Imran Khan: Pakistan’s Next PM?
George F Maximillian July 17, 1999
#44 Posted by ferozk on July 30, 1999 4:35:56 pm
I was suprised that you did not include Mein Kamfp in your list of required readings!
You mentioned that Pakistan needs to re-focus on the issues of clothing, food and shelter (reminds one of the speeches of Z.A. Bhutto) et al based on the core principles of freedom, peace, equality and fairness is nothing more than an utopian ideal. Are these not the same things we, as a nation, have been waiting for the last 52 years and our leaders have been promising us for 52 years? What makes you think this mircle will happen in the next few years?
You believe in the empowerment of the masses to have the freedom of choice in deciding the matters that effect their lives and really concern them. Sounds like a nice sound byte for PTV evening news, but in reality that would imply democracy in Pakistan, which due to the diligence and eternal vigil of our politicans, which is destined to be nothing more than a noble idea.
As Mayhem has said before, none of these noble and honorable intentions will amount to anything unless your ``common people`` avail themselves of this mode of thinking and empower themselves!
No one can save the people of Pakistan unless they, themselves, are prepared to save themselves.
You mentioned that Pakistan needs to re-focus on the issues of clothing, food and shelter (reminds one of the speeches of Z.A. Bhutto) et al based on the core principles of freedom, peace, equality and fairness is nothing more than an utopian ideal. Are these not the same things we, as a nation, have been waiting for the last 52 years and our leaders have been promising us for 52 years? What makes you think this mircle will happen in the next few years?
You believe in the empowerment of the masses to have the freedom of choice in deciding the matters that effect their lives and really concern them. Sounds like a nice sound byte for PTV evening news, but in reality that would imply democracy in Pakistan, which due to the diligence and eternal vigil of our politicans, which is destined to be nothing more than a noble idea.
As Mayhem has said before, none of these noble and honorable intentions will amount to anything unless your ``common people`` avail themselves of this mode of thinking and empower themselves!
No one can save the people of Pakistan unless they, themselves, are prepared to save themselves.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#43 Posted by bahmad on July 30, 1999 7:07:25 am
In response to Ferozk (Repply # 51):
Ferozk has made several good observations in response to my letter (see Reply #50) where I have stressed the need to understand: (1) how the great powers have gained an edge over other countries of the world; (2) our real worth in the comity of nations; and (3) the need to develop enviable qualities in our nation. Let me clarify, my call is not guided by the need to produce a few so-called experts. I am more concerned with a collective sense of understanding that needs to be developed slowly, gradually, and uninterruptedly.
Ferozk has rightly pointed out that the question ``how the great powers have gained an edge over other countries of the world`` depend on the what we mean by ``great powers.`` In my letter, the phrase ``great powers`` was used for those countries (or sets of countries) that possess (or have possessed) the capacity to make a difference in the economic, political, and cultural spheres of many many countries of the world. In this sense, I would consider the United States, UK, and the former Soviet Union as three most powerful nations in the twentieth century. A good understanding of the evolution of great powers, I assume, requires a good grasp of capitalism, colonialism, and all forms of imperialism. The writings of Marx, Wallerstein, Tilly, and Said are useful basic readings.
Ferozk then enquires about the bench mark ``to judge Pakistan`s value in the comity of nations.`` The issues of bench mark and value are far more difficult to determine. I would argue that these notions are relative and they need to be determined discursively. We, however, need to focus on the issues of food, clothing, shelter, education, health and sanitation, and good governance in light of a ``vision`` that rests upon the fundamental values of freedom, peace, equality, and fairness. Progress in these matters will slowly and gradually enhance our real worth in relation to other parts of the world. In this regard, we would need to reorient some of our wrongly placed priorities. Air Marshall Asghar Khan has, for example, made a timely appeal for ``spending our meager resources on the well-being of our people and not on building a powerful war machine`` (The Nation, July 29, 1999).
Ferozk agrees that education needs to be stressed. I think, our schooling should stress upon good human values, basic literacy, creativity, and vocational training. Although the notion of expert(s) has some sort of universal acceptance, I am not a great fan of the so-called foreign experts and the way they work to provide (advertently or inadvertently) some sort of fictitious legitimacy to our bureaucracy and politicians. My reference to society-centered social sciences and humanities was guided by the need to develop a better understanding of the local-global social relations. Reports of the so-called experts (even if possessing some merit) are often shelved or implemented poorly. My mode of thinking is somewhat different, I believe in empowering common people by sharing knowledge with them and by providing them the freedom to participate more actively in matters that really concern them.
Regards, Bilal Ahmad
Ferozk has made several good observations in response to my letter (see Reply #50) where I have stressed the need to understand: (1) how the great powers have gained an edge over other countries of the world; (2) our real worth in the comity of nations; and (3) the need to develop enviable qualities in our nation. Let me clarify, my call is not guided by the need to produce a few so-called experts. I am more concerned with a collective sense of understanding that needs to be developed slowly, gradually, and uninterruptedly.
Ferozk has rightly pointed out that the question ``how the great powers have gained an edge over other countries of the world`` depend on the what we mean by ``great powers.`` In my letter, the phrase ``great powers`` was used for those countries (or sets of countries) that possess (or have possessed) the capacity to make a difference in the economic, political, and cultural spheres of many many countries of the world. In this sense, I would consider the United States, UK, and the former Soviet Union as three most powerful nations in the twentieth century. A good understanding of the evolution of great powers, I assume, requires a good grasp of capitalism, colonialism, and all forms of imperialism. The writings of Marx, Wallerstein, Tilly, and Said are useful basic readings.
Ferozk then enquires about the bench mark ``to judge Pakistan`s value in the comity of nations.`` The issues of bench mark and value are far more difficult to determine. I would argue that these notions are relative and they need to be determined discursively. We, however, need to focus on the issues of food, clothing, shelter, education, health and sanitation, and good governance in light of a ``vision`` that rests upon the fundamental values of freedom, peace, equality, and fairness. Progress in these matters will slowly and gradually enhance our real worth in relation to other parts of the world. In this regard, we would need to reorient some of our wrongly placed priorities. Air Marshall Asghar Khan has, for example, made a timely appeal for ``spending our meager resources on the well-being of our people and not on building a powerful war machine`` (The Nation, July 29, 1999).
Ferozk agrees that education needs to be stressed. I think, our schooling should stress upon good human values, basic literacy, creativity, and vocational training. Although the notion of expert(s) has some sort of universal acceptance, I am not a great fan of the so-called foreign experts and the way they work to provide (advertently or inadvertently) some sort of fictitious legitimacy to our bureaucracy and politicians. My reference to society-centered social sciences and humanities was guided by the need to develop a better understanding of the local-global social relations. Reports of the so-called experts (even if possessing some merit) are often shelved or implemented poorly. My mode of thinking is somewhat different, I believe in empowering common people by sharing knowledge with them and by providing them the freedom to participate more actively in matters that really concern them.
Regards, Bilal Ahmad
#42 Posted by ferozk on July 29, 1999 6:20:51 pm
Re: bahmed # 50
Your question how the great powers have gained an edge over other countries of the world is an interesting one, and answer depends on how what you mean by ``great powers``.
Again, what is the bench mark you are using to judge Pakistan`s value in the comity of nations and lastly,
I agree with you. Education needs to be stressed in Pakistan, but with one exception. Geo-political economy, international relations, and other area studies will not help Pakistan as long as its leaders refuse to accept its message and continue to seek short term political gains. You can have all the experts you like, but if their advice is ignored and not listened to, then what good is having experts in those fields or learning about those fields?
Your question how the great powers have gained an edge over other countries of the world is an interesting one, and answer depends on how what you mean by ``great powers``.
Again, what is the bench mark you are using to judge Pakistan`s value in the comity of nations and lastly,
I agree with you. Education needs to be stressed in Pakistan, but with one exception. Geo-political economy, international relations, and other area studies will not help Pakistan as long as its leaders refuse to accept its message and continue to seek short term political gains. You can have all the experts you like, but if their advice is ignored and not listened to, then what good is having experts in those fields or learning about those fields?
#41 Posted by bahmad on July 29, 1999 2:44:04 pm
I agree with Wasiq (Reply #48) and Anita (Reply #49) and wish to share the following letter to the editor:
Frontier Post, July 29, 1999
Our children, Our priorities?
In a recent letter to the editor of the Nation, Samin Khan of Peshawar raised two very important points concerning Pakistani politics and society (July 26, 1999).
With reference to the role of Western political leaders regarding the Kashmir problem, Samin Khan asks: Why would these leaders care much about a problem that has no real importance to their country? A short and simple answer would be: They would have no reason to care unless the issue at hand has some bearing upon their national interests or has, in their view, a humanitarian touch. Yet, they possess the power to affect the political economies of most countries around the World. If my assessment has some merit, then we need to understand: (1) how the great powers have gained an edge over other countries of the world; (2) our real worth in the comity of nations; and (3) the need to develop enviable qualities in our nation. These tasks require us to reorient our educational system toward focusing on society-centered social sciences and humanities (particularly critical social theory, political economy, geopolitics and international relations, cultural studies, and area studies).
The second point, in my view, is of no less importance. Samin Khan contends that we ``should be more creative and original to think our problems and their solutions afresh.`` The question of creativity is very important for our future place in this competitive and fast-shrinking world. We as Pakistanis often demonstrate great creativity in matters concerning short-term gains. However, when it comes to the question of our long-term existence in relation to other nations, we tend to stop thinking, fail miserably, or take false pride in some of our accomplishments. These tendencies are simple manifestations of our lack of creativity and wisdom, which is indeed a product of a poorly developed and flawed system of education.
We need to realize that our plight is partly due to our inability to allocate sufficient resources for education in the past. Let us learn from our mistakes and ensure a better educational system for our coming generations.
Bilal Ahmad
USA
Frontier Post, July 29, 1999
Our children, Our priorities?
In a recent letter to the editor of the Nation, Samin Khan of Peshawar raised two very important points concerning Pakistani politics and society (July 26, 1999).
With reference to the role of Western political leaders regarding the Kashmir problem, Samin Khan asks: Why would these leaders care much about a problem that has no real importance to their country? A short and simple answer would be: They would have no reason to care unless the issue at hand has some bearing upon their national interests or has, in their view, a humanitarian touch. Yet, they possess the power to affect the political economies of most countries around the World. If my assessment has some merit, then we need to understand: (1) how the great powers have gained an edge over other countries of the world; (2) our real worth in the comity of nations; and (3) the need to develop enviable qualities in our nation. These tasks require us to reorient our educational system toward focusing on society-centered social sciences and humanities (particularly critical social theory, political economy, geopolitics and international relations, cultural studies, and area studies).
The second point, in my view, is of no less importance. Samin Khan contends that we ``should be more creative and original to think our problems and their solutions afresh.`` The question of creativity is very important for our future place in this competitive and fast-shrinking world. We as Pakistanis often demonstrate great creativity in matters concerning short-term gains. However, when it comes to the question of our long-term existence in relation to other nations, we tend to stop thinking, fail miserably, or take false pride in some of our accomplishments. These tendencies are simple manifestations of our lack of creativity and wisdom, which is indeed a product of a poorly developed and flawed system of education.
We need to realize that our plight is partly due to our inability to allocate sufficient resources for education in the past. Let us learn from our mistakes and ensure a better educational system for our coming generations.
Bilal Ahmad
USA
#40 Posted by Anita Zaidi on July 29, 1999 12:21:56 pm
The exchange between mayhem and bilal ahmed is interesting. As you both state, the reality isn`t as simple as saying children should be educated and providing a classroom, teachers, and books. Parents in developing environments depend heavily on childrens earnings, as well as contributions to household chores. In rural areas, children are needed for firewood gathering and transporting water. Many have shown in Pakistan and elsewhere that even after controlling for income, there is a strong correlation between distance from firewood and water and number of children a family has. In these subsistence conditions of day-to-day survival, it is difficult for parents to ignore current reality and focus on potential future benefits realized through their childrens education.
We need creative solutions - perhaps teaching a combination of didactic and practical skills whose value can be realized in the near future, or restricting the school day to 3 hours, or small stipends to students ...
Anita
We need creative solutions - perhaps teaching a combination of didactic and practical skills whose value can be realized in the near future, or restricting the school day to 3 hours, or small stipends to students ...
Anita
#39 Posted by tariqlodi on July 29, 1999 6:50:21 am
IMRAN KHAN THE NEXT PRIME MINISTER OF PAKISTAN.
Unfortunately I have to agree with you.
Why not when the first P.M. is murdered and the conspiracy has not been unearthed in 50 years!
Why not when first constitution of Pakistan is strangulated on its birth and the then governor-general insists and becomes the First President of Pakistan!
Why not when one can write his own constitution and become President. And Field Marshal without winning a battle!
Why not when two can be consecutive marshal law administrators/ Presidents despite character sketch by General Akbar Khan in Bey Taigh Sipahi.
Why not when a mere M.N.A. elect, and not even sworn in, could threaten the rest and the spineless to break their legs if they went to east Pakistan and discussed Mujeeb’s 14 points!
Why not when the very same down with flue is sent to tear away the Polish resolution in the U.N!
Why not when the very same person is rewarded in return and he chooses to become the one and only in the world “civilian marshal law administrator”!
Why not when one could wait to react and see the people defying curfew till the time when an accord had been reached to hold fresh elections and the first ever elected government could result!
Why not when one could head a very large party, the qualification being to be an offspring of a head!
Why not when one could win with negative vote of the opponents and sacrifice the office and power to save the feudal class! And once again be offered the power! It reminds me of a caption of a cartoon by “Y.L”, announcement on T.V. by Maulan Kausar niazi the then (1972-77 era) information Minister, ``Mr. Wali Khan has once again been declared a patriot, until further orders!
Why not when one borrows the bowl, for begging, from Ghalib, the poet, and not from JUMSHED, the ancient king of Persia.
JAM-E- JUM SEY MERA JAM-E-SIFAL ACHCHA HAI
LAY AIN GAY BAZAR SE JA KAR AUR
(My bowl of wine is of clay and can be PURCHASED over and over again, unlike the Persian king’s!)
For me a mule would do. At least, its bridles are visible and we do have 37 years experience of ballot box manufacturing!
I have nothing against Imran Khan. Let him contribute to the politics of Pakistan, to the masses. Let him work for the betterment of the people, unlike the up till now have beens, who have always asked the masses to sacrifice. The whole assembly that votes for “the people to sacrifice” in the same breath votes themselves a raise in their allowances! No doubt he has built a cancer hospital. Just that does not, to my mind, qualify him to become a P.M. May be on that basis he can be elected to the house and start building his political career. But that has not been the route to power for any body in Pakistan, so, why for him? If not ancestors, he does have western in- laws!
For me a mule would do. At least, its bridles are visible and we do have 37 years experience of ballot box manufacturing!
TARIQ LODI.
Unfortunately I have to agree with you.
Why not when the first P.M. is murdered and the conspiracy has not been unearthed in 50 years!
Why not when first constitution of Pakistan is strangulated on its birth and the then governor-general insists and becomes the First President of Pakistan!
Why not when one can write his own constitution and become President. And Field Marshal without winning a battle!
Why not when two can be consecutive marshal law administrators/ Presidents despite character sketch by General Akbar Khan in Bey Taigh Sipahi.
Why not when a mere M.N.A. elect, and not even sworn in, could threaten the rest and the spineless to break their legs if they went to east Pakistan and discussed Mujeeb’s 14 points!
Why not when the very same down with flue is sent to tear away the Polish resolution in the U.N!
Why not when the very same person is rewarded in return and he chooses to become the one and only in the world “civilian marshal law administrator”!
Why not when one could wait to react and see the people defying curfew till the time when an accord had been reached to hold fresh elections and the first ever elected government could result!
Why not when one could head a very large party, the qualification being to be an offspring of a head!
Why not when one could win with negative vote of the opponents and sacrifice the office and power to save the feudal class! And once again be offered the power! It reminds me of a caption of a cartoon by “Y.L”, announcement on T.V. by Maulan Kausar niazi the then (1972-77 era) information Minister, ``Mr. Wali Khan has once again been declared a patriot, until further orders!
Why not when one borrows the bowl, for begging, from Ghalib, the poet, and not from JUMSHED, the ancient king of Persia.
JAM-E- JUM SEY MERA JAM-E-SIFAL ACHCHA HAI
LAY AIN GAY BAZAR SE JA KAR AUR
(My bowl of wine is of clay and can be PURCHASED over and over again, unlike the Persian king’s!)
For me a mule would do. At least, its bridles are visible and we do have 37 years experience of ballot box manufacturing!
I have nothing against Imran Khan. Let him contribute to the politics of Pakistan, to the masses. Let him work for the betterment of the people, unlike the up till now have beens, who have always asked the masses to sacrifice. The whole assembly that votes for “the people to sacrifice” in the same breath votes themselves a raise in their allowances! No doubt he has built a cancer hospital. Just that does not, to my mind, qualify him to become a P.M. May be on that basis he can be elected to the house and start building his political career. But that has not been the route to power for any body in Pakistan, so, why for him? If not ancestors, he does have western in- laws!
For me a mule would do. At least, its bridles are visible and we do have 37 years experience of ballot box manufacturing!
TARIQ LODI.
#38 Posted by bahmad on July 29, 1999 6:50:21 am
There were a couple of typos in my Reply # 45. The correct form of my questions is:
Was education really free in all respects?
What role would you like the State of Pakistan to play in this regard?
I regret my carelessness. Thanks.
-- Bilal Ahmad
Was education really free in all respects?
What role would you like the State of Pakistan to play in this regard?
I regret my carelessness. Thanks.
-- Bilal Ahmad
#37 Posted by bahmad on July 28, 1999 8:39:49 pm
In response to Mayhem (Reply # 44):
Mayhem has drawn our attention toward the practice of child labor in Pakistan. He has also identified the indifference of (lack of appreciation among) many/most poor parents to send their children to schools (even if education was/is free). Mayhem`s generalizations are based upon his experience of running two industrial operations over a span of six years. Mayhem`s narrative, however, suggests his inability to look more deeply into the question of child labor. Dear Mayhem, would you kindly answer the following questions:
Did you try to theorize/analyze the behavior of parents? Were the parents simply ignorant people who had no interest in the future of their children? Was child labor necessary for the day to day survival of the families? If no, what evidence do you have to support your point? Was child labor a source of additional income for the middle or long-term needs of the poor families (such as marriage of some female members of the family)? What education really free in all respects? Do you think that the parents actually violated the citizenship and/or human rights of their children? Would role would you like the State of Pakistan to play in this regard?
-- Bilal Ahmad
Mayhem has drawn our attention toward the practice of child labor in Pakistan. He has also identified the indifference of (lack of appreciation among) many/most poor parents to send their children to schools (even if education was/is free). Mayhem`s generalizations are based upon his experience of running two industrial operations over a span of six years. Mayhem`s narrative, however, suggests his inability to look more deeply into the question of child labor. Dear Mayhem, would you kindly answer the following questions:
Did you try to theorize/analyze the behavior of parents? Were the parents simply ignorant people who had no interest in the future of their children? Was child labor necessary for the day to day survival of the families? If no, what evidence do you have to support your point? Was child labor a source of additional income for the middle or long-term needs of the poor families (such as marriage of some female members of the family)? What education really free in all respects? Do you think that the parents actually violated the citizenship and/or human rights of their children? Would role would you like the State of Pakistan to play in this regard?
-- Bilal Ahmad
#36 Posted by mayhem on July 28, 1999 3:07:41 pm
re: Wasiq (40)
The people do have the potential to be much more, but they choose not to. I ran a corn oil and a textile factory in Pakistan fo 6 years. I hired school teachers to teach the workers kids for free, paid the worker more than what they were getting at other factories...basically treated them very well...what did they do...pulled their kids out of the school I created and put them to work, said I didn`t want them to have supplemental income among other things. With this kind of mentality, they are going to remain uneducated. I tried making a difference, thinking it made up for the haram ki zindagi in Pakistan (i.e there is no way you can export anythig with out bribing truckers unions, customs officials, shipping corporations, but I was wrong.
I choose not to be a part of any political rallies, which are all propaganda. Why should I support tried and tested leaders who are only interested in their personal gain. I made a healthy profit with my factories, but I knew how much money was enough and when to start giving back to the people...but the ``leaders`` of this country don`t seem to know that. I met Imran Khan, and listened to his views on education, admitting his short comings, knowing he had to hire honest advisors...this is a change. I have lived ``amongst the people who I dismiss so easily`` for 16 years. I have to disagree with you, but I am sure that my charachterization of the poor masses of the Paksitani people is correct. I explained to them (i.e. the 630 factory workers) that my father used to sell sugar cane on a donkey cart in the 1950`s...but he won a scholarship to Berkely, ...becasue he spent all his free time at the public library and wrote one hell on a paper on industrial organization...and thats how our family`s fortunes grew. I said if your kids get educated they can become like this too. Not everyone will go to the states, but they can go to Punjab university, become programmers, professors, take the CSS exam, or anything...but they refused...what is a person supposed to do then...when 590/630 people refuse to get their kids educated for free...knowing it will be to their own generation`s benefit. The people are uneducated, the majority don`t want to be, and I frankly, don`t understand the point of your reply.
Respectfully,
Mayhem
The people do have the potential to be much more, but they choose not to. I ran a corn oil and a textile factory in Pakistan fo 6 years. I hired school teachers to teach the workers kids for free, paid the worker more than what they were getting at other factories...basically treated them very well...what did they do...pulled their kids out of the school I created and put them to work, said I didn`t want them to have supplemental income among other things. With this kind of mentality, they are going to remain uneducated. I tried making a difference, thinking it made up for the haram ki zindagi in Pakistan (i.e there is no way you can export anythig with out bribing truckers unions, customs officials, shipping corporations, but I was wrong.
I choose not to be a part of any political rallies, which are all propaganda. Why should I support tried and tested leaders who are only interested in their personal gain. I made a healthy profit with my factories, but I knew how much money was enough and when to start giving back to the people...but the ``leaders`` of this country don`t seem to know that. I met Imran Khan, and listened to his views on education, admitting his short comings, knowing he had to hire honest advisors...this is a change. I have lived ``amongst the people who I dismiss so easily`` for 16 years. I have to disagree with you, but I am sure that my charachterization of the poor masses of the Paksitani people is correct. I explained to them (i.e. the 630 factory workers) that my father used to sell sugar cane on a donkey cart in the 1950`s...but he won a scholarship to Berkely, ...becasue he spent all his free time at the public library and wrote one hell on a paper on industrial organization...and thats how our family`s fortunes grew. I said if your kids get educated they can become like this too. Not everyone will go to the states, but they can go to Punjab university, become programmers, professors, take the CSS exam, or anything...but they refused...what is a person supposed to do then...when 590/630 people refuse to get their kids educated for free...knowing it will be to their own generation`s benefit. The people are uneducated, the majority don`t want to be, and I frankly, don`t understand the point of your reply.
Respectfully,
Mayhem
#35 Posted by bahmad on July 25, 1999 12:04:42 pm
In response to Mayhem (Reply # 34) and Wasiq (Reply #40):
Pakistani historiography has so far failed to provide much understanding of the nature, role, and power of common people. A major source of the problem is our obsession with the ruling elite -- a top-down history and politics. I think, both Mayhem and Wasiq have identified something important.
In my commentary on Dr. Mubashir Hasan`s vision of South Asia (Pakistan Link, March 12, 1999), I wrote:
Although Hasan acknowledges that the common people in South Asia possess ``an enormous capacity to bear suffering and oppression, `` he treats them as mere pawns who neither have ``any pride`` in their state-based (such as Pakistani or Indian) way of life nor the ability to decide as to ``what is moral, what is just, what is good, what is beautiful and what is sacred.`` He further maintains that the common people do not work-hard because they want to keep their powerful oppressors and exploiters weak and vulnerable. I have three major difficulties with Hasan`s position. First, I wonder what Hasan really means by the Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Nepali, or Sri Lankan way of life. In Pakistan, for example, there is no such thing as a peculiarly Pakistani way of life. Pakistan has many ethno-linguistic social groups whose ways of life have many similarities and differences.
Second, Hasan`s remarks about the moral and ethical dispositions of the common people are rather sweeping and unwarranted, as they are only partially correct. These remarks, I suspect, are likely to frustrate most honest, hard-working, conscientious, and fair-minded people in South Asia. Third, and finally, Hasan`s remarks suggest his failure to appreciate the way common people have responded (both directly or indirectly) to the deeply structured conditions of their existence.
-Bilal Ahmad
Pakistani historiography has so far failed to provide much understanding of the nature, role, and power of common people. A major source of the problem is our obsession with the ruling elite -- a top-down history and politics. I think, both Mayhem and Wasiq have identified something important.
In my commentary on Dr. Mubashir Hasan`s vision of South Asia (Pakistan Link, March 12, 1999), I wrote:
Although Hasan acknowledges that the common people in South Asia possess ``an enormous capacity to bear suffering and oppression, `` he treats them as mere pawns who neither have ``any pride`` in their state-based (such as Pakistani or Indian) way of life nor the ability to decide as to ``what is moral, what is just, what is good, what is beautiful and what is sacred.`` He further maintains that the common people do not work-hard because they want to keep their powerful oppressors and exploiters weak and vulnerable. I have three major difficulties with Hasan`s position. First, I wonder what Hasan really means by the Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Nepali, or Sri Lankan way of life. In Pakistan, for example, there is no such thing as a peculiarly Pakistani way of life. Pakistan has many ethno-linguistic social groups whose ways of life have many similarities and differences.
Second, Hasan`s remarks about the moral and ethical dispositions of the common people are rather sweeping and unwarranted, as they are only partially correct. These remarks, I suspect, are likely to frustrate most honest, hard-working, conscientious, and fair-minded people in South Asia. Third, and finally, Hasan`s remarks suggest his failure to appreciate the way common people have responded (both directly or indirectly) to the deeply structured conditions of their existence.
-Bilal Ahmad
#34 Posted by bahmad on July 24, 1999 1:00:28 pm
In response to Wasiq (Reply #39):
An impressive game-theoretic response of my questions on corruption. I tend to agree with your other comments too. Thank you Wasiq for your effort. We need many more people like you.
Sincerely, Bilal
P.S. Just curiosity: Are you Wasiq Nawaz too?
An impressive game-theoretic response of my questions on corruption. I tend to agree with your other comments too. Thank you Wasiq for your effort. We need many more people like you.
Sincerely, Bilal
P.S. Just curiosity: Are you Wasiq Nawaz too?
#33 Posted by bahmad on July 23, 1999 2:45:39 pm
In reponse to tqa (see replies #36 and 37):
In response to some of my questions, tqs wrote:
``Answers to your questions: 0% to 100%.
Anything or everything is possible in Pakistan!
There are 100% chances of Imran Khan being successful (good for Pakistan) and 100% chances of him being/becoming corrupt. We (Pakistanis) have seen/tested BB and NS, the only one left is IK, he is the only one left why not give him a chance, we have nothing to loose?``
Comment (Just food for thought):
If it is 0% success, why should people give Imran Khan a chance?
With a nearly 0% chance of success and nearly 100% chance of becoming corrupt, we have everything to loose.
Something more: Why IK? Why not Wali, Beg, Qazi, Leghari, Younus? And, if we bent upon auctioning Pakistan, why not Tariq Aziz, the greatest surreal auctioneer? And if my questions are not appropriate, why not empower the people of Pakistan through some sort of devolution. Devolution would create localized or regional power structures (as they already exist without much legal support and restrictions).
In response to some of my questions, tqs wrote:
``Answers to your questions: 0% to 100%.
Anything or everything is possible in Pakistan!
There are 100% chances of Imran Khan being successful (good for Pakistan) and 100% chances of him being/becoming corrupt. We (Pakistanis) have seen/tested BB and NS, the only one left is IK, he is the only one left why not give him a chance, we have nothing to loose?``
Comment (Just food for thought):
If it is 0% success, why should people give Imran Khan a chance?
With a nearly 0% chance of success and nearly 100% chance of becoming corrupt, we have everything to loose.
Something more: Why IK? Why not Wali, Beg, Qazi, Leghari, Younus? And, if we bent upon auctioning Pakistan, why not Tariq Aziz, the greatest surreal auctioneer? And if my questions are not appropriate, why not empower the people of Pakistan through some sort of devolution. Devolution would create localized or regional power structures (as they already exist without much legal support and restrictions).
#32 Posted by bahmad on July 23, 1999 7:18:26 am
Some question to ponder:
What is corruption? is corruption a myth or reality? Is corruption bad for our country? Why do people become corrupt?
Who is corrupt in Pakistan? Almost everyone or just a few?
Assuming that Imran Khan is not corrupt (based on a general definition), what are his chances of becoming corrupt during his first term in power? How about the second term?
Assuming that he retains his honesty and integrity intact, what are his chances of completing his first term? His second term?
Can someone theorize the process through which Imran Khan (assuming that he is not at all corrupt) would turn into a corrupt leader?
Is it realistically possible that a corrupt leader may transform Pakistan into an economically and politically strong and an essentially corruption-free country? If yes, how?
Good Luck!
What is corruption? is corruption a myth or reality? Is corruption bad for our country? Why do people become corrupt?
Who is corrupt in Pakistan? Almost everyone or just a few?
Assuming that Imran Khan is not corrupt (based on a general definition), what are his chances of becoming corrupt during his first term in power? How about the second term?
Assuming that he retains his honesty and integrity intact, what are his chances of completing his first term? His second term?
Can someone theorize the process through which Imran Khan (assuming that he is not at all corrupt) would turn into a corrupt leader?
Is it realistically possible that a corrupt leader may transform Pakistan into an economically and politically strong and an essentially corruption-free country? If yes, how?
Good Luck!
#31 Posted by UR on July 22, 1999 1:36:22 pm
It is amazing to see how willing people are of accepting the status quo in the Pakistani political scenario. The discussions here seem to indicate that currently Pakistan is in good hands, and unless someone with a proven political record comes along, BB and NS should be allowed to continue with their rotations of occupying the Prime Minister`s office.
The question is not whether Imran Khan is the best option. The question is whether he is a better option than BB and NS. Infact, any honest Pakistani with average intelligence and dedication would be better than the political leadership that is available to Pakistan at the moment. However, very few dedicated people are willing to come out and make an effort at running for a political office. They have everything to lose, and not much to gain. Imran Khan has made that effort.
For those of you who think, Imran Khan should not be the next premier; kindly name the person who should be (someone who has the chance of being elected).
The question is not whether Imran Khan is the best option. The question is whether he is a better option than BB and NS. Infact, any honest Pakistani with average intelligence and dedication would be better than the political leadership that is available to Pakistan at the moment. However, very few dedicated people are willing to come out and make an effort at running for a political office. They have everything to lose, and not much to gain. Imran Khan has made that effort.
For those of you who think, Imran Khan should not be the next premier; kindly name the person who should be (someone who has the chance of being elected).
#30 Posted by mayhem on July 21, 1999 5:53:06 pm
Wasiq of course we can discern who is qualified and who isn`t we are educated people. But you are being like a typical politician and only thinking of yourself and the friends in your circle. I am talking about the thousands of uneducated, illetrate, easily influenced masses. Duh!
#29 Posted by aikrindd on July 21, 1999 5:17:02 pm
rather than merely looking at imran khan, perhaps looking at the other members of the Tehrik-e-Insaaf will give us a better idea on the intentions of Imran Khan. This article should have mentioned those selected by the Khan to join TI. remember, it`s parliamentary system and those elected will elect the leader. obviously IK`s image overshadows all the other`s but still, the other members of TI, so far, have represented what the Khan has been insisting. that is where the chants of support and criticism should be based upon.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- anil: Re: # 257 Masadi: Seems like... Terrorism Unveiled
- anil: Re: # 267 What is... Terrorism Unveiled
- anil: Masadi: So you do understand... Terrorism Unveiled
- masadi: Anil writes "I think... Terrorism Unveiled
- masadi: Anil writes "Please let... Terrorism Unveiled
- anil: Re: # 258 Masadi: In English... Terrorism Unveiled
- okhla99: In an operation... A Guantanamo Diary
- masadi: Anil writes "I suppose... Terrorism Unveiled
