THE ease with which democratic governments have given way to authoritarian regimes in one underdeveloped country after another has made many thinkers ask in despair whether the parliamentary system based on the western model is suited to the Third World countries. Majority of people who do not know how to read and write, they argue, can hardly know how to vote.

Popular elections often bring incompetent men to the top and the division of party breeds corruption, they contend. What is worse, the system of perpetual party warfare which is in full swing in Jinnah's Pakistan obstructs the business of government.

They point to the dismal results of the last 10 years. The pace of social and economic change has been far to slow, it picks pace only in the government's claim, and governments in most of the underdeveloped countries have failed to come to grips with the problems which face the ordinary people.

What they say is no doubt true to some extent but it is pertinent to remember that any alternative to democracy in no way guarantees integrity of efficiency in the administration and also lacks even the saving merit of the regime which is based on the suffrage of the people. Leave it to the people to find out, by trail and error, who is their best friend.

The people can peacefully get rid of democratic governments which have failed to keep its promise; they can overthrow a dictatorial regime only through a violent revolution. Those who feel sore over the ills from which democratic regimes suffer should be wary, therefore, of suggesting a cure which is likely to undermine the democratic structure of the state.

The people can at least raise their voice of protest against the injustices of a democratic government; they can only suffer (that the people of Pakistan have been every now and then) in silence the tyranny of a regime which is responsible to no one but itself.

MOHSIN LARIK
Taxila