May the Best Rioters Win

Source: @safya777

Source: @safya777

We know that there is not much that we can trust our government with in Pakistan, but there is one thing about which you can be completely certain. You can count on the government to not provide you with any security whenever a violent rioting mob is on the loose.

Now, violent rioters in the sub-continent in general, and in Pakistan in particular are not isolated incidents. It’s a pattern, a culture, which is not just openly practiced, but even encouraged by otherwise seemingly sane individuals and political leaders.

We have invented a million functions of the government from the regulation of online speech to forcing the prices in the market, but sadly we have completely lost focus of the most essential and fundamental one. Establishing law and order and protecting the lives and the property of citizens.

From Gojra riots to Joseph Colony tragedy, Kot Radha Kishan and Sialkot lynch mobs to the Yohannabad violence, and from the Benazir Bhutto assassination riots to May 11 shootings in Karachi, the common winners have been the rioting forces, looters, rapists and criminals. The only losers have been unarmed, defenseless, peaceful, law-abiding citizens.

While it is not hard to understand that the government is almost incapable of blocking terrorist attacks, despite its best efforts, it can at least use its police to stop a riot from culminating. Especially considering the recent examples of police violence on violent political protesters in the PTI and PAT rallies in Islamabad.

However, stopping a riot is not the usual custom. Especially when the riot is of religious nature, the police prefer to witness the complete carnage instead of taking any action and relying on footage captures for trying to catch the criminals afterwards. In all fairness, sometimes the police have valid reasons too, because no one wants to be tried for murder just because they prevented a crime. But largely, it kills the purpose of trusting the police and necessitates civilian arms.

It really does not matter if there are laws encouraging protection of self-defense. It is whether such laws help protect people or not is what is important.

I don’t care who the rioters are in any of the several past or future cases.  I don’t care who or what they associate with. I don’t care what their grievance is. If they resort to threatening people’s lives and private property, they are criminals. Invoking constitutional right to assembly to justify their madness is not only inappropriate and abusive, but also intellectually dishonest.

If they are threatening life and property, the law enforcement authorities are justified to use whatever force is possible to disable and disperse them. Either that, or pay the damages to the victims suffering at the hands of these violent mobs. Sadly, you cannot pay for lost human life with money, if the government ever had the intention to compensate the victims due to their negligence.

I don’t see any harm in shooting at a violent rioting mob to disable and disperse them when they are clearly about to hurt people or threaten their property, and a lot of harm in letting them run loose. There is no other way to deal with such threats to public safety. Unless the police are empowered and adequately equipped to do so with reasonable exceptions, I don’t see any end to this culture of madness in the near future.

The more humanitarian side of our political spectrum could see the condemnation of mob violence as provocation to further violence or even suppressing people’s rights to protest, but encouraging the culture of mob violence is even worse. They should revisit their definition of hate speech as far as political rhetoric and its impact are concerned.

Actually, it is justifying and apologizing for violent riots and tolerating the suspension of law and order which is inviting more unrest and harm. It is precisely the tolerance of state toward violent rioters that brings rioters to the streets more violently than ever before every excuse they get.

The way things are right now, you can only perceive the law enforcement authorities to be inviting people to take it to the streets and indulge in violent riots. Because apparently that is the only way your grievances are going to be addressed in this country and nobody seems to have a lot of problems with it either.

Any group that is not resorting to violent riots is idiotic, as they are missing out on this tremendous equal opportunity to clinch their rights by burning cites to ashes, robbing banks and businesses, and lynching defenseless people to death.

The more enlightened elements of the society are actually losing the battle by just resorting to vigils. If they want something done, say restoring the YouTube, they should begin a riot just like the one that forced the government to ban it.

The more oppressed segments of the society, such as the Hazara, should stop with their peaceful protests already. Christian communities in Punjab should stop turning the other cheek as their colonies are burned to dust and should retaliate by burning some more buildings to ground.

No aggrieved party should wait for the courts to try the murderers of their people. They should be lynched to death and burned alive.

Let the violent mobs run loose on the streets of the country and deliver the swift justice that we have been aching for so badly.

May the best rioters win…

The post was originally published in The Nation blogs.

 

Advertisements

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.

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.