corruption is bad but no society is without it and more importantly corruption is not the biggest crime in the world. incompetent government officials pose same threat to a country that corrupt officials do. obviously in an ideal society, you would prefer govt officials to be smart as well as honest but unfortunately such society does not exist especially in the third world.
as far as pakistan is concerned, every chacha mamoo talks about corruption but no one focuses on the issue of competence. for example, many people claim imran khan is not corrupt so he has an automatic right to power. no one focusses on imran khan’s ability to deal with critical issues facing pak such as his plans to deal with jehadis or his policies to keep the economy growing and what are his ideas to help pakistan cope with rising energy and commodity prices? given pakistan’s fairly precarious economic position, country will face a huge setback if the next government implements wrong policies. i would argue country would be better off voting for a moderately corrupt government that gets policies right.
best example to support my argument is the government of mahatir mohammad which was somewhat corrupt but hugely competent and has turned malaysia into the most developed muslim country. cowasjee had an interesting article on mahatir:
“…All Mahathir’s children (Marina, Mirzan, Melinda, Mokhzani, Mukhriz, Maizura and Mazar) are multi-millionaires and came to that station by the time they were 30! The Mahathir cronies including the banks and rich Chinese, were falling over [each other] in wanting to have a child of his as a shareholder or director in their companies as that was a sure way to secure government contracts.”
so who would be a better for pak? mahatir. who while being highly competent was tolerant of corruption? or imran khan, who is completely honest but advocates ideas that are completely kooky?
Re: mahatir vs. imran - who would be better for pak?
Abb tu nay ya kiya boring thread start kar dee yara, Oh bhai mara mariiiii ka zamana hai , itnna sochanay ka waqat kissy kay pass nahi, MIRCH MASALAY wali thread start kar agar karni hai tu warna nikal lay patli gali say.
Re: mahatir vs. imran - who would be better for pak?
I hope you are not suggesting that Musharraf = Mahathir.
Pakistan has seen industrialization under military regime (Ayub), destruction of Pakistan under military regime (Bengladesh), undoing of industrialization under ZAB (was it pure civilian govt?), destruction of Pakistan/society/constitution/governance under another military regime (Zia), circus of do-undo-do-do-undo-undo under below mediocre democracies (NS and Bibi) and now yet another institutional/constitutional destruction/rape of the country though with economic growth.
Whatever happened under Mahathir in Malaysia was different from current Pakistan as the country is under attack from so-called Islamist extremists. Mahathir may have done corruption but his policies were sincere with the country. In our case, the policies are flip-flop, depending on late night phone call, there is no consistency. Only good thing has been the political "stability" which usually happens under a dictatorship. If current instability had occurred under a civilian government it would've long gone by now, dismissed for incompetency, corruption etc.
Re: mahatir vs. imran - who would be better for pak?
I hope you are not suggesting that Musharraf = Mahathir.
Pakistan has seen industrialization under military regime (Ayub), destruction of Pakistan under military regime (Bengladesh), undoing of industrialization under ZAB (was it pure civilian govt?), destruction of Pakistan/society/constitution/governance under another military regime (Zia), circus of do-undo-do-do-undo-undo under below mediocre democracies (NS and Bibi) and now yet another institutional/constitutional destruction/rape of the country though with economic growth.
Whatever happened under Mahathir in Malaysia was different from current Pakistan as the country is under attack from so-called Islamist extremists. Mahathir may have done corruption but his policies were sincere with the country. In our case, the policies are flip-flop, depending on late night phone call, there is no consistency. Only good thing has been the political "stability" which usually happens under a dictatorship. If current instability had occurred under a civilian government it would've long gone by now, dismissed for incompetency, corruption etc.
i agree with most of your analysis and no this has nothing to do with musharraf. i am just interested in finding out why competence is not an issue in pak politics/media and if we were to rate political leadership based competence, who would be the best candidate to lead pak?
Re: mahatir vs. imran - who would be better for pak?
i agree with most of your analysis and no this has nothing to do with musharraf. i am just interested in finding out why competence is not an issue in pak politics/media and if we were to rate political leadership based competence, who would be the best candidate to lead pak?
Well this is still a mistery to me. No one on this board had balls to undermine his support of any political leader, who could lead this country in future.
They are only half hearted supports for IK. Not to be taken serious either. The Mushy supporters is a different issue though.
Re: mahatir vs. imran - who would be better for pak?
Well this is still a mistery to me. No one on this board had balls to undermine his support of any political leader, who could lead this country in future.
They are only half hearted supports for IK. Not to be taken serious either. The Mushy supporters is a different issue though.
unfortunately, we can only select leaders we had and not leaders we wish we had. of all the leaders on our national scene such as bb, ns, shaukat aziz, pevez elahi, akram durrani, arbab jehangir, imran khan etc, who would be the best candidate to lead pakistan? which leader will implement policies that will make pakistan a better place to live by the time the tenure of next govt comes to an end?
Re: mahatir vs. imran - who would be better for pak?
unfortunately, we can only select leaders we had and not leaders we wish we had. of all the leaders in our national scene such as bb, ns, shaukat aziz, pevez elahi, akram durrani, arbab jehangir, imran khan etc, who would be the best candidate to lead pakistan? which leader will implement policies that will make pakistan a better place to live by the time the tenure of next govt comes to an end?
I think Pak's major problem is, that we have part time politicians sitting in parlament. THere is no real threat coming from the underground scene, like Student movements (parties). Like it appears to happen in Europe. There is no real support to maintain a healthy supply chain of young blood politicians. We have to choose from dictator, thug, thief, terrorist and exiled and corrupt politician. A dull future of Paks politics.
Re: mahatir vs. imran - who would be better for pak?
I think Pak's major problem is, that we have part time politicians sitting in parlament. THere is no real threat coming from the underground scene, like Student movements (parties). Like it appears to happen in Europe. There is no real support to maintain a healthy supply chain of young blood politicians. We have to choose from dictator, thug, thief, terrorist and exiled and corrupt politician. A dull future of Paks politics.
indian politicians are neither aflatoon nor angels. in fact a huge number of their mps have court cases against them and a lot of criminals get into indian politics because public office provides immunity from prosecution. yet indian awam election after election votes for these crooks. why should pakistanis expect any thing different especially since our politics is much more backward than india's politics. if we want democracy, we have to select one leader. who should that person be?
Re: mahatir vs. imran - who would be better for pak?
indian politicians are neither aflatoon nor angels. in fact a huge number of their mps have court cases against them and a lot of criminals get into indian politics because public office provides immunity from prosecution. yet indian awam election after election votes for these crooks. why should pakistanis expect any thing different especially since our politics is much more backward than india's politics. if we want democracy, we have to select one leader. who should that person be?
Agreed, I never had much love for the largest democracy in Asia anyway.
Most are corrupt and yet they can claim and blame of having a democracy. Which is their tool to justify even slaugthering of Muslims in Godhra and Co.
However, these politicians are either fully convinced of being angels or declare themselves as rightwing party supporters and enjoy their freedom. Used as good or evil is their decision.