Pak Tea House » Pakistan » Imran Khan, Urban Middleclass Morality and its Contradictions
Imran Khan, Urban Middleclass Morality and its Contradictions
This article is critical of Imran Khan’s political orientation and tries to introspect middleclass liking for him. It admits Imran’s virtues as a cricketer and philanthropist but argues that his politics is the wrong medicine for the country. It also tries to examine as to why he has not been able to connect with the masses
By Raza Habib Raja
In Pakistan we, particularly those belonging to relatively more educated and urbanized middleclass, have developed this psyche to find strange solace in other’s miseries and in some rare patches of better times in our history. So when Sialkot lynching occurred, many of us were appalled and shaken to the core and then tried to draw parallels to similar incidences in other countries to bolster our dwindling self esteem. A war of articles started where liberals were described as self loathers and were reminded that such incidences were a norm in other countries. Hence there was no need to worry and be depressed.
And then this scandal broke out and exposed the moral depravity of some of our most talented cricketers on television. Predictably we were first shocked, disgusted and then in an ever familiar way started to look for conspiracy theories to remain in our self created delusional state of denial (and of course link it with corruption of Zardari also!!!). On Express news, actually RAW was cited as the possible culprit ( And their most famous anchor drew parallels to Zardari’s corruption). But deep down we all know that we are actually on a very weak wicket.
Invariably we are also looking towards a rare patch of successful and taintless period of Pakistan cricket much of which was under Imran Khan. Imran is being remembered fondly and as a cricket fan, I can fully understand. Yes those were the days and Pakistan’s cricket team has never been the same after his departure.
The persona of Imran Khan is also in the forefront in flood relief efforts. It is strange that a person who despite being a political minnow commands extraordinary respect in philanthropy. People are willing to entrust him with notes but not with votes.
Sometimes, I really feel disappointed that a person with his education, brilliance as a cricketer and above all his extraordinary services in the field of social work had to take a political direction that I actually have to pray that he never wins.
There is a tendency in the liberal media to lynch Imran Khan (Mr. Nadeem Farooq Paracha it seems has made it a passion of his life) and to some extent it is well deserved also. But let’s not forget that despite his reactionary political orientation, his contributions to Pakistan are enormous. In many ways Imran Khan is Pakistan’s asset and someone who has dedicated his life to this country. And here lies the irony that a squeaky clean person with an impeccable record, if elected, will be the one of the worst nightmares for Pakistan.
Personally Imran is the embodiment of good aspects of upper middle class morality such as professional integrity, fairness and self pride. But politically he embodies whatever is wrong with the same class.
Self respect when projected on the political horizon becomes almost naïve delusional state of denial further reinforced by slogans like “Qaumi Ghairat”. Although Imran has not been the conspiracy theorist but suffers from another somewhat related ailment of coming up with apologetic defense of extremism. Both of these “diseases” (conspiracy theories and apologetic defense) are broadly similar outcomes of immense self delusional pride rooted in ideologically determined identity which makes it difficult to find flaws in one’s own culture and tribe particularly when these are under the critical microscope of the others. The middleclass, particularly the upper segment suffers from a strange twisted envy of the West where it follows western fashions and prefers their luxury goods and lifestyles while being ferociously defensive about its own identity defined in terms of religion and Pakistani nationalism.
In Imran’s case also the western lifestyle fuses with the strange and immense self pride which extends to include the domestic culture and fails to even see some of its blatant shortcomings. In fact the brutal “justice” system of tribal areas is construed as fair and impartial. Taliban despite atrocities openly committed and then claimed by them are given apologetic defense of “reaction” against USA’s atrocities and drone attacks despite killing militants are interpreted as a violation of sovereignty.
This class which is dominant in Media, Corporate Sector, and all the “establishment” institutions is more conscious about its identity defined in terms of religion and Pakistani nationalism and has a stronger ideological fervor. It will ape West in the desire to be more sophisticated and modern and at the same time retaliate when there is some backlash on ideological front and identity. Even the most sophisticated and foreign educated ones belonging to this class write articles like “liberal lynch Mob” and are appropriately labeled as “designer patriots”!!
Other than “National Sovereignty”, corruption becomes another obsessive concern of this class. Real or perceived corruption of the politicians is debated like hell in the drawing rooms ranging from Karachi to Islamabad. Of course Zardari is perceived as a corruption king and all the ills of the society are attributed to him. Imran khan once again voices that “concern” with utmost zeal on the media and is often perceived as the savior of the country by the same media watching middleclass. In fact if elections were held on internet, he would be a straight winner!!! I am categorically mentioning internet because frankly this class seldom bothers to stand up in the queue and actually vote! On social networking sites like Facebook the young and more sophisticated of this class regularly make Imran Khan the Prime Minister.
Imran, more than anyone else, symbolizes the middle and upper middleclass morality, its sophistication and its strange contradictions. And no wonder, he is well liked by the same class. This class is sympathetic towards the plight of the poor but is still yet unable to engage with them. Their attitude is more of patronizing rather than equality and once again Imran more than anyone else embodies it. After all despite doing extraordinary work in the field of philanthropy, the poor are the ones who despite respecting him cannot associate with him politically. Politics, particularly modern politics is strongly intertwined with connection and engagement. Successful politicians, particularly in a nascent democratic culture, have to successfully engage masses. Merely having sympathetic attitude towards masses will perhaps make you a respectable philanthropist but not a successful politician.
Imran and for that matter a large chunk of professionals belonging to the middleclass have to realize that in politics you have to engage and on issues which matter to MAJORITY of the people also. Yes corruption is an issue but is not the sole issue. Yes sovereignty is an issue but once again not that important. And yes, downright condescending attitude smacking of intellectual arrogance towards masses will not endear you to them.
For convincing you have to go mainstream and take your case to the masses. Engage them and that is how a polity changes in democracy. Unfortunately we are not ready for making such engagement and no wonder end up yearning for the military rule again.
Filed under: Pakistan
68 Responses to "Imran Khan, Urban Middleclass Morality and its Contradictions"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- RajTOO
said tajender,
you're more of a cartoon than a serious... - no-communal
said BM,
.
I read parts of your debate on slavery. I... - tajender
said Fingolfin
kayasth are illegetimate off spring... - tajender said Fingolfin
kaysth are not bania.they are not tra...
- RajTOO said Fingolfin,
tajender knows nothing. He just copy p...
- Fingolfin
said Tajender
you poor soul Amitabh is not a Brahmin... - tajender said ahem,truth is this that,
Corruption dents India...
- tajender said It is the mainstay of islam. Islam was, is and alw...
- ahem
said to raj
Quote:
"He was ok till some muslims c... - RajTOO said I don't think posters here should make tajender in...
@Feroz Khan
I was misled by the use of Imran Khan as an example to make your larger point, that the Pakistani westernised classes were what is generally considered to be the Pakistani liberal section of society, with complete confusion ensuing.
However, there is no doubt in my mind about the larger and rather more satisfying issue that you have raised, which is of course true not only of Pakistan but of its sister states Bangladesh and India as well. We do have a tendency to confuse westernisation with identification with a modern mind-set and with modern beliefs, and among them the liberal point of view about politics.
That confusion does not mean that the liberal does not exist in any of these three countries. It does mean that sometimes we confuse westernised individuals, individuals who are politically autocratic or oligarchic, correctly speaking, in rather the ancient Greek sense, with liberals.
That is all.
Sadly, it leaves us with a very small number of people who happen to be of a democratic bent of mind. The larger section of the westernised are as you have described them, rentiers interested only in military dictatorships which allow them to increase the scope of their rentier activities.
What the implications are, is a different story. For the moment, I shall confine myself to denying as emphatically as possible, from the example of those that I have been dealing with, and from the example of those that I encounter with reasonable frequency in India, that the only class that exists is an autocracy-prone westernised class of the conservative.
I am sorry for the incoherence. It is due to a mad rush to conclude my theft of band-width, occasioned due to an unfortunate period of bereavement of my own broadband connection. More later, perhaps.
@ Fayaaz and karachikhatmal
Thanks a lot. You can make use of this article as much as possible.
thanks for appreciation and encouragement.
@ feroz Khan
I fully agree about middleclass not understanding about liberalism…particularly constitutional liberalsim. In fact for those who have studied evolution of democracy in western europe know that constitutional liberalism which is underpinned by rule of law, seperation of powers actually PRECEDED universal suffarge.
Farid zakria’s book future of freedom chronochiles evolution of democracy in various countries and concludes that for democracy to be stable rule of law has to be there.
But having said, so imran Khan supported Musharraf initially and his own party is totally on cult of personality.
I am not sure whether Mr Khan is the right example in political aspect
simply a great article..superb
i agree with you 99.9%
BUT i will vote for IMRAN KHAN in next election.I am secular,liberal,humanist..and there are many more like us..but we dont have a choice..
IMRAN has that tribute which is enough reason for secular humanists like me to vote for him..and that is INTEGRITY..we have to sacrifise perfectionism and idealism temporarily..IMRAN is the best choice for us..we secular humanist(like midlle class)dont have much choice.
secondly in countries like Pakistan masses cant be mobilized without using religious sentiments..even SECULAR HUMANIST like MOHAMMAD ALI JINNAH had to use it in 1947 to mobilize muslims of subcontinent to protect their political rights..
I’m not sure what to make of this…there are some very good points in this, but some very serious flaws as well.
I don’t see why you think that patriotism and westernization are mutually exclusive; why you choose to completely rule out the ‘Taliban are reactionary’ argument.
What, for example, do you consider to be ‘aping the West’ – using iPods and wearing jeans? How does that contradict the Pakistani identity? Since when is a precondition of being Pakistani to wear only shalwar kamiz and only listen to folk music? Exactly why is someone being self-contradictory if they say that they are Muslims and enjoy cheesecake?
I also disagree with some of your generalizations – how can you say that everyone who expresses pride is being self delusional? Is it delusional to be proud of the natural beauty of Pakistan? Is it necessarily self-delusional to be proud of sufi music?
I would also add, by the way, that any nation subjected to the biased media portrayal of Pakistan would be defensive. Not that it’s a good thing to be defensive – but I am merely trying to explain how it is a natural phenomenon, not strange or twisted or illustrative of any hypocrisy. In the upper middle class you speak of, there are people who completely deny any association with Pakistan (mostly amongst those who move abroad) and then there are many who realize that their identity is irrevocably Pakistani and cannot be erased. And when Pakistan is attacked, they feel like THEY are being attacked – and, understandably, respond. Some get defensive, some cook up conspiracy theories, some cite a lack of religion…some criticize the govt, others join NGOs, others try to be good Pakistanis in their own capacity…there are many different ways in which people respond, most of which are not intrinsically bad, but probably incomplete and imperfect.
And I am hardly a Taliban apologist, but your argument seems to be that anyone who cites drone attacks as a reason for extremism is one. Come on. No one can doubt that they are at least part of the reason, can they? Again – I’m not an expert in international relations and sovereignty law, but it seems to me that if the US military were carrying out any operations without the Pakistani government’s knowledge/implicit approval, it WOULD be a violation of sovereignty. The Pakistani government’s traditional public position that they do not approve of these attacks is what causes confusion in so many people.
So, yes. While I agree with your statements about Imran the politician, I disagree with your pronouncements about the ‘middle class’.
@ nabeel
I have not mentioned anywhere in the article that wearing jeans and patriotism is mutually exclusive.
That was not the point. read again and you would find a reason as to why it was aping west was mentioned. you are pretty intelligent as is clear by your post, you will gauge it. the word used was “twisted” envy
regading drone attacks…well what is apologetic defense in the first place..that basically those who are blowing themselves are not blowing themselves because of ideological issue but merely as a reaction.
Yes you are right this may be part of the reason but unfortunately majority of people do not think as reasonably as you think. Just listen to your most of media and general media watching people. They think either it is a conspiracy or just that hardliners have been forced to blow themselves in lahore because USA drones killed someone in FATA!!
@ Raza Raja
I agree, with you on the rule of law.
That is why, the real argument for the suitability of a political candidate in Pakistan, has to be removed from from issues of personality to one of procedures. Pakistani political parties and our leaders’ biggest flaw is the lack of a democratic tradition and the fact that they do not preach, what they practice.
Hopefully, in Pakistan, we will mature to the point that we debate the potential of our leaders not on the basis of their personalities or even issues, but on the basis of the process, which allowed them to assume the positions of leadership. Our leaders and our political parties cannot represent the people as long the leaders are the self-appointed messiahs of their own vanities and remain unaccountable to the people.
ciao
“Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.”
Ronald Reagan
@ Vajra
Yes, I would agree with you and would add, that a liberal is one who is willing accept a result or an opinion, which has been arrived in a constitutional manner, regardless of his her/her personal opinion.
Case in point: lets say there are fair and free elections in Pakistan in 2013 and all the international observers confirm that their results were free of any irregularities, but those elections bring the religous parties to power in Pakistan.
What happens then? A liberal minded Pakistani would have to accept those results no matter how much they may personally detest the religious right.
Are the so-called Pakistani liberals willing to accept the results or will they justify a military coup in a Machavellian sense that denies the religious parties their right to form a government?
Liberals do exist in these nations, but they are still immature in their political belief structures and still mis-identify liberalism, and their stance, as a reaction to a view rather than understand liberalism as a belief in process of politics itself governed by constitutionalism.
ciao
No, actually, I’m not too clear on what you mean by the contradictions. Could you explain?
‘merely as a reaction’ can probably be called an apologetic defense, but saying that suicide attacks are at least partially reactionary is not a defense by any stretch of the imagination – it’s just an explanation.
@humanist
And who should have known better than that raddled old panderer to the baser elements of every citizen?
@Raza: We have been re electing mainstream parties for a very long time, and this is not unique to Pakistan but elsewhere as well. The result: Same old status quo, no change.
My friend we have never had any ghairat in our leadership, they have been doing the same thing for years which is taking the weak position and taking dications from foreign powers. Again expecting that the same thing will bring different results is Einsteins definition of madness. Obviously if one thing doesnt work then why not try the other?
IK for the millionth time….has condemned ttp attacks, and has not tried to justify them but understand them, and is as critical of them as much as the drone attacks. Do you even watch his interviews?
Also as for your comment on ”non voting populace” . Has it not occured to anyone that not a lot of people knew what IK’s position was in 2002 becuase we didnt have a vibrant media that could get his message across? Also he boycotted the 2008 elections so we didnt get the chance to see his popularity on a national scale. Now that we do have a media, and now that people do know what he is about, we will see in the next national elections how many people vote for him. I am sure its going to be a lot more, who else do we have? Altaf Hussain? Zardari? Nawaz Sharif? I think we have better choices.
@nsahmed
Kindly read this article also http://www.chowk.com/articles/17506. May be you will understand what I mean by apologetic defense. I think the term is pretty commonly used and there should not be confusion regarding it.
Aplogetic defense normally comes with a “justification” tone rather than as explanation and adopts somewhat sympathetic tone.
If I am still not able to clarify…well then I apologize and will try to do better next time..
Thanks for giving me a balanced prespective on this article. I am happy to note that you looked both its positives and negatives which is the right way to analyse any stuff.
Writer starts the article with wrong assumption.Very few in Pakistan vote for Pakistan.Voting criteria in Pakistan is etnicity,barardism,feudalism.There are those who win votes by using guns.There is massive riiging always.
PTI in last 5 elections had bagged good votes and turned out to be second in three elctions out of five.
Writer my suggestion to you is,get your basic rights.Are you among those who consider Bush better than Iqbal?You seem to be so suggested by your writing.
I agree with the general message of the article, i.e., that the people who are most enamoured by IK are the non-voting types but that he has failed to attract the masses. Nevertheless, I also feel that the article conflates a lot of issues and thus is inaccurate on certain matters. For instance, the intro really doesn’t have much to do with the rest of the article. The debate in ET with respect to the Sialkot killings (referenced in the intro here) really has little to do with which side of the IK divide you fall on. In fact, I doubt that the people who wrote in support of looking beyond Pakistan to widen the debate were either conspiracy theorists or IK fans. That is a wholly separate matter and does not fit in with this subject matter or line of argument. Besides, one could also make the argument that a lot of those who insist on not taking a global view of Pakistan’s failings (which has nothing to do with justifying wrongdoing) may not have spent any time abroad and thus developed a narrow view of how “Pakistanis have lost all values” without taking into account the shortcomings of others. Again, pointing this out does not mean that Pakistan’s flaws should not be discussed or rectified.
It seems the author is expecting perfection and I hope he/she must define how a perfect leader should be? In my opinion people have to compromise on certain traits/points just so they could move on unlike the author who’s approach is rather pessimistic.
Plus I think the writer should consider the voting in Pakistan is not done by intellectual, people sell their votes every year. There’s nothing much IK can do when people want to live in misery.