Does it matter?
Today if Zia were alive, with the current people, who would have gotten the mandate?
Zia or Imran?
Of course it matters...! Man may hold whatever opinion on an individual level but on a collective level when it comes to making decisions about 'right & wrong', 'acceptable & unacceptable', 'reasonable & unreasonable', man hasn't come up with a better thing than the 'democratic process' i.e let the will of the most minds prevail. Which is not to say that it ain't dysfunctional for it is...it has some glaring deficiencies that make you wanna pull your hair out ! But then again if its not 'democracy' than whats the alternative ? God himself descends from heaven to mediate between us or One man takes over & we are subservient to his will ? So however dysfunctional it maybe it is without a parallel. The good thing about democracy is also the assumption that collective wisdom will prevail i.e people cannot agree in error ! This, though untrue at times, has more often than not stood the test of time. Another thing good about democracy is that you have to pander to a plethora of groups just to get into power & so your final decisions always carry a piece of their influence...their voice in other words. These two things are what ensure that a society cannot be radicalized for no one would agree to shoot themselves in the foot nor would any politician win a seat without accommodating the demands of a wide-variety of people.
So you see whereas Zia was able to enforce his puritanical version of Islam on the lot of us, had he come through the democratic process he would have had to deal with the Secularists, the Shias, the Sufis, the Sunnis of other sects, the Non-Muslims, the Marxists, the ethno-nationalists, the non-interventionists & a whole bunch of other people that had we the time we could harken back to collecting information from his era. An example could be - Hudood Ordiance ! Almost every Secular, Shia, Sufi & quite a few Sunnis oppose it. The marginalization of our provincial languages - almost every ethno nationalist & many many Islamist would oppose it ! The Afghan Jihad - The Marxists, the Secularist (the Non-Marxist kind), the Non-Interventionists, the Ethno-Nationalist & quite a few Islamist (who had dealings with the Afghans before) opposed it !
Additionally is 'democracy' not the 'will of the people' ? If that is true than let them elect whosoever they will - Whether it be a Zia ul Haq or a Mostapha Kemal Ataturk ! If they themselves have decided, at a collective level, that they'd want Shariah to be institutionalized than that decision, as per the very rationale behind the 'democratic process' is absolutely correct. Similarly if they have decided that we're going to do away with 'religion in the public sphere' than that decision too is perfectly correct. We may disagree with it on a personal level but on a collective level the method we chose to make these very decisions has given its verdict - This is what the majority wants !
Okay Doc, I've got to go now !
P.S Koi practice wagheraa nahin karteii Clinic peh yaaa saraa timm PDF pe hii beitheii rehteii ho ?
