Bilawal Bhutto is the complete opposite of Imran Khan: Khan was aggressive as a political leader, at least when he was a free man. Bilawal Bhutto firmly criticizes his opponents in his speeches, but he demonstrates no signs of aggressive behavior. Imran Khan used to deploy abusive and threatening language against his “enemies” in his speeches. Bilawal Bhutto is soft spoken and never uses threatening language.
Imran Khan’s rhetoric was full of utopian day dreams, which he repackaged in his promises to the Pakistani masses. Bilawal Bhutto’s speeches hint at a desire for serious debate on public policy. Imran Khan exhibits signs that his politics has broken free from the political and constitutional norms that the political elites of the 1970s had framed for our polity when we held the first general elections in the country. That’s why attacking military installations was a trivial matter for him and his party.
Bilawal Bhutto, although he belongs to a younger generation in our society, has proven that his politics is a continuity of the constitutional and political norms, which are the only guarantee against the centrifugal forces tearing our society apart. That’s why he always punctuates his speeches with references to the 1973 Constitution. On the other hand, Imran Khan’s style of politics indicates that he wants to take our society back to the polarization of the 1970s and 1990s. Bilawal Bhutto, in complete contrast, seems to demonstrate that he knows the norms of parliamentary politics, where you sometimes have to make compromises with your opponents on policy matters.
For Imran Khan, politics is akin to tribal warfare, where opponents are enemies and the contest is akin to a do or die situation. The traditional style of politics in our society has turned parliamentary democracy into an arena for the tribal warfare style of politics, where political opponents are treated as enemies. In parliamentary democracy, there are no enemies. For Bilawal, other parties are opponents, not enemies. Honest disagreement is not only acceptable, it is considered healthy for the strengthening of our political system.
The Need For........