Since the division of the subcontinent, the Pakistani political arena has not been able to rid itself of the commonly used religious aspect, which creates unison and divide simultaneously.
This exploitation of religion begun with the emergence of the All India Muslim League, using the two nation theory as a road to independence.
Keeping note of Jinnah's political aptitude, he carefully used this tool to both satisfy the landlords and the peasants, i.e the 'jotedaars' and the 'mazdoor tabka'.
However, most of Jinnah's speeches reflect his aspirations towards not the 'Islamic Republic' but something of a more secular nature which does not seem to fit with 'Pakistan ka Matlab Kya, La Ilaha Illalla'.
Drawing a parallel to current politics, we see most political affiliations with certain sects of religion, predominantly, Islam. When we see that the constitutions founding pillars are based on the objectives resolution which was uniformly opposed by ALL minority representatives, we see that religion indeed ends up becoming a vicious force in shaping and appeasing popular belief.
To draw a conclusion from this discussion, we cannot expect a political party to take any opinion other than what is supported by popular belief. Which also means the sustenance of items such as the second amendment, such as shia killings, such as burning of Christian families. The saddest part is, it's the job of any human, rather than a secular state to provide its citizens thef 'Freedom of Life'. Political parties less so, leaders even less likely, it is the mass ideology that needs to be changed. We are, after all, a democracy.
3 comments:
The popular belief you talk about is what needs to be changed. For the upper middle class, the privileged lot, the idea of Shia killings and burning Christian houses down it is illiteracy in the most disgraceful form. However, to the people who do it, the motive is that of clear intentions and dedication to what their faith is. It is this idea that needs to be demolished, and that can only be done through political intervention and establishment of ideologies that spread peace. This can be seen as the most approachable way of decreasing violence, because through historical proof, we can see that it is party ideology that can really change the way people think.
The idea about ethnic voting is quite true in case of Pakistan as we are so much affiliated to our ethnic identities that if we do vote the person of any other group, we will be considered out from our identity. Family system is strong in Pakistan and in rural areas, people usually vote on the decision of the head of the family. So, the specific political affiliation carries with the generation.
The popular belief, regardless of whether its wrong or right, is a prevalent reality. Agree or not, there are millions who hold a soft spot for Qadri despite the fact that he abused the law in every way. There are also people in every mosque and town that hold great animosity towards our Shiite brothers. Needless to say, greater hatred is found towards Ahmedis. These, I am afraid are the sick realities of our society. The job of Bhutto was just to feed a bone to this large sector of society. Afterall, this is what democracy is, voice of the people! What policies are passed, what amendments are made are more often than not, only the echoing of such voices. How this can be changed may just be a very complicated and sensitive matter, but ofcourse education is the answer to a lot of such problems hopefully.
Post a Comment