Benazir Bhutto was a renowned politician and the first female Prime Minister of Pakistan during a time that changed the face of the world; the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks of the World Trade Center, Pentagon and Flight 95. She was outspoken against the policy, rhetoric and agenda of Al Qaeda. On the 4th of October 2002, Bhutto gave a speech to the world stating that Al Qaeda not only victimized western society, but victimized Muslim Nations and the people of Islam. In her speech she invites the Democracies of the world to help thwart terrorism by replacing Dictatorships with Democratic Governments that provide for their people.
Bhutto states, “Democracies which operate under pluralistic and public constraints, must provide for the public welfare, must provide social services, and must provide education, health and housing. Dictatorships need not. ” (WV 293) In this essay I will discuss my disposition of Benazir Bhutto’s statement of government involvement of society. Benazir Bhutto belonged to a part of the world that most of us do not know well. She comes from a part of the world that does not consider women as man’s equal in society and religion.
Part of this world has been plagued by the scourge of Al Qaeda; a terrorist organization that based its belief in the total destruction of Western Civilization for the preservation of Islam, taught in the method of extremism. The Islamic extremist group Al Qaeda assassinated Benazir Bhutto for her disagreement of the ways, methods and extreme fundamentalisms purported by Al Qaeda. She paid the ultimate price with her life for her outspoken beliefs against the unguided, against the recklessness and against the atrocity afflicted upon a Muslim society dictated by a mind hell bent on suffer for not conforming to his/her blueprint.
She herself was enlightened, seeking progress of mankind. Dictatorships are more prominent around the world than one would think. Almost every nation has had a form of Dictatorship at one time in its history. Dictatorships are defined as authoritarian government ruled by one person. Usually the leader of these societies will take resources from his/her people to distribute elsewhere, primarily the military. In turn the people will do without food, state run services, electricity, running water, education and medical services. They’re even told how to worship religion throughout their lives.
When people are oppressed and subject to such regimes they either protest their government or in some cases embrace it. I understand what Bhutto is inferring with her quote. When people are forced into these oppressive regimes it breeds hatred that can easily spill outside of its borders. It makes sense that oppressed people can become frustrated by outside influences and resort to a simplistic way of life. The oppressed can become more open to a suggested and dangerous agenda carrying with them the heavy burden over generations. On the other hand, Democracy is more in tune with its people.
I define Democracy as a government system that sets all citizens as equal and allows its people to voice their opinion all for the greater good of society. In these societies the government can provide for its citizens what Dictatorships usually neglect. Democracies have the power to ensure that each citizen is entitled to education rights, social services, health care, public welfare and housing needs for the less fortunate. Democratic citizens who are in need should have no worries of doing without, as if Mom or Dad is there to lend a helping hand to their children.
The citizens can control what benefits they have rights to through Democratic process where as people subdued by a Dictator struggle to get by with whatever they can get their hands on. A Democracy supports the ideas of many whereas a Dictatorship pushes the agenda of one person across its people. A Democracy encourages people to live positively and hopeful. It’s easy to say that people who live under Democracy are not oppressed but in some cases spoiled by the fruits of their government.
Unfortunately the circumstantial effect of Dictatorships can ultimately lead to factions that want nothing more but to change the world into their idealisms. These groups become extreme in their own right and force their agenda on the world through extreme action. Dictatorships become breeding grounds for this kind of filth and their ilk; in some cases a terrorist organization houses a Dictator with the power to spread rhetoric to the world by utilizing media outlets that air the aftermath of terror attacks. The entire populace of one’s country is negatively reflected and become polarized by the extreme leadership.
A Democracy’s citizens have everything they need to live a healthy life and make something of themselves and should have no reason to embrace jealousy and hatred of extremism. Ultimately the citizen makes the country. There are some very rare cases of factions that form within Democracies that hold a specific agenda. These factions really do nothing more than stir up the opinion of the public through their protest. Rarely do these factions become violent or organized enough to enforce their agenda onto the world through acts of terror. Do I agree with Benazir Bhutto? Yes and no.
I honestly feel that all people of the world should live freely and allowed to flourish in society. I think that someone should be able to see a doctor if they are sick or with cancer. I do not believe that government should put itself before its people, at any given time! I think that there should be no person that starves and lives under a bridge wondering what tomorrow is going to be like. And the one thing I think that Democracy cannot cure is extremism of any aspect of society. There will always be someone who is not happy with their way of life and will resort to an extreme ideals and methods.
Courtney from Study Moose
Hi there, would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one? Check it out https://goo.gl/3TYhaX