Civil society and the limbs and levers of power
A MEMORIAL meeting on Faiz Ahmad Faiz turned sour when a couple of so-called progressive writers repeatedly made some utterly uncalled for remarks against writers and poets who happen to be in public service and who, to my mind and by all standards of performance, are ably and competently handling their job and at the same time looking after the overall interests of literature and literary people alike. The critics were promptly told that the great Faiz had himself headed public literary bodies and much that we see today in the shape of organisations promoting creative and cultural activities was due in part to his efforts. In fact promotion of culture and arts has always been a responsibility of the state whether under imperial, dictatorial or democratic governments.
To the memorial meeting organised by Strengthening Participatory Organisation (SPO) in Islamabad last week, a number of literary societies among them the Progressive Writers Association, Halqa-i-Arbab-i-Zauq and Alao had brought statements against the imposition of emergency and the PCO that were read there and the gathering passed a combined resolution demanding restoration of constitutional rule and return to pre-emergency situation. Writer and activist Feryal Ali Gauhar had also sent a bouquet of a message in support. Dramatist Sarmad Sehbai and rights activist Marvi thought writers should find creative ways to lodge their protest. Cliched statements had better be left to the politicians. A gentleman of the Left wanted to draw the line to exclude the right wingers from the protest. Prof Khwaja Masud who was in the chair, Harris Khaleeque and PWA’s Rahat Saeed told him it was not the time to beat personal drums.
During the rambling discussion one participant who said he came from the rural outback claimed the village folk didn’t know what was happening in the country and among their concerns the restoration of the pre-PCO judiciary or for that matter of any kind of constitutional rule had no place. He was probably right, but I reckon, in a superficial kind of way, because what he was referring to was in fact ignorance and illiteracy, not apathy of the rural folk who were alive to the problems created by an inept system of governance. He seemed to suggest the rural folk were not a part of the civil society which would mean that the civil society that we so fondly talk about in the cities was nearly sixty percent less in size than what we supposed it to be. Is it then that the civil society was only composed of the urban citizenry, and among them too only those who were aware of the current political and constitutional affairs? And whom did they represent when they voiced their concern and came out to register their protest. Only themselves? Well, that is what the establishment has been saying all along. The lawyers represent the lawyers and the judges, judges and the students, students?
Another gentleman whose butt of criticism were the writers and poets in government service and who expected them to join the protest by resigning their positions seemed to imply the writers and poets were the only educated people in government service that alone formed part of civil society. Weren’t a great many in the civil bureaucracy – starting from assistants, section officers, deputy, joint and additional to divisional secretaries – not a part of this ‘elite’ class by virtue of their education and expected level of awareness. If they as a class are silent and avoid participation in political activities and cite in their defence their undertaking to government, so might the former. It is a different matter that they fail to go into aspects of legitimacy which one may trust is an implied condition of their service bond. Well, society is not that acute in its perceptions yet. Who do then form part of the civil society? Political parties with their followings, voluntary groups, lawyers, journalists, students, retired government servants and the bazaar? And who do they represent? Only themselves? Or the rest of the lot also – the bonded bureaucracy, the ignorant rural majority, beggars, slum dwellers and the vagrant homeless drifters.
Then, what about the collaborators, among whom we have highly educated professionals, men of law, honourable members of the judiciary, intellectuals of all descriptions and able men from various callings who come forth eagerly to serve any master. We may call them time servers or worshippers of the rising sun or what ever we like. But there they are, grinning with self assured avidity, salivating, glib with justifications of their own. Are they not part of the civil society, if we restrict it to only the educated urban class that possesses social awareness and feels responsible for the common good. These people come from good social backgrounds, what are called respectable families, and have read law, the sciences and even books of literature. They go to art galleries and make good conversation; devout Muslims, habitual pilgrims of shrines and the Kaaba, who, come Ramazan, sit in aitekaf to purify their souls. Survivors all, just make an offer and watch. Watch how the PCO governments grow by the day, the solemn oaths for a few weeks stint in power! Can we count these lubricants of the system out of the mechanics of civil society? They are an essential part of the system like the worker bees of the honey comb. They are the limbs and levers of the establishment and by virtue of their function in society have nothing to do with the ethics and principles of legitimacy or any qualms of conscience. Serving the system, any system, is their biological instinct. Without them the state would cease to function.
It may be recalled that a group of citizens, that in current parlance we call civil society, comprising Maulanas, Mashaikh, barons of industry, traders, politicians and professionals had gone to Karachi to confer the title of Muhafiz-i-Millat on Governor General Ghulam Mohammad when all he could do was wet his bed, drool and babble profanities.
Source: Dawn
Date:11/29/2007
” 
” 
” 
” 
” 
