At a general level, dialectics refers to the tension between opposing forces: a tension that in society can propel political change. Such dialectics within society, economy, polity and the understanding thereof, create the possibility for individuals, classes and nations to shape their future through conscious social action.
In Pakistan today, a range of contradictions are at play within and between the ideological, the political, the institutional and the economic spheres. For instance, at the ideological level, there is contention between the religious and the secular democratic discourses. Within the religious, there is tension between the various sects who aim to impose conflicting notions of ‘Sharia’ on society on the one hand and, on the other, the Sufi tradition of love and human solidarity as the pre-eminent norm: a perspective that has historically permeated folk culture in each of the provinces of what is Pakistan today.
The ideological space is also being contended by the democratic discourse, which propounds the idea of legislation through representative government, of institutionalised guarantees of freedom and protection of internationally recognised human rights.
At the institutional level, there is the struggle by the militant extremist organisations to establish, through terror, a despotic state (Emirate) with rules that would coerce individuals to behave according to their notion of ‘religious’ propriety. There is also within the nascent democratic structure the struggle to subordinate in practice, the military to elected civil authority; at the same time, there is contention between the different organs of the state such as the judiciary, the executive and the legislature to protect their respective domains of authority.
At the economic level, there is a contradiction between the interests of the elite and those classes, which have been systematically excluded from the process of economic growth as well as equitable access to public services such as education, health and justice.
Given this edifice of contradictions in Pakistan, it is important to identify the principal contradictions. This is necessary for articulating a course of action to re-establish order, build a more humane society and save the state.
Four inter-related contradictions are primary: 1) the contradiction between the militant extremists and the state of Pakistan; 2) despotism versus democracy; 3) an ideology based on bigotry, hate and violence versus an Islamic religious tradition based on love, knowledge and tolerance; 4) an economy for the elite versus an economy for the people that draws upon their investment, innovation and enterprise.
A creative resolution of these contradictions towards a better future will require organised struggle, an enlightened application of power and institution-building.
In undertaking this great endeavour, it is necessary to understand that religion is not brutality, bigotry and coercion. Religion is the re-establishment of the ligament with God: the ligament of love, knowledge and freedom.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 27th, 2012.
COMMENTS (6)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
I am disappointed since I have normally enjoyed his writings. This is a shallow piece. Sorry.
It's one of those articles that perhaps could be submitted for a paper and not suitable for publication in a newspaper. Devoid of practicability and utterly boring..
Sounds like a great article. Is there an English version of it somewhere?
It is now predictable that even intellectuals like the author will skirt around the Indian system of dialectics and the strong foundation which was followed in the area that now comprises Pakistan long before Rumi and other Sufis were born. However, more pertinent to the article is the missing prequisite for dialectics of willingness to dialogue - none of these forces can arrive at a logical solution to their contradictions because there is no central hypothesis/ pre-supposition on either side that can be eliminated to reach a mutually acceptable conclusion. The system that is adopted here is one of formal dualism wherein there is no possibility to transcend the opposites and arrive at an integral relationship between the warring positions.
Doctor Sahab - Great article. Contradiction is the most interesting subject of any discipline because it requires extensive systems oriented thinking considering multiple layers of forces and factors interacting with each other during different phases of the system life-cycle. On a side note, it is good to see mention of Rumi and Sultan Bahu in an ET article. They are the forgotten legends of our spiritual heritage.
@author::So far as your description of democracy is concerned it is very concise and precise,but the contradictory forces you are calling for making a joint struggle to bring about a stable democratic set up is concerned it seems rather impossible.Different groups with their own ideologies and individual interpretations of both democracy and religion are very hard rather impossible to be brought to agree on any one point of consent.This leaves whole scenario as just a wishful thinking and nothing more.Not at least in near future