Shahid Ali
Siasat.pk - Blogger
Friends, Pls comment. But kindly refrain from any personality or any party bashing.
I request you to comment on the content. Thanks.
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNLadFsuh3Q&feature=related[/video]
WESTERN DEMOCRACY! RIGHT PILL AT WRONG TIME?
If we look upon countries trying to advance which are generally called as developing countries, specially South Asian developing countries, we will find that since their inception nothing at large has been improved. Big percentage of their population lives below poverty line. Food, drinking water, health, education, housing, nothing is adequately available to common people.
Since decades we are hearing that democracy is the only solution to these problems, uninterrupted democratic process will drain out dishonest politicians and socio-economic condition of common man will improve. All our thinkers, intellectuals and scholars have fed this in our minds since our childhood.
Some of developing countries have had continuous democracy in their history while some also had military interventions in between. One thing among these countries is common that all are obsessed upon forcing western democracy but their condition is still unchanged.
On the contrary, developed countries are reaping fruits from the same democratic system. Why our pudding is not as tasty as theirs? Why is the same medicine not helping us but affecting them?
Developing countries should evaluate themselves if this Western Democracy is really the solution provider during developing stage of a nation or this is a pill that we should take on a later stage?
To evaluate, take examples of few South Asian countries namely Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. All these countries are passionate to be called as democratic states.
India had enjoyed more than sixty years of democracy; almost same is with Sri Lanka. Military interventions could be witnessed in the political history of Pakistan and Bangladesh. But all these countries share same pathetic social and economic conditions; corruption is at its peak, justice is scarce, clean drinking water is not available, children die from common diseases, literacy rate is lowest (except Sri Lanka) and basic necessities of life are not available to poor.
Upon analyzing we will find that during the developing period of western countries, this current form of democracy was not in place. Their leaders excluded common man from ruling class and even from voting class.
At that time, besides personal interests, rulers and social scientists might be of the view that if they allow common man to participate in decision making of the state or allow them to elect their leaders, common man will elect leaders on the basis of color, cast, religion, tribe, ethnicity and wealth instead of leaders abilities.
Western rulers believed that common man does not have the aptitude to evaluate or elect competent rulers. At first common man was given education, made socially free and mentally strong to evaluate and elect their ruler. Evolution and development process of human resource and other social institutions was initiated and political system transformed gradually with the passage of time.
Few very brief historical facts could be furnished here.
1. Americans gave the right of vote to women after almost 150 years of countrys inception.
2. African Americans (Blacks) were given full rights to vote in 1965, almost after 190 years. Before that many statutes were made to block most African Americans and many poor whites from the right to vote. And that was the period when America flourished.
3. In England only wealthy property owners were given the right to vote. House of Commons and House of Lords still exist in England.
4. After 140 years, British women over 21 years of age were given that right to vote in 1928.
5. In Switzerland women gained the right to vote in February 1959.
6. In Australia Aboriginals were not allowed to vote until 1967, it took 66 years after independence.
Our neighboring, friendly and fast developing country China was a pure-communist state till 1982 and has 33 years of pure-communist history. Primarily their leaders improved the socio-economic conditions of people and political system started liberalizing with time. China gradually gave socio-political rights to citizens with various constitutional amendments but still they have not declared China a democratic republic.
There are other countries with monarch as rulers but socio-economic condition of people is far better than developing countries with long history of democracy.
Presently developing countries are almost in the same socio-political conditions as western countries were during their developing period. Obstacle in our progress is that we are trying to apply Wests PRESENT political system while our position is similar to their PAST. Are we trying to climb directly to second floor avoiding the first?
Either constant-democratic countries like India and Sri Lanka or episodic-democratic countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh, our rulers come from the same feudal, tribal, ethnic, religious, military and wealthy families. Ability to lead the nation towards prosperity is not their selection criteria. Uneducated, unqualified and even criminals are elected because at present our common man does not have that capacity to evaluate nor have the social freedom to elect appropriate leaders.
Our intellectuals and socio-political analysts should re-examine and re-define our political system rationally with a clear head. This should be done keeping in view the ground realities and without obsession towards any political system.
There could be variety of views with various possible alternatives. A strict criterion for rulers with very strict restrictions over right of wealth and compulsory moderate living standard could be suggested enabling to drain out dishonest and artificial leaders. Or suspension of common mans some political rights for a certain period of time till the society matures. A mixture of democracy, communism and socialism could also come out of intellectual deliberations.
I request you to comment on the content. Thanks.
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNLadFsuh3Q&feature=related[/video]
WESTERN DEMOCRACY! RIGHT PILL AT WRONG TIME?
If we look upon countries trying to advance which are generally called as developing countries, specially South Asian developing countries, we will find that since their inception nothing at large has been improved. Big percentage of their population lives below poverty line. Food, drinking water, health, education, housing, nothing is adequately available to common people.
Since decades we are hearing that democracy is the only solution to these problems, uninterrupted democratic process will drain out dishonest politicians and socio-economic condition of common man will improve. All our thinkers, intellectuals and scholars have fed this in our minds since our childhood.
Some of developing countries have had continuous democracy in their history while some also had military interventions in between. One thing among these countries is common that all are obsessed upon forcing western democracy but their condition is still unchanged.
On the contrary, developed countries are reaping fruits from the same democratic system. Why our pudding is not as tasty as theirs? Why is the same medicine not helping us but affecting them?
Developing countries should evaluate themselves if this Western Democracy is really the solution provider during developing stage of a nation or this is a pill that we should take on a later stage?
To evaluate, take examples of few South Asian countries namely Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. All these countries are passionate to be called as democratic states.
India had enjoyed more than sixty years of democracy; almost same is with Sri Lanka. Military interventions could be witnessed in the political history of Pakistan and Bangladesh. But all these countries share same pathetic social and economic conditions; corruption is at its peak, justice is scarce, clean drinking water is not available, children die from common diseases, literacy rate is lowest (except Sri Lanka) and basic necessities of life are not available to poor.
Upon analyzing we will find that during the developing period of western countries, this current form of democracy was not in place. Their leaders excluded common man from ruling class and even from voting class.
At that time, besides personal interests, rulers and social scientists might be of the view that if they allow common man to participate in decision making of the state or allow them to elect their leaders, common man will elect leaders on the basis of color, cast, religion, tribe, ethnicity and wealth instead of leaders abilities.
Western rulers believed that common man does not have the aptitude to evaluate or elect competent rulers. At first common man was given education, made socially free and mentally strong to evaluate and elect their ruler. Evolution and development process of human resource and other social institutions was initiated and political system transformed gradually with the passage of time.
Few very brief historical facts could be furnished here.
1. Americans gave the right of vote to women after almost 150 years of countrys inception.
2. African Americans (Blacks) were given full rights to vote in 1965, almost after 190 years. Before that many statutes were made to block most African Americans and many poor whites from the right to vote. And that was the period when America flourished.
3. In England only wealthy property owners were given the right to vote. House of Commons and House of Lords still exist in England.
4. After 140 years, British women over 21 years of age were given that right to vote in 1928.
5. In Switzerland women gained the right to vote in February 1959.
6. In Australia Aboriginals were not allowed to vote until 1967, it took 66 years after independence.
Our neighboring, friendly and fast developing country China was a pure-communist state till 1982 and has 33 years of pure-communist history. Primarily their leaders improved the socio-economic conditions of people and political system started liberalizing with time. China gradually gave socio-political rights to citizens with various constitutional amendments but still they have not declared China a democratic republic.
There are other countries with monarch as rulers but socio-economic condition of people is far better than developing countries with long history of democracy.
Presently developing countries are almost in the same socio-political conditions as western countries were during their developing period. Obstacle in our progress is that we are trying to apply Wests PRESENT political system while our position is similar to their PAST. Are we trying to climb directly to second floor avoiding the first?
Either constant-democratic countries like India and Sri Lanka or episodic-democratic countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh, our rulers come from the same feudal, tribal, ethnic, religious, military and wealthy families. Ability to lead the nation towards prosperity is not their selection criteria. Uneducated, unqualified and even criminals are elected because at present our common man does not have that capacity to evaluate nor have the social freedom to elect appropriate leaders.
Our intellectuals and socio-political analysts should re-examine and re-define our political system rationally with a clear head. This should be done keeping in view the ground realities and without obsession towards any political system.
There could be variety of views with various possible alternatives. A strict criterion for rulers with very strict restrictions over right of wealth and compulsory moderate living standard could be suggested enabling to drain out dishonest and artificial leaders. Or suspension of common mans some political rights for a certain period of time till the society matures. A mixture of democracy, communism and socialism could also come out of intellectual deliberations.
