Defining Democracy in Pakistan

Democracy, rule of the people, is such a vast term that it encompasses many meanings. If, today, someone was to establish that Pakistan is best suited as being a democratic regime, the idea of democracy is be too vague for us to understand his implication. Does that person mean that majoritarionism is best for Pakistan? Or that the government should be pluralistic and equally represented by and opportunities provided to all factions? Perhaps it means that public offices should be filled after a system of regular competitive election by the people so that the elected government serves their interests. Or maybe it means that Pakistan requires a system that secures minority rights by keeping a check upon majority power. Lincon's idea of it as a rule of the people, by the people and for the people furthers the ambiguity of this notion. In this sense, I was impressed by the book's quote "A term that can mean anything to anyone is in danger of meaning nothing at all".

For a clearer perspective, we take the help of democratic models to understand which one is best suitable for Pakistan. The model of a classical Democracy, based on mass meetings,was such a direct system of popular rule that it could only have been applicable to Athens in that setting as it is a micro-scale democracy that can now only be adopted in cases of town councils and assemblies. The possibilities of it being used to mean democracy in Pakistan are very limited.

The second model, of a protective democracy, was the idea of protection against government encroachment. Individuals seek to protect themselves ang governments exist for protection, therefore they should have the right to vote so that they can elect a government to protect their material well being and so assists capitalism. But the fact is that this model furthers the wealth imbalance and Pakistan is already a country suffering from class divides. A formal application of protective democracy will only increase the gaps between the "haves" and "have nots" and since it assumes that the elite will be in power,with our landlord system in place, it is bound to be maliciously used to further peoples interests and to exploit the poor.Therefore, this system(some parts of it already being informally applied in Pakistan) is highly juxtaposed to the fundamental idea of democracy, rule of the masses, itself.

We then look at a developmental democracy which seeks to promote development of individual capacities. This model is too righteous as it assumes people engage in civic issues and want the best for society. Such universal altruism can only exist in a Utopia. Connecting democracy to morality by believing citizens are responsible for the oversight of their work can in no way be applied to a country like Pakistan where corruption has seeped into all levels.

Lastly, we find the People's democracy. developed and applied to communist states. Pakistan is an Islamic state with radical religious factions and even the mention of adopting a system used by communists can instigate wars.  Marx and Lenin were themselevs unsure about its proper implementation and it has no mechanisms for checking power of the ruling party or to ensure that it remained accountable to the working class.

As none of these models are applicable to Pakistan today, I am deeply confused by what someone who claims that Pakistan should be a democracy really means.