What's new

Why safe and all time/weather working Karachi is a must

Separate province will create a mess load of problems and ppp will play victim card. Rather have local functioning govts. Elaqa nazims knows what's needed in their area not someone from 500 miles away.
 
second thought ...we might be seeing a second Deng Xiaoping in MBS and Saudi Arabia...I onot know why but I have the feeling that this man is forward lookinh
I mean technically UAE is 2nd Shenzen.. Till 80s it was nothing, but see today. And no doubt SA can reform its economy, but it is harder for them. They have a complex society, especially the central region. Point is they have to reform a lot, like UAE to have many business/industrial centres...
Separate province will create a mess load of problems and ppp will play victim card. Rather have local functioning govts. Elaqa nazims knows what's needed in their area not someone from 500 miles away.
Every thing seems hard.. remember we made one unit, merge FATA. It is all how you play your cards. Sindh nationalist will resist anything. So making a province will give them many rights under 18th amendment. Anyway, slow and gradual is also right like mayor system with no meddling, but you know what was the status of Dr Farooq. He couldn't do anything, in recent govt, despite being mayor.
Edit waseem akhtar
 
You are trying to put reason and sense into Desi zionists.

"Meri zameen, meri marzi" lol

Half of the land of Karachi is owned by DHA/Cant/Bahria etc.

Everyone is equally involved in turmoil happening in this city of ours.

Even after losing East Pakistan in 71, our brains still can't figure out what went wrong..

--

Just recently someone posted a govt job ad from National Institute of Oceanography, it had job positions for all provinces except the people of Karachi.

Funny thing is, the aforementioned federal institute solely deals with ocean research and Karachiites who happen to live near sea are not allowed to work there.

--

Thanks to Almighty Allah, who is providing us with provision despite of our greed, shortcomings and discriminatory behavior towards our own countrymen.

Yeah. I saw that ad too

I have an opinion which even many Karachiites may find very amusing and new.

People all over Pakistan face discrimination but Karachi's case is very special and deliberate one.

PPP is MAINLY responsible. Establishment might be bias against us but they are not stopping PPP to develop Sindh...Yes, Pindi is responsible as well for keeping Sindh deprived of their rights

But there is another thing - What if PPP or other Sindhi nationalists just see us as a proxy of federation/Pindi? May be that's why they are taking their anger out on us???

MQM has that reputation of being proxy of Pindi and quite rightly so....

Karachi can still be rebuild...Our community still loves it and calls her their home.

All we need a nice and sincere government and Karachi will touch sky. We have that guts and determination. May be that's why friends and enemies both feel threatened from us.

I am in customer service. Have communication with all over Pakistanis. It's just bad politics which separated brother from brother.

Karachi should and must regain her lost glory back.....Our forefathers didn't lay their lives so that their offspring lives in dust, sewerage water and travel in fuc**d up buses.

PPP humiliates poor farmers and Sindhis....Power has corrupted MQM and has corrupted PPP as well.

In short - We never had true representatives of ours for quite a time......I consider MQM a compromised lot...Were they been true and sincere to Karachi - they wouldn't have had sit quiet on issues of Karachi. Since they know their hands are dirty as well....so they can't go against PPP as they should

Our people got played BIG time.

Patience and actions with extreme foresightedness are only way forward to get out of this mess.

There's need to be a WHOLE NEW breed of Young Karachiites collectively working for a common goal.
How will the country benefit when an entire province is up in arms?

I am Urdu speaking from Karachi and I believe Karachi should not become a separate province because hurting the feelings of common Sindhis is/should not be the objective.

Karachi can be manageable while being part of Sindh. Just an honest and fully powered local government is needed.

The era of Naimatullah Khan and Mustafa Kamal can be back again....Karachi was developing in those times and it was part of Sindh as well.....So, yes..Karachi can be developed while still being part of Sindh...

Honesty is required here.
 
Last edited:
Karachi and Bombay used to be sister cities. They are similar in many ways. Bombay though not ideally governed and high corruption is still doing Okay. It's not a separate province. Making Karachi a province a prerequisite for development is a lazy excuse.
 
Last edited:
Karachi walas should join hands with PPP and fight with establishment for their rights. Karachi made mistakes by siding with establishment against North sindhis. It's time to call themselves south sindhis and fight against establishment and north pakistan which are using karachi sindhis balochis.
 
Karachi walas should join hands with PPP and fight with establishment for their rights. Karachi made mistakes by siding with establishment against North sindhis. It's time to call themselves south sindhis and fight against establishment and north pakistan which are using karachi sindhis balochis.

Karachiites have nothing against Sindhis, Punjabis or any nationality. We're just tired of corruption in our departments. I have friends from all ethnicities.

I'm tired of corruption.

The youngster of Karachi has same health of a 40 year old living in Islamabad. The air quality is shit. Hard chemical water creating stones in kidneys.

The youth of Karachi can't even think for applying a government job. All job top and low positions are either filled by other provinces or PPP goons.

--

I know I am being sadist, negative but.. Jis zameen pe ghuroor hai in luteron ko, wo hi zameen nigal le gi inhay.
 
can you even imagine sindh without Karachi? it will be even worst then FATA without Karachi thanks to PEE PEE PEE.
 
Pre-2011 Libya and current Venezuela ( despite the regime-change situation there ) was / is like that. Decentralized, Direct Democracy-based management of of neighborhoods, cities and the country. I will copy-paste from my post about this about Libya :
Let's see it from neighborhood level to country level :In every neighborhood the residents form themselves into a BPC ( Basic People's Congress ). From the BPC the residents discuss and elect a secretariat from amongst themselves. The secretariat is supposed to put forward these citizens' ideas at the next levels.The city is divided into such neighborhood level Basic People's Congresses and the collection of the secretariats of the BPCs is called Non-Basic People's Congress. You may call it MPC ( Municipal People's Congress ). So one MPC for a city.The BPCs consult amongst themselves and through the MPC elect People's Committees from among eligible people to carry out administrative activities in the city ( water supply, electricity, public transport, internet, housing, bank, security etc ). The People's Committees are directly answerable to the people through the MPC.Whenever the MPC meets, the agenda and feedback is directly done by the neighborhood level people through the secretariats of each BPC in the city.All the MPCs in the country form the GPC ( General People's Congress ) which will discuss issues of national and international situations. For example, building a water pipeline that starts from a river in one city and goes through other cities. Another example, setting the strategic security alliance with a certain group of countries. Another example, begin to replace all privately-owned personal transport vehicles in the country with taxis and buses. All these issues can go two ways : (a). Arise from a neighborhood level BPC and go to country level GPC, (b). Proposed by the GPC and go down to be discussed in all the BPCs.The traditional parliament is replaced by the General People's Congress. This way, issues and ideas are managed and discussed by the people directly without there being any political party existing, or any professional politician existing or the need to have any five-yearly election.Please read this thread whose OP is an article about Libya's pre-2011 Direct Democracy system in practice.
I find this similar to normal democracy. Don't we have Municipal Corporation elections (city level)? Gram Panchayats and Gram Sabha(village level), Panchayat Samiti(taluka level), Municipal Councils (town level), etc. And then the Vidhan Sabha, Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, etc.

Also read about the 73rd Amendment Act, 1992. It basically made the Panchayati Raj institutions in the country constitutional bodies for the 1st time.

 
I find this similar to normal democracy. Don't we have Municipal Corporation elections (city level)? Gram Panchayats and Gram Sabha(village level), Panchayat Samiti(taluka level), Municipal Councils (town level), etc. And then the Vidhan Sabha, Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, etc.

Also read about the 73rd Amendment Act, 1992. It basically made the Panchayati Raj institutions in the country constitutional bodies for the 1st time.


The link I previously gave also described the Libyan system as per my understanding then. Perhaps that is also what you are quoting. But I will later quote an OP by a Chinese member which will start to correctly describe how the Libyan system worked and how that can be contrasted with the Indian system.

We in India, some of which you have jotted down, have a lot of hierarchies, overlapping elements and built-in chaos :

1. The level starting from village level to national government level.

2. Overlaps like Governor vs Chief Minister, Prime Minister vs President, Vidhan Sabha vs Lok Sabha vs Rajya Sabha.

3. The chaos of a multi-party system where a fickle-minded public is allowed to vote at different points in time for various administration levels as in #2. The public votes for parties, not discuss about issues, not plan for issues.

Contrast to the Libyan system where :

1. There is no party system at all thus simplifying the approach.

2. The public is allowed to discuss and decide issues directly through only two admin hierarchical level : (a). The BPC ( Basic People's Congress ) and the GPC ( General People's Congress ). I had unwantedly included a MPC ( Municipal People's Congress ) earlier. In the Libyan system where there directly are 800 BPCs in the whole of the country and their make-up as described in that previous quoted post. To use this in the Indian context there are 718 districts in India and when India is compared to Libya there can be 718 BPCs represented in the Lok Sabha. There need not be Vidhan Sabha, Rajya Sabha and other levels. Now to that article posted by the Chinese member ( Taishang ) :
Under Gaddafi’s unique system of direct democracy, traditional institutions of government were disbanded and abolished, and power belonged to the people directly through various committees and congresses.​
Far from control being in the hands of one man, Libya was highly decentralized and divided into several small communities that were essentially “mini-autonomous States” within a State. These autonomous States had control over their districts and could make a range of decisions including how to allocate oil revenue and budgetary funds. Within these mini autonomous States, the three main bodies of Libya’s democracy were Local Committees, Basic People’s Congresses and Executive Revolutionary Councils.​
The Basic People’s Congress (BPC), or Mu’tamar shaʿbi asāsi was essentially Libya’s functional equivalent of the House of Commons in the United Kingdom or the House of Representatives in the United States. However, Libya’s People’s Congress was not comprised merely of elected representatives who discussed and proposed legislation on behalf of the people; rather, the Congress allowed all Libyans to directly participate in this process. Eight hundred People’s Congresses were set up across the country and all Libyans were free to attend and shape national policy and make decisions over all major issues including budgets, education, industry, and the economy.​
In 2009, Gaddafi invited the New York Times to Libya to spend two weeks observing the nation’s direct democracy. The New York Times, that has traditionally been highly critical of Colonel Gaddafi’s democratic experiment, conceded that in Libya, the intention was that​
“everyone is involved in every decision…Tens of thousands of people take part in local committee meetings to discuss issues and vote on everything from foreign treaties to building schools.”​
The fundamental difference between western democratic systems and the Libyan Jamahiriya’s direct democracy is that in Libya all citizens were allowed to voice their views directly – not in one parliament of only a few hundred wealthy politicians – but in hundreds of committees attended by tens of thousands of ordinary citizens. Far from being a military dictatorship, Libya under Mr. Gaddafi was Africa’s most prosperous democracy.​
On numerous occasions Mr. Gaddafi’s proposals were rejected by popular vote during Congresses and the opposite was approved and enacted as legislation.​
For instance, on many occasions Mr. Gaddafi proposed the abolition of capital punishment and he pushed for home schooling over traditional schools. However, the People’s Congresses wanted to maintain the death penalty and classic schools, and the will of the People’s Congresses prevailed. Similarly, in 2009, Colonel Gaddafi put forward a proposal to essentially abolish the central government altogether and give all the oil proceeds directly to each family. The People’s Congresses rejected this idea too.​

Please ask if what I wrote is not clear enough.
 
Last edited:
1. The level starting from village level to national government level.

2. Overlaps like Governor vs Chief Minister, Prime Minister vs President, Vidhan Sabha vs Lok Sabha vs Rajya Sabha.
The overlaps you are referring to are actually various levels of checks in power.
We in India, some of which you have jotted down, have a lot of hierarchies, overlapping elements and built-in chaos :
I like the fact that the lowest level in administration such as the Gram Sabha and Gram Panchayat have been given constitutional status. The hierarchy you are talking about actually ensures the governance from the lowest level to the highest level. The hierarchies are essential as without them how will a government even function? How will your city even function if you don't have a Municipal Corporation? Or how will a village develop without the Gram Panchayat?
There is no party system at all thus simplifying the approach.
This leads to the say of only a few people. In a homogenous society, I don't know it may still work. But in a diverse country like India, we need a multi-party system to represent the aspirations of all sections of the society. It could be a worker living on a tea plantation in the North East to a shepherd in Rajasthan to a person working in an MNC in Bengaluru.
 
lols thread!!

DHA/Bharia/FWO are must not Pakistan!

Alpha Mafias inc > Pakistan or Pakistanis!
 
The overlaps you are referring to are actually various levels of checks in power.

Instead of "Overlaps" I should really have used the word "Duplications".

You say "Various levels of checks in power" but if you consider these are no checks really. For example, the PM, the President and the Vice President are all from BJP. No checks and balances at the highest levels. This is also the case of Madhya Pradesh where the CM and Governor are from the same party, BJP.

I will post later for the rest of your points.
 
You say "Various levels of checks in power" but if you consider these are no checks really. For example, the PM, the President and the Vice President are all from BJP. This is also the case of Madhya Pradesh where the CM and Governor are from the same party, BJP.
And that's because they've been elected to that position. It won't always be the case that the President will belong to the same party. For example, BJP won the Lok Sabha elections in 2014 and Modi became the PM but Pranab Mukherjee from INC was the President till 2017. And even within the same party, the President and PM don't necessarily have to agree on all the things.

Wasn't Gaddafi the dictator in Libya?
 
And that's because they've been elected to that position. It won't always be the case that the President will belong to the same party. For example, BJP won the Lok Sabha elections in 2014 and Modi became the PM but Pranab Mukherjee from INC was the President till 2017. And even within the same party, the President and PM don't necessarily have to agree on all the things.

1. About Pranab Mukherjee, he was sympathetic to BJP's actions for which his own daughter once publicly criticized him. Even I once heard him say "My government" for something about the BJP government's budget presentation.

2. ATM there is effectively no checks and balances at the highest levels of governance. Just yesterday the Vice President, who is from the BJP, said that that TMC MP tearing up the papers of a central minister in the parliament is "lowering of the country's democracy". Come on, we all know who has been lowering the country's democracy, yes ? This situation should not have come to pass.

3. About "Same party" that should be yours and mine next discussion : The party system. I will write about this later.

Wasn't Gaddafi the dictator in Libya?

No, he gave over daily executive power to the people sometime in the 1970s. From then on he was called "The guide of the revolution" though yes he did wield certain "inspirational" influence. But you can read in the quoted section in Taishang's post how some of Gaddafi's ideas were over-ruled by the people and how this over-ruling was acknowledged even by the previously hostile New York Times.
 
Back
Top Bottom