WAQAS119
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
- Messages
- 5,426
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Webmaster is ok with it.
And this is Hypocrisy!!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Webmaster is ok with it.
CJP & other Judges of that time were Puppets .. We as a nation don't care about our constitution..
Musharraf cannot peacefully run a campaign in Pakistan because of dadagiri, corruption and jhalat.
Anyways, best of luck to you guys. Probably one of the best decent political party currently.
The main reason why i sticked it was only because of my personal opinion that Musharraf needs to be supported for what he is trying to do..and that is to become a civilian and run for the office again. It was a personally a good option to support him...otherwise 100 rupees per vote walay will be in power once again.
Asking such questions is a bit premature right now understanding that the party is newly formed. No average person would have answers to these questions. Only the parties representatives would be able to answer these questions. IMO, these questions are not of utmost importance right now.
What is utmost importance is the party's representatives and its goals.
Here is where APML with no doubt will emerge as a major force.
While the main parties currently rely on representatives (of the people) with fake degrees, it is unlikely that such representatives will form the APML. From my understanding APML will form of highly educated professionals who will fill-in their specialized roles.
The fact that the economy, military and the country had prosper under Musharraf compare to the current corrupted regime is what our hopes are based on. There is no need for the statistical data on the current economy. We all know how that is going. Musharraf in my opinion will change that.
Musharraf needs to be given another chance. A much better option than Taliban sympathizers and other corrupted political parties.
Those seats were taken by PML-Q and they are still a powerful party in Pakistan without Musharraf, I think they would've done better without Musharraf.I agree that votings is a numbers game and in 2008 elections, President Musharraf's name got PML-Q 53 seats in the National Assembly and these seats were from all over Pakistan.
On the other hand Nawaz league got 5 seats from NWFP and rest of the seats were from Punjab.
President Musharraf's participation in politics will only benefit Pakistan because it will give another option to the people of Pakistan and will add pressure on ohters to actually do some work.
I assure you that he is going to return and it is a matter of when and not if.
He couldn't move an inch on the land distribution since he had tied himself up with feudal lords, any such redistribution on the national level would affect his allies too.
I am however supportive of having a set education criteria for participation in the general elections. Fake degrees aside, it ensures (or will ensure) that a person has gone through a process of earning up their position in public office. Even if the awaam is too illiterate to make the distinction, a filtration process will reduce the impact of voting for your feudal lord mai **** and instead voting for someone who has earned college credit and had an exposure to the various subject matters that he/she will be exposed to in public office.
Its still democratic, only process oriented democratic.
Land reform and what not dare not come up because across party lines, this is the one thing in common that these folks share, their desire to perpetuate their holdings. The only exception to this case are parties like ANP and MQM but they do not have a national footprint so even if there stance for land reforms (among other things), is laudable, it cannot move things. Musharraf has only these folks to rely upon which makes it all the harder for him to push things through. I guess I would agree that if he was not able to sort these folks out when he had the khaki on, there is little chance that the fundamental problem with land reform and feudalism will end in Pakistan.
As far as Sparks questions, just the other day I picked up the PPP manifesto. There is a checkmark on everything that Spark is raising...essentially "Haan ji hum bhi yeh kartain hain" type bakvaas. In Pakistan, the easiest thing to spin is the "Ideology". There is a an ideology for each of the parties. Unfortunately the only thing missing is the national ideology.
Since, the discussion on sticky-ness and partisanship is closed, I've got the opportunity to question about these comments.
Long gone the days of Rs. 100. The rate is much higher now.
Since you stated that he has the best new party (in the other thread) please answer my following queries:-
1. Does the APML support neo-liberalism like the way Musharraf's previous era embraced it (although I doubt Musharraf can differentiate even between monetary and fiscal policies)?
2. What is their position on land re-distribution? What is the party's view on benami ownership and absentee landlordism? On state land distribution amongst the elite?
3. What is APML's position on progressive economic tax or will they impose a flat slab like Shaukat Aziz wanted to after they had already eliminated the wealth tax?
4. Is the APML protectionist or pro- free trade?
5. Will the APML support unionization or ban trade unions like the previous dictator did? (which resulted in a 6% decrease in real wages)
6. Is the APML going to support a completely secular constituion or is it okay with the status quo?
7. Does the APML support a devolution or power or centralization?
8. Will the APML embrace foreign investment in agriculture and corporate farming or embrace the welfare of the peasants? (since land grabs were alloted to arabs during the previous dictator's era and continue even now)
9. Will the APML embrace consumer financing as the source of "development"?
10. Will the APML sell more land like Bundal and Budoo island to foreign real estate "developers"? (read destroyers)
Or just answer this question, does the APML lean to the left, right, centre of left, centre of right or what?
As I'm sure, nobody has an answer to even the last question.
It's just a one-man party, focused on personalities just like all other parties in Pakistan. But that is not surprising since it is a product of our society where everything is focused on personalities and relies on kinship and blood ties.
You cannot possibly in this world move from 100 rupee, biradiri and chacha-mama votes to a progressive system of governance. Evolutionary steps are small and the usual knee-jerk reaction that emanates because of the frustration with the system of governance gives rise to these hypocritical statements and hopes of oxymoronic "benevolent dictators" and one-man-fix-it-all schemes. (although I must point out that rural constituencies have a far higher swing votes than urban areas where traders firmly hold onto one group or another).
Nobody ever has, ever can or ever will possibly change a country's socio-politico inclinations on his own. It takes decades and it requires people's will. The frustration visible amongst the urban upper middle class always makes me glad since we benefit from this exploitative state structure through the fact that we are part of the state apparatus but by merely suggesting that we don't own millions of acres of lands, we chant slogans of being middle class and representative of the state, which we are not.
There is no reason to state the party as some new beacon of light. It's a man who has spent 9 years in the premier office (through power of the barrel and tanks) and still wants to come back to power. The hunger for power therefore never dies.
And please no look-at-others arguments and avoid fallacies especially ones like Reductio ad Zardarium.
PS : Me showing open defiance. Webby, please don't bump me
Sparky - I can resonate with the direction you're headed forThere is no point in discussing the economic legacy, the rise in inequality and the theoretical short-comings of neo-liberalism itself.