Adil Najam
The picture of lawyer Ahmed Raza Kasuri with his face blackened by spray is now everywhere. So are links to the video of Geo News show “The Great Debate” where Ahmad Raza Kasuri not only lost his cool but also all sense of decorum and decency that is demanded not only by his profession, but by mere humanity. The face of lawyer Muhammad Khurshid Khan, who had sprayed the black stuff on Mr. Kasuri, has been granted bail but his face is equally blackened by this vile, childish and dishonorable act.
As a post on the Islamabad Metroblog pointed out, had this in fact been the work of an impetous youth there might even have been some excuse. Coming from a ‘senior’ gray-haired lawyer and directed at another ‘senior’ gray-haired lawyer, it was just despicable.
Irrespective of what their political views might be, the actions of both Mr. Kasuri and Mr. Khurshid were vulgar. There is absolutely no excuse for either. It does not matter what the issue was. It does not matter how heated the emotions were. It does not matter who ‘started’ it. It does not matter whose views are right. The actions of both are just plain wrong. And what is wrong is wrong. No excuses. No taking sides. Only condemnation. (The same is, in fact, true of the attack on lawyer Naeem Bokhari in court recently).
This post is really not about the views that the two men hold on Pakistan politics and the Presidential elections. We wish to ask a set of much deeper and much more important questions:
Are we Pakistanis, as a nation, capable of decent civil discourse? Are we capable of honestly disagreeing with each other without becoming disagreeable? Are we able to partake in a honest discussion without getting our own egos offended and without getting down to marna maraana? Why must our anger trump everything else? If, in fact, we have trained ourselves to repel discussion and discourse and seek solutions rooted in violence – either physical or verbal – then how can we aspire for true democracy?
Extreme anger and abuse like the one we heard from Mr. Kasuri and saw from Mr. Khurshid is not just the domain of lawyers. We have seen it often – from cricketers, from actvists, and from
society – and we also see it here at ATP in a milder, but equally disturbing form. We have mildly cribbed about it here before, but to little avail. Moderation of this blog is the most (and only) thankless job of running Pakistaniat.com. It takes up a huge amount of time, and it is emotionally draining. Sometimes we feel like giving up and have even thought of just banning all comments all together. And in the process, no one is ever happy with us.
What gets to us is not that people do not agree with us (most comments, most of the time, do not). What gets to us is that people seem incapable of disagreeing with each other without being disagreeable. We seem to be perpetually angry. About everything. We fail to realize that the violence of words can be as painful as the violence of hands. It is as if we are incapable of telling someone that we disagree with them without adding a string of insults. Oddly, many of the same people who seem to think that insulting someone is ‘funny’ (they add smileys to the comment and think that will mellow the pain), are the same who get most easily offended. Nor is this a matter of “left” or “right.” It is a malady that effect all types, and equally. If you look through the archives you will find umpteen comments where people will (seriously) argue for tolerance by suggesting that they intolerant should be eliminated (killed)! Too many seem to show their opposition to violence by advocating more violence.
Even on mild things, note how people are hesitant to show even the most basic respect to the people they disagree with. Its not enough for you to say that you do not agree with me, you also have to question my patriotism, by links to ‘foreign hands’, the lack of tarbeeat from my parents, the inappropriate of my religious convictions, my inherent stupidity and idioticity, and my damn my previous and future saat pushtain. And all because I said that I like pakoras better than samoosas. Give yourself a break, yaar!
This example is fictional, but the problem is not. Just read the comments and note the underlaying overlying sense of anger and frustration that seems to permeate everything. All this makes our life difficult. But that, too, is not the point. After all, that is our own doing. We have chosen to have the moderation policies that we do, knowing full well that many people be angry with us. Those who we agree with as well as those we do not agree with. As Munir Niazi said:
The point is deeper. Why are we so angry and what does it mean to our collective national future? One could argue that part of the anger comes from the institutional failures around us. Not getting and not expecting justice from the institutions around us, we choose to take things into our own hands. Not used to getting fairness from others, we are eager to assume that everyone will be unfair to us, unless we trump them by being even more unfair. Or, maybe, it is just because we grew up in a place with too much sun. Personally, I doubt if any of these explanations – particularly the last one – is totally valid. I cannot believe that it is “genetic” but I do fear that as a society we have now been trained to be this way and are in danger of seeing this perpetual anger as the norm rather than as an abberation.
If it is so, it is truly truly dangerous. Anger is never a solution. It can lead to horrendous injustices. If we look around us in society. On talk shows. In the daily newspaper headlines. In current events. In the baazar right before aaftari. I suspect you will find a lot of anger. Too much anger. Needless anger. Sometimes violent. Always distasteful. But you will also find a great acceptance of anger as the “normal” way of doing things. That is what is truly truly scary. There is nothing “normal” about the anger that surrounds us everywhere. Until and unless we accept that fact, we are unlikely to be able to do anything about it. And if we do not do something about it, only worse things will happen to us.
P.S. Before someone says this, let me acknowledge that even if our anger can sometimes be excessive, it is nt something unique to us. Many others can also be as or more angry than us. Yes, they can. But so what? That is no excuse. Plus, we are concerned here only about “All Things Pakistan.” Its Pakistani anger and the repercussion of Pakistani anger that keeps me awake (sometimes, quite literally).
I must say that Munir Malik conducted himself very well. Trying to put myself in his place, I find it hard to imagine how he kept his cool.
While we should express our strong displeasure at Qasoori’s behaviour and the blackening of his face, we should also commend those who set a good example.
I do not wish to comment on the incidents related to Mr. Kasuri other than to agree that what was done to him, and what he did on TV show, was absolutely disgraceful.
But the author has raised a very important issue; that of our anger and, in particular, the manner in which it gets expressed in our discourse. Before saying anything further, let me admit that I may have occasionally breached the bounds of civility in expressing myself in this, and other, discussion fora. For this, I tender abject and unconditional apology to all those who may have been affected. I realize that a mere apology does not always help much, but admitting mistake and expressing sorrow and shame is a lot better than standing one’s ground and further compounding the pain of those one may have already aggravated.
I also wish to point out that, perhaps, anger is reaction to genuinely felt pain at the action of someone else. Not that this justifies insulting and vilifying someone’s “saath pushtaiN” as Adil has aptly pointed out. But there seem to situations every now and then which can pain and anger people. Up to a point, I think it is normal to feel – and express – anger over such situations, rather than internalizing it. Equally, if someone remains totally wooden and unaffected at unjustified provocations, at least I felt that there was something unnatural about such stoic behavior.
This brings me back to the question that I wish to ask; is it wrong to expereince anger, and to express it? And what is appropriate reaction to register the fact of one’s hurt and displeasure?
For instance, right now I am extremely hurt and disgusted at the timing, location, and crass opportunism of BB’s statement that she will provide Western investigators access to Dr. A. Q. Khan.
Am I alone in this? Do people who feel angered by such actions have the right to “vent” themselves?
You must realize that we are not living in times. Infact this is the most frustrating and desperate time the nation has ever witnessed and in such times why do you expect normal behavior from others?
An excellent post.
One more explanation (again, not totally valid) is that we grew up without learning how to exchange ideas and disagree without being disagreeable.
Our educational institutions generally don’t have debates (only speech competitions labled as debates) on hot topics where students have passionate views but are required and taught to debate with some decorum. Our social science courses are mostly about indoctrination of a single ‘correct’ view. By the time we grow up, we have not developed the habit of engaging in a constructive discussion where we exchange views, learn from each other and try to understand where others are coming from even when we disagree with them. With this background, we come to our blogs, political talkshows, conferences and discussions in an authoritarian political dispensation where we vax endlessly about democracy but are often ready to explode with anger the moment there is a major disagreement.
My own behaviour has not been examplery; unfortunately, I was never taught how to discuss, and am too old to try changing my habits now. If someone reminds me of manners, I will get even more angry because, hay, I’m a grown up so how dare someone try to tell me to behave?
I can not think of any magical solution, but all I can say is that we need more and more debates and exchanges of ideas in order to learn. It should start from schools. There should be proper debate competitions where opposing teams take different positions on the topic and also respond to each other’s points rather than just delivering monologs that put everyone to sleep. There should be regular class discussion periods for topics other than those in the curriculum. We badly need local radio and TV stations for discussing and debating local issues. People should grow up with all the exposure to debate they can get at the very grass roots level and not under the kind of censorship oriented regimes we have had (our civilian govts included). Debate, debate and more debate and perhaps we will gradually learn.
Absolutely disgraceful.