Over the top

By Amit Julka

Confused.

I had always assumed ‘getting screwed’ to be a good thing. In fact, most of my teenage years were spent in fruitless pursuit of this goal. However, as I grew, and my concerns became more cerebral, the term assumed new connotations, none of which were in any sense even remotely positive. ‘Getting screwed’ began to mean something nasty (though not in the way you were thinking), which your professors or seniors (basically people who are supposed to guide you) did to you.

Of late, I have noticed that India is going through such a dreadful phase of getting screwed by people left, right and centre. Obviously these people are none other than those for whom we soil our thumbs with ink once every five years, our dear politicians and leaders. For a seemingly disparate group, they have shown remarkable consensus on their cherished goal of sucking the nation dry, albeit using different techniques and methods. Some use their perverted ideologies, some oppose for the heck of opposition, and some simply rob us.

Let me first begin with those who always think that they are ‘right’. And yes, you guessed it; I am referring to the mother of all parivars, the Sangh Parivar. With their twisted ideology and their warped notions of macho nationalism, they have ensured that an 800 million strong stays in perpetual fear of its (imagined) enemies. Not satisfied with ideology alone, some ‘Swami Unlimited Joy’ probably thought that having a ‘blast’ was a more worthwhile idea. Now that his cover has been blown, the self righteous brigade probably thought it better to deflect attention by launching an ‘Ekta Yatra’ (loose translation: Trip for Unity), which ironically has divided the country more than uniting it.

Moving on from the right towards the centre, Lord Buddha had always stressed on the middle path and avoidance of extremes. However, I think he couldn’t have envisioned that those in the so-called ‘centre’ would have such a devastating impact on Indian politics. Headed by a famous economist, one of their ministers, affectionately called ‘King’ has mastered the art of siphoning money to such insane levels that one can only exclaim “Gee!” (Twice). Whoever knew that one could make so much money through cell phones?

Another annoying trait of the followers of the middle path is their advocacy of sycophancy as a legitimate means of advancement. Now historically, Indians have been firm believers in the philosophy of ‘Vasudeva Kutumbkam’, which means that ‘the whole world is my family’. Unfortunately, through some mistranslation of the original Sanskrit, members of this party inferred the motto to be ‘the Family is the world’. What a pity!

Lastly, I shall talk about those who are left behind. Before saying anything further, I should specify a few things. First of all the ‘left’ in the contemporary context has probably less to do with ideology and more to do with being a ‘fashion statement’ of sorts amongst a strange sect who otherwise call themselves ‘intellectuals’ (the writer of this lousy article being one). By this I refer to those people who, after giving a few speeches on Marx and talking about the proletariat, quickly slip off into their air-conditioned homes where ‘daddy capitalist’ earns enough to support their misplaced idealism. Apart from these pseudo leftists, there are those who still haven’t bought new calendars since the late eighties.  A random stroll through the streets of Kolkata on any given day would be a good way to see members of this species up, close and personal.

Apart from the ones I have described, there are other specimens in the subcontinent who are just as colourful and interesting. However, due to constraints of space and time, I haven’t been able to do justice to this veritable ecosystem. Breaking the barriers of caste, creed and race, they truly are symbolic of the unity in diversity that is India. Omnipresent and omnipotent, they have become interwoven into the fabric of this great nation. Probably a sher which my father told me sums it up rather well,

Har Shaakh Pe Ullu Baitha Hai,
Anjaam-e-Gulistaan Kya Hoga?
(An owl sits on every branch,
What fate befalls this garden?)

Global Demonstration 30th January

Binayak Sen, on christmas eve last year was sentenced to life imprisonment on flimsy evidence (mostly a planted letter, hearsay evidence; find more here) for spreading ‘disaffection’ towards the state. Section 124A of the Indian penal Code mandates an absolute unconditional love for the state. Beware, you may be charged with sedition under Indian law (a section that has outlived the British Raj who introduced it) if you express any feeling that falls an inch short of devoted love and adulation. Critiquing state practices of land grabbing, tribal dispossession, inadequate (read no) rehabilitation, extrajudicial killing, torture and the  curious phenomenon of salwa judum fit the bill of falling out of love with the state. In other words, ‘disaffection’. Notwithstanding what the Father of the Nation boldly proclaimed almost 90 years ago–that sedition was the highest duty of a citizen, not many in the state machinery and corporate media seem to share the same sentiment. Close to a century, colonialism has taken its roots in India. Last year, in  what was an unbelievable show of unbridled love for the country, the Bharatiya Janata Party demanded that Arundhati Roy and others who shared the stage with her in a Seminar in New Delhi on Kashmir, be charged with sedition. Roy famously remarked that Kashmir was never an integral part of India, a sentiment echoed by thousand other Kashmiris. The frenzy that erupted has few parallels in the history of media circus in the country. The net tightens around Roy thundered a channel. Arundhati Roy’s ’seditious’ speech, echoed others.

With Binayak Sen, the media has been kinder. However the witch hunt by the State has filled up the gaps of unkindness not contributed by the media. Shortly after Sen’s sentence, his wife was slammed with an FIR, which was, after insistence by the Union Home Ministry (which in turn acted only after rights groups took up the matter) dropped.

Today, the Free Binayak Sen Campaign has taken the world by storm, demanding the immediate release of Sen and protesting against his unjust sentence. Demonstrations in front of the Indian Consulates in London, New York, San Francisco, Vancouver, Washington and a growing Facebook campaign prove that the campaign has come here to stay. A hopelessly romantic assertion is– here at the ground of the tireless protests and the long marches, democracy rings the strongest, the values embedded in the Constitution stands the tallest; the chants of ‘free democracy’, ‘we are all binayak sen’, ring sharper than all the media frenzy of hunting down civil liberties and fundamental rights to life and freedom. Egypt, anyone?

For more information:

http://www.freebinayaksen.org/

By Bilal Ibne Rasheed

Mumtaz Qadri's hometown shows its support as he appears in court.

The most shocking thing which has come to light in the aftermath of Salman Taseer’s assassination in Islamabad, Pakistan is the magnitude of support Mumtaz Qadri, the assassin, has garnered among the Pakistani masses. Although 97% of Pakistanis are Muslims, a vast majority of them don’t practice the religion. Most of them don’t adhere to even the basic tenets of Islam: offering namaz five times a day, fasting for thirty days during Ramazan, going for Hajj (if one can afford to), paying zakat (2.5% of one’s wealth). It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to locate a Pakistani who doesn’t want interest on his savings despite the fact that Allah has declared it haraam, and whosoever indulges in it will be considered at war with Him. Practices like back-biting, lying, bribery, and extra-marital sex, though explicitly forbidden by Islam, are fairly common among the Pakistani Muslims. Then there are some eighty million sects and sub-sects of Islam in Pakistan (am I exaggerating?). The only differences between some of the sects/sub-sects pertain to the length of one’s beard, the place on one’s chest where one should hold hands while offering namaz, the portion of ankles (of males, of course) which should remain uncovered at all times, the colour of one’s turban, and countless other things like these. Interestingly, adherents of some of the sects/sub-sects do not consider followers of other sects/sub-sects Muslims and declare them kuffaar (infidels).

So then why and how Mumtaz Qadri, the killer of Salman Taseer, is able to have such a massive and unconditional support across the length and breadth of the Land of the Pure? Soon after the assassination, the Pakistani society found itself split into two opposing factions: one which condemned the killing calling it a cold-blooded murder blackening the name of Islam and Pakistan, and the other which rejoiced the assassination and compared Qadri to Ilm-ud-Din. According to Qadri, Taseer had blasphemed the Prophet Muhammad and he was a gustaakh-e-rasool.

It is important to note that Salman Taseer didn’t blaspheme the Prophet Muhammad. He only criticized the blasphemy law (section 295 of the Pakistan Penal Code) and asked for its revision. To him laws like this would make it difficult for Pakistan to be accepted in the countries with developed markets, thereby, limiting the economic growth in Pakistan. An aspect of Taseer’s personality which largely remained overshadowed by his corporate success, western lifestyle, and political shenanigans was his firm belief in Allah. In fact, he used to wear Ayat-ul-Kursi around his neck for protection. How a vast majority of Pakistanis have equated Taseer’s criticism of the blasphemy law with actual blasphemy is a phenomenon which needs to be looked into more deeply and carefully.

Salman Taseer's son

Samuel P. Huntington writes in The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order: ‘We know who we are only when we know who we are not and often only when we know whom we are against.’ To me, it is this ideology to which Pakistani Muslims subscribe. It is not who-we-are which  has brought them together, it is who-we-are-not and more importantly whom-we-are-against which is the real cohesive force behind the massive support for Qadri. For a vast majority of Pakistanis, Taseer represented and embodied the imposition of western social values on their society. Photos and videos of Taseer’s son partying with bikini-clad girls and his daughter swimming did rounds for quite a while in the Pakistani cyberspace. These photos and videos painted Taseer (and his family) as utterly westernised, morally corrupt, and extraordinarily debauched – something absolutely contradictory to the Pakistani societal norms. The Pakistani masses resent the structural colonialism and are convinced that their government is dictated by the whims and fancies of the western powers: governments such as the US, and institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank. To them Salman Taseer was a representative of the west who tried to westernise them as well. It is this ideology of whom-we-are-against which has united all the factions of Islam from Bralevi, to Deobandi, to Ahl-e-Hadith, to Shias, to you-name-it.

The failure of the state and the absolutely poor governance is also one of the factors in this whom-we-are-against discourse. The Pakistani masses don’t trust their government at all and for good reasons: frequent terrorists attacks, rampant corruption, astronomical inflation, and no social capital.  The politicians and the bureaucrats are busy beefing up their bank accounts and don’t even give a hoot about the condition of the common man. This attitude of the government really frustrates the masses who feel exploited and marginalised by their own representatives. I can assure you the ordinary Pakistanis wouldn’t feel even a tinge of sorrow if any prominent politician or a bureaucrat dies today of natural causes.

With this social milieu in mind, let’s revisit the murder of Taseer. To ordinary Pakistanis, Taseer was a corrupt politician of a corrupt government which is doing nothing except making the lives of the masses more miserable and its own more lavish. For those Pakistanis who were not religiously motivated to support Qadri, it was schadenfreude which convinced them of the righteousness of the assassin: now these rich and the mighty will think twice before hurting the sentiments of the lower cadre; they should know that if they can exploit us, we can kill them. It is the corrupt image of the politicians which stops a considerable majority of Pakistanis to sympathize with Taseer. A personal remark from Taseer, quoted by Tariq Ali, would be in order. When Ali asked Taseer why the latter decided to go into politics, wasn’t being a businessman bad enough, Tasser replied: You’ll never understand. If I’m a politician as well, I can save money because I don’t have to pay myself bribes.

There are some who argue that if Taseer had blasphemed the Prophet he could have been tried in a court according to the blasphemy law. This argument misses the point that the common man doesn’t trust the judicial system of the country – again a failure of the state. The masses think that the rich and the mighty have the power to distort and manipulate laws in their favour.

Another aspect of this phenomenon which has largely remained overlooked is the social class difference between the two opposing factions. Those who support Taseer (a minority) usually belong to the upper and the upper-middle class while those who support Qadri (a majority) belong to the lower and the lower-middle class of the society. The argument that the social pressures, channelled through the religion, have been manipulated and exploited by the religio-political parties for their political gains doesn’t seem implausible.

The language divide, a subset of the social class divide, should also be noted here. Those who supported Taseer, did so mostly in the English speaking section of the Pakistani media while those who supported Qadri, or openly opposed Taseer, did so in the Urdu speaking section. Although an official language, only a small minority of Pakistanis are at home in English.

Like adherents of every other religion, Muslims too practice Islam very selectively: only that part of religion which suits their worldly interests. An important question which needs to be asked at this point is why the masses resort to religion so often in cases like these? To me, it is mainly because of the uncertainty in the society. (Notice the rank of Pakistan according to social capital: 110^th out of 110 countries.) The vacuum created by this uncertainty in the society is filled in by the religion which solaces the common man who is not educated and finds himself unable to model and justify this uncertainty. Religion helps him do this: the situation is bleak because Allah has willed it to be so; it’s our sins which bring calamities on us; we’ve forgotten the Koran and that’s why we are at the mercy of infidels, the hardships of this life will bear fruits in the afterlife.

The liberal section of the Pakistani society argues that the shrinking space for public discourse can only be gained by standing up to religious fanatics. This argument does not acknowledge the importance of economic prosperity and social capital in creating tolerance among the masses. As long as the masses remain impoverished, downtrodden, exploited, and devoid of social capital, Qadris will continue to star.

The world’s most famous political prisoner was released today amidst jubilant supporters, hundreds and thousands of them, who flocked at her residence. Aung San Suu Kyi, Nobel laureate and Amnesty International’s most prominent prisoner of conscience was under house arrest with the latest period of detention spanning 7 1/2 years. She spent 15 of the last 21 years under house arrest or in jail.

Supporters flock as Aung San Suu Kyi is freed

In 1990, in her essay Freedom from Fear, she famously set right the equation between power and corruption expressed first by Lord Acton in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887.  Suu Kyi said–

‘It is not power that corrupts but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it……..Fearlessness may be a gift but perhaps more precious is the courage acquired through endeavour, courage that comes from cultivating the habit of refusing to let fear dictate one’s actions, courage that could be described as ‘grace under pressure’ – grace which is renewed repeatedly in the face of harsh, unremitting pressure.’

Grace is Aung San Suu Kyi today.

Last week, one heard about the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority’s (PTA) decision to impose a partial ban on The Baloch Hal, the first and only online newspaper that tells the story of Balochistan to the rest of Pakistan and the world-at-large. The reason for the ban, according to the PTA, was that The Baloch Hal published ‘anti-Pakistan material’. As expected, this vague claim remains unsubstantiated.
(more…)