Myth of the saviour
Democratic systems are about compromises, and they are about constitutional values
The writer is a lawyer based in Lahore and also teaches at the Lahore University of Management Sciences. He holds an LL M from New York University where he was a Hauser Global Scholar. He tweets at @HNiaziii
I remember often seeing an old man standing on Lahore’s Liberty Chowk holding a placard that had ‘we want Jinnah’s Pakistan’, scribbled on it. Many in Pakistan share the same dream. We talk about how Jinnah would do things if he was alive today. Most opinions are unanimous that he would do a better job than the dynastic parties holding sway over the land of the pure.
This is something peculiar to Pakistan. People in the United States don’t sit around and ponder over George Washington’s America even when they have to deal with the shame of having President Trump. Perhaps this has something to do with the fact that countries like America don’t need to harken back to a golden past when the present is full of just as much promise. We, on the other hand, are not at that point as a country. For many people, Jinnah’s time was the only time of pride for the nation.
But, forlorn memories of Jinnah’s Pakistan have also allowed another mindset to creep into the nation: dreams of a messiah-like figure who will swoop down on our country and fix all its problems. A top-down reformer is the secret desire of many in the population.
Let’s be clear about one thing: Jinnah was a democrat, not an autocrat. Jinnah believed in democracy. But our population and some of our ‘reformers’ sometimes miss that point. Fed up with democracy’s slow movement, we have become obsessed with the belief that we need a saviour. Everyone casts their potential candidate: it’s the Chief Justice, it’s Imran Khan, it’s the Army Chief.
Funnily enough, everyone in a position of power also believes they can be our saviour. That they can single-handedly change the course of our future. That is the myth that we must get rid of.
Our obsession with a savior materialises in various forms. Sometimes in extreme forms (everyone is corrupt, so democracy cannot run in Pakistan). Sometimes in subtler forms (get rid of the 18th Amendment and get a presidential system in place). Sometimes it is detached from reality (we need a caliphate.)
The appeal towards a centralising figure functioning as a saviour makes sense to many — it guarantees quick short-term results. Democracy, with its long and often complicated decision-making process just doesn’t hold the same appeal. This is the tragedy of the Pakistani mindset. But to do away with this mindset must now be the long-term goal for Pakistan’s political discourse. The people cannot be allowed to grasp onto a mindset that they need a saviour. They cannot be distanced from the fact that the only one who can save them is themselves. The real power of change is a slow often arduous process that is done for the people by the people.
Dreams of messiahs are intoxicating but have deadly long-term effects. Democratic systems are about compromises, and they are about constitutional values. Systems based on autocratic saviours — whether elected or not — are about doing away with the safeguards that keep power in check. For example, take one of the promises that Imran Khan made after he won the recent election: he stated that he would eliminate the corrupt using the example of China as his model. But the only way he can do what China did is if he throws the Constitution of our country out the window. China proceeded with sham trials to cull the so-called ‘corrupt’ that can only happen in a country that has no constitutional values.
Pakistan shouldn’t aspire to go down that route. No matter how noble the intentions of Imran Khan may be, his talk about curtailing the 18th Amendment, or creating a presidential system, does not signal a healthy democracy. Punishing the corrupt may be a worthy goal, but not at the cost of due process.
Our democratic values as a country are regressing instead of evolving. The systems we admire are telling in this regard. We admire China, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia — all regimes built around the myth of a modernising autocrat. In a country like Pakistan, the system of constitutional democracy cannot be taken for granted. However, given mass poverty, lack of food, water, housing, and security, vast swathes of Pakistan’s population don’t really care about arguments for long-term democratic growth if top-down power can ease their pain in a flash.
In fact, many people still believe in the myth that undemocratic regimes can achieve exponential economic growth. The argument goes that a strong leader, free from messy democratic constraints, can produce economic growth in a way that democratic leaders just can’t. Just look at China as an example.
This is a myth. Autocratic regimes have been responsible for some of the worst economic disasters across the globe. North Korea, Zimbabwe, Venezuela and the list goes on.
Pakistan’s future lies in nurturing democratic values in its population and busting the myth that a saviour is what we need. Imran Khan and his party must realise that this is the only way forward for the country. Khan needs this to be the larger goal for his five years in office. Of a bigger goal of setting up a sustainable democracy where people realise the larger benefits of a democratic system without dreaming of a messiah to solve their problems.
What’s in it for Khan? Doesn’t it benefit him if people think of him as a saviour?
In the short term, yes. But if the entire appeal of the party of change lies in one person, then, the party of change will eventually splinter and die with Imran Khan.
If Imran Khan genuinely wishes for Pakistan to prosper exponentially, then he must think about entrenching his party as a true democratic party, as well as, entrenching democracy as the true system of Pakistan.
It may be asking too much, but we expect so much from Imran Khan. Hope is a strange thing, but it is something that Pakistan has always had in abundance.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 25th, 2019.
This is something peculiar to Pakistan. People in the United States don’t sit around and ponder over George Washington’s America even when they have to deal with the shame of having President Trump. Perhaps this has something to do with the fact that countries like America don’t need to harken back to a golden past when the present is full of just as much promise. We, on the other hand, are not at that point as a country. For many people, Jinnah’s time was the only time of pride for the nation.
But, forlorn memories of Jinnah’s Pakistan have also allowed another mindset to creep into the nation: dreams of a messiah-like figure who will swoop down on our country and fix all its problems. A top-down reformer is the secret desire of many in the population.
Let’s be clear about one thing: Jinnah was a democrat, not an autocrat. Jinnah believed in democracy. But our population and some of our ‘reformers’ sometimes miss that point. Fed up with democracy’s slow movement, we have become obsessed with the belief that we need a saviour. Everyone casts their potential candidate: it’s the Chief Justice, it’s Imran Khan, it’s the Army Chief.
Funnily enough, everyone in a position of power also believes they can be our saviour. That they can single-handedly change the course of our future. That is the myth that we must get rid of.
Our obsession with a savior materialises in various forms. Sometimes in extreme forms (everyone is corrupt, so democracy cannot run in Pakistan). Sometimes in subtler forms (get rid of the 18th Amendment and get a presidential system in place). Sometimes it is detached from reality (we need a caliphate.)
The appeal towards a centralising figure functioning as a saviour makes sense to many — it guarantees quick short-term results. Democracy, with its long and often complicated decision-making process just doesn’t hold the same appeal. This is the tragedy of the Pakistani mindset. But to do away with this mindset must now be the long-term goal for Pakistan’s political discourse. The people cannot be allowed to grasp onto a mindset that they need a saviour. They cannot be distanced from the fact that the only one who can save them is themselves. The real power of change is a slow often arduous process that is done for the people by the people.
Dreams of messiahs are intoxicating but have deadly long-term effects. Democratic systems are about compromises, and they are about constitutional values. Systems based on autocratic saviours — whether elected or not — are about doing away with the safeguards that keep power in check. For example, take one of the promises that Imran Khan made after he won the recent election: he stated that he would eliminate the corrupt using the example of China as his model. But the only way he can do what China did is if he throws the Constitution of our country out the window. China proceeded with sham trials to cull the so-called ‘corrupt’ that can only happen in a country that has no constitutional values.
Pakistan shouldn’t aspire to go down that route. No matter how noble the intentions of Imran Khan may be, his talk about curtailing the 18th Amendment, or creating a presidential system, does not signal a healthy democracy. Punishing the corrupt may be a worthy goal, but not at the cost of due process.
Our democratic values as a country are regressing instead of evolving. The systems we admire are telling in this regard. We admire China, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia — all regimes built around the myth of a modernising autocrat. In a country like Pakistan, the system of constitutional democracy cannot be taken for granted. However, given mass poverty, lack of food, water, housing, and security, vast swathes of Pakistan’s population don’t really care about arguments for long-term democratic growth if top-down power can ease their pain in a flash.
In fact, many people still believe in the myth that undemocratic regimes can achieve exponential economic growth. The argument goes that a strong leader, free from messy democratic constraints, can produce economic growth in a way that democratic leaders just can’t. Just look at China as an example.
This is a myth. Autocratic regimes have been responsible for some of the worst economic disasters across the globe. North Korea, Zimbabwe, Venezuela and the list goes on.
Pakistan’s future lies in nurturing democratic values in its population and busting the myth that a saviour is what we need. Imran Khan and his party must realise that this is the only way forward for the country. Khan needs this to be the larger goal for his five years in office. Of a bigger goal of setting up a sustainable democracy where people realise the larger benefits of a democratic system without dreaming of a messiah to solve their problems.
What’s in it for Khan? Doesn’t it benefit him if people think of him as a saviour?
In the short term, yes. But if the entire appeal of the party of change lies in one person, then, the party of change will eventually splinter and die with Imran Khan.
If Imran Khan genuinely wishes for Pakistan to prosper exponentially, then he must think about entrenching his party as a true democratic party, as well as, entrenching democracy as the true system of Pakistan.
It may be asking too much, but we expect so much from Imran Khan. Hope is a strange thing, but it is something that Pakistan has always had in abundance.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 25th, 2019.