Pakistan’s Democratic Delusion: A Case Against Voting.

Hold your hormones, youth of Pakistan. This post is not for the emotionally motivated, average teenager, who is so eager to bring a change that he or she will be willing to risk bringing the wrong type of it. Before you proceed, you will have to set aside your mob mentality and that false-consensus effect you carry around so pompously, feeling like an elitist political specialist because of all your social networking slogans and hashtags.

Did that sound familiar?


Here’s another assertion you might be familiar with.

You’ve been lied to! 

You stopped living in a democratic society a long, long time ago. Around 450 BC, to be somewhat precise. That was when the first, and sadly the last, democratic state was established in Athens. In Athenian democracy, candidates were chosen by lottery, a process known as sortition. This ensured that every citizen, regardless of how rich or poor, gets a chance to become a decision-maker for the people. What we have here, in Pakistan (and probably most other democratic states) is an Oligarchy. A system, where only the most powerful and monetarily influential people have the resources to run for office.

Take the next few lines with a pinch of salt. If the information in the paragraph above comes as news to you, you should abstain from voting. You owe it to the rest of us. You lack the ability vote in an informed, competent, and logical manner if you’re under the impression that you’re exercising your democratic rights. No one is saying that you don’t mean well. I, for one, am a firm believer in the fact that most of these ill-informed voters carry the best intentions. There isn’t anything wrong with being politically ignorant; as long as you don’t vote! 

Still confused? Let’s dumb it down a little further.

Suppose you were given an opportunity to elect the baker at your local pâtisserie. A select few candidates, rich enough to buy their way into the competition, came to you and talked for hours about what wonderful ingredients they would use in their confections and propelled at you every term in the book of a Cordon Bleu valedictorian. You as a mere costumer, rather than a connoisseur, had no idea what the hell they were talking about. And suppose you proceeded to vote. Wouldn’t you be voting in an uninformed manner & perhaps voting in a candidate unsuitable for the job? Wouldn’t it be better if you left the task to the handful of well-informed people who are familiar with the culinary vernacular and arts? Unfortunately, we might not even have a proportion of such people required to make a difference.

The system is flawed. You are being fed a false illusion of democracy and freedom.

If you vote, you endorse the system. 

Boycott the system. Do not vote!

When they come to question your intentions, tell them why.



3 thoughts on “Pakistan’s Democratic Delusion: A Case Against Voting.

  1. MUBARAK HO, MUBARAK HO! You’re the new Tahir-Ul-Qadri! #Vote4NONE!

    Jokes apart, I think your views are pretty solid and your logic makes sense. However, if the educated people of our country read this post and decide not to vote, that leaves the uneducated people, and we all know that THEY are more manipulated and brainwashed into voting for whoever they do than the rest of us. Which really won’t help. Also, I think you should make your post a little longer with more points, so that everyone who wants to create an argument will have more than just a couple of points to work against.

    That being said, great post, Mango! (I’ll still be voting though :p)

  2. A good post, but I’m afraid the logic is flawed. Your argument stems from the ‘fact’ that due to limited resources, people like you and me cannot run for elections. I don’t know if you know this or not, but technically, you and I can both run for elections if we meet the criteria, and I’m certain that possessing an exact amount of sum is not a prerequisite for contesting in the polls. It is true that money plays an undeniable role in the elections, but simply assuming that freedom is forgone if one has more resources than someone who doesn’t, is absolutely false. There are always other alternatives that you could exercise to garner support; or you could even find other ways to raise money for the elections. My own grandfather won the elections for the provincial assembly and he stood up against an opponent who had vast sums of money and experience. Your argument here was more or less a ‘limited choice’ fallacy because you’re assuming that there is no choice beyond the obvious, which is clearly not the case.

    Moreover, you talked about manipulation and you dumbed it down for us into the baker’s example. This argument is particularly even more confusing than the last one; you are blatantly assuming that none of us are well informed, and that we are politically ignorant which means even though our intentions are clean, our choice to vote for a particular candidate might be wrong. Let us assume, for one second, that this is true. Is it a flaw OF the system or is it your own flaw? Remember, you only CHOOSE to remain politically ignorant and you CAN choose to be politically well-informed. I would also say that your argument is not objective; it seems that you’re calling someone politically ignorant simply on the basis of disagreement. You are assuming that if someone has something particular to say, or an opinion to espouse, then he or she is automatically politically ignorant and does not know. If someone does not agree to your political agenda, then that doesn’t make them politically ignorant.

    Stepping aside from assumptions – of which there are plenty – let me also assert that voting for the right candidate is your responsibility, and that responsibility entails the effort that one should make to be ‘politically well-informed’. This is NOT a flaw in the system; this is a FLAW in you and me. If we can’t make well-informed choices for ourselves, then it is our fault.

    Plus, this whole concept of not voting is quite ironic, given the context. From your article, I am ASSUMING that you’re longing for a palpable form of freedom, but not voting is in-fact doing the opposite. Democracy is an evolution from hierarchy and totalitarianism. By not voting, you are actively endorsing the system of absolute government, one that pledges no representation of the people. Democracy is meant to empower people. In the old times, nobles used to rule a whole empire. Now, lets say, that only 20% of the people vote, then aren’t those 20% of people ‘nobles’ to the rest of the 80%? Aren’t those 20% representing all of the 100% of people? Yes, they are, and this is wrong. The more percentage of people that vote, the closer we get to eradicate of battle this misrepresentation dilemma, which is the whole point of democracy and empowering people like you and me.

    All of this aside, I really appreciate the fact that you thought of all that on your own; shows that you have a keen eye for all that’s happening.

  3. Pingback: The day an Average Virgin Pakistani Voter was banged. (PG18; Of course) | Pressure Cooker

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s