What's new

Why are Pakistanis afraid of democracy?

So now I'm a coward and am indecisive. Well, thanks, I guess. You've never met me, have no idea who I might or might not be, so logically any commentary you pass on me personally, would inevitably be inaccurate.

The discussion was on whether LOGICALLY, democracy is or isn't a flawed system of government, and there is a logical argument that says that it is. I have yet to see it refuted.

"Pragmatically", democracy has killed millions upon millions. The world's strongest democracy has waged over fifty wars since the end of the second world war, toppled governments all around the world. There are a dozen "rich" countries that consume a tremendous amount of resources. The dozen countries used to outrightly colonise and subjugate much of the world, and that led to wars where even people from the "rich" places died and stuff like that. Now, we don't have colonies, bu the exploitation is still there, in a much more effective and efficient system. Billions of people have to slave off everyday for very very meager wages making shoes for Nike in Vietnam or clothes in textile mills in India, so megacorps from the "rich" countries can raise their bottomline. They earn salaries to the tune of $1 a day(<= $365 a year, as people get sick, etc), and if they ask for better working conditions, they get replaced by others desperate to scrape a living. And the average person in the US is also a victim of this, they're forced to compete with the poorest of the poor from around the globe. They are sold on promises that are never fulfilled and are manipulated in so many ways... the education system, the taxation system, the healthcare system, the military/warfare system.

The education system, when reforms were rolled in democratically to make student loans easy, the concept people were sold on was that alot more people would be able to attain higher education. Instead, universities just raised their prices by 3x or more because people could get loans to enroll, and then work it off for a decade. Many tragedies in the taxation system, people who had everything taken by the IRS, because it's a big corp and they don't really count for much in a democracy, just one vote, faceless in "mob rule". Healthcare system where parents are forced to decide which eye they want their infant child to keep, because the insurance company won't cover treating both. The military/industrial complex, where they start wars based on engineered events(have been doing so for ages, like the Gulf of Tonkin incident half a century ago that provided a pretext to start the Vietnam war) and send off sons and brothers to die in foreign lands, just because it is profitable for the military industrial complex and politically easy to achieve.

There are many pragmatic flaws in democracy, this type of society is not something to work towards. Eastern cultures typically have had low suicide rates, lower divorce rates, almost no serial killings or school/college shootouts every one or two years. So I don't buy into this, that the whole world has to be more like that. People say that we should give democracy time, and in time we'd get to something like western democracy. I look at the victims of western democracy, and it is just tragic.
 
Last edited:
So now I'm a coward and am indecisive. Well, thanks, I guess. You've never met me, have no idea who I might or might not be, so logically any commentary you pass on me personally, would inevitably be inaccurate.
What else do I have to go by? This is about making a decision on one's ideological and political stance. Where do you stand? Stop criticizing for a moment and assert yourself.

"Pragmatically", democracy has killed millions upon millions.
Right...So now your argument is that wherever someone is calling for a more 'democratic' society, he is wishing for a warlike one. In that case, Pakistan should go to the mullahs. Root out and kill anyone who call for 'democratic' reforms. You do not want a democratic and warlike Pakistan, do you?
 
Hi,

One of the biggest hurdle in the face of democracy in pakistan is the pakistani election system for the parliament---.

In pakistan---a person can seek election at the same time for the same election from more than one seat if he has the money and if he has the approval of the party he is affliated with.

Which mean that a supposed national election to be held in pakistan on supposed 23rd of march 2011----Mr Gilani and fight for election in his native Multan---and if he wishes to from Lahore---Islamabad or from any other place.

Where is the fairness to election, to the people, to democracy in this kind of selection.

It is like HEADS I WIN---TAILS YOU LOOSE.

In the afore mentioned election type---where is the loyalty to your electorate.

In this above form of election---such a position is taken to take out a strong opponent from a different area who you think will win otherwise---.

Pakistan eletion commission needs to strengthen the requirements of residency for people who want to participate in running for public office.

That will be the first step----like building a strong foundation!!!!!
 
Last edited:
@MastanKhan: FYI the same is true in India. Most politicians(especially top leaders of parties) use it for their debut election runs or at times of fierce opposition like when Indira Gandhi did. Sonia Gandhi is another example.
 
I ask myself why so many people are against democracy in Pakistan or to say the least are afraid that democracy does not conform with Islam? Is it because they don't understand it completely? Or is it in fact against the tenets of Islam?
What does the school curriculum teach about democracy in the civics chapter? Is is present at all as part of the social studies?
Someone please answer...

Dear ruby, to get answer for your question you do need to know a bit about islam.

Islam is based on foundation of brotherhood therefore it is against any ideology that goes against human brotherhood.

Islam is fundamentally secular and democratic because it is for the good of humanity in this world. However it opposes the secular democracy that is based on the ideology of win or lose ie anti brotherhood anti humanity ideologies. They are there not only for human exploitation for greed but for human abuse and not for the good of humanity.

SEE HERE FOR MORE
 
Dear ruby, to get answer for your question you do need to know a bit about islam.

Islam is based on foundation of brotherhood therefore it is against any ideology that goes against human brotherhood.

Islam is fundamentally secular and democratic because it is for the good of humanity in this world. However it opposes the secular democracy that is based on the ideology of win or lose ie anti brotherhood anti humanity ideologies. They are there not only for human exploitation for greed but for human abuse and not for the good of humanity.

SEE HERE FOR MORE

Sir,

That is a wonderful thought but " ISLAM" cannot hold the islamic nations hostages, that unless all the conditions are met---till then they cannot have democracy---.

Islam has nothing to do with democracy per say except to enhance it---every person born in this world has a right to a democratic way of life---Islam or no Islam---democracy has to be the predominant focus of the administration---that was the practise of prophet Mohammad---and his caliphs that followed in his footsteps.

Everything else is false and made up---. Islam is the first religion that gave each individual a democratic way of life and made the ruler accountable to his people---. People converted to islam for equal rights and freedom and civil liberties---.
 
Last edited:
It do-sent matter which type of gov you have as long as the people in power are sincere with their country. we have a good example of china, our problem is we don't have sincere leadership.
Why we don't give a chance to democracy ? we did and we are bearing fruit of it look at the country now. It do-sent mater to the common person who ever is in power as long as hes doing good for the people & county. we need to re organize our democratic system why ? , a good example can be the 18 amendment of the Constitution in which it gives power to a 19 year old (bilawal) who can dismiss a member of the Parliament on voting against their party.

on the side note why they canceled the bachelors requirement for the parliamentarian's, education is important in all aspects of life now a days. and i am in favor of 2 term ban its enough time for some one to prove him self even if he was good or bad there are 170 mil people in this country give some one else a chance theres always some one better.
 
Dear ruby, to get answer for your question you do need to know a bit about islam.

Islam is based on foundation of brotherhood therefore it is against any ideology that goes against human brotherhood.

Islam is fundamentally secular and democratic because it is for the good of humanity in this world. However it opposes the secular democracy that is based on the ideology of win or lose ie anti brotherhood anti humanity ideologies. They are there not only for human exploitation for greed but for human abuse and not for the good of humanity.

SEE HERE FOR MORE
But religion cannot be used on governance of a state. Brotherhood is possible at family level or locality level but attempting to do so at national level would spell disaster. And one would see radicals and self-proclaimed scholars of religion popping up and controlling the society. The Ottoman Empire is the finest example you could consider.

During its initial years, the reason why Ottomans were able to build a strong foundation was not because of just your religion, but because they understood that an open mind, a versatile thinking and innovative approach that is man-made rather than religious, is required to govern a world run by mankind. Hence, there was a unique political system within the periphery of Islam.

However during the last years of that empire, dogma, absolutism and clerical evil began to show its face thus dead-stopping its innovative thinking and restricting it to dogma.

Almost every society on this planet of any faith has seen fall when dogma, absolutism and religious panderings intervene in a man-made society that can only be run by man-made concepts. Religion at best should be kept between the man and God like a personal divine conversation.

Democracy is a man-made concept for a country of human beings and hence is the most flexible option available. Absolutism has shown you what happens and theocracy in your neighbouring Iran has shown you what religion can do when mixed with politics.
 
(1)... And one would see radicals and self-proclaimed scholars of religion popping up and controlling the society.

(2)The Ottoman Empire....Hence, there was a unique political system within the periphery of Islam.

(3) ...Religion at best should be kept between the man and God like a personal divine conversation.

(4a)Democracy is ... the most flexible option available.

(4b)Absolutism has shown you what happens and theocracy in your neighbouring Iran has shown you what religion can do when mixed with politics.

(1) That's a desirable end - people who are radical(rooted) and scholars - leading other people. Isn't it the same now - people who have training in a trade are made responsible for it, or would you want a banker leading a medical doctors' union?

(2) Many versions of policy could integrate into the framework of Islam. We can to an extent practically implement democracy while disagreeing in principle with it.

(3) What if what you call religion has two dimensions - between god and man and between man and man?

(4a) I didn't expect a grown and probably educated man to make an absolute statement like this and offer no explanation.

(4b) What do you see wrong with Iran's political system?
 
I ask myself why so many people are against democracy in Pakistan or to say the least are afraid that democracy does not conform with Islam? Is it because they don't understand it completely? Or is it in fact against the tenets of Islam?
What does the school curriculum teach about democracy in the civics chapter? Is is present at all as part of the social studies?
Someone please answer...

I want freedom. I won't bow down to a rule that rubyjackass made. I can only accept slavery to the one that created me, keeps my heart pumping, and will one day enforce death upon me.

That all Islam means. Freedom.

woh eek sajdah jisee tuu giraa.n samajhtaa haee
hazaar sajdoo.n se deetaa haee aadmii koo nijaat


And that's why it shall always be on one side and all man-made systems on the other side of the line, whatever kind of line.
 
When islamic scholar claim that the secular democracy is enshrined in the Quran itself then how can it be a Kufr invention?

I was being sarcastic and the comment was meant to highlight the persistent thought of many religiously charged populace of our nation.

What has occured in our nation is that whatever that might help the country is labelled as anti-Islam by the clerics. This thought is than propagated through multiple channels, be it media, mosque sermons, books and even through falsified tales spread amongst the population.

No matter how much a scholar or scholars convey that what is being preached or practice is not what the Quran teaches us, the more work is done to negate the ideas of democracy and secularism.

In reality, the Quran does not have any mention of the kind of Blasphemy laws we have, nor the classification of groups as Non Muslim. It teaches the core values being followed by the west and not us.

Religion in our nation is a business, a way to control and manipulate the population, a country where religion can make many not condemn a murder shows the extent of damage done to it by the propagation of irrational religious thought.

Look where we are today and look at the tool of all this destruction, when the people cannot even raise a word against the tyranny, they would never support a system that in their mind has been ingrained as a Kufr invention.
 
I ask myself why so many people are against democracy in Pakistan or to say the least are afraid that democracy does not conform with Islam? Is it because they don't understand it completely? Or is it in fact against the tenets of Islam?
What does the school curriculum teach about democracy in the civics chapter? Is is present at all as part of the social studies?
Someone please answer...

we are not afraid of democracy because we know in the end it has died ... as iqbal said ......... yai tahzeeb apnay hi khanjar say khudkushi karay gi .......
we favour khilafat more than anything ....... many of you will argue with me even pakistani and muslims and will say me that i am talking illogical nonsense ......... but ALLAH has the power to complete the impossible ..................... we have to go back to khilafat and non-riba system and we pakistani will be the first to adopt it INSHALLAH
 
@Gambit Democracy has it's flaws, if you read up on it's history, it seems to have failed every time. I personally found it very facinating reading about what the US founding fathers had to say about it - they abhored democracy, even though the memory of being under the food of a tyrannical government was very fresh in their mind. They called democracy "mob rule". "Mobs" can democratically agree to ransack places and set people's stuff on fire, it doesn't mean it's right.

I don't think that democracy is a particularly good form of government. I feel that an informed and active populace is the key, that element can make governance work, regardless of whether it's a democracy or not.

I highly recommend you do some more research on this, you already seem like a very well-informed person on so many topics, it would be neat if you were equally well-read on this. I suggest looking at The Truth about DemocracyThe truth about Democracy

And The War on Democracy
The War On Democracy by John Pilger

I would love to hear any logical argument supporting democracy, in the context of the various logical points made in these two documentaries.

Which is why modern democracies have checks and balances to prevent elected representatives from over reaching themselves.
 
I'll support dictatorship if it means having a leader like Ayub Khan or Musharraf.

But I'll oppose it if it means having a leader like Yahya Khan or Zia-ul-Haq.
 
because its crap it allows outside forces to channel in funds in country and indirectly control our national interest thru veil of democracy

Our population education rate is too low to see difference between a guy getting millions form OUT SIDE , and a local guy getting nothing

So its not a great way for our country
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom