PTI News, Updates and Discussion

Do you think PTI has a future without Imran Khan?

  • Yes

    Votes: 22 19.6%

  • No

    Votes: 80 71.4%

  • Only if senior leadership is released

    Votes: 10 8.9%
  • Total voters
    112
Status
Not open for further replies.
Pradotlc said:
A Pakistani senator has demanded "immediate access" to the country's imprisoned former prime minister, Imran Khan, as fears grow over his well-being. Khan's family and friends say they have had no contact with Khan for three weeks.
Click to expand...

Warna kia hogaa?
 
The guarantors of democracy that enabled NRO didn't factor in the emergence of a new party. None of these are essentially ideologues or ideological... primarily cults of personalities propped up to keep the masses in check. However, since it wasn't part of the deal... the plug was pulled. All it does is expose the thin veil masking discourse as popular public opinion disguised as mandate of the masses... i.e. democracy.
There is an eerie similarity with Morsi and Egyptian junta... another state under occupation and emergency rule forever. It is not to reflect public opinion but rule via fiat till everyone falls in line with the ruling convention. Because de facto rule doesn't trust nor assume masses as true arbiters and more importantly lack agency to affect change... anyone standing up is quickly isolated and quashed to make it abundantly clear on who is and is not in control. The corporate rule is essentially by coercion because their agency is derived by making leveraging lifestyles and expenses associated with it... at peril of destitution.
So, what is the takeaway? Power is not native. It is via proxy and extended to indifferent institutions/corporations/agencies with a structured managerial class devoid of empathy and agency on their own. Political parties offer distraction in form of hope, change, greatness, victory... generally meaningless ideals that have no bearing on individual or community and keep them busy biding time. A con only works as long as those pulling it keep it wrapped up and ones with intent and agency crushed.

So, even though Khan is not the answer to Pakistan's underlying problems... his release is problematic enough for the machine to keep overwriting its own rules. Who thought rules were merely an instrument on the ruled and one of many instruments for the ruling.
 
Last edited:
Oldenwisdom...قول بزرگ said:
The guarantors of democracy that enabled NRO didn't factor in the emergence of a new party. None of these are essentially ideologues or ideological... primarily cults of personalities propped up to keep the masses in check. However, since it wasn't part of the deal... the plug was pulled. All it does is expose the thin veil masking discourse as popular public opinion disguised as mandate of the masses... i.e. democracy.
There are eerie similarity with Morsi and Egyptian junta... another state under occupation and emergency rule forever. It is not to reflect public opinion but rule via fiat till everyone falls in line with the ruling convention. Because de facto rule doesn't trust nor assumes masses as true arbiters and more importantly lack agency to affect change... anyone standing up is quickly isolated and squashed to make it abundantly clear on who is and is not in control. The corporate rule is essentially by coercion because their agency is derived by making leveraging lifestyles and expenses associated with it... at peril of destitution.

So, even though Khan is not the answer to Pakistan's underlyOne could argue, however, that despite the machinations of entrenched actors and the episodic derailments of civilian authority, the democratic impulse in Pakistan has not merely survived—it has stubbornly resurged. The very emergence of new political forces, however imperfect or personality-centric, demonstrates an underlying societal refusal to accept predetermined hierarchies. What some interpret as orchestration from above can also be seen as the electorate’s persistent insistence on being heard, even if the channels are constricted and the outcomes distorted.

True democracy is not a pristine, pre-manufactured artifact handed down by enlightened custodians. It is a messy, iterative struggle in which the populace continually renegotiates its space. Pakistan’s political awakening—visible in mass mobilizations, public dissent, and an increasingly politicized younger demographic—suggests that the governed are no longer passive recipients of elite fiat. Instead, they are gradually asserting themselves as stakeholders whose consent cannot be permanently circumvented. The “management” model of the state may seek obedience, but it increasingly confronts a public that has learned to question, challenge, and recalibrate those who presume unaccountable authority.

If anything, the turbulence is evidence that democracy—real democracy—is forcing itself into existence. The system’s spasms, reversals, and contradictions expose the limits of imposed narratives and the fragility of power exercised without legitimacy. Institutions may attempt to overwrite their own rules, but each overwrite leaves a fissure, a widening crack through which public agency seeps and eventually reshapes the political terrain.

Thus, the takeaway need not be fatalistic resignation. It may instead be that democratic aspiration, though constrained, remains the only force capable of compelling long-term stability, accountability, and equitable governance. Even flawed leaders, contested elections, and imperfect mandates reveal a foundational truth: the people have not relinquished their claim to arbitership. And any system—no matter how entrenched—must eventually reckon with that persistent, inconvenient insistence on self-determination.ing problems... his release is problematic enough for the machine to keep overwriting its own rules. Who thought rules were merely an instrument on the ruled and one of many instruments for the ruling.
Click to expand...
despite the machinations of entrenched actors and the episodic derailments of civilian authority, the democratic impulse in Pakistan has not merely survived—it has stubbornly resurged. The very emergence of new political forces, however imperfect or personality-centric, demonstrates an underlying societal refusal to accept predetermined hierarchies. What some interpret as orchestration from above can also be seen as the electorate’s persistent insistence on being heard, even if the channels are constricted and the outcomes distorted.

True democracy is not a pristine, pre-manufactured artifact handed down by enlightened custodians. It is a messy, iterative struggle in which the populace continually renegotiates its space. Pakistan’s political awakening—visible in mass mobilizations, public dissent, and an increasingly politicized younger demographic—suggests that the governed are no longer passive recipients of elite fiat. Instead, they are gradually asserting themselves as stakeholders whose consent cannot be permanently circumvented. The “management” model of the state may seek obedience, but it increasingly confronts a public that has learned to question, challenge, and recalibrate those who presume unaccountable authority.

If anything, the turbulence is evidence that democracy—real democracy—is forcing itself into existence. The system’s spasms, reversals, and contradictions expose the limits of imposed narratives and the fragility of power exercised without legitimacy. Institutions may attempt to overwrite their own rules, but each overwrite leaves a fissure, a widening crack through which public agency seeps and eventually reshapes the political terrain.

Thus, the takeaway need not be fatalistic resignation. It may instead be that democratic aspiration, though constrained, remains the only force capable of compelling long-term stability, accountability, and equitable governance. Even flawed leaders, contested elections, and imperfect mandates reveal a foundational truth: the people have not relinquished their claim to arbitership. And any system—no matter how entrenched—must eventually reckon with that persistent, inconvenient insistence on self-determination.
 
VCheng said:
So the only "fair" elections are the ones IK wins? Quite a funny claim to a fair observer.
Click to expand...

Yes that is literally what I'm saying.

If we hold a fair election he'll win because he'll get the most votes by far. If you look at the previous election, Nawaz Sharif couldn't even win his own seat in Lahore. He lost to an old woman with cancer.
 
Pradotlc said:
that is your assessment based on selective news

Khan is different which is why the majority still supports him.

Think for two seconds , despite all the election rigging , mass arrests , paid journalists,targeting of independent media and judiciary etc in short every thing North Korea would have done ..Khan is incredibly popular and people don’t believe your made up stories
.

I hated Benazir Bhutto to death and still do simply cos her father played a critical part in the destruction of East Pakistan and all she wanted revenge for her papa..

But the fact did remain she was incredibly popular especially in the 1990s across the board won elections when not rigged…


Your opinions are not facts
Click to expand...
Agreed but I think IK’s popularity dwarfs that of BB and ZAB. IK is so popular that no matter what the army tries to do they cannot do anything to marginalize him and that is what worries them. They can’t even kill him because if they do they will be the say when literally millions of people are going to storm the army house as well as the residences of sharifs and zardari and will hang them in public or slaughter them all . That day I hope never comes . So army is stuck ..they cannot marginalize him ..cannot kill hi’m . The only option they have is to buy time and keep the status quo and hope that the public forgets him. I doubt that this is going to work
 
VCheng said:
So the only "fair" elections are the ones IK wins? Quite a funny claim to a fair observer.
Click to expand...
Yes … bcos you have no idea what is happening in Pakistan


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Auqab13 said:
WOW!

I bet you needed a horoscope, star reading, yogi astrological prediction to say this. Something definitely did happen!
Click to expand...

You're talking like this because many big things have happened rather catsually - Imran removed from office, Imran jailed , Shebaz made PM and so on, But even by those standards, I think something extraordinary has happened- and there is a fear and silence in international circules.

- There is no million man march asking for IK's proof of life. Sure, some online demands and press statements have been made, but how is that different from the hundreds done in the last few years? Why would newsweek jump on it? And it's not the only major international publiction.

- My friends tell me there is an eerie quiet and silence on all things pakistan in higher circles. As if they are in some kind of a huddle. That's when I noticed, for several days the usual abuse hurling machine on pakistan is less active than usual.

Just a few in a series of abnormal stuff. Kuch hua hai and everyone is becoming cautious and careful. .
 
Truth Seeker said:
fatalistic resignation
Click to expand...

I like the enthusiasm but "fatalistic resignation" is not my choice of words. I would counter between staying the course as touched by destiny or course correct... understanding the flawed approach and the condition of a hamstrung apparatus.

Throwing lofty ideals keeps one running till the lights go out.... because they're devoid of ground reality. Knowing that even though the system is rigid(recoils for only what it considers its core), the masses must be deft enought to not cause the collapse the whole edifice. That only comes from taking ownership and acknowledging the stakes.

Second, democracy in on itself is meaningless... simply an opinion of the plurality that can swayed one way or the other by salami slicing masses on emotionally and socially charged issues. Besides we miss the obvious, who gets to be in charge once impressionable get impassioned decision making? The swindlers, shysters and vested interests!
That is not true representation nor concerns constituents... make up of whom when not defined can be gerrymandered to the liking of vested interests.

I don't want to steer this thread to a totally different topic as we meander into a rabbit hole this big.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 21 (members: 0, guests: 21)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top