Morality: The might of the weak?
During a recent visit to Lahore for a conference, a colleague and I strolled outside the conference hall at a 5-star hotel for a smoke. Looking for a quiet place to share a cigarette and some ideas, we ended up on some comfy chairs laid out near the hotel`s swimming pool.
Engrossed in a discussion, we were suddenly interrupted by a middle-aged woman who was an employee of the hotel.
Talking first to my colleague she said: `Excuse me, sir, you are not allowed here`.
Believing that she was protesting about the smoking bit, my colleague innocently inquired whether one was not allowed to smoke in the open areas of the hotel or not.
`I`m not talking about smoking, sir,` she said, politely. But the politeness was soon followed by a tad more firmness in her tone when she explained that it was the `ladies hour` (to swim).
My colleague and I looked around, but the only lady we could see was the one wagging a finger at us. `What ladies?` My colleague asked.
`Sir, they aren`t coming out because of you two`, she explained.
My colleague (like me from Karachi and also like me, in his 40s), got a tad agitated: `I see, so you are suggesting that we timed our arrival here to coincide with the arrival of some very fragile, modest and decent sisters who`d like a dip in a hotel pool?` Before the hotel lady could offer her defence, I intervened and tried to lightly defuse the situation: `We understand, ma`am. No problem. We`ll go smoke somewhere else. Forgive us, for we are both from Karachi and Karachi, as you Lahorites know, is a very indecent city`.
As I began to walk back towards the hall, my colleague continued to mumble: `You Lahore folks are strange. Why even have a swimming pool? This area too should be turned into a praying area.
This left the hotel lady a bit angry: `Sir, I`m sure things are done differently in Karachi, but here in Lahore we have values that we take very seriously`.
Alas, my slow march towards the conference hall was suddenly halted: `That`s nice to hear,` I smiled. `But only if you guys were also willing to keep an equally stern eye on the extremists breeding freely at the Punjab University as you do on folks wanting a peek at modest lady swimmers, I think the value bit would have sounded a tad more convincing`.
Nevertheless, it has been a long-held belief of mine that at least in Pakistan, the act of imposing moralistic dictates and rules of behavior are not enacted from a position of strength,as such. Instead, on most occasions they emerge from a sense of apathy, insecurity and failure to impose more concrete modes of behaviour and rules regarding economics and politics.
For example, in the late 1960s, when parties like the Awami League, the National Awami Party and Z.A. Bhutto`s PPP rose in popularity and influence by offering various leftist economic, political and social alternatives, the right-wing Jamaati-Islami (JI) reacted by suggesting that such alternatives would damage Pakistan`s moral fabric.The moralists were routed in the 1970 election because the country`s working classes, the peasants and the petty-bourgeoise were more interested in economic reforms than in toiling under a so-called Islamic government who just promised them a better hereafter.
The JI had acted from a position of political and ideological weakness and thus, decided to wield the stick of morality that it explained as being ordained by the Almighty and not orchestrated by any `earthly philosophy`.
Interestingly, Bhutto (whose party managed to come intopower in 1972) decided to borrow the same stick when his chips were down six years later.
Facing a concentrated protest movement in 1977 and failing to stem the economic rot that had begun to besiege his regime, the secular and socialist Bhutto agreed to accept the moralistic aspects of the demands put to him by his rightwing opponents.
It is amazing to note that even thoughBhutto`s economic policies were what made the country`s urban middle and lower-middle classes rally around the calls of the right-wing parties against him, all they got in the end were certain moralistic maneuvers.
It seemed that the country`s economic ills were squarely due to the presence of nightclubs, gambling houses, bars and the fact that Sunday (instead of Friday) was the weekly holiday in Muslim Pakistan.
Well, in order to survive, Bhutto agreed to change all this and he did so purely from a position of desperate weakness.
Pakistan`s worst military dictator, General Ziaul Haq (19771988), would continue the tradition in the most dramatic manner.
Every time his dictatorship faced discontent due to failing economics, bad politics and rising corruption, he responded by introducing laws and policies that claimed to uphold the best interests of faith and morality.
He wasn`t doing this from a position of dictatorial strength.
He did it every time this strength was challenged and he found it difficult to address this challenge through sound economics and politics.
And so it has gone on. Weakness to initiate bold economic, social and political reforms has always resulted in the imposition of moralistic eyewashes.
State institutions do this and end up giving vast spaces to extremist outfits. The judiciary does this when after failing to resolve the problem of corruption and chaos faced by millions in the lower courts, it instead begins to offer headline-grabbing populist, moralistic and reactionary platitudes.
But most of all it is the politicians that do so the most.
Cornered by corruption and bad governance? Ban YouTube.
Can`t stop terrorism? Start praising terrorists and their `morally correct stand`. Can`t revive a rotting economy? Ban `vulgar stage plays`. Failing to compete with foreign films and TV plays? Ban them for being against our superior moral values.
Can`t attract foreign tourists? Introduce `ladies hour` at hotel swimming pools. You get the picture.
http://www.cssforum.com.pk/Morality: The might of the weak