Politics is the pre-requisite of every democratic system in the world. The political psychology and political behaviours reflect the overall image of a country. Different political stunts are always used to create the hindrances to tarnish the image of political leaders. Political blame game and political agenda setting are always prevalent in countries but the civilised states avoid using abusive scandals to fight their opponents. To keep morality in check during the political blame game is indispensible to sustain a good image of the country and its people. The sarcastic, pathetic and wretched remarks about the political personalities damage the national solidarity and integrity. The time and energy devoted to blaming each other has kept our elected policymakers from carrying out even their most basic responsibilities. The current political scenario in Pakistan has become the worst in its nature. This is against the norms, values, traditions, and principles of a civilised nation. The best way is to criticise the policies and their implication. The public has no concern regarding the personal lives of political leaders as long as they sincerely deliver their service. Media has become the most useful weapon to promote the political blame game. It is Pakistan’s history that insults and abusive language has been used to disgrace the opponent. This kind of language is the last stick in the hands of politicians to defame the opponent. The goal of the blame game is not to enlighten, but to weaken the opposition by pushing it on to the defensive. The political leaders of our country do not know that they relinquish their power when they blame others for situations in their life. The blame does not change the situation and only keeps them in a victim mentality. Political blame game and scandals usually proceed in two stages; first, the discovery of a contentious issue is followed by heated debate about reasons and responsibilities; and second, public attention is quickly diverted on to the next attention-grabbing issue. The goal of the blame game is not to enlighten, but to weaken the opposition by pushing it on to the defensive Often, we are left wondering why politicians and also high-ranking bureaucrats stumble over the most irrelevant personal demerit or, in comparison, get away despite considerable wrongdoings. It is interesting to know that who is a ‘blame maker’ and who is the ‘blame taker’ in Pakistan at the moment. Reham Khan’s book is another controversial kind of blame game for the PTI Chairman Imran Khan. The character assassination of Khan is the nutshell of the book. A few politicians in Pakistan have been trying to highlight the issue of Imran Khan’s alleged daughter with Sita White. They’re hopeful that if they will get success to bring this issue into the Supreme Court of Pakistan, it would become very difficult for Imran Khan to defend himself and ultimately he’ll also be disqualified for being dishonest about the parentage of the girl. The politicians don’t know that the blame games are only one side of the coin. Most politicians are smart enough to know that they’re swimming in dangerous waters; complex policy problems, rising public demands, and heightened transparency make governing an increasingly risky task. Politicians know that even minor issues can be politicised and turned against them. This is why they go to great lengths to anticipate and alleviate potentially dangerous situations. So there aren’t just ‘reactive’ blame games in which politicians defend themselves under the eye of the public, but also ‘anticipatory’ blame games happening behind closed doors. Both blame games require distinct skills and capabilities. When our politicians realise that an issue in their ‘responsibility sphere’, i.e. the area of tasks and duties for which they are held publicly responsible, has the potential to develop into a scandal, they can try to increase the likelihood that the issue goes unnoticed. For instance, politicians can try to negotiate deals on contentious issues behind closed doors, or shift dicey policy decisions to bodies such as central banks or independent regulatory agencies, which are often not directly politically accountable. If an issue gets politicised and attracts blame nevertheless, politicians are now in a good position to deflect the blame to those actors to which they shifted decision-making power in the first place. Politicians can also demonstrate commitment by launching inquiries or propose symbolic reforms to resolve the problem and tackle its consequences. The strategic demotion of subordinate officials can also be used to stymie adversaries. Both types of blame games have distinct implications for our understanding of politics. The pressing questions which guide the study of reactive blame games is whether, and under which conditions, they lead to policy and system change that effectively addresses the problem at the root of the scandal. Can reactive blame games fulfil the function of spotlighting issues or do they represent mere acts of political entertainment? The crucial question is why politicians translate into blame-deflecting institutional arrangements that may negatively influence the effectiveness of policies and ultimately damage democracy. After all, the much-debated declining responsiveness of political systems to various kinds of problems must also be discussed in the light of policymaking arrangements deliberately designed for reasons of blame avoidance. A more careful and systematic look at both anticipatory and reactive blame games should advance our understanding of how politicians make decisions and act under risk. It constitutes an important step in creating a more realistic understanding of politicians, their behaviour, and the consequences this behaviour may have for the functioning of democracies. It argues that the current level of partisan polarisation is actually the culmination of a number of forces at work during the past decades in Pakistan. These include a perception by each party that the other is using unfair political tactics; the subsequent creation of a culture of blame, with each party blaming the other for the dysfunction; a decline in political norms, leading to childlike behaviour by politicians and political candidates; and a culture of payback in which the opposition argues that their opponents are responsible for the decline. Recent political rhetoric in Pakistan has been dominated not by advocacy and explanation of competitive policy proposals, but by party partisans blaming and demonising each other. The role of media is very important in political blame game. Several issues that were prioritised were strongly associated with selective media coverage. Media coverage is used in politics because it is suitable for political elites. It is relevant to furthering their goals. The information encapsulated through media forms a useful political resource. First, the media forms a formidable source of factual information about societal problems and their potential solutions. Politicians simply learn about society via the news. They not only learn from the media about problems and solutions, but also about public opinion. They even learn about what other political actors are doing. So they set their agendas and point fingers accordingly. In politics, even if the problem is someone else’s fault, the blame game is a waste of time, effort, and energy that takes the attention away from the solution. It creates restlessness and promotes the trust deficit. It is good to remember that one who cannot dance must not blame the song. The writer is a PhD scholar and author of various books on international relations, criminology and gender studies. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org Published in Daily Times, June 15th 2018.