Extremism as it has manifested in Pakistan is defined as not only an act of extreme consequence under religious pretext, for example suicide bombing or vigilantism, but also the passive acceptance of such or perceiving extreme acts as such acceptable. This is a much broader definition and one which engulfs a much larger percentage of the Pakistani population; also it means the action, or inaction, of this increased percentage will naturally be of larger significance. Although there were always some elements of extremists throughout the history of this region, they were never of significant number and were always thought of as a fringe. However the rapid growth in numbers over the past decade is alarming to say the least and has reached a threshold point where it is no longer possible to avoid or discard the problem. While terrorism is an act of violence and terrorists are physical beings that can be acted against; extremism is a mentality, based on extreme ideology and thus much more difficult to combat. Extremism can not be jailed, maimed or droned. Also extremists of today in Pakistan are not Al Qaeda or a small group but rather an entire chunk of population. This may seem an exaggeration to some but recent events have been an eye opener in terms of polarity in this country. This is a battle that can be won only through rationality and argument, and thus will be long and testing. However there is a problem, most voices in Pakistan that speak of rationality and logic against extremism are quickly discredited and labelled as anti religion, agents of the west, or 'liberal extremists' by conservative voices and thus are shunned by the masses.
This is a consequence of the popular perception of the stratification in Pakistani society; religious extremists, moderates, and liberal extremists. This has now become a widely used stratification and is quoted not only by popular television frequenters but also the masses of urban youth on the internet. The 'liberal extremists' argue that the tag is unfair as they have never blown themselves up against anyone, and equating holding liberal opinions with terrorists is nothing but absurd. The conservatives of society argue that their love for alcohol, parties, fashion shows and western attire is an extreme act in the context of Pakistani tradition and one that corrupts the 'land of the pure'. An example of this was when a popular journalist on the most popular private news channel said on a prime time show that “there are one crore liberal extremists in this country who consume alcohol and it is their mission to make the remaining 17 crore also alcoholics”. This is an appalling statement to give at the very least and one that is grossly misleading, however it is also a reflection of the popular belief in society at large. Lets then just say for the sake of argument we take this definition of liberal extremism. If that is to be the case then the entire stratification of Pakistani society is wrong and has to be redressed because it is not reflective of the wide variety of opinions amongst the 180 million people of this country. I propose rather then the 3 categories, we redefine it into 5 as the following: Religious extremist, conservatives, moderates, liberals, and liberal extremists.
This I believe is absolutely essential in order to restore some sanity in the country and reduce the hostility towards either camp by decreasing the polarity. As the ideology of religious extremism is to be countered not by bombs but rather by promotion of moderate religious views and by liberal arguments, these liberal arguments must not only be heard but also listened to. This is only possible if they are not discredited by a label or a tag. Liberal views such as democracy, pluralism, equal rights for women and minorities, freedom of opinion and expression, the idea of live and let live, etc, must not in any way be connected or associated to alcohol and parties. If the definition of 'liberal extremist' remains, and this new stratification is established and popularised, then it is very possible to promote liberal ideals among the religiously inclined masses who now are stuck having to chose between the two 'poles'. A liberal may be defined as someone who holds the above mentioned perfectly reasonable views but does not indulge into 'vices' associated today with 'liberal extremists'. Such a person can not be discredited and shunned under pretexts of character and may command greater influence among the masses.
In this war of ideas, if this view of stratification spreads then it will be easier to pull more people from the right to the centre through moderate teachings, and more people from the centre to the left through liberal ideals; for the eventual goal of a progressive society.
No comments:
Post a Comment