I have my concerns about the method for the achievement of Islamic change and revolution. As it is clear that in a democratic society, any change will be possible only when majority approves of it. If the majority of Pakistan does not support then, according to the democratic spirit, the Islamic revolution cannot take place. This is the major point which contradicts the Islamic spirit in this regard. In the perspective of Islam, one has to invite for the change whether or not the majority approves of it and supports it.
Secondly, the main aim of an Islamic struggle should be to present true Islamic teachings, no matter if the people accept it or not. A Muslim is only responsible to preach and elucidate Islam regardless whether people accept it or not because this is not in the hands of the preacher. Why is the Jamā‘at-i-Islāmī just using the democratic means to come into power? If by preaching Islam in a true Islamic manner, the Jamā‘at is not be able to get into power, it will not be a problem at all. It can at least justify its standing on the Day of Judgment. Many Prophets in history were not able to come into power as their people did not place credence to their message. These Prophets have surely done their duties in a true manner and they never used any unislamic way just to come into power. I hope you understand my concerns. I am a well wisher of religious parties but I just wish that I be clarified about the issues I discussed.
The term Islamic revolution has been coined in this age and probably it was the reaction of the downfall of Muslim empires. We do not find any trace of this term in the early days of Islam. The mission and basic concern of all the prophets were to show humanity the right path and guide them how to attain eternal success. As far as this mission and purpose is concerned the last Prophet Muhammad (sws) also is no exception.
I no doubt agree to the crux of your comments but I would surely like to add the following.
Democratic way has nothing unislamic in it. The political system of Islam revolves round the shūrā (consultation body); and shūra may take on styles and patterns depending upon the socio-cultural and geographical aspects of a Muslim community.
Nowadays elections and other related means are nothing but to elicit the opinion of the majority and majority has the authority to rule.
The duty of religious parties as well as other political parties is simply to present their manifesto before the masses and the rest is up to the latter; these parties should avoid and shun all unfair means for mustering support for their stance.
Mind making and Islamic training of the masses is another thing and no doubt it should be the first step. The practical way for these political parties is to form a separate preaching wing for the purpose and this wing should continue its struggle regardless of what happens on the political stage.
You are right that ‘public acceptance’ is no criterion for doing a virtue or preaching what is good. We will only be asked by the Almighty whether we did what we could. Our duty begins with sincere struggle and ends with it. The rest is up to the addressees and they will be asked about the message they received. We should move towards right objectives in the appropriate manner. If sincere struggles bear no fruit we should remain content that we have done our duty. And God will accept the same from us, inshā Allāh.