mirza described it later !!

One very important (but often ignored) development was the 1954 provincial elections held in East Pakistan .. Elections were due in 1951, but the ML used delay tactics (though it didn't help them in the long run). The elections resulted in a landslide victory for the socialists and nationalists i.e. United Front which won 228 seats in a House of 309 (including nine reserved seats for women). On the other hand, the Muslim League, the party in power directly or indirectly ever since 1937, managed to get only 7 seats ... This heralded the rise of Bengali Nationalists .. But On May 30, just after two months, the ministry was dismissed and direct governor’s rule was imposed.... Now ML knew that in case general elections were held, the Bengali Nationalists would come to power in the center as well (as Bengalis formed the "Majority"), and the political hegemony of ML would be over ...

This was when ML decided to use "Islam" as a political tool against the socialists of East Pakistan ... And those Mullahs who had openly opposed Jinnah and proudly rejected Jinnah's "unIslamic" ideals, were invited to join ML (see Munir Report of 1954 for details) ....... The country was named "Islamic Republic" in 1956 ... We were the first one in the world to add prefix "Islamic" to our republican status .. ... Elections were further delayed by ML .. In 1957 most of the detractors came together in the left-wing and secular National Awami Party (NAP) and were confident that the party was in a good position to win the most seats in the promised direct elections (that were to be held in 1958). But then first Martial Law was imposed in the country in late 1958 by the "elected" president of ML who invited Army to take over hoping that this would keep Bengalis (and others) permanently away from the corridors of power, as they had almost no representation in the predominantly Punjabi Army of Pakistan ... (But this proved to be "catastrophic" in the long run ... No amount of "Islam" or "military force" could hold Nationalist Bengalis for long ... And in 1971, we paid the price of "selfish" policies adopted by the ML) ..





It was the Muslim League power hungry politicians who didn't give democracy a proper chance to grow and prosper in the newly born state of Pakistan. Army came in much later (invited by Muslim Leaguers).

It's always easy (in fact fashionable) to bash Pak Army and hold it responsible for all our ills ... Politicians are equally (if not more) responsible ...



Furtive Fallacy and Casual Oversimplification, but overall a nice write-up. Will get back to You on other points (esp. the "Democracy" part) when I have time.

Regards

Bro,you explained the reasons very well but where is the solution to the problem,how to move forward with whom?
People talk about whats wrong ,how it got this far and what should be done to get out of this mess but nobody named a person or a ''group'' to do it.

 

[RAMPAGE]

What is the "ideology" of Pakistan anyway ??

The term ‘Pakistan Ideology’ (Nazriah-e-Pakistan’) was nowhere in Jinnah's speeches before or after the creation of Pakistan in 1947. Prof. Khurshid Ahmed, one of the leading members of Jamat e Islami (JI), is said to have first coined the term ‘Nazriah-e-Pakistan’ in 1962 in "response" to Ayub Khan's (a Dictator) policy of evolving Pakistan's nationhood in accordance with progressive dictates of Jinnah. Jamat e Islami, of course, was opposed to Jinnah's vision of a progressive and modern Muslim State, and that's why it had opposed Pakistan Movement during 1940's. JI had it's own vision. JI suggested that Pakistan Ideology should be squarely based on policies constructed on the teachings of the Qu’ran and Sunnah and should strive to turn Pakistan into an Islamic State.


And if you are talking about the "damage" caused by Gen. Zia ul Haq (a close compatriot of Jamat e Islami), I am no fan of Zia, but I think it is Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto who deserves the blame .. It was during his regime that religion became the official legitimizing strategy for all political manoeuvres. In a frenzy to break the momentum of the PNA-led movement, numerous Islamisation measures erupted. Shariat laws were introduced; gambling, horse racing, and alcohol were banned. The PPP manifesto was duly amended, making Friday the weekly holiday, introducing Quranic studies as mandatory for all students, establishing Ulema (clerical) academies and so forth . These moves established the PPP’s dedication to the cause of Islam, which became Bhutto’s most powerful defence to fight the PNA in their own battlefield.


He was the one who made Islam the state religion and set pre-requisites for the head of state to be Muslim.... One of Bhutto’s last desperate bids to buy off religious parties agitating for his overthrow with U.S. backing was to declare the Ahmadiyya Community non-Muslim in 1974 ... The concept of "constitutional kafir" was introduced for the first time, thereby making "official adoption" of sectarianism (as a state policy)...


In 1976, ZAB controversially appointed General Zia-ul-Haq the Chief of Army Staff in another move to appease the JI (of whom Zia was a close compatriot) ... Zia ul Haq was the Pakistan army's most junior Lt. General when Bhutto selected him to be Chief of the Army Staff.... Later regretting his choice, ZAB told the Supreme Court (which sent him to the gallows): "I appointed a Chief of Army belonging to Jamaat-i-Islami and the result is before us." ... Bhutto institutionalized mullahism through constitution, and then he appointed an Army Chief belonging to JI .. !! Who is the 'actual' culprit behind the "damage" then ?? Zia, or the "politician" Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto ?







Now coming to the second part of your statement, "democracy, on the other hand, has never been given a proper chance to grow and prosper", the question arises who was "originally" responsible for this ? Politicians or Military ?

Once Pakistan was created, Jinnah reportedly tried to open the membership of Muslim League(ML) to all citizens of Pakistan (irrespective of religion), or alternatively dissolve it (as it had achieved its goal) .. Unfortunately he was unsuccessful ... Jinnah, who had been a Bombayite, had no similar roots in Karachi (the new Capital) .. Time and again he was made aware that he was an outsider. Similarly, many of his close associates (like Liaquat Ali Khan, Ibrahim Ismail Chundrigar etc. ) had no roots in Pakistan ... This was one of the reasons the ML didn't want to hold general elections in Pakistan... The first General Elections were held in Pakistan in 1970 (i.e. 23 years after the creation of Pakistan), whereas, In India, the first General Elections were held in 1951-52 ..


After the death of Jinnah in 1948, there was not a single person in ML who could effectively replace Jinnah as the undisputed leader of the ML or Pakistan. This was when "Islam" was brought into politics by the Leaguers for the first time (to be used as a political tool) .. "Prostitution of Islam for political ends" as Iskander Mirza described it later !!

One very important (but often ignored) development was the 1954 provincial elections held in East Pakistan .. Elections were due in 1951, but the ML used delay tactics (though it didn't help them in the long run). The elections resulted in a landslide victory for the socialists and nationalists i.e. United Front which won 228 seats in a House of 309 (including nine reserved seats for women). On the other hand, the Muslim League, the party in power directly or indirectly ever since 1937, managed to get only 7 seats ... This heralded the rise of Bengali Nationalists .. But On May 30, just after two months, the ministry was dismissed and direct governor’s rule was imposed.... Now ML knew that in case general elections were held, the Bengali Nationalists would come to power in the center as well (as Bengalis formed the "Majority"), and the political hegemony of ML would be over ...

This was when ML decided to use "Islam" as a political tool against the socialists of East Pakistan ... And those Mullahs who had openly opposed Jinnah and proudly rejected Jinnah's "unIslamic" ideals, were invited to join ML (see Munir Report of 1954 for details) ....... The country was named "Islamic Republic" in 1956 ... We were the first one in the world to add prefix "Islamic" to our republican status .. ... Elections were further delayed by ML .. In 1957 most of the detractors came together in the left-wing and secular National Awami Party (NAP) and were confident that the party was in a good position to win the most seats in the promised direct elections (that were to be held in 1958). But then first Martial Law was imposed in the country in late 1958 by the "elected" president of ML who invited Army to take over hoping that this would keep Bengalis (and others) permanently away from the corridors of power, as they had almost no representation in the predominantly Punjabi Army of Pakistan ... (But this proved to be "catastrophic" in the long run ... No amount of "Islam" or "military force" could hold Nationalist Bengalis for long ... And in 1971, we paid the price of "selfish" policies adopted by the ML) ..





It was the Muslim League power hungry politicians who didn't give democracy a proper chance to grow and prosper in the newly born state of Pakistan. Army came in much later (invited by Muslim Leaguers).

It's always easy (in fact fashionable) to bash Pak Army and hold it responsible for all our ills ... Politicians are equally (if not more) responsible ...



Furtive Fallacy and Casual Oversimplification, but overall a nice write-up. Will get back to You on other points (esp. the "Democracy" part) when I have time.

Regards

Just one positive rating? Goes to show the quality of PDFs TT brigade, or lack thereof. What an excellent, excellent post.

The term ‘Pakistan Ideology’ (Nazriah-e-Pakistan’) was nowhere in Jinnah's speeches before or after the creation of Pakistan in 1947. Prof. Khurshid Ahmed, one of the leading members of Jamat e Islami (JI), is said to have first coined the term ‘Nazriah-e-Pakistan’ in 1962 in "response" to Ayub Khan's (a Dictator) policy of evolving Pakistan's nationhood in accordance with progressive dictates of Jinnah. Jamat e Islami, of course, was opposed to Jinnah's vision of a progressive and modern Muslim State, and that's why it had opposed Pakistan Movement during 1940's. JI had it's own vision. JI suggested that Pakistan Ideology should be squarely based on policies constructed on the teachings of the Qu’ran and Sunnah and should strive to turn Pakistan into an Islamic State.

Did you really have to do this? What is the difference between a Muslim State and an Islamic State? I thought the idea was to get us representation, not a Muslim State or a Madina e Thani.

 

[Shah01]

Of course what you say is great, but more believable only when you decide to move back.

Sir I already have more invested in Pakistan than UK (where I reside). So stakes are high for me and I am hopeful it will get better. So I am probably helping Pakistan (Indirectly) more than I would be able to while/if I reside there. I may even move back depending on how my family circumstances are etc.