Criminals -- or Victims of an Unjust System?

Omair: feudalism/colonialism is more a mentality than a title. Anyone can have a feudal mentality..because pakistani society and it`s laws prerfer people who have that mentality.

Zakk #17: You are correct in saying that it feudalism is a mentality. However, those who possess just the mentality cannot do much harm. It is only when the mentality is combined with the power of actual land ownership, that it becomes extremely dangerous. This is the tragedy of Pakistan.

Now it is becoming even more dangerous, because the mentality and land ownership, is slowly being combined with high-level foreign education, by the next generation off-spring of the feudals. This has allowed Pakistan`s feudal parties to actually become the flag-bearers of secularism and liberalism in Pakistan. This gives them the required cover to ensure that what they do in their own lands remains hidden. They now have a daughter who works for an NGO, and is a Harvard grad. A son, who is Chartered Accountat and is a graduate of another foreign university, and writes poetry. Goras love them, because they speak English with an accent.

The Bhutto family is a prime example. All of them are graduates of the most elite schools of the world. Listening to them, one would think they are the epitome of liberalism. Yet they are the flagbearers of a system and group, which is entrenched in some of the biggest suppressions of the women in the world.

Unless a woman is the wife or daughter of a feudal, she will always be at the receiving end of all of this. This is why I have always felt that anyone who feeds the feudal parties (PPP and PML) by joining them or voting for them, to a great degree, loses the right of talking about women`s rights. Since he/she becomes a part of the problem. And not a part of the solution.

I am actually quite convinced that if the maulvis took over in feudal areas, they will introduce more rights for women in those areas, then the feudals ever would. This does not make the maulvis the solution, but it does highlight the extreme-ness of the problem. The PPP and PML govts. could have finished off all these Hadood laws in one hour, with one vote. They did that for the 15th Amendment. The fact that they did not do so, should tell us something.

If you want to see the society any ruler will set up in the whole country, just go and see what kind of society he prefers in the land he is elected from (or in the case of feudals actually owns). Go to rural Sind, and you will find out what the PPP values. And go to Southern Punjab and you will find out what the PML values. Jamali and Fahim will run Pakistan like they run their tribal lands. Go there and see the status of women......

Omair I agree with some points of your argument, but let`s remember a few facts when talking about Feudalism. Contrary to what people think the Bhuttos are not the largest Feudal family in Sindh, I believe that title is with the Jatois and the present CHief minister`s family.

Another reason for the status quo is the failure of institutionalising the political system. Whenever Pakistan faces it`s eternal problem of institutional instability, it is people with money who survive(not neccessarily feudals). People like the Chaudhries of Gujarat, the Akhtar Rehmans and Ijaz ul Haqs or Saifullahs were not from landed families. Your party leader the skipper is famous for his arrogance does that mean he has a feudal mentality?

Again examples abound..you have senior Army officers from self made backgrounds who when retired become landlords and become hee epitome of the feudal.

In the civil service you have the Political agents and old DC`s who again excercised power like a feudal ruler.

All the people mentioned are from more middle class backgrounds and truth be told our middle classes are as rotten as everyone else, again push comes to shove it`s a question of mentality.

Zakk #19: I don`t think I can agree with your argument, within the context of this article. It makes sense, if we just look at attitudes, in general. But this article is specifically about women`s rights. On that issue, what you have to look at is how these individuals treat the women in their own families. That is the best clue.

The civil servant may be corrupt. And the Army general may be arrogant. But their wives, daughters etc. are not victims of the suppression against women that exists in feudal lands. Go to any Army or Navy or PAF cantonment, and it will be obvious. If there was ever an honor killing of even the wife of a janitor, the commanders would have hell to pay. Similarly for civil services.

I doubt Imran Khan, despite his arrogance, would ever advocate or defend honor killings and the suppression related with it. Musharraf`s own lifestyle is a clear indication of his views on women. As is Jamali`s and Fahim. I have yet to see the wives of the later two, in public. Have you?

These problems have two prime culprits:

1) At the top of the list are feudals. They are now, generally, themselves educated and westernized. But they need to ensure that their lands remain feudal and caught up in customs that supress women. I can make a bet that Jamali and Fahim would not support laws in favor of women. They would have hell to pay in their tribes, if they did.

2) Maulvis are the second problem. Maulvis do not kill women. But they do want to segregate them, and to keep them covered. So they will send them to school, but not to co-education. They will let them work, but not where men work. etc. So they are not as bad as feudals. But still bad.

``Women`s bill splits Pakistani MPs

The split goes right to the very top.

An official commission set up by the government recommended that the Hudood ordinance should be repealed and President Pervez Musharraf backs the move.`` (www.bbc.co.uk/urdu)

Zakk #19: A furthur comment regarding Bhuttos not being the largest feudal family in Pakistan. You are correct. Though the Bhuttos are a very large one.

Feudalism is almost like an organization. It doesn`t matter which party they belong to. PPP and PML MNAs regularly change loyalties. They usually reprsent the two most powerful feudals in a constituency - one on one party, and one in the other. They are part of one clan, with similar views.

If you look at the statistics of Pakistan`s National Assembly, you will notice that generally balances around 60-66% feudal members. That range has been constant for a long time. This indicates that it is quite stable. Bhuttos are the unofficial leaders and interface for feudals. They hold the feudal flag. Jatoi maybe a bigger landonwer, but he does not have the charisma of a Zulfiqar or Benazir Bhutto. So the feudals have wisely kept the Bhuttos in front. Jatoi cannot talk to Hillary Clinton, in her language, but Benazir can.

These feudals, and especially their kids, are now amongst the most liberal elements of Pakistan. They write poetry, and work for NGOs. I think a few regularly visit Chowk. They appear to be, personally, the most enlightened people in Pakistan. And probably are, in their personal lives. But they need to keep the ancient feudal system in place, to remain in control. Hence, at a social level, they will always push that agenda, despite pushing secularism, personally.

So much so, that many urbanites, like the Chowk crowd, have bought into the arguments of these parties. They completely ignore the fact that, in their own constituencies, these same, ``secular`` feudals are far more suppressive towards women, than the maulvis.

With maulvis, what you see is what you get. They treat their own women in the same manner as they want all women treated. Feudals, in many cases, treat their own women one way, and all other women in another way.

Islam, even in its most repressive interpretation, cannot be as suppressive towards women, as the feudal social system. And Bhuttos stand right at the top of that feudal social system, and are its biggest beneficiary.

What is needed in Pakistani politics, more than anything else, is an internal revolution in these parties, themselves. Because PPP and PML will always have a majority of the vote, since the majority lives in rural areas. Until PPP gets taken over by its urban members, nothing will change. It doesn`t matter how, ``secular`` it may be. And ditto for PML. PML does have some urbanites now at the top, even though its power base is still feudal.

If people want the condition of women to improve in Pakistan, they have to dump these feudal parties, even if they are led by a woman, and have Sherry Rahman as a member. Sherry Rahmans of the world, and the Aitezaz Ahsans of the world, will always be on the sidelines of PPP. They will never become its chairperson, because they don`t represent the feudal class. They are mere decoration pieces, that these parties need to provide a sophisticated interface to the Western public.

Support any other party (except PPP, PML, MMA) and the condition of women will improve. PTI, TI, MQM etc. According to a survey, the most popular political leader, amongst women voters in Pakistan, was Imran Khan.Even in case of MMA, while the condition of women will go down in urban areas, if will improve in rural areas, where most of the women live.

Unfortunately, many of the people on Chowk are amongst the biggest supporters of these feudal parties. They like them because they feel these parties are, ``secular`` and ``democratic.`` In my opinion, Musharraf will do far more for women (and minorities) in Pakistan than any Bhutto, Fahim, Qazi or Jamali. He already has done a lot more.

Omair: I agree with you to a point about feudalism again, however some of your comments do not seemr ealistic. While I agree BB`s running of the PPP is very feudal in style the Party has undergone something of a transformation over the last 4 years. It`s candidates have become increasingly middle class. I believe this is in part to do with the loss of it`s former ``bad boy`` reputation..yesterdays bad boys are todays distinguished gentlemen for the lack of a better term.

In case of the unlamented Nawaz Sharif, many things can be said of the man but being a feudal is not one of them, he was a handpicked favourite because he was from a business family. In fact many of the people drawn to the the PML-N after 1993 especially in Sindh were leftists who felt he was the best chance against feudals. His style however was distinctly feudal, again that was in part because he was not groomed to work within the democratic process.

The problem is the selective application of the law and that precdent was set equally by corrupt politicians, the Military and civil service as hang overs of colonial rule. Again this is a mentality ...