Zaid hamid rips "Democracy" A new one!

[jamal18]

Countries that have made rapid progress: south korea ( military dictatorship ), Taiwan(Military dictatorship), singapore (one party state), Japan (pretend democracy initially, opposition kept out by chicanery). Under Allende, a brutal undemocratic regime with no human rights, Chile got out of its economic disaster and became, economically, one of south america's most successful economies.

 

[Kasrkin]

Guys we should stop looking at extremes. We already know that:

Democracy is not = prosperity

any more than

Dictatorship = prosperity

Also the world is not divided between democracies and dictatorships. There are many, many types of government and even varying technicalities within those governments. I don't think western style democracy is the best idea for Pakistan at this stage, but at the same time I don’t want my country to become an Egypt too. Pakistan is very enigmatic for most outsiders to understand.

 

[Pashtun]

Haven't watched the video yet but have thrown a great laugh at "media aawara huwa hay". Absolutely dead on.

Democracy is not a system of governance, it is a system of electing an entity to govern, whether Islamic or Secular or Communist or Capitalist etc. etc..

This is, however, not for Muslims, rather it is created by west to control the third world, specially Muslims, who have a complete governance system of their own. This is the democracy for the Muslims:

Kill me and call it: Collateral Damage.
Imprison me and call it: Security Measure.
Exile my people en masse & call it: New Middle East
Rob my resources, invade my lands, alter my leadership and call it: Democracy

 

[qsaark]

For those Pakistanis who dont beleive in the democracy and put their bet on the totalitarian Governmetns, all I can say is, they are not following the guidlines set by M.A. Jinnah and his disciple for the Pakistanis.

"Democracy is in the blood of Muslamans who look upon complete equality of man. I give you an example. Very often when I go to a mosque, my chauffeur stands side by side with me. Muslamans believe in fraternity, equality and liberty". (Speech at Kingsway Hall, London. 14.12.1946)

"There are no people in the world who are more democratic even in their religion than the Muslamans". (All India Muslim League Session, Lucknow, 1916)

"It is my belief that our salvation lies in following the golden rules of conduct set for us by our great law giver the Prophet of Islam (Peace Be Upon Him). Let us lay the foundation of our democracy on the basis of the truly Islamic ideals and principles. Our Almighty has taught us that our decisions in the affairs of the state shall be guided by discussions and consultations". (Sibi, 14.02.1948)

“The constitution of Pakistan has yet to be framed by the Pakistan Constituent Assembly. I do not know what the ultimate shape of this constitution is going to be, but I am sure that it will be of a democratic type, embodying the essential principle of Islam. Today, they are as applicable in actual life as they were 1,300 years ago. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of man, justice and fairplay to everybody. We are the inheritors of these glorious traditions and are fully alive to our responsibilities and obligations as framers of the future constitution of Pakistan. In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non-Muslims --Hindus, Christians, and Parsis --but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.” (Broadcast talk to the people of the United States of America on Pakistan recorded February, 1948).

If his words cant convince Pakistanis, I dont know what can. May I ask what exactly have we achieved under the military dictatorships? Lost our case on Kashmir; lost East Pakistan; Got ourself into Afghan mess for what we are still paying and will continue to pay for God knows how long.

 

[qsaark]

Countries that have made rapid progress: south korea ( military dictatorship ), Taiwan(Military dictatorship), singapore (one party state), Japan (pretend democracy initially, opposition kept out by chicanery). Under Allende, a brutal undemocratic regime with no human rights, Chile got out of its economic disaster and became, economically, one of south america's most successful economies.

South Korea is holding presidential as well as legislative elections from 1948 (18 in total, last in 2008). In Taiwan, first legislative elections took place in 1948, since than 17 legislative elections have been taken place, most recent one in 2008. Singapore has seen 19 Parliamentary elections since its independence in 1966. There have been 45 elections in Japan, first being in 1890. In Chile, a lot has been changed after General Augusto Pinochet. In April 2007, President Michelle Bachelet sent a bill to Congress to reform the older controversial system, so that 20 additional seats in the Chamber of Deputies are elected under the rules of a proportional system, in which parties or coalitions obtaining over 5% of the votes are guaranteed representation in Congress. Chile is gradually making progress towards a full democracy. Dude, that is true that I hold a PhD in Molecular Biology, but my teachers have also taught me Pakistan/Social Studies very well in the school and college.

Why Pakistan did not make rapid progress even though it has been under direct military rule for more than 35 years and under indirect military rule for much longer than that?

 

[jamal18]

South Korea had a pretend democracy, it was run by dictatorial system that effectively kept out the opposition until, I believen the 80's.

Taiwan was run by the military and democracy came very late in the day.

Singapore was effectively a one party, one leader state.

Yes, they have all changed since then, but the intial progress took place under these systems.

There are also many, many instances of poor progress in countries without democracy.

The mistake people make is that copying western traits/ style leads to western level standard of living.

Good government, and good economic policies lead to growth.

The presence or absence of democracy, in this context, is irrelevant.

 

[qsaark]

South Korea had a pretend democracy, it was run by dictatorial system that effectively kept out the opposition until, I believen the 80's.

Taiwan was run by the military and democracy came very late in the day.

Singapore was effectively a one party, one leader state.

Yes, they have all changed since then, but the intial progress took place under these systems.

There are also many, many instances of poor progress in countries without democracy.

The mistake people make is that copying western traits/ style leads to western level standard of living.

Good government, and good economic policies lead to growth.

The presence or absence of democracy, in this context, is irrelevant.

It can always be argued that it is a pretended democracy. I just wanted to tell you that your information on certain countries is not right. They are not under military regimes for more than 50 years (except for Chile). How a democracy should look like, can we afford to have western democracy etc are different issues and can be addressed separately.

Good government, and good economic policies lead to growth.

The presence or absence of democracy, in this context, is irrelevant.

The punch line is good Government. 'Good' and 'Military Dictatorship' never go hand in hand. Hence the presene and absence of democracy (rule by the people, not just select few) ARE relevant.

 

[jamal18]

qsaark, I am happy for you to believe as you want.

I have no doubt that a competent military dictatorship can provide better government than a democracy, and vice versa.

The west got their love of democracy from their love of classical greece.

And even they (Plato) said the best possible government was a benign dictator, democracy was a second best solutuion.

As I said, each to his own.

 

[Evil Flare]

M A Jinnah Made Pakistan by Running on a Path of LAW ....

 

[rubyjackass]

qsaark, I am happy for you to believe as you want.

I have no doubt that a competent military dictatorship can provide better government than a democracy, and vice versa.

The west got their love of democracy from their love of classical greece.

And even they (Plato) said the best possible government was a benign dictator, democracy was a second best solutuion.

As I said, each to his own.

There cannot be a 'benign' dictator. Because dictators are human.
Don't go with philosophical arguments. World is not ideal at a human level.

 

[paritosh]

ther's one question i have for the pakistanis on this forum...i personally give a flying **** about how pakistan is governed...but dont you see that democracy is the slower road to fulfillment and achievemnt?you havent given democracry enough time to shape'p in pakistan...you have to be more patient...democracy is not a western concept...it's a human concept.personally i dont think that theres any other muslim country that has the potential of pakistan...MA Jinnah was a brilliant man...he had a vision...your dictators never let democracy seep into the people...giving people the power to decide is the purest way of running a country...it can be painfully slow...but you have to trust it...we've had some corrupt leaders but our army and the general fabric of our system has somehow remained intact...we too like china are progressing now after seeing the lowest lows...you cant leave a nation to the will of one man.Hitler's rise was cheered too....germany dint go much far now did it?
give democracy some time and it will deliver...no matter how many counter-measures you use to check a dictator...they dont work after a time...a man...nomatter how just and able he is will make mistakes...and put the whole nation in jeopardy as has happend with ALL the dictators always.decisions are slower in a democracy...because they are carefuly audited.
Zaid hamid is an extremist...he is no-doubt a patriot....but would you ever want him to judge a case of yours in a court of law when you are the accused and you life's at stake?
if your answer is no then you'd understand why people like mr. hamid should not be policy makers of a country.Belive me when i say that the moderates hold the key to the future of the sub-continent.