As a little light relief let’s turn to the admirable Peter Alexa0nder, Baron von Ustinov (1921-2004), a man of multiple talents when it comes to the word. From a column written in 1990: “The word democracy has been used and abused beyond belief. First of all it was used by the Greeks to describe what they were doing naturally and to lend some rules to a national penchant for argument. Then it was applied to the Icelandic parliament, which shouted from rock to rock across a crevice separating government from opposition. Not a bad idea.
“Magna Carta, the French Revolution, Tom Paine and the American rediscovery of democracy followed, and finally the word was used and abused as a way of describing every representative government in the world, such as the German Democratic Republic and the Democratic Republic of North Korea.”
Well, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan more than fits the slot. It proclaims from its shoddy rooftops that it is a democracy, it shouts the same to the polluted skies. Whatever is said or done by our governments, mainly of the ‘bloody civilian’ (a la pal Kamran Shafi) types, is said and done in the name of democracy. When anything manifestly wrong, even destructive, is done it is to ‘save’ or ‘strengthen’ democracy. Hypocritical to the core!
To those referred to erroneously as representatives of the people — elections are held, so ergo that defines democracy, and the interested or involved world powers go along with the nonsense because it suits them to do so — they are licenced to get away with murder, larceny, mendacity or whatever criminal activity or moral degradation furthers their design because they are defined democrats.
Just exactly how did the recent resolution, thought up by six senators in the deemed honourable Senate last week — that body of men and women not even directly elected — that the spouses and children of former parliamentarians be elevated to the shameful ranks of those known as VIPs or VVIPs and granted ‘blue’ passports have any connection with either democracy or the national interest or even constitutional supremacy? It didn’t, it was all about the national preoccupation with ‘being important’, different and superior to the ‘rest’. Unusually, better sense prevailed, why or how is unknown. And just why do all former parliamentarians themselves have this facility? They should not, they do not deserve it. At one time, sitting in the unrepresentative Senate was a man who staunchly upheld the practice of burying women alive for their alleged sins.
That the green passport is so embarrassing speaks volumes for the standing of the democratic republic worldwide. But should not the ‘blue’ ones be restricted to former presidents and prime ministers (and to present parliamentarians or serving high officials to be surrendered when they step down)?
Parliament and supremacy have never gone hand in hand, and never will until the mettle of those who sit in it is radically changed. It is not about to happen due to the ingrained amorality and incapability thrown up by either the choice of ignorant purchased people, or uniformed adventurers who step in thinking they can fill the void — all in the name of the national interest and democracy.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 14th, 2015.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
Islamic “Republic” of Pakistan – that itself is an oxymoron. A republic can’t be theocratic, democracy or not.
The preamble to PAK constitution does not reflect the ideals of a republic and is in conflict with the theocratic principles of PAK.
Demographic representation to elect a representative may be a democracy but whether the pak demography holds the ideals of a republic is highly questionable.
Islamic pakistan is correct and constitutionally and demographically true. Republic-? Not in million years and the idea died with Jinnah.
Thank you for putting it in perspective.
Thank you, somebody had to put it in perspective.
Sterling article. From a very distinguished author.
Are you sure you wanted to say ‘false’ illusions ? Did you want to say that though it seems as an illusion, actually it is not illusion but the reality and hence illusion is false ? I get stumped when some people say – it was a wrong misunderstanding ! or something to that effect. False illusion is the latest example.
@john B: Funny you should think that way as India, after all, is a very flawed democracy. You can’t have a theocratic right wing government and call yourself secular. The two don’t mix.
Simply brilliant…….your efforts to shame the shameless are heroic.
@Daniyal
Last time i checked, a theocracy had a religious head and laws based on a religion. Now tell me honourable sir, where is the need to resort to India bashing to justify the condition of Pakistan’s political scenario? And just to clarify sir, this country was born on the very fundamentals of religion, a past that cannot be conveniently disposed at will.
@Someone
Who said anything about India? What’s the reason for this comparison? The author has specifically written about A PAKISTANI problem , one of which is ignoramuses like you and their imbecile opinions
@Someone: The article is about Pakistan it has nothing to do with India but your comments shows how much obsessed you are with India, right wing or left wing it is our headach we elect what we think right, think about Pakistan , their was no martial law since 1947 and you will have one more very soon.
Those False Illusions.
The Oxford Dictionary defines Illusion as A false idea or belief:
A double kill by way of ‘False Illusions’ is wholly unnecessary.
Thought you should know.