Meet In CommonNews

Local

Democracy in Chains: How Waderas Still Rule Pakistan

Meet in Common connects news with real conversations. Use ThinkMatch to arrange a Roundtable and meet people to discuss this story.

Source: Fair Observer

Feudalism in Pakistan is based on the traditional land ownership system where influential families have a strong command over agricultural land, rural communities and local decision-making. Throughout history, large landowners gained economic benefits from land ownership, as well as social and political power, especially in the countryside. In the Sindh province, waderas are influential landlords. Their impact goes beyond land ownership and can also affect farmer-to-community and farmer-to-political-institution relationships. Working for the landlords and relying on them for financial support and access to resources in the area could restrict the economic independence and political options of many tenant farmers. Even after many years of democratic development, these traditional power arrangements still affect rural areas of Pakistan.

This excerpt comes from the named source. Read the original for the full reporting.

Read the original at Fair Observer

Featured places to meet in Palo Alto, CA

Explore these places and arrange a conversation through ThinkMatch.

Yutori

Yutori 3375 El Camino Real Palo Alto, CA, 94306 US

Cafe Riace

Cafe Riace 200 Sheridan Avenue Palo Alto, CA, US

City guide for Palo Alto, CA

Community Poll

Public sports funding should prioritize everyday participation over elite competition.

Share your view, then see how readers voted. No sign-in required. This poll is shared across stories.

Do you agree or disagree?

Choose one answer

Common Quandary

A Common Quandary to discuss

Another conversation to explore, separate from this news story.

Your anonymous gift could inspire millions more if you reveal your name. Do you?

A donor wants to make a transformative gift without recognition. The charity believes announcing the gift and the donor's identity would encourage matching contributions and help far more people.

Can the opportunity to create more good outweigh a preference for privacy?

Explore this quandary