Institutional economics for Imran Khan

What marked 30th October as a day of ‘revolution’ for the famous and furious ‘PTI’ leader was the centre of several debates, discussion and battles amongst those who consider Imran Khan as the nation’s only and final hope and others skeptical of his political acumen and most importantly PTI’s manifesto! There are some who declared Punjab as an open and unbiased arena, as a positive outcome, and some more who logically deduced the availability of the arena as an opportunity for PPP to further strengthen its constituency in the region. Against this backdrop, all rationalists would agree that even after the display of magnetism and unity on the ‘historic’ day, Imran Khan is unlikey to yield himself any political significance in the upcoming elections or even in the next five to ten years. While the writer, not for once doubts the truth and sincerity the captain’s dedication in pointing out what all really needs to be done, “we will ask politicians to declare assets… and… collaborate with China!”, she seriously doubts the leader’s capacity to bring about any institutional change in the country which if it has to ever come about will have to come through a change in the property rights structure. Before delving into a discussion on to the discussion of why Khan may not be the ultimate game changer for the country and the economy, the basic lie in very clear crude basis of the institutional economics discipline; the leader and/or the PTI’s supporters lack the material resources to exert their weight on changing the legal structure. An excellent example would be that of Britain where industrial revolution only came about when the trading community or the bourgeoisie became rich, a parallel force against the Church, resourceful enough to form a parliament that supports economic/ trade activity to this day! Second, and fortunately the party clearly lacks coercive defacto power, which is heavily characteristic of the Pakistani politics today. Against this argument arises every diehard PPP fan’s best example; Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the ultimate revolutionary who mobilised people from every nook and corner of this pure land. Aside from the exalted charisma of the great leader, one must not forget the country was subject to Ayub Khan’s hardcore capitalistic policies, which had led to the rise of the notable 22 families. So Bhutto’s famous slogan was the first time in the history of the country, that the needs of the poor were made the centre of a political campaign. It has been many years since. The same naara does not hold truth for many anymore. For any change to come about, the ‘masses’ have to be mobilised… and unfortunately for this urban movement, this group of people is neither educated nor of urban residence. These are people vertically aligned and fuelling a patriarchal structure and its vertex in ’rural’ areas. These people form more than 60 per cent of the population and it does not mean anything to them if politicians are made to declare their assets, local or internationally held. It does not matter to them if you align yourself to China, end corruption and what not! What matters to them is survival, being able to provide for their families, in addition to accessing the informal credit market not on a monthly but a daily basis! What dilutes the Khan’s chances of bringing about a political and economic revolution in this country is just this very fact; how does he plan to end this vertical alignment. Yes, we all very well understand that if it were to break, the economy would prosper, but only in the medium term! What of the immediate term, where people will live only if they feed their offspring?
One must not forget that amongst those who cheered to the music and the idea of a better Pakistan, were some who were terribly upset at not being paid to attend!