I wish what you say could be done. But first, let's understand the basic political dynamics of Karachi and why they are not conducive to what you suggest.
We have to realize, politicians only care about doing the right thing when their vote bank is threatened. Karachi is not ruled by people elected by Karachiites. It is ruled by those elected from the interior of Sind. This is the biggest gift that the PPP got in the form of 18A thanks to Zardari.
No matter who the mayor is, no matter who the elected local city officers are, they cannot do anything because the funding/power rests with Bilawal House.
On top of that, Karachittes are not one united citizenry. Like the rest of Pakistan, ethnic, tribal and societal affiliations get in the way of their social cohesion and campaigning. These fault lines are well known to the PPP cadres running the place and they exploit them.
PTI and MQM were no better without direct federal government support.
Karachi is a victim of its own potential. PPP will not let it go because it is the ultimate cash cow. Yet, PPP won't deliver services to the masses because they happen to live in strongholds of MQM, PTI etc. and they don't get the vote from there. So, the only way for them to run the place and suck its resources dry is to keep the city literally limping and barely surviving on life support. Come election time, they know they will have the provincial government which trumps the city government. Thus the circus continues.
I have a few observations that I wish to present purely from a social and historical perspective, detached from emotion.
In my view, love, respect, and mutual understanding are more important than argumentation itself.
1. Historical background and the role of the elite
Within the migrant (Muhajir) community, there existed a segment that had been part of the elite or the administrative structure during the British period. The problem is that a class that itself grew under a colonial system, when it arrives in a new country, possesses neither an independent economic base nor genuine institutional experience. As a result, when such a group attempts to manage new land, new politics, and new economic opportunities, the risk–return balance often becomes distorted—high risk with limited capacity.
2. Educational and social condition of the majority
A large portion of the migrant population came from the middle or lower-middle classes, who even in the subcontinent were largely regarded as laborers or semi-literate. Expecting people from such backgrounds to suddenly become administratively, economically, or socially sophisticated is unrealistic. Social evolution takes time, and experiences of subjugation or dependency leave deep psychological and capacity-related effects on human beings.
3. Absence of investment, industry, and institution-building
The investors within the migrant community did not establish large-scale industries, educational institutions, or research centers in Pakistan. While there were a few individual business successes, overall institution-building remained weak. As a result, neither strong universities emerged, nor a culture of research developed, nor the industrial base that can alter the economic direction of a city or a nation.
4. Lack of technical expertise and collective vision
At a foundational level, the migrant community generally lacked strong technical expertise. The core issue was not that individuals were entirely unskilled; rather, they never cultivated a collective or long-term vision.
For instance, after Gul Plaza incident, some individuals began making grand political claims—going so far as to suggest that the public should establish its own private fire brigade. This line of thinking reflected a fundamental unfamiliarity with social order, state responsibility, and the principles of industrial development.
A civilized, educated, and visionary class invests not in private fire brigades, but in industry, research, and institution-building—because these are the foundations that lead a city or a nation toward progress.
5. State lending policies and their consequences
Around the world, states provide loans to industrialists, but Pakistan’s situation was different. The primary objective behind Pakistan’s creation was to generate employment and establish a strong economic structure—not to extend loans to capital holders who lacked the capacity to build industry.
When loans were granted to individuals who neither possessed an industrial vision nor the ability to build institutions, capital, which should have functioned like water to extinguish economic fires, became fire itself.
Thus, the flow of state resources that could have served as an engine of development instead turned counterproductive.
personal observation:
This post is based purely on a personal observation. When I used to speak with people from interior Sindh or Punjab at my bank, even the educated ones, most of them spoke in a way that made it seem as if a bandit or robber was standing in front of me. They talked as though I had stolen something from them.
Similarly, when you talk to an Urdu‑speaking person, their tone often feels as if they have been nobles for seven generations… whereas in reality, many of them turn out to have quite a different lineage altogether.
urdu speaking tell themselves as king of administration!
In my view, a particular segment of the Urdu‑speaking population has done to this country what even an enemy might not have been capable of.
Their dishonesty and opportunism have eaten away at the state’s moral structure like termites, distorted its business sense, and warped the nation’s economic compass so completely that direction, capability, and standards, all of it, collapsed into dust