Sigh, you are deluding yourself if you think most of American population is liberal. They are more conservative and religious then most muslim countries. I am not arguing against Islam you idiot, I was merely pointing out there are no political parties who actually conform to liberal ideas. Your rant against West is pointless, and correlating it to mean liberal means pro violence is as deluded as the rest of your post.
I beg to differ because your posts confirm that you're deluded and confused.
You simply defined a "liberal" on two terms being they're anti-violence and for the rule of law (conditions you used to eliminate the PPP, MQM and ANP as being "liberal" parties) and stated almost all democratic countries have both left and right parties but Pakistan doesn't.
From your statement one can only conclude you were talking about nations like the US, second largest "democracy" on the planet, with parties such as the Democrats (liberal) and Republicans (conservatives) but as I demonstrated with the Gallup poll both Democrat and Republican supporters almost unanimously supported the use of violence in Afghanistan and didn't support the rule of law since the invasion violated their own constitution that required Bush to go to congress to vote before sending troops. Unfortunately, now you're making up excuses like stating the American population isn't liberal which I can only guess means there are no "liberal" parties in the US either.
If not the US then what countries and what parties are you referring to? You provide absolutely no examples for anything you've said.
You don't think Pakistan has "liberal" parties because the two criteria you define a "liberal" party by not only contradict themselves depending on the circumstances but are too limiting since no "liberal" party anywhere could or would abide by a policy of anti-violence.
In relation to your two conditions about who is/isn't a "liberal" questions that beg to be asked are:
1. What about violence in the defence of freedom of ones people and homeland? Does the "liberal" sit around all day scratching his balls while his people are killed/raped and lands occupied?
2. What if your countries laws require you commit acts of violence (ex. conscription into the army during wartime)? Do you obey the law or not and either way are you still a "liberal" by your definition?
3. What about a situation where the government passes laws that sanction the persecution of a minority and demands all citizens with knowledge of their whereabouts report and/or hand them over to the authorities? Are you still a "liberal" if you follow the law even if it means certain death for the person you reported/handed over considering you wouldn't have committed a violent act yourself?
As I stated before good and evil, right and wrong are subjective values that vary across time and between civilizations so what defines a "liberal" in one place won't define a "liberal" elsewhere the same goes for a "conservative".
The large majority of Pakistani's already recognize that Islam is the perfect system of governance. What the people want isn't "liberalism" or any other type of "-ism" they want a legal system and parties that correspond to the laws of our creator as dictated in the Quran (unchanged and unchanging for all time) and exemplified by the actions of the prophet pbuh within shaih hadith regardless of whether they conform to the varying "liberal" or "conservative" values elsewhere.