Shafqat Mahmood May 11, 2005
#48 Posted by tahmed32 on May 13, 2005 11:21:20 pm
The latest chowk windmill that Don Quixote (aka Urstruly) and Sancho Panza (aka SR) attack: the dreaded Borg Corporation!! John Grisham`s thriller of the same name comes out this summer. So to be made into a movie!!!
#49 Posted by harish_hyd on May 14, 2005 12:08:20 am
#23 by Zakkk
I pretty much agree with your analysis. But the tide started turning against democracy in Pakistan when it was still in its infancy. I`ve read Jinnah himself was an autocrat who would brook no dissent. The other Paki leaders were so much in awe of him that they ceded their democratic right to question and dissent. This set a bad precedent at the very beginning of Pakistan`s existence. Then came the army coup, and the rest as they say is history. Zia was just another name in the list of leaders who thought they were the best Pakistan could hope for.
The only individual who I feel can restore Pakistan to democracy is Musharraf. Despite his obvious failures in bringing back a modicum of sanity into Pakistan`s law and order situation and the political musical chairs being played out in Islamabad, I say this because after a very long period (after Zia) in Pakistan`s history, he is the man who has demonstrated the ability to lead his country, even though this has been forced by the fortuitious circumstances Pakistan finds itself in, post 9/11. Agreed that his decision to side with the US in the war on terror has not gone down too well with the public and sections in the Army and ISI as well, but at least it hasn`t threatened to dethrone him, unlike other dispensations that would have incurred the Army`s wrath after such a radical departure from a time-worn policy. Also, he is not a fundamentalist like Zia, which means he is less likely to pander to the Mullahs and turn Pakistan into a Saudi-style theocracy. Even here, some may accuse him of trying to appease the Mullahs on the passport issue, but for the Mullahs, this can only be termed a pyrrhic victory at best since on substantial issues like foreign policy which is the key to improving Pakistan`s image, they haven`t been able to force Musharraf`s hand. If only Musharraf weren`t so interested in perpetuating his rule, things could be so much better for Pakistan.
I pretty much agree with your analysis. But the tide started turning against democracy in Pakistan when it was still in its infancy. I`ve read Jinnah himself was an autocrat who would brook no dissent. The other Paki leaders were so much in awe of him that they ceded their democratic right to question and dissent. This set a bad precedent at the very beginning of Pakistan`s existence. Then came the army coup, and the rest as they say is history. Zia was just another name in the list of leaders who thought they were the best Pakistan could hope for.
The only individual who I feel can restore Pakistan to democracy is Musharraf. Despite his obvious failures in bringing back a modicum of sanity into Pakistan`s law and order situation and the political musical chairs being played out in Islamabad, I say this because after a very long period (after Zia) in Pakistan`s history, he is the man who has demonstrated the ability to lead his country, even though this has been forced by the fortuitious circumstances Pakistan finds itself in, post 9/11. Agreed that his decision to side with the US in the war on terror has not gone down too well with the public and sections in the Army and ISI as well, but at least it hasn`t threatened to dethrone him, unlike other dispensations that would have incurred the Army`s wrath after such a radical departure from a time-worn policy. Also, he is not a fundamentalist like Zia, which means he is less likely to pander to the Mullahs and turn Pakistan into a Saudi-style theocracy. Even here, some may accuse him of trying to appease the Mullahs on the passport issue, but for the Mullahs, this can only be termed a pyrrhic victory at best since on substantial issues like foreign policy which is the key to improving Pakistan`s image, they haven`t been able to force Musharraf`s hand. If only Musharraf weren`t so interested in perpetuating his rule, things could be so much better for Pakistan.
#50 Posted by Urstruly on May 14, 2005 11:31:43 am
Re: # 45 SR
I find it hard to beleive that you live inside a geo-dome, where your only contact with the outside world is through the finacial pages of the daily newspaper. But anyway we create our own world in our mind around us - all of us. I, for example, take solace in the fact that the amount of money I make here or even that I send ourside far exceeds that of which I return back into the system as my taxes. The money that I make was my money anyway which they plundered thru their corporations and other means, so I take back what was already mine.
#51 Posted by arjun_m on May 14, 2005 12:14:07 pm
#50 by Urstruly on May 14, 2005 11:31am PT
I, for example, take solace in the fact that the amount of money I make here or even that I send ourside
what makes you think the money you`re sending back to pakiland isn`t being used by the na-pak faujis to bomb your jihadi brothers in the tribal areas?
I, for example, take solace in the fact that the amount of money I make here or even that I send ourside
what makes you think the money you`re sending back to pakiland isn`t being used by the na-pak faujis to bomb your jihadi brothers in the tribal areas?
#52 Posted by Zakkk on May 14, 2005 12:45:54 pm
Re: # 49 Interesting point of view Harish..
While I agree with you Jinnah was during his brief tenure authoritarian..The reasoning is straight forward the Muslim League did not exist in most of the areas of Pakistan as a proper grass roots political party
The reality is Democracy can only grow if you have institutional stability..the components of institutional stability are simple..a non personality centric system which can exist without the individual..a peaceful transition of power and an ability to cohabit with opposing groups.
This was achieved in an Indian context by two events, the death of Nehru and the transfer of power to Shastri, the defeat of Indira Gandhi and her acceptence of the election results.
In Pakistan these events have never properly happened..every electio defeat for a major or minor party in power was subsequet to a dismissal of dubious validity followed by an election of a doubtful nature. These mistakes have been repeated once again by Musharraf although to a lesser extent...while he was willing to accept the MMA coming into power in Frontier and Baluchistan he was not willing to do the same in Sind where the PPP was the largest party..in a Democracy you have to be willing to follow the rule of law even if the consequences are unpleasant..Musharraf has not..and will not do that..one is perhaps the trapping of power which corrupts as we know absolutely..the other is no matter what amendment he puts in..the fear of being punished by his successor (whether Fauji or Politico) is always there...
While I agree with you Jinnah was during his brief tenure authoritarian..The reasoning is straight forward the Muslim League did not exist in most of the areas of Pakistan as a proper grass roots political party
The reality is Democracy can only grow if you have institutional stability..the components of institutional stability are simple..a non personality centric system which can exist without the individual..a peaceful transition of power and an ability to cohabit with opposing groups.
This was achieved in an Indian context by two events, the death of Nehru and the transfer of power to Shastri, the defeat of Indira Gandhi and her acceptence of the election results.
In Pakistan these events have never properly happened..every electio defeat for a major or minor party in power was subsequet to a dismissal of dubious validity followed by an election of a doubtful nature. These mistakes have been repeated once again by Musharraf although to a lesser extent...while he was willing to accept the MMA coming into power in Frontier and Baluchistan he was not willing to do the same in Sind where the PPP was the largest party..in a Democracy you have to be willing to follow the rule of law even if the consequences are unpleasant..Musharraf has not..and will not do that..one is perhaps the trapping of power which corrupts as we know absolutely..the other is no matter what amendment he puts in..the fear of being punished by his successor (whether Fauji or Politico) is always there...
#53 Posted by Urstruly on May 14, 2005 1:49:14 pm
Re: # 51
My family lives in a geodome in pakistan and keeps contact with outside world thru finance pages in newspapers and garbage collectors.
My family lives in a geodome in pakistan and keeps contact with outside world thru finance pages in newspapers and garbage collectors.
#54 Posted by Urstruly on May 14, 2005 1:53:34 pm
Re: # 52
Zakk
Please don`t fall for this myth that Jinnah was authroritarian or worse, a dictator, which is created by fauji establishment. Keep in mind that Quaid-e-Azam fired Pakistan`s first Commander-in-Chief General Gracey for refusing to support Jihad in Kashmir. NaPak fauj, the reminiscent of British raj and legacy has never forgotten that.
Zakk
Please don`t fall for this myth that Jinnah was authroritarian or worse, a dictator, which is created by fauji establishment. Keep in mind that Quaid-e-Azam fired Pakistan`s first Commander-in-Chief General Gracey for refusing to support Jihad in Kashmir. NaPak fauj, the reminiscent of British raj and legacy has never forgotten that.
#55 Posted by Urstruly on May 14, 2005 2:00:52 pm
WASHINGTON TIMES APOLOGIZES TO PAKISTAN - and replaces the head of dog with that of the real dog.
#56 Posted by Zakkk on May 14, 2005 2:13:09 pm
Re: # 54 Considering what happened during Qayyum Khans time in the Frontier ..I think authoritarian is an acceptable term..I do understand the reasoning for it ..but that doesn`t change the fact it was authoritarian
#57 Posted by SR on May 14, 2005 2:44:06 pm
Urstruly
No need to justify your passive support to the atrocities, injustices and imorality of your new Masters. Most of us will not hold it against you. We know you think that you don`t have a choice... They will put you in jail if you take a moral stand. It is quite humbling isn`t it? I mean to realize that it is a lot easier to rant and rave about our principles than to live by them. Sure, we`d all like to be saints and take the consequences of our convictions, but that can get painful. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. That is what I meant when I said ``you have been assimilated... resistance is futile``...
I do not claim to be any better, but I`ve voted with my feet, not once but twice in my life. When I left Pakiland, it was as a dessenter... it cost me dearly at the time. But I left because I was disgusted... up to my eyeballs with the ultra-primitive minded Neanderthals who would run my life had I stayed back. It was an ideological divorce and I`ve never looked back. At the time I came to an America that had already changed from the one I had hoped to have moved to. As I wrote earlier, I am an uncompromising individualist and my ideological leaning was pro-Jeffersonian. After 2000 we realized that America was a ``Paradise Lost`` and I had to take my family and leave. Mind you I consider myself a true American (by choice) and one who is committed to the principles of Liberty as originally intended in the Declaration of Independence. My wife is American and comes from a southern family with a long military tradition (Patton). We, along with many others in her family, all loyal Americans, believe that the country has been hijacked by the fascists who have destroyed the true American spirit and corrupted the values that America stands for. That is why we are hated the world over. It was an ethical choice ... I call it ``Hijrat``...
While you were busy expounding the virtues of Al Qaida on the one hand and faithfully paying your taxes to Uncle Sam, thus enabling the neo-cons to further their evil agenda, I was disgruntled and planned to quit being a part of the system that I considered fundamentally unjust, exploitative and fascistic. Since you brought it up let me fill you in further.
After having taken two bus loads of protesters, at considerable expense, twelve hundred miles to Washington DC, and participated in anti-war demonstrations, promoted a nation-wide tax-revolt movement, being harassed by the Feds and been an anti-war tax protester since after 1991, we decided, with a heavy heart, to go into self-imposed exile and abandon living in the US. This has come at an enormous personal, emotional, financial and social expense. But we did it because we felt compelled.
So, no, we don`t live in a geo-dome. We do however live our lives in austere simplicity and shun the trappings of consumerism as far as reasonably possible. We do not keep a TV (or play station, x-box etc) in our house because of the children and do not subscribe to main stream news papers either. We try to minimize these corrupting influences as much as possible. Our children attend a rural Waldorf school where Mickey Mouse is not allowed and pottery, wood work, gardening, musical instruments and foreign languages are an integral part of the syllabus. But we are not anti-technology luddites either. My main source of outside information is the internet and Ham Radio. I also get several subscribed publications. I know of several brave and patriotic Americans who are keeping the struggle against the fascists alive back home. They are all waiting and preparing for the Second American Revolution, when the Jeffersonian ideals will be restored and the fascists will be defeated.
Before you go on extolling the virtues of the ummah, please remember that there are many, many genuine Americans (white, black, brown and yellow) who have nothing to do with the present fascist empire and who are paying a far bigger personal price resisting it on grounds of principle than the hypocritical fat muslims of Detroit and Houston who comfortably drive their SUVs to the mosque, bad mouth America and go pay their taxes to the fascist state religiously.
It is much easier to talk about our principles than to live by them.
Best wishes,
...SR
No need to justify your passive support to the atrocities, injustices and imorality of your new Masters. Most of us will not hold it against you. We know you think that you don`t have a choice... They will put you in jail if you take a moral stand. It is quite humbling isn`t it? I mean to realize that it is a lot easier to rant and rave about our principles than to live by them. Sure, we`d all like to be saints and take the consequences of our convictions, but that can get painful. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. That is what I meant when I said ``you have been assimilated... resistance is futile``...
I do not claim to be any better, but I`ve voted with my feet, not once but twice in my life. When I left Pakiland, it was as a dessenter... it cost me dearly at the time. But I left because I was disgusted... up to my eyeballs with the ultra-primitive minded Neanderthals who would run my life had I stayed back. It was an ideological divorce and I`ve never looked back. At the time I came to an America that had already changed from the one I had hoped to have moved to. As I wrote earlier, I am an uncompromising individualist and my ideological leaning was pro-Jeffersonian. After 2000 we realized that America was a ``Paradise Lost`` and I had to take my family and leave. Mind you I consider myself a true American (by choice) and one who is committed to the principles of Liberty as originally intended in the Declaration of Independence. My wife is American and comes from a southern family with a long military tradition (Patton). We, along with many others in her family, all loyal Americans, believe that the country has been hijacked by the fascists who have destroyed the true American spirit and corrupted the values that America stands for. That is why we are hated the world over. It was an ethical choice ... I call it ``Hijrat``...
While you were busy expounding the virtues of Al Qaida on the one hand and faithfully paying your taxes to Uncle Sam, thus enabling the neo-cons to further their evil agenda, I was disgruntled and planned to quit being a part of the system that I considered fundamentally unjust, exploitative and fascistic. Since you brought it up let me fill you in further.
After having taken two bus loads of protesters, at considerable expense, twelve hundred miles to Washington DC, and participated in anti-war demonstrations, promoted a nation-wide tax-revolt movement, being harassed by the Feds and been an anti-war tax protester since after 1991, we decided, with a heavy heart, to go into self-imposed exile and abandon living in the US. This has come at an enormous personal, emotional, financial and social expense. But we did it because we felt compelled.
So, no, we don`t live in a geo-dome. We do however live our lives in austere simplicity and shun the trappings of consumerism as far as reasonably possible. We do not keep a TV (or play station, x-box etc) in our house because of the children and do not subscribe to main stream news papers either. We try to minimize these corrupting influences as much as possible. Our children attend a rural Waldorf school where Mickey Mouse is not allowed and pottery, wood work, gardening, musical instruments and foreign languages are an integral part of the syllabus. But we are not anti-technology luddites either. My main source of outside information is the internet and Ham Radio. I also get several subscribed publications. I know of several brave and patriotic Americans who are keeping the struggle against the fascists alive back home. They are all waiting and preparing for the Second American Revolution, when the Jeffersonian ideals will be restored and the fascists will be defeated.
Before you go on extolling the virtues of the ummah, please remember that there are many, many genuine Americans (white, black, brown and yellow) who have nothing to do with the present fascist empire and who are paying a far bigger personal price resisting it on grounds of principle than the hypocritical fat muslims of Detroit and Houston who comfortably drive their SUVs to the mosque, bad mouth America and go pay their taxes to the fascist state religiously.
It is much easier to talk about our principles than to live by them.
Best wishes,
...SR
#58 Posted by temporal on May 14, 2005 4:31:19 pm
SR:
re: #57
hope is alive!l...
and when she is lit, dark clouds can only linger and pass-by...they cannot extinguish it...they do not carry the moisture nor the thunder to extinguish hope...
god bless!
t
re: #57
hope is alive!l...
and when she is lit, dark clouds can only linger and pass-by...they cannot extinguish it...they do not carry the moisture nor the thunder to extinguish hope...
god bless!
t
#59 Posted by tahmed32 on May 14, 2005 5:21:01 pm
SR: You may disagree with the policies of the Bush government - but as you should know, it has been elected through due process, and so cannot be called a fascist regime.
You are too intelligent to throw around terms carelessly - leave that for lesser people than you.
You are too intelligent to throw around terms carelessly - leave that for lesser people than you.
#60 Posted by vivek on May 14, 2005 6:09:11 pm
SR,
Agreed with you that this govt.`s policies are not the best but they are not fascists.
tahmed,
The BJP was elected to power too, but if I remember right, you did call them fascist in one of your posts.
Agreed with you that this govt.`s policies are not the best but they are not fascists.
tahmed,
The BJP was elected to power too, but if I remember right, you did call them fascist in one of your posts.
#61 Posted by tahmed32 on May 14, 2005 7:27:36 pm
vivek: Please dont say I said something unless you can cut and paste what I wrote. Dont waste time claiming I said something if you ``remember right``. I think the BJP philosophy is a despicable one, but I dont go around throwing pseudo-intellectual labels like the some chowk posters do.
#62 Posted by SR on May 15, 2005 3:25:16 am
Re: # 59
Ahmed sahib, you are an educated man so I`ll try to appeal to your intellect. Fascism is a very commonly misunderstood term. Actually the definition of fascism is not one that is etched in stone. However, the basic traits that are generally seen as the hallmarks of a fascist system are the following:
Strong Nationalism or nationalist chauvinism: Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
Identification of Enemies / Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause: The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Supremacy of Military: Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
Obsession with National Security: Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Religion and Governmant are intertwined: Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government`s policies or actions.
Corporate Power is Protected: The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
Cronyism and Corruption: Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability.
Obssession with Crime and Punishment: Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
Supression of Labor: Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
Manipulation of Mass Media: Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly manipulated by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts: Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
Irregularity in National Elections: Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
Based the above one would tend to conclude that the USSA (along with several other countries like Israel, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc, etc, etc...) meets MOST if not ALL of the above outlined fascist criteria. It is not this or that adminsitration that is the real problem, it is the fundamental corruption of the system that began earlier in the last century after the war and got a strong foot-hold by the 1970s, got well-entrenched by the 1980s, fully estblished by the 1990s and completely solidified after 2000.
Now you seem to suggest that because a certain government is elected therefore it cannot be fascistic. Please recall that both Hitler and Mussolini were originally elected by their respective people.
best regards
...SR
Ahmed sahib, you are an educated man so I`ll try to appeal to your intellect. Fascism is a very commonly misunderstood term. Actually the definition of fascism is not one that is etched in stone. However, the basic traits that are generally seen as the hallmarks of a fascist system are the following:
Strong Nationalism or nationalist chauvinism: Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
Identification of Enemies / Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause: The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Supremacy of Military: Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
Obsession with National Security: Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Religion and Governmant are intertwined: Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government`s policies or actions.
Corporate Power is Protected: The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
Cronyism and Corruption: Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability.
Obssession with Crime and Punishment: Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
Supression of Labor: Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
Manipulation of Mass Media: Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly manipulated by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts: Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
Irregularity in National Elections: Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
Based the above one would tend to conclude that the USSA (along with several other countries like Israel, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc, etc, etc...) meets MOST if not ALL of the above outlined fascist criteria. It is not this or that adminsitration that is the real problem, it is the fundamental corruption of the system that began earlier in the last century after the war and got a strong foot-hold by the 1970s, got well-entrenched by the 1980s, fully estblished by the 1990s and completely solidified after 2000.
Now you seem to suggest that because a certain government is elected therefore it cannot be fascistic. Please recall that both Hitler and Mussolini were originally elected by their respective people.
best regards
...SR
#63 Posted by SR on May 15, 2005 3:27:29 am
Re: # 58
Mr. T, (or should I say ``T. Rex``)
Hope is all we`ve got... without hope life is like a broken winged bird that cannot fly.
...SR
Mr. T, (or should I say ``T. Rex``)
Hope is all we`ve got... without hope life is like a broken winged bird that cannot fly.
...SR
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- mohar11: I mean - zardari... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
- Dash_Dot: Tahmed32 sabji LOL at... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
- AlephNull: There's nothing particularly mysterious... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
- mohar11: kaal oh, we understand it... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
- mohar11: if pakis really want... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
- Eklavya: mohar, Pakistanis may be... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
- mohar11: Saala chutiya paki -... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
- mohar11: Saala chutiya paki -... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in








reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content