Why Pakistan Isn’t A Democratic Country : 1. In decline era and 1857: With the decline of Mughal Empire the base of Muslim ruling class destroyed. Their base was sovereign ruler, efficient army and strong capital. When these bases weaken then Sikhs, Marhattas and Jaats started attacking the Mughal Empire. Muslim ruling class searched the substitute of their lost power. Shah Walli Ullah’s invitation to Abdalli is a proof of the fact that a strong king and army is necessary to save Muslims.
Opinion of Syed Ahmad Shaheed is also there that Muslims could only be saved by Personality of Ameer Ul Muslymeen and Jihad. About war of 1857 we can say that it was the last effort of Muslim ruling class to save their objectives by power. And after its failure their resistance ended.
2. After 1857:
When British rule started then Muslim ruling class had lost their power. So Sir Syed Ahmed Khan thought that Muslim should save their objectives by compromise by British rule. Sir Syed and Muslim lords were having a wish for an eternal British rule on India because they thought that only in this condition; objectives of Muslims can be saved. Descendants of Sir Syed expressed this view many times. They opposed the jobs allotments on competition examination and representative government as they thought that it was dangerous for Muslims. In December 1906, Nawab Waqar Ul Mulk said in his speech:
“Our population in India is 1/5 as compared to Hindus.
May God not do, if British government ends then our
Life, property, reputation will end. We will be slaves to
When Muslim ruling class associated their safety and objectives to British government then they opposed every movement which could weaken the government. This is the reason for which Sir Syed criticized the establishment and political activities of Congress when Congress demanded power sharing with Indians then Sir Syed representing the Muslim elite opposed it and said that in democracy Hindu voters due to their majority will rule India and Muslims both. He also said that political capability of Muslims is far less then Hindus so in any form of election, Muslimscannot overcome Hindus, so British should rule independently and Muslims should remain loyal to government.
As it was in benefit of British rule that Muslims and Hindus should not unite so to keep Muslims against the political activism laid be Hindus they created an anti-democratic psyche in Muslims. Once Professor Theudor Marrison principle of Ali Garh, said in his speech to students:
“Democratic system will made the minorities on the status of
Working class and even every name and sign of Muslims
Will be ceased to exist in India.”
In this background Muslim educated class belonging to elites became opponents of democracy because of the threat of losing their power. In producing such an opinion their historical consciousness also took part, it was in their mind that they were the rulers and they ruled the Hindu majority with power. So they are racially superior to Hindus then how can we accept that democracy make the Hindus rulers .
In 1920 Muhammad Ali Johar opposed democracy due to same reasons as stated above.
One thing should also be kept mind that these views among democracy were only of Muslim elite which had no link with common Muslims. Even in the earlier days of British rule they did not sent their children in Government schools to avoid interactionswith common class Muslim children. Muslim elite due to their class objective opposed democracy. They think to status quo due to their loyalty with British government. Allama Iqbal also expressed the same views regarding democracy. His poetry also has anti- democratic contents.