The obstacle in social mobility in Pakistan

It was good to read something about the problem that has suffocated the economy since 1947. I would like to highlight few major reason for the failure of all the three land reforms.

Since the inception of Pakistan the majority of the people in power(parliament) belonged to feudal/land lord factions. E.g in 1942, of 503 parliamentary members of Muslim League more than 150 were landlords and so on so forth in all eras ration increased intead of decreasing. And these ppl are still there.

Evertime the land reforms took place a very un realistic and unequitable measure was used. They used PIU`s (Producers Index Unit) for determining the ceiling on ownership.

Jiss khait say dehkaan ko muyassar na ho rozi.....Uss khait kay har khosha-e-gandam ko jala do

You have highlighted well the obstacles...but as far as I learnt, the second land reform was introduced in 1972, by President Zulifikar Ali Bhutto. The ownership ceiling was reduced to 150 acres of irrigated and 300 acres of unirrigated land. However, although these reforms looked good on paper, the impact was totally diluted when they were actually implemented. Less than 0.9 million acres of land was acquired for redistribution, which was about one-third of the land resumed under the 1959 land reforms. Once again, the ceilings were in terms of individuals rather than families. That meant a number of large landowners managed to keep their holdings within an extended joint family framework and gave up only some marginal, not very productive, swampy lands.

What went wrong was not the intention, but the implementation of land reforms. They had to be implemented by the ruling class which was also the class that was going to be negatively affected by them. Of course, there was no way these could be implemented realistically speaking because of this.

And so land reform remain a great possibility in Pakistan, but not a reality.

First impose your language on the natives, now take their land away.

Good article. Everyone agrees some form of land reforms are necessary. But I will play the devil`s advocate.

``China underwent radical land reform movement brought about by exectuions of landlords and confiscation of land during the regin of the Communits; such drastic measures in the present era would be ineffective.``

Why is forcible confiscation ineffective? The only problem is, there is no one strong enough to forcibly confiscate. The Pakistan Army are the biggest feudal crooks. But regardless, nothing is more effective then forcible confiscation. You mentioned India having implemented land reforms. They pretty much took the land from the big landowners forcibly.

``What is needed today is a moderate approach to redistribute the wealth interms of land inorder to create a more egalitarian society. ``

The moderate approach was tried twice already. It failed because feudals are parasites living off of hosts. They will not negotiate- especially to moderate influences. And PARTICULARLY since they sleep in the same bed as the only other powerbroker- Pakistan Army. So how does one go about this?

Solutions and steps are the need of the hour!

The biggest ally of the feudals is Pakistan`s screwed up democratic system. This is why the biggest, ``democrats`` in Pakistan are nearly all feudals. Feudals, as a group, head the two biggest parties in Pakistan, PPP and PML. All other parties are dwarfed by these two parties. Feudals historically lead all the, ``Restoration of Democracy`` movements, like ARD and MRD and xRD. And every Pakistani elected govt. has almost 66% feudals (actually around 63%).

Every feudal, and his/her family, seems more interested in politics, than in farming. This is strange, since doctors or businessmen, or comp. scientists etc. in Pakistan, are not all interested in politics. PPP is (or was) led by the Bhuttos, Fahims, Makhdooms, Khars, Jatois, Legharis, etc. PML is (or was) led by Pagaros, Junejos, Soomros etc. Nawaz Sharif is the only non-feudal guy, who made it to the top, and that too because Zia brought him in through the back door.

The logic given by many Pakistani supporters of status-quo democracy is that, it will eventually get rid of the feudals. If that were the case, then the feudals would not be the biggest supporters of the status-quo system. They would obviously oppose something that was going to get rid of them. But they know that this democratic system will only strengthen them. Hence their disproprtionately high interest in politics. Pakistan had four elections in the 90s, and nearly the identical number of feudals entered the assemblies, each time. In one election the PPP feudal defeated the PML feudal, and in the other it was vice-versa. But their overall number of seats remained undented.

Even if all of Pakistan`s urban seats (35% or so of total) went to one party, it would still be dwarfed by the feudals, who would have still have nearly twice as many seats. And Pakistan`s urban vote is too divided, between JI, MQM, TI, PML, PPP, ANP to go to one party, anyways. No party in Pakistan has even an iota of a chance in power, if it does not bring in all the feudals. In which case, it will itself become a feudal party.

This is Pakistan`s Catch-22. Getting rid of the feudals, requires true democracy. And true democracy requires first getting rid of the feudals.

There is no easy way of getting rid of landed power, any where in the world. Western Europe got rid of it, after centuries of evolution through education, renessaince, enlightenment - not to mention major was. India got rid of it, after centuries, over which it developed a large urban class. The USA fought a civil war will the plantation owners. But the areas constituting Pakistan, historically, were too backwards to develop a large urban class. And thus, in Pakistan, Feudals still make the laws. Why would they make laws against themselves?

The only two groups who can get rid of feudals are the Army and Maulvis. The Army, for some strange reasons, has never gone after the feudals. Even though, the Army is completely from non-feudal areas (Karachi, Potohor and Soth-Eastern NWFP). But, Ayub and Zia`s families actually joined the feudal parties and/or households. The Mullahs are thus the only ones who are giving the feudals a run for their money. They have kicked them out of NWFP. And have partially kicked them out of Baluchistan. The reason is that the Mullahs are the only party in Pakistan which brings in the lower class. They have sent farmers and mosque imams into the assemblies. And because they bring in the fear of the one source, which scares the peasant on the feudal land, even more than his feudal master, i.e. God. However, the mullahs have other issues.

So, there is only one path for, ``Pakistani style democracy`` to get rid of the feudals: the mullahs to remove them in all areas, including Sind, through elections. And then hope that the progressive urban parties, can then remove the mullahs, through elections. If the progressive urban parties, like the violent MQM and the unelectable PTI cannot get rid of the mullahs, afterwards, then Pakistan turns into Iran.

The other option is to let the feudals rule over us forever in a screwed up democratic system, with the naive hope that, they will get rid of themselves.

So Pakistani democracy will be stuck in a battle between the feudals on one side, and the mullahs on the other. The feudals will go out of their way to present themselves as the, ``secular`` option of Pakistan, even though in their lands, they support far more conservatism than the mullahs. The mullahs will try to impose Shariah. The urban elite, will buy into the Secularism argument, and will support the feudal parties, because they have money, and want their right to party (which Mullahs will not allow them). While the urban middle class and lower class will be fed-up of the feudal mismanagement of the economy, and will start supporting the mullah, more and more.

And the Army will step in anytime it wants to, withouth any public opposition, because Pakistanis, on the whole will be too fed-up with the feudals and the mullahs.

No country can have true Western liberal democracy until it first has the pre-requisites: 1) No feudalism b) A certain per capita income b) relatively good education rate. Pakistan fails on all three accounts. India fails on account b). USA, Western Europe etc. pass on all three.

I responded to you guys earlier, but I don`t know what happened to that post. Its frustrating to type the same stuff again, but here it goes.

Dreamz
YOu are right there is a mistake, the year of second reform was 1972. I had turned in this article to chowk about threee weeks ago and I changed the date on my saved file but forgot to email chowk the edited copy. thanks for pointing the mistake.
Rational Faith
I can`t understand what you wrote, maybe if you write more clearly I can answer back.
Malyck
You are correct, the problem is that pakistan`s so called democracy is nothing but a playground for feudal lords. They control a major sector of the political arean and if they are not doing it out in the open then they are indirectly controlling the other leader puppets.
Rozaiba
Thanks for your input. Pakistan is already being deemed as a nation of extremists and religious fanatics so that is why i emphasized on the moderate approach. what the commis did in china can not possibly be carried out in modern day because pakistan has to be accountable to the int`l community. though many other countries are not accountable for thier actions but as soon as pakistan engages in confiscation of land by use of force then it will become the rest of the world`s business, with our so called ms. liberty being the first.
So at this point we must look for some moderate approach and it can only be possible if the pakistani govt takes an active role in it and delivers on the promises it has made to its citizens.
Romair
Very nice couplet, is it by you or some poet.

Hello Everyone

I responded to you guys earlier, but I don`t know what happened to that post. Its frustrating to type the same stuff again, but here it goes.

Dreamz
YOu are right there is a mistake, the year of second reform was 1972. I had turned in this article to chowk about threee weeks ago and I changed the date on my saved file but forgot to email chowk the edited copy. thanks for pointing the mistake.
Rational Faith
I can`t understand what you wrote, maybe if you write more clearly I can answer back.
Malyck
You are correct, the problem is that pakistan`s so called democracy is nothing but a playground for feudal lords. They control a major sector of the political arean and if they are not doing it out in the open then they are indirectly controlling the other leader puppets.
Rozaiba
Thanks for your input. Pakistan is already being deemed as a nation of extremists and religious fanatics so that is why i emphasized on the moderate approach. what the commis did in china can not possibly be carried out in modern day because pakistan has to be accountable to the int`l community. though many other countries are not accountable for thier actions but as soon as pakistan engages in confiscation of land by use of force then it will become the rest of the world`s business, with our so called ms. liberty being the first.
So at this point we must look for some moderate approach and it can only be possible if the pakistani govt takes an active role in it and delivers on the promises it has made to its citizens.
Romair
Very nice couplet, is it by you or some poet.

Good analysis, Faiza, but I`m afraid the proposed, pragmatic, approach to a solution will not work, becasue there is an inherent contradiction:

``Though initially the governments have to bear the burden of monetary appropriations in order to comepnsate for the redistribution of land of the landlords, these expenditures are far less than that which the government would have to spend to support the same number of people in urban settlements. It is estimated that the amount of money spent on legalization of land occupations in a year is much less than the amount of money that must be spent on supporting the rural citizens in urban towns. ``

An underlying assumption here is that those in power have some concern with ``supporting the same number of people in urban settlements.`` How true is this, I wonder. The cities are fast turning into sprawling, out of control monsters, hotbeds of crime-- while the rulers play their fiddles behinf ten foot high boundary walls or on the safe foothills of Margalla.
Jabke ghairat hi nahiN tou pragmatic social solutions ki kya baat kar sakte hai hum?

And I also wonder how much weight of our woes we can reasonably attach to Pakistan`s feudal culture. Evenb if we assume that ALL of the PPPP`s 81 MNAs and say, half od PML-Q`s 60 and PLM-N`s 19 are of fedual backgorunds, that accounts for only a third of the toatl number of seats in the NA. What am I missing?

But you`ve done a good job in at least highlighting the problem. Awareness is definitely a need of the hour.

rgds,
PM

Thanks for reading and providing your comments.
Dreamz
You are right, the second land reforms were in 1972 and not 1979. this article was turned into chowk about three weeks ago and i did make that change in the original one but forgot to send it to chowk.
Yes the problem with past land reforms have been due to the method of implementation. YOu can`t expect these feudal lords to committ to something that might threaten their status quo

Rozaiba
Well the Muslim world is already seen as extremists for one reason or another, so that is why I emphasized on the moderate approach. We can`t possibly undertake the same actions that chinese commis did because it would just exacerbate pakistan`s status in the int`l community. so something moderate can work but its just a matter of how faithful our leaders are in bringing about changes that they have promised the populace.

Malyck
You are correct, feudal lords control and thus have a greater hegemony on Pakistan`s politics than they should have.

Romair
Like the couplet, if you don`t mind can I use it one of my articles?
Rational Faith
Please explain your comment, I didn`t understand what exactly you were referring to?
Thanks

faizahussain #10: ``Romair
Like the couplet, if you don`t mind can I use it one of my articles?``

I have no problem if you use this couplet. However, you may want to check with a guy, whose first name was Sir, whose middle name was Mohammad, and whose last name started with I. As long as he doesn`t mind, I am ok also.

``Very nice couplet, is it by you or some poet.``

The universities in Houston don`t have an Urdu program, do they :-)

RationalFaith: First impose your language. Now take away their land.

FaizaHussain: ``I can`t understand what you wrote, maybe if you write more clearly I can answer back.``

That`s ok, FaizaHussain. Some of your `countrymen` made certain choices. Let them enjoy its sweet benefits. After all what is the value of language and what is the value of land? :)

You won`t understand, Faiza. I am writing about Pakistan. No one expects you to know anything about the place. You have been educated there.

If you have time, keep a count the number of Mohajirs writing on this board.

This, Faiza, is called complete rape of a people.

:)

Romair,

Allow me to say that your analysis is wrong ...

Kindly read S. Akbar Zaidi`s `Issues in Pakistan`s Economy`... and you will realize that it is the Military which has kept the feudal status quo. Remember even Feudal Bhutto`s PPP Government was committed to land reforms which it did carry out, whereas it is Musharraf/Military backed Jamali Government which has announced no land reforms policy.

Similarly the Mullah has no popularity amongst the masses... this shows your isolation from reality. The Mullah won less 1.5 Million of the Popular vote (most of which was Afghan immigrant vote due to virulent Anti-American sentiment)... you can check the figures. It was because PPP and PML(N) were not allowed to campaign that their voter didn`t come out. Still PPP had the largest vote bank with 3.3 Million votes, and the government backed PML aka Winners club had the second largest. So if you think Mullah has the capability or the inclination to remove the feudals ... then you are sadly mistaken. If anyone has the popularity amongst the masses it is the Pakistan Peoples` Party. You will not accept given your military bias, but it is true.

The democratic system is the only system that delivered Europe from Feudalism. We should learn from history... the Army and the Mullah are the allies of the feudals... Feudalism can be defeated by a strong and efficient judicial system coupled with complete and unfettered democracy... not the Army or the Mullahs... so stop misleading the people of Pakistan.

-YLH

Faiza,

So then, what strategy to adopt?

Since waiting for God to work wonders is a questionable option, there is only one alternative to forcible confiscation of land.

And it is to let a CORRUPT DEMOCRATIC FEUDAL INFESTED PROCESS play out. PROCESS. The ONLY REAL way of allowing INSTITUTIONS to growh.

I don`t see anything wrong with the Muslim world or any third world country other than that they LACK INSTITUTIONS.

Again and again, Bangladesh is an example. They have had governments COMPELTE their term and get booted out by ELECTIONS. The buds of democracy are engrained now in that society. NEVER AGAIN can parasitic dictators like the army usurp power. Bangladesh is far more corrupt than Pakistan. It is poorer, and has far fewer resources. The political deadlocks there are far far worse than any that have occured in Pakistan- and these `country wide` strikes continue every now and then. Yet, DESPITE ALL these reasons, the army there has been made so impotent after allowing consecutive governments to complete their terms, that the army can never dream of a coup again. Why do I keep harping on about that country? Because they have established a PROCESS. And thus, have a real possibility of attaing political as well as economic stability.

These fauji-lovers are actually bed-fellows of feudals- as are the mullahs. This is their attitdue: They want to get rid of feudals in TWO WEEKS. Any strategy that takes longer than two weeks is completely unacceptable. So they despise democracy. Why this attitude? It is the result of a recently identified (though existing for time immemorial)ailment called the `Askari complex`- a term that needs to be immediately added to the dictionary of psychology under the heading `DISORDERS`. Those afflicted with the `askari complex` have a skewed point of view of the world. The patient thinks the world can only be understood in black and white. Everything is really quite straight forward and reasonable. While they themselves live in structured patterns with nice small houses in cordoned complexes (askari= military) with batman servants and what not, and orders being followed to the word, they refuse to see that the world outside the confines of military housing complexes is extremely variable. Thus proposterous statements like `only the mullah or army can ditch feudals`.

This trash talk about Mullahs getting rid of feudalism is bull-sht. Fauji-lovers like to conveniently forget that it was the ACE MULLAH of Pakistan- what`s his name.... Maudoodi, who hated socialism SO BAD, he proclaimed that `socialist ideals` like land reforms were UNISLAMIC and so should never be done!!! And this is supposedly the MOST learned MULLAH the country has ever produced (as an aside, I pray we never have anyone more learned them him).

I say lets give democracy TWENTY YEARS. Uninterupted democracy for twenty years.
The thing is, we have never produced dictatorial leaders like Lee Kwon Yu or Deng Xiaoping or even of the hazy Korean dictator kind. Our fauj is too incompetent and too much of a parasite to be willing to sacrifice anything. If PPP and PML (N) leadership was mostly corrupt, at least there were some decent and effective elected officials. A friend pointed out how the recent fauji tampering under Musharaf has left us with the WORST of Pakistani politicians- the filthiest feudals rule the roost and with them are now the Mullahs- another self-serving creation of the faujiz.

But the question remains! What strategy to adopt? There are PLENTY of capable persons from the middle and lower middle classes in urban and semi-urban areas (I am well acquainted with two) who do speeches for money for FEUDAL or aristocractic fauji-lovers. These youths have the capacity and desire to RUN THEMSELVES for parties like PTI, BUT lack the financial resources. Imran Khan as constantly complained on this (financial resources) being the main reason for PTI representatives not making any in roads. If these youths, who end up making speeches for the fauji-loving trash of society, can be provided their own means of running campaigns, much can be done. The urban and semi-urban base which is over a third of Pakistan is there to be tapped.

PROCESSES are evolutionary requiring a flow and we should make use of the phases that we are currently in. If the feudal hold of the rural lands push us down, then the shifting demographics towards urban centers is an opportunity to pull society forward. This push and pull is where the evolutionary processes will unfold. Right now, that is the prime possibility for change that I see (other than forcible confiscation which to me sounds quite logical).

Agreed!

For the Askari World view to work... they need a leader in the mould of Kemal Ataturk ... and all Pakistan Army has are midgets.

Faiza,

The most important factor that induces mobility in society is education, and no place can probably demonstrate that more than india. From a village in kerala, where we walked for an hour to go to the primary school, studied iwith kerocene lamp, I have said many times before is my friend, who is one of the three senior vice presidents runnig the world largest refinary ( no it is not aramco) Reliance refinary at Jamnagar, with 10 billion dollar investment.

No Faiza, you cannot mention education as the supreme, it is another education, not from the book, that is haram in pakistan. There are schools in pakistan built with foreign funding, but the faujis will not appoint teavhers, so that the romair and tahmeds can give the excuse that jihadis are the products of the failure of schools.

Education is the only point where one can interfere and influence the evolution of a society. That is already cornered by the jihadists, and you cannot say that. Faiza, may be it is time to accept the reality, in a islamic country what elase can the children study.