Pakistan and Civil Society

Ijaz
Valiant effort.

However, you still write from the perspective of a nation state led by a government. We may live within national boundaries because the world forces us to but should we truly seek to have one identitiy, on vision within that nation state.

Civil society will not develop unless there is a plurality of ideas and a plurality of visions within the nation state.

When you say ``The role of the Non Profit Organisations also needs to be regulated and monitored within the premise of a nation state. In the existing hype, there is probability that many of these organisations could form a nexus with the civil servants and become hot beds of corruption.`` You are seeking to empower the government which has so stifled civil society.

The only way for civil society to develop is to return the government to its main function--law and order. Which means it should withdraw from everytheng else that it does, including education and regulation. Currently the government cannot give us security because it is invlolved in the violence, yet it wants to regulate our lives in every way. All this is done in the name of the nation state.

All the best

Ijaz

Even your subtitle is a contradiction.....``An Engine for Undiluted Nationalism.``

Civil society is the most developed in Europe precisely because nationalism has been subdued.

American civil society suffers because of jingoistic nationalism.

We subcontinentals are hung up on nationalism of the 19th century European kind. This idea is an import and not a locally generated idea.

I repeat civil society needs to be dissociated from nationalism. It is the community, the people and their networks of trust that are different from nationalism.

Please do not misunderstand this to mean that the nation state must go. It is there and will be there. But it should not subsume all, especially not civil society. This is what has gone wrong with Pakistan.

All the best

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Not my country, so don`t particularly care, but I would like to dispute that there was a nation before partition. I have also had an argument previously with someone on chowk because I don`t believe Pakistanis can claim inheritance of the Indus valley civilisation-whoever the other was would not agree the mother goddess was worshipped there.Good luck to the country that now exists, but why start talking about something like this, where you know there will be a sharp divide-what`s the point of provoking another slanging match? It was not needed to make your point. Don`t look at me, I`m not the one who slags off the extended families and partners of Chowk members.

sameerjb,

..... i second your proposal for ammendment to the constitution with a small change - all her majesty`s appointments, in addition to being from the west, should also be white .........it wouldn`t make any difference if she appointed sir ghulam rasool from manchester as the governor of sindh - the chances are he will go native and apeshit as soon as he lands in karachi .......... as t.e. lawrence and other dead orientalists have pointed out, the brown man is incapable of ruling himself ............ a couple of years ago i saw this phenomenon at a diler mehdi concert in chicago ............ there was sheer chaos and pandemonium as a crowd of five thousand desis armed with phd`s and md`s fought over seats like doodh-walas from gujranwala - everyone quickly shut up and sat down as soon as a couple of seven dollar an hour white men in security uniforms yelled at them ............ it is in the genes

i am confused by the term `undiluted nationalism`. is there such a thing? as for one of the responses talking about us being stuck between religion and nationalism, religion IS a form of nationalism. religion and nationalism go hand in hand. religion is what ultra nationalists have invoked in places such as the balkans, cyprus, nazi germany in the 30`s, and yes, even in pakistan and one of our neighboring countries.

perhaps i am confused by the definition of civil society. i have always understood civil society to be separate from the apparatus of the state. .which just so happens to be a part of the nation-state. the nation-state in pakistan, has tended to crush participation of various elements of civil society. women`s groups for example are an essential part of civil society, are they not? is it the role of civil society to be part of what can be the coercive nature of the state. or is it rather the role of civil society to keep a check on the coercive nature of the state, and by extension, nationalism?

this is a well-crafted essay, of that there is no doubt. i just find it problematic, and as sameer has said, the likelihood of any of these steps taking place is quite low. . .especially as long as the current `government` is in place, and nationalism, even in its `undiluted` form excludes groups of people.

jay:

It is time that people like you stop writing crap.

wise man follow their own advice

(hope you don`t mind my senile friend...like you i have nothing to do today;))

rgds,

t

Izas,

It is time that people like you stop writing crap. Pakistan was created by one man and his idea of TNT fitted the designs of the colonial masters. It is only now, that pakistan is finding its roots as a nation. It is built from the ground up, by the ordinary people of pakistan.

``a random sample in Gujranwala, local business contributions in Zakat to both registered and unregistered civic bodies were four times the amount paid as taxes.``

As you correctly point out, it is the people who want the madrassas and the jihadic way of life. In pakistan, a new version of islam is taking shape, the jihadic islam. It is founded in the madrassas and the k for kafir education of the other schools. At last the children of TNT are reaching a mature age, they are attacking the military, they founded the taliban and the al quida.

The formation of pakistan as a nation started only after 1947. At last now the foundation has been laid and when the jihadis sieze the military, that is when the superstructure will be built.

It is an opportunity for the pakistanis to celebrate. Look at the hard facts, look at the evenets in karachi, the attacks on the military, the still missing osama in the jihadic labyrinths of pakistan, it is a nation in formation, the jihadic republic of pakistan. There is nothing wrong with it, that is what the people of pakistan wants and it is for the rest of the world to eliminate it.

This is a very well-written article. Hardly any one will disagree with carefully crafted suggestions although agreeing or disagreeing mean little when likelihood of these series of steps taking place is quite low. Additionally, the history of civil society in the making for a long time is not as praiseworthy as you have mentioned; it is no way an ``A`` grade performance.

Since you have proposed a series of steps that are necessary towards bulilding a better civil society than the current level, which might take long time on a coarse path or never take place, I also suggest easy and quick step which will not take much time but is not likely to happen as well. Pakistan needs a constitutional amendment that transfers power to appoint COAS and all the justices of the Supreme Court including Chief Justice - invoking membership of British Commonwealth - to Queen of England with the conditions that all appointees should be non-Pakistanis and preferably of British origin. Few other appointments like Governor of State Bank, Finance czar and Cheif Secretary (as chief bureaucrat) should also be appointed by Her Majesty from non-Pakistanis, preferably British, Canadians, Australians or New Zealanders. This will certainly bring some character at the top and help improve Pakistani governments` standing among masses.

Fab article !
I think we Pakistanis are stuck between nationalism and religion ;we are a divided nation in terms of social and economic develoupment we need to address this in ordre to restore confidence in the state of Pakistan. We should try to be a bit positive ( is my request)