Dr Qadri: revolution vs reformation
SOCIETY in Pakistan has been regularly hearing slogans of revolution by parties like the PTI for a long time and most recently by Dr Tahirul Qadri. It has been a historical fact that whenever a nation is deprived of its basic rights and the system fails to meet the expectations of the people, the call for revolution instils.
But to ensure a clear vision it is important to maintain the difference between revolution and reformation.
Reformation is an evolutionary process. It accepts the structure of the present system and calls for legislative changes with the yardstick of the existent system.
Revolution is a process of political birth and a hard line change but reformation is subordinated to established institutions. Political reform within the premises of state architecture never brings about the change in political principles but adhere to them.
If someone calls for changes in the constitution, then he must know that it is not the call for revolution because constitution is legislative expression of the existent state and idea, while revolution is overthrowing it with installation of alternative state and idea.
Working under the umbrella of the constitution but rejecting the system means cutting the trunk of the same tree which you have climbed, and this is insane.
On the other hand, time has witnessed the French revolution, the Communist revolution and the Islamic revolution in Madina.
These revolutions did not go for gradual changes within the pre-existing system, rather led to the collapse of regimes and installation of a totally different model of governance in place.
In simple words, with partial legislative changes a capitalist society can neither be transformed into communist nor Islamist society and vice versa.
Although there are differences between dictatorship and democracy, for 65 years both processes have put capitalism into practice. If Pakistan continues to revolve or evolves within the same system, then the word ‘revolution’ must not be politically exploited.
The second choice is a different ideological model of governance. The two most likely options are socialism and caliphate. The latter fits the fabric of Pakistani society. Lastly, peaceful transitions are impossible if the people in power refrain from standing with the people.
DR Qadri’s sit-in ended in a peaceful manner. We may have difference on his stance or demands but we cannot deny the enthusiasm and discipline of the huge crowd.
No damage by the crowd has been reported during the long march and sit-in. We should appreciate their peaceful protest for democracy.
WITHOUT going into controversies surrounding Dr Tahirul Qadri’s agenda, a number of lessons could be drawn from the long march led by him. With an able leadership, a mammoth crowd can remain disciplined and organised despite hostile weather and lack of facilities.
Furthermore, Islam is the religion of peace and its followers can pursue jihad against injustice without violence if the leader appropriately trains them. Also, women and men can work together for the achievement of common goals if they have trustworthy leadership.
Finally, our nation can be groomed to demonstrate civic sense by protecting national assets such as streetlights and other fixtures if the leader has the charisma to inspire them.
DR NAJEEB A. KHAN
ALTHOUGH Dr Tahirul Qadri has not succeeded in enforcing his agenda for the time being, he has ended it with a strong speech against the corrupt culture of politics and governance. Obviously, no one was wishing him to go for violence, especially in the presence of innocent children and women and given the severity of the weather.
Although he had educated the nation on true implementation of the constitution, he really let down every change-seeker when he was sharing lighter moments with government functionaries and agreed to a guarantee by Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf on whose arrest order Dr Qadri had announced that half of his job was done. It was ridiculous.
ZAFAR JAMAL JASRA
A PERSON is sitting inside a container worth Rs50 million with an internal heating system, constant food supply, shelter and protection, making speeches to the people sitting out in the cold with literally nothing Do the people really think that they have found themselves a revolutionary leader?
How can we just allow a person having a foreign nationality dictate to us what to do? It is not that the other politicians are loyal. The question is: can Dr Tahirul Qadri be trusted?
Will this step help us to achieve a democratic country? What is he trying to prove? We, the people of Pakistan, need a lot more maturity if we really need a change.