Running A Country
Countries of the third world were beggared by the socialist wave that swept the world through the middle of the last century. In hindsight all the towering figures of the non-aligned world of the 50s were not even great politicians, the vision they had for their people was based mostly on grandiose, economically bankrupt plans. In contrast to totalitarian regimes of the communist world, the free market economies of some dictatorships were far more successful, albeit with generous economic help (US AID) from Uncle Sam, the US being the doyen of all capitalist countries. With the aspirations of the people the need for democracy grew stronger, even those leaders were found having feet of clay. One lesson should have been learnt here, in the developed world with its vast economic and industrial base the private sector with its sound management and good business practices kept services and utilities within the buying power of the masses, when free market philosophy is applied in the developing world, it puts an enormous, even back-breaking burden on the common man.
National Service
Third world countries must learn to mobilise their manpower resources at the ab-initio youth stage for the ultimate future of both, the individual and the nation. Countries with diverse ethnicity and other problems emanating from sect if not caste, religion if not race, etc must evolve a process to bring the young together in one giant melting pot that will merge all the differences and bind them together to promote national integration. No country has a mix of more nationalities and religions in its populace than the US of A. It did not become a Superpower purely on its economic and military strength, USA became a Superpower because of the proper exploitation of its manpower potential, Along with the freedoms of democracy, universal conscription was mandated by law at a critical part in its domestic history, finessed by the Peace Corps initiative by John F. Kennedy that reached out to the world. Community service is at the heart of the American society and it is because of this selfless hands-on labour by a cross-section of the populace that the US has been able to cope with the major fault lines in its multi-ethnic multi-racial diverse religious populace. All four major wars, the First and Second World Wars, the Korean War and Vietnam, brought together whites and blacks, rich and poor, the educated and the illiterate, into one massive cauldron that wiped out all differences in the same manner as we envisage in Islam. In Pakistan, we have a major polarisation of society as the rich become richer and the poor poorer, all men becoming unequal. This further manifests itself in the Sindhi-Mohajir divide, the Shia-Sunni fault lines, etc. The penchant for separation along regional/religious lines is not confined to Pakistan alone but is increasingly a problem all over the world, in many cases in bloody manifestation thereof e.g. Bosnia, Rwanda, Kosovo, East Timor, etc. We pride ourselves in having the basis of our nationhood in Islam, yet we do not take concrete steps in ensuring all are equal in all senses of the word.
180 Days in Economic History
Almost two decades ago, the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) set in motion a chain of events leading to economic apocalypse. In defence of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto it must be said that while riding the crest of public opinion (which was aroused against free enterprise held captive of a handful of robber barons), he genuinely believed that a socialistic system would bring about amelioration in the miseries of the masses. In this he was not alone in the world, this was the fashion of the times in most Third World countries. Our tragedy was that in reacting against the greed of the few we ended up in the proliferation of corruption, at a particular economic crossroads we took the wrong turn. The collapse of the Socialist Empire has seen, a reaction against the system set in through the Third World, everybody is now abandoning Carl Marx for Adam Smith.