In a world with an intellectual history of seven thousand years behind it, where do Pakistanis stand, what are they doing, what do they aspire to be, and what ought they to be doing? This Blog takes Notes of all of that ...
Thursday, December 31, 2015
Sunday, December 27, 2015
Forsaken by the State
Note: The day Benazir Bhutto was murdered, December 27, 2007, it was the day when all the semblance of government evaporated in Pakistan; there was widespread anarchy and uncertainty; there was arson, loot, and destruction. Fear prevailed. As if the life and property of ordinary citizens of this country were forsaken by the State! Here is the Story:
Where
there is no property there is no injustice.
John Locke
John Locke
Regardless
of the controversy whether we human beings are by nature good or bad, what is
crucially required to keep our society intact is that we must be treated as
free agents. This washes away all those excuses the science of psychology and
its Freuds and no-Freuds have heaped on and which provide an eternal alibi for
the criminals to prove their innocence under the guise of this or that mental
state or illness, or this or that instinctual impulse which, it is pleaded,
eventually forces them into acting that crime: that they were not just
themselves at the time of crime (I would like, in such cases, that self of
theirs to be punished at least!).
Thus,
it is of immense significance, and both tradition and moral and social values,
and law too, have it that everyone who commits an offence must be tried and
punished accordingly. It behooves to be presumed that it is a certain person
and it is he and only he who committed the crime. Otherwise, we will have only
crimes, and no criminals, a state of affairs we cannot afford if we believe in
justice and its dispensation as the sine qua non for the continuation of a
society.
The
true relevance of this requirement demonstrates well when we are faced with a
concrete danger to our life and property. It must be noted here that property
is not a separate entity from one’s self though physically it is; rather it is
an extension of one’s self and his life. ‘Every man has a property in his own
person. This nobody has a right to, but himself,’ Locke observed. He held that
‘the reason why men enter into society is the preservation of their property.’
Without property we, who are not all mystics, are just in the midst of a forced
hermitage, a state of social and existential nothingness. Probably it is why we
protect our property at the risk of our life; and, certainly it is why we take
lives of others to grab their property. Also, it was why in the 18th century
England stealing was punishable by death.
It
is in this context that the focus of British classical liberals such as Locke
(1632-1704) and Hume (1711-1776) on the protective function of government can
be best understood. Locke maintains that ‘government has no other end, but the
preservation of property.’ Hume believed that ‘the convention for the
distinction of property, and for the stability of possession, is of all
circumstances the most necessary to the establishment of human society, and
that after the agreement for the fixing and observing of this rule, there
remains little or nothing to be done towards settling a perfect harmony and
concord.’
Thus,
any authority that takes on the task of governing a people, for it the foremost
thing is to extend protection of life and property to every individual under
its jurisdiction so that he should live in peace and happiness. If it fails to
deliver that, it loses the confidence and trust of its people. Converse to all
this, the state in Pakistan, as a rule, has been quite unmindful of this
foremost responsibility. In the heat of moments, such as the assassination of
Benazir Bhutto, it just sleeps. Actually, whatever government is it, a civilian
or military or any other, they have a theory to make excuse of: Let people vent
their anger. They think this diverts people’s attention from the real issues
and real culprits.
After
the cold-blooded murder of Benazir Bhutto, the loot and arson that took place
has shaken the confidence of all the citizenry. No doubt, her assassination
must be condemned in unequivocal terms, and on the face of it is itself the
strongest evidence of the state’s criminal negligence in protecting the lives
of the people and their leaders. But of course it should not be taken as an
excuse for the uncalled for lawlessness to prevail. No incident of any
magnitude licenses anyone to incur damage to the life and property of his
fellow citizens.
However,
the fact is that as the news of her assassination spread, unruly mobs took to
the streets and markets and let loose a reign of terror as if no administrative
authority existed in the country. From big cities to small towns, routine life
and businesses suffered a standstill for days. As many as 58 people were killed
amidst the worst lawlessness. The state’s conspicuous absence from the scene
further created a sense of fear and insecurity among the people. Though the
initial estimates of loss and damage have started pouring in, the real damage
that has shattered the society’s trust in the ability of the state to protect
the citizenry is immeasurable.
Here
are some horrible recounts of the loot and arson private and public property
underwent:
- The ensuing night of December 27 witnessed the horrible act of burning of a hospital in Karachi.
- Inside a garment factory which was set on fire by the rioters in Karachi seven workers including a woman lost their lives.
- 16 Edhi ambulances were set on fire.
- Dozens of trucks which were torched in Korangi Industrial area included two trucks loaded with wheat.
- About 36 factories, 3 restaurants, eights petrol pumps, 55 shops were torched in Karachi.
- More than 900 private vehicles were torched in Sindh.
- About 15 spinning mills in Kotri and 6 in North Karachi industrial area were destroyed or set on fire and more than a dozen factories in different industrial areas of Karachi alone were looted.
- Both domestic and foreign trade came to a halt, and traders suffered a loss of Rs.10 billion.
- Hundreds of cargo trailer-trucks loaded with milk, ghee, chemicals, fertilizers, pulses, wheat, machinery, fiber boards, fruits and vegetables were looted and burnt. The Karachi Goods Carriers Association estimates the accumulated losses at 193.5 millions rupees.
- According to Karachi Chamber of Commerce and Industry 5 days of riots caused a corporate loss of Rs.80 billion, and the loss to GDP is to the tune of Rs.8.706 billion.
- A total of 699 branches of various banks were looted, damaged, and burnt. The State Bank’s estimates of losses reach about Rs.1.2 billion.
- Trains carrying passengers were stoned, attacked and burnt. In two cases, after forcing the passengers to disembark the carriages were burnt. In total, 6 trains, 78 train bogies, 26 locomotives, and 25 railway stations were set on fire. As much as 16 bridges, 18 level crossings, a number of railways cranes and motor trolleys were set ablaze. At six places, the rail track was uprooted and fish plates were removed; railways communication system also suffered damage. The loss is estimated to be more than Rs.12 billion.
- The tax authorities estimate the Revenue losses amounting to Rs.35 billion.
This
was not the first such incident when the people of Pakistan were forsaken by
the state. Only a few months back in May 2007 Karachi was subjected to a most
brazen show of lawlessness under the criminal silence of provincial and federal
governments. The fact of the matter is that whenever there is such a public
outrage, the theory: ‘let the people vent their anger’ comes into force and
government’s administrative authority disappears altogether. As to the December
27 chaos, there are concerns that in some cases the looting particularly of
banks was organized and was done by organized groups.
All
this is outrageous. However, what is more outrageous is that government has set
up a commission that will assess the extent of the damage done to private and
public property. Whereas what is required is the setting up of a commission
that should include representatives of all sections of society, and it should
be tasked in the first instance with the determination of the fact why and how
the law enforcing agencies and their bosses from top to bottom absented when
the reign of terror was let loose across the country, and of course to ensure
that there is law in the country those found guilty of negligence be awarded
due punishments.
As
to the demand of compensation being made by the manufacturers, traders,
transporters, and small businessmen who suffered incalculable losses, they
should realize that in fact it will backfire. Seeking compensation from
government will no doubt result in levying of more taxes, and entrenching of
the rentiers’ regime. Ultimately it will hurt their own businesses by reducing,
already shrinking purchasing power of common man. The lawful course is to file
damages suits in the courts against both law enforcing agencies and ransackers.
That will set a precedent for the future also.
But
as is expected the courts may not be able to provide them with justice, and in
that event the government will be stripped of all the semblance of its
protective function and a government for the people. Thus it will lose all
moral, legal, and constitutional authority to tax the citizens. That will be
the end of such regimes which have made Pakistan such a place for people to
live where if there be choice they will migrate to other lands where their
person and property is safe.
This article was completed in January 2008.
This article was completed in January 2008.
Labels:
benazir bhutto,
Freud,
Hume,
John Locke,
Murder of BB,
PPP,
state
Tuesday, December 15, 2015
The road ahead is quite straight
This article was written last year in the wake of December 16 APS Tragedy to expose the Politicians' inaction. It's still relevant today on December 16, 2015.
The road ahead is quite straight
The road ahead is quite straight
Beware
of the politicians! They cannot think and act out of their politically blocked
mentality! They are a victim of paradigms made of their own choice; that’s why
they disdain rules, laws and the constitution, which require and bind them to
act accordingly. They won’t break the paradigms, which ensure their short-term
survival, and it’s seldom that they shift to newer paradigms of thinking and
action in a broader perspective. Whenever that happens, that happens temporarily
and perforce due to the force of the circumstances, like the one which the
December 16 Peshawar massacre of the children generated, or under the pressure
of the “Subjects,” “Awaam,” like the one which got Iftikhaar Muhammad Chaudhry
former Chief Justice of Pakistan restored against the will of the whole “state”
of Pakistan, which its politicians consider themselves to be the “Ashraaf” and “Haakim!”
So the moment that pressure releases, they are the same politicians - Haakim
and Ashraaf!
What
are these paradigms of Paki politicians? First, see how they respond and react
to such tragedies of unfathomable magnitude! Try to empathize the immense grief
the Peshawar massacre caused: 132 is the number of those innocent souls death
of whom has devastated hundreds of families, thousands of their relatives and
friends, millions of their dreams, and shocked billions of human beings all
over the globe! The unimaginable tragedy has jolted Pakistan’s “imagined
enemies” also! And how the politicians, whether they are in the parliament or
out of it, took it is more important, relevant and pertinent in the sense that
it will show at the end of the day how the state of Pakistan is going to tackle
the menace.
The
first political paradigm comprises the narrative which includes: condemnations, consolations, condolences,
resolutions; and the likes. The second paradigm calls for meetings,
conferences, APCs; and the likes. An APC of all the parliamentary parties we
have already seen happening. Another highlight in this regard is the Pakistan Peoples
Party’s demand to call for a joint session of the parliament. The third
paradigm opts for constitution of commissions for inquiries, investigations;
and the likes. There are various inquiries and investigations, announced and
unannounced, already in the process. The fourth paradigm focuses on setting up
commissions, committees for devising action plans. As a result of the
above-mentioned APC, a parliamentary committee has been formed to devise a
National Action Plan, which has already set up a Working Group. The political
imagination never goes beyond these paradigms. Hence, it’s rarely seen that the
action plans thus devised by such committees are put to work or put through. Nor
are implemented any findings and recommendations of any inquiry commission or
investigation committee thus formed.
Right
from the beginning: Justice Munir Inquiry Report (1954), the only report the
original text of which along with its official Urdu translation the then
government made public, never put to any use; Hamoodur Rahman Commission
Report, which inquired into the military debacle of East Pakistan (now
Bangladesh) never saw the light of the day nor were implemented any of its
recommendations; Saleem Shahzad Inquiry Report, which inquired the mysterious
murder of Saleem Shahzad, a renowned journalist, did not bear any fruit; and,
Abbottabad Commission Report, which inquired into the circumstances under which
Osama Bin Laden safely resided for years in Abbottabad, a military town, remains
dumped in all respects. So that’s the fate of all the political paradigms!
As
mentioned earlier the politicians seldom come to alter their paradigms, it
amounts to saying that they won’t change them this time too, and though there is
unprecedented outrage against the politicians as well as so-called powerful
Generals of the army, the politicians won’t do anything worthwhile but such
measures which help them water down the social and psychological heaviness that
the Peshawar massacre of children has begotten. Most probably, they will drag
the issue and allow time to lessen its intensity and finally bury it. Although
executions of certain terrorists have started making headlines, whose dead
bodies otherwise should have by now worn out in the graves, there is nothing
substantial in the offing as the “measures and actions” the government is
deliberating and taking now attest.
In
contradistinction to it, what may be termed “cash politics” in point of fact
takes no time to get launched; for instance, a number of power generation
projects are in the pipeline, whereas no attention is being given to the real
cause of the acute power shortage, i.e. mismanagement in the power sector. It
is such opportunities that the Paki politicians are most interested in. In
other words, it’s Cash Politics where the political paradigm of action may only
be seen working actively. All other issues, whatever their magnitude and
fatality, do not interest the Paki politicians.
In
case, someone starts analyzing the present troubles, his findings will reveal
that the miseries and killings the ordinary Pakistanis are undergoing today may
be traced to such issues which were deliberately delayed and complicated by the
politicians, and that they were never dealt with sternly and with
determination. That list includes Terrorism, Extremism, Sectarianism, Non-Civilian
Supremacy as the top most issues. The question staring us in the face is: Do
the Pakistani constitution, rules and laws on the one hand, and the courts,
police and other related institutions and agencies on the other are not
competent enough to deal with these and like issues? The courts had already
handed those terrorists death sentence whom the government is executing now! Also,
if new legislation and new institutions were required in order to cope with
these menaces, why it was not done in time promptly and efficiently! Why
relaxing in political paradigms remained the way of the politicians? In
conclusion, it may be said that the state of Pakistan has already got all that
paraphernalia it requires to deal with these issues; do not give it turns and
twists; leave your political paradigms; the road ahead is quite straight; have
courage to tread it and focus on the Unity of Action, not on the Unity of the
Nation, and Unity of the Politicians!
Note: This article was completed on December 20, 2014.
Monday, December 7, 2015
Crimes and the political alibi
“I
am a politician; I cannot commit any crime; I am perfectly innocent!”
That
is how, as we know at least in Pakistan, politicians argue. That manner of
political self-defense clears the two-way traffic: criminals may become
politicians; and, politicians may become criminals. Pakistanis have enough of
both. And the breed is multiplying like rabbits. All the more, species
belonging to other realms of social, economic, military, cultural, religious
have started aping the politicians. They have learned the art of politics from
them. That’s a hundred percent fool-proof method of overcoming any odds.
Also,
that has rendered all the systems of accountability inefficacious. Why?
Because, and it is awfully baffling that, all the systems of accountability are
conceived, detailed and legislated by the criminal politicians or political
criminals. Who can forget the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO)? And it
is these politicians, tainted with criminality, who appoint the heads to these
accountability systems, just like Chaudhry Qamar Zaman, has been appointed
Chairman of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB). Just like the leader of the
opposition party in the National Assembly, Khurshid Shah, has been made Chairman
of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC). Such systems are a product of the
political-criminal complex in Pakistan.
The
latest episode from this complex unfolded a few days earlier when on May 29 an
anti-corruption court issued non-bailable warrants for the arrest of former
prime minister Yousaf Raza Gillani and Makhdoom Amin Fahim, former commerce
minister and a member of Gillani’s cabinet. Both are senior leaders of Pakistan
Peoples Party. Seven others include the list of the accused in this case which
allegedly involves major irregularities of Rs.7 billion in granting freight
subsidies to fake trading companies by the Trade Development Authority of
Pakistan (TDAP). Previously both politicians were issued three notices to
appear before the court. As the notices were ignored (note their arrogance!),
then bailable warrants were issued. Now non-bailable warrants have been issued
with hearing adjourned till June 17.
The
same day the former prime minister issued a statement and said: no case in this
country was completed without implicating him whether it was the case of OGRA,
NICL, NRO, TDAP or Haj scam. He added: the beneficiaries of the NRO had been
exonerated but he was still facing the music. His political alibi was worded
thus: ‘He asked the government to avoid crossing the limits of victimization
and unleash it to the extent they could also bear it tomorrow. They had no
stomach to tolerate even the fraction of what was going on against him.’
No
sooner this news item flashed than the political machinery of Peoples Party got
switched on and statements started pouring in the newspapers and TV channels to
beat the drum of political victimization. Very next day co-chairman of the PPP
and former president Asif Ali Zardari ‘deplored the victimization of former
prime ministers Yousaf Raza Gillani and Raja Pervez Ashraf and former federal
minister Makhdoom Amin Fahim behind the façade of accountability as witch-hunting.’
He warned: ‘that bodes ill for the politics of tolerance, accommodation and
reconciliation.’
This
narrative of Political Victimization is very much typical and repeats itself on
various occasions and for various personalities. Now it’s Asif Ali Zardari’s
turn to mouth it: in his statement he pretended to be shocked while, according
to him, the PPP was seeking to protect the democratic system through political
reconciliation the government was chasing political opponents and thereby
undermining the unity of political forces. His tirade is totally based on political
alibi: he said that decisions in national policies whether in the rental power
plants or subsidies or concessions in importing commodities were taken
collectively and transparently by the cabinet in the light of objective
realities and singling out the prime minister is patently wrong and smacks of
political victimization. Also he found a poignant similarity between the
hounding of Benazir Bhutto in late 1990s for the decisions jointly taken by the
cabinet at the time and the chasing of Yousaf Raza Gillani, Raja Pervez Ashraf
and Makhdoom Amin Fahim now for decisions taken by the cabinet. He advised the
government to review its policies and stop witch-hunting and victimization of
political opponents.
This
narrative of political victimization amounts to this: all the decisions
politicians make while they are in government, whether they prove to be good or
bad, must be treated as unquestionable; since by dint of their electoral
mandate they are innocent; and more than that by virtue of their being
politicians and representing the people they cannot make any wrong decisions. In
short, in their capacity of being politicians, they are infallible. And while
they win elections, they place themselves beyond every norm, value, principle,
and morality and law; thus, their infallibility perfects. Gillani’s and Zardari’s
words quoted above are based on these presumptions. They may be termed as the
Political Alibi.
Thus
the political alibi claims the politicians must be considered and treated as
beyond the law of the land. That means they are King, who used to be law unto
himself. So they, the politicians of Pakistan, are law unto themselves. No need
to try Yousaf Raza Gillani, Raja Pervez Ashraf, Makhdoom Amin Fahim, or Asif
Ali Zaradri for any wrong-doing; they are infallible; they are themselves law
of this land.
Or
otherwise, if this or any other government think of trying or tries them, their
narrative by implication means to say that, they will not protect the
democratic system; they will give up political reconciliation; and so on. In
this sense, the political alibi conceals threats of undermining the system. Just
as psychological alibis provide criminals with excuses for their crimes, such
as harming others, or murders in the name of honor, etc; in the same way,
politicians use the political alibis as excuses to hide their inefficiencies,
incompetencies, corrupt and dishonest practices, scamming, nepotism, cronyism, and
misappropriating the public exchequer.
Finally
it may be reminded that the law of Pakistan provides for no such alibi to any
one, be they politicians. That was why they took recourse to the NRO;
otherwise, such a law would have come to their rescue. If any charge is made
against any politician, he / she should present himself / herself in the court
of law and prove his / her innocence. Political alibi is no way of proving ones
innocence; it may prove the guilt, instead!
Note: This article was completed on June
2, 2014.
Labels:
criminal politics,
NAB,
NICL,
NRO,
OGRA,
PAC,
politicians,
PPP,
TDAP
Tuesday, November 24, 2015
Paki philosophers and politics
The
two noblest professions are teaching and politics. [Aristotle]
Back
in 2002 when the 35th Annual Session of Pakistan Philosophical
Congress held in the Bukhari Auditorium, Government College (now G. C.
University), Lahore. Dr. Naeem Ahmad was Secretary of the PPC (Dr. Naeem had
been Chairman Department of Philosophy, University of the Punjab, Lahore), and well before the start of the proceedings I
had time and time again requested him to allow me to present a Resolution in
its General Body meeting. He was positive. On March 16, while the proceedings
ended, late in the evening meeting of the General Body of the Congress was in
progress. When all the items on the agenda, such as issues relating to the next
Congress, elections of the office-bearers, stood settled, Dr. Naeem announced
the closing of the Congress.
I
was dumbstruck; yet in a second I decided: it’s now or never. Based on the past
experience, nobody knew when the next Congress would be held. I went up on the
stage, occupied the rostrum and expressed myself thus: ‘Dr. Naeem sahib
promised me and I had requested him to allow me to move a Resolution here.’ Meanwhile,
Dr. Ghazal Irfan intervened and assured to give me time to speak. After a while
she invited me; I read out the Resolution making the following demands:
“I)
Since its inception, Pakistani State
has been repeatedly failing in protecting the life, liberty and property of its
citizens. It has suppressed even the liberties ensured to them in the various
constitutions of the country, too.
II) Likewise, it has usurped its citizens’ right to Education of their
liking. From the first grade to the intermediate level, the State has
monopolized the development and implementation of curricula which it uses for
whole-scale Indoctrination.
III) With the provincial text-book boards working
as its tentacles, the Curriculum Wing of the Federal Ministry of Education has
been instrumental in strengthening the cause of Propaganda and Indoctrination.
IV)
For instance, according to the 1994 Curriculum Wing Document for Social Studies
(5th class), children were to be taught “Hindu-Muslim differences”,
“India’s evil designs on Pakistan”, “India’s wars of aggression against
Pakistan”, and to learn to make speeches on Jehad and Shahadat.
V) That is like supplying the content of Education right from the State’s
inventory in the form of finished goods. Same is the case with the aims and
objectives of Education. Under the yoke of national and collective objectives,
there is no room for the individual citizen, his rights and his freedoms.
VI)
By denying Education, the State has
denied its citizens their rights to free inquiry, free thinking and free
speech; and, thus, has dehumanized them.
VII) With the help of Indoctrination, the State has tried to become
intellectual progenitor of every mind. It has resorted to the science of
cloning to beget intellectual and ideological Dollies.
To restore their humanity and individuality back to its citizens:
a) the State should stop telling the citizens what to think and what not to think, and what to do and what not to do;
b) the State should ensure its citizens their individual rights and freedoms, and should abstain from interfering in their private lives;
c) the State should divert its resources and energies to the fulfillment of its basic duties, i.e. protecting the life, liberty, and property of its citizens;
d) the State should focus upon establishing and maintaining the Rule of Law in the country.
In
view of the above considerations, it is demanded that
1) Indoctrination be eliminated from Education;
2) Curriculum Wing of the Federal Ministry of Education be abolished;
3)
Provincial text-book boards be dismantled;
4) Academic Freedom be restored to
educational institutions;
5) Electronic and Print Media be freed from State’s control;
6) Protection of life, liberty and property
along with freedom of religion,
press, assembly and association be assured to every citizen.”
The moment I finished, there was uproar in
the hall. I tried to make sense of it, and saw one old lady standing and
arguing haughtily; she was Jocelyn Ort Saeed, an Australian poet settled in
Pakistan. Her argument ran like this: ‘How come that you want the Curriculum
Wing abolished! What would we teach our children, then? What are you up to?’ As
she concluded, another lady stood up: ‘We are philosophers, and we have nothing
to do with politics? You want us to be embroiled in politics; why?’ She was Dr.
Arifa Farid from the Department of Philosophy, University of Karachi.
It was quite noiseful in the hall. I was
unable to see what had I done which caused such an outrage. Then, Dr. Iqbal
Amiri, another fellow from the Department of Philosophy, University of Karachi,
came up and grabbed the microphone. He was counter-arguing in favor of the
demands made in the Resolution. I remember the gist: ‘How could you say that Philosophers
have nothing to do with politics; it’s everything is politics. What the state
is doing, how come that it has got any right to do that? Philosophers need to
stand up against it.’
By now, there emerged two groups: one
favoring and the other opposing the Resolution. It was quite an intellectual
commotion there. In the midst of that, Dr. Ashraf Adeel, who became the new
President of the PPC the same evening, tried to hush up the matter. He wanted the
discussion on the Resolution be put off now and take it up again when the 36th
Congress was held. That was like killing it. However, the group in favor of the
Resolution demanded a Vote, which was conceded by way of raising hands.
As the 35th Congress was hosted by
the Department of Philosophy, G. C. Lahore, a good many number of students
present there belonged to the same Department, which Mirza Athar Baig, now a well-known
Urdu novelist, was the Chairman of. The Resolution was defeated by one vote; 19
votes polled in its favor; 20 against. Mirza Athar Baing voted against the
Resolution. The President of the Congress, Dr. Ashraf Adeel, did not cast his
vote; I reminded him, but he shrugged off. At the dinner, Mirza Athar Baig came
to me and said: ‘Why didn’t you tell me about it earlier?’ I explained: ‘What was
there to tell beforehand? It was all happening before you!’
The Resolution could not be carried through;
but it succeeded in view of the fact that most of the demands made in it were
raised first time in the history of Pakistan, especially about the abolition of
the Curriculum Wing and dismantling of the provincial text-book boards. It
proved to be the first step towards disseminating a spate of ideas in Pakistan
bringing the fundamental rights of the citizens to the fore! Note: The facts
narrated above are for the sake of putting the record straight!
Note: This article was completed on January 1, 2015.
Thursday, November 12, 2015
Depoliticization and its causes
Here is the first part of this article: A depoliticized Pakistan on the rampage
The 2nd and the final part: Depoliticization and its causes
What’s a depoliticized Pakistan; how is it different from a politically apathetic Pakistan; how is it damaging both for the society and its state; who does now represent it, such questions were discussed in A depoliticized Pakistan on the rampage. In the present piece, some other questions will be dwelt on such as: why doesn’t a depoliticized India or Bangladesh exist in India or Bangladesh, for example? Why that’s so only with Pakistan? Why is Pakistan so fecund for such elements? What are the elements that feed milk and butter to a depoliticized Pakistan?
The 2nd and the final part: Depoliticization and its causes
What’s a depoliticized Pakistan; how is it different from a politically apathetic Pakistan; how is it damaging both for the society and its state; who does now represent it, such questions were discussed in A depoliticized Pakistan on the rampage. In the present piece, some other questions will be dwelt on such as: why doesn’t a depoliticized India or Bangladesh exist in India or Bangladesh, for example? Why that’s so only with Pakistan? Why is Pakistan so fecund for such elements? What are the elements that feed milk and butter to a depoliticized Pakistan?
Since
long it has been my contention that the main culprit for the backward Pakistan
is Politicians. In this case also, the main culprit for a depoliticized
Pakistan is again Politicians. The previous article argues that it is barren
politics that among other things may have caused Political Apathy to take root.
That’s natural. Decades of experience made people learn: ‘Politics, Sir, is a
cow that will yield such people no more milk, and so they are gone to milk the
bull.” (Samuel Johnson used Truth in the place of Politics!) Though sort of a
“Development Politics” entered the political arena, but it could not change the
political paradigm. In the midst of present Islamabad Dharna, one must have
noticed the top leadership of the Pakistan Muslim League-N harping on its
development projects in vain.
It’s
no denying that Political Apathy contributed to the solidification of a
depoliticized citizenry. Moreover, it is consecutive martial laws which banned
political activities, curbed political liberties, surgically operated political
parties, built up artificial political structures, and last but not least,
destroyed an independent political culture. Whoever ventured in politics made
it a point that in order to succeed he needs to be part and parcel of the
so-called establishment! It was the most successful short-cut to power in
Pakistan. That it inspired a depoliticized Pakistan to love no-politics is
evident.
Despite
the voluminous charge-sheet against the imposers of martial laws, it may be
argued that no martial law did ever succeed without the complicity of
politicians. Let the generals impose martial law, and let no political party
come to their aid, you will see the generals running back to their barracks! It
is politicians who partner with the generals and give them constitutional
cover. It is like reprieving a murderer from the gallows. In response to an
objection that politicians are an amorphous entity and thus are vulnerable to
insinuations, one may retort that politicians are well-organized in political
parties with a devout following, and may prove an invincible citadel if they
plan to act so; however, they always choose the path of submission and subservience.
In this sense martial laws did not create such conditions which proved
conducive to the growth and spread of a depoliticized citizenry, but it is the
political opportunism and political cowardice on the part of political parties
which helped a depoliticized citizenry most in fortifying its depoliticized
vision for Pakistan.
Also,
it is political parties which did not create an independent political culture
in Pakistan; they always let their trees grow in the lawns of in-service or
retired generals. Practically they behave in a manner as if the source of power
lies in the General Head Quarters (GHQ). It’s strange and at the same time
perplexing that no political party ever seems to believe in the constitution
which unequivocally declares power as residing with the people of Pakistan.
They do vie for the people’s mandate but never abide by its implications. Once
they come to power, they do not remain in contact with the people whose mandate
makes them rule the same people. That does strengthen the depoliticized
Pakistan.
Another
factor is the same old refrain: political parties did not deliver, political
parties do not deliver. That translates into a fact that politics do not
deliver; so let it be passed, let it be part of the past. Surprisingly it is
characteristic of a depoliticized Pakistan that it does not delve into the
past; it focuses its eyes only on the future. It is in this sense that a
depoliticized Pakistan discards all that is part of a political past; it lives
in the future. This especially explains the politics of Imran Khan’s Pakistan
Tehreek-e-Insaf: Imran Khan and his followers have no inkling of Pakistan’s
political past and they present the PTI as the first true political party of
Pakistan, trashing all others. That’s not mere arrogance of an ignoramus; it is
inherent in the politics of PTI that it’s the only true political force,
whereas all other parties are just corrupt entities. That’s depoliticized
Pakistan in action!
One
more thing requires some elaboration as it is far more confusing. That’s about
the number of people who participate in the PTI Dharnas, meetings and rallies,
the latest one held in Rahim Yar Khan on Nov 9. Actually, numbers must not be
mixed up with principles. Hitler had much following in Germany; but at the end of
the day he was a fascist, who finally set out to conquer the world. Imran Khan
has a substantial following of those sections of a depoliticized Pakistan which
believe in political power legitimately belonging to them, and as their
privileged right like divine right of the Kings of medieval world. It is
fascism pure and simple. Imran Khan also wants to conquer the whole Pakistan,
but what is characteristic of him and his politics and a depoliticized Pakistan
also which he represents is his non-political politics, or his anti-political
politics (a contradiction in terms). He seeks power in non-political ways.
As
for India, there may be a depoliticized citizenry too weak to be noticed; it
may be more vibrant in Bangladesh; but for the same reasons a depoliticized
citizenry seems stronger and more damaging in Pakistan. It means it is not in
martial laws (Bangladesh has had its share of which) that the rationale for a
depoliticized citizenry may be found; it is in the quality of politicians that
the process of depoliticization grows it stuff and substance. It is politicians
themselves who depoliticized Pakistan, who fed it with milk and butter; now
they are condemned to face the same depoliticized Pakistan!
Note: The 2nd part of this article was completed on October 1st and was originally posted in December 2014.
Wednesday, October 28, 2015
Why taxes are not a political issue in Pakistan?
Note: I sent this piece of writing to all the newspapers one by one; none bothered to see it or use it, that I am justified to conclude!
Why taxes are not a political issue in Pakistan?
All the politics is about collecting and spending taxes; but
unfortunately that reality does not translate into political issues in Pakistan.
What it translates into is power-politics pure and simple!
See the arrogant issueless politics of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf; see the pseudo-development
politics of Pakistan Muslim League (N); see the outdated Roti-Kapra-Makaan
politics of Pakistan Peoples Party (P); see the identity-less politics of Awami
National Party; and also see the self-centered religious politics of Jamat-e-Islami,
Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam (F). At the end of the day, all of their politics is
about seeking power and state-benefits; or it is politicking on pseudo-issues
ranging from anti-Americanism and pro-Palestine rallies to this or that religious
or sectarian wrangling.
The political parties of Pakistan never ever take up any
issue which directly concerns the ordinary citizens; such as the cruel
state-machinery; deplorable conditions of social services; police brutalities;
unavailability of prompt justice; protection of life and property, and most
importantly taxes. For the last 68 years, these parties are constantly trying
to protect “democracy,” which in fact is in danger by the very politics of the
same political parties. And this “democracy” has delivered nothing to the
people, but the crumbs.
Likewise, no political party minds the imposition of a new
tax or an increase in an already existing tax; since they would be following
the same practice while in the government. Probably for the same reason, no
political party makes an issue of the taxes imposed, taxes increased or
unjustified taxation. They may be objecting and debating it, now and then, in
the national or provincial assemblies and resorting to a cosmetic walk-out or a
boycott; however, they would never make it a political issue and educate their
voters. Are they not the representatives of the people, who are required to
take care of their interests? Or they are not the true representatives of the
people!
For instance, take the case of Withholding Tax (0.3 % and
0.6 %) levied in this year’s budget. It got through the parliament smoothly;
the opposition, a very active for that matter, having taken no notice of it. Only
the middle-level traders, who are an organized community, and whom this tax
affects directly, have come out against it. The other sections of society,
which are not organized, such as pensioners, widows, ordinary savers, National
Savings’ customers, it seems have no voice. It is in this context that question
arises on the legitimacy of the role of the representatives sitting in the
parliament. One must ask: Whose interests they are supposed to protect? And, whose
interests they are protecting?
Crueler than this Withholding Tax, there is another
arbitrary and unjust tax imposed years back on cash withdrawals from banks. Without
any justification and starkly against the principles of taxation, it too
penalizes those who use banking channels. Ironically, this tax also defies its
purpose, i.e. promoting of banking channels and thus formal economy.
Isn’t is surprising and at the same time instructive that no
parliamentarian and no politician or no political party took up the case of
Withholding Tax on cash withdrawals and spoke against it let alone making it a
political issue! Also, no court bothered to take “suo motto” notice of it. The
same is happening as far as the Withholding Tax on all the banking instruments
is concerned. No political party is ready to make it a political issue. They
announced their support for the traders and sympathized with their cause; but
that’s part of their power-politics!
As is the case, all the taxes ultimately trickle down to the
end-consumers. Is it the reason no political party make them a political issue
in which case they are not the true representatives of the people. But for the
same reason, all the political parties must make the taxes a political issue in
which case they may come to truly represent the people. Are the political
parties of Pakistan are ready to play role of the true representatives of the
people? Or they are there to vouch for their own special Ashraafi interests? Then
the people must not vote them in power!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)