of Ayaz's pragmatism, Imran's zero political acumen and Q-league's snickering

You have described politicians universally ash. The same is said in every country in the world, the difference is without ..it is just said without as much venom or consequence.

Ah pragmatists...it is said the ultimate idealist is a saint or a madman, what does that make the ultimate pragmatist? so the joke goes Maulana Fazlur Rehman!

I've said this before, it's a very very basic argument nation states are not destroyed by their politicians being crooks or idiots; financial corruption at it's worst impoverishes nations, stifles development but it does not destroy them.

Nations are destroyed by a leaders corruption of power. To elaborate I'd argue Yahya to a greater extent and Musharraf to a lesser extent are not personally corrupt but I'd say there obsession with power exacerbated Pakistan's ethnic and sectarian divisions to a level that led to the state "writ" disintegrating.

Movements come, movements go ash, to say the US civil rights movement or countless others achieved their goal is a lie..in fact they failed ultimately (Nixon won!). What they do is change the terms of debate. The argument that a movement will just enable the army to take over (as it has in 1969 and 77) is to argue that any struggle is pointless?

Ash as someone who understands Pak politics knows that is a huge caveat..people don't know what will happen to them in the next five minutes in Pakistan let alone a year.