The physical balkanisation of Pakistan may well take place, but we’ve already seen a balkanisation of the mind. We define ourselves in terms of our beliefs, and then we seek out others with matching beliefs and form little intellectual ghettos. The liberals will hang out with other liberals and the right-wingers will find their own humkhayals. The conversation in both camps is simply for the purpose of validating, reinforcing, and strengthening already deeply-held beliefs. When they engage with each other, if such a term can be used for what is usually an exchange of insults, they talk at, and not to, their opposites. If you need an example, just take a look at the tiny echo chamber that is Pakistani Twitter.
One group will cite Voltaire and the universality of human rights, while the other will quote Sahih Bukhari and give examples from Islamic history. Interestingly, what similarities the two groups may share are lost in what becomes a game of one-upmanship, rather than a genuine attempt at dialogue. But then, dialogue isn’t what either party are looking for, because all that they really want to is to score points that they can then use to shore up their credentials with their own cosy little support groups. Like all good cults, both right and left have certain canons that, it seems, have to be subscribed to in their entirety if you want membership in their respective little clubs.
For the left, there is the belief that each and every one of our current problems can be traced to General Ziaul Haq, whose legacy is being perpetuated by the omnipresent and omnipotent establishment. There is also the belief that only Pakistan’s agencies are capable of dirty tricks while the rest of the world’s shadow-masters are somehow benign. In this paradigm, the civilian governments are hapless puppets who are buffeted by the waves of deep state-sponsored extremists and are to be pitied, rather than pilloried. In the right hand corner, there is the conviction that every member of the nebulous ‘West’ (Israel and India being honorary members) goes to sleep thinking of ways to destroy Pakistan and then wakes up only to implement those plans. There is also no such thing as domestic terrorism in Pakistan and all acts that can be ascribed to such are, in fact, due to enemy agents. Democracy is a failure and the only way forward is to turn back towards an imagined, and largely imaginary, golden age. The list goes on, but you get the idea.
Now, this leaves people like me (I’m hoping I’m not the only one here) in something of a dilemma. I categorically support the right of women to wear what they want, but I also extend that right to those women who, of their own will, choose to wear an abaya. I won’t even qualify that with a “but of course, she’s internalised the patriarchal mores of society”. BS. If she says it’s her decision, that’s good enough for me. Where does this place me on the left-right spectrum? I don’t think Pakistan should unilaterally denuclearise in the pursuit of some illusory moral high ground, nor do I think that disbanding the army will lead to anything but foreign invasion. However, I do also feel that peace with India is the only sustainable way to proceed to a mutually prosperous future. Does that make me a Hawk or a Dove? Or does it just make me hard to pigeonhole?
When it comes to Balochistan, for example, I fully acknowledge that the state has played a historical role in bringing matters to the low ebb that they are at now, but I also believe that foreign powers are absolutely pouring petrol over the flames. I condemn those killings that the state, deep or otherwise, is responsible for, but I condemn the atrocities being carried out by the insurgents as well. Sadly, I’ve seen that very few from the left will do so, simply because it runs counter to their narrative of state: Bad, everyone else: Good. That just doesn’t cut it. Good is Good and Bad is Bad, it doesn’t matter if your favourites-of-the-day are carrying out the killing; murder remains murder. The same applies for rightist apologists who say that the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan are ‘misguided’ and will simply lay down their arms once the war on terror concludes. They won’t. Don’t fool yourselves.
But I digress. One does that when one stands in the middle because there really isn’t much company. So here’s what I want to say: the left needs to acknowledge that the mainstream discourse is a largely conservative one because, like it or not, this is a conservative nation. Practically, this means that while you don’t have to throw away your Proust, you may just want to read the translated Quran and some commentaries as well. It won’t hurt and you just may get some new ammunition for your humanistic arguments. For the religious right, well you guys also need to understand that history didn’t begin with the Hijri. There’s a whole world out there and most of it is not your enemy. And to both of you, I have an appeal: take the middle road. It’s one that some of the greatest minds this world has been blessed with have repeatedly urged us to do. And one of them, who was born about 1,400 years ago in the Arabian desert, was more humane and spiritual than all of us combined.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 9th, 2012.
COMMENTS (44)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Samar: "Kia baat hai! I was waiting for something like this! Zaid Hamid and Nadeem paracha, both need to read this now!"
False equivalence. Zaid Hamid routinely advocates killing people who differ from him, NFP clearly has not done so. In most countries people like NFP would be called centrist and voice of reason. In your country they are marginalized and called liberal fascist- a term which makes zero sense.
@Sanam Taseer:
Only if there is a left can there be centre.
Gem of a comment. Brilliant.
A down-to-earth article that reveals the requirement of a rational and practical way of approaching the present crisis in Pakistan. But, I feel there are no 'two' courses, as the author claims, between which he seems to be caught. The 'extremist' course is so powerful that even the govt declares a holiday to enable them to cause damage to public property and its own image. People like the author are not caught in the middle course, but are almost ignored and considered non-existent! Unless the all-pervasive course is swept away, and that too soon, Pakistan, I am afraid to say, is getting closer to anarchy.
Only if there is a left can there be centre.
rasool bux palijo, fazil rahu and their awami tehreek have been the only real left in the national discourse of past century. what r the views of the author on their struggle
The article is a veritable treasure trove of false equivalences. I strongly feel that some of them at least need to be exposed for what they are.
False Equivalence No 1- **One group will cite Voltaire and the universality of human rights, while the other will quote Sahih Bukhari and give examples from Islamic history.
Even the most rabid Voltaire spewing liberal fascist will not kill in the name of Voltaire. Whereas 76% of those who thump the Sahih Bukhari would prefer to kill if someone shows even marginally less fervor towards Sahih Bukhari. And about 50% of them are convinced that Shias are not Muslims and deserve all that they are receiving. Don't take my word for it. See it for yourself.
http://www.pewglobal.org/2010/07/29/concern-about-extremist-threat-slips-in-pakistan/
http://dawn.com/2012/08/15/who-gets-to-be-a-muslim-in-pakistan/
False Equivalence No 2- **There is also the belief that only Pakistan’s agencies are capable of dirty tricks while the rest of the world’s shadow-masters are somehow benign.
While RAW/MOSSAD/CIA are certainly not Girl Scout Groups, but they certainly do not support, fund, train and nurture terrorists for operation in their own countries. And no, they do not try to influenceelections either. And their Chiefs will be thrown out of their offices the moment they even hinted at the Head of the State being treasonous.
False Equivalence No 3-So here’s what I want to say: the left needs to acknowledge that the mainstream discourse is a largely conservative one because, like it or not, this is a conservative nation
OK so the 24% who do not approve murder for a change in belief should pack up and like it or not move to the other side as this is a conservative nation? What happened to your middle road then?
@observer: Well said. Add Malala Yousafzai to that list, who apparently was targeted for supposedly being 'secular' of all things. It is incredibly skewed comparison and a false equivalence.
I do not know what a moderate even is nowadays in Pakistan...even if you're an independent minded practising person of the majority Sunni Muslim sect who wants to even amend, for the sake of an imaginary 'middle road', the un-Islamic Hudood Ordinance, which is a twisted and butchered interpretation of what was actually a progressive law for its time to protect women from false accusations but now incredibly exploited against them, somehow you're a 'liberal fascist' and shouldn't rock the boat against this 'conservative' Islamist (or munafiq/hypocrite) republic status quo, and simply liable to be killed. Imagine how minorities are suppose to appeal to reason of such a majority.
You're first mistake is thinking that there are no Pakis who are reasoned and take the factual approach as opposed to the ideological approach (leftist or conservative). Circle-jerks on the internets doesn't mean what they say is all of the sudden relevant and the only discourse. Your second mistake is giving the self-styled "liberals" and "conservatives" a label which they are hopelessly short of (at best). Desi "liberals" don't know the first thing about liberalism. They are essentially neo-cons with brown skin, acting as the enlightened native. "Conservatives" are closer to the pre-Muhammad kafirs they so despise than they are to the Sahabis. Hypocrites and jahils to the core. They have and will continue to desecrate Islam more than any non-Muslim could ever hope to. The last mistake is thinking this is about religion/ideology. It won't matter a damn if the leftists suddenly discovered liberalism or a progressive approach and came to a discussion armed with reason instead of polemic trolling. Nor will it matter if the conservatives discover the meaning of itjehad. "We" or "they" don't control anything, and hence one way over the other is impossible.
Kia baat hai! I was waiting for something like this! Zaid Hamid and Nadeem paracha, both need to read this now!
@Author:
An excellent write-up in its own right. However, I have two observations.
1- Being moderate is entirely different than the one who diplomatically adopts some middle ground. There is no harm in having strong opinion for what you believe is right as long as you try to convince others using reasoning and facts instead of violence. Respecting the right of others to have different opinion than yours is what is a moderate behavior.
2- It really disappoints me when intelligent people like yourself just simple describe what is on the surface, which perhaps a common person already knows, instead of trying to dig out the actual causes of the problem and devise systematic strategies for overcoming it. Well, revealing a problem and pointing fingers is the easiest part, the real hard part is to diagnose the causes and then suggest the treatment. Unfortunately, most of the scholars in Pakistan just do the first easier part.
I read something similar on ET blogs a few weeks back
Excellent article. This is exactly the kind of thing our people need to hear more often. Do consider having it translated and published in various local language newspapers.
Author
Really like your article. It takes a person of intellectual strength to be able to take the middle ground, to tolerate differences in opinion, and to actually engage in discussion, rather than close their minds to a different opinion.
I suspect that most people form the silent majority of the the 'middle ground'.
bhaijan you have nailed it once again! amazing how good the voice of reason sounds, i'm sure the liberals didn't take too well to the PBUH reference at the end ;)
With the country in a ditch, this is hardly the time to be a "moderate". Religious extremism must be crushed with an iron fist. We can either charge ahead or slip away into non-existence.
Are left killing people like religion right? Where is the comparison?
@Afzaal Khan: @Zain M If I was a English-speaking Pak Elite like you, I will ask outsiders to stay out too. If I were you I would want no interference in exploiting 99% of poor, il-literate, ill-informed, un-washed masses. I wish I were a Muslim capitalist/elite like you guys. I envy you.
I leave my Che Guevara T-shirt at home when I hang out with the surkhas.
Do remember to put it on when attending Tsunamis.
One group will cite Voltaire and the universality of human rights, while the other will quote Sahih Bukhari and give examples from Islamic history.
OK,OK, I get it. Voltaire should be quoted in Arabic or may be Sahih Bukhari should be read in French, for the sake of the middle ground. Please also consider the one quoting Voltaire does not kill those quoting Sahih Bukhari.
For the left, there is the belief that each and every one of our current problems can be traced to General Ziaul Haq, whose legacy is being perpetuated by the omnipresent and omnipotent establishment.
For the 'Left' only? What do the majority of people feel? If they are convinced that Ziaism has been entirely benign, why change it. Carry on up the Heavenly Path.
So here’s what I want to say: the left needs to acknowledge that the mainstream discourse is a largely conservative one because, like it or not, this is a conservative nation.
So the Middle Road is this. The LEFT, better stuff it, or else. It is a 'conservative country'. PERIOD
Now, a question of my own,Who or what is this thing that you keep on calling the LEFT in today's Pakistan?
Let me be more specific. Parvez Hoodbhoy is critical of the present situation, is he LEFT? Salman Taseer lost his life for his views, was he LEFT? Syed Saleem Shahzad wrote about certain powers and conspiracies, was he LEFT?
What percentage of today's Pakistan is LEFT?
Someday do look up the meaning of Apologist.
@Faraz Talat: And clearly you're part of the problem.
You cannot lean on the liberal side of the divide 80% of the times, and call yourself a "moderate" by virtue of the few exceptions where you fall in the central or the conservative zone.
If you believe in a woman's freedom to wear whatever she wants, without acknowledging the rad-fem rants against headscarves, then that makes you moderately liberal, but a liberal nonetheless.
There's nothing wrong with taking sides. No rational person should have to take the "middle ground" when dealing with things like women's rights, LGBT's rights and minority protection. You're either on the side of change, or you're an impediment to our social progress!
@Hukum Singh, Gp65 and other indians
Author is talking to pakistanis not indian trolls like you, I like the message and as always will try to me more open to my pakistani brethern, it is not directed at you indians, why don't you try fixing your own country first? Really getting tired of hypocrisy by indians and holier then thou attitude.
@Hukum Singh: "Where is the Liberal/left in Pakistan?..." Totally agree with you about the composition of political opinion in Pak. Most of the labeling done is from the least politically educated persons. They simply repeat what they have heard somewhere, without having even a basic grasp of what they are talking about. .
Agree partially with your assesment, but i think rather than expecting people to adopt a middle of the road approach to all issues ( which is not possible with a population as diverse as ours), it is better to have your own opinion, but be ready to tolerate the (differing) opinions of others. At the heart of it, all our violence stems from the inability to tolerate each other ( in religion, sect, ethnicity, nationality etc.)
Hukum Singh leave Pakistan alone. Quite a lot of your people are good friends of Pakistan inspite of its problems. We will come out of it, don't forget that.
"I have an appeal: take the middle road. "
One road is skeptical, empirist and based on reason. The other road follows a path which is unquestioning and based on total submission. There is no middle road !
Excellent article. I think it represent a silent majority's view to a large extent.
I find my self in one corner yes....but your generalization of both siges is dangerously oversimplitic...argued in the language of 10 graders. I would give a little more respect to both sides of the argument...for our nation its at least as important as the.arguments of the French and American revolutions. Don't oversimplify it to absurdity..
@Hukum Singh: "If I were Azim Premji I will migrate to Pakistan and exploit the wretched and brainwashed masses of Pakistan "
Well it looks like he became a multibillionaire without exploitation, something that none of the Pakistani capitalists has achieved with all their exploitation. So unless the goal was exploitation instead of wealth creation, not sure such a move would serve?
Muslim capitalists in Muslim countries have it made. You can use religion to exploit workers. Sway the electorate. Use religion to keep the poor in their place. And use Mullahs if the poor fall out of line. If I were Azim Premji I will migrate to Pakistan and exploit the wretched and brainwashed masses of Pakistan who can be swayed to give their precious lives just on rumors of a badly made movie-trailer OR a well written book of fiction.
In fact, on a second read, this is an extraordinary contribution, and one I miss sorely each and every day. The Balochistan example is perfect: the 'right' won't accept our own mistakes in causing the crisis, and solving it, while the left simply won't hear of any foreign influence. It's a stupid, stunted, fearful, unintellectual 'debate' for it seems as if both sides are afraid that deviating one bit from their position will mean that the country will swing totally the other way. This political situation is as divisive as the American one.
Why can't we accept that we have indeed mistreated the Balochis in the past, and are still committing crimes against them? And why can we not accept that there does seem to be ample proof that foreign countries are indeed playing a role in Balochistan. Has history taught us nothing? When the smallest of opportunities opens up, do we expect RAW, at the very least, to sit by idly? This is what intelligence agencies the world over do, and for anyone familiar with the history of foreign involvement by India, USA, and Israel would accept such an eventuality.
So why not accept both these facts, and then make sure that we do everything in our power to respectfully, intelligently resolve this crisis and put our house in order, for whether RAW is involved in not, at the end of the day, we are ones who have to clean this mess.
This left and right division is too simplistic. The liberals in Pakistan like to identify themselves with the left, as it's seen as the more intellectual, impressive group in the West. However, Jamaat-e-Islami supports a very left-wing, redistributive economic policy, and contrary to the so-called leftist liberals, is not averse to government intervention. Hence, when it comes to economic policy, JI is more leftist than these liberals. The late American intellectual Daniel Bell described himself as a "socialist in economics, a liberal in politics, and a conservative in culture."
To analyse our country correctly, we need this sort of a flexible approach.
On another note, Mr. Khuhro's contrarian nature is interesting, and admirable. It's a very good contribution, because these divides have become too entrenched in our society, with the liberals thinking that religious people want to chop of everyone's heads and the religious feeling that liberals want to create a totally Europeanised society here.
Where is the Liberal/left in Pakistan? Is there a single socialist/communist party in Pakistan (or any Islamic country) that fights for workers rights? All an outsider can see is Right (33 %), Extreme Right (33%) and a Literal fundamentalists/Taliban (33%) and less than 1% who would qualify as Liberal / Left as defined in West. Same is true on other Islamic countries. Nobody to speak for workers and minority and women and poor peoples rights. Which is why these groups are dirt poor and miserable. I would love to be a muslim capiltalist in a muslim country. Being a hindu, you are just asking to be kidnapped.
You give "Enlightened Moderation" a whole new meaning! Perhaps en-lightened because of the absence of any weight?
Amazing, thoughtful and enlightening piece: very candid, and leaving no door unopened. This country definitely needs a perspective like that in these times. Loved it, and I expected nothing less from you sir.
A very sane voice of reason, I hope more and more ppl agree with the Author, God bless you Sir, this is what we need moderation in all aspects of life. We can do better then what we all been doing, I for one IA will make wholehearted effort to be more moderate and not anger take over my reasoning. Thank you sir.
So, you are basically suggesting to believe in nothing? Well. That's a pretty radical idea.
I hate to break it to you but you have been a fashionable lefty liberal all this time. Or have I been an unfashionable moderate all this time while thinking I'm in a tiny fashionable minority of liberals? Now I have a political identity crisis...
Excellent article, sir! You read my mind, and I'm sure of many others as well. This is the only way forward for Pakistan and Pakistanis, to think and act in moderation.
. What an enlightening piece! This is the voice of those who genuinely feel for Pakistan, and don't carry a personal agenda. Bravo! You need to write more.
Bingo. One of the most balanced articles I have seen in ET in a long time. Ideological polarization is the biggest ideological risk we face as a nation where the very capable people on fringes are too busy bashing each other to make any significant progress on fundamental issues.If we were to spend much less time judging each other and much more time understanding each other, we would be in a much better shape as a nation.
Zarrar sb,
Finally! A voice of reason and sanity, among the people who love to classify each other as liberal fascists, deep state, Zia Daur Kee Pedaawaar, mullah, DPC sponsored, etc. This frenzy of labeling each other take us only southwards.
Author "And one of them, who was born about 1,400 years ago in the Arabian desert, was more humane and spiritual than all of us combined". You have said it as it is. liked your article kudos and regards
There are whole lot of us who feel the same. Extermists thinks we are liberals and Kaafir and Liberals thinks we are narrow minded and trolls if we voice our opinion. We all shall learn to respect each other's opinions.