Dr Zia Ul Haque Shamsi<\/p>\n
The theory of peoplism cannot coexist with election engineering, because the people\u2019s choice and voice, are snubbed by coercion and manipulation<\/p>\n
Populism, a concept developed in the 19th century, established itself as a social theory and drew strength from its ideals of representing common people against the elites. However, it ran out of steam in the debate of left and right, east and west, north and south, and the developed and developing societies. Therefore, this author believes that a newer terminology with a different outlook may be introduced to achieve meaningful results.
\nPopulism was known to be striving to appeal to common people to rise against the elite class of the society, which appeared oblivious to their problems and disregarded the genuine issues, which may have resolved some of the recurring problems. Whereas the peoplism that is being proposed aims to make ordinary people demand their inclusion in the policy and decision-making processes of the state. Perhaps, it is time that peoplism is considered a social theory that would draw its strength from people\u2019s desire to be heard and not only as a popular sloganeering.
\nThe peoplism, in its proposed outlook, would be far more appealing than a mere public opinion that has no place in the developing world. The people in the developed world may be more fortunate that their opinion is given due weightage and there is very little room for the ruling elite to ignore public opinion. However, this is not the case in most developing states and even the elections in some countries are engineered in a manner that people\u2019s voice is rendered ineffective.
\nLet\u2019s first catch up on Election Engineering, because Pakistan also suffers from this perennial disease and even the winners also complain of large-scale irregularities in the election processes and the outcome. The term \u201celectoral engineering,\u201d describes \u201cthe development and implementation of constitutional and legal provisions for electoral systems frameworks that are targeted at achieving specific societal goals.\u201d
\nHowever, the election process is often looked at with suspicion even in the most advanced and developed democracies due to emerging terminologies like \u201cdigital gerrymandering\u201d etc. \u201cA gerrymander is the manipulation of voting district boundaries for partisan effect.\u201d The terminology is attributed to Elbridge Gerry, who contested for the re-election of the Massachusetts governor\u2019s office in the early 1800s, however, \u201cthe tactic it describes dates back at least as far as 1701.\u201d Although Gerry lost the elections, \u201cits potential for manipulating election results was immediately recognized by the electoral-victory-at-any-cost partisans as a boon to oligarchy, and it\u2019s been used to great effect ever since.\u201d Not too far back in the history of US Presidential elections in 2016, \u201cwe saw how foreign powers could affect US elections. Now the nation is scrambling to secure the system amid a pandemic.\u201d The outcome of the 2020 Presidential elections was even more dreadful where the sitting President did not accept the results or even the court decisions on several petitions that he and his party had filed.
\nThe theory of peoplism cannot coexist with election engineering, because the people\u2019s choice and voice, are snubbed by coercion and manipulation. The process gets more strained because the people who think that their choice and voice were not respected, do not participate in the policy and decision-making processes, and hence remain disillusioned with the government. On the other hand, the government, elected or selected, does not take people-friendly policy decisions and ignores their demands for the sake of remaining in power by expanding all available means.
\nThe ruling elites\u2019 outright rejection of people\u2019s will has had extremely adverse outcomes in various developing states in the last decade. Beginning in North Africa, the commonly referred to as Arab Spring, led to the ousters of many sitting governments and massive destruction of state infrastructure and fatalities, which could all be attributed to lack of peoplism in those states. The new Sri Lankan government is still grappling with the aftershocks of economic-driven political chaos, mainly due to political elites\u2019 apathy towards peoples\u2019 will.
\nTherefore, this author is of the view that with the increased awareness of the people due to the emergence of social media as a medium of hi-speed information, it would be prudent for the ruling elite not to ignore people\u2019s will. For the people, it is suggested that they voice their concerns in a peaceful and organised manner that would give strength to peoplism instead of populism which has disappeared in the debate of developing and the developed world. The peoplism can survive if it remains peaceful, meaningful, result-oriented, firm and logical in its demands, and under a strong, competent, resolute, and dependable leadership.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Dr Zia Ul Haque Shamsi The theory of peoplism cannot coexist with election engineering, because the people\u2019s choice and voice, are snubbed by coercion and manipulation Populism, a concept developed in the 19th century, established itself as a social theory and drew strength from its ideals of representing common people against the elites. However, it […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[1914,9326,9327,3538],"class_list":{"0":"post-269787","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-article","7":"tag-dr-zia-ul-haque-shamsi","8":"tag-eoplism","9":"tag-populism","10":"tag-replacement"},"yoast_head":"\n