1. Pakistan Movement and Muslim League: Muslim elite had just one way to keep their preferences safe and that was to loyalty to British government. Muslim League representing Muslim elite got separate electoral process and quota system that is completely opposite to the ideology of democracy. Muslim League never thought about welfare of common Muslims and that’s a reason that Muslim Socialists joined Indian nationalized Congress instead of Elite’s Muslim League.
These situations created such psyche in Muslim community that was based on threat of Hindu majority and danger to their culture and religion. Here Muslim League’s intellectuals complete an historical fault when they said that Islam and Muslim culture in India are same and thus different from Hinduism and Hindu culture. Jinnah’s speech of 1940 convention is based on this fault.
Another thing that makes the people of Pakistan separate from political activism is that Pakistan faction was a constitutional war between Muslim League and Congress. So the participation of common Muslims was very low. That’s a why after the partition common Muslim didn’t show any sort of political activism. It is a law that in those Colonies where political independence was got by public movements and revolution, people participated in political activities but Pakistan Movement was a constitutional war. The areas where Muslim League started some common people movements became the part of India later. Current Pakistan was represented was Feudal elite, so democratic thinking didn’t flourished here. And after independence Feudal Lords and Bourgeois controlled the whole population of common Muslims with military, Judiciary and Beurocracy.
Muslim hadn’t any tradition of giving political training to its workers. Students of Aligarh and other educational institutes can be said as politically trained and conscious workers to a limited extent. After the elections of 1937 Muslim League just emphasized on increasing the number its members and thus voters. But it was against the objectives of the Muslim Feudal and elite to trained political workers. As they knew that after independence they will require such workers who can obey only to their orders and thus an un-trained cadre was necessary for the Feudal, having completely anti-democratic approach.
2. After independence:
Muslim Feudal got the role of new born Pakistan. It is a principle that an authoritarian have to have some strong reason close to the people’s will so that their rule could be saved. After independence, Muslim elite of Pakistan practiced the same experiment which was being practiced from Mahmood of Ghazna. The principle which stopped the democracy in Pakistan was a part of collective consciousness of Muslims of India. This
1. Threat of attack by Hindu’s majority state named “India”.
2. A strong and well equipped army for defiance.
3. Use of Religion.
These points are chronologically associated and turn under the theory of elite’s rule. From the very first day of independence it was taught to common Pakistanis that India is your enemy and still she is trying to create the subcontinent united. And for the same reason, she attacked Pakistan for many time. So there should be a strong army to defend Pakistan “the castle of Islam”.
Muslim League in Pakistan movement while representing Muslim elite had opinion that as Muslim are minority and educationally they are minor then Hindus, so democracy will create slaves of Hindus. But after independence, Muslim elite of Pakistan adopted the views that as people of Pakistan are not well-educated and are not trained politically so democracy is unfit for them. And Ayub Khan the first military dictator of Pakistan said that democracy is only applicable in cold countries and not in hot countries like Pakistan.