Desperately seeking ‘liberal-fascist’

Published: February 5, 2011
SHARES
Email
The writer is a director at the South Asia Free Media Association, Lahore 
khaled.ahmed@tribune.com.pk

The writer is a director at the South Asia Free Media Association, Lahore [email protected]

According to Hamid Mir in Jang (Jan 20, 2011), a “liberal-fascist is he who supports the US drone attacks on Pakistani territory, opposes the Islamic articles of the 1973 Constitution, supports Musharraf in his rule and is now supporting Zardari, and is in the habit of designating his opponents as friends of the Taliban. The extremists and liberals are in the same category because they both don’t accept the Constitution of Pakistan. One lies after drinking wine, the other lies after saying Namaz”.

Yasser Latif Hamdani wrote in Daily Times (Jan 31, 2011): “Hamza Alavi once described secularists and liberals to be the true inheritors of Pakistan’s real ideology. Unfortunately, in the Pakistan we live in today, [TV hosts] Kamran Shahids and Oria Maqbool Jaans have taken to calling these true inheritors of Pakistan’s real ideology ‘liberal fascists’. I suppose they are fascists because they advocate a civilised democratic polity where everyone would have equal rights. The word absurd sounds so hollow when describing the state of affairs in Pakistan”.

When people invent an oxymoron, a shiver of pleasure runs through their spine. They know that a fascist is a fascist only when he has organisational power when not in government and has the power to coerce when in government. The fascist is empowered by the certitude of his beliefs and his conviction that he must get people to accept them under pain of punishment. The highest point in nationalism is fascism and it is totalitarian in nature. Totalitarianism was considered right wing till Hannah Arendt told us that the Soviet state, too, was totalitarian.

The liberal person lacks certitude. He pleads for those who are victims of the certitude of others. He also has self-doubt because it is through doubt that he gains independent thinking and altruism in speaking for the underdog. His function is intercessional, not agitational. When required to act, he fails to agree on a strategy, as was pointed out by Afiya Shehrbano in her article “Strategic surrender” (The News, 26 Jan, 2011). He is moderate, generous and tolerant because he discounts his own ego and — more dangerously — the ego of the community and the state.

A liberal has the fatal tendency of finding his locus in the middle of things. When two extreme factions are drawn out against each other, he stands in the middle and gets thrashed from both sides. In times of high collective emotion he runs the risk of losing his life. That is why he is usually in retreat when confronted with a conflictual situation. He rarely agrees with fellow liberals. There is nothing new about him since John Stuart Mill made liberalism look like a creed.

Extremism springs from the condition of certitude. And no certitude is possible without reductionism. When you feel certitude welling up inside you that is the time to stop yourself from becoming violent. You can become the fascist who imposes his creed on others. People who are fired by conviction look impressive. Liberals fail to impress because they find fault with creeds and are singularly lacking in symbolism of power. A liberal can’t get Khalid Khwaja killed with a phone call. He can’t hate the Qadianis in Pakistan; therefore, he is a lonely figure and quite harmless.

Among Muslims, faith (iman) and certitude (yaqin) are considered synonymous while their etymology points to different definitions. But my Lughaatul Quran (1960) written by Ghulam Ahmad Parwez, says the Holy Book wants us to consider them as synonyms (mutaradif hain).

Published in The Express Tribune, February 6th, 2011.

Facebook Conversations

Reader Comments (52)

  • Gurriya
    Feb 5, 2011 - 11:45PM

    khaled saab, you just got back at him, didnt you? Loved this piece of yours, he needed this dose. and so did all of us. brilliant as ever!!Recommend

  • ali
    Feb 6, 2011 - 1:11AM

    Brilliant! Unlike extremists, the liberals dont force their believes on others and they dont kill people. You cant deny us the right to hold an opinion. Recommend

  • omar
    Feb 6, 2011 - 2:04AM

    Very nicely done. But unfortunately, a voice in the wilderness right now…Recommend

  • sl65
    Feb 6, 2011 - 5:27AM

    Liberalism is no panacea, but it is a useful starting point for creating a society in which people can get along without killing each other for differences of conviction.Recommend

  • Truthseeker
    Feb 6, 2011 - 8:22AM

    They have built an ‘Ideological Ark’ within which they want to float down the flood tide of very short history of Pakistan.They don’t realise that already so many holes have appeared in the ark that further floating is lethal unless the holes are repaired.But these passengers of the ark are not willing to get the services of those who can mend it.
    So leave them as they wish to be left alone to steer their ark and their fate. Recommend

  • varun bhardwaj
    Feb 6, 2011 - 9:02AM

    Good read, nice article.Recommend

  • pmbm
    Feb 6, 2011 - 9:54AM

    ‘Liberals’ vs ‘extremists’, ‘sunnies’ vs’ shias’, ‘exploiters’ vs ‘exploited’, ‘mohajir’ vs ‘local’ and many many more divisions. Whatever happened to Pakistanis? Can we write about how to improve the entire lot collectively instead of just massaging our own little egos?Recommend

  • Junaid Manzoor
    Feb 6, 2011 - 10:45AM

    Brilliant piece of writing. Though i need to get some more elaboration on the last paragraph..Recommend

  • Usman
    Feb 6, 2011 - 11:03AM

    we r quite fortunate that we have u. it is one of the blessings of internet that we know u and have access to ur work otherwise we used to know worthy people when they are no more. I got to know Eqbal Ahmad and Hamza Alavi only when i have access to interne. Recommend

  • Shams Zaman
    Feb 6, 2011 - 11:03AM

    Not really a complete pictorial view of a liberal fascist. A liberal fascist, which some like to term as intellectual terrorist or liberal extremist consider the western and Hindu traditions far superior to that of Islam, is completely allergic to the world Islam (however once it comes to Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism he usually adopts a different line), he consider concept of Islamic jurisprudence and caliphate as outdated and brutal, he regards the western values of morality as universal. They consider the human wisdom far superior than the wisdom of God who, in their opinion failed to deliver humans with some better and more “civilized” manifesto for life. For them, pornography, nudity and vulgarity are regarded as cultural manifestations which must be adopted as a norm of modernity. Religious obligations and practices are considered by them as dogmatic norm thus must not be stressed to be adopted place in a civilized society and those stressing on its importance and suggesting others are shunned through bigotry and hateful sentiments. The religious malpractices of religious illiterates are frequently mentioned by them while turning a blind eye to brutality of west in Abu-ghraib or Guantanamo bay at times justifying it. They mocks the established religious norms and feel no shame in hurting the sensitivity or sentiments of large majority of population. Even any peaceful public display by the religious people is condemned by these seculars.
    This model of vulgarity and insanity they want to see in Pakistan in which divine values are replaced with humanistic values and for that use of drones or other kind of violence is considered as permissible by them. So this is the real face of liberal fascist or intellectual terrorists which is no different from the real terrorists. The real terrorist cause physical damage and loss while these cause intellectual and psychological damage.Recommend

  • Furqan
    Feb 6, 2011 - 1:48PM

    I see no confusion here. A lot of people watch Indian and western movies and all types of questionable shows on TV with relish (liberal acts). Simultaneously, they support Taliban and their ultra-conservative world-view too, which bans all such activities (extremist thought process). It looks like most of our middle class comes under this definition of ‘liberal extremists’.Recommend

  • I See Dumb People
    Feb 6, 2011 - 2:09PM

    No matter what they call themselves, they are only a small bunch from middle and upper class of the socio-economic spectrum. It is only them who would benefit from this ideology, not the majority of the country who are “Taliban sympathizers” and pro-Islamists (or the mullahists, as some would like to call them).

    So, those who said “good riddance” after the Lal Masjid massacre and the imprisonment of Dr Aafia should not be surprised when they are decisively outnumbered by those who refuse to mourn the death of Taseer and those who support Mumtaz Qadri.Recommend

  • Aslam
    Feb 6, 2011 - 2:28PM

    Khalid Sahib, Your definition of “liberal” is pretty close to the reality. The term “liberal fascist”does not apply to the people who are not extremists nor fanatics.Recommend

  • saleem muhammad
    Feb 6, 2011 - 4:13PM

    Hope this as final nail to coffin. Bravo khalid sahib, right on target. Recommend

  • Usman Ahmad
    Feb 6, 2011 - 5:04PM

    It is not about the definition of a liberal. It is about the attitude of liberal. Read Hamid Mir’s latest column in which he said, ‘ Khalid saheb is a well-educated man but he has translated some of my words according to his wishes, and not in the way I meant them.’ Recommend

  • Usman Ahmad
    Feb 6, 2011 - 5:06PM

    @Shams Zaman:
    Bravo! Well said!Recommend

  • Feb 6, 2011 - 7:08PM

    I am scary after reading many articles like that from different contributers. The thing that disturb me is the wave of excessive personalization infesting our media like it has damaged our politics long ago and has made it passive. If this unending debates of personal attacks and labeling continued for long time then how would our respective journalist think about people. It is dangerous …I swear that it is dangerous. At first it looks juicy and spicy but in the long damage the fabrics of polity and divide it into many pieces. We poor Pakistanis have many expectation on our media and if media persons are busy in claiming each other extremist, fascist or liberal etc then whats the point in our expectations.
    I don’t think Jinnah had some obsession in portraying himself a liberal secular or like that.He had just obsession with his work and his whole attentions were to channelize his effort to achieve his goal. I had just one conclusion ( Forgive me if i am wrong) our media like our other institution is losing his goal. Recommend

  • Haseeb Asif
    Feb 7, 2011 - 3:11AM

    @Shams Zaman:
    I don’t think you’ve quite grasped the concept of fascism. Promoting humanistic values can never result in fascism, just as making a circle can never result in a square, unless well, you’re that bad at it. Your ‘divine values’ have much more in common with fascism (collective identity, unquestionable law) than anything a liberal can come up with.Recommend

  • Sheikh Sarmad
    Feb 7, 2011 - 9:19AM

    Excellent article as always…!Recommend

  • TruthSeeker2
    Feb 7, 2011 - 9:19AM

    *I totally agree with you Shams Zaman Sahib. Well said!
    “Not really a complete pictorial view of a liberal fascist. A liberal fascist, which some like to term as intellectual terrorist or liberal extremist consider the western and Hindu traditions far superior to that of Islam, is completely allergic to the world Islam (however once it comes to Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism he usually adopts a different line), he consider concept of Islamic jurisprudence and caliphate as outdated and brutal, he regards the western values of morality as universal. They consider the human wisdom far superior than the wisdom of God who, in their opinion failed to deliver humans with some better and more “civilized” manifesto for life. For them, pornography, nudity and vulgarity are regarded as cultural manifestations which must be adopted as a norm of modernity. Religious obligations and practices are considered by them as dogmatic norm thus must not be stressed to be adopted place in a civilized society and those stressing on its importance and suggesting others are shunned through bigotry and hateful sentiments. The religious malpractices of religious illiterates are frequently mentioned by them while turning a blind eye to brutality of west in Abu-ghraib or Guantanamo bay at times justifying it. They mocks the established religious norms and feel no shame in hurting the sensitivity or sentiments of large majority of population. Even any peaceful public display by the religious people is condemned by these seculars.
    This model of vulgarity and insanity they want to see in Pakistan in which divine values are replaced with humanistic values and for that use of drones or other kind of violence is considered as permissible by them. So this is the real face of liberal fascist or intellectual terrorists which is no different from the real terrorists. The real terrorist cause physical damage and loss while these cause intellectual and psychological damage.”Recommend

  • myja
    Feb 7, 2011 - 10:09AM

    then why are liberals not saying anyting about the killings carried out in cold blood by Mr. Raymond Davis? Every one is out defending him just because he is american…? True …liberals dont use guns but instead their pens to impale and tongues to lynch any one when who even tries to take middle ground….aint it so just read…? ur coloumn and comments given by ur ‘liberal brigade’..U guys are as dangerous as Mr. Zaid HamidRecommend

  • raheem
    Feb 7, 2011 - 11:39AM

    @Shams Zaman:
    @pmbm:

    sad to see you not understanding the point. psychological damage? not killing, not inciting violence, not cheering on someone’s death, not killing outside the law (a liberal position does not even want to kill according to law), not wanting hypocrisy – they make plenty of porn on Hall Road, Lahore but they also fund the jihadis & celebrate qadri, who cry at the fate of their country where killing, persecution is the order of day & rather than looking inwards, its blame game. i hope some day you’ll understand what ‘ freedom of thought & expression ‘ mean & why they are necessary for any society… its just unfortunate that your mind takes to porn, women, drinking when you think of freedom. may be someday we’ll embrace sanity.Recommend

  • Faisal Iftikhar
    Feb 7, 2011 - 12:28PM

    I feel sorry for our country which was created in the name of Islam and now so called liberals are destroying it. Islam is complete religion and explains everything about a society and cannot be altered based on personal feelings and believes. Liberal is a term introduced by west to deprive Muslims of their believes and to dilute their culture. Now using liberalism term we are actually asking for everything that is against our basic believes and will lead to a situation that is uncontrolable. Recommend

  • White Russian
    Feb 7, 2011 - 3:30PM

    Khaled Ahmed Sahib, you never fail to awake the hidden thinker in your reader. That is why I always passionately wait for your contributions since I grew up.

    Definitions of liberal and non-liberal, and of right and left have peculiarities of its own inPakistan, which may not necessarily conform with those in outside world. Please consider the following:

    1. I find it intriguing that parties like ANP or MQM would be considered right wing elsewhere for their ethnocentric agenda. But in our country secularist and liberal are deemed synonymous.

    2. Whoever coined an oxymoron like liberal-fascists, simply did it because of our nationalmalaise of not properly doing the home-work. Urdu columnists actually mean ‘secularist-fascist’ whenever they write ‘liberal-fascist’.

    3. If PPP is a secularist party, in the sense that it does not recognise an explicitly public role for religion, what would you say of Babar Awan’s persona on the TV? Far from being fascist, secularists of Pakistan are pushed harder into an appeasing mode.

    4. Fascism is not simply belief in coercion. It involves coercion for the belief in an ideology. There is some hope: literature on nihilistic activism during 19th century Tsarist Russia still exist to get an idea of
    being secularist and fascist while not in power.

    5. Secularist-fascists or Liberal-fascists? Pity for Hamid Mir and his ilk, none exist in this country. Secularist-fascists do not exist because: public of Pakistan appreciates the demagogy only of Mulla. You may expect rise of Khomeni or of Mulla Omar but never of Hitler or Stalin in this country. Liberal-fascists do not exist simply because: of impossibility of simultaneously believing in political liberalism and fascism.

    6. Islamists are the only true fascists in this country. Coercion, they do for ideology. Slandering and lying, they do for expediency.Recommend

  • Tanzeela
    Feb 7, 2011 - 4:06PM

    Khalid Sahab did you read Mir sahab’s latest column in response of this update? Please read and make another try. Let’s see who wins. :PRecommend

  • Tony Singh
    Feb 7, 2011 - 6:07PM

    @Shams Zaman:
    What a waste of time reading your long, winding and distorted argument. Going by your arguments, the dumb, no question asked, followers of religion make better ‘humans’ than the people who present their point of view in a rational way. Recommend

  • Raja Arsalan Khan
    Feb 7, 2011 - 6:42PM

    @Shams Zaman:

    Please tell me what system of governanace Islam has given to us (Islam did not claim to do so). What social contribution has ever been made by the Muslim conquerors around the world? Does Islam sanctioned tribal or fuedal societies?
    You are afraid of any thing new because it needs reasoning and adaptability. Seeking refuge in Islam for all of your misdeeds is the ultimate solution you are capable of thinking. Recommend

  • White Russian
    Feb 7, 2011 - 8:28PM

    @Tanzeela:
    I read Hamid Mir’s response in his urdu rant. He did not contribute anything substantial.
    Only thing he could say in his defence of using “liberal-fascist” paradigm is that an American author Jonah Goldberg also used the term Liberal Fascism as the title of his book. So what? Regarding Khaled’s column, this does not mean anything.

    It is to be noted that Jonah Goldberg borrowed this term from Philip Coupland’s article titled “H.G. Wells’s ‘Liberal Fascism’ “, in which Coupland discusses H.G. Wells’s futuristic depiction of use of coercive means to create a utopian Liberal society (i.e. achieving liberal ends through fascist means) in his novel “The Shape of Things to Come”. Interestingly H.G. Wells at one stage, believed in eugenics.

    Jonah Goldberg wrote the book “Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning”, in which he discusses the political liberalism and its conceptual connections with the 20th century Fascism. This book is even more controversial than Hamid Mir’s borrowing of its title. But for the purpose of present discussion, I dont undestand what connection Hamid Mir wants to establish between the ideological pedigree of American Left and the people in Paksitan whom he dubs ‘Liberal Fascists. I seriously doubt Mr Mir’s ability or interest in the history of ideas, and hence any spurious connection he might have arrived at between secularist Pakistanis and Mussolini’s fascist party. What does he want to tell us? that J. S. Mill was basically a secret Fascist?

    I am sure about one thing though. There are two kind of political animals in
    Pakistan: Those who have political agenda which is helped by dishonest use of religion, and those who want to keep politics clear of any theological or sectarian bearing. Mr. Mir clearly falls in first category, and using the term ‘liberal-fascist’ is a very suitable slandering device to malign the people who dont agree with his ideas or his tareeka-i-wardaat. If there were any liberal fascist in this country, there would have been a strong violent retaliation after the murder of Governer Taseer. Instead the supposedly ‘fascist’ secularists have tucked their tails in the legs and are runnig for the cover.

    Honestly, I am seriously sceptical about the existence even of political liberals in this country, not to mention those who come with additional fascist hue! Anyhow, it is time that secularists of this country stand up and debunk the extremist-right’s credentials. Even on the grounds, that if we allow Goldberg”‘s thesis about liberal-fascists to reach its logical conclusion, Mir and his ilk would be very unhappy again.
    Pakistan’s rightists tend to like Goldberg as long as they have something bad to say about liberals. Pakistan’s religious right tend to like Chmosky as long as he criticises USA. But the gist of the arguments of such western intellectuals still goes against the Pakistani extremist camp, no matter how much this camp is pleased by it.Recommend

  • Sunny
    Feb 8, 2011 - 1:21AM

    @Tanzeela:
    darling go get your daily dose of kabaddi somewhere else. or better still, watch a saas bahu soap to satisfy yourself. Recommend

  • pmbm
    Feb 8, 2011 - 10:49AM

    @Raheem
    Sanity would be ” to collectively improve the whole lot” instead of creating senseless divisions.
    Recommend

  • Faisal Iftikhar
    Feb 8, 2011 - 1:36PM

    @Raja Arsalan Khan:
    Freedom of speech doesn’t mean we talk about something we don’t know. Please first study Islam and history of Islam in depth and than comment. You are specking exactly what west is speaking now that if a Muslim is doing something wrong means Islam is responsible for it.

    Being Muslim we believe Islam to be a complete religion so why do you people need NEW SYSTEMS?? Why don’t we take guidance from Quran and why are we always putting blame on past Muslim rulers? Can we give one good example liberalism have generated or to be simple can we define liberalism exactly, specially when being Muslim we claim Islam to be complete religion and has guidance till day of judgement.

    Of course if we don’t believe it than there is no point in debating as everyone has right of disagreement. Recommend

  • JAMSHID MUBARIK
    Feb 8, 2011 - 10:33PM

    Well done Khalid Sb,you are a great man!Plz. also ask a question from Hamid Mir,
    If Quaid-e-Azam wanted islamic state then why he appointed a Hindu Jogandar Noth Mandal as a First Fedral Law minister,did Quaid-e-Azam wish the application and interpretition of Islamic Laws made by a Hindu?”Recommend

  • billo
    Feb 9, 2011 - 12:52AM

    @ Faisal Iftikhar
    You wrote “Being Muslim we believe Islam to be a complete religion so why do you people need NEW SYSTEMS??”
    Because there is a huge difference between being a complete religion and a complete political system. Religion is there to connect with the Creator. It is not there to answer the millions of smaller questions basic to running a society, such as “What should be the exact price of daal and bread?” or “Should we drive on the right side of the road or on the left side?” or “What should be the minimum width and depth of sewage pipes?” If you can not give a specific answer to these questions with reference to religion then you have to admit that a separate system of governance beyond religion is required. The confusion Pakistan is stuck in comes from needlessly tying the two systems together. Recommend

  • Sara Taseer
    Feb 9, 2011 - 9:58AM

    @myja:
    I am a liberal. I condemn Richmond Davies for the murder he committed. In fact no one I know supports the man for what he did, liberal or conservative, its a matter of law. the only ones buckling under the pressure is the govt not the people. Recommend

  • JAMSHID MUBARIK
    Feb 9, 2011 - 11:45AM

    Well said!!!!
    It’s our unfortune that we are playing in the hands of those people who were against the creation of Pakistan and now ‘ve become the great saviour & major stake holder of it.We really need one more secular Quaid-e-Azam,who appointed a Hindu Jogandar Noth Mandal as a First Fedral Law Minister,that selection clearly indicates that Quaid-e-Azam did not want the application and interpretition of Islamic Laws formed by a Hindu,but urged to made it a Secular State,as it can be seen more vivdly in his famous speech of 11th August 1947 to constitutional assembally(the assembally who’s going to lay foundation of constitution),but was hidden from public by Nawabzada sher Ali khan(Information minister of president Gen.yahya) and so-called islamic ideology was introduced to make lame excuse of holding power on the name of security threat to state.Then same strategy was carried and promoted by Bhutto(so-called libral),Zia(most hypocrate ruler),Musharaf and even still is safeguarded by establishment(Army),as Kayani feels proud of being indian centric to get major share of budget on the name of defence and security propaganda,instead of changing it into Social Welfare Society.Recommend

  • JAMSHID MUBARIK
    Feb 9, 2011 - 11:50AM

    It’s our misfortune that we are playing in the hands of those people who were against the creation of Pakistan and now ‘ve become the great saviour & major stake holder of it.We really need one more secular Quaid-e-Azam,who appointed a Hindu Jogandar Noth Mandal as a First Fedral Law Minister,that selection clearly indicates that Quaid-e-Azam did not want the application and interpretition of Islamic Laws formed by a Hindu,but urged to made it a Secular State,as it can be seen more vivdly in his famous speech of 11th August 1947 to constitutional assembally(the assembally who’s going to lay foundation of constitution),but was hidden from public by Nawabzada sher Ali khan(Information minister of president Gen.yahya) and so-called islamic ideology was introduced to make lame excuse of holding power on the name of security threat to state.Then same strategy was carried and promoted by Bhutto(so-called libral),Zia(most hypocrate ruler),Musharaf and even still is safeguarded by establishment(Army),as Kayani feels proud of being indian centric to get major share of budget on the name of defence and security propaganda,instead of changing it into Social Welfare Society.Recommend

  • Faisal Iftikhar
    Feb 9, 2011 - 11:56AM

    @billo:
    You don’t need to be a liberal for seeking these questions and what you mentioned is not a political system but it is political wisdom and will we require. All these thing you mentioned are because of corruption and not because of Islamic laws :)

    Again try to understand please what i am saying, religion guide you to become a good human being and take decisions in right directions. A good human being will at least try to do what is good and if you have will and wisdom with you than you can do miracles.Recommend

  • Saad A Khan
    Feb 9, 2011 - 12:22PM

    I just finished reading this article (via FB link). I understood almost nothing of it. What is the purpose of it? Can someone please give me a Khaled Ahmed for Dummies version of this article?

    Thank youRecommend

  • yaz
    Feb 9, 2011 - 1:02PM

    A liberal fascist may be an extreme term but there are extremists in liberals. Extreme freedom secular mindset is as bad (read dangerous) as extreme religious spiritual attitude. Anti Islam are as bad as Islamists. Our pseudo elite (left wing seculars) vs religious bigots are both intolerant. Any extreme is dangerous.
    Ex: Burning a US flag in the US is tolerated. Should it be? Do we need this kind of tolerance? Should anyone have the freedom to mock other persons’ religion?
    Too much of tolerance & freedom is not a good thing. That’s my personal opinion.Recommend

  • Abdullah
    Feb 9, 2011 - 1:07PM

    I think this self staged artificial war organized by so called liberals and extremist thinkers is a fake one. Blog Writers/anchors from both camps are trying making fool to readers and viewers with help of this proxy war. Their main aim is to keep the war like ‘tempo’ alive between liberals and extremists. They are drawing huge salaries and facilities from their newspapers and tv shows for this “show”. They are just wasting time of their own and of the readers. They are not sincere to society but with only their bank balances.They will change their jobs,newspapers,tv channels and even their ideologies just for some more Rupees in their previous salary and we see it happening daily.Recommend

  • londonistani
    Feb 9, 2011 - 4:05PM

    one thing i always feel, why are all these articles always telling what liberal are NOT, rather than what liberals are? can u please define a ‘liberal’ in pakistan’s context?

    if they dont believe pakistan is an ideological state, and it wasnt meant to be an islamic state, what was the reason of creation of pakistan? nobody ever denied the the strength india could ve acheived if kept united, so why did we ever broke up? and if we dont have an ideology and there is no connection between a state and religion, then why shouldnt we join india and end all our woes.Recommend

  • Skyrus
    Feb 9, 2011 - 4:23PM

    @Khaled Ahmed…!
    Enjoyed your column with a cup of coffee!
    Being honest, it wasn’t any less amusing than the fairytales we used to study in kindergarten classes…but obviously..gone are those days..!!
    Where does such “liberal person” exist in this world?
    Please name just a few places where we can find such existence of human race!!
    Liberals or Non-Liberals, don’t we all come across the same feelings and emotions, which you have symoblized over liberals, with your definition of liberalism?
    Didn’t you just try to portray naiveness of a direction-less human as liberalism!!
    With all respect, would you please help us to understand your portrayed “liberalism” by giving just a few examples of people who ever ruled this world! Be it from any part, if they ever existed, did they ever succeed to lead their country or nation? If yes, please name them. It might, just might, help to understand your opinion. Recommend

  • moise
    Feb 9, 2011 - 6:29PM

    @ali: If you read H G Wells quotes, he said use force to propagate liberal fascism. Remember Hitler, he was democratically elected as well and Times man of the year. Remember Ataruk? Remember all those Arab dictatorships?Recommend

  • Hashim Khan
    Feb 9, 2011 - 6:57PM

    Brilliantly written but I am wondering if HM was able to pick up even one word of this write-up. I don’t think he’s even close to being of this caliber.Recommend

  • Muhammad Ali Akhtar
    Feb 9, 2011 - 11:18PM

    Well liberal fascists have been responsible for more killing. I don’t agree with Hamid mir on lost of issues but he is right about Liberal fascists.

    Most of the points in this article actually define a moderates. Neither liberal Fascist, nor religious extremists. Most of the pakistanis are moderates. Neither talibans, nor Characterless people.

    Liberal Fascists are same as Tehreek Taliban Pakistan. They are both extremest and terrorists.Recommend

  • Shams Zaman
    Feb 10, 2011 - 12:49AM

    Some of my dear friends have questioned my argument that I have called for “stop asking questions regarding religion and stop questioning the religious authority while advocating tribal style Islam”. I think either they have not been able to get my point or I haven’t been able to convey my point correctly. This space is not mentioned for pursuing personal discussions I just wanted to clarify that anyone who considers questioning or is advocating a religious theocracy or a tribal version of Islam “made in Wazirstan” version of Islam has failed to understand Islam. Islam is much more than that.Recommend

  • Raja Imran Khan
    Feb 10, 2011 - 9:23AM

    we need more khalid to correct the political dictionary of mockers to save our society from the tyranny of conservative religion mindset….

    It is unfortunate while living in 21 century mullah and semieducated internet user youth, still insisting on 1500 years old tribal system for solutions of the modern time societal and political problems.But worse is that they try to impose their creed through intimidation, in the name of Allah.

    I amaze to see and read lot of well educated youth is also not thinking for a moment that what does mean the rule of law? and they also never take into consideration the other teaching of Quran and Sunnah…that who would be wajubul Qatil …this is all unfortunateRecommend

  • Raja Imran Khan
    Feb 10, 2011 - 9:37AM

    @ skyrus: you should read again this column, your answer is inside it……and if you want to what actually a liberal should do? read ” On Liberty” by John Stuart Mill. He told that it is the duty of a person to fight against the tyranny of custom and tradition to save other……

    It is all about(Liberalism) a attitude not a set of belief until people not accept that other person like them have to live according his own philosophy of life…..A mullha(molvi) is not problem for me unless he do not force me to do what he thought but if he try to force me or force other sane fellow it is a duty of a liberal to stop him to do so……..

    Liberal have no duty to enforce Liberalism infact liberalism not a set of beleif but a type of counseling to enlighten the people in the society. Recommend

  • nadfa
    Feb 10, 2011 - 3:06PM

    @Saad A Khan:
    Dear Saad, Khaled Ahmed is only for adults.Recommend

  • Raqib Ali
    Feb 11, 2011 - 3:17AM

    great one Mr. Khaled Ahmed!! Recommend

  • Raja Arsalan Khan
    Feb 11, 2011 - 6:36PM

    @Shams Zaman:

    You said that this space is meant for argument. True! But since your opinion is now a public property, threatening to confuse and make the Muslims more lethal, it is my responsibility to add a few of mine.
    Islam is much more than that? If it is true then why there is a clash of civilisations? Why u r afraid of every thing mundane? Why do you insist and impose some ‘particulars’? Why do carry Islam into each and every thing on this earth? Why destruction is a part and parcel of the philosophy of custodians of Islam? You may make those fool who relate themselves with the past but anyone with a capacity to reason would certainly question your edicts.
    That is why all “great Muslims thinkers” are opposed to reasoning. Iqbal, Maududi, Hasan al bana are a few of them. Just read these figure thoroughly and you would find that I am right.Recommend

  • Nadir Khan
    Feb 16, 2011 - 3:37PM

    Absolutely spot on! Well done, Khalid Sahib!Recommend

More in Opinion

Karachi

Fiqah Hanfia
Sehar 4:14 AM
Iftar 7:26 PM
Fiqah Jafaria
Sehar 4:26 AM
Iftar 7:26 PM
Fiqah Hanfia
Sehar 4:14 AM
Iftar 7:26 PM
Fiqah Jafaria
Sehar 4:26 AM
Iftar 7:26 PM

Lahore

Islamabad