At a certain point in their historical lives, social classes become detached from their traditional parties. In other words, the traditional parties in that particular organisational form, with the particular men who constitute, represent and lead them, are no longer recognised by that class (or fraction of a class) as its expression. When such crises occur, the immediate situation becomes delicate and congerous, because the field is open for violent solutions (State and Civil Society by Antonio Gramsci)
It goes without saying that early 20th century Italy, and 21st century Pakistan are hardly comparable. The specificity of Gramscis writing, set in the context of European turmoil and fascism, is fairly unique; but its quite clear that it doesnt take away the longevity of his idea. What Gramsci is talking about in dense academese, is a crisis of representation. A crisis that separates the represented from those who claim to represent. A crisis that creates the possibility for conflict and violence in society.
Over the course of the last 30 years, we have seen the development of some political parties that are completely cognizant with the aspirations, ambitions, and cultural ethos of those that they represent. The two best examples from this time period are the PML(N) and the MQM. Both of these parties draw their leadership from roughly the same social class to whom they cater to, and both have developed a narrative that ensures their institutionalisation within a particular electorate. For the Punjabi trader who runs a shop on Brandreth Road in Lahore, and the Muhajir pant-shirt wearing white-collar worker, there is little need to hunt for representation.
So far, so good. No Gramscian crisis in sight.
Turn your attention to the other side of the picture, and for a second, it almost seems as if Gramsci was writing about the PPP circa 2011. With renewed optimism, and a fair bit of hand-holding by the IMF, the PPP government has decided to follow structural adjustment (or whatever its called these days) in letter and spirit. Removing subsidies, privatising government institutions, increasing taxes, the whole nine yards (and then some). What was once labelled as the traditional party for the poor and the marginalised has now devolved into a heavily insulated and largely confused political club, which throws up tragic-bordering-on-the-humorous examples of political contradiction.
The PPP will not allow privatisation of any government institution.
This gem a mere two weeks before the privatisation commission released a fresh plan to privatize both OGDCL (through bond floatation in March 2011) and chalked up a list of 27 other institutions, which included PPL and Pakistan Post.
No change will be brought to the blasphemy laws as long as I am Law Minister.
This briefly after Sherry Rehman tabled her amendment bill in the National Assembly.
The farcical list of contradictions is fairly long. The reason behind this farce, however, is quite simple. In an attempt to balance its current position, of lying within a restricted policy space, and the rather burdensome tag of being a party of the poor (at least in two provinces), the PPP leaves little doubt that its going through a crisis not too different from the one mentioned at the start. When you pose this question to party loyalists and apologists, they cite cash-transfer schemes like the BISP as proof of PPPs commitment to the cause of the working classes. When you ask them to move beyond such short-term commitments, they automatically point to the lack of space afforded to them by the establishment.
What is basically happening is an evasion of responsibility. Too afraid to take on the challenges of becoming an active representative of the silent majority, the PPP has settled for whatever piece it can get from this increasingly stale pie. Too afraid to realign its agenda of governance with its intellectual foundations, the PPP has decided to cut deals or just bury its head in the sand.
What is perhaps most telling is that less than a week ago, political activist and academic Aasim Sajjad, wrote a report highlighting how the Christian community of Islamabad were willing to throw their lot in with the Jamaat-i-Islami candidate in the next election. When asked why on earth, the answer was that the PPP had failed, not only in protecting their rights as a minority group, but also as a party responsible for ensuring some manner of basic services to the working classes. They thought the Jamaat candidate will probably label them as kafir, but he might just get their water pipes fixed.
Perhaps its a tragedy of this volatile era that our definition of conflict and violence starts and ends with drone attacks, suicide bombings and militants. These legitimate pre-occupations aside, we continue to miss out on the very real conflicts taking place in our society because of economic and social marginalisation. If the PPP wishes to resolve the intellectual, discursive, and representative malaise it finds itself in, it needs to pay attention to those who still come out and vote for it. Otherwise, this spiral downwards will continue unabated, not just for the PPP but for the entire country.
The writer is an aspiring pundit who blogs at http://recycled-thought.blogspot.com. He can be contacted at [email protected]
