The Holy Mind Blow

The day I left Pakistan, liberalism died there. You are still mourning.

On a serious note, I agree with your lament but in Pakistan there was only a brief period after 1971 when people felt a little better and a little liberated and that too because fifty fifty and Gupshup were on the TV. For those who can’t make this connection, I really have no advice. But for Paracha, I will add that Pakistan society was only slightly to the left of in Ayub or in ZAB era. This means that liberalism was never something people were exposed to in its full meaning.
Pakistani liberalism at that time was also confined to people having some sharab shroob and may be smoking joints etc. Even for people who smoked and drank, religion was still a major part of their lives and it appears that it still is. Not much has changed since I left.
And I am not going back!

The root of the problem is the influence of feudalism couple with the religion and we have a doo atisha talwar jo sub liberals ka kabara kar daity hai.

PS. Paracha if you like to meet some liberals in Pakistan, let me know. They are in their forties now but they are true liberals.

Liberalism,or at least the socio-cultural manifestation of it in form of literature,theater etc., is not an end it itself;not even the means to an end; but the offshoot of social and political movements for change. Since, in Pakistan,any kind of movement has to be for democracy first, so constructs like liberalism,moderation etc. have to be woven around whatever the dictator chooses to push down the throat. Class struggle or struggle against religious fundamentalism cannot precede struggle for democracy; at least thats what I can postulate from axiomatic principles.
In India, the situation is very different, and the biggest challenge for ``liberals``, if they realize it
, is not escaping from the tenets of religion;but escaping from pseudo secularism, and not taking political correctness to absurd extremes. Religion has never been that big an issue in India, class has been a big issue and still is. In that sense, socio-cultutal manifestations of liberalism can do with more representation from vernacular, and not just elite liberals.

This whole business of starting everything even nonreligious with readings from Quran
and naat really is bizzare. And I agree with you when you say it is done in this part
of world so matter of factly. But I don`t know if we have any liberals here. Just extremists
and moderates and that`s why you seem pissed.

HP I don`t believe Paracha is looking for liberals, just retro or neo metro or whatever Marxists who insist that Marxism is not dead and that it is still the best expression of seculerism. Give it in Paracha, your decade long shouting against corporate pop in Pakistan didn`t do much and now you constant ravings against mullahs and liberals wont achieve much either.

NFP: Careful. Blasphemy law is still in full force.

NFP: I think you are taking ``permissiveness`` and ``liberalism`` to be the same thing. Permissiveness is just a convenience based attitude i.e you do things or let things happen which you believe to be wrong, but you let them happen nevertheless because its convenient to do so. If it werent convenient or if you had the time and energy or resolve, you would stop them. Liberalism is when you let people do what they want, inspite of the fact that you disagree with those things, BECAUSE you believe that people are entitled to do those things; i.e because you believe in liberty. There is no liberalism in Pakistan. Even those taken to be liberals are at best ``very permissive``.

Patwari: How does ``marxism`` (or any other idealogy) ``die`` ? Because there is no more a Soviet Union ? Marxism existed before there was a Soviet Union. It still does. Perhaps you wanted to say that ``at present there exists no country that professes to base its political and economic system on the communist ideal.`` Though even this statement would be incorrect. Cuba.

NFP: Careful. Blasphemy law is still in full force.

NFP: I think you are taking ``permissiveness`` and ``liberalism`` to be the same thing. Permissiveness is just a convenience based attitude i.e you do things or let things happen which you believe to be wrong, but you let them happen nevertheless because its convenient to do so. If it werent convenient or if you had the time and energy or resolve, you would stop them. Liberalism is when you let people do what they want, inspite of the fact that you disagree with those things, BECAUSE you believe that people are entitled to do those things; i.e because you believe in liberty. There is no liberalism in Pakistan. Even those taken to be liberals are at best ``very permissive``.

Patwari: How does ``marxism`` (or any other idealogy) ``die`` ? Because there is no more a Soviet Union ? Marxism existed before there was a Soviet Union. It still does. Perhaps you wanted to say that ``at present there exists no country that professes to base its political and economic system on the communist ideal.`` Though even this statement would be incorrect. Cuba.

wasif2: First ofall I see nothing unGodly about this article, in fact I think it should make NFP`s leading enemies happy even though he mocks them as much as he mocks the liberals. Secondly I did not mean since there is no USSR now so that`s why marxism is dead. Marxism is dead because economic ground realities have proven that it will never work. People like NFP are romantics who are now just cynical and bitter about everything, even though I actually agree with a lot of his views he makes here.

Re: # 8

Is there any definition of of blasphemy in law? Is there any basis for the law in sharia? As far as I know there is no basis for a common law in sharia in this respect. There is only a lynch law which allows you complete discretion to lynch any body by judging him a blasphemer-vide hadees given below:-

Sunnan Abudaud

Book 38, Number 4348:
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:
A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.


A

Patwari: ``lil recitation from the Koran`` and ``bloody naat`` qualify as blasphemy under the existing law.

Ground realities change. Can be changed. That is in the essence of human beings.

wasif2: No they don`t. How can they? Blasphemy is when you bad mouth the prophet (PBUH) and the holy book. And the big Marxist apologist that NFP is, he is mocking mortals who use religion and God. I think he is saying that religion is personal matter and should be treated that way without being forced by government or media.
So you agree with my changing ground realities point then?

I just called Asma Jehangir. She says its blasphemy. She is so human rights and all. Obvioulsy she knows best. So stop arguing with me now.

Agree with you ? Why no Pats...

I meant present reality... I prefer to say physical conditions... can be changed. Changed by people. There is nothing in them to make marxism irrelevant.

So what are you saying wsif2 that NFP be hanged?

Now thats a thought Pats....

Me don`t think there is anything wrong in ppl starting
nonreligious events with name of God. I don`t know how
does the writer think this amounts to contradiction.

I just went through half of your scribbling and want to post a reply but unfortunately don’t have time to do so.. but will make sure that I comment on your thoughts by tomorrow or day after..

Till then Paracha sahib go to McLenins and smoke a joint… ;)

it seems that everyone has their own definition of ``liberalism``, or what liberals are. i`ve never found much use for these labels, but just because one is ``liberal`` as NFP says, doesn`t mean that one disavows themselves of religion, or doesn`t believe that religion should be a huge part of their lives.

there is a divide between marxists and liberals. but to what extent can we call marxist ideology secular? some marxists themselves are so wrapped around the ideology that it could be ``the opium of the `believers``` marxists can be just as fundoo as the religious fundoos. . but this was just a digression.

i do agree that it is not the ``underclass`` or the very poor and uneducated who have provided us with the most fanatical moralists. as for the bourgeois-liberal-mullah nexus, add the military to it and it becomes even more dangerous.

one keeps hearing about how pakistan has opened up more since the zaalim zia days, but you know that saying. . the more things change, the more they stay the same. and attitudes that have been there long before the zaalim`s regime, that were given free reign to flourish during those regressive years are still there. these attitudes are what still power the nexus, these attitudes are what allow the nexus to be in control. would that there could be a way where those in control could restore ``that old-time religion`` back to the domain of the private, and corporal without bringing it into every aspect of social and political life. but until we reach that point it`s more a case of ``paisa phainko, tamasha dekho.``

for those who don`t think that there is a contradiction in praying or singing n`aat before a non-religious event, yes you do have a point, afterall, what is a religious vs. a non-religious event (is eating religious?!). . . but i personally do find a contradiction in praying right before you murder someone, or praying right before what is in their own eyes ``defiling`` something or someone with words.

as for the blasphemy laws, those are bogus anyway and the biggest offenders of the blasphemy laws are those who support and promote them. enough said.