“They take their cookery from Paris and their opinions from Moscow.”
Some of the words used by George Orwell, a lifelong leftist himself, disdainfully describing the English left. Lacking the common touch, he felt these elitist wonks were living in a bubble and had an inability to relate to the man on the street.
Could the same be said of the Pakistani civil society? Specially those components within it that champion liberal causes?
Yes, civil society types are not all walking-talking stereotypes that are out of touch with the realities of the world, but many actually are. This state of affairs is very harmful. You see, some of the causes that the liberati associate themselves with, like women’s rights and environmental issues, affect the poor the most; they are the issues of the common people, but by virtue of association, in the greater public’s mind, these issues stand to be considered as the pastimes of the rich and vapid. Appearing on a talk show on women’s issues, say, would be a grounded, articulate right-winger versus an anglicised member of the elite-auntie-brigade who, after years of staying within a supportive echo chamber of like-minded people, wouldn’t be able to defend her valid points of view. Much to learn from neighbouring India, which has a significant share of salt-of-the-earth liberal activists comfortable in vernacular languages.
The vapidity of the civil society appears particularly stark when it squares off against the political class, like it has in the case of the Orange Line. You might say that of course, the politicians would have a leg up over the civil society when it comes to having their pulse on the people’s wants; that it is wrong to compare apples and oranges. But, as they say, it is tempting to compare apples and oranges when they are being sold at the same stall. In this case, the market of ideas.
*****
First thing out of the way, it is clear that most of the principal protestors would likely never have travelled on public transport and rarely, if ever, on rickshaws. With that in mind, since their protests are against a massive project of public transport, they should take care in at least appearing to be concerned about issues of public transport. Every third or fourth line out of their mouths should be statements conceding the necessity of public transportation projects.
Online viewers can watch Geo News’ Capital Talk of the 18th of February below. It was three civil society members versus one government representative. Now the latter handled himself with aplomb, barring one gaffe. The other side, however, were fighting amongst themselves in an effort to get a word in, what to speak of letting him give a clean, uninterrupted argument.
And whereas the government representative was arguing specifically to the point, his detractors were throwing everything and the kitchen sink in their arguments, all while constantly changing the goalposts of the arguments.
Upon being asked specifics of what was wrong with the project, one from the civil society insisted on speaking about health. With the elected government of the day choosing to prioritise itself in the manner it has chosen to (and it doesn’t ignore the rest of the social sector), the task of the civil society is then to focus itself only on the modus operandi and procedural requirements.
*****
A city as large as Lahore, with its intense urban sprawl, has to be catered to in an effective manner. Rapid and affordable mobility will ensure that the city remains liveable. It would ensure that the working classes escape the tyranny of their geography, giving them some power of negotiation. It will ensure that working class women get to their places of employment in a manner safer than the hell that they are used to.
The preservation of our cultural heritage is the only smoking gun that the civil society has. Pakistan is a member nation of the UN and agrees to UNESCO’s rules about world heritage sites. Our heritage needs to be protected for the coming generations. Are these heritage sites more important than the transport projects? Doesn’t have to be an either-or. It could all go together. For that, the government could have been far more inclusive and consensus-driven than it has been, but that is a hallmark of the PML-N. One of the areas — few as they might have been — where they really need to learn from the PPP.
But the ones in real need of learning how to play the game are the members of the civil society. They need to work hard on learning how to leverage the media to their own advantage. They need to dispel their image of being elitist hipsters who do not care about the lot of the scores of people who will ply the city’s transport networks on a daily basis.