Libre Magazine

Very well written and although i agree with your direction and feeling on the broader level, especially with the mentality issue, I must say I disagree with you on some micros within the article and would further like to add to some of your points.

You drew a contrast between South Korea and Pakistan- I disagree with the comparison, primarily based on 2 factors.

1) Given that 35 years ago, the foreign interest in South Korea was very different in purpose, even if not in action, relative to the Pakistan.
2) South Korea progressed into democracy, did not jump into it. Implying that the transition was coupled with several institutional reforms which are not allowed to take place in Pakistan, at least not peacefully.

On a different note, like today we continue to advocate for a military free democratic government, fairly and rightly so! Although we do not really know how to progress in the future with this government, which is based on the very bottlenecks our society is plagued with. Similarly, further back in the day we kept advocating for independence, however we did not know what to do with it, once we attained it. For instance if we would have implemented land reforms right after independence, our economic and social policies would not be contained around such sticky structural rigidities. Therefore, foresight is our biggest constraint.

I think it is misleading to say that the people of Pakistan are not aware of the cost at stake. However, I do agree they seem tuned and immune to their surroundings, hence the lack of panic in the business environment and the robustness shown by the stock market, in terms of its ability to bounce back, which if anything, is a positive rather than a negative.

I certainly agree, that the wheat and energy crisis are the result of the mishandlings of the previous government, however past portfolios of other standing governments do show differing but not better results.

In terms of inequality, yes it has been a chronic disease with a natural outcome of the neo-liberal policies imposed in the capital given our environment, these policies are predominantly efficiency based and instigate inequality in the short run. However, it is never the case of one for the other; better redistribution policies need to be implemented. However, redistribution is not the long term solution. Better education in terms of quantity and quality is the only way to prosperity, with a core emphasis on deepening of the system. Therefore, regardless of the economic policy, due to the low literacy and flexibility among the major crux of the masses, inequality is inevitable!

However, it is important to note that issues of redistribution have existed for much longer than the period of this government therefore in terms of issues relative to redistribution (corruption and mismanagement of funds through the system) it is virtually impossible to enforce an effective redistribution system without a long term commitment to solve the problem. However, better interim action could have been taken.

I would further argue, based on hindsight, although relative inequality has increased, absolute poverty which is the true measure of poverty has decreased in core terms- i.e. if we disregard the current wheat and energy crisis, which is more a global rather than Pakistan instigated phenomena. However, alternatives such a better management for wheat and coal as a energy alternative should be looked into as well.

Ali Sohail wrote this article while responding to a previous article by Anas Tahir: Pakistan: Into The Future