Letter from Pakistan

Re: # 1 YLH

``...Pakistan is evolving and will soon be a functioning democracy ..``
I would like to take this to the next level: are you willing to bet real money on that happening? You pick a time limit and the amount of money you are willing to bet. If you are willing to wager USD 1000 on Pakistan becoming a `functioning` democracy (i.e. freely elected legislature and PM, army back in the barracks, etc.) within 2 years (my yardstick for `soon`), I will be interested.

This is an incredibly stupid concept. Noone else is to blame for the fact that Pakistani society is at this point based on social injustice whether it is feudalism or everyday misogyny. Literacy and improved economics will fix that. Or maybe we should write sweet letters to america asking them to stop supporting Pakistani govt`s altogether till some Govt roots out all Pakistans social evils first?
Removing Mush is not the issue and yes i was distributing sweets and i dont regret it, after the cyclic assaults of BB and NS it was a relief to finally have a person who wasnt a cheap hooker in office. If he had left after 3 years he would have been a national hero. However power corrupts and he has in many ways neglected to be the change we wanted to see in our world. Also since he is a moderate in an increasingly polar world he will likely be out soon. But this cycle of unstable democracies and military coups is going to continue till society itself evolves.
As for ``america`` your naivete is touching. I suggest you read some Noam Chomsky to get a good idea of how the country who is rightly lauded for the best internal system of social justice has never reflected that in its foreign policy and isnt about to start. There are many unique and beautiful things about the US but its international agenda is as beautiful as the MMA`s internal agenda.

Tahmed writes <<< Like any other government, it will work with the de facto government in a given country. >>>

Look how easily he exempts his masters from any and all blame as if they are subservient to the whatever the de-facto government happens to be, in other words he say that the US government with over 1000 (secret and revealed) military bases around the globe, its military interventions, its long history of support of dictators of all kinds, (long lists as well as recently declassified CIA documents are available aplenty for all to see), its domination of international institutions like the WTO and the World Bank that in fact determines lives and deaths that occur in country-wide economies, means absolutely nothing to this a-hole.

The fact is that America is not a- country it is the-country in the current setup and its elite determine affairs for all strategically important points (of which one happens to be our area) in the globe, not only that they ensure that their hegemony is not threatened by local wannabes so they employ all kinds of tactics from media ownership, manufacturing crisis, to outright wars in the case of Iraq to determine international affiars. Excusing all of that by saying that they are merely looking after their own constituency- also major BS, given the poverty, lack of nutrition, functional illiteracy and lack of health care among the millions in the US even as the profits of the corporations that sit in political directorates, as well as wealth ownership of the top one percent has sky rocketed.

The Pakistan military has a very long history of working for and with the Americans to facilitate whatever the desire of the US elite happens to be at the time in the region, and while doing so it has received the blessings of the Americans and helped it pervert and stunt the growth of democratic institutions in this country. The Blame lies firmly and squarely with the Americans and with their occupation force in Pakistan, strategically named the Pakistan Army and indigenously staffed for just such deception purposes.

Of course tahmed as an unconditional worshipper of the US elite and their perverted policies including the carnage in Iraq and the colonization of our people in the past by the British is expected to act in this deceptive, hypocritical, immoral manner by trying to excuse US barbarism in this area by employing nonsense arguments about `personal responsibility` and what not, as if he means well. This snake, sob, wants to perpetuate US over lordship in this area and for that he blames the people that are being choked to death to `breathe``. How can they when the higher immorals have created a structure that defaults to harming the indigenous at the expense of enriching themselves...

In #19 read << and for that he blames the people that are being choked to death to `breathe``. >>>

as

<< and for that he aks the people that are being choked to death and unable to breathe to `breathe``. >>>

EastmWest, Ejaz Haroon,

I am not going to go into what is democratic and legally what is one man one vote.

Allow me to say this though... it was precisely the failure of the Muslim Majority of Pakistan to apply the principle on which Pakistan was based (i.e. ``No permanent majority by sheer number should be allowed to dictate to a permanent minority``) that caused the inequity in Pakistan.

The basic issue ``objectives resolution`` in 1949 was passed by 50-10 or something like that with all non-muslims voting against it... had the ``majority is authority`` principle been abandoned in favor of the principle that any law affecting a minority would have to have the approval of the majority of that minority .... Pakistan would not have had the issues it has in form of objectives resolution and the constitution of 1973.

Remember democracy means... rule of all the people... not some of the people or most of the people- when speaking in terms of permanent majorities and minorities conception.
By your logic... one could argue that all federal principles are a negation of one person one vote...

masadi-college-peon: mian, tujhe samosay laynay bhejja thha, aur tu gaaliaN bak raha hai.

#21 by Mantolives on June 27, 2007 3:26am PT


Remember democracy means... rule of all the people


I`ll have to call BS on that....democracy doesn`t mean you only do things that everyone agrees on....It is, to a large extent, the will of the majority....if the majority vote one way, there`s a good chance the policies of the elected government will go that way...

If the majority of brits reject sharia then the will of the pakislamofascists shouldn`t matter....

#10 by Urstruly,

So, only people who are left to run America are of only two kinds - Christian religious nuts and godless capitalists. So here we are..between devil and deep sea.

You forgot the trailer-park hindoos who type code and shake out bed bugs from the mattresses in motels.

Dear Imran,
I hope this letter finds you in the best of health, hope family is doing well? My apologies that I havent written lately, you know how it is in Amrikka, we get busy with work and tend to forget the rest of the world. As a matter of fact since we work so hard, are the most productive nation in the world, God has blessed us ( god bless america), we have a god given right to determine whats world series and whats not (BTW do you know of any other country beside Canada, Japan and Cuba that plays baseball, and how many countries play american football).

Forget USA for a second, can you please explain why a democratically chosen dictator (Musharraf) of Pakistan captures Al Qaeda agents when CNN and FOX cameras are flashing, however he supports the same agents when Al-Jazeera shows up?

I must admit that living in USA for the past 30 years has dumbed me down considerably and I have embraced naivity with open arms. The statement above in the form of a question displays duplicity by Pakistani government. I can safely state that 160 million people of pakistan are not terrorists, however when the same 160 million people pick a government that is devious in nature that explains the honesty and dedication of people that propped him up in the first place.

Warmest Regards
Your Pakistani Brother

arjunm,

The ordinary functioning of the government, the making of the government and transition from one form of government to another.. this is all done by majority principle. However this comes after the agreement on fundamentals which has to take into account all groups and then the democratic principle applies vis a vis each group within itself.

However... agreeing on the fundamentals requires assent of all contending groups... and that agreement cannot be on the basis of majority and minority but rather the agreement of each affected group.

Since I am not concerned with Britain etc... but only Pakistan... in Pakistan it should mean that logically before undertaking any Islamisation that may affect the rights of any minority group whether religious or sectarian, the general will of that group must be first ascertained. It is a good principle and safeguard against tyranny of the majority... it is also in my view true democracy.

#26 by Mantolives on June 27, 2007 5:29am PT



agreeing on the fundamentals requires assent of all contending groups


Sorry..the fundamentals of a democracy are it`s constitution...the supreme law of the land..a constitution is usually voted upon by the majority of the people or some version of a majority..A majority doesn`t always mean absolute majority.......If the majority, in whatever form, want Islamic law to be an integral part of the constitution, then it`s still a democracy...the land of the pure can ban alchohol and pork and still be a democracy...

face it...there`ll always be some minority that doesn`t want some law...what if a minority of chaddis wanted sati to be legal? tough luck...

#24 by zeemax on June 27, 2007 4:35am PT

pakis run america too....without pakis, how would I get from LA Guardia to downtown like I have to next week...

arjun #28 ``how would I get from LA Guardia to downtown ``

Ride on the broomstick I saw this shrivelled little Indian janitor (who probably also talks big like you when writing home) using to clean up La Guardia?

Re: # 26
Manto, for any of this to happen, you need to first decide underwhich framework the constitution or laws would work. In the current situation in Pakistan it has to be Islamic - nothing else will work. The reason nothitng else will work is that the opposing camp does not have people of a great calibre who can convince and move people in their direction - in the way perhaps Ambedkar or Nehru were able to do it in India.

The example, nearest one, is to have a framework of the sort the US had in 1776 - very christian (liberationist/refromist/protestant kind) - and the constitution reflected the claims of the time - and allow it to evolve with time. (that the words have been reinterpreted to suit todays ideas and views is what allows the yanks to claim ``that their constituion was ahead of its time``) Thus anti-slavery etc. This could have worked if it was implemented in 1947. But now the expectation are greater, and pace of change is expected to be even more rapid.

Your kite will not fly far given today`s situation. So settle for a constituion based on an Islamic Framework, and make it work for you. Allow time to heal and change interpretations.

Re: # 24
zeemax why are you getting jealous? Are you not shifting crap in England by being on the dole and other state handouts?

Dear iron mask,

I have absolutely no qualms with agreeing an Islamic constitutions provided the rules of the game are followed fair and square... and the principle of citizenship is not breached.

For example... the Constitution of 1973 guaranteed fundamental rights and complete equality of citizenship... it also provided for interpretation of Islam according to each established sect... And yet we`ve seen a complete negation of all the fundamental principles of that constitution ...


All I am saying is that by applying the principle of ``majority is authority`` to the constitution, Pakistanis are actually negating the very fundamental basic principle on which they got the country i.e. ``no permanent majority can by its sheer number dictate to a permanent minority``... had we paid heed to this principle instead of burying it... there would be no objectives resolution, islam in the constitution blah blah... I am referring to actual voting patterns in this case and not hoping and wishing.