Tracing Autonomism, Mutualism and Direct Democracy within the Political Economy of Punjab; A Special Focus on the Demands for New Province(s)

Abstract

Post-1960 term of “Autonomism” cannot be referred to as a single ideology or movement but it is a series of different socio-political movements that were/are against centralized decisions. On the other hand, “Mutualism” deals with the free market and occupation of resources (and somewhat means of basic necessities). At the same time, the term “Direct Democracy” allows people to decide their policy initiatives directly.

By analyzing political culture, it has been clearly observed that the Punjab Province in Pakistan is experiencing conflicting paradigms between these three ideologies (directly or indirectly). At one side, different sorts of ethnic identities seek regional autonomy; in terms of either forming new provinces, restoring Devolution Plan of Pervez Musharraf, announcing One Unit, or, establishing administrative units/regions within the Punjab Province. Similarly, on another side, different fractions believe in mutualism. Although, they defend the “free market” within the territorial jurisdiction of the country and beyond, for the occupation of resources, they have contradictory viewpoints. Some follow principles of “Third Positionism” while, some look at “Authoritarian Liberalism” at this stage. Along with these two sides, the third side reflects the followers of “Direct Democracy” who demand their role in policy-making and legislation for the areas where they live. This fraction of people not only seeks pure local self-government at district level but also demand new provinces on administrative grounds.

This study highlights why the followers of autonomism, mutualism and direct democracy have contradictions in opinion for staying within the Punjab Province or demanding new province(s) within Punjab. As “Third Positionism” traces political and economic control over the resources on ethnic bases, this study mentions how it is being conflicted with “Authoritarian Liberalism” under the expected restoration of “One Unit” or “Tight Federalism” under the presidential system. In the last, Study analyzes the impacts of respective ideologies and tries to conclude whether they are stimulating movements for the new province(s) or not; if yes then in which shape/style, and, if no then why.