“The nations who play with history,
History in turn plays with them, and
History never lost any game in the
Whole history.”
“why Pakistan isn’t a democratic country. Some Historical causes”
Introduction:
To find the causes of a non-democratic Pakistan we have to analyze the situation after the 1947 but also before the 1947. The collective consciousness and psyche of a nation develops in hundreds of years. So in this essay we will study the factors which are in a sequence before and after the independence.
1. Military based policy:
In south India Muslim started their attacks with Mahmood of Ghazna and after Mohammad Ghaouri they established their own state in India. But this state was surrounded in Hindu states and was thus constantly on threat of war. So the survival of Turkish ruler was in this policy that a strong ruler with an efficient and well equipped army should have rule on Delhi so that he may regularly carry on the war policy against his neighboring states. On this stage another problem was that how to get as many people as required for a strong army? Surely they can got people from Muslim colonies which were established after conquest. These people could only be made ready for joining army if they were given they knowledge of their non-safe life. And this was only possible if a strong separation between Muslim and Hindu is created. And thus the majority of Hindu and Threat of their attack created a psyche in Muslim Indians that their safe life is only possible if a sovereign king with an efficient army and strong capital is there. In their opinion survival with Hindu majority was only possible on base of power. And for this reason, even till now , Muslim paid respect to those ruler with carried on the policy of war and other rulers who shown weakness in military matters were criticized and were considered responsible for Muslim decline.
1. Use of Religion:
Muslim ruling class of India knew that their rule and power is based on Muslim community so for getting more support from them they felt it necessary to use the religion. And thus all Muslim rulers tried to be called as “saver of ummah”. Although practically they were bounded to run the governmental system on secular basis but they used the religion as well. They supervised Ullamah and they supported Sufis. They also implemented some religious laws which were not directly opposite of political system. At the same they created a threat in the minds of the people that if their rule is over thrown on weaken then Muslim Community from India will cease to survive. Its example could be seen from Khilji era. When Khusro Malik named slave who was racially Indian got the rule after killing the last Khilji king Quttab-ud-Deen Mubarak, they he was propagated as Hindu and also that the life and property of Muslims was in danger. This threat gathered all the Lords under the supervision of Ghayas-ud-Deen Tughlaq. Khusro was defeated and contemporary histories told that Muslim lords felt nice that their life and preferences were saved. Its second example could be observed in Akbar regime. Akbar’s secular policy threatened the strict believers and they opposed Akbar on the slogan that Islam is in danger. Muslim lords wanted that only they should be awarded the part in rule and no one else should be there with whom they have to share their rule. For this case religion was used because if state is labeled Muslim then only Muslims has the right to run the state.
So it was in their benefit that State should be named Islamic and that Muslim and Hindu should not be closed culturally and socially. Use of religion on such an extent hide the class contradictions within the Muslims and the common Muslim remained happy only because of the fact that they and the ruler belongs to same religion. Even till now to hide the class contradictions between the Muslim a common goal based on Islam is propagated. “Aik hi saf men khary ho gae Mahmood o Ayaz” is a proof of such a psyche of Muslim rulers.