Thursday, October 31, 2019

02:15 PM (GMT +5)

Like Share 484K people like this. Sign Up to see what your friends like.
 

Home Beginner's Guide Rules Syllabus Past Papers CSP Members

  CSS Forums > General > News & Articles User Name User Name Remember Me?
Feudalism----A Big Problem Password Log in

Home Register Awards Community Today's Posts Search

News & Articles Here you can share News and Articles that you consider important for the exam

Share Thread: Facebook     Twitter     Google+    

  LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread

Thursday, August 11, 2011   #1  

Join Date: Nov 2009

Location: Peshawar
afaq_hunts   Posts: 18
Junior Member Thanks: 23
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Feudalism----A Big Problem

Feudalism---A big Problem

When general Musharraf came to power in October 1999, we had written in an editorial captioned ‘Pakistan at a New
Turning Point’ that the military rulers that had come into power in 1958, 1969 and 1977 had not relinquished power of
their own. Though general Musharraf has held elections in the country yet he is the real ruler. When the honoured
general had arrived he had tried in a press conference to equate himself with Kemal Ataturk. He had also cited
Chinese examples to show that he was a champion of the Sino-Pak friendship. He had spoken against the feudal
lords. He had also shown the people the way to reforms. His military media in charge major general Rashid Qureishi,
too, had talked about the controls of the feudal lords. But what happened? The prime minister of president Musharraf
says that there is no problem of feudalism in the country and there is no question of reforms in the agrarian relations.
.
After the partition of the sub-continent, the so-called capitalist democracy could come to the part which constituted
India but Pakistan could not enjoy it. The reason behind that was that the Indian part had developed industries and
the power of feudal lords was smashed there. That is why after partition they could destroy the feudal system and
bourgeois democracy could be initiated there to some extent. The so-called democracy in India is usually eulogised
but we understand that a real democracy can only come under a regime of the workers and peasants and that is
impossible without an agrarian revolution.

Nehru became the prime minister of India with full powers in his hands. It is only the prime minister who gets all the
powers in his hands in a bourgeois democracy. On this side, Qaede-Azam was the champion of bourgeois democracy
but he too loved to have the post of a governor general under a feudal system which has all the powers concentrated
at the ‘top’, and he became a ‘boss’. The Supreme Court, the bureaucracy and the army were formed to run that
system. Had he not died so soon it was possible that the Qaede-Azam too would have tried to get rid of the feudal
system like mian Iftkhar-ul-din, Mumtaz Daultana, Khan Qayoom Khan, Zahid Hussain, M. Masood and Haidar Baksh
had done. But the country continued to be ruled by the feudal lords. The later regimes, including that of Ayub Khan,
Yahya Khan, Zia-ul-haq and now president Musharraf were founded on the foundations of feudalism.

This bunch of feudal lords who are nourished by imperialism can also fake elections as a showing off but the power
always remains with it and the parliament acts like a cage where these ‘birds’, which are the product of this decadent
system, are allowed to twitter in their respective languages. If we evaluate our history we find that feudalism had its
roots in the Mughal period. If we see feudalism in the pre-partition period we find that Shah Abdal Aziz and Sir Sayyed
Ahmad Khan (1746-1824) played an important role in creating a bourgeois mentality among the Muslims through the
capitalist banking system. The British empire had tried to destroy the old system by giving property rights to ‘revenue
collectors’ and they too became the masters of the landless peasants. Muhammad Ali Johar, Maulana Azad and
Allama Iqbal could not understand the efforts of Sir Sayyed Ahmad Khan. They could not understand the economic
and social power of the Muslims and all the powers dealing with the economic and social issues went into the hands
of non-Muslims.

When Pakistan came into existence this whole region was under the domination of feudal lords. The religious
organisations united themselves with the feudal forces and further strengthened this system. And now we have a
situation where 67.5 % population is under the control of these forces which have kept them as hostages. Unless this
system is destroyed the ideas prevailing in Pakistan concerning way of life, society and politics cannot change. Such
is the situation that the so-called reforms which were carried out during the times of Ayub Khan and Bhutto sahib
were stopped by a sharia court from 23rd March 1990 onwards. Why did such a thing happen after all? Not just to
keep Pakistan under the yoke of feudal lords but also to maintain the unity of the mullahs with the feudal forces.

We fail to understand that at the time of freedom the big landlords had usurped state power and the feudal system
was bestowed upon us by the British colonialists. The sons of these very feudal forces dominate the scene in
Pakistan today, especially in Punjab and Sind provinces. The Sirdari system which was present in 1947 continues to
dominate in Baluchistan. Similarly, the tribal system continued its political domination in the Frontier province. The
rulers of these provinces of Pakistan were neither interested in carrying out any change nor did they allow it to
happen because the system was serving them and they were fleecing the people white.

The reforms carried out by Ayub Khan and Bhutto were half hearted and half done. Only certain privileged people
benefited from these reforms. Very influential people were behind the failure of the reforms. They transferred their
lands to relatives and children through spurious methods. Many of them secured their lands by joining Bhutto’s party.
In this way they continued to hold political and personal sway. The national and regional assemblies were under their
influence.
Commenting upon the situation prevailing in Pakistan an opposition leader, Kichloo Ali, of Baluchistan has said, ‘What
an irony that president Pervez Musharraf had pledged to smash feudalism but his prime minister is strengthening it.’
– just 7% of the landlords own 40% of land. In this situation how can a peasant and a poor person raise his head
before these feudal lords? The so-called reforms of Ayub Khan and Bhutto had allowed the landlords to keep big
farms in the name of gardens and hunting grounds which were later used for cultivation. A minister in Bhutto’s
cabinet, Mustafa Khar, has said that he purchased 150 acres of land at rupees 4000 per acre and converted that into
a farm, and by taking advantage of his ministership he managed to bring a canal through his land. In this way, the
price of his land was increased enormously. Later, he sold a part of his land at a very high price.
. There is much weight in what Dr. Ishrat Hussain says in this regard. He says that whatever reforms were effected
have failed. The things which are responsible for these failures include loopholes in the laws, manipulations while
implementing these laws, and also the influences and pressures of the land owners have played their role. On the one
hand, the experts in the socio-economic field have arrived at a common conclusion and demand that unless
feudalism and landlordism is totally done away with in Pakistan and if the land remains in a few hands, the
agriculture economy will not progress. They put forward the examples of South Korea, Taiwan and especially that of
India in this regard where after the demise of feudalism production has increased enormously. Such is the situation in
our beloved country where it has stagnated for the last 56 years. The country is in the control of parasitic feudal
forces. The imperialist powers, for their own interests, want this country to be controlled by these forces.
Then how the conditions will change? Will the feudal lords and their henchmen change feudalism? How is it possible
that the rulers would behead themselves on their own? A long drawn out struggle is needed for that. Only the working
class can accomplish this job through an unbreakable alliance with the peasantry and by taking along all other
patriotic forces with them. This can be accomplished only through struggles and struggles alone, leading to a
thoroughgoing revolution. To snatch back rights one does not go in for favours. Right is secured through struggle.

The feudal archetype in Pakistan consists of landlords with large joint families possessing hundreds or even
thousands of acres of land. They seldom make any direct contribution to agricultural production. Instead, all work is
done by peasants or tenants who live at subsistence level. Pakistan suffers not only from decadent feudalism but
also from the primitive tribal system.[1] In Pakistan remote areas periodically run into vast estates — comparable to
medieval Europe — in which the landowner runs the town, perhaps operates a private prison in which enemies are
placed, and sometimes pretty much enslaves local people through debt bondage, generation after generation.[2]
The landlord, by virtue of his ownership and control of such vast amounts of land and human resources, is powerful
enough to influence the distribution of water, fertilisers, tractor permits and agricultural credit and, consequently
exercises considerable influence over the revenue, police and judicial administration of the area. The landlord is, thus,
lord and master. Such absolute power can easily corrupt, and it is no wonder that the feudal system there is humanly
degrading.

Almost half of Pakistan's Gross National Product and the bulk of its export earnings are derived primarily from the
agricultural sector controlled by a few thousand feudal families. Armed with a monopoly of economic power, they
easily pre-empted political power.
To begin with, the Pakistan Muslim League, the party laying Pakistan's foundation 53 years ago, was almost wholly
dominated by feudal lords such as the Zamindars, Jagirdars, Nawabs, Nawabzadas and Sardars, the sole exception
being the Jinnahs. Pakistan's major political parties are feudal-oriented, and more than two-thirds of the National
Assembly (Lower House) is composed of this class. Besides, most of the key executive posts in the provinces are
held by them.
The region of Pakistan was notorious for its feudal and tribal background. More so the Punjab. It provided soldiers to
the British empire. Naturally, the British extended special patronage to these feudal elements. The region was rich
and fertile, had the best irrigation system and was dominated by Muslims. They did not support the demand for
Pakistan. Why should they, when they were already masters of the region?

Religious scholars like Maudoodi and other Ulema have long ago issued religious decrees i.e. Fatwas for their
abolition. Their point is to investigate the origins of landlords in our country. Most of them will be found to have
gained rights on the lands as awards from the colonial British masters. They got these rewards for acting as traitors,
who sided and supported the British betraying the common interests of the ordinary people.

It owes its origin to the war of independence 1857, when different people were awarded large swathes of land by the
British government because of their treacherous cooperation with the latter. Those feudal families joined Muslim
League when they saw that Pakistan was going to be a reality and inherited power after the death of founding father

There are many answers to the questions above. But the explanation that appeals to me most is the one offered by
British writer William Dalrymple. He wrote for the Guardian as follows on Pakistan's 60th independence day:

"There is a fundamental flaw in Pakistan's political system. Democracy has never thrived here, at least in part
because landowning remains almost the only social base from which politicians can emerge. In general, the
educated middle class - which in India seized control in 1947, emasculating the power of its landowners - is in
Pakistan still largely excluded from the political process. As a result, in many of the more backward parts of Pakistan
the local feudal zamindar can expect his people to vote for his chosen candidate. Such loyalty can be enforced. Many
of the biggest zamindars have private prisons and most have private armies."

Comments on the post will be appreciated.

__________________
EXPECT THE BEST, PREPARE FOR THE WORST: M.A. JINNAH
 « Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Posting Rules

You may not post new threads

You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Rules

Similar Threads

Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post

Pakistan's History From 1947-till present Sumairs Pakistan Affairs 14 3 Days Ago 02:55 PM

Sunday, July 20, 2014

Psychology, By David G. Myers, 6th Edition sarfrazmayo Psychology 24
03:47 PM

Saturday, January 05,

How to become Creative? Tips and Examples redmax Off Topic Lounge 2
2013 06:54 AM

Friday, February 01, 2008

The debate on feudalism shakeel shaikh News & Articles 0
01:49 PM

CSS Forum - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Top

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions,
advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the
author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The
fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in
any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable
message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.