How not to react to the elections

Some reactions are more damaging than the result

The results of the 2013 elections have elicited mixed reactions; while some expressing confidence that the Sharif government will guarantee improvements on the economic front at the very least, others are wary of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) regime having observed their last two terms. A divided reaction is not surprising in a country tainted by a history of constant political turmoil and military takeovers; but what is more startling is the way the ‘educated’ class has dealt with the outcome of the elections. Before delving further I would like to state that political negotiation and debates are healthy and the demand for free and fair elections is every citizen’s democratic right. However, turning political opinions into personal vendettas and believing exclusivity in one’s own correctness is counterproductive and promotes the very culture of intolerance that a legitimate democracy strives to thwart. Social media has seldom played such an elemental role in local politics as it has done in the past week, with Facebook and Twitter savvy individuals of all ages using these forums to protest against or support the new government.

As someone who does not supporter any mainstream political party, I have witnessed steady political fervor turn into individualised battles between Facebook acquaintances and some political candidates. The tendency to enforce one’s own righteousness and treat criticism of a public figure’s manifesto as personal insults shifts focus from a crucial discussion about the future of democracy and political bias in Pakistan into a petty contest of who can put the other down first and in the best manner. We have forgetten to look at the complete picture – Pakistan is a diverse state and being such it has different socio-economic classes, a variety cultures and people with contrasting belief systems. Everybody— the child beggar on the street, the government employee, the traffic warden, the single mother, the soaring industrialist, the struggling farmer, the young student, the bed-ridden grandfather—wants the best Pakistan they can get, but not everybody shares the same views on how to achieve it. There are a number of arguments from urban industrialists on why they support PML-N and an equal number of counter arguments coming from different segments of society. A democracy calls for the approval of the majority, not the endorsement of every single citizen of the state, because despite social pressure to conform to a singular set of norms, we are all individuals and as such, unique.

The movement to gather unanimous support for any party or to “convert” others onto your political agenda is rooted in an evangelical, fundamentalist and, dare I say, fascist way of thinking. Take for example, the ease with which people have taken to social media, calling each other ‘educated jahils,” “unworthy of a better Pakistan,” “lost hope,” “impediments to democracy”—to criticize a political party like that is fine but to belittle an entire nation or anyone supporting a manifesto dissimilar to your own displays a mentality that is extremely damaging to the general morale of the country. The reason social media played such an effective and positive role in the Arab Spring protests was because it allowed people to own their revolution. The rallies on Tahrir Sqaure and elsewhere were for the emancipation of the nation from corrupt rule and not for the supremacy of a certain political party or leader. Furthermore, it is crucial to note that most of the allegations of rigging are centered in Lahore and Karachi, the strong-holds of the liberal, educated class. I find it a little hard to believe that in a country where a democratic government just completed a full term for the first time since 1947, rigging only took place in certain cities against certain political parties. What is more likely is that some candidates from all political parties indulged in unfair practices. Sure, the MQM case is a unique one but this is not the first election where we have witnessed Karachi’s frustration with the aforementioned party. In fighting for a democratic and moderate Pakistan, one must set an example and launch a protest against unfair elections in a democratic way. Instead of indulging in petty banter on social media forums that a very small, select percentage of the population can access, try attaining the support of other members of society who might feel wronged. There is a Pakistan beyond Lahore and Karachi waiting to be heard and sadly social media mavens are not taking their opinions into account. How will a ‘meme’ degrading Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, a boy will estranged from Pakistani politics at large, help in improving the future of Pakistan?

It is ironic that the very people who crying against dynastic politics and claiming that PPPP relies on the Bhutto name to garner support have managed to create a dynasty of their own. When any individual enters politics, they willingly trade in their private identity for a public one and in doing so open themselves up to criticism. In a democratic government, a political leader is not a monarch; rather, he/she owes a duty to the people as their elected representative. Calling Imran Khan “The King of the North” or conversely, the Sharif brothers, “The Lions of The Punjab” promotes a hegemonic power structure that places political leaders above reproach. A better Pakistan does not entail hero-worshipping individuals at the drop of a dime; a better Pakistan would encourage healthy criticism of all views and respect the right of individual opinion. Above all, a government is there to serve its people and doing so it pays homage to them not vice versa.

The writer is a staff member of Pakistan Today and holds a degree from Mount Holyoke College.