Hoopla over a uniform...

What does our country really think it will gain by forcing Musharraf to give up his uniform? What will it gain by getting him to give up all that he has accomplished in his military career for the sake of being president or give up the presidency for the sake of being COAS? How much will we really gain by having a civillian president?

It's the principle of the matter, supposedly. Supremacy of the people must prevail, no matter what the circumstances, and no single entity must weild as much power over the country as the President of Pakistan currently does as jointly holding the title of COAS. Such power can be dangerous. It could ruin a country while it's leaders plunder and steal from it's wealth, and the public is at there mercy, unable to question, unable to protect what is rightly theirs. But wait... hasn't that been the the case in our country inspite of a democratic process of electing leadership?

Proponents of democracy cry about how our past elected governments were never allowed to complete their tenures, but would that really have made us better off? Back then, when we were engaged in a facade of democracy, did anyone think to ask our leaders... did anyone have the nerve to ask them: our country has incurred billions of dollars in debt... for what? What do we have to show for it? Where did all that money go?

Did we really have any accountability then?

The principle of democracy rests on the premise that people make informed decisions. That very principle makes the process inherently flawed in third world country like ours... for what if we attempt to implement this process in a place where the majority is at the mercy of a few, held hostage by its illiteracy, by its poverty, thus making it susceptible to misinformation, propaganda and blackmail? Would those decisions be informed? Would they reflect the true desires of the majority? Wouldn't the democratic decision in such a scenario in reality be the preference of a few?

This is not an argument against democracy.

Lets first understand that democracy is less a process of electing leaders and more an ideology of freedom. Let us realize that for democracy to have its desired effect at the national level, our people must first be empowered with the freedom to think for themselves at a personal level. The essence of democracy, the supremacy of the people, cannot be won unless we confront our personal hypocracy regarding the democratic process. Lets first ask if we really do believe in an individual's freedom to choose. The same people who tout banners demanding a democratic process of electing government do not believe in their grown children's right to choose their life partners or their career paths. We may eventually be able to swing a democratic election, but we will never win, even if the group we vote for does, not if we aren't honest believers of the process first, not if we don't believe in empowering EVERYONE with the right to choose, not if we think we know better and others don't, not if we keep making decisions on behalf of others without taking their sentiments into account, not if we don't consider ourselves accountable for the decisions we make.

Lets not blindly cry for democracy because we've been told it's right, but because we feel, we understand and we believe it's right. To institutionalize freedom with democracy, we must first believe in the right of each individual to that freedom. Only then can we make a democratic decision that brings in a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people." Until then, the process will remain flawed and we are better off with a despot who appears to have done more good than harm. He can keep the presidency and his uniform... until we're ready to make an informed choice.