If Running Buses Is Good Governance, Why Did We Need Freedom from the British? Athar Kazmi
Sajid Ali | Published September 21, 2026 | 04:09 PM
An anchorperson and analyst, Athar Kazmi, has delivered a scathing critique of the current narrative surrounding "good governance." He argues that while the British established impressive infrastructure like railways and a legal framework, their rule was characterized by violations of constitutional and democratic rights, political restrictions, and oppression.
In his vlog, Kazmi emphasizes that true good governance should prioritize protecting the public's constitutional and democratic rights in a free society, serving the public interest above personal interests and power. He questions whether restricting political opposition, violating homes, and conducting raids and arrests can be considered good governance, suggesting it resembles colonial rule.
Key Takeaways:
-
The British era, despite its development projects, was marked by restrictions on political freedoms and oppression of dissent.
-
True good governance guarantees constitutional and democratic rights and serves the public interest.
-
Current claims of "good governance" are bogus if they disregard these fundamental principles.