A State that Took over Society

You can bring the rich to the level of the poor overnight but it takes a lifetime to lift the poor to the level of the rich.
- Irish proverb

During the 1970s, Pakistan went in for wholesale nationalization of its private enterprises, taking even educational institutions into the state’s hands. This was a move laden with far-reaching and unforeseeable consequences. Some are still being unveiled today. It changed not only the economic and political, but also the social, intellectual and moral landscape of the country for generations to come.

The story began in 1968, with a political movement basing itself purely on totalitarian economic agenda. Its slogans were reminiscent of an ancient collective tribal life where everything belonged to everyone. Two of these were: ‘socialism is our economy’ and ‘all power to the people.’ The movement was built on the myth of 22 wealthy families: it was argued that the sole cause of poverty of the people of Pakistan was the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few big industrialists. This myth was exploited fully to gain the political benefit.

Thus, under the Nationalization Order of 1972, a number of industries such as iron and steel, basic metals, heavy engineering, heavy electrical, assembling and manufacturing of motor vehicles and tractors, heavy and basic chemicals, petrochemicals, cement, public utilities, power generation, transmission and distribution, and gas and oil refineries were nationalized. The Order ostracized the private sector from economic areas of ‘crucial importance’. In 1972 all private educational institutions, including schools, were shifted to the public sector. The second Order in 1974 led to the nationalization of banks, life insurance, shipping and marketing of petroleum products. In 1976, 2,815 cotton ginning, rice husking and flour milling units were taken over. It ‘created an administrative nightmare and widespread resentment,’ as an analyst said.

More important were the revolutionary changes in the wake of nationalization. The damage was more than economic: mutual trust and regard for personal freedom and property disappeared. It was just like a powerful windstorm uprooting everything coming in its way. There was simultaneous nationalization of social and moral values of Pakistani society. Thus, out of the dust of this storm emerged a new ethic that ultimately proved inimical to basic principles of human civilization. In time, these values pervaded the thinking and practices of people at all levels of society.

The foremost value was: ‘all wealth is evil.’ Some of the other values let us sense the gravity of the crisis: that wealth can only be earned by evil means; or, it is created only through evil means; that one who has wealth has got it through evil means; that the wealth one has, was stolen from someone else; that wealth is not a private property; that it is to be owned only collectively; and last but not least, that earning it in any manner is perfectly justified.

These values reflect only the tip of the iceberg. The crisis was so deep and pervasive that it engulfed and destroyed all profit-incentive, work-incentive, work ethics and business ethics. The very concept of property rights and justice was dismantled, resulting in an unprecedented jungle-like anarchy where everything belonged to everyone, and ultimately came to belong to none but the mightiest.

Naturally, the nationalized entities were mercilessly plundered, over-employed and finally collapsed. This gave rise to a kleptocratic institution of government and a kleptocratic society as well. One of Pakistan’s greatest entrepreneurs, G.M. Adamjee, pondered, "In a society neck-deep in corruption, I more often than not find myself a misfit. There is no place for a veteran businessman."

Under the circumstances, the state acquired the role of an instrument of making and redistributing money, and it was the influential elite that used it most, made money and redistributed money the most. This elitist system benefited only a few - and those who were networked. All politics of the elitist state found an exclusive focus ready to be exploited for amassing wealth, and cultivated a general consensus that the state must provide for all of the citizens according to their wishes, no matter what their social and economic status is. This induced an unrelenting scramble for power and money.

Poverty was now to be considered a disadvantage for individuals, caused by the larger earnings of the rich. It meant that the poor were poor because the rich were rich. This was a situation of mistaken targeting: it was not the rich industrialists or capitalists who were responsible for the poverty or low standard of living for people at large as was understood generally. The people who were at the helm of the affairs - regardless of whether they were industrialists or landlords, bureaucrats or politicians or others  - grabbed political power and resources, and exploited the rest.

All this prevented Pakistan from moving towards and forward on the path to development and prosperity for all.

When the economy had reached a state where it was in a shambles, the winds changed direction. It was during the 1990s that Pakistan started treading on the path to de-nationalization, privatization, and then moved ahead with de-regulation and liberalization with a hope to redress the damage done till date. But of course, it will take time for confidence and mutual trust to be restored among the people, and between the people and the state. Moreover, the damage done to the social and moral fabric of society will take a much longer time to heal. The society of Pakistan is still in a state of valuelessness and lawlessness!

Note: This article was completed in February 7, 2008.

Politics and the destruction of our cities

Years back, I sent an article titled, “Nationalization of social and moral values in Pakistan,” to a newspaper. It did publish but with entirely a different title. The new title, “A state that took over society” aptly described what that article was about. Now when I want to write about the destruction of our cities by the political elites in their bid to impress the citizens as voters, I cannot think of a better title than the present one. First I thought of this one: “Preserving the older cities.” However, both the titles communicate what this article argues about. First, the political elites are destroying our cities; and, second, we need to preserve our cities and their age-old soul.

As far as the concept of cities prevailing in our society is concerned, it needs to be reminded that cities are not a complex of roads, buildings, houses, streets, schools, colleges, universities, markets, hotels, restaurants, parks, gardens, libraries; in fact, they are a complex of conceptual environment in which people are born; where they are brought up; where they play, study, comingle, make friends, indulge in love; where they do business, politics; where they organize in various associational initiatives; where they build their world of dreams; where they wage struggle for the improvement of their life or others’ life; where they marry, settle in new homes and beget children; where they pass their old age completely in harmony with their cities; and finally where they are buried. And cities are such places where after their death, they are remembered and visited and prayed for a peaceful afterlife by their survivors. Ultimately cities are made of the stuff dreams are made of.

But as the Pakistani state has taken over its society; along with it, it has grabbed that environment of our cities also where the citizens used to be part of the city’s conceptual environment, and now they feel stranger in their own cities. Now when I go about in Lahore here and there, I miss so many things that were the part of my existence, and like me part of millions of Lahoris’ existence; however, they are no more there. Flyovers, underpasses, overhead bridges, metro-bus have encroached upon the canvas of Lahore. I really feel lost. Just go in front of the MAO College, and see how that Muhammadan Anglo Oriental College has lost its look and image under the ugly shadow of the elevated road for the metro-bus. Not only the MAO College, but just opposite to it another old red-brick building of the erstwhile government college of education stands eclipsed by the same elevated road.

That may mean that one is despising the progressive work meant for the benefit of the people at large, and he may be diagnosed of having a retrogressive mindset. For example, metro-bus is such a good facility that saves time and money of the thousands of commuters. Flyovers, overhead bridges, or underpasses, they all facilitate smooth flow of vehicles and do not allow for any traffic jams. That it’s a great achievement seems to be a truism.

However, the underlying story is quite different. As far as Lahore is concerned, its population has increased manifold and it lacks many of the civic facilities. Good roads and smooth traffic are two big issues. But the question is how to solve these issues; by running metro-bus (which consumed so muc of the space), building flyovers, overhead bridges, underpasses; or by improving the roads and managing the traffic as is required by the traffic laws. It cannot be controverted that in Lahore and in other cities also, rules and laws of traffic are not implemented. Nobody in the department of the traffic police, and up to the chief minister, bothers about controlling the traffic mess that’s a daily suffering for millions of people. While a number of flyovers, overhead bridges, underpasses do not witness much traffic using them, one is forced to ask why so much money has been spent on such “political marvels.”

Clearly, it is political economy working behind these, in most of the cases, un-needed and un-wanted projects. And, no doubt, they are to prove that the government is doing a lot, and surveys and studies are misled by this illusion of progress and development. In Lahore, there has been built an overhead bridge where the Shalimar Link Road crosses the Canal Road; one can stand there for one hour and count only dozens of vehicles use this bridge; and just beneath this bridge, there is almost always a painful traffic mess facing the people. That shows what is needed is management of traffic on the roads by strictly implementing the rules and laws of traffic, not these political impressive!

It reminds me of a short-story which narrates the ordeal of a simple woman from a suburban village coming to one of the biggest city hospitals to have her daughter treated by the specialist doctors. The first day she has to go back unattended by the doctors; because she has to face a complex network of doors, corridors, floors, stairs on the one hand, and on the other, complicated system of availing various medical services provided by the hospital. She was not familiar to that complicated style of building housing the complicated way of providing services. It takes whole of her second day to know where to go for this and where to go for that.

The gist of the matter is that progress and development means facilitation; not complication; simplicity, and not complexity. Sure, that means simple cities imbued with their soul and spirit. That amounts to saying that development in cities doesn’t mean disfiguring of the face of those cities. Politicians and rulers must understand this simple truth that their mandate to rule is just for 5 years, and they have no authority or right to destroy the 500 years old existence of our cities. In many cases, these cities of ours, like Lyallpur, Gujrat, Karachi, Peshawar, Lahore and so many others may be much older than a period of 500 hundred years.

The politicians and rulers must not impose their dreams on our cities; they should go and develop new cities and do whatever they like, just as they did in Islamabad. Our cities are the dreams of our ancestors as well as ours. We want our cities back. O politicians and rulers leave our cities alone to us, the civil society which can better take care of them. O politicians do not destroy our cities for your temporary political gains! Do not politicize our cities! Let our cities be ourselves!

Note: This article was completed on June 9, and was originally posted in June 2014.