How to Judge an Act

Source: APP/Dawn

I am pretty sure it always would have been sick to live in Pakistan, but I can tell you it is getting sicker by the day and I am afraid it will only get sicker in the future. For a people who have isolated themselves from the rest of the India supposedly for their superior moral values and purity (therefore the name Pakistan or “Land of the Pure”), away from unclean, uncircumcised and idol-worshiping Hindus, they have become so decadent that they have apparently lost all human common sense of what is right and wrong.

As if they needed any further degradation? Some might add.

In today’s Pakistan, the 21st century Pakistan, when humans are jumping off the edge of the stratosphere of the planet, we are still insistent on enforcing beliefs in barbarian medieval nonsense. But let us even keep religion out of it, because a lot of my friends are insistent that I am too obsessed with it, though it really is that way because everyone around me is. Though you cannot really keep it out of the discourse in context of the Pakistani society, can you? But saying that, it at least establishes how self-important and self-conscious it is of its morality.

Whenever you see some kind of moral idiocy emerge to public discussion, it is usually the result of some rotten and twisted piece of moral conclusion in a reaction to the wounded collective ego of a mob. You know, mobs like nations, religious communities and political parties, or may be even other groups. But so much for generalizations. Let us leave such privileges to the morally correct so that they can decide who is patriotic and who is moral and who is religious or not.

I have just discovered a new standard on how to judge an act. To be able to tell whether it is right or wrong. To be able to tell whether you are supposed to celebrate or mourn it. Simply see what kind of people are condemning or applauding it. So you would be able to tell whether you see such an act as a real occurrence or dismiss it as a charade pulled off by the master superpower forces of the world. There are no limits when you are thinking with a bias and starting your arguments with one. So it seems.

So now some of us, particularly the only patriotic, the only religious and certainly the most morally righteous ones of all, have sunk to a new low by imagining the shooting of a 14 year old as the justifiable punishment to “an American agent” at times and to be a complete fraud that had never actually have happened in the first place at others. I would particularly envy the intelligence of all those who are able to hold both these views on the Malala shooting incident at the same time. But then again, in a world ruled by Godly-Satanic superpowers, anything is possible. Of course, it must be something good if pro-West secular hypocrites are condemning it.

But I don’t really wish to be harsh. Not everyone thinks like a complete idiot, and I am talking about nationalist-religious patriots, even though it implies otherwise by definition. This is when matters of common sense and those of great sensitivity are discussed, such as the ones that involve 14 year old girls being shot by unreasonable and barbarian terrorists, or militants, or freedom fighters, but certainly criminals. As much as I believe in peaceful Pakistanis and peaceful Muslims, I am more than ever convinced that I am living amid individuals blinded by one of the most horrific moral standards and religious-nationalistic ideologies and who would go to any extent to justify their beliefs.

And I don’t say this out of frustration on dealing with their arguments, quite the contrary since they can so easily be proved wrong. Though making them believe that they are wrong is another story. But I say this because of the violence and the risk that it involves. I say this because you cannot breathe in this society without offending someone somewhere and getting threatened for who knows what. I say this because it is not safe, it has never been safe, to say what you think is right and to express what you really believe in.

I more than welcome and support the right of expression of ridiculous arguments, because all they end up doing is showing broad daylight. A lot of my friends oppose hate speech very strongly, to the extent of banning it. I oppose hate speech too and when it comes to direct threats, I would lean in favor of removing it from published and broadcast content as well, but I’d just like to make a point here. Firstly, you can’t completely ban hate speech any more in the world of social media, but even if you wanted to, displays of hate speech perfectly tell you the bigots from people who are controlling and fighting prejudice abuse, or the prejudices their upbringing imprinted them with.

You cannot help but feel disgusted at people targeting Malala like this. I made this point earlier too, but I am honestly sick up to the throat with this nonsense. The Pakistani nation is in a state of denial right now and they are in a state of denial because they are too afraid to face and consciously accept what they believe in, or what they think they strongly believe in.

Yes, denial is that easy when the reality is that ugly.

Like life.

Advertisements

Malice, Morality & Malala: or Adding Insult to Injury

Source: AP/The Hindu

I write this with a heavy heart, with disgust and with a sense of insecurity and fear.

As you all know, teenage education activist Malala Yousafzai had been shot by the Taliban in her native Swat on October 9, 2012 to the shock of not only the entire nation, but the whole world. Right now she is struggling her way back to life and hopefully making good progress. However, I am seriously concerned for her well being in the future as she is feared to have suffered brain damage, but that’s not confirmed. Hopefully not.

After this sad incident, amid spontaneous sympathy and genuine grief, all kinds of genuine heartlessness, cruelty and the usual idiocy emerged. I am talking about the organized campaign and the spontaneous reactions aimed at undermining the tragedy of the shooting of Malala Yousafzai and maligning her character as an activist.

You can find all kinds of people coming up and linking the event with their political agenda and trying to prove something completely unrelated.

So, you’re upset about Malala, right? How come you don’t make the same kind of fuss about hundreds of little children who have died in the drone attacks?

I am so sorry for not outraging as much about the hundreds of little children who have died in the drone attacks, but what in the world drone attacks have to do with Malala and what does grieving for her have to do with grieving for the children dying in drone attacks? Why is grieving for a girl that you knew as a public figure wrong and how that negates the feelings you have for the people dying in drone attacks?

So is speaking out for the attack on her wrong just because you think people are not condemning drone attacks? What kind of morality is that, by any of the twisted standards we have in this world of ours? Maybe just because the whole world is sympathizing with her, she must be an evil person, right? The ever-obnoxiously-eloquent Ayaz Amir puts it like this.

I mean what in the world are people trying to prove over here. Yes, drone attacks (which are, mind you, bombings, which are bombings and are lethal, let them be by manned aircraft or not) are atrocious for both innocent and terrorists alike, but those events are completely irrelevant to the point that Malala Yousafzai was an innocent little child who was brutally shot. I literally felt as if someone had shot my own daughter, but you don’t have to feel the pain to imagine if the girl was your “daughter” really. I regret even mentioning that word here. Though I cannot see it or put it any other way.

Actually the reaction from many of the hyper-nationalist and self-proclaimed exclusively-patriotic and religious right and center-right (with sincere apologies to the sane center-rightists) of the country, and especially the religious leaders and “scholars”, is nothing more than a dirty display of Groupthink, with hurt pride turning into venomous damnation of Malala and of all the sympathy for her. It is certainly not without a reason.

They do actually consider Malala and everything she represents as a threat. A threat to their religious-nationalist identity. A threat to the Pakhtun Islamism, a threat to the Islamic clergy, a threat to the Taliban and a threat to their cult of oppressing women into oblivion, ignorance and obscurantism, depriving them a right to education and a happy and free life.

Islamists like the Taliban are more aware than your average moderate Pakistani Muslim what great a threat secular education can possibly be to the religious dogma and faith. The reason is that education on scientific basis can help children grow to become freethinkers and use reason and scientific method, which could possibly eliminate the superstition and the supernatural from their lives.

Oh yes, was she really innocent of all her charges? The razor-sharp wit of Wus’atullah Khan so sarcastically puts why she was not. Even Nicholas Kristof sees it this way.

I agree that she is not innocent of her charges. I am proud that she is not. She was doing something even the most outspoken of liberal and secular public figures were and are afraid to do. She was propagating, supporting, endorsing and practically ensuring secular education to the children of her land, especially girls. This is something remarkable considering how the Taliban love to blow up girls’ schools and how they consider education to women an evil.

This is also remarkable because not long ago the Taliban and allied Islamist militant groups had taken over the control of Swat and enforced their Shariah there for the time. The Pakistani state had briefly lost control over the territory until a military operation was carried out to regain it. So it takes some courage to take on the Taliban not far from their lair.

This is precisely why the Taliban targeted her and their spokesperson Ehsanullah Ehsan has vowed to attack her again if she survives this one. Actually, the Taliban specifically mentioned that she was attacked because she was “secular-minded”. This is the reason why many in the rest of the supposedly moderate Pakistan think that attacking her was justified, even though they cannot or could not do it themselves.

So much for those who think that though shooting her is wrong, she does not deserve all this attention and sympathy. There are even those who think that shooting her was completely justified. Those who side with the Taliban. Therefore, I find this incident, not polarizing, but cleansing, in terms of who is who in our society. If we still cannot see who our enemies are as Pakistanis, then we never will.

Source: Amnesty International

While I think about Malala Yousafzai this day, what overwhelms me more than anything else and what really puts me to shame is her bravery and her clarity. Because what she is demanding is so obviously and unmistakably right and worth defending and not worth giving up, even for a second, just like breathing, eating and drinking. And stepping down and giving that up just because your life is under threat is just clearly wrong reasoning, isn’t it? But are we fighting that hard?

Either we are stupid or Malala is.