Bombay Lefties

Re: # 88
Indians have been at receiving end for centuries...a series of Muslim invaders and imperial rulers were not room mates of Hindus, nor will the imperialist America be one.
Riaz Haq, PakAlumni Worldwide

Riaz: I have to strongly disagree with you that dictatorship is superior to democracy in developing a country. I contend that a democracy with strong institutions of judiciary, free media, and a responsive parliament would produce much better results.

Let’s look at what Musharraf did right or wrong. I’ll give him credit for opening the media and bringing some sort of democratic participation at local level. One other hand his failings are many. He destroyed the judiciary. He established fake political parties and supported extremist groups. Corruption during his time was as high as ever, I know good people who had to leave to make room for army officers. It is obvious that he failed to manage his relationship with USA properly and it cost big in terms of domestic peace and economic well being. I won’t talk about Kargil.

The worst decision he made was picking a banker to run the economy. Bankers know only one thing expand credit and consumption and you saw the results in shortages, inflation, budget deficits and balance of payment problems. Policy should favor production and let the consumption take care of itself. In any case state should invest in infrastructure like water, power and communications.


I don’t see one area where he can proudly declare success

#34 by jrabamind

Interesting thought provoking comments by a well traveled man. Now I got a feel of why Harish Bhai seemed to be a bit aggressive disturbed.

Huh?! Yaar Prashanth, there are several well traveled and intelligent Pakis, if you really have to suck up to one. Riaz mian might be well traveled, but thought provoking?

Birds of the same feather flock together, so could it be the reason you're seeking him out?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: # 79
BJ2...
In a vast country like India, there should be political diversity...even in ancient era, the sages have given diffrenet direction of life....
left, centre, left of centre, right of centre, ultra left, communal, regional, casteist, right...... all sorts of political thoughts should exist in India...It will be surprising to be hostile to other thoughts....It is against Indian ethos...
Don't you see BJP supporting CPI(M), when both are oppisng Congress...Congress supporting BJP, when it comes to war and industral policy....Christains supporting BJP, in war against islamic terrorism.....?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: # 77

http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/pakistan/pakcia.htm#espionage

You could go through the declassified documents by following the above link.

Re: # 49
Skeptical...
Nice article....
And I think Majumder et all have already answered Riaz Katue several times....Pakistan and 1/2 of Africa is under dic-tators-ship for long time; But their record of progress is something deplorable...

Democracy is not something which produces food,medicine and healthcare,eucation...It is not mechanism of resource generation, but most effective way of Governance....

For example, in oil rich Saudi Arabia, whatever system you place, it will not plunge economicaly; as long as the oil money enriches their coffer....And you may find Paki muslas like Riaz, who will link this prosperity with Shariat/Sharia system, and recession in UK/Britain to democracy...means this deception ( or stupidity) will keep on going here, those who want to waste their time here....

Bombay is just one city. Although having a significant population, it is miniscule in the Indian scheme of things (1 Billion people). So what if a miniscule bunch of Bombayites are left-leaning?! They are entitled to their opinions, meritorious or otherwise!

BTW, the name is now Mumbai!
:):):)

Riazhaq (PAWW) #73

{{There is no bigger whore for America today than India's leadership}}

Skillful whoring takes practice. Your polity has been at it practically non-stop for a good six decades (BTW, is it true, as Urstruly wrote, that the arrival of aid packages from abroad is a cause for national celebration in Pakistani newspapers?). We Indians could not hope to approach your level of abject prostitution to American interests even if we wanted to.

Re: # 75
Don't obsess about the US. Pakistanis themselves will beseech the military to return, just as they have in the past after periods of unbearable misrule by your elected leaders. There is only so much the people can take as they are being forced to return to the dark ages without electricity, water or jobs.

The rest of what you say matters little.
Riaz Haq, PakAlumni Worldwide

Re: # 69The economic reforms by Bhutto were heavily influenced by outcome of Ayub’s policies particularly doctrine of functional inequality and industrialization process which was conducted by transferring of resources from agriculture to large scale manufacturing. Bhutto in sync with the grievances caused by Ayub’s reforms both in the working class as well as the landed aristocracy went for nationalization of industries, the banking sector and even the educational institutions. In the hindsight, it may seem like a wrong decision but at that time nationalization was in vogue. 1970s was a decade of “anti materialism” and great leaps were being taken to project collective interest over individual “greed”. What Bhutto did was perfectly in tune with the global mood at that moment. However,I do agree that the way nationalization was carried out without concomitant effective land reforms did have an over all regressive impact. It hit industrialists and middle class too much while tilting the balance in favor of the landed aristocracy.
But kindly see that in those times nationalization was in vogue every where.
And secondly the 'progress" during Musharraf, Ayub and Zia owes a lot to continous US aid which came to support these military leaders. This aid kept the balance of payment defecits in check allowing Pakistan to concentrate more on spurring investment. The "progress" during Musharraf does not owe to military rule's superior economic understanding. Moreover, any econmist will tell you that wrong policies generally show their adverse affect after a lag. Right now what you are seeing is the lagged effect of certain policies adopted during Musharraf regime.
Musharraf regime was marked by speculation which allocated too much resources to property and stock exchange, mismanagement of infrastructure and worst shameless attack on virtually all the institutions. Military itself was not spared. In fact since you think that military men are some how or the other better, kindly elaborate as to why general kayani had to roll back military from all civilian bodies as soon as he took over. He being an intelligent person fully understood that military had been badly mismanaged by Musharraf