PLUMS

“I want you to keep your heads up as citizens of a free and independent sovereign State. Praise your Government when it deserves. Criticize your Government fearlessly when it deserves, but do not go on all the time attacking, indulging in destructive criticism, taking delight in running down the Ministry or the officials.”

Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s reply to a welcome address at Edwardes College, Peshawar on 18th April 1948.

“Quaid Ka Pakistan” is a term we hear more than often, but only to say that we we are far from being near to it. It is unfortunate that Pakistan is 71 years old but it has not been able to become the land that the Quaid envisaged. Not long after the birth of the state of Pakistan on 14th August 1947, it found itself grappling with issues of war, security, infrastructure, economy, water and princely states; the most concerning being Kashmir. To top it all was weak administration and leadership, and on 16th December 1971, Dhaka fell and East Pakistan became Bangladesh. A dark day in Pakistani history, it was marred with bloodshed, violence and rape. Series of military coups and unstable tenures followed and the nation became accustomed to seeing an impairing of democracy and feeling vulnerable, betrayed and sad. However, such a past cannot be an excuse as to why we as a nation have become so angry and cynical. We have indulged ourselves in the blame game for quite some years, and so now we should acknowledge our own weaknesses and ponder over how much we have tried to be close to Quaid’s Pakistan.

Sitting governments of democratic countries all over the world are at a disadvantage of incumbency. However, in nascent democracies such as Pakistan, where democracies have not had the chance to fully develop and create democratic traditions, it becomes easier for those in power to sway the masses. Factors such as inequality, extreme poverty and illiteracy also contribute to the acceptance of oppression by the majority. Weak democracy allows opposition to disparage the sitting government to the extent of creating political instability. In Pakistan, intense anti-government campaign is a by-product of every general election and is practiced for all the remaining tenure; all for one’s own greed for political power. Politicians’ refusal to learn from previous mistakes and put aside personal motives has not only disrupted socio-economic progress but also risked national security.

In Pakistan, politics is a bureaucratically managed affair. It has failed to rid itself of social cleavages such as gender, class, ethnicity, religion, race and creed. Organs of popular will and collective action are vilified and demonized. Student unions and trade unions are banned, and media is censored. Politics is not an open and active sphere. The masses are unable to hold their destiny in their own hands because the reins of power are controlled by a small portion of elite who works to strengthen the long established power structure and entrenched status quo. As a result, people feel skeptically alienated, and from that stems cynicism.

Cynicism is an attitude or state of mind characterized by a general distrust of others’ motives. Political cynicism results from unfulfilled expectations regarding politics or government, which create feelings of disillusionment and betrayal. In Pakistan, cynicism has become the dominant ideology of response. However, it is a dangerous disciplinary mechanism because it leads to political helplessness and withdrawal. It is a deplorable characteristic that our tragic past has given us. We have lost all pride and faith, and how cliché it may sound, but we have forgotten the sacrifices our forefathers gave to achieve this independent land that we can call home.

We need to learn to maintain the balance. Being grateful to be born into an independent country without having to face the gruesome partition of 1947 is one thing, and feeling upset about all the wrongs and speaking up against them is another, and both of them are equally important. If we relinquish the former, we are left with pessimism and cynicism. Living in today’s Pakistan, we should be grateful but not content. We should never stop asking. Above all, we should not forget that the only anti-dote of cynicism is hope, and when we are presented with the slightest ray of hope, we should hold on to it with unity and positivity. Our government officials are corrupt and deceitful and so our criticism is natural. But when they take a step that is for the good of the people, they should be praised. Unsubstantiated defamation and personal attacks should be avoided.

As Muhammad Ali Jinnah said, we should own up to our land in complete totality, and it is only after doing so, that we can criticize. Once there is renewed sense of belonging and vigorous passion for the betterment of our country, we will find it easier to draw the line between criticism and cynicism. We should start from ourselves, and from our homes. From small things like not littering on the roads to putting an end to the ridiculous culture of “maids and ayas are not allowed beyond this point”, we should make an effort in bringing the change that we talk about while sitting in air conditioned rooms as maid girls serve chai and biscuits to us, or that which we type out on our expensive gadgets which we got as a present for clearing an exam; not to forget that sitting in that exam was also a privilege that only few enjoy in this country. We abuse our politicians for being dishonest but the next minute, we lie to someone on the phone by saying that we are out of city, or that we have caught a severe viral cold, and we manage to escape work. We deplore the expensive and classist lifestyle of our leaders, but we do not care, let alone pity, on our maid who fails to show up one day because her son fell sick, and since her husband was probably drunk with his friends, she could not leave him alone. There are numerous examples of when we can prove to be different than those we blame, but the harsh reality is that we all misuse our power in our own capacity. More so than anything else, if our politicians are so devoid of honesty and integrity, why do we elect them? We should understand and acknowledge both our weaknesses and our strengths, and work on eliminating the former while capitalizing on the latter, for a better and stronger Pakistan- Quaid’s Pakistan.

The day after the attack on APS Peshawar, Jibran Nasir and four others held a candlelight vigil in front of Lal Masjid, Islamabad, protesting against then-chief cleric Abdul Aziz for refusing to condemn the massacre. After Mr. Nasir proliferated the campaign on social media, the number of people drawn to the premise rapidly increased. Soon, a sizeable number of demonstrators were found camping in the blistering cold outside of Islamabad’s oldest mosque, calling out Abdul Aziz for his statement and Taliban apologists in general. They belonged to various segments of society, including politicians, activists, students, and ordinary citizens. Eventually, an FIR was registered against Mr. Aziz for threatening the protesters. More significantly, perhaps, Lal Masjid’s deputy khatib and other clerics joined the protesters in condemning the Peshawar attack.

This incident illustrates a key feature of Mr. Nasir’s campaign – grassroots advocacy. He has frequently used approaches involving community-based education and collective action of the ordinary citizens to challenge the status quo, addressing a number of social issues. Many of these, including marginalization of Ahmadiyya, women empowerment, and rights of religious and ethnic minorities, tend to be avoided by most politicians seeking the support of more conservative and right-wing voters. Nevertheless, Mr. Nasir has repeatedly refused to compromise on his outlook to attract more voters from this base, leading few to question his integrity.

Altering the status quo in Pakistan is a notion strongly entwined with Mr. Nasir’s campaign, and is evident in his other ventures. As a lawyer, for example, he is a part of the counsel for Khadija Siddiqui, for the father of Naqeebullah Mehsud, and against Shahrukh Jatoi. Likewise, in a recent, widely reported incident, Mr. Nasir was arrested and allegedly beaten for refusing to give way to a judge’s protocol, citing ‘VIP culture.’ This stand has culminated into a strong base of support. To many, he is essentially a candidate representing greater involvement of the middle class and a stronger voice for the marginalized groups in society.

NA-247 is a highly competitive constituency this year, with MQM leader Farooq Sattar, PSP’s Fauzia Kasuri, PTI stalwart Dr. Arif Alvi, and Mr. Nasir all campaigning for a seat in the National Assembly. The constituency encompasses Defence Housing Authority, Clifton Cantonment, Saddar and Civil Lines, and part of the old city, Kharadar, cutting across socio-economic classes. The residents report facing a multitude of concerns, including a water shortage, improper sanitation, inadequate education for underprivileged children, and for the Christians and Hindus, few, if any, public places of worship.

There is no questioning that each candidate has a strong understanding of the political and socio-economic dynamics of the issues present in this constituency. Nor can it be reasonably denied that each has a resolve and manifesto to solve or mitigate said issues. However, it is not enough to meet these challenges without integrating the marginalization and neglect, in varying structures, of many of the citizens of the constituency. Innovation and development can no longer come from building upon the political, social, and economic reform for specific citizens, but at least raising the standard for all. Unless the underlying hindrances, the status quo being a part, are not committed to being overcome, no development is adequately progressive.
Though this may be understood by all party candidates, experienced politicians that they are, they are essentially limited in taking action by their party’s policies and perspectives. Take Imran Khan’s recent undermining of feminism and religious minorities, or MQM’s history of political instability. Or the fact that, again, few politicians go against the status quo. The less likely they are to change it, ultimately. Given that Mr. Nasir has already been heading in a different direction, the importance of this will be the deciding factor in a vote for him.

The candidate has risen to prominence following the Lal Masjid protest, with his work gaining greater attention. His endorsement by a number of celebrities, as well his policies, which have appealed most significantly to both leftists and moderates, have made him a serious opponent for his fellow candidates in this year’s elections.
While Jibran Nasir may, as an elected candidate, be unable to carry forward several of his resolutions, that is not the rationale behind his campaign or the support for it. Few serve to represent and enhance the progressive movement in Pakistan, on the national legislature. Grassroots campaigning will primarily be a step in the direction of reforming the social constructs that establish the status quo.