The emergent middle class of Pakistan won’t settle for a corrupt system with constant terrorism and will push for reforms in a burgeoning democracy. Here’s to the new civil society of Pakistan, who will use connectivity, information and the Internet, to drive a peaceful revolution that brings Pakistan up to its true potential.
Gosh, I sure hope so. Maybe Eric should talk to some of the Green Revolution folks.
I don't mean to be cynical, but the desires of the emerging middle class are going to have to compete -- perhaps with great violence -- with the desires of the established interests. That's what happens when political systems aren't able to auto-correct and run for many decades.
The question I would have like Schmidt to answer is this: is Pakistan a country? That is, does it control its borders, is the government the sole user of force against the population, is there a place where international partners can go and ask for and receive redress when wronged by citizens of Pakistan?
I don't think it is. Or if it is, it's a close call.
Having said all of that negative stuff, I wish the people living in Pakistan the best. An emerging middle class, along with a decent education and unfettered internet access, is their best shot at a happier tomorrow.
I think you raise valid points. One difficult problem is (and I have faced this myself for the longest time and it is evident the Eric Schmidt is suffering from it as well) is that one tends to appraise a country along a line that mirrors one's own priors of what a country typically is. Such priors usually mirrors ones own country.
Pakistan's position is really very unique and it takes time to understand it. The usual labels take very different meanings. For instance what the western world calls "middle class" almost doesn't exist in the form that they expect it to. Even if it did, it has nowhere the clout or the purchase. The country is deeply, and I do mean deeply, feudal. "Middle class" either means of a feudal family decent or of military lineage. Feudal land holdings and military are the two, and pretty much the only two centers that drives the economy and are locked in their desire to keep their privileges intact. If you are interested in this topic, do take time to find out what percentage these two forces account for.
And then you have the significantly large radicalized population. And even here it is very different. You would think radical groups are fringe groups, but not quite so in Pakistan and this has been cultivated by deliberate intent over several decades. The identity of a victimized population that the world has been unfair to because of their religion gets ingrained very early in the education system. Such a belief of persecution is rampant even in the mainstream, sometimes given a modicum of a veneer. Its difficult to catch these undertones unless one is familiar with the language and reads the same newspapers that the Pakistanis read, or watch the same TV shows that Pakistanis watch. Find out about Zaid Hamid and then consider the fact that there he is as main stream as vanila ice-cream.
Next word: army. It is very different from an army one would expect to see. It is a cross between a rich political party that has an unprecedentedly militarized cadre and a mafia house doling out favors (in the form of jobs and other privileges) to keep the population in control. On one hand it controls what you would call the civic life and on the other it also controls albeit at a very decentralized way the different Jihadi outfits which are again smaller mafia houses as entrenched in an economic endeavor as much as a religious one. Its common to dismiss these radical outfits as religious whackos, but you would get a better understanding if you also follow the money and see how the business side of it works.
Entwined with the feudal system is a deep ethnic undercurrent and you would often find the different parties locked in a perverse game theoretic equilibrium trying to gain control. All this goes unreported in the western media, or well in their own country as well. To see what I am talking about, dig up statistics of violence related civilian (police personnel included) deaths in Karachi in the past year, and Karachi is the most liberal city there.
The funniest comment by Eric Schmidt was about freedom of the press. That does not exist. Unless you have some seat of power guarding your life you cant say what you want to say at least not while residing in Pakistan.
> The question I would have like Schmidt to answer is this: is Pakistan a country?
Given that there is no real agreed definition as to what exactly a country is, it's unlikely that Schmidt could answer that. Also your definitions about what a country is are strangely arbitrary and seem to have little to do with whether a country is a country or not.
But, but almost any definition of country, Pakistan is a country. It may have many problems, but it's absurd to suggest that it might not be.
Gosh, I sure hope so. Maybe Eric should talk to some of the Green Revolution folks.
I don't mean to be cynical, but the desires of the emerging middle class are going to have to compete -- perhaps with great violence -- with the desires of the established interests. That's what happens when political systems aren't able to auto-correct and run for many decades.
The question I would have like Schmidt to answer is this: is Pakistan a country? That is, does it control its borders, is the government the sole user of force against the population, is there a place where international partners can go and ask for and receive redress when wronged by citizens of Pakistan?
I don't think it is. Or if it is, it's a close call.
Having said all of that negative stuff, I wish the people living in Pakistan the best. An emerging middle class, along with a decent education and unfettered internet access, is their best shot at a happier tomorrow.