They say fools who wear their hearts on their sleeves fail to make much of their lives. And it sounds, in its own weird way, true. There is only a limit to which emotions can take you and in this adult world (adult as in rated movies: violence R18, strong language R18, sexually explicit content PG13), maturity is supposed to do the rest. But can we mortals claim to be devoid of emotions? If we could, would we be any different from the metal men made of metal, silicon (silicon puts me in doubt though, and reminds me vaguely of something I cannot place properly) and circuits? Most probably not.

It is in human nature to pretend to be what one is not. While children are often not quite adept at that, look at the great lengths we go to hide our inner child from the world around us. Candidly put, immaturity has absolutely nothing to do with your upbringing or genes. Every living soul is bound to be immature one way or another. A classic example is your average, everyday office politics. Where else, after all, would you find examples of tiny men with huge egos? The ferocity with which we employees quarrel among ourselves, play the ruthless, heartless game of chess in the name of advancing our careers at other people’s cost has absolutely no other parallel. In doing so, do we not forget that no job can be forever and no matter how much we blame others for our inefficiency, one day we will have to leave this job too? Accept it, for it is all about career advancement and even religious terrorists to their reckoning are advancing careers in the afterlife.
The jury is still out on the name of the most powerful emotion. Some say it is love, others believe fear is the one. Of the two aforementioned the latter seems more plausible for had it not been for Freud’s befuddling and perverting interpretations, my heart was set on love. It is out of fear and not love that species in Darwin’s world appear to have evolved. While it is the positive aspect, there indeed is a flipside too. Fear kills our best talents and waylays our finest spirit. And in this context the worst fear inducing stimulus is not a multi-headed python or the prospect of fall from the top of the newly built Burj Khalifa, but the very society we live in. If anything, this is the ultimate machine of manufacturing consent and alas…mediocrity.
I know I am inverting every concept of social psychology but that at least is worth a try. You should then also know of the three penultimate deathly social fears in my vocabulary: the fear of rejection, of failure and of course of the unknown — better known as xenophobia. I know what rejection is through a relatively long and arduous journey in the media profession. The pain and realisation of someone trying to play the god and not even trying to understand your true potential is unfathomable and so is its fear.
Failure was one thing that was added in my dictionary only in recent years. When a newborn nephew died just in front of my eyes a few years back due to the negligence of doctors and I could not do anything, I understood what failure really was. Another failure came last year when a cousin, as dear as a brother, trapped in unfortunate circumstances, passed away at a young age and I, despite all my attempts to rescue him, could not help. The burden of these and the fear of more will always haunt me.
We will discuss fear of the unknown some other time. Suffice it to say that after living a long life of a homophobe when I finally knew and befriended a couple from the other side of the fence, I found out that they were not that horrible people after all. Freud’s work is another unknown that gives me severe headaches when I approach it.
When the three fears are brought together you can understand our political dilemmas too. Everyday I come across someone complaining that the president is talking too much of the conspiracies from the invisible forces. Then the prime minister’s example is given, who refuses to admit that something at all nefarious is afoot. Why this stark contrast, I am asked and I have to control my grin with much effort. Is it not obvious folks? The monkey tamasha staged during and after the NRO hearing by the media persons must have given those in power silent chills. How we ever came up to struggle for the independence of the judiciary is beyond my comprehension. Otherwise it clearly seems that we media-wallas consider ourselves judge, jury and executioner at the same time. Consider our opening lines regarding the NRO case: “Mulk ki looti hui daulat keh cases” (the cases pertaining to the looted wealth of the nation). The hearing, if I am not wrong, was about the Ordinance that gave amnesty to those who were being tried in the courts after these accusations. Not only did we then conclude that the national wealth was actually robbed but that too by the very accused.
So is it not natural for the one being treated as the chief accused to feel paranoid, especially when he has lost his wife and father-in-law to the very conspiracies? And as for the prime minister, who enjoys better rapport with other elements of the state and is not being implicated in the NRO debate, perhaps knows things a tad bit better and does not see any lethal hidden motives. Our army, opposition and the judiciary then might also be suffering from the fear of the unknown. There exists regarding the consecutive PPP tenures enough propaganda that the one inhaling it might be seriously worried about the future of the country.
This is the paradigm of fear that extensively explains the politics of the Islamic republic. Let me now turn to the paradigm of love where I will try to overturn Freud’s judgements. Without going into the details of the mechanics of love, I can say with full confidence that true love does exist and true hatred does not. Hatred, like evil, to me is the absence of love, trust and the fear of the unknown. If you love your country and your people deeply enough to actually care for their future, your own future of course becomes a secondary consideration. And here I believe none of my nation’s leaders fails me. Then where lies the actual problem? I think in the above mentioned compulsions of society. One of our social conventions is that a leader is supposed to have a coterie of sycophants around him. And this bureaucracy of mediocrity works on you in eerie ways to manufacture consent. Politicians are told that they will have no future if they do not turn belligerent.
Contrary to others I never considered the Charter of Democracy (CoD) a desperate bid to survive by two marginalised politicians. I considered it a serious effort to undo the wrongs of the past. Check my writings of the time and you will know that I never believed the confrontation between the superior courts and Musharraf was the judiciary’s attempt at self-preservation. Likewise, the army’s distancing from Musharraf was not an act of dumping a liability but a serious desire to learn from history. And for a while all these forces struggled together in harmony. Please give us back that spirit and allow us to live with the distinct pride in our leadership. A part of our sociology is the desire to leave behind a legacy. But by stamping out a few fear-related irritants, our current leadership can leave behind a legacy that will never be forgotten. So let us shun the assigned roles of society and rise above the tide of history to make a difference.
(The above column under the title “Zardari government and NRO judgement” first appeared in Daily Times dated January 7, 2010. Click here to see the original.)

Print This Post Print This Post