Rule of law as opposed to rule by law
The middle class is traditionally considered the harbinger of social change in societies. The most recent examples are bazaari’s (small merchants) of Iran that supported the Islamic revolution led by Imam Khomeini. Arab Spring was also spearheaded by middle classes. In the first example they were able to dislodge the status quo but were then discarded by the Islamic revolution and became subjugated by it. In the Arab Spring the result was not much different. The question then is will Pakistani middle class be able to lead the transformation of the country?
Political Scientist Francis Fukuyama wrote a two-volume work addressing the question of why certain societies have remained behind while others have progressed. First volume covers from classic times to the French Revolution, while the second volume covers the period from then to now. There are some interesting ideas presented in the book. Let me first share those before we move to discuss the situation in Pakistan. He has argued that rule by law is different from rule of law. For example, in USA the dominant force is rule of law. While on the other hand in China as well as in Pakistan we experience rule by law. In the first situation the state is impartial towards any particular segment of society and adjudicates judicial matters based on law without any preference for a class, race, sect or ethnicity. In the latter case the law is used by the elite to safeguard their special interest.
Political Scientist Francis Fukuyama wrote a two-volume work addressing the question of why certain societies have remained behind while others have progressed
Another idea presented by him is that democratic evolution, which preceded nation building, has not produced desired results. His finding is that countries where a strong state was prevalent before emergence of democracy have performed well. When a democratic order appears in the absence of a strong state, it produces patronage in society. Patronage is when politicians offer incentives like public sector jobs to secure votes while clientilism is to provide benefits to a segment of the society rather than work for greater good. For instance US regulations to provide funds to ailing banks under the disguise of too big to fail were an example of clientilism.
In Pakistan after the independence, the delay in introduction of a constitution retarded formation of a state and the social contract that holds the nation together. This allowed emergence of an elite that comprising the military establishment, civilian bureaucracy, landed feudal and religious scholars and large industrialists/businessmen. Military/civilian bureaucracy and religious scholars largely rose from the middle class, while landed feudal and industrialists were from upper classes. From the early years of our nationhood the elites from middle classes controlled the state and to legitimise their rule engaged in patronage and clientalism. This distorted the ethical and moral foundations of the state for which we are paying price today.
Feudals and industrialists then banded together to form political parties and sought control of the state. Bhutto, despite his popular credentials, was from the feudal class of Sindh. The mistake he made was to alienate the industrial class that was his natural ally by nationalising industries to undermine their political influence that they could exercise through control of the economy. These classes then retaliated by supporting General Zia-ul-Haq, along with his other traditional partners, civil bureaucracy and religious scholars.
From the get-go General Musharraf allied himself with the middle class by promising far reaching reforms. But he failed to deliver and was thrown out by them through a lawyers movement, which was also spearheaded by the middle class. Emergence of electronic media provided another platform for the middle class to exert political pressure. Almost all anchors, editors, and journalists belong to this class. But even then some of them are not hesitant to support the re-emergence of the military, which has been their traditional source of political power. Ex-bureaucrats, coming forward to provide evidence against a democratic government and demanding installation of a technocratic government, are motivated to seek direct power backed by the military.
When a democratic order appears in the absence of a strong state, it produces patronage in society
The middle class today retains complete control of the military, bureaucracy, academia, media and small businesses. Despite this grip on major sources of power, the country is in a state of decay both ethically and morally. In this situation it is wrong to blame politicians and feudals. For industrialists and the feudal class, it is a matter of survival to control political parties. It is the failure of the middle class to build the nation rather than the other way around.
What should be done in this scenario? It is time for the middle class to decide whether it wants the status quo to remain or transform the nation in a way that eventually benefits everyone. They have to form a new social contract, which is then implemented through a political platform that has the people’s mandate.
The social contract we need to form should be based on certain well defined principles. For instance, we should all ensure and guarantee implementation of social justice so that there is no discrimination based on sect, class or ethnicity. We should strive for rule of law rather than rule by law. We should provide a level playing field for all to have the ability to express their talent in pursuing a career. Being rich should not be a curse but at the same time the rich should not be allowed to exploit the less fortunate by ensuring that there is equitable application of rule of law. The state should exercise its powers to break monopolies and oligarchies so prices are based on natural forces of supply and demand rather than manipulation.
A nation is made of different segments of communities. Creating balance between these competing groups defines a stable and strong nation. State is the invisible structure that ensures that social contract is applied fairly to hold the nation together. We can create ten different constitutions but none of them will succeed unless and until all of us agree to practice it in letter and spirit. Deficiencies of the constitution can be removed through amendments but rejecting it altogether is wrong and destabilising.
The middle class has to take the lead in nation building and fix itself before demanding others to change. If we fail to achieve this balance, then this nation will remain unstable and home to scripts and conspiracies hatched in foreign and our own cities.
