Since the ouster of ex-Prime Minister Imran Khan, most of the headlines of various newspapers, highlight contours of the monster known as ‘Political Polarisation’. This monster is dwelling in the society and is maturing by feeding on our minds.
For the past few months, many of the political happenings -- from corruption cases to foreign funding, from political hunt down to hate speech, from blame game to long march, from parliamentary stunts to judicial surprises -- are hinting towards a political meltdown, which is escalating into social polarisation – where the elite capture the state institutions and systems and the needy search for food and shelter.
Currently, political polarisation is shaping us at various levels. At individual level, we are mistrustful of the information floating around and try to legitimise our fabricated reality as the ultimate truth. At societal level, we see people are less tolerant of opposing views. On national level, we are sceptical of the state institutions and feel all of them together are conspiring against us.
Are we at war with our own people?
The role of a political party is to influence policy and work toward the country’s stability to ensure social and economic progress. On the other hand pressure groups bridge the gap between the public and state institutions and promote democratic participation. However, Pakistani political elites since 1947 have done quite the contrary, and have paved the way for a polarised polity.
Pakistan’s political history is replete with examples where political polarisation was used to achieve vested political results or to retain power. The 1960s and 70s were a far more polarised time, when ideological conflicts between socialists and conservatives in Pakistan over the nature of the economy, as well as the ethnic conflict between East and West Pakistan over the nature of the federal system, took place. The current polarisation of political parties is a continuation of the same pattern.
‘Polarisation’ is a tool that is commonly used by political elite to pursue their political interests by declared idiosyncratic morals that mostly are in conflict with actual values. They exhibit their opponents as evil and traitorous and themselves as good and patriotic. They use blame game tactics, corruption charges, foreign funding cases and accountability for ills in the society. This further plants the idea of ‘ethnocentrism’ – the belief that one’s entity is superior in organisation, performance and administration over all the others. Their opinion is their firm belief.
We are at the receiving end -- just like in the book, Animal Farm, by George Orwell, the silver-tongued pig Squealer manipulated the incidents and words by whatever means seem necessary only to justify Napoleon’s (a totalitarian pig who leads the Animal Farm) actions and policies to the ones who were ruled. We are at a place where information reaches us after being distorted and fabricated. Won’t it be wise that instead of believing what today’s Squealer has to offer we begin to question the facts in order to reach an understanding of the ongoing happenings?
The leading parties of Pakistan, unfortunately, have set the precedent so low that we have started to justify actions and policies on the basis of ‘lesser evil’. The political debate is full of comparisons on all implausible and useless metrics. Emotions have dominated rationality. Biasness is the new norm.
In Pakistan, there are three mainstream political parties -- PTI, PML-N and PPP -- with many other small politico-religious and ethno-nationalistic parties -- like JUI-F, JI, MQM, ANP -- which altogether have muddled the spectrum of politics through the ills of dynastic structure and factionalism. Interestingly, the process of polarisation is not limited within the political arena but runs beyond that. Even the citizens belonging to different social, economic, or political strata become a victim of the ongoing political battle and polarisation. It’s strange how the parameters of their political association and affiliation influence and form their social and individual identity.
For the past few months, many of the political happenings -- from corruption cases to foreign funding, from political hunt down to hate speech, from blame game to long march, from parliamentary stunts to judicial surprises -- are hinting towards a political meltdown, which is escalating into social polarisation – where the elite capture the state institutions and systems and the needy search for food and shelter.
Currently, political polarisation is shaping us at various levels. At individual level, we are mistrustful of the information floating around and try to legitimise our fabricated reality as the ultimate truth. At societal level, we see people are less tolerant of opposing views. On national level, we are sceptical of the state institutions and feel all of them together are conspiring against us.
Are we at war with our own people?
The role of a political party is to influence policy and work toward the country’s stability to ensure social and economic progress. On the other hand pressure groups bridge the gap between the public and state institutions and promote democratic participation. However, Pakistani political elites since 1947 have done quite the contrary, and have paved the way for a polarised polity.
Pakistan’s political history is replete with examples where political polarisation was used to achieve vested political results or to retain power. The 1960s and 70s were a far more polarised time, when ideological conflicts between socialists and conservatives in Pakistan over the nature of the economy, as well as the ethnic conflict between East and West Pakistan over the nature of the federal system, took place. The current polarisation of political parties is a continuation of the same pattern.
Even the citizens belonging to different social, economic, or political strata become a victim of the ongoing political battle and polarisation. It’s strange how the parameters of their political association and affiliation influence and form their social and individual identity.
‘Polarisation’ is a tool that is commonly used by political elite to pursue their political interests by declared idiosyncratic morals that mostly are in conflict with actual values. They exhibit their opponents as evil and traitorous and themselves as good and patriotic. They use blame game tactics, corruption charges, foreign funding cases and accountability for ills in the society. This further plants the idea of ‘ethnocentrism’ – the belief that one’s entity is superior in organisation, performance and administration over all the others. Their opinion is their firm belief.
We are at the receiving end -- just like in the book, Animal Farm, by George Orwell, the silver-tongued pig Squealer manipulated the incidents and words by whatever means seem necessary only to justify Napoleon’s (a totalitarian pig who leads the Animal Farm) actions and policies to the ones who were ruled. We are at a place where information reaches us after being distorted and fabricated. Won’t it be wise that instead of believing what today’s Squealer has to offer we begin to question the facts in order to reach an understanding of the ongoing happenings?
The leading parties of Pakistan, unfortunately, have set the precedent so low that we have started to justify actions and policies on the basis of ‘lesser evil’. The political debate is full of comparisons on all implausible and useless metrics. Emotions have dominated rationality. Biasness is the new norm.
In Pakistan, there are three mainstream political parties -- PTI, PML-N and PPP -- with many other small politico-religious and ethno-nationalistic parties -- like JUI-F, JI, MQM, ANP -- which altogether have muddled the spectrum of politics through the ills of dynastic structure and factionalism. Interestingly, the process of polarisation is not limited within the political arena but runs beyond that. Even the citizens belonging to different social, economic, or political strata become a victim of the ongoing political battle and polarisation. It’s strange how the parameters of their political association and affiliation influence and form their social and individual identity.