When the UK Prime Minister proposed a global government, the question that raised eyebrows and triggered everyone’s mind was, is a democracy or democratic system needs to be revisited or is it no more good enough? To find the answer, one needs to ask another question, i.e., are the masses satisfied with democracy and its processes? What is happening in the world research institutions to examine the efficacy of the political system worldwide? Are most of the population getting benefited or otherwise? In order to find out the answers and explore improvements, one has to examine political science as a subject. It is defined as a systematic study of the world political system. The political phenomenon is studied in different countries. It includes legislature, political parties, behaviour and ideologies. A sub-branch of political science is comparative politics: the Study of close governments, societies, how they coop with different problems, and political structure. In his book, principles of democracy and democratization, John T Ishiyama, while defining comparative politics, states that democracy is not the best institutional arrangement given a set of historical economic, social, cultural, and international circumstances. The UK took 700 years to establish a democratic system through gradual evolution. Starting from the Magna Carta treaty in the 11th century, the power of the king of England was curtailed and some nobles were given the right to elect their leadership. The political structure evolved with the country’s social fabric change, which was initially based on agriculture. Later on, with the onset of industrialization, the masses shifted to form big cities giving rise to a middle class, which was the backbone of the emerging democratic system. Finally, the king of England was stripped off his powers to be reduced to a ceremonial figurehead that we witness in today’s England.
Pakistan was given a democratic system as implemented by the British, whereas its population had neither gone through industrialization nor evolving middle class; instead, it was a suppressed population that had a history of struggle against the government of England. With a rebellious attitude practised for almost a century, the people got liberty overnight. This was a challenge for the population as well as the government. Our history proves that there had to be interventions in a democratic system through bureaucracy, judiciary, and administration. Subsequently, the courts had to legalize these interventions endorsing them under the Law of necessity. Besides these factors, the foreign interventions triggered events directly impinging on the security of the state. The famous phone call after 911 demanding Pakistan to be on either side, i.e., join the USA or be prepared to be sent to the Stone Age, is well known. Similarly, the Study of the change of regime falls under the umbrella of comparative politics. It covers why and how regime changes based on the Study of political conflicts, society, political economics and relationship with the world. Besides comparative politics, there are sub-branches of political science such as international relations (political phenomenon between states), pubic administration, judicial politics and political theory. You must be wondering that most of the discussion on media, social media, print media and news channels comes under the definition of political science. Sometimes, the judiciary is targeted; at times, bureaucracy (civil or military) is blamed, and political leadership is accused.
In contrast, some intelligent players lambast the establishment, which is a broad term covering all these elements of national power. This is interesting because the first scholar to research Greek civilization’s political system and governance was Aristotle. He surveyed the eastern Mediterranean states and analyzed how they were governed through legitimate rule by one called monarchy or by a few called aristocracy or by many called polity. He found that when the ruler started to enrich themselves instead of promoting interest, the legitimate rule becomes degenerative. Therefore monarchy in its degenerated form becomes tyranny; a ruling aristocracy degenerates to oligarchy and polity turns into democracy. He concluded that pure oligarchy or pure democracies are the most unstable political systems. Aristotle called democracy mob rule.
Today 5000 years after Aristotle, how is this model of a rule affecting an ordinary person in Pakistan? The answer is that every individual in our nation feels the heat of political science’s internal and external challenges. The root cause of internal destabilization is greed and lust for money. Critical issues such as blasphemy, atrocities on Muslims of Kashmir and Palestine are directly causing pain and anguish to people from all walks of life. As per Aristotle, any political system due to this weakness turns into a challenge rather than an opportunity.
The question arises whether we need political reforms or bureaucratic reforms, or both? If democracy is not the ultimate solution, then what our researchers and intellectuals have to offer? What is the model of Islamic governance? There is a need to implement the concept of social security promulgated by Hazrat Umar. Both France and Britain have the models according to their environment and requirements. However, instead of importing foreign prescriptions, we need to take reforms program. Political scholars, religious clergy and students of comparative politics need to sit down to propose solutions based on our own spiritual and ideological principles that could ensure honest leadership or emir. It could be done at provincial as well as federal levels. This will enable us to preserve our sovereignty, Law and order, defend state authority from internal non-state rivals. This will lead Pakistan to a more robust status as it can protect itself from outside attacks.
