What's new

Walls and Bridges

As much as you discuss about Walls and Bridges and moats it will always come to the persistent question. Internal Change.

When feudalism ends in Pakistan like it ended in India long ago this, this basic step will start a chain of reactions.

Read it as Concentration of money in hands of few.
 
So it all boils down to Democracy?

Let me put it this way: IMO, at this stage of human evolution, a stable democracy - if you can get it- is a great way to keep everyone interested in the nation state.

The Kemal/ Turkey model also works, but it is rarer to find that exact blend of culture, appropriate military dictator, economy and circumstances.
 
Let me put it this way: IMO, at this stage of human evolution, a stable democracy - if you can get it- is a great way to keep everyone interested in the nation state.

The Kemal/ Turkey model also works, but it is rarer to find that exact blend of culture, appropriate military dictator, economy and circumstances.

But what about China? That also works pretty spectacularly no?
 
As much as you discuss about Walls and Bridges and moats it will always come to the persistent question. Internal Change.

When feudalism ends in Pakistan like it ended in India long ago this, this basic step will start a chain of reactions.

Read it as Concentration of money in hands of few.

There isn't much in the way of feudalism in Pakistan considering that the PML N is a party driven by Industrialists & Businessmen, the PPP is a party driven by, it beggars belief but, intellectuals & businessmen, the PML Q by Landlords, Industrialists & Businessmen, the ANP by the upper middle class & the MQM by the middle class. Most of the feudal parties are ethno-nationalists & I can't remember them getting more than single digit seats in any of our provincial or national assemblies.
 
There isn't much in the way of feudalism in Pakistan considering that the PML N is a party driven by Industrialists & Businessmen, the PPP is a party driven by, it beggars belief but, intellectuals & businessmen, the PML Q by Landlords, Industrialists & Businessmen, the ANP by the upper middle class & the MQM by the middle class. Most of the feudal parties are ethno-nationalists & I can't remember them getting more than single digit seats in any of our provincial or national assemblies.

Wherever there is Feudalism these people will have a say in the decisions of govt directly or indirectly impending the natural growth. Case in point taxation of agriculture in Pakistan.
 
But what about China? That also works pretty spectacularly no?

So far it's worked brilliantly. However, I am not sure whether new elites are emerging in that country, the levels of dissatisfaction, etc. We'll see how they evolve going forward.

But yeah, there's never one model for success.
 
I dunno mate, I don't think its feudalism per se but more of an abysmal state of our institutions that give all & sundry the vacuum to rip the rest of us off with impunity; you've got everyone from retired & serving generals to leading industrialists & so called intellectuals of Pakistan all taking the mickey out of the masses !

The industrialist loves the middle class because that's his market and his workforce. The feudal hates it because a middle class means social activism, democracy, accountability and all the 'bad' stuff that erodes his dictatorial powers. As for the general, well, one would think the general would realize that fancy toys come with fancy price tags, which need a fancy economy, but ...

But the good thing is that people are more politically aware today than they were a few years ago & we might just have a chance to break out of this regressive cycle once & for all.

After seeing the adulation given to Bilawal Bhutto and the Sharifs, I doubt anything is going to change. The urban middle class is simply too small to make any difference.

That makes it even harder on the 'nation state' concept. If no new elites are allowed to develop, frustration and anger agains the systems are almost a given.

The police is controlled by the feudal/ethnic lords. The army is controlled by the generals. The people will complain for a bit and then adjust to the new realities.

We have a heritage with the West -- the idea that we should have nothing to with the West is an extreme, is it not?

I don't think anyone is suggesting that we cut ties with the West; the approach should be one of balance, where we appreciate our own cultural heritage while selectively taking the best of the West.

For example, a man who says "any woman who wears a skirt is a slut" would be considered a misogynist. It should be no more acceptable, and equally reproachable, for a man to say "any woman who wears a hijab is an extremist".
 
..........

The police is controlled by the feudal/ethnic lords. The army is controlled by the generals. The people will complain for a bit and then adjust to the new realities...........

As much as they adjust, consciously or sub-consciously its hard for such a people to consider it 'their police' or 'their army', or ultimately 'their nation state'.

Although I think all of us in the sub-continent can relate to the uneasiness with our police- they're never there to help us, but to oppress. They really are- as someone put it memorably a few months ago, an occupying force.

(As a personal anecdote, every single Indian or Pakistani I have met and who has grown up in their countries is fundamentally uneasy around a cop, in a way very different from those who have grown up in the west).
 
Wherever there is Feudalism these people will have a say in the decisions of govt directly or indirectly impending the natural growth. Case in point taxation of agriculture in Pakistan.

Thats because Pakistan is an agrarian economy & we don't have a US styled system of lobbies for the Landlords to influence those parties to such an end.
 
(As a personal anecdote, every single Indian or Pakistani I have met and who has grown up in their countries is fundamentally uneasy around a cop, in a way very different from those who have grown up in the west).

See our cops sir. We do not give them guns, but arm them with lathis. Then we tie their hands so that anyone with any half assed connection can spit on them and walk away. Finally we pay them peanuts. I am not disagreeing with you. Being a student, I have got my share of lathis on my shins from thullas. But they have a reason to be frustrated and corrupt.
 
See our cops sir. We do not give them guns, but arm them with lathis. Then we tie their hands so that anyone with any half assed connection can spit on them and walk away. Finally we pay them peanuts. I am not disagreeing with you. Being a student, I have got my share of lathis on my shins from thullas. But they have a reason to be frustrated and corrupt.

True, but for various they are what they are- an occupying force.
 
Please stop this drivel about India does not accept your existence. The history of partition resulting from Jinnah's demands not being met, the 24 years gap between our first nuclear tests, the option of striking installations that was turned down by M. Desai, and countless other contextual examples should be enough to dispel this notion.

However, when a certain group of people in your country adamantly refuse to believe that India is sick and tired of such hyphenation, that we want nothing other than to fix the socio-economic mess left in our country by the British since partition, then who can help you? It's akin to telling a child one's sincere feeling, whilst he puts fingers in both ears and screams what he wants to believe.

That is the real crux of it. You don't want to believe India is indifferent or focused on itself because that negates, to a large extent, the foundation of your state. You are what India is not, by definition. If India were majority muslim at partition, forget about agreeing to adopt an Islamic system of governance, the question of Pakistan would never have arisen. Being anti- something, rather than having a positive definition that stands by itself, at inception is the root of many problems.

Then, as other friends here point out, the whole economic and class-based impetus has it's role too. The feudals who wanted to retain their barbaric, medieval position of power considered it a life and death matter to preserve that system, knowing full well Nehru's socialist leanings prior to independence. They fought for 'autonomy' to maintain enslavement of tillers initially, with a provision for the right to secede if such 'autonomy' was jeopardized. Then seeing Nehru's stubbornness and arrogance, they fought to the last drop of blood in the commoner's veins to live like kings in an independent country, caring not for the immediate consequences of broken families, bloodshed and expulsion, nor for the tides that may befall the country in future.

The class struggle and socio-economic reasons are greatly underestimated in my opinion, which is why both countries don't learn their lessons and continue the same stupid mistakes with regard to where the fruits of development reach. It would be much more wise and pragmatic to focus on this issue, rather than the constant negative fixation with India and vice versa. But unfortunately, some morons on both sides continue with their insolence, blocking their ears and shaking their heads too violently to even hear a different view. We have not taken an oath to remain daft, livid and jaahil throughout our existence. The time is ripe for both of us to discard such thinking.
 
It's really interesting because if Indians decide they will not play Kashmir, where would that leave Pakistan?


I wish if I would understand that right

1 India not play as Pakistan wants
2 or not play at all?
3 or play in a way to close the matter once for all?

I think thats what is happening right now and is resulting in military stand off along the borders of disputed territory. so the status quo shall continue?

2 by not playing at all might also more or less result the same as the first and keep Pak India relations on one point agenda of Kashmir dispute and thus continue to provide the virtual feed to our military and religious parties as a motivation. LeT and all its clones will continue to work and might succeed in causing a major armed conflict between the two countries.

3 if the inconceivable happens then moderates n both countries will have more chance to improve the relations far better than the token bus/ train service and occasional conferences in 5 star hotels.

ok your turn I didnt get it
 
.

Read it as Concentration of money in hands of few.

thats capitalism
the culture of building huge industial empire from the loans and having their written off e.g. the building of Sherif dynasty
they will replace the Sardars, Maliks and chaudhries but will be the same beast in new skin.
 
thats capitalism
the culture of building huge industial empire from the loans and having their written off e.g. the building of Sherif dynasty
they will replace the Sardars, Maliks and chaudhries but will be the same beast in new skin.

that may be but feudalism is not capitalism, in capitalism there will be concentration but there will be a chance that a person can atleast dream about making big. These industrialists might control finance but they will not and cannot monopolize and make the public suffer like these fuedals do??
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom