Rotten Tree of Democarcy Must Be Uprooted

[deathfromabove]

“Another such victory and we have had it”, King Pyrrhus of Epirus

This ancient quote comes to mind after witnessing the latest run of CIA imposed democracy in Pakistan. The old crooks back with gloss and glitter. The biggest crook getting the biggest prize, the Presidency, the rest of the goons settling for ministries and cabinet posts. The humble people of Pakistan were mesmerized by the media into welcoming these crooks back into power. People have short memories, it is true for any nation, but a nation that forgets its history has its geography changed by its enemies.

The masses were blinded by the media and the liberal fascists who want to enforce their 1% doctrine of western cultural, political, economic and secular agenda on the 99% nation of Pakistan. The mantra of democracy was tuned into the minds of the people using the best propaganda tool ‘the television’. Now second year into the Zardari government people are praying for Divine intervention or some miracle to rid the nation of this cancerous government. On the other hand, the 1% liberal fascist elite class wants to enslave 99% of the nation into bowing down to US slavery. We shouldn’t really blame them for they have been programmed into being nothing else but servants of the Zionist cabal.

The so called popular sentiment ingrained into the viewers’ minds by TV anchors and talk-show hosts, that the ‘worst democracy is better than military dictatorship’ – is absolute rubbish and distortion of facts. The people of Pakistan do not care if a civilian prime minister is ruling over them or a General. The nation is looking for someone who can solve the ills of the society. We don’t care about western urban jargons and CNN’s polls on democracy in Pakistan or IRI’s opinion polls.

From being a slum Malaysia became an ‘Asian Tiger’, was this achieved through democracy or one man’s benevolent leadership? What about UAE, Qatar, or Kuwait? Is there any democracy there? What about Indonesia? Ask any Indonesian if they are having a good time with their democracy. Singapore had a benevolent dictator who turned Singapore from a pirate marshy swamp into 9th largest economy of the world. Add to that Chavez in Venezuela, Lula in Brazil and the list goes on. Even Russia has recovered from IMF and World Bank enforced torture through the able leadership of Putin (formed FSB head and a nationalist). And we must not forget China from this list.

What we don’t find is a model of European or US styled democracy able to lift people out of their misery anywhere in the world. Their own experience with democracy has been a disaster. UK has the highest number of fascists groups on its soil, followed by Germany and France. The US, has its entire socio-economic-political model collapsing on its own hollow foundations. Every nation that has tried to follow Western-imported democracy has been in ruins and complete disaster. Hondourus, Columbia, Panama, Philippines, South Korea, Mexico, and many other countries fill the list of failed democratic experiences.

Democracy in Pakistan means nothing more than a breeding ground for robber barons and scoundrels. Pakistan has a literacy rate of 40% and according to the UN Human Development Report one of the few countries in the world which has a declining literacy rate. Literate in Pakistan means anyone who can read and write their name. The electoral constituencies in Pakistan are nothing more than family holdings, where elections results have produced the same people every time elections have been held. Only change has been the different family members switching political parties, with half the family members sitting in opposition and half in government. The elite class became elite courtesy of selling their loyalties time and again to the highest bidder.

The political background of Pakistan is easy to understand. The Indian sub-continent was ruled by Mughals for a longtime. When Shah Jehan was the King, Mughal Empire had become huge and de-centralization was required. In order to rule efficiently the Mughals had divided the empire into provinces which were further divided into cities, and towns. Further sub-division led to the creation of zameens, or land holdings ruled by zamindar, which were loyal to the Mughal Empire, they paid taxes, maintained an army, which was also loyal to the Mughal King. When the sun set on the Mughal Empire Punjab was over run and ruled by Sikhs, the zameendars were in no mood to let go off their power and prestige and simply removed the Mughal Flag and replaced it with Sikh Flag. It’s indeed easier to sell your soul, than die with honor. When the Sikhs were overthrown by the British Empire the zameendars removed the Portrait of Raja Duleep Singh and replaced it with the Queen of England. These zameendars were not interested in anything else but maintaining their own power. Zameendars of Punjab were the most active among all. They happily served as subjects of the Mughal, Sikh and British Empire. When the zameendars saw that the creation of Pakistan was inevitable they started joining the Muslim League, and labeled themselves as patriots.

The British created their Unionist Party which openly called for the British to remain in India, and was against the creation of Pakistan. Almost all the zameendars of Punjab joined this party. The situation in Sindh was similar, and the famous families of Sindh and Punjab were getting their monthly stipends from British Empire. Chandios, Mengals, Talpurs, Tiwana, Jamali, Ghutani, Bazinjo, Bughti, Khan of Kalat, Mukhdoom family of Punjab, Aitezaz Ahsan’s grandfather, Hamid Nasir Chatta’s grandfather, Shahnawaz Bhutto, Sikander Hayat are just few prominent names from a very long laundry list of families whose allegiance for a few hundred years have not been with the people whose lives they are destined to destroy, but with their masters elsewhere. The irony is that the current political leaders are the grand children or direct relatives of these same people. The election result has not bought any change, we can have elections every year but it will never bring any change until we change the system once and for all. During Ayub Khan’s tenure, all the names mentioned above and others including Bhutto were against Fatima Jinnah in the Presidential elections with Ayub Khan. This is the patriotism of all these Zameendar families that they chose to support Gen. Ayub against Madr-e-Millat, Fatima Jinnah. Not only this they arranged many political Jalsay or rallies where they maligned Fatima Jinnah. These so called champions of democracy have acted in the most hypocritical ways over the last three or four hundred years.

The situation right now is that Pakistan is on the edge of turmoil because of these corrupt to the core political families and landlords who couldn’t care less about Pakistan or Pakistan’s interests. Both Nawaz League and PPP are completely incompetent to provide any direction to the nation. Both these parties are corrupt to the core, most of their party members are the same landlords who are not interested in anything else but making more money. ANP, another party that is in coalition with PPP, was founded by Abdul Ghaffar Khan, who was called “frontier Gandhi”, because of his allegiance to Indian Congress and his anti Pakistan stance. ANP still is a sub nationalist anti-state party. During the Soviet-Afghan war they openly supported the Soviet Union, and now the same ANP is supporting the US. Just recently party Chief Asfandyar Wali spent a longtime meeting key US officials in USA.

What we need in Pakistan is not CIA enforced hypocritical democracy – What we need in Pakistan is a complete overhaul of the system. We need to get rid of these tyrants and robber barons who have become our leaders in the name of patriotism. As Thomas Jefferson said, “tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

It’s high time that we wake up from our slumber and decipher the cheap rhetoric that our politicians have been feeding us from a very longtime. Democracy does not work in a nation with millions of uneducated people; democracy doesn’t work in a country where there have never been land reforms. CNN and CIA’s color coded movements can’t and will never work in Pakistan because people of Pakistan reject such democracies and will do so in future as well. We need to get rid of landlords and land owners who have monopolized the lives of rural peasants of Pakistan. The dream of Pakistan that was envisioned by Allama Iqbal and Jinnah will be achieved even if it takes some time. In Iqbal’s Pakistan there will be no place for these liberal fascists, and progeny of corrupt political parties. What they have with them are hollow western slogans, and corrupt politics, what we have with us are Islamic principles, Iqbal’s Khudi and Jinnah’s resolute courage. These are real ideas, and ideas are stronger than bullets, and can’t be replaced by ballots or textbooks.

Pakistan Zindabad

//PKKH

 

[Chanakyaa]

It’s high time that we wake up from our slumber and decipher the cheap rhetoric that our politicians have been feeding us from a very longtime. Democracy does not work in a nation with millions of uneducated people; democracy doesn’t work in a country where there have never been land reforms. CNN and CIA’s color coded movements can’t and will never work in Pakistan because people of Pakistan reject such democracies and will do so in future as well. We need to get rid of landlords and land owners who have monopolized the lives of rural peasants of Pakistan. The dream of Pakistan that was envisioned by Allama Iqbal and Jinnah will be achieved even if it takes some time. In Iqbal’s Pakistan there will be no place for these liberal fascists, and progeny of corrupt political parties. What they have with them are hollow western slogans, and corrupt politics, what we have with us are Islamic principles, Iqbal’s Khudi and Jinnah’s resolute courage. These are real ideas, and ideas are stronger than bullets, and can’t be replaced by ballots or textbooks.

I guess, You Must send a copy of the same to Gen. Kayani
He is the Right person with ample powers to actually execute the above ideas.

I Only wish That The Move Does Good to ur Nation, Not like what happened with Gen Musharraf and His widely condemned actions.

 

[Solomon2]

"liberal fascists who want to enforce their 1% doctrine of western cultural, political, economic and secular agenda on the 99% nation of Pakistan....What we need in Pakistan is not CIA enforced hypocritical democracy – What we need in Pakistan is a complete overhaul of the system. We need to get rid of these tyrants and robber barons who have become our leaders in the name of patriotism. As Thomas Jefferson said, “tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

Yes. That's needed to ensure democracy doesn't become a farce, to assert the principle of rule OF law doesn't devolve into rule BY law - the ruling class must answer to the law just as the little people do.

There is a way out of this tangle, one that plots a course to freedom and liberty without straying from the democratic banner. If you believe nationally organized elections are a sham, don't accept them but organize your own elections on the local level with media and police presence to keep the process honest. (That's how it's done in the U.S.) You can then, with reason, demand that government institutions transfer their loyalty to your winning candidates - or else threaten to withhold not just loyalty, but tax revenues. Middlesex won that battle against the English Parliament in the eighteenth century, eventually compelling it to seat John Wilkes, a key but little-taught victory in the struggle for democratic freedoms.

 

[scrumpy]

DeathFromAbove, For every alternative that has been suggested in the article, there are a number of examples of catastrophic failures which find no mention.

What did Jinnah want for Pakistan? As far as I can tell, Jinnah wanted a democracy for Pakistan where religion played no part in the workings of the government. I may be wrong, but he does sound like a liberal to me.

 

[deathfromabove]

DeathFromAbove, For every alternative that has been suggested in the article, there are a number of examples of catastrophic failures which find no mention.

What did Jinnah want for Pakistan? As far as I can tell, Jinnah wanted a democracy for Pakistan where religion played no part in the workings of the government. I may be wrong, but he does sound like a liberal to me.

Jinnah at the inauguration of State Bank of Pakistan:

“The economic system of the West has created almost insoluble problems for humanity and to many of us it appears that only a miracle can save it from disaster that is not facing the world. It has failed to do justice between man and man and to eradicate friction from the international field. On the contrary, it was largely responsible for the two world wars in the last half century. The Western world, in spite of its advantages, of mechanization and industrial efficiency is today in a worse mess than ever before in history. The adoption of Western economic theory and practice will not help us in achieving our goal of creating a happy and contended people. We must work our destiny in our own way and present to the world an economic system based on true Islamic concept of equality of manhood and social justice.”

Although the context is different but I guess that's the answer.

 

[deathfromabove]

"liberal fascists who want to enforce their 1% doctrine of western cultural, political, economic and secular agenda on the 99% nation of Pakistan....What we need in Pakistan is not CIA enforced hypocritical democracy – What we need in Pakistan is a complete overhaul of the system. We need to get rid of these tyrants and robber barons who have become our leaders in the name of patriotism. As Thomas Jefferson said, “tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

Yes. That's needed to ensure democracy doesn't become a farce, to assert the principle of rule OF law doesn't devolve into rule BY law - the ruling class must answer to the law just as the little people do.

There is a way out of this tangle, one that plots a course to freedom and liberty without straying from the democratic banner. If you believe nationally organized elections are a sham, don't accept them but organize your own elections on the local level with media and police presence to keep the process honest. (That's how it's done in the U.S.) You can then, with reason, demand that government institutions transfer their loyalty to your winning candidates - or else threaten to withhold not just loyalty, but tax revenues. Middlesex won that battle against the English Parliament in the eighteenth century, eventually compelling it to seat John Wilkes, a key but little-taught victory in the struggle for democratic freedoms.

A revolution is needed to change the current scenario. To protect the lives of masses and our future generation, blood of few will have to be sacrificed and we are sacrificing daily. As Thomas Jefferson puts it, “tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

 

[Solomon2]

No, Jinnah wanted "Islamic" socialism. Maybe just like Nasser, Gaddafi, and Asad: The kind of socialism that makes people feel good because it gets rid of the free-market system that was portrayed as a symbol of the colonialists, but condemns the people to poverty of mind and body as the ruling class collects the loot and attempts to control what people think.

Equality = wealth redistribution, social justice = redistributed the way the people in power say.

 

[Solomon2]

A revolution is needed to change the current scenario.

Maybe. Read!

 

[deathfromabove]

No, Jinnah wanted "Islamic" socialism. Maybe just like Nasser, Gaddafi, and Asad: The kind of socialism that makes people feel good because it gets rid of the free-market system that was portrayed as a symbol of the colonialists, but condemns the people to poverty of mind and body as the ruling class collects the loot and attempts to control what people think.

Equality = wealth redistribution, social justice = redistributed the way the people in power say.

I guess you are right. Let me dig a little.

 

[oceanx]

“Another such victory and we have had it”, King Pyrrhus of Epirus

...

These are real ideas, and ideas are stronger than bullets, and can’t be replaced by ballots or textbooks.

Pakistan Zindabad
:

One question - pls do not take offense as none is intended: did you write all that yourself, "deathfromabove"?

The ideas behind the "rant" were nothing new. But you sure did a good job "fleshing things out" as far as Pakistani domestic political evolution was concerned.

 

[deathfromabove]

One question - pls do not take offense as none is intended: did you write all that yourself, "deathfromabove"?

The ideas behind the "rant" were nothing new. But you sure did a good job "fleshing things out" as far as Pakistani domestic political evolution was concerned.

None taken. Its an article taken from a Pakistani nationalist site. I'll post the link. And I've also written site initials - PKKH
Rotten Tree of Democarcy Must Be Uprooted Pakistan Ka Khuda Hafiz

 

[TruthSeeker]

An apropos article in today's Washington Post:

5 myths about the beauty of the ballot box

By Paul Collier
Sunday, November 8, 2009

The United States has invested heavily in promoting free elections around the world, with the expectation that they in turn will promote legitimate governments and democratic ideals. It hasn't always worked out that way -- not in Iraq, not in the Palestinian territories and not, most recently, in Afghanistan. Dispelling some common myths about what elections can and cannot do in emerging democracies will help us face more realistically the difference between a ballot box and a magic bullet.

1. Elections usually produce legitimate governments.

After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, elections became an emblem of modernization: Dictators everywhere agreed to hold them. A few of the more naive rulers, such as President Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia, were ousted in honest elections, having believed their own propaganda about their popularity. But many realized it was possible to adhere to form without substance. When my colleague Anke Hoeffler and I studied data on 786 elections in 155 countries from 1974 to 2004, we found that fraud may have affected the results in 41 percent of them. Perhaps that shouldn't be surprising, since incumbent politicians who cheat to get reelected stay in office 2.5 times longer than they would have playing it fair and square. These sham elections do not fool the citizens, who view the resulting governments as illegitimate and do not hold the "elected" officials accountable.

2. The democratic process promotes peace.

We so want to believe that elections foster peace that we assume it must be true. Unfortunately, the effect of democracy on the risk of political violence depends on a country's income. Above $2,700 per capita, democracies are less prone to violence than are autocracies. But most political violence happens in countries where income is far below that threshold; there, democracy is associated with a greater risk of bloodshed.

In recent years, elections have served as a de facto exit strategy for peacekeepers after a conflict has ended. The theory has evidently been that by establishing a legitimate and accountable government, a democratic election reduces the likelihood of continuing turmoil. But my research found that, although the risk of violence falls in the year before an election, it rises in the year after. This makes a certain sense, because in the run-up to balloting, efforts to gain power are diverted into politics; after a vote there is a winner who no longer feels pressure to govern inclusively and a loser who regards the outcome as fraudulent.

3. Fair elections can happen everywhere.

The apparent success of democratization in post-Soviet Eastern Europe helped persuade the international community that elections would work anywhere; all that was necessary was to topple the dictators. But evidence of stolen elections among the new democracies challenged that assumption. My research shows that election misconduct tends to be concentrated in countries that have low per capita incomes, small populations, rich natural resources and a lack of institutional checks and balances. Eastern Europe didn't fit this picture because its population was already in the middle-income range, it was not resource-rich, and it had the advantage of prior democratic experience. Most of the countries in sub-Saharan Africa, however, have all the characteristics that undermine elections, giving them a mere 3 percent chance of an honest vote, according to my calculations. By this measure, Afghanistan is not exceptional; in fact, electoral misconduct there was almost inevitable.

4. Elections compel new democratic governments to overspend, worsening economic policies and performance.

When I investigated elections' effect on economic policy in newly democratic countries, I found that populist pressure does cause policies to deteriorate somewhat in the year before an election. They certainly did in Ghana in 2008. But governments that face frequent elections have significantly better economic policies when they are averaged over the political cycle, and governments that become subject to elections improve their policies.

Unfortunately, there is a caveat: Elections in which there is misconduct have, at best, no effect on economic policy because governments are off the hook of accountability. For example, President Robert Mugabe chose to wreck the Zimbabwean economy precisely when he was facing contested elections. His policies were not even populist; he simply relied on fraud and intimidation to establish policies that benefited only a tiny political elite.

5. We can't do anything about electoral misconduct.

If 41 percent of elections aren't conducted fairly, disconnecting governments from true accountability, there is a problem. But the international community can take steps to help solve it. One of the main ways incumbents steal elections is through patronage financed by looting the public purse, as President Daniel arap Moi did in Kenya. So countries, such as the United States, that provide financing for democratic elections should make their aid conditional upon the government's being both transparent and accountable to its citizens in its budget processes.

Beyond that, supporting governments can provide high-powered incentives for incumbents to keep elections honest. What incumbents fear most is not losing an election, but being overthrown by their own military. When the international community can protect a government from such a threat, it should do so, conditional upon the election being properly conducted. For example, the ousting of the properly elected president of Madagascar in 2008 by a coup could have been averted by prompt international military action. Ultimately, transparent budgets and security guarantees might be enough to nudge these elections closer to our democratic ideal.

Paul Collier is a professor of economics at Oxford University and the author of "Wars, Guns and Votes: Democracy in Dangerous Places."

washingtonpost.com

 

[deathfromabove]

Free market flawed, says survey

Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, a new BBC poll has found widespread dissatisfaction with free-market capitalism.

In the global poll for the BBC World Service, only 11% of those questioned across 27 countries said that it was working well.

Most thought regulation and reform of the capitalist system were necessary.

There were also sharp divisions around the world on whether the end of the Soviet Union was a good thing.

Economic regulation

In 1989, as the Berlin Wall fell, it was a victory for ordinary people across Eastern and Central Europe.

It also looked at the time like a crushing victory for free-market capitalism.

Twenty years on, this new global poll suggests confidence in free markets has taken heavy blows from the past 12 months of financial and economic crisis.

More than 29,000 people in 27 countries were questioned. In only two countries, the United States and Pakistan, did more than one in five people feel that capitalism works well as it stands.

Almost a quarter - 23% of those who responded - feel it is fatally flawed. That is the view of 43% in France, 38% in Mexico and 35% in Brazil.

And there is very strong support around the world for governments to distribute wealth more evenly. That is backed by majorities in 22 of the 27 countries.

If there is one issue where a global consensus seems to emerge from the survey it is this: there are majorities almost everywhere wanting government to be more active in regulating business.

It is only in Turkey that a majority want less government regulation.

Opinion about the disintegration of the Soviet Union is sharply divided.

Europeans overwhelmingly say it was a good thing: 79% in Germany, 76% in Britain and 74% in France feel that way.

But outside the developed West it is a different picture. Almost seven in 10 Egyptians say the end of the Soviet Union was a bad thing and views are sharply divided in India, Kenya and Indonesia.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/8347409.stm

 

[gambit]

So who here HONESTLY want to live in North Korea? Without capital, there can be no 'rich' or 'poor'. If everyone live exactly the same way, there is no reason for anyone to be jealous of anyone for any reasons. If the government determine what you are best suited for society, then you need not burden yourself with choices, which can take up valuable time and can create inefficiencies. Your children can live in state managed child care centers, staffed with dedicated health professionals so you can dedicate your day to the task that the state originally assigned to you. Worker's Paradise, no?

 

[Awesome]

In Pakistan democracy is being used to legitimize their past criminal acts aka NRO.

Free and fair elections cannot happen unless all politicians played nice. Politicians and nice...

However the answer to correcting one wrong is not to make another wrong. Democracy should live on, these current leaders should live in jails and the money they are looting from the treasury should be taken back.

The notion that foreign countries would come and help solve these things is ridiculous. If the foreign countries wanted all of Pakistan's money could've been returned which these people keep offshore out of Pakistan.

The answer is simple... We have to become good human beings first, the rest would follow.