DEMOCRACY is like everyone having a say in how things are run. Sounds dreamy, right? In some places, they used to gather and vote on everything in public – that’s ancient Greece for you. Back then, a regular person wasn’t just a voter but also kind of like a boss, defender, and a regular Joe. As societies grew, the whole town hall voting thing got too big. So, we shifted to picking a few people we like to make decisions for us – that’s representative democracy. These chosen ones make laws and handle stuff, while we cheer or complain from the sidelines.
However, democracy in Pakistan appears as a rhetorical tact employed by political leaders to gain popular support. The slogans, manifestos, and promises of top political parties seem democratic and influential. Therefore, when common citizens read the manifestos, they might believe that a particular party advocates truly democratic principles. But as the election process concludes, promises to uphold democracy become fading, neglected and compromised, as politicians in Pakistan typically rely on the support of the Establishment rather than popular support. This is the reason that political parties when in power face failures to govern independently, from those who previously facilitated their rise to power.
Hence the echoes of Machiavelli’s views on human nature resonate in the contemporary political leadership of Pakistan. Machiavelli Born in 1469 in Florence, Italy, Machiavelli observed a time marked by political instability and selfish motives. He perceived a cunning nature in humans, akin to Thomas Hobbes. Machiavelli contended that individuals are inherently irrational, guided by emotions, and inclined towards selfishness, traits mirrored in Pakistan’s political leadership.
The 2018 government’s formation with undemocratic support, exemplified by extending the army chief’s tenure, reflects Machiavellian power dynamics. Moreover, PDM was formed by undemocratic forces to oust Imran Khan, especially during times when the interests of so-called democratic and undemocratic forces clashed. The PDM, despite its name suggesting the “Pakistan Democratic Movement,” was ironically perceived as a joke, given that undemocratic forces sought to promote democracy in Pakistan, reminiscent of previous promises made by dictators.
To counter the chaos and avert potential coups, a genuine democracy emerges as the only solution. “Genuine” implies political leadership consistently committed to democratic ideals, not relying on the Establishment for power. Hafiz Naeem ur Rehman’s decision to vacate his seat due to manipulated elections exemplifies the spirit needed for true democracy. Top leaders should unite to strengthen the 2006 Charter of Democracy, setting aside differences to establish civilian supremacy as mandated by the Constitution.
—The writer is associated with the University of Science & Technology, Bannu, KP.
Email: [email protected]
views expressed are writer’s own.
