By Amir Zia
Monday, July 21, 2014
The News
Perhaps revolution was never on the agenda of the leadership of these small leftist parties. Many of their front-line leaders were happy to play second and even the third and fourth fiddle to the feudal, tribal and the urban rich while paying lip-service to the revolutionary cause.
"The revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall”. – Che Guevara.
There is hardly a parallel between the words and actions of Che and our very own self-professed revolutionary Allama Tahirul Qadri. They are individuals belonging to two different planets. Che – a guerrilla fighter – fought, lived and died for the revolution. Qadri’s revolutionary struggle starts on board a first-class flight from Canada and keeps him secure in a bullet proof, bomb-proof, comfortable container.
Yet, one must not doubt the sincerity of our esteemed Allama Qadri and his passion to stage a revolution for which he will soon announce a date. However, to date, it is not clear whether he will give the day and time for the beginning of the revolutionary struggle or its culmination. A revolution with a defined deadline will be the first of its kind in history if it succeeds.
Certainly, Allama Qadri is not the first Pakistani politician to wave the banner of revolution in the country or we the first generation to hear claims that a sweeping change is on its way. Much before Qadri unfurled his banner with a pledge to destroy this “decadent, rotten and exploitative system” many other politicians tried to sell a similar dream to their followers and the masses under various wrappings.
Some defined revolution in all its Marxist sense of class struggle, while others interpreted it purely on religious lines to establish the rule of the clergy in the country. The centrist politicians called for a revolution from the comforts of their luxurious homes and four-wheel drive vehicles.
But just like Imran Khan’s so-called tsunami of today, they, too, aimed for a mere change of faces of rulers without disturbing the ruling elite, comprising the same powerful families of feudal lords, tribal chiefs and business and industrialist tycoons, who have been holding the destiny of this country in their hands all these years – be it under a democratic or military rule.
Most of our full-time and part-time revolutionaries only used, misused and abused the concept of revolution in all its superficial and phony sense just as others did the same with democracy and Islam. Their words were bombastic, their promises were big… some were eloquent speakers, but all of them were part of the system they claimed to uproot and destroy.
“You cannot make a revolution in white gloves”, said Vladimir Lenin. But many of our ‘revolutionary’ charlatans – leftist, rightist or centrist – never tried to take off their white, spotless gloves. No wonder, the hair of one generation after another kept turning grey while waiting for the elusive revolution – which never came.
Various types of leftist groups – Maoist, pro-Soviet, Trotskyites – with inflated optimism and mindless innocence used to see a red revolution coming all through the ‘60s, 70s and ’80s. “Give one more push to the crumbling walls” was one popular slogan that echoed through all those years. But the ‘oppressive walls’s did not crumble and Pakistani ‘proletariat and peasants’ never got united to stage a socialist or communist revolution.
Yes, for a brief period Zulfikar Ali Bhutto did manage to ride the revolutionary bubble comprising mainly urban middle and lower middle class leftwing students and trade unions as people across the West Pakistan of yesteryears were mobilised against Ayub Khan’s rule and then for the 1970s elections, but he dumped the left soon after assuming power.
Many leftist ideologues, who were the founding members of the Pakistan People’s Party, landed in jail, beaten and tortured in the initial years of Bhutto rule.
What went wrong for these senior comrades?
To put it in simple words, they forgot the basic lesson of revolutionary struggle while joining hands with Bhutto; people usually act in line with their class interest. And Bhutto, despite donning the Mao cap, was not Mao Tse-tung to declass himself and stop being a feudal lord.
The left lost its steam after making the wrong ‘Bhutto choice’, but even till the late 1980s and the initial years of 1990s, various small but effective leftist groups did manage to survive. Some operated on narrow nationalist lines, while others debated whether change in Pakistan would be according to the ‘Soviet party line’ of national democratic revolution or the Maoist ‘peoples’ democratic revolution’. But these groups, despite their small size and the oppression of General Ziaul Haq’s martial law, did play an important role in the movement for the restoration of democracy – only to be dumped again by the Benazir Bhutto-led PPP in the 1988 elections.
Our comrades again forgot the basic lesson of the revolutionary struggle described in such a simple and articulate manner by Chairman Mao; “Who are our enemies? Who are our friends? This is a question of the first importance for the revolution.”
But perhaps revolution was never on the agenda of the leadership of these small leftist parties. Many of their front-line leaders were happy to play second and even the third and fourth fiddle to the feudal, tribal and the urban rich while paying lip-service to the revolutionary cause. But in their essence, they acted like the same ‘bourgeois’ parties that were their allies. This explains why one-by-one, many of the middle-class romantic revolutionaries too followed the opportunism of their leaders and became part of the system.
Today, remnants of some of these leftist groups still exist, but they are a shadow of their past. They operate more as talking societies of pseudo-middle- and upper-class intellectuals, ultra-liberal civil and human rights advocacy groups and NGOs. No wonder they live in their tiny bubbles and fail to connect to the masses.
Our rightwing, religiously motivated revolutionaries, too, had their mirages of glory. From the Tehreek Nizam-e-Mustafa (pbuh) against Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s rule following the 1977 elections to the chants of “revolution, revolution, Islamic revolution,” all through the 1980s and the early 1990s against the backdrop of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, the religious parties managed to mobilise vast crowds and fuelled the imaginations of countless of youngsters, who took up weapons for their revolutionary Islamic cause in Afghanistan, Indian-held Kashmir and many other parts of the world as well as in Pakistan against all those they considered their enemies.
Those were the good days for the religious parties. The Pakistani establishment, the United States and all its western and Arab allies were on the same page and were doing all they could to bolster the armed Islamic groups of non-state actors to take on the Soviet Union and their communist allies. The Americans, the army and these self-proclaimed soldiers of Allah were one.
But once the Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan, the Americans lost interest in their partners. Both the Pakistani and Afghan Islamic political parties and armed groups, which proved so effective in the acts of destruction, failed to give a new system as they fought among themselves for the spoils. This underlines the fact that the religious leadership proved as insincere and shallow as their counterparts in the leftist and secular parties. The failure of the right in playing a positive role is more appalling because unlike the left, they enjoyed the support and the backing of the establishment until recently.
How would Qadri’s revolutionary struggle prove different from the predecessors – both rightists and leftist? That is difficult to predict. But let’s not get cynical and for a while ignore all the criticism on his lifestyle, the lingering doubts about the class composition of his party, its source of funding and some contradictions in his words and actions.
Let’s just remind him in the words of Chairman Mao that “a revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery; it cannot be so refined, so leisurely and gentle, so temperate, kind, courteous, restrained and magnanimous. A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another.”
Will Allama Qadri prove to write a different history in Pakistan’s subdued revolutionary history? Your guess should be as good as mine.0
Monday, July 21, 2014
The News
Perhaps revolution was never on the agenda of the leadership of these small leftist parties. Many of their front-line leaders were happy to play second and even the third and fourth fiddle to the feudal, tribal and the urban rich while paying lip-service to the revolutionary cause.
"The revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall”. – Che Guevara.
There is hardly a parallel between the words and actions of Che and our very own self-professed revolutionary Allama Tahirul Qadri. They are individuals belonging to two different planets. Che – a guerrilla fighter – fought, lived and died for the revolution. Qadri’s revolutionary struggle starts on board a first-class flight from Canada and keeps him secure in a bullet proof, bomb-proof, comfortable container.
Yet, one must not doubt the sincerity of our esteemed Allama Qadri and his passion to stage a revolution for which he will soon announce a date. However, to date, it is not clear whether he will give the day and time for the beginning of the revolutionary struggle or its culmination. A revolution with a defined deadline will be the first of its kind in history if it succeeds.
Certainly, Allama Qadri is not the first Pakistani politician to wave the banner of revolution in the country or we the first generation to hear claims that a sweeping change is on its way. Much before Qadri unfurled his banner with a pledge to destroy this “decadent, rotten and exploitative system” many other politicians tried to sell a similar dream to their followers and the masses under various wrappings.
Some defined revolution in all its Marxist sense of class struggle, while others interpreted it purely on religious lines to establish the rule of the clergy in the country. The centrist politicians called for a revolution from the comforts of their luxurious homes and four-wheel drive vehicles.
But just like Imran Khan’s so-called tsunami of today, they, too, aimed for a mere change of faces of rulers without disturbing the ruling elite, comprising the same powerful families of feudal lords, tribal chiefs and business and industrialist tycoons, who have been holding the destiny of this country in their hands all these years – be it under a democratic or military rule.
Most of our full-time and part-time revolutionaries only used, misused and abused the concept of revolution in all its superficial and phony sense just as others did the same with democracy and Islam. Their words were bombastic, their promises were big… some were eloquent speakers, but all of them were part of the system they claimed to uproot and destroy.
“You cannot make a revolution in white gloves”, said Vladimir Lenin. But many of our ‘revolutionary’ charlatans – leftist, rightist or centrist – never tried to take off their white, spotless gloves. No wonder, the hair of one generation after another kept turning grey while waiting for the elusive revolution – which never came.
Various types of leftist groups – Maoist, pro-Soviet, Trotskyites – with inflated optimism and mindless innocence used to see a red revolution coming all through the ‘60s, 70s and ’80s. “Give one more push to the crumbling walls” was one popular slogan that echoed through all those years. But the ‘oppressive walls’s did not crumble and Pakistani ‘proletariat and peasants’ never got united to stage a socialist or communist revolution.
Yes, for a brief period Zulfikar Ali Bhutto did manage to ride the revolutionary bubble comprising mainly urban middle and lower middle class leftwing students and trade unions as people across the West Pakistan of yesteryears were mobilised against Ayub Khan’s rule and then for the 1970s elections, but he dumped the left soon after assuming power.
Many leftist ideologues, who were the founding members of the Pakistan People’s Party, landed in jail, beaten and tortured in the initial years of Bhutto rule.
What went wrong for these senior comrades?
To put it in simple words, they forgot the basic lesson of revolutionary struggle while joining hands with Bhutto; people usually act in line with their class interest. And Bhutto, despite donning the Mao cap, was not Mao Tse-tung to declass himself and stop being a feudal lord.
The left lost its steam after making the wrong ‘Bhutto choice’, but even till the late 1980s and the initial years of 1990s, various small but effective leftist groups did manage to survive. Some operated on narrow nationalist lines, while others debated whether change in Pakistan would be according to the ‘Soviet party line’ of national democratic revolution or the Maoist ‘peoples’ democratic revolution’. But these groups, despite their small size and the oppression of General Ziaul Haq’s martial law, did play an important role in the movement for the restoration of democracy – only to be dumped again by the Benazir Bhutto-led PPP in the 1988 elections.
Our comrades again forgot the basic lesson of the revolutionary struggle described in such a simple and articulate manner by Chairman Mao; “Who are our enemies? Who are our friends? This is a question of the first importance for the revolution.”
But perhaps revolution was never on the agenda of the leadership of these small leftist parties. Many of their front-line leaders were happy to play second and even the third and fourth fiddle to the feudal, tribal and the urban rich while paying lip-service to the revolutionary cause. But in their essence, they acted like the same ‘bourgeois’ parties that were their allies. This explains why one-by-one, many of the middle-class romantic revolutionaries too followed the opportunism of their leaders and became part of the system.
Today, remnants of some of these leftist groups still exist, but they are a shadow of their past. They operate more as talking societies of pseudo-middle- and upper-class intellectuals, ultra-liberal civil and human rights advocacy groups and NGOs. No wonder they live in their tiny bubbles and fail to connect to the masses.
Our rightwing, religiously motivated revolutionaries, too, had their mirages of glory. From the Tehreek Nizam-e-Mustafa (pbuh) against Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s rule following the 1977 elections to the chants of “revolution, revolution, Islamic revolution,” all through the 1980s and the early 1990s against the backdrop of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, the religious parties managed to mobilise vast crowds and fuelled the imaginations of countless of youngsters, who took up weapons for their revolutionary Islamic cause in Afghanistan, Indian-held Kashmir and many other parts of the world as well as in Pakistan against all those they considered their enemies.
Those were the good days for the religious parties. The Pakistani establishment, the United States and all its western and Arab allies were on the same page and were doing all they could to bolster the armed Islamic groups of non-state actors to take on the Soviet Union and their communist allies. The Americans, the army and these self-proclaimed soldiers of Allah were one.
But once the Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan, the Americans lost interest in their partners. Both the Pakistani and Afghan Islamic political parties and armed groups, which proved so effective in the acts of destruction, failed to give a new system as they fought among themselves for the spoils. This underlines the fact that the religious leadership proved as insincere and shallow as their counterparts in the leftist and secular parties. The failure of the right in playing a positive role is more appalling because unlike the left, they enjoyed the support and the backing of the establishment until recently.
How would Qadri’s revolutionary struggle prove different from the predecessors – both rightists and leftist? That is difficult to predict. But let’s not get cynical and for a while ignore all the criticism on his lifestyle, the lingering doubts about the class composition of his party, its source of funding and some contradictions in his words and actions.
Let’s just remind him in the words of Chairman Mao that “a revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery; it cannot be so refined, so leisurely and gentle, so temperate, kind, courteous, restrained and magnanimous. A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another.”
Will Allama Qadri prove to write a different history in Pakistan’s subdued revolutionary history? Your guess should be as good as mine.0
My guess is same as yours
ReplyDeleteVery interesting sir.
ReplyDelete