Chhatrapati
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2016
- Messages
- 11,579
- Reaction score
- -22
- Country
- Location
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.
It depends. Every system sounds good in theory, but has a flaw in practice. E.g., if Zardari becomes President, he can freely assign his goons to the government, and then make his position for life. We humans have limited knowledge, so we can't tie every loose end, and in Pakistan's case, even one of those loose ends can cause us a lot of problems.The first thing we should do is switch to a presidential system instead of a parliamentary one. Even if you aren't a monarchist, you have to agree that the presidential system is better. @peagle @Bilal Khan (Quwa)
The first thing we should do is switch to a presidential system instead of a parliamentary one. Even if you aren't a monarchist, you have to agree that the presidential system is better. @peagle @Bilal Khan (Quwa)
@CatSultan
Should it be an Islamic monarchy or let's say a Caliphate rather than just any kind of monarchy?
Regards
Real Chaliphate is a democracy. Before early Muslim chose Abu Bakr as Chalip, there is debate and voting while Umar, Ustman, and Ali were chosen by consensus/aclamation based on previous Chalip preference, but it was a basic democracy system and not yet as developed as recent democratic system.
Muslim society is indeed ahead and much advance during its earliest period.
What we need is a stable democracy with no third party interference.
We need grass root level local body system, so that new and good leadership emerge.
Once the system is in place, the bad elements will automatically be booted out.
We do not need a monarch, military dictator or anything else.
Democracy doesn't work in Pakistan and a lot of other "developing countries" and we should abandon it for these reasons.
- Democracy works best in a nation state. A nation state is where the whole country is made of one ethnicity or one ethnic group. Although you could argue that Pakistan is a nation state because all the people in Pakistan are related genetically, the reality is many people only identify with their "sub-ethnicity". When you have a parliament with mixed ethnicity members, they all want to gain more autonomy and independence and we can see many political parties divided by ethnicity rather than actual political ideology. Pakistan has to rely on religion to keep people together and Islam is the only thing keeping this country from falling apart. The Ottoman Empire had to abandon their first attempt at creating a constitutional monarchy because they had too many ethnicities.
- Tribal mentality. A good portion of the population of Pakistan is not "educated". Most of the members on this forum have gone through some sort of western education so we have a different worldview than the village/tribal people of Pakistan. Although you could argue that there are more educated people in Pakistan than there are uneducated ones. Uneducated people reproduce more so they will always be a large portion of the population. One of the prerequisites for a functioning democracy is a high level of individualism among the population. Tribal people do not see themselves as individuals, they see themselves as part of their tribe/ethnicity. Therefore, it is easy to manipulate a lot of people's votes by just bribing or threatening the tribal chieftains or Zamindar land owners.
- People in Pakistan want a strong central figure to look up to. It is easy to cheat the government when it is just a bunch of corrupt politicians arguing and yelling. But People would think twice if the government was represented by one person. This has been proven by studies done in the Scandinavian and Arab kingdoms.
- Corruption. There will always be corruption in a democracy. Europe and America regulate this corruption and call it "Lobbying". They allow it because if they don't, people will be doing illegally and be much worse. Also their systems of democracy are much more centralized than Pakistan so they can actually get stuff done. However, corruption is so rampant in Pakistan that if we legalize it, nobody will care because we can't enforce the law because of this corruption.
So with all these problems, what is the alternative? Nobody wants a dictatorship. Instead, we should implement a semi-constitutional monarchy like Jordan has. Why a monarchy? Because a monarch is inherently uncorrupt able, his interests align with that of the state. He will be able to keep a check on corruption and make sure the parliament is giving what is good for the people and not just what they want. Some of the best countries in terms of stability, economic growth and happiness are monarchies. Just look at the Scandinavian countries like Sweden, Denmark and Finland. He will also provide a strong military figure that people can look up to and trust. Even if you are not a fan of military rule, you have to admit some of the most stable times in Pakistan was under leaders like General Zia ul Haq.
"A monarch? But isn't that backwards and undemocratic?"
This is what we call a genetic fallacy. Just because something is old doesn't make it bad and just because something is new doesn't make it good. Anyways, some of the top countries on the democracy index are monarchies. A monarch is not a dictator that can do whatever he wants. He has to follow the law and in a constitution monarchy, he can be deposed with a 2/3rd majority vote and/or a fatwa from the Grand Mufti or other top religious figurehead.
Well the stable dictator ruined us, the first dictator marginalized the nation. The 2nd divided the country into two by denying government to the rightful party. Third created the Kalashinkoff culture in Pakistan. The 4th pushed Pakistan into a civil war, due to which we are now the poorest in the region.Stable democracy isn't easy , it took a dictator to turn South Korea what it's today so honestly the same could be done in Pakistan or Bangladesh all you need is a man or women with actual vision to make the country developed and idc if they steal money in the process
At least you got toilet and safety for women unlike some Supa Powa.Well the stable dictator ruined us, the first dictator marginalized the nation. The 2nd divided the country into two by denying government to the rightful party. Third created the Kalashinkoff culture in Pakistan. The 4th pushed Pakistan into a civil war, due to which we are now the poorest in the region.
Well the stable dictator ruined us, the first dictator marginalized the nation. The 2nd divided the country into two by denying government to the rightful party. Third created the Kalashinkoff culture in Pakistan. The 4th pushed Pakistan into a civil war, due to which we are now the poorest in the region.
At least you got toilet and safety for women unlike some Supa Powa.