LIKE many others I also read and enjoy F.S. Aijazuddin’s articles for their substance, language and perceptive analyses.

Apropos his article ‘A crimson birthday’ (Aug 14), I would have liked to read some of his observations differently. First, his reference in the context of a person 2000 years ago (Socrates 489-399 BC) is hardly relevant for there is no sage person like Socrates around. He took hemlock to die rather than break the oppressive law of the state and avail the opportunity to escape the prison. Yes, may be the analogy for Imran Khan is apt if we refer to Julius Caesar’s (100-44 BC) proclaiming “what is for Caesar is Caesar’s”.

Second, if the PTI was even a shadow of Mensheviks, they would have spent all their time and energy in KP and established their credentials to win the next elections. But Imran Khan talks about revolution. For decades, the Bolsheviks worked on an ideology and then indoctrinated thousands of comrades before staging a revolution. And where are Lenin and Trotsky?

Yes, Mr Khan can shake and has shaken the fragile democracy and the economy. The paths of democracy and revolution are different.

Third, rigging or not, the PPP could win at least a simple majority in the 1977 elections. Had Asghar Khan not vetoed the agreement between the PNA and the PPP, the country would not have been on the path that it is tracking on until today. Whatever our other weaknesses, carnage, extortions and violence were not in our history.

In vengeance against the Brothers Sharif, Imran has only helped his previous rivals the MQM, the PPP and the JUI.

M. Taher Punjwani

Karachi

Published in Dawn, August 20th, 2014