Past Present

Past Present: Dead language
MUBARAK ALI PUBLISHED MAY 31, 2015 06:46AM

Language is a repository of social and cultural values and traditions. It reflects ideas, concepts, sensibilities and the mindset of a society. Literature
in a certain language indicates its richness and dynamism. If a language fails to produce any original literature and there is no addition of new
vocabulary and terminology, it shows how stagnant the society is.
It is the responsibility of intellectuals to enrich a language with new ideas and create linguistic consciousness in a nation. Linguistic nationalism
plays an important role in uniting scattered cultural groups and shaping them into a nation.
After the French Revolution of 1789, the revolutionary government made French the national language and forcibly wiped out other languages in
order to unify all linguistic groups. Another example is of Germany which was divided into many small principalities and petty states until its
intellectuals and thinkers made efforts to create a national consciousness by enriching the German language with new ideas. Successful in their
endeavours, the Germans not only became united politically but also linguistically.
Simple, unintimidating words and technology might help maximise the potential of Urdu as an academic language
The German language produced rich literature and replaced the hegemony of the French which was spoken by the elite classes. The same policy was
adopted by Arab intellectuals who made the Arabic language rich and powerful enough to consolidate Arab nationalism which integrates all Arabicspeaking countries.
In the subcontinent, the Bengali intellectuals transformed Bengali into an academic language. The intellectuals play an important role in developing
languages by contributing new thoughts and ideas thereby providing a linguistic identity to the nation.
Another factor which improves the capacity of a language is when important books from other languages are translated. In Japans early period of
modernisation, the works of Western intellectuals were translated into Japanese. Eventually, they produced their own original work in social as well
as national sciences.
Similarly, in Iran, the translation of Western literature, history, philosophy and science was done very professionally. Also, the Iranian writers
published their original contributions in every field of knowledge which made Persian a highly academic and scientific language.
Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was the first scholar who made an attempt to make Urdu prose simple and academic. His tradition was followed by his
companions but his style was not continued. Abul Kalam Azad adopted a heavily Arabicised style of writing.
In this perspective, when we study the history of Urdu we find that after ending the supremacy of the Persian language, it emerged as a language of
the elite classes of North India. It was heavily dominated by Persian and Arabic words which were unfamiliar to the common man. Moreover, it
became the language of poetry and religious ideas. Its prose was so complicated that it was difficult to understand the content. The writers emphasis
was on displaying language writing skills at the cost of using unfamiliar words and terms. As a result the narrative of the early period Urdu prose
does not have ideas but only the charm of colourful and poetic language.
Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was the first scholar who made an attempt to make Urdu prose simple and academic. His tradition was followed by his
companions but his style was not continued. Abul Kalam Azad adopted a heavily Arabicised style of writing.
Another effort to make Urdu an academic language was made by the Usmania University, Hyderabad, India, but it discontinued after the partition in
1947. The Usmania University as well as Anjuman-i-Tarraqi-i-Urdu managed to translate important literature from European languages into Urdu
but in the absence of creative literature, the efforts remained ineffective in making Urdu academic.
When the British government founded universities in India and made English the medium of instruction, the newly-educated class adopted it as a
tool to express their ideas; therefore instead of writing in Urdu, the scholars chose English as a medium. Urdu had failed to compete with English
and was confined only to being the language of poetry and religion and could not expand its scope to become scientific and academic.
After the independence of Pakistan, although Urdu was declared as a national language and no efforts have been made to improve it and create
academic and scientific literature in Urdu. The National Language Authority, Islamabad and the University of Karachi have published several
translations of scientific and technical terminologies but being unfamiliar, they cannot be understood by readers.
According to Mehmood Mirza, there was a time in the 1950s or 60s, when Urdu could have been made rich and fertile by translating Western
literature. However, at this stage it has become nearly impossible because of the knowledge and information explosion.
In developed countries, hundreds of books are published daily on every topic, therefore it is no longer feasible perhaps to translate them all into
Urdu. As a result, knowledge in Urdu language has become stagnant. In order to familiarise ourselves with new ideas and concepts, we have to read
new, published material in English or European languages. Under these circumstances, Urdu has lost its opportunity to become a scientific and
academic language.
Past Present: Understanding Aurangzeb

WHATSAPP
0 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
Illustration by Abro
Being a repository of past events, history preserves the record of those individuals who played an important role in shaping the history of their time
and are resurrected and used from time to time by politicians to accomplish their interests. In the subcontinent, Akbar and Aurangzeb contributed
significantly in creating social and political orders, although both were antithetical to each other.
Akbar was a believer of Sulh-i-kul (peace with all), tolerant to followers of all religions. He made attempts to cut off cultural relations with Central
Asia and Indianise the Mughal court by adopting Indian customs, traditions and festivals. On the other hand, Aurangzeb tried to subvert this policy
and Islamise the Mughal State by introducing Islamic provisions.
The role of these two emperors was analysed critically during the colonial period and in the process of the freedom struggle. When in the 1920s
Indian history was communalised, Aurangzeb was considered as an orthodox Muslim ruler of India who alienated his Hindu subjects through his
religious policies. As a result, he became a hero for the Muslim community of India, admired for being the man who restored the prestige of Islam,
defending it against opposing forces. This process picked up pace when the two-nation theory became a cornerstone of the Pakistan movement.
After the Partition in 1947, Pakistani historians supporting state ideology in the two-nation theory reconstructed the historical narrative by critically
examining Akbar and Aurangzeb. I.H. Qureshi condemned Akbar and his religious policy as being against the interest of the Muslims of India. He
accused Akbar of being the major cause of the downfall of the Mughal empire as he had granted concessions to the Hindus thereby alienating the
support of the Muslims. To promote the image of Aurangzeb and to popularise his policies, Alamgir Day was observed on May 3, 1965 under the
patronage of Dairah-i-Muin-al-Marif.
In his lecture on Aurangzeb, Moinul Haq, Secretary Pakistan Historical Society, stated that the Indian and Western historians had tried to create a
wrong impression by wrong interpretation of the benign policies of Aurangzeb Alamgir, which he had initiated for the welfare of the people and the
progress of his empire it was not true that Jizyah was a poll tax or that its incidence was heavy. This twist was given by the so-called impartial
Indian and Western historians to taint the reputation of Aurangzeb who was also a worker for restoring the Islamic ideal of life.
Our nation needs the right kind of heroes
Pakistani historians tried to make Aurangzeb a model for Pakistani politicians. There are several instances where Aurangzeb shrewdly twisted
religion for his own political interests. For example, Dara Shikoh was not executed for being a political rival but as an apostate, based on a fatwa
which was issued by the ulema to suit the interests of the emperor.
Once some Hindu and Muslims prisoners were brought before the qazi of the court, who issued a fatwa that the Hindus would be released if they
were converted to Islam, while the Muslim prisoners would be kept imprisoned. When Aurangzeb found out about it, he reprimanded the qazi for
issuing a fatwa based on Hanafi jurisprudence, while there were other schools of thought which he could have consulted. When the qazi realised that
the emperor wanted to execute the prisoners, he researched a valid reason for execution by studying other schools of religious jurisprudence and reissued the fatwa ordering the execution of the prisoners.
On the one hand Aurangzeb demolished temples, while on the other he granted financial aid to the Hindus, Sikhs and Jain for their temples. Whether
to favour other religions or to oppose them depended on the prevailing political conditions. For example, in order to ensure the support of his Hindu
subjects in South India where he stayed 17 years, he did not impose Jizya.
When the ulema raised objections on the employment of Shias and Hindus in important offices of the state, Aurangzeb asserted that politics and
religion were two separate entities. He ignored the ulemas disapproval on not marrying his daughters according to the Islamic tradition, his attack
on the Muslim state of Deccan and execution of Dara on religious grounds; however, he banned music, un-Islamic celebrations and reduced court
expenses to demonstrate his piousness, despite which he failed to reform the Mughal society that was entrenched in corruption and debauchery.
It seems that Pakistani politicians have been following the policy of Aurangzeb by politicising religion and exploiting people in its name. From
Liaquat Ali Khan to the present leaders, religion has been used to promote the self-interest of politicians and to hide their crimes.
Through his policy of Islamisation, Ziaul-Haq changed the whole fabric of Pakistani society but like Aurangzeb, the Islamisation failed to reform the
society. When a nation adopts a culture that does not suit the relevant times, it leads the whole nation into disorder and chaos.
Adopting Aurangzeb as a model is hardly a good policy as it blocks the process of enlightenment and progress. Our society needs a policy of
tolerance and pluralism, not a culture of intolerance and extremism. Nations make mistakes when they do not study history in its true perspective.
Past Present: Pragmatic politics

WHATSAPP
4 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
After the integration of Persian culture into Muslim society, the Abbasid Revolution brought to light the difference in the concept of a historical or a
religious past. When the capital was shifted from Damascus to the newly built Baghdad in 762AD, it distanced the caliphate from the land of Arabia
and brought it closer to Persia.
The Persian bureaucrats who contributed to the success of the Abbasid rule transformed the caliphs on the model of the Sassanid emperors. They
introduced Persian ceremonies and festivals such as Nauroze (the spring festival), and Mehar Jan (the autumn festival), which were celebrated with
fervour and gaiety. The Abbasid caliphs became influenced by the Persian past and their link with Islamic tradition weakened. Instead of adopting
the simple traditions of the Rightly Guided Caliphs (Khulafa-i-Rashideen), they emulated the grandeur and glory of the Persian rulers. The ulema
were employed as state servants who fulfilled royal commands and wishes through their interpretation of religious teachings. In this way the caliphs
became absolute rulers.
This model continued with successive ruling dynasties such as the Buwahids, the Ziyarid, the Tahirits, the Safarids, the Samanids, the Ghaznavids
and the Seljuks. They revived ancient Persian traditions that the people of Central Asia were accustomed to so that the glorious past could be
reconstructed.
Books such as Qabusnama by Keikavus (ca.1050-1087), Siyasatnama by Nizamul Mulk Tusi (d. 1092) and Nasihatul Maluk by Ghazali (d.1111)
emerged as a new genre of literature known as Mirrors for Princes. These books provided instances and stories from Persian literature based on
political ideas that gave guidance and advice to the rulers for the welfare of their subjects.
History shows that empires flourish and people prosper when religion plays zero role in statecraft
In India, the Sultans of Delhi emulated the traditions of their predecessors. Balban (r.1266-1287) traced his lineage to the legendary Persian king
Afrasiab. They did not implement the Sharia or the Islamic legal system, but formulated their own rules and regulations to administer state affairs.
Once Allaudin Khilji (r. 1296-1316) inquired from Qazi Mughis whether it was lawful to spend from the state treasury (Bait-ul-Mal) for his personal
needs. The Qazis response was that according to the Islamic law it was illegal to do so. Since the reply did not suit the Khiljis agenda, he decided
to call the Qazi an illiterate person who knew nothing about the Sharia.
In his book Fatawa-i-Jahandari, Ziauddin Barani (1285-1357) justified the rulers building palaces, maintaining a luxurious lifestyle and the
splendour of their court on the basis that rules and regulations for government and the Sharia were two different entities and that religion and politics
should remain separate from each other. Therefore, throughout the Sultanate period (1206-1526), the rulers controlled the ulema and avoided the
implementation of the Sharia. They adopted the policies according to the needs of the time and never tried to convert people by force or persuasion.
When the Mughals conquered and began to rule India, instead of linking themselves to the defeated Persian rulers, they preferred to trace their
ancestry to Genghis Khan, the Mongol leader because they felt a pride and glory in being associated with Genghis Khan after the Mongol invasion
of Central Asia and Iran. Eventually, matrimonial alliances followed between the Taimurid family and the dynasty of Genghis Khan.
The Mughals did not take legal guidance from the Islamic past but invoked the Tora-i-Chingizi or the de facto laws of the Mongol leader from time
to time according to their needs. They did not patronise missionary groups aiming to convert people to Islam. On the other hand, according to
Harbans Mukhia, author of Mughals of India, Jahangir (d.1605-1627) forbade any conversion unless sanctioned by the ruler.
For the Abbasids or the rulers of Central Asia and India, the Islamic past held no charm and fascination. The Persian past, on the other hand,
enhanced the status of the rulers and their splendid courts by the practice of Persian rituals and ceremonies. Similarly, they paid lip service to Islamic
teachings and never fully implemented the Sharia. They constituted their own rules and regulations to deal with the administration and did not adopt
the policy of religious extremism and persecution of their non-Muslim subjects. This could only be done by keeping religion and politics separate
and by not permitting the ulema to exercise power and interfere in the affairs of the state.
It was a kind of secularism observed by the Muslim rulers for their subjects including those who belonged to different religions and sects. As a
result, peace and religious harmony continued in the society and was disturbed only occasionally when a ruler deviated from it, almost inevitably
creating disorder and anarchy. It is evident from history that as long as the state remains aloof from religion, it plays an impartial role in society.
Past Present: Trial by ordeal

WHATSAPP
0 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
Torture has been used by the state to silence its political opponents. It is also used against criminals in order to maintain peace and security in the
society. Here, the object of torture is to extract confessions and to punish in the name of the law, while actually disobeying the law. It is also used by
religious sects and political parties against heretics, dissidents and enemies to either absorb them within the fold of their sects or parties or to crush
their spirit in order to prevent them from creating further opposition and confrontation. In the case of individuals, torture is also used for revenge.
Interestingly, torturers usually arent some kind of easily identifiable monsters; they tend to be exactly like ordinary people in their daily lives. They
have families and children who they love and feel affectionate towards, so it is difficult to understand how they become so brutal and unkind while
inflicting pain on people, feeling no emotion when their victims cry out and express their suffering and helplessness. Those who torture others do
not let their feelings and emotions interfere with their work. The reason perhaps is that those who are authorised by the state to torture its victims are
duty bound to consider them enemies, anti-state elements and a threat to state security and existence. These arguments dehumanise the victims,
making it easy for the agents of the state to eliminate them. There are many examples of state authorities torturing political opponents in violation of
the law. In some of these cases, the opponents are either killed or imprisoned for an indefinite period.
In Nazi Germany, officials who tortured or executed the Jews, Gypsies and the Communists in concentration camps were tried for crimes against
humanity after the Nazi regime came to an end. The argument of these officials was that they simply obeyed the orders of higher authorities. In case
of refusal, they would have been condemned and punished by the government. Therefore, whether state officials should obey or refuse orders
against human rights remains an unanswered question.
Despite being outlawed by international conventions, treaties and governments of most nations, torture is alive and thriving under all kinds of
pretexts
Hannah Arendt in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem discusses how Adolph Eichmann was tried on charges of killing the Jews and his response was
that he did so according to the law of the state therefore he could not be held responsible for the massacre of the Jews.
In the medieval period, it was believed that criminals, dissidents and heretics can be reformed by severe punishment. Therefore, it was customary to
torture such people in public not only as a warning to others but to create terror and fear in the society as well. It was customary that the man who
was tortured was carried all the way through the main streets of the city to show people his fate as a warning. On a raised platform, the executioner
either sliced his hands, feet and other parts of his body or broke his bones after binding him to a wheel. Another way of torture was known as the
pillory, which consisted of hinged wooden boards with holes through which the head and / or his limbs were inserted and the boards were locked
together to secure the captive. Pillories were set up to hold and humiliate petty criminals in public places like marketplaces and crossroads.
During the Roman period, the common criminals were crucified as a means of execution as well as humiliation. After crushing the slave rebellion of
Spartacus, 20,000 slaves were crucified by the Romans.
The culture of torture was continued by the Church when it instituted the Inquisition to try heretics and enemies. Torture was used to elicit
confessions from the victims. The institution used various instruments to torture those who were condemned. When Galileo was tried by the
Inquisition, he was shown some of these instruments to force him to confess his sin. In order to escape from the horrible punishment, he accepted
his mistake and recognised the religious views of the Church. It was the practice of the Inquisition that after confession, the condemned man was
handed over to secular authorities to burn him at stake.
In case of Pakistan, torture is used not only by the state, but also by non-state actors. Torture has become so widespread in our society that it is
accepted as a daily routine of life and there is no resistance against it.
Sadly, torture continues despite the progress of human civilisation. The question is: how long it would continue to crush, subdue and eliminate
people because their ideas, views and way of life are different?
Past Present: Mums the word

WHATSAPP
0 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
Power over the present can easily translate into power over the past and even the future. This is because those who command power today can wield
it to control and patronise historians to record events in their favour.
Often while constructing the past, historians either mention events which do not glorify the ruling classes in a perfunctory manner or instead ignore
them entirely. In ancient Egypt, it was the practice of historians not to mention the Egyptian armys defeats; only victories were documented.
Similarly, if a succeeding monarch did not like his predecessor, he made attempts to delete his or her name entirely from history. For example,
Queen Hatshepsut (d.1457 BC), who ruled Egypt as a pharaoh, was a powerful personality who acquired a distinct status among the rulers of ancient
Egypt. She acted like a male to assert herself and even wore a false beard like other rulers.
However, her successor Thutmose III began a campaign to obliterate Hatshepsuts memory by destroying or defacing her monuments, erasing many
of her inscriptions and constructing a wall around her obelisks. While some believe this was the result of a long-held grudge, it was more likely to
have been a stringent political effort to emphasise his line of succession and ensure that no one challenged his son, Amenemhat, for the throne.
Modern archaeologists retrieved her name and the period of her rule in the new kingdom through in-depth research.
History will be kind to me for I intend to write it. Winston Churchill
There are many such examples where events and people were expunged from traditional history on the basis of prejudice, likes or dislikes of the
ruling classes. Sometimes the forgotten past is retrieved and the events and people may be rehabilitated, but at other times their memory and their
existence is lost forever.
One example is of the slave revolution in the French colony of Saint Domingo in 1791, inspired by the French revolution of 1789. This colony
provided France with coffee and sugar as the French colonisers settled there owned huge plantations where a large number of African slaves worked
as labourers.
During the revolutionary period, the national assembly of France debated on the issue of slavery; whether it should be retained or abolished. The
majority of the members favoured abolition despite opposition by the colonisers.
However, when Napoleon assumed power in 1799 he restored slavery by changing the decision of the national assembly and sent a force to Saint
Domingo to crush the revolution.
The revolution went through different stages but finally the French were defeated and Saint Domingo was declared as the Republic of Haiti. It was
the first slave revolution which became successful against powerful enemies.
Michel-Rolph Trouillot in his book, Silencing the past, power and the production of history, points out how historians remained silent about this
revolution because it involved three important elements: slavery, race and colonisation.
The event is neither mentioned in American or European textbooks. The French historians remain silent, although the French army, fighting against
the slaves, lost Napoleons brother-in-law as well as 19 generals a greater number than those lost in the battle of Waterloo.
The British intervened in the conflict to counter the French, but their historians are also reluctant to give details of the revolution. Trouillot laments
that even Eric Hobsbawm, a distinguished historian of the left, who wrote The Age of revolution mentioning all major revolutions of Europe till
1848, devotes just a few lines for the Haitian Revolution. The reason for their silence is obvious as the revolution was about black slaves defeating
their white masters. Therefore, historians are not in favour of giving any credit to people who they regard as inferior and hesitate to recognise the
political consciousness, military skill and love for liberty and freedom for which the people sacrificed their lives.
The practice of silencing history continues. In case of Pakistan, we try to delete certain events from the nations history. Our history textbooks as
well as our grand national narratives neither discuss nor answer questions regarding Bangladesh, in the name of national interest. It is evident that
when selective history is written and all aspects are not included, the society cannot achieve true historical consciousness and hence fails to
understand its past. Silencing history is not a solution for hiding the truth. If truth is bitter it should be recognised so as not to repeat the mistakes
made in the past.
Past Present: Light and dark

MUBARAK ALI UPDATED APR 30, 2015 12:21AM
WHATSAPP
2 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
The Greek colony of Ionia produced great thinkers and philosophers, whose ideas were discussed, analysed and interpreted generation after
generation to understand the society and its problems.
Heraclitus (d.475 BCE), known as the weeping philosopher, was one of the thinkers whose philosophy is debated even today by politicians and
historians.
His concepts were pluralistic. He believed that everything was in motion and changed according to time and environment as stated in his famous
saying, No man ever steps in the same river twice, for its not the same river and hes not the same man. According to him, this suited the interests
of the society and he argued that the traditions and values altered their meanings according to the prevailing circumstances.
On the contrary, Parmenides (d.460 BCE) opposed his pluralistic views and presented monism, that there is one absolute truth and assertion on the
changelessness and motionlessness of values and traditions.
In the 4th century BC, a group of thinkers known as the sophists emerged who educated and trained politicians and supported Heraclitus philosophy
on the relativity of customs and traditions and his views on continuous change.
Pluralism is the only solution for the state of affairs in our country
These two ideas of pluralism and monism contradict each other and provide an insight to understanding the working of the political system.
We notice that generally in Imperial States, the followers of different religions chose to adopt the policy of pluralism to adjust to all people of faith,
race and nationalities to create harmony and unity. In the case of the Roman Empire, whenever a ruler followed the policy of religious tolerance he
maintained tranquillity and prosperity in the Empire, but when the ruler deviated from this policy and forced to convert his subjects to the Imperial
religion, there was resentment and conflict in the society.
In the subcontinent, after the Mauryan emperor Ashoka converted to Buddhism, he observed a policy of religious tolerance, declaring in a number of
edicts that people should respect other religions.
In the modern period, after the emergence of democracy, the State has played an active role in politics. Thinkers and politicians debated whether the
state should be granted absolute powers to control its citizens by adopting the policy of monism or should rights be granted to different groups of
people in the society so that they realise their objectives within the framework of pluralism.
German thinkers highly valued the institution of the state, which was to them a shadow of divinity on earth. It was believed that individuals and
groups of people could achieve their objectives only through the state without making allowances for moral issues. It was considered the
responsibility of the bureaucrats and state officials to follow the law of the state. Hanna Arendt in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem quoted Eichmann
who professed his innocence by declaring that by sending the Jews to concentration camps, he merely obeyed the command of the state which, as a
state servant, he could not reject.
It is seen that whenever the state is controlled by ideological forces or extremists, they transform it to a totalitarian system as a weapon to terrorise
and force people to follow state policies. The state then takes on the responsibility of nation building, defining it as patriotism and nationalism. Any
deviation from state policies is regarded as treason. The coercive nature of the state ended the creativity of individuals and society plunged into
intellectual stagnation. In the case of Nazi Germany, the state controlled its citizens and prevented any activity which was against the Nazi ideology.
History shows that states which followed a policy of pluralism and granted space for different social and political groups to realise their objectives
by creating their own policies and ideas, were successful in providing basic rights and facilities to their citizens.
In Pakistan, the state has become an ideological one adopting the principal of monism and not allowing any space to plural values. As a result,
society is decaying day by day while various groups in society have failed to play an active role to solve its problems and reform their own status.
Once a totalitarian and ideological state becomes corrupt and its institutions exploit their power to deprive people from taking initiatives
independently, it pushes talented people away by not allowing them to display their creativity. The dissident groups and individuals in Pakistan are
terrorised by fear of death and prefer to remain silent instead of raising their voices against injustice, misdeeds and corruption of the ruling classes.
Past Present: To each his own

MUBARAK ALI PUBLISHED APR 19, 2015 07:42AM
WHATSAPP
5 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
After the fall of the Roman Empire and the conversion of Constantine to Christianity, gradually medieval Europe was transformed to the land of the
Christians, referred to as Christendom. Its spiritual head was the Pope, while the rulers of European countries maintained their political sovereignty
under his control.
The institution of the Church became so powerful and influential that it assumed the status of a state within a state. It would supervise the religious
beliefs of the people and all rituals from birth to death were its jurisdiction.
Even a small village would have a small church that took care of the religious needs of its inhabitants. The office of the Pope was not only respected
but feared by the rulers because he had the weapon of excommunication for those who defied his authority. The Pope was declared infallible and
possessed widespread power to interpret the Bible and religious teachings as he saw fit.
It is never too late to review, rethink and redefine our national interest
There are several examples of rulers who opposed the Pope and paid a heavy price for it. Henry II of England was flogged in public for being
involved in the assassination of Thomas Becket in 1170. The penitent Holy Roman Emperor, Henry IV stood barefoot in the snow outside the gates
of the Castle of Canossa for three days to seek the Popes absolution in 1077. Finally, the Pope lifted the excommunication, imposing a vow to
comply with certain conditions.
The Church received religious taxes from all European countries, which was resented by the rulers but they did not have the courage to oppose the
process.
During the crusading wars which continued from the 11th to the 13th centuries, the political as well as spiritual powers of the Pope were enormously
increased as nearly all major rulers of Europe took an oath to fight for the recapture of the holy places. This also gave the Church a chance to relate
its existence and powers directly to Jerusalem and thus derive historical legitimacy.
The Church also monopolised education since the time of Charlemagne, the first Holy Roman Emperor, who was crowned by the Pope in the year
800AD. In order to spread education in his realm, he authorised the Church to educate the people and education became an effective weapon used
by the Church to disseminate its beliefs among the younger generation. As a result, philosophy, science, history, art and literature were devoted to
propagating religious beliefs. All major universities such as Paris, Oxford, Cambridge, Padova and Bologna became religious seminaries for the
clergy.
In the 14th century, the scholars of Renaissance challenged the status of the Church and the Pope. They denied the relationship with Jerusalem and
turned their attention to the ancient Greek and Roman past. It was the beginning of the process of secularisation of Christendom. The Renaissance
scholars searched the manuscripts of the Greek and Roman philosophers and after editing, published them to create a secular consciousness in the
society.
In 1453, when Constantinople was conquered by the Ottomans, a group of Christian scholars arrived in Europe, bringing with them old Greek
manuscripts which included the histories of Thucydides. This rediscovered knowledge created a conflict between the old and new traditions.
However, secular knowledge gradually dominated the society and weakened the power of the Church and the Pope.
When Luther defied the Pope in 1517, Christendom was divided between Catholics and Protestants. In 1648, the treaty of Westphalia was signed
after the Thirty Years War and nation-states were established in Europe, ending the concept of Christendom. Eventually, European countries were
identified on the basis of their geography and each acquired a separate national identity instead of a collective religious one.
The term Islamic world was coined in the modern period, at a time when attempts were being made to unite all Muslim countries under a PanIslamic Movement and to liberate them from European Imperialism. However, there was no actual unity in the Islamic world.
On the other hand, the Arab countries struggled against the Ottoman Imperialism for their independence. The Khilafat movement of the subcontinent
aimed at protecting the institution of the Caliphate was not supported by any Muslim country, including Turkey itself.
After the Second World War, all Muslim countries which were colonised by Europe struggled separately for their liberation without any support
from other Muslim countries such as Algeria, Tunisia, Indonesia and Malaysia. Those Muslim countries which became independent preferred to call
themselves nation-states. Therefore, there is no such thing as the unity of the Islamic world; every Muslim country has its own national interest and
follows policies for its protection and sovereignty. It is time we realise that and concentrate on adopting policies for our national interest.
Past Present: A multi-layered heritage

WHATSAPP
10 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
In the history of nations, the past is often in many layers. It is the task of the historians to discover and reconstruct the past which disappeared into
the oblivion of history. The past is interpreted on the basis of contemporary historical writings, archaeological excavations and antiquities.
Sometimes, the different layers of the past are amalgamated as one unit while at other times they are treated separately.
The past is used politically and socially, sometimes glorified or criticised as circumstances may demand. In case of India, most of its ancient past
was forgotten because of the lack of historical resources. During the colonial period, attempts were made to rediscover this forgotten past by editing
and publishing the classical texts and through excavation of old sites.
The Asiatic society of Bengal has contributed to the reconstruction of the ancient past of the subcontinent. For example, historians were unaware of
the rule of Asoka, the Mauryan king. After the discovery of his edicts, the inscriptions were deciphered which provided an insight into his rule, his
conversion and preaching of Buddhism.
Our history neither starts with 1947, nor with Muhammed bin Qasims conquest of Sindh, but goes back to the Indus Valley Civilisation are we
going to reject our past?
In the 1920s, nobody knew anything about the Indus Valley Civilisation, until excavations in the cities of Harappa and Mohenjodaro brought to light
the great civilisation which flourished before the arrival of the Aryans. The findings enriched the ancient past of the subcontinent and inspired
politicians to use it in the struggle of freedom against the colonial rule.
During the freedom movement, Indian nationalism resurrected the ancient, as well as the medieval past which was dominated by Turkish and
Mughal rule. Although the Indus Valley Civilisation was Dravidian, the Aryan past consisted of Vedic, Buddhist and Hindu periods, while the
medieval period is characterised as the Turkish and the Mughal period. All the three layers were amalgamated to consolidate Indian nationalism.
However, a change occurred when Indian politics was communalised and the Muslim community of India developed the two-nation theory which
divided the past on the basis of religion.
The Muslims rejected the ancient pre-Islamic past and the Hindu period. They also hesitated to recognise the Turkish and the Mughals as their
heritage because it was treated as a part of Indian nationalism. Therefore, they turned their attention outside India in search of an Islamic past.
Muslim historians, poets and novelists redefined the Muslim identity in the Indian subcontinent, relating them to the past which was different to the
Hindus. Shibli wrote Al-Farooq and Al-Mamoon; Abdul Razzaq Kanpuri wrote Nizamul Mulk and Al-Bramica. Abdul Haleem Sharar published
Islamic novels narrating Muslim conquests and glorifying their role in history. Altaf Hussain Hali composed the Musaddas describing the rise and
fall of the Muslim power. Iqbal narrated achievements of the Muslims which inspired the Muslim community of India and created in them a sense of
pride. As a result, the Hindus and the Muslims were separated politically and culturally which culminated in the Partition of the subcontinent in
1947.
After Partition, Pakistani historians confronted the problem of presenting the past. The question is: whether the pre-Islamic past should be accepted
or rejected? If they disown the pre-Islamic past, we would be deprived of the Indus Valley Civilisation and the Gandhara culture which originated
and developed in this part of the subcontinent.
The other issue is that there are changes in the Middle Eastern countries which have altered their perspective of the Islamic past. The emergence of
Arab nationalism sought to unite Arabic-speaking countries while excluding the non-Arabs from their fold. Also, when the nation states were
established, they looked at their past from the perspective of their local nationalism; for example, the Egyptians are proud of their civilisation which
produced great monuments and technological achievements.
The Iraqis are proud of the Mesopotamian civilisation which introduced the writing system, agricultural techniques and contributed to art, literature
and architecture. Similarly, the other Muslim countries are tracing their past in the pre-Islamic period. This has weakened the roots of Islamic past in
the Middle-Eastern and North African countries.
At this critical juncture, should we continue to search our history and identity outside Pakistan or find it in our own homeland? The consciousness of
the past is very important as it is related to our national identity. It is high time that in order to determine our national identity, we decide where the
roots of our civilisation and culture lie.
Past Present: Unholy wars

WHATSAPP
5 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
It is wrongly assumed that the crusades were targeted at the Muslims in order to control Jerusalem. In fact, the crusades were not restricted only to
Muslims but also aimed at those Christians who either politically opposed the Pope or deviated from the teachings of the church.
However, the campaign of crusades against the Muslims to recover the Holy Land from their domination created a religious zeal, fervour and
extremism in Europe. It made the Catholic Church a powerful institution which threatened the independence of the European rulers. The succeeding
popes used the holy war to assert their authority and to crush any opposition whether political or religious.
The Holy Roman Emperor, who belonged to the Hohenstaufen dynasty of Germany, was a political threat to the Pope therefore a campaign was
launched against him which lasted from 1194 to 1250. As a result, it reduced the power of the Holy Roman Emperor. The Northern Crusades were
declared against the Prussians, Poles and Slavs in the 12th century. The object of this holy war was to convert them to Christianity.
Wars fought in the name of religions damage society to an extent that is only fully realised much after the wars have ended
This crusade inspired some warriors to organise themselves as Teutonic Knights who contributed to the campaign of conversion. The third crusade
was against a sect known as Cathars, who were inhabitants of Albigens, in the south of France in the year 1209. They were condemned as heretics
and stern military action was taken against them. Their villages were burnt and they were massacred. All this happened in the name of religion.
Two crusades that were not sanctioned by the Pope but initiated independently out of religious sentiment were the Childrens Crusade and the
Shepherds Crusade.
In the former, the children belonged to poor families and it was believed that the crusade would provide them religious solace and blessings. They
marched to liberate the Holy Land from Muslims in 1212 but as it was organised haphazardly therefore failed disastrously. The Shepherds crusade
broke out in 1320 and was directed against the Jewish money lenders, the clergy and landlords. They burnt the churches and hounded the clerics. It
shocked the Pope as well as the rulers and resulted in violent action against the crusaders. They were ruthlessly dispersed and killed, which ended
their crusade.
In Spain, when Castile and Aragon were united in 1469 under Ferdinand and Isabella, they undertook a crusade against the Muslim States of
Andulus, defeating and incorporated them into their kingdom. The last one was Grenada which was vanquished in 1492, after which the Jews and
the Muslims were expelled and Spain was completely Christianised.
History shows how the religious sentiments of the people were exploited and used by the Church for its advantage. However, the results of the
crusading spirit were devastating politically, socially and economically. It destabilised the position of the European rulers and divided the society
into many dissident groups. Since the European rulers suffered financially, their interest was to acquire wealth and property to compensate their
losses. The Order of the Knights Templars became rich during the crusades.
They acquired religious relics, wealth and properties throughout Europe. Eager to get their wealth, Philip II of France condemned them as heretics.
In 1307, 67 knights along with their grand masters were burnt at the stake and their property was confiscated. The knights, who were organised in
the name of religion and fought crusades against the Muslims, themselves became victims and suffered at the hands of Christian rulers due to their
wealth and property.
However, the crusade against the Muslims also had positive results as the Europeans acquired the knowledge of philosophy, science and medicine
from Muslim society. The prejudices they had against Islam were also minimised. The first Latin translation of the holy Quran was completed in
12th century by the Christian scholars of Spain under the guidance of Peter, the Venerable. The wars also opened trade routes from the West to the
East and Venice and Geneva especially profited largely by these contracts.
The crusades may have failed to achieve the objective of liberating the Holy Land from the Muslims and to protect the Byzantine Empire from the
Turks, but in 1453 the Ottomans occupied Constantinople and ended the Byzantine rule.
These crusades amalgamated religion and politics which popularised the concept of Just War, fought in the name of religion. It weakened the policy
of religious tolerance and enhanced extremism that paved the way for succeeding conflicts and clashes between the Muslims and the Christians.
Even today, we are facing hostility either in terms of clash of civilisations or in the fight against religious terrorism.
Past Present: The high cost of hatred

MUBARAK ALI UPDATED MAR 29, 2015 11:04AM
WHATSAPP
10 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
From time to time, politicians from the West use the term crusade when describing the battle against Islamic fundamentalism, perhaps not realising
that the term itself harks to a bloody campaign waged by fanatical Christian extremists in order to recover the holy places in the Middle East which
were then under the control of Muslim rulers.
Pope Urban II ordered the first crusade in 1095 in response to the appeal of the Byzantine emperor who sought help of his co-religionists to protect
him against the Turkish invaders. The Pope combined these two projects into one and urged the European rulers and people to go to war and serve
the cause of God. He also declared some concessions for the crusaders who were ready to embark on this campaign. They were granted indulgences
which would eliminate their worldly sins and reduce their torment in purgatory, paving the way to heaven. Those who would die fighting would earn
martyrdom.
Such was the impact of the Popes declaration and the propaganda conducted for the Church by the likes of Peter the Hermit, a religious fanatic, that
there was great enthusiasm among the common people to go and fight against the infidels.
They embarked on the first crusade on 1095 and travelled by land and sea first to Constantinople.
When the Crusaders reached Constantinople, the emperor was disappointed that they were not warriors but instead common people with no
experience of fighting. He encouraged them to go to Anatolia and fight against the Turks. As a result of the encounter, they were slaughtered in the
battlefield.
From the crusaders to todays suicide bombers, there have been many who have shed blood in the name of religion
The First Crusade, known as the Crusade of the Barons ended in failure. Armed with only religious enthusiasm, they could not succeed in the
battlefield.
The news of their failure created dismay and hopelessness in Europe. However, such was the religious zeal and support of the Church that this time
the European rulers, aristocracy and knights began preparations in advance to once again undertake the project of capturing the holy places.
The Second Crusade was launched in 1147. Before embarking, the rulers and the knights made sure that they were well-prepared for the war
considering the high cost of weapons, horses and living expenses. Some sold their properties which were purchased mostly by the bishops who were
rich and could afford to invest in real estate. Others prepared their wills and bequeathed their wealth and properties to their families.
They accepted this war as a religious obligation of the highest order that would absolve them of their sins.
The Second Crusade was different from the first as it was fought by professional warriors who had previously been involved in battles against their
rivals in Europe. They succeeded in a number of battles against the Muslim armies and captured important cities, their final triumph being the
occupation of Jerusalem which was the main target of the holy warriors. After occupying the city, they neither spared the Muslims nor the Jewish
inhabitants, and massacred them all.
The Second Crusade led to the establishment of crusader states in the Middle East, headed by different rulers belonging to the royal families of
Europe. However, these states were surrounded by the Muslim rulers who either continued the war against the crusaders or concluded treaties of
peace.
After the occupation of Jerusalem, two important Orders of Knights emerged, one was known as the Templars, originated from the Temple of
Solomon and the Aqsa mosque. The other was known as Hospitallers whose duty was to take care of the pilgrims. These two were the militant
Orders whose responsibility was to protect and look after the pilgrims who visited the holy places and were directly under the control of the Pope.
In the meantime, political changes took place in the Middle East. After the decline of the Fatimid caliphate in 1171, Salahuddin Ayubi became the
Sultan of Egypt and extended his political power in Syria. He decided to fight against the crusading states and liberated Jerusalem from the Christian
rule. His campaign coincided with the Third Crusade in 1187, which was led by Richard the Lionheart, the king of England.
After defeating the crusaders in a number of battles Salahuddin finally reoccupied Jerusalem in 1187. However, his treatment with the Christians of
Jerusalem was different and he allowed them to live peacefully and retain their properties.
His victory earned him the title of Ghazi for rescuing the holy city from the Christians. In history, he is known as not only a warrior but also as a
generous and tolerant king.
The Third Crusade continued for five more years but failed to achieve any substantive results. When the Mamluk dynasty (1250-1517) came to
power in Egypt, Sultan Baibars undertook campaigns against the crusading states and defeated them one by one. After existing for nearly two
centuries, these states were wiped out and the crusaders also stopped coming to the Middle East for their help.
Such was the outcome of the crusades which cost thousands of lives and loss of property; they brought nothing but failure and disappointment in the
end. Religious fervour which urged the people of Europe to sacrifice for a holy cause ended without achieving anything.
Although the crusades were popularly supported in Europe, there was also criticism by some individuals who argued that to shed blood in war was
against the teachings of Christ; it was a religion of peace, love and brotherhood which appealed to its followers to love their enemies. However,
these voices remained unheard. Religious passion motivated people not for peace but for violence and bloodshed which created an environment of
terror and the fear of death.
Death and taxes

MUBARAK ALI PUBLISHED MAR 22, 2015 06:42AM
WHATSAPP
7 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
In Muqaddima, his philosophy of history, Ibn Khaldun points out that the tribesmen found it humiliating to pay taxes to the government. They
believed that if they paid taxes, they would have to rely on the government to provide them protection from enemies and adversity. Since the
tribesmen carried arms themselves and enjoyed independence, they were confident of defending themselves against enemies instead of paying taxes
to purchase protection from the government.
On the other hand, the peasants and artisans who were the productive classes of the society expected protection from the rulers, warriors and
bureaucrats. In return for the protection that they provided, the rulers demanded payment in the shape of taxes from the productive classes.
But when the rulers imposed heavy taxes on people, the taxed classes suffered as they faced poverty and misery. On the other hand, if the taxes were
waived or reduced, people expressed happiness and gratitude. For example, when Akbar abolished jizya and pilgrimage taxes for his Hindu subjects,
his popularity increased.
The system of taxation also brought radical and revolutionary changes in the structure of society. In 1215, the feudal lords in England forced King
John to sign a peace treaty called the Magna Carta to regulate the customs and practices that had grown up around feudalism. The king could no
longer impose taxes without the permission of the parliament and his powers were reduced while the authority and prestige of parliament was
enhanced.
The rebellion of the Thirteen Colonies against the British government, one of the major causes of the American Revolution, can be taken as another
example. One of the taxes that the British government levied was the stamp duty. Since the British were taxing the colonial population to raise
revenue for their own purposes, the Americans claimed that their constitutional rights were violated, as only the colonial legislatures could levy
taxes. Across the American colonies, opposition to the tax took the form of violence and intimidation and the slogan No taxation without
representation was raised during the 1750s and 1760s.
The main cause of the French revolution in 1789 was the discriminative system of taxation from which the nobles and the clergy were exempt, while
the rest of the society paid different kinds of taxes. The revolution ended this discrimination and attempts were made to structure the society on the
basis of equality.
Taxation without representation has spelled the doom of many a nation

In the subcontinent, the East India Company, after its victory in the Battle of Buxar in 1764, was awarded the right to collect revenue from Bengal
and Bihar. As a trading body, the company maximised its profits through land tax as well as trade tariffs levied in Bengal. As lands came under the
company control, the land tax was typically raised five fold of what it had been. In the first years of the rule of the British East India Company, the
total land tax income was doubled and most of this revenue flowed out of the country, making the most prosperous Mughal province barren and
deserted. People experienced hardships as a result of continuous famine. Once the company became a supreme power, it introduced three types of
revenue systems.
The Permanent Settlement in Bengal was an agreement between the East India Company and Bengali landlords, according to which the landlords
were required to pay a fixed amount of revenue called Jama bandi in which the village community collectively paid the revenue. Another system
was the Ryottwari in which the peasants paid the revenue individually to the government. The burden of taxes on the common man created unrest
and anger and in 1957, the War of Independence ensued which was crushed by the East India Company and the British rule was restored.
In 1860, the British Government of India introduced the income tax, the main objective of which was to compensate for the expenses which the
company incurred during the war of 1857. Dadabhai Nauroji, R.C. Dutta and Rajani Palme Dutta have written in great detail about the wealth
pilfered by the British, from India to England.
Recently, two American professors, Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson have published a book entitled Why Nations Failed, in which they have
presented a survey of the history of many Asian and African nations and traced their political and economic failure. According to them, extractive
and inclusive institutions play an important role in the success or failure of nations.
If the ruling classes of a nation extract heavily from the people in the form of taxes, it causes crises, unrest and anarchy in the society. On the other
hand, if people are represented in state institutions and allowed to look after their affairs in a democratic way, crises in the society could be
controlled and prosperity and peace would be achieved.
In Pakistan, the ruling classes have adopted the policy of extracting taxes from people directly and indirectly. The revenue is typically not spent on
public welfare such as education, health etc but wasted on buildings for the ruling classes and on providing them with privileges and facilities. The
result is obvious; there is crisis after crisis and people suffer without any compensation or relief from the government.
The role of the people in the democratic institutions is nil. People are victims of the politicians whims who exploit them through false promises for
a better future.
Whenever there is a struggle for democracy against dictatorship, it is the politicians belonging to the elite classes who are rewarded without
sacrificing anything instead. In the end, the public is left with feelings of disappointment and frustration that the government has failed to provide a
solution for the problems of common people.
To protect, serve and sell out

WHATSAPP
0 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
The Roman Empire gradually expanded through military conquests. When the victorious generals returned home after a conquest with war booty
and slaves, a triumphal march was arranged and they were welcomed by the citizens with jubilation and pride.
The victories made the generals popular and more ambitious for power and wealth. In memory of their conquests the Roman emperors depicted war
scenes through carvings on pillars which were erected in the Forum in order to display their achievements to the public. Hence, the emperors and
generals used war as a tool to gain popularity among the masses.
The Roman Republic was the period of the ancient Roman civilisation beginning with the overthrow of the Roman Kingdom, traditionally dated to
509 BC, and ending in 27 BC with the establishment of the Roman Empire. During the Republic days there was a conflict among the ambitious
generals who wanted to assume more power than their rivals. The first important conflict was made between Sulla (d.78 BC) and Marius (d.86 BC).
Sulla protected the rights of the aristocracy while Marius sympathised with the common people. In the end Sulla was successful and crushed his
opponents brutally, confiscating their properties. He retired a wealthy man and spent the rest of his life in prosperity.
Roman history shows that in the absence of disciplined rule, the state and society suffer
The second important clash was between Julius Caesar (d.44 BC) and Pompey (d.48 BC) in which the latter was defeated and killed while he took
refuge in Egypt. Emboldened by his success and popularity in the army, Caesar became desirous of absolute power. Sensing his objectives, the
Roman senators conspired against him and assassinated him to save the Republic from absolutism. However, the ensuing civil war spelled the end of
the days of the Republic.
Caesars successor Augustus (d.14 AD) stabilised the empire. He instituted the Praetorian guards whose duty was to protect the emperors tent in the
army camp. They were loyal and faithful to the emperor. Augustus reorganised the army and after conquering the neighbouring countries extended
the empire. He may not have assumed the royal title but he enjoyed absolute power and maintained good relations with the senate. After his death,
his successors were incapable of managing the affairs of the empire. Due to the prevailing political instability, the Praetorian guards became
powerful and played the role of kingmakers.
When the third emperor of the Aygustinian dynasty, Caligula (d.41 AD) exceeded his brutality and debauchery, there was no alternative other than to
get rid of him. The Praetorian guards conspired against him and stabbed him to death.
During their rampage in the Royal Palace, the soldiers found Claudius (d.54 AD), an uncle of the dead emperor hiding behind a curtain in order to
save his life. When the soldiers found out that he was from the family of Augustus, they took him to the army camp and declared him the emperor.
Fearful of the army, the senate confirmed his emperorship. His rule was modest and he introduced some important reforms. Claudius was poisoned
by his wife, who wanted her son Nero (d.68 AD) to become the emperor.
Nero proved a disaster for the Roman Empire. When he became unpopular the guards wanted to kill him but he committed suicide before they could
act. His death was followed by the successive rise and fall of four generals. Three of them met a violent end at the hands of the army and the mob
while the fourth emperor died peacefully in his bed.
After the end of the rule of four emperors, the successors made attempts to restore stability and the order of the empire. However, after the death of
Marcus Aurelius (d.180 AD), his son Commodus (d.192 AD) became the emperor and created chaos and anarchy as a result of his debauchery and
barbarism. He was also murdered, leaving a power vacuum behind.
After him, 21 emperors followed and each one of them came into power with the support of the army. On the occasion of succession, to win the
favour of the army that played the role of the kingmaker, they promised to pay the army a huge amount for its support. Some of them ruled for days,
some for months and some for years.
Historians called the period when the army put the emperorship up for auction, the dark period of the Roman Empire. This chaotic situation came to
an end when Diocletian (d.311 AD) became the emperor and restored the prestige of empire.
He divided the empire into four parts and appointed four emperors to administer their assigned territories. However, even this solution could not
prevent the decline and fall. Armed conflict and clashes among the power-hungry generals led to civil war and consequently there was bloodshed
and anarchy.
The emperor lost his prestige and honour and became an object of mockery. During this chaotic period, common people suffered heavily. The cities
were looted and burnt, people were massacred and the aristocracy lost their status and privileges.
Finally, the last general to strengthen the empire was Constantine (d.337 AD), who defeated his rival and became the emperor. He shifted his capital
from Rome to the newly built city of Constantinople. He converted to Christianity in 311 AD.
After him, the Roman Empire was divided between the East and West. Rome was sacked in 410 AD by the German tribes who invaded the western
part of the Roman Empire. The eastern part survived as the Byzantine Empire right up to 1453 when it was conquered by the Ottoman Turks.
Work is worship
MUBARAK ALI UPDATED MAR 09, 2015 09:40AM
WHATSAPP
1 COMMENT
EMAIL
PRINT
With the decline of feudalism and feudal culture, the industrial revolution transformed the structure of society and also changed the concept of work.
Feudal values were replaced by a new, energetic and dynamic cultural tradition. The pride of belonging to a privileged family was no more an
automatic right to higher status in society. It was replaced by merit, which subsequently subverted the established and conservative class structure.
It now became possible for an ordinary person to achieve high status in society on the basis of his skill, profession and work.
Ample opportunities were available to a new class of entrepreneurs who were not wealthy but had an innovative and creative mind which broke
down the conservative order and introduced new techniques to promote industry.
There were many examples in Europe and America where the poorest and resource-less individuals achieved prominence because of their
intellectual capacity and innovative skill. It was now possible for a person to go from rags to riches within a short span of time.
For instance, Andrew Carnegie who was a son of Scottish weaver migrated to America and became a steel industry tycoon. He contributed
generously for the promotion of education and founded libraries in the cities. American industrialists supported universities and established research
foundations for scholars to work in different academic fields.
We can find similar examples in Europe. The characteristics of these entrepreneurs were that they worked in their factories like other workers and
never displayed their wealth, nor spent hard earned money on empty rituals and ceremonies. On the other hand, they contributed funds for libraries,
art galleries and music halls. Such progress was possible only in an industrial society, where mobility from one class to another was rapid and based
on merit and work.
Without the empowerment of the working class, true societal progress will remain a distant dream
Industrialisation produced a community of workers who were required to know how to handle machinery in a factory. This prerequisite made
minimum education for workers essential and arrangements were made to train them in the use of new technical inventions. Factories required
healthy workers who could be more productive than malnourished and sickly ones. This led to the introduction of reforms by the government in the
health sector.
In the early period of industrialisation, nearly all technical inventions were made by technicians, not scientists. In factories, new professions such as
managers, accountants, supervisors and engineers emerged, dividing workers into two classes: white collar workers who were bureaucrats and blue
collar workers who were further subdivided into skilled and unskilled. These workers organised trade unions for their rights. On the basis of these
organisations they demanded a reduction in their working hours as well as a raise in their salaries. This comradeship created political consciousness
among the workers and they played an important role in the democratic system.
In England, the Labour Party emerged from the trade unions of workers whose main objective was to elect representatives for the parliament where
they would support legislation for their advantage. The workers parties throughout Europe had a deep impact on the democratisation of the society.
Fearful of the workers power, European governments granted them concessions which raised their living standard and consequently they earned
respect in society. No more did work remain a humiliation as it was in the feudal culture but was now considered dignified. It was admired and
praised in art and literature as important for the progress of a society.
With industrialisation, many new professions emerged. In the market, where the industrial products were sold, salesmen and salesgirls were trained
how to interact with consumers. The art of displaying products in the shops was developed to attract the clients. A new aesthetic taste was developed
which led to the creation of fashion and new commodities for daily use.
Industrialisation, however, created an inequality in the society which caused differences between rich and poor. In Europe, the condition of the
workers is much improved but in the newly independent countries of the third world, the plight of the workers is deplorable.
In case of Pakistan, we still have dominance of the feudal culture because the process of industrialisation is very slow. As a result, work is still
regarded as undignified and humiliating and the working class, despite its struggle, has failed to achieve a respectable status in society.
Past Present: The culture of work

WHATSAPP
4 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
Throughout history, the concept of work has evolved according to the structuring and restructuring of society. In the early period of human history,
man hunted for food and gathered material for shelter, after which he enjoyed plenty of leisure time.
In the Neolithic period, when proper human settlements were established and agriculture was introduced, people worked in the fields to cultivate
crops. The men worked in the field while women were engaged in domestic work. A new class of artisans also emerged to manufacture tools which
were required for agricultural and domestic activities.
With the advancement of society new classes such as warriors and priests emerged. Both these classes were non-productive and relied on the surplus
production of society. However, the task of the warriors was to defend the settlement against any invader and protect its people and property. The
priests would devote their time and energy to please their gods and goddesses in order to ensure the health of the crops so that agriculture, and the
settlement itself, would flourish. During this period, everyone had a task which was fulfilled to serve the society; hence, work became a guarantee
for survival.
No race can prosper till it learns that there is as much dignity in tilling a field as in writing a poem. Booker T. Washington
However, the character of work changed when the system of slavery was introduced. These slaves were either prisoners of war or those poor people
who failed to pay debts to their feudal lords and sold themselves instead. Slaves were engaged to work in mines or employed as domestic servants,
and generally performed those tasks that were avoided by other classes of society. The result was that the concept of the dignity of work became
diminished due to its association with slaves.
There was no slavery in the society of the subcontinent. Instead, it was the caste system that established a social demarcation by dividing the society
into four different classes based on their hereditary professions the priests, the warriors, the peasants and the servants. A fifth class of the
untouchables regarded as the out-castes and the lowest on the social scale also existed. They were assigned menial cleaning duties and were not
allowed to reside in the cities where they worked. Their settlements were located outside the walled cities.
However, society refused to recognise the importance of their work. They suffered humiliation and insult throughout history. Although Gandhi
called them Harijans or the children of God, yet the mere change of name could not alter their status and they continued to belong to the lowest
strata of society. Due to the fact that they cleaned dirt and filth, they were considered unclean, undignified and wretched.
In the slave-owning feudal society, rulers and aristocrats had a large number of slaves and servants to work for them. For example, a ruler would
have a servant for each and everything that he did in his daily life. One would be in charge of dressing him up, one to serve meals and drinks,
another for his weapons, horses and other animals.
The author of Bazm-i-Akhar provides a long list of servants who remained in attendance of the last Mughal ruler in order to fulfil his wishes
immediately. Though the dynasty was in decline, the number of slaves nevertheless increased to serve the powerless emperor. The aristocracy also
followed the same practice and employed a large staff to serve them day and night. To actually do their own work themselves was considered below
their dignity. It is said that some of the ulema never learnt how to write because to them it was the profession of calligraphers and scribes, and to
learn something was considered below their status. Therefore, they dictated the text and stamped their seal of approval as a proof of its validity.
In the medieval period, when the Turks arrived in India, they brought new technology such as the manufacturing of paper and new tools for the
textile industry which in turn introduced new professions. This raised the standard of living of the artisan classes.
At the same time, the new rulers and the nobility required different kinds of dresses, jewellery, furniture, buildings and weapons which the artisans
manufactured and became financially sound. This upset the aristocrats and nobility whose interest was to maintain their high status and keep the
artisans socially subordinate to them. The tension between them is depicted in Ziauddin Baranis Tareekh-i-Feroz Shahi where he criticised the new
emerging classes as worthless, mean and uncultured.
When the British ruled in India, the English officers also followed the custom of employing a large number of servants for their comfort. A captain
of the British army would have at least 15 servants at his disposal which included the cook, tailor, launderer, gardener, guards and a person to take
care of the horses. It is said that the Viceregal Lodge had 3,000 servants for its maintenance.
After partition, we inherited this feudal perception of work in which any kind of labour is considered below ones dignity and honour. The glimpses
of this culture are still visible in both rural and urban areas. Feudal lords have a large number of servants to work for them. In the urban centres,
bureaucrats and rich people consider it below their status to work.
A society where work is not respected cannot achieve a dignified place among other nations.
Past Present: Exchanges of value

MUBARAK ALI PUBLISHED FEB 22, 2015 06:56AM
WHATSAPP
1 COMMENT
EMAIL
PRINT
Earlier, historians concentrated their research on the ruling classes as makers of history and neglected the marginalised groups including traders and
merchants. They began to focus their attention towards the role of trading activities, when they realised that trade brought external and internal,
social, cultural and economic changes in society.
For the sake of profit, traders travelled to far off countries, risked disasters, bandits and endured all sorts of trouble to accomplish their missions.
They brought unusual and extraordinary merchandise from other countries and introduced them in their society.
Trade networks crisscrossed continents, inextricably linking cultures throughout history

They also increased the knowledge of language, culture and history.
Historians made efforts to find various sources of their commercial activities and brought to light their contribution to history. Rulers patronised
them, built rest houses called serai on highways for their convenience and arranged protection for their caravans. In exchange, they got revenue as
well as precious commodities from other countries.
Correspondence between the Assyrian merchants and their families is on record. One merchant wrote a letter on a clay tablet in cuneiform script,
asking his wife to send him textile and other goods which he needed for the market. She replied saying that she had financial issues and had spent all
the money that he had left behind for expenses. It indicates how the merchants communicated with their family to supply them with merchandise
that they needed.
In the Islamic world, the Arab traders played a significant role. Just after the advent of Islam, the Arab traders reached South India and settled there
under the protection of the local rulers.
The other famous trading community was of the Phoenicians who originated from Lebanon and built the famous city of Carthage in North Africa.
They had settlements in Spain, Sicily and Marseilles. After a conflict with the Roman Empire, they fought a number of battles known as the Punic
Wars. Finally, Carthage was destroyed by the Romans and the Phoenicians lost their control of the Eastern Mediterranean region.
Another reputed trading community was of the Jews, who excelled in the art of trade and commerce. Recently, the business record of some Jewish
firms written on papyrus was discovered in Egypt. It shows their commercial relations with different Jewish traders who were scattered in different
countries.
Werner Sombart (d.1941), a German economist, highlighted the role of the Jews and their contribution to the rise of Capitalism. According to him,
when they were expelled from Spain in 1492, they arrived at Antwerp, the port city of Holland which became the hub of commercial activities.
When they moved to Amsterdam, it became the city of commerce and trade. When they moved to London from Amsterdam, their presence
promoted commercial activities. On the basis of this argument, Sombart proved that wherever the Jewish community migrated, it contributed to the
economy.
In the Islamic world, the Arab traders played a significant role. Just after the advent of Islam, the Arab traders reached South India and settled there
under the protection of the local rulers. They married local women, adopted the local culture and language and became known as Mopalas. Other
Arab traders reached Sri Lanka, South East Asia and China. It was because of these traders that Islam spread in South East Asia as they settled there
with the local population.
In the medieval period, the Italian cities of Venice, Genoa and Florence played an important role in trade with the East. The traders of Venice earned
so much profit that they built huge and imposing buildings in their city. They also founded the Padova University where scholars taught law,
medicine and theology. The merchants of Florence specialised in woollen trade and flourished in their trading skills to become the bankers of
Europe.
They became so powerful that they expelled the nobles from the city and took control.
The Medici family of Florence became so wealthy and influential that they got a member of their family elected as the Pope. Since they patronised
artists, architects, sculptors and writers, during the Renaissance, Florence produced Machiavelli, Dante, Michelangelo and Galileo.
The European travellers were responsible for not only trade and commerce but also for encouraging Imperialism. When Vasco da Gama reached
Calicut in 1493, he opened the gates to Portuguese colonialism in Africa and Asia. The Portuguese established their trading centres on the coast of
Gujarat and captured the city of Goa which was ruled by the Sultan of Golkanda, and was populated by the Muslims and later became the
Portuguese headquarters.
The other European powers followed in the footsteps of the Portuguese. Holland, England and France founded companies to trade with the East. The
contribution of Holland in commercial activities was somewhat more than the other companies as they introduced an insurance system for its
merchant ships as well as launching a scheme of shares for the public.
These European countries brought spices, textile, indigo and saltpetre. Taking advantage of political weakness, the European forces occupied Asian
and African countries with the help of naval and armed forces. As a result, this direct political rule further benefitted trade and commerce.
The importance of traders continues to the present day with the process of modernisation and technological development. Business has become a
special profession and traders have earned a high social status.
Past Present: In a material world

WHATSAPP
4 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
In every society, there is a conflict between conservative tradition and modern ideas. Those who believe in old traditions want to preserve them and
prevent any attempt made to replace them with new and modern values.
Agents of change belonging to different sections of society make efforts to dismantle the old structure and construct a society based on new ideas
which could enhance their role and status. Among these, traders are the most active and vibrant agents of social change, which is why they are
criticised and condemned by conservatives who wish to uphold the traditional system which provides them security and privileges.
Edmund Burke (d.1797), the conservative thinker of the 18th century and the author of Reflection of French Revolution (1790) critically examines
the role of traders during the French Revolution. According to him, besides intellectuals, it was traders who contributed to the destruction of the old
political and social institutions of France which preserved stability and peace.
Is modern day consumerism responsible for social change?
According to him, the aristocracy checked radical change and kept the old system in order. As the French traders helped the revolutionary forces to
lessen the power of the church, the nobility and the king, French society became chaotic. The traders on the other hand were interested in change
because it would open new venues of profit and benefit their commercial activities. Burke, however, did not consider the role of the French traders
positive because their endeavours plunged the society into conflict.

Burke also accused the traders of the East India Company of using illegitimate ways and means to accumulate wealth pilfered from India. He
pointed out that as the traders belonged to the lower social classes of England, they lacked the high qualities of the English aristocratic culture,
which was primarily the reason that they committed crimes in India by making profits from illegal trade as well as accepting a lot of money as
bribes from the Indian rulers.
When they came back to England with all the riches that they had accumulated in India, they polluted English politics by buying land and seats in
the parliament. They destroyed the institutions of India and created a vacuum in politics which subverted the local values and norms and destabilised
the political structure.
Burke, throughout his parliamentarian career, criticised the East India Company and its rulers. His approach towards the role of the traders remained
negative and he regarded them as destroyers and not builders.
Adam Smith (d.1790) in his book Wealth of Nations also castigated the role of the East India Company. According to him, when a trading company
ruled India with the help of a military force, its interest was limited to trade concessions. Since the companys interest was to earn more profit, it
consequently ruined the industry in the subcontinent and gave no advantage to the English society through its business. He concluded that whenever
traders became rulers, they used political power for profit and not for the welfare of people.
Another intellectual who defended the conservative system was Justus Mser (d.1794) who was the inhabitant of a small German state, Osnabrck.
He was skeptical about the new changes which came about as a result of the Industrial Revolution.
He was content with the old lifestyle in his small city where artisans manufactured things according to the local needs and shopkeepers sold
commodities of daily use. There was no materialistic desire among people to have extra stuff that was not very useful to them.
However, after the industrial revolution, the situation rapidly changed. With mass production in factories, traders were interested in creating
consumers for it. There was an invasion of traders in Osnabrck, who brought new products and sold them cheaply in the market. It greatly affected
the traditional artisans and shopkeepers who failed to compete with the aggressive traders and they lost their profession as well as their income.
According to Mser, the village life changed when peddlers reached distant places to sell new products. To Mser, it was the end of the old world in
which people had been happy and content with what the local artisans produced for their needs. The change increased material desires among people
and transformed them into avid consumers.
In The History of Syedwala, Muhammad Ramzan describes how during the colonial period, a family in a village could live on Rs69 for a whole
year, excluding the expense of wheat and daily use products. Life was simple and the desire for consumption was limited.
In the capitalist system, the approach is to attract people to buy new products. In the olden days, shopkeepers did not display their commodities and
the customers could not see them openly so they bought what they needed. In the new system, the products are displayed to catch the attraction of
the consumers and to create a desire for purchasing and ownership. People also enjoy window shopping as a pastime. The question arises as to
whether consumerism is a positive change or is it disastrous for the common man who is constantly competing with others to consume the new
product.
The process of globalisation can also be examined on the basis of past historical knowledge. As in the past, the industrial revolution wiped out the
traditional artisan classes, similarly globalisation is destroying the local industry by importing cheap goods and commodities and transforming
people from producers to consumers.
Past Present: Turncoats and traitors

WHATSAPP
7 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
Opportunism is a characteristic of human nature. Some people may adopt it to retain their status, privileges and property, while others use it to get
more power and favour from the ruling authorities.
However, there are examples in history where some individuals declined their chance to become opportunists, defied political authority and refused
to change their loyalties under new circumstances.
After defeating the Qin Dynasty, Kublai Khan, the Mongol conqueror, became the ruler of China. Since he needed experienced Chinese officials to
run the administration, he was eager for the old bureaucracy to support and cooperate with him. Most of the officials submitted to Kublai Khan but
there was one minister reputed for his honesty, efficiency and loyalty to the past government, who rejected the offer saying that he could not serve
two masters. The Khan disapproved his response and ordered his execution.
Another example in the history of England is of King Henry VIII who wanted to divorce his wife and marry another woman. He asked his
chancellor Sir Thomas Moore to pursue the pope for permission to remarry. Moore refused to oblige the king; infuriated, the king ordered his arrest.
He was imprisoned in the Tower of London, tried on fictitious charges and finally executed. By setting an example of ethics and morality, Sir
Thomas Moore left his name to posterity.
These are the tales of those who refuse to bend before the prevailing winds, and are broken as a result.
On the other hand, throughout history there are many examples of individuals who compromised national interest, changing loyalties from one
authority to another for the sake of personal benefits. When the Mughal emperor Humayun invaded Gujarat, defeating the ruler Bahadur Shah, one
of Bahadur Shahs nobles known as Rumi Khan betrayed Shah and joined the Mughal forces to help them occupy Gujarat.
He was denounced by the people of Gujarat as a traitor. One day when Humayun was in his court, Rumi Khan arrived to pay him homage but much
to his dismay, he was received by Bahadur Shahs favourite parrot in a cage hung from the ceiling, chanting Rumi Khan ghaddar, Rumi Khan
ghaddar (Rumi Khan, the betrayer).
These chants echoed in the silence of the court and Humayun and the courtiers were stunned, while Rumi Khans head was lowered in disgrace. The
parrot apparently had learnt these words from the people around him who had been calling Rumi Khan a traitor.
Humayun told him that if these words were uttered by a human, he would have executed him immediately, but he could not take any action against
the bird.
In another example, Nadir Shah invaded India after defeating the Mughal emperor Muhammad Shah, but agreed to a ceasefire after accepting Rs2
crores to return to Afghanistan. But Saadat-ul-Mulk, an ambitious Mughal noble who had just arrived from Iran was furious at the Mughal emperor
for appointing Nizam-ul-Mulk at the post of Amir-ul-Umra as he wanted the post for himself.
So he decided to take revenge at the cost of his loyalty to the Mughals. He told Nadir Shah that the Rs2 crores which he accepted from the Mughal
emperor was a pittance and that the Mughal treasury was full of riches which he should plunder. Nadir Shah changed his plan to return to his
homeland and instead occupied Dehli, taking away the centuries-old Mughal treasury to Afghanistan.
Opportunism continues from the past to present. In Pakistan, we have many examples of bureaucrats, politicians and intellectuals who compromised
national interest for personal advantage. Qudratullah Shahab, a top bureaucrat during the dictatorship of Ayub Khan undertook the job to close
progressive newspapers because of their opposition to the dictatorship. To please Ayub Khan, he also established the Writers Guild to get the
support of intellectuals for the government. However, in his memoirs Shahabnama, he projects himself as a democrat and a champion of freedom
a sharp contrast to his real self.
When Gen Zia came into power, he also approached writers to support his Government. He started to hold the Ahl-i-Qalam conferences and invited
leading writers to Islamabad to attend and participate and present their literary writings. With the exception of a few, the majority of writers accepted
his invitation without challenging the way he had come into power.
Hafeez Jalandhari after attending one conference remarked that it was due to Gen Zia that the writers of this country had access to the presidential
house. He was the same poet who composed poems during World War II, urging the youth of India to join the British forces. Later on, he composed
the national anthem of Pakistan and earned respect and reputation in society.
We can also find opportunism in the community of journalists and politicians who join one party after another violating all norms of morality. The
people of Pakistan are accustomed to the examples of opportunism so these people are neither looked down upon nor disgraced in the society,
instead they enjoy high status and privileges at the cost of honour and dignity.
When opportunism prevails in a society, it causes decline of moral values and promotes dishonesty, disloyalty and corruption, which consequently
weakens the very foundation of the society.
What Confucius taught us

MUBARAK ALI UPDATED FEB 02, 2015 10:13AM
WHATSAPP
8 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
When a society passes through critical crises, alternative systems emerge to tackle the situation. Reformers try to repair the broken system and make
it functional again. On the other hand, revolutionaries and radicals want to completely abolish old institutions and replace them with new ones that
are based on their ideology.
After developing an understanding of the society and its problems, philosophers, thinkers and intellectuals present ideas and thoughts to change the
social fabric. The role of philosophers became crucial and effective in Chinese history whenever the society faced political, social and economic
difficulties.
The famous philosopher who presented innovative ideas to control the crises and to transform the society was Confucius, who was born in 551BC at
Lu (Northern China). After completing his education, he wandered from one state to another in search of employment as he wanted to implement his
ideas through state authority. But he failed to get a job and returned home disappointed.
We love Chinese food and culture, how about some Chinese philosophy?
Later, when he became a teacher, he attracted students and disciples who were eager to learn his brand of philosophy. He established an academy,
which was an innovation because there was no such educational institution in China at the time. Previously, education was a privilege only for
children from the nobility, but his academy was open to the rich and poor alike. This showed his belief in social equality. He introduced a curriculum
which included poetry, history, politics, music and sports with the objective of producing educated and well-rounded people for a model society.
Confucius, like Socrates, did not write anything but verbally transmitted his knowledge to his students. Later, his disciples collected his sayings in
the form of a book entitled Annalex. Through this book, we can study the philosophy and ideology of Confucius which emphasises the creation of a
class of morally and ethically sound bureaucrats. He believed that the three qualities imperative for government officials were kindness, courtesy
and compassion.
He wanted them to be appointed on the basis of their intelligence and merit, and not by right of birth or because they belonged to a privileged
family. Thirdly, he believed that they should have the determination and courage to implement law and order, and perform their duties without any
fear of higher authorities. Candidates appearing in the examination for bureaucracy or civil service had to learn and memorise the ideas and
teachings of Confucius as part of the curriculum.
Confucius also laid stress on maintaining the hierarchical order of the society. In a family, children should obey their parents and look after them in
their old age. Since there was no system of social security for the elderly, this ensured that the family would be morally bound to take care of their
elderly parents and grandparents.
He highlighted ancestry and the importance of linking the past to the present. He wanted people to obey their superiors and ultimately the ruler.
Successive Chinese ruling dynasties adopted the philosophy of Confucius to control social and political problems and to establish their domination.
Is the philosophy or ideas of Confucius relevant today or not? In Pakistan, moral and ethical values have declined and thus corruption, lawlessness,
disorder and anarchy have been unleashed. There is increased unemployment leading to an increased crime rate. The bureaucracy trained and
educated on principles of colonialism is inefficient and corrupt, arrogant, rude and anti-people.
The society needs to learn moral values as a solution to these problems. Confucius philosophy is not based on any religious or spiritual authority
but purely on a secular concept of meritocracy. Perhaps our society requires such moral and ethical values to restore honesty, piety, dignity and
compassion.
Twist and shout

MUBARAK ALI UPDATED JAN 25, 2015 10:57AM
WHATSAPP
1 COMMENT
EMAIL
PRINT
In the history of every nation, some events are considered to be more significant and important than others. At times they are remembered and
celebrated in order to inspire people to respond to the challenges of the time. Sometimes they remain a forgotten part of the past.
Paul A. Cohen in his book History and Popular Memory narrates some historical events and describes certain personalities who have played an
important role in national struggles and resistance against adversaries.
The first event that he points out is the battle of Kosovo fought between the Turks and the Serbs in 1448. The battle became a memorable event in
the history of Serbia because those who fought in the battle sacrificed their lives for the honour of their nation. It is said that before the beginning of
the battle, the Serbian leader addressed his army and told them that they had only two choices; one, to live in the kingdom of heaven and two, to
accept the slavery of Turks and face humiliation on this earth.
The result was a bloody battle in which the Ottoman army led by Sultan Murad slaughtered the Serbians and defeated them. Though the Serbs were
defeated, they immortalised their defeat and recognised those who died in the battlefield as national heroes. More than 500 years have gone by, yet
the Serbs have never forgotten the battle of Kosovo and celebrate it as their national pride.
History is often revised to advance political or ideological agendas
In 1989, when the communist government of Russia fell into disarry, Yugoslavia (which united different ethnic nationalities) disintegrated. As a
result, Serbia emerged as an independent nation and made attempts to infuse the spirit of nationalism among its people. The event of the battle of
Kosovo was resurrected and a ceremony was held in the very battlefield of Kosovo.
A bloody conflict followed among different nationalities including Albanians, Croatians and Bosnians while Kosovo became an independent country
despite Serbias protest. However, the battle of Kosovo remains an unforgettable event in the history of the Serbs.
Another important event was the Siege of Masada, when the Romans invaded Jerusalem in 70AD and destroyed the Israelite city and the temple of
the Jews. A religious extremist group of the Jews known as Zealots took refuge in the fortress of Masada. When the Roman soldiers attacked the
fortress, the Zealots decided to commit mass suicide by setting the fortress ablaze. This was the only way to save themselves from the humiliation of
being killed or enslaved by the Romans.
When the Roman army entered the fortress they found nothing but dead bodies of the besieged Jews. The story of this deadly ritual of suicide was
told to the Romans by two women and five children who survived by hiding somewhere in the fort.
After occupying Palestine, the Israelis transformed the fortress of Masada into a shrine where the recruits of the Israeli army visited and took an oath
to not allow the same event to ever happen again. Children visited Masada on school trips and learnt about the bravery and courage of those who
died but did not submit to the enemy.
However, as the Israeli government became politically stable, it changed the symbolic importance of Masada because they thought it reflected defeat
and failure instead of the bravery of the Jews. The new message was that the Jews must not surrender but resist in order to ensure their survival and
existence. Masada is still a national monument but the army and school children are not obliged to take an oath to repeat the tradition of the Jews
who committed suicide. This is how the interpretation of history is transformed according to current national needs.
A third example of an unforgettable event is that of Joan of Arc (d.1431), a peasant girl of 17, who claimed that she received visions of the
Archangel Michael, Saint Margaret and Saint Catherine instructing her to support Charles VII and rescue France from English domination late in the
Hundred Years War (13371453) between England and France.
When she approached the French king and told him that she would liberate the country from the foreign army, no one took her seriously but
eventually King Charles VII sent Joan to the siege of Orlans as part of a relief mission. The siege was lifted in only nine days.
Several additional swift victories led to Charles VIIs coronation at Reims. In 1430, she was captured at Compigne by the allied EnglishBurgundian faction and later handed over to the English and then put on trial by the pro-English Bishop of Beauvais Pierre Cauchon on charges of
being a witch, a heretic and a liar who had misguided people by her false claims. After Cauchon declared her guilty, she was burned at the stake in
1431, dying at about 19 years of age.
Her story was revived in the 18th century and she was portrayed as a national heroine. She emerged as a source of inspiration during the Second
World War when Marshal Petain (d.1951) established a government with the collaboration of Germans who occupied France. He invoked John of
Arc as a national heroine who saved France from foreigners. He ritualised her memory, published pamphlets, narrated her achievements and
organised celebrations in her memory in order to legitimise his rule.
On the other hand, John of Arc also became a national symbol to Charles De Gaulle (d.1970), leader of the resistance movement. In his office were
portraits of Joan of Arc and Napoleon. De Gaulle considered himself the modern Joan of Arc as he struggled against the occupation of the Germans.
History is used politically to fulfill the designs of the nations who need to derive inspiration and hope from past events.
In the history of subcontinent, past events and personalities have either been politically revived or razed. The temple of Somanath was plundered
and destroyed by Mehmood of Ghazni in 1025 AD. The event was largely forgotten, but after independence, some Hindu groups revived the
memory of the destruction of temple and rebuilt it as a sacred monument. Romila Thapar in her book Somanatha: The Many Voices of a History
points out how a forgotten event has been restored to inspire Hindu nationalism.
Past Present: State of violence

MUBARAK ALI PUBLISHED JAN 18, 2015 07:19AM
WHATSAPP
2 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
In the early period of history, when the institution of state was absent, tribes and communities were responsible for their own protection against any
attack or invasion. Every member of a tribe would be well-armed not only to secure himself but also to defend his community in case of conflict. As
a result, tribes would engage in warfare and bloodshed to resolve their differences.
If a member of a tribe was assassinated by the rival group, it was incumbent upon the family of the murdered one and his tribe to take revenge. It
was a question of honour, and violence would be a part of the response. After the emergence of the institution of the state, the situation changed.
Security was provided to tribes, which became united, ending mutual warfare and bloodshed.
In the light of this development, citizens of the state disarmed and only authorised individuals and institutions were allowed to carry arms. Any
violation of the law was punished severely. Under this system, if a person was killed by his opponent, it was the responsibility of the state and not
the family or tribe to pursue the case and punish the perpetrator.
As long as the state controlled all ways and means of violence and did not allow any group or organisation to use violence for its vested interests, the
society remained peaceful. However, the situation deteriorated when the state weakened and consequently different groups and mafias seized power,
using violence to further strengthen themselves.
Commenting on this situation, Thomas Aquinas, a theologian of medieval Europe pointed out that violence is the monopoly of the state. His version
of the state was of medieval kingship when knights as professional warriors upheld its rule and power, crushing any rebellion against the authority
of the state. In his book The Civilising Process, Norbert Elias further explained that the state subdued the aggressive nature of man and made
attempts to pacify the society by using civilisational means. Societies changed their attitude as a result of education, art, literature and music, which
influenced its sensibilities.
On one hand however, the monopoly of the state over violence ended the culture of warlords and united the society on the basis of mutual interest.
But on the other hand, the state also became dangerous when it was captured by fanatics and extremists who used its violent institutions such as the
army, police and secret agencies to eliminate their opponents and to establish their hegemony.
A recent example is of Pol Pot of Cambodia who after seizing political power adopted the policy of genocide in order to further his political
ideology. Dictators and totalitarian rulers in the past used state violence to empower their rule and to terrorise people so that they would not raise a
voice against them.
Keeping in view this historical perspective, when we study the Pakistani state and its role to monopolise violence, we find that it has failed in this
attempt, and as a result, powerful groups and parties armed themselves against the law and used violence to accomplish their agenda. Sectarian,
ethnic and criminal groups have free access to arms and ammunition. As violence is widespread in the society, armed groups are busy in extortion of
traders and shopkeepers, or kidnap people for ransom and kill them in case of any defiance or resistance. The plague of target killing is prevalent
and continues unchecked because of weakness of the state and its apparatus. In the presence of these armed groups, state institutions such as the
army, police, rangers, judiciary and secret agencies are rendered helpless. When intellectuals and politicians discuss terrorism, violence and
lawlessness, it seems that they have failed to understand the root cause of the problem.
History shows that the institution of the state has played an important role in maintaining peace, security and order for which it is necessary for the
state not only to become stable and strong but also to be able to take stern action against all warlords, gangs and armed groups who challenge state
authority.
At present, our society is confronted with criminal and violent activities of different religious, sectarian and ethnic groups without being able to
crush their power. When violence is scattered in the society and state cannot control it, people feel insecure and lose faith in the state. They seek
protection against mafias and gangs and live in a state of despondency and disillusionment.
Political violence
WHATSAPP
0 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
History shows that terrorism has been used by various groups and parties from time to time to achieve their objectives. It has been used to suppress
slaves, peasants and minorities so that the victims could be reduced to a state of submission and obedience.
Certain radical and revolutionary groups believe that through terrorism, rulers and high state officials can be eliminated and they could succeed in
changing the structure of the state. Gangs of criminals and mafia tried to get rid of their opponents and rivals through terrorism in order to assert
their power and independence.
In ancient Greece, the Dorians occupied Sparta after defeating the local inhabitants, known as Helots, and forcing them to cultivate land so that the
agricultural produce would benefit the conquerors. It was customary for the Spartans to go to the residential areas of the Helots during the night and
kill anyone who was found outside the house. This would create terror in the community, compelling them to remain obedient to the rulers.
At the end of the American civil war, slavery was abolished but Ku Klux Klan, a white underground terrorist group would not accept AfricanAmericans as equals. They would dress up in white robes to emphasise the purity of their race and also disguise their identities. They would
subject the black population to lynching, firebombing and other terror attacks.. The black population thus lived in fear and dread, staying clear of the
white areas.
Terrorism rarely achieves its end goals
Among Muslims, the first terrorist organisation was that of the followers of Hassan-i-Sabbah (d.1124) in northern Persia. They were known as
Fidayeens or devotees. They assassinated high government officials and ulema who opposed their ideology. It was customary that after killing their
victim, they stayed on the spot to face the consequences.
In the 12th century, radical groups emerged in Russia whose targets were the czar and his ministers. Though they succeeded in killing the rulers and
the ministers, the positions were replaced immediately and the structure of the state remained intact.
In India, after 1905 when Bengal was partitioned, various terrorist groups tried to destabilise the administrative working of the state by killing police
officials and bombing public places. However, the British government repressed these movements and restored peace and order in the country.
In Iran, radical groups made several attempts to assassinate Mohammad Reza Pahalvi, but he survived and crushed these groups with the help of his
secret police, called Savak. It shows that if state institutions are strong, they can crush terrorist movements and eliminate them.
On the other hand, sometimes the state uses terrorism to eradicate its opponents. But in the case of state terrorism, a legal procedure is adopted to
deal with the anti-state elements. During the French revolution, the period between 1793 and 1794 is known as Reign of Terror. In order to protect
the revolution from anti forces, the revolutionary government established the committee of public safety and the revolutionary tribunal, which tried
the king, the queen and a large number of people, condemning them to death penalty. Over 60,000 people were executed for being antirevolutionaries. The same process was adopted by Russia and China after their respective revolutions.
History indicates that terrorist movements could not achieve their objects by creating panic in the society through killing, bombing and shooting
people. Once they became involved in the act of terrorism, they lost the sympathy of the people and weaken their moral stance.
Learning lessons from history, the African National Council of South Africa finally decided to resort to non-violent methods to oppose the apartheid
government. It succeeded in changing the structure of the state and black people were recognised as equals. The Irish Republican Army or the IRA
continued with the policy of terrorism for a long period but in the end, they compromised with the political situation by adopting non-violence.
Similarly, the Basque Nationalist movement was a struggle for a separate homeland where terror was used as a mean to achieve success. Here also,
violence was renounced in the end in order to compromise with the Spanish government.
Terrorist movements in the past have mostly failed to change the structure of the state or to transform a society according to their agenda. Terrorism
instead plunges the country into bloodshed, anarchy and disorder without achieving its stated goals.
Red tape
WHATSAPP
4 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
With the emergence of the State, the institution of bureaucracy was set up to administer affairs such as revenue collection, implementation of law,
keeping a check on crime and upholding the maintenance of social order, price regulation for commodities and the welfare of people. In the early
period of history, it was a custom among rulers to appoint administrative officers from the nobility. This was not based on merit but on the privilege
of their birth. The system prevailed in most countries and continued for some time without a major change.
China was the first country to introduce the institution of bureaucracy systematically, which became well-organised and well-disciplined during the
Han period. According to the Chinese system, bureaucrats were selected after a meticulous and competitive examination that was open to all classes
of society. They were required to study the history of China, teachings of Confucius and the values and norms of morality.
In the first stage, examinations were held in districts throughout China. Those who qualified were allowed to appear in the final examination which
was held in the capital. The duration of the examination was three days and the candidates were asked to bring their bedding, food, writing materials
and chamber pot. Candidates were allotted a cell where they would spend three days writing answers to the questions. In case of the death of a
candidate, his body was taken away from the cell without disturbing other candidates. Copying was strictly prohibited. In one case, an invigilator
was beheaded because of negligence of duty.
Those who passed the examination were appointed on high and important posts. They were allowed to wear a special dress and have a carriage for
their conveyance. They were married into the nobility in order to integrate them with the ruling classes. This system continued for nearly 2,000
years only to be interrupted by the Mongols who ruled over China and brought their own bureaucrats for administration. Revived again by the Ming
dynasty, these bureaucrat scholars were known as mandarins.
Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time when the quo has lost its status. Laurence J. Peter
In Europe, the modern bureaucratic system was introduced by the Prussian government. The administration was divided into different units and
trained bureaucrats were appointed to deal with the affairs of each department. The other European governments followed it and instituted
competitive examinations for selection of the bureaucrats.
In India, the British government established the Indian Civil Services (ICS) cadre for bureaucrats. The candidates were asked to learn Latin and
other classical languages and the subjects of their choice included history, economics, politics and law. The maximum age for the candidate to
appear was 20 years.
Despite the regulations, which were aimed at not giving the locals a fair chance, Rabindranath Tagores brother passed the examination, bewildering
the British government. To ensure that such an incident would not repeat in the future, the government reduced the age from 20 to 18 years. The
duration of their service was to be 30 years after which they would be retired. With the passage of time, the colonial rulers had no choice but to hold
these examinations in India, so that the Indians could become a part of the colonial bureaucracy.
Hannah Arendt in her book The Origins of Totalitarian State points out that imperialism and bureaucracy were co-related. The example is British
India, where 1,000 British bureaucrats administered and managed the affairs of the state in the subcontinent. They were highly paid in order to
prevent them from resorting to bribery and corruption. They were honest and responsible officials who served the cause of colonialism with zeal. In
India, bureaucracy was sustained and the colonial rule was strengthened by administrative skills.
In Pakistan, we inherited this colonial institution which was specifically designed for foreign rulers to run the administration with an anti-people
approach. The same policy continued after partition. Gradually, the competitive examinations lost their validity while influential families would
interfere with the process of selection to get appointments for their children and relatives. The institution further deteriorated when the system of
lateral entry was introduced and favourites were appointed on high posts without a fair judgment of their merits. Retired army officers also have a
quota fixed in the civil services.
Consequently, most bureaucrats are not capable of dealing with the complex issues of their departments, their real interest being to obtain privileges
and financial benefits that come with their appointment as civil servants. To get promoted, they require recommendations by higher authorities
which are only possible through sycophancy and corruption. The institution of bureaucracy has been further ruined by military dictators and
inefficient and corrupt politicians. There is a distance between the bureaucrats and people and officials are not interested in either solving the
problems of the masses or in their welfare.
History shows us that when government officials become corrupt, inefficient and dishonest, the society faces crisis after crisis without any solution
in sight. This is the situation that the Pakistani society confronts presently.
Violent chapters
MUBARAK ALI UPDATED DEC 28, 2014 12:08PM
WHATSAPP
0 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
History has a knack of exposing human brutality and callousness in spite of claims of being civilised and cultured. Historical accounts show that
nations and individuals motivated by self-interest violated all moral norms and human values. This brings to mind the most famous and oft quoted
line from James Joyces novel Ulysses: history is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake.
In the 4th century BC, when the Athenians came to power after defeating the Persians, they were ambitious enough to invade neighbouring islands
and countries in order to occupy them and to establish their political hegemony. Their argument was simply that the weaker nations should submit to
the powerful ones, and accept their domination. If the Athenians met any resistance, their opponents would be crushed mercilessly.
Once the Romans acquired military power, they too were desirous of ruling over the greater part of the world. Julius Caesar alone killed half of the
population of the Gauls and enslaved nearly 60,000 people, who were brought to Rome and traded in the market. The Roman generals fought for
power and killed thousands of soldiers to achieve their personal designs. Although the Romans built a great empire, it was at the cost of human
suffering and the loss of lives of thousands of soldiers and common people. Is that an achievement to be proud of?
History has been a witness to some terrible events of killing and carnage. When the Abbasids overthrew the Umayyad caliphate, they murdered all
members of the ruling dynasty and celebrated victory. It is said that a victorious general or two cut the head of his defeated opponent and made a
drinking bowl out of his skull. It was a Mongolian custom to build pillars out of the skulls of their enemies. Babar also followed suit after the battle
of Panipat in 1526.
Nightmarish episodes they might be, but human civilisation is a story of suffering and sacrifice.
On the other hand, we find examples of progress in human history. There are scientific and technological inventions which are regarded as a sign of
human development and a transition from the age of barbarism to civilisation. However, it is also seen that in some instances, the very same
inventions have caused destruction to the very civilisation which led to their creation or invention.
In the modern period, there are many examples when technology is used as a killing machine to massacre nations or ethnic groups. In Africa, in the
conflict between the two tribes, Hutu and Tutsi, the Hutus being in power launched a campaign known as ethnic cleansing against the Tutsi tribe.
They were well-equipped with modern weapons and enjoyed government support.
In order to facilitate them gainst their rival tribe, the government also provided the Hutu with information about the Tutsi. When the rioters went out
in search of their victims, in one hand they had guns and in the other they would carry a transistor radio broadcasting the addresses and localities of
the Tutsis. In one case, when a group of Tutsi people approached the church for refuge against the attackers, the bishop of the church refused to open
the gate and told them that there was no place for them in the church. Consequently, they had to die, even the co-religionists declined to help them
and save their lives.
In a similar event of ethnic cleansing, the Slavs systemically massacred the Bosnians. In Gujarat, the provincial government was involved in the
bloodshed of the Muslim community. The miscreants were provided lists of the Muslim community which indicated their names and locations of
their property. Unhindered by police or any state authority to stop the killing, they freely continued burning and killing the community. When the
state becomes involved in riots, disasters are more extensive and unlimited because there is no authority to check or stop the bloody action.
In all the above three cases, the world community observed silently and took notice of the genocide only after the event. According to an estimate,
nearly 35 million people have been killed in religious, sectarian and ethnic violence, while 61m people have died because of state terrorism.
History is full of examples where nations in the name of civilisation, nationalism, racism and religion, have committed crimes against humanity.
Human development and progress has taken place alongside bloodshed and cruelty to others. Civilisation is hence perhaps not the result of
sophistication and refinement of the human character, but it is just an outcome of human suffering and sacrifice.
Past Present: The new imperialism

MUBARAK ALI PUBLISHED DEC 21, 2014 06:46AM
WHATSAPP
2 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
After reaching its zenith, classical imperialism may have declined but its institutions and traditions have remained for historians to study and
understand. After evolving through different stages, its objectives were accomplished by justifying the process on moral, religious, political and
economic grounds.
When the Europeans discovered the three continents North America, Africa, and Australasia they propagated that these were lands without
people. It meant that the land was no ones property and, therefore, could be occupied and used by the imperial powers.
In North America, the settlers occupied land by depriving native tribes of their property. This argument is advanced in the The Frontier Thesis by
historian Turner. On the other hand, Australia became the dumping ground for convicts and criminals, who were transported from Britain to work as
cheap labour. It was the governments policy to shift its excess population to the newly discovered continents.
It is another historical epoch but Israels occupation of Palestine reflects how classical imperialism has been recreated for use in the modern world
Another policy of imperialism was to establish colonies in the conquered countries. After the conquest of Ireland, England settled its Protestant
citizens there, with the objective of controlling the local population. As the landlords were Protestants who were supported and protected by
England, the Irish peasants suffered exploitation and mistreatment. This conflict between Protestants and Catholics continues to the present day,
especially in Northern Ireland. England adopted the policy of colonisation in North America and in the African continent, where the goldmines in
South Africa and the diamond mines of modern-day Zimbabwe were an attraction for them.
As political power strengthened, English imperialism became responsible for committing atrocities using new technological weapons. In Africa, the
tribal people lived a simple life when they encountered the white people. They fought with spears, bows and arrows, while the English fought with
cannons, rifles and guns decimating the opposing forces easily. Terror and violence were used for political domination. Religious forces were also
employed in order to further the stronghold of imperialism. Missionaries arrived to convert the heathens to Christianity in order to make them
modern and civilised.
England and the European powers, including France, Germany and Belgium continued to exploit the resources of the African continent. Leopold II,
the Belgian king is remembered for his shocking brutality and exploitation in Congo, which was also condemned by the Europeans. Joseph Conrads
novel Heart of Darkness exposes the rapacity and cruelty of the Belgian forces and suffering of the Africans. The intervention of Europeans and the
economic exploitation of the African natural resources became known in history as the scramble for Africa.
Africa was depopulated because of the slave trade, casualties, war and deprivation of their national wealth. Their peace and prosperity and their
simple life was destroyed by the civilisation mission of the Europeans. Chinua Achebe in his novel, Things fall Apart, portrays the impact of
colonialism on the traditional society of Africa which was destroyed as a result.
In the modern period, Israel is emulating the methodology of classical imperialism to strengthen its state. By propagating that Palestine was a land
without people, it justified its occupation and use for cultivation as well as settlement. Israel also adopted the policy of terror on the Palestinians to
appropriate their property. Its terrorist organisation is responsible for genocide of the Palestinians. In Deir Yassin (1948), the whole population of the
village was massacred. This terrified the people from other villages and they fled from Palestine to take refuge in different Arab countries. As the
Jewish population was not large enough to counter the Palestinians, the Israeli government encouraged the Russians, Eastern Europeans and the
Middle Eastern Jewish communities to come to Israel and settle there. The policy of colonisation still continues.
After the 1967 war, Israel occupied East Jerusalem, West Bank and Golan Heights. Israel is systematically building new houses in the West Bank as
well as expelling the Palestinians from East Jerusalem on a variety of different pretexts.
Israel also follows the policy of keeping the Palestinians subdued by raiding their villages, cutting olive trees and destroying their farmland. Over
the years, Israel has become not only a military but a nuclear power. Its army is well equipped with new, technological weapons. Therefore, each
year, it is a routine for Israel to invade Palestinian territories, kill thousands of Palestinians and demolish their infrastructure like schools, hospitals
and libraries only to return after a ceasefire. The Palestinians live in prison-like conditions in constant fear and mental agony. Thousands of them are
in Israeli prisons because of their resistance and endure torture which is legalised by the Israeli judiciary.
The question is how long Israel would continue to crush the Palestinians right for their homeland and how long it would spend its energy and
resources to keep the Israeli State intact against any challenge. Israeli imperialism has already created a Palestinian nationalism which will fight
against Israeli atrocities and harshness and finally emerge as a triumphant nation.
Beware the contempt of the under-classes

MUBARAK ALI UPDATED DEC 14, 2014 08:23AM
WHATSAPP
6 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
When culture declines in society, it loses its creativity, innovation and vibrancy. The decay becomes apparent in architecture, painting and literature
and creates a space for scholars, artists, musicians and scientists to contribute to culture and civilisation.
In circumstances where society begins to degenerate, only those with authority and wealth are considered prominent people. In the last days of the
Mughal Empire, the ruling classes endeavoured to become significant and important by assuming grandiose titles such as pillar of the state,
victorious in the battle field and lord of honesty and dignity.
In reality, however, they would betray their masters and switch loyalties in order to accomplish their selfish interests. Although the appearance of
glory and prestige was hollow, they tried to adopt symbols that would transform them to a higher status despite the fact that they might have lacked
talent, intellect, professional skills and physical beauty. Hence, their insignificant personalities were hidden behind glittering dresses, ornaments and
jewellery. They tried to elevate their status by building and living in palaces and by possessing carriages, horses and elephants.
When they travelled or commuted, it was in the form of a procession which included a large number of servants to flaunt their power and dignity.
Occasionally, they held grand feasts and banquets, where delicious food was cooked for guests who were also entertained by musicians and dancers.
This extravagance was only possible by extracting taxes from peasants, thereby reducing them to abject poverty.
Its a throwback to the Mughal age: a culture of entitlement and grandiose displays of wealth pushes society towards great decay and greater
discontent
In the end, the Mughal nobility paid the price for their grandeur and luxurious lifestyle. When Nadir Shah and Ahmed Shah Abdali invaded India,
they were the ones who became victims and lost their wealth and status to the invaders. Nobody came to help them or sympathise with them during
the crises because there was a wide gap between them and the common man. A lesson to learn from their tragic downfall is not to become a victim
of ignorance and arrogance like the Mughal nobility.
The Pakistani society faces similar problems which were encountered by the Mughal society during its decline. Our ruling classes are status
conscious and demand homage and respect from the masses as their deliverers and leaders despite being corrupt themselves. Since they have no
talent, professional skill or the intellectual capacity to fill this gap, they adopt artificial ways and means to achieve distinction in the society. As far
as the people are concerned, they respect them as long they are in power. As soon as they lose their powerful status and fall to lower ranks, they are
disrespected or ignored.
The ruling classes are, therefore, anxious to promote VIP or VVIP culture to hide their weaknesses. The signs and symbol of VIP culture are
witnessed on a daily basis. For moving from point A to B, roads are blocked for traffic and the public has to wait for the procession of VIP vehicles
to arrive and pass by. When they are invited to preside over a function, they always arrive late and the audience has to endure the torture of waiting
for them. They do not have the courtesy to apologise for the inconvenience caused by them.
Their speeches, which are obviously written by professional speech writers, are full of hollow and artificial expression of nationalism and
patriotism. They always advise people to work hard and devote their time to serve the country but they never practice themselves what they so
passionately preach. They throw grand parties where a large number of their friends and colleagues are invited. These feasts involve elaborate
arrangements to entertain guests. However, the food which is served to the drivers, servants and workers is of inferior quality, which shows their
contempt towards the poor. Whenever they go to watch a performance or sport, a separate enclosure is reserved for them.
Their wealth, like the Mughal nobility, is extracted from the taxes of the poor people. The ruling classes accumulate wealth through illegal means
and spend it to strengthen their social status.
In such a society, respect and honour is given to those who are intellectually bankrupt, mediocre and incapable of contributing to or promoting
culture. Scholars are ignored and artists are contemptuously cheated, musicians are downgraded, professionals are discouraged and artisans looked
down upon. Such a society cannot create or innovate anything because of the marginalisation of talented people.
The Pakistani society is paying a high price for its VVIP culture, which is devouring its resources and stealing fundamental rights from its people.
Blood ties
MUBARAK ALI PUBLISHED DEC 07, 2014 07:10AM
WHATSAPP
2 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
In the political system of kinship, ruling dynasties played an important role in controlling the affairs of the state. Through power and authority they
accumulated wealth and riches, but allocated a part of it to acquire the loyalty of the aristocracy who supported them in order to sustain their status.
Once the ruling dynasty acquired power, they would concentrate on ways and means to retain power within the family so that it could be inherited
by the future generations.
To distinguish themselves from other classes, ruling dynasties often used symbols or a unique logic and reasoning. Some of them claimed either to
be divine representatives or assumed divine power to legitimise their rule. For example, Alexander claimed to be the son of Zeus, who had
impregnated his mother in the shape of a snake. When Alexander conquered Egypt, he was recognised as pharaoh and thus a god on earth.
Likewise, Roman emperors enjoyed the same status as deities. In medieval Europe, it was believed that the king had spiritual power and his touch
could heal the sick and ailing. The Asian rulers also legitimised their rule on the basis of spiritual power. However, it is evident that when a dynasty
and its members ruled for a longer period, the subsequent generations became less talented and gradually lost the vitality and capability of ruling
over the country. The reason for this was probably the fact that they inherited power and authority by qualification of their birth and not on merit or
after struggle and endeavour.
Dynasties have a sell-by date, after which they lose potency and relevance
In his book the Muqaddimah, Ibn Khaldun argues that the royal family could rule with the capacity and understanding of political matters up to four
generations. After that, there would be rulers who succeeded not because of their intelligence but only as imitators of their ancestors. As a result, the
dynasty declined and lost its prestige.
If we were to apply Khalduns analysis to the Mughal dynasty, excluding Babar and Humayun, but considering Akbar the founder of the dynasty, the
Mughal rule continued undisturbed up to Aurengzeb. After him began their period of decline. One after another, worthless and debauched rulers
came into power. It is not possible for any dynasty to produce talented and intelligent members continuously because talent is not a property of any
particular family. When power is inherited by the weak and dependent, the state confronts disorder and chaos.
In a democratic system, the monopoly of a royal dynasty over political power gradually comes to an end. Democracy opens the venue to all classes
of society to contest for power and display their talent to govern the country. In advanced democratic societies, political parties provide space to all
people to participate in politics which is why people from humble origins can also get the opportunity to become the head of the state. This is the
beauty of a democratic system that it benefits from intelligent people who utilise their energy for building institutions and traditions for the welfare
of the country.
In the case of Pakistan, we can divide history into two parts. The first is from 1947 to 1970, while the second part is from 1972 to the present. In the
first part of the history of this country, political parties were not dominated by any dynasty. However post 1970, the situation changed with the PPP
emerging as an important political faction, coming into power after the independence of Bangladesh. Since then, dynastic politics have been
introduced into our political system with the sole aim of preserving leadership within the family and not allowing it to be shared with others. It is
similar to the feudal culture where landlords are very protective of their property and want to confine it to their families.
The same policy is adopted in case of political parties which are considered as their property or jagirs, while political workers are like their
subordinates.
No ordinary member is allowed to contest for high posts. There is such a grip of family members on the affairs of the party that only sycophants
survive to maintain their closeness to the leadership.
Any violation or disobedience of the leader would result in expulsion of the political worker and cancellation of their party membership. Therefore
all political workers and important members of the party blindly follow the instructions of the top leadership.
As a matter of fact, dynastic politics works against democratic traditions and norms since a privileged family has no legitimate right to acquire
leadership of the party. If this type of leadership is allowed to continue, the result is incompetent leadership. Mature leadership cannot be achieved
only through rhetoric or by mobilising public emotion. Large gatherings and processions may thrive on the energies of people but they dont
necessarily inculcate among them a sense of discipline or political consciousness.
The spirit of the small town

MUBARAK ALI UPDATED NOV 30, 2014 01:25PM
WHATSAPP
2 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
Generally, historians give importance to big cities by highlighting their role in history while small towns are ignored along with their contribution to
cultural and social development in society. However, each small town has its own history, its unique character and culture, traditions and institutions.
Under its cultural milieu, its inhabitants evolve with a certain type of behaviour, attitude and an approach to their daily life. The impact of culture is
so visible that they can be recognised by their association with their home town. Often writers and scholars identify themselves by adding the name
of the town to their name, for instance, Shikarpuri, Thattavi or Hyderabadi. It shows their pride in belonging to the city that they represent.
Interestingly, each of these towns identifies with a certain profession or genre such as music, wrestling, scholarship, politics and business or it may
be famous for specialty products such as sweets, fruits and handicrafts. There may be particular expressions or dialects that are particular to a town.
Professionals from these towns are in demand by the bigger neighbouring cities where they can contribute socially, politically or professionally.
These small towns create a Kasbati culture with a unique character that inspires people to emulate and contribute to it through poetry, music, art and
architecture.
While stories of the city loom large in history, tales of the town go unrecorded
To unfold the cultural history of the small towns of Sindh such as Shikarpur, Larkana, Sukkur, Khairpur, Mirpur, Dadu and Mithi, etc., oral history
should be used as a tool. Historians who are well-trained to collect oral material about a town could record and document 100 years of history of
each town through interviews of teachers, shopkeepers, artists, musicians, physicians, politicians, workers and literary people. The first important
question should perhaps be in regard to the condition of the town before partition, when it was populated by the Hindus, the Sikhs and the Parsis,
and how the life in the city changed over the years after the departure of non-Muslims. People should be asked about their childhood, youth and
middle-age experiences while living in that particular town.
These narratives would bring to light different occurrences and events which took place in that town over the years. One could conclude whether
these changes benefitted the town or deteriorated its traditions and values.
The cultural significance of a town is judged by its cultural institutions and events. Literary meetings are organised where writers present short
stories, essays and columns. Music concerts and theatre performances are held which provide entertainment to people. In formal meetings, held
either in hotels or other prestigious venues, people participate in political, social and economic discussions. These meetings and gatherings bring
people together and facilitate an exchange of views.
Since it was customary in the past for each mohallah to be populated either by a certain caste or cadre of professionals, the history of different
neighbourhoods (mohallas) should be emphasised upon. This would bring to light fascinating details about the cultural characteristics and
contribution of these mohallas to the society.
Another important institution is the main bazaar which is generally known in Sindh as the Shahi bazaar. It has a variety of shops supplying all
kinds of goods to the locals as well as the nearby villagers who visit the town to buy and sell.
On the same pattern, cultural history of the towns of Punjab, KP and Balochistan may also be recorded. The significant feature of this type of history
writing would be aspects which are not mentioned in the grand, national narratives. Once the contribution of small towns is recognised, they would
not be referred to in a derogatory manner but instead be admired for their participation in shaping national culture.
There are talented individuals in these small towns whose creativity is not recognised because they lack access to national media. The result is that
their contribution remains unknown and unacknowledged. Therefore, it is the task of historians in the media to hunt such talent and introduce their
work to the masses.
Writing the history of Sindh

MUBARAK ALI UPDATED NOV 23, 2014 07:13AM
WHATSAPP
5 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
There are two important elements for writing the history of any land: the availability of basic sources, and the presence of professional and trained
historians. The modern historiography of Sindh was introduced during the British rule when the Historical Society of Sindh was founded with the
purpose of reconstructing the history of Sindh. The Society held regular meetings where the members presented research papers on different aspects
of history, as well as published a historical journal which contained well-researched papers, thus contributing immensely to recording the history of
Sindh. Sadly, the Society and the journal discontinued after Partition.
However, in its early period, the Sindhi Adabi Board published some material originally available in Persian, after careful editing of the manuscripts.
In this respect the Boards efforts are commendable. The Board had planned to publish the history of Sindh in nine volumes. However, the goal
could not be accomplished and only four volumes were published. The first two volumes deal with the pre-historic period covering the Indus Valley
civilisation and are written by H.T. Lambrick. The material in these volumes is not up-to-date and needs to be re-written based on newly discovered
information.
The history of the Kalhoras was written by Maulana Ghulam Rasool Mehar, but he was not a professional historian and had no training in analysing
the events. Hence, his work is merely a chronology of events and simple description of Persian sources in Urdu. Mumtaz Pathans work about the
Arab rule in Sindh is based on Arab sources but it also lacks critical examination. His other volume on the history of Talpurs is well written, though
with some shortcomings as he was not well-acquainted with modern historical trends.
The original plan of the Adabi Board suffered from the drawback that it was based on traditional historiography, i.e. narratives of dynastic history.
The modern historiography has changed the approach of writing history from above; it requires emphasis on the contribution of common people in
shaping history from below. Therefore, there is a need to change the whole approach to writing the history of Sindh and to train young historian to
analyse, examine and assess history.
History is not just about dynasties; modern historiography requires emphasis on the contribution of common people in shaping history from below
The Sindh Archives Department is making efforts to collect documents from the revenue department, judiciary, police, CID and jails. It has already
collected important documents which could be used to write the history of the daily life of common people, trade and commerce, domestic conflicts
and the condition of women. Another important source of material are the accounts of foreign travellers who visited Sindh from the 16th century to
the colonial period. These travellers recorded their observations regarding the social, cultural and economic conditions of common people. As their
observations contained their biases, it is important to examine them critically before accepting them as truth. I have compiled the social and cultural
history of Sindh based on the travellers accounts, which could be used as a base for further research.
The archival documents are important source of writing social history. For example, the proceedings of the trial of Rahim Hangoro, a dacoit who
was tried in Hyderabad Jail, were fully documented. It is quite interesting to see how a simple peasant became a bandit who looted and killed rich
people. His story helps one to understand the roots of banditry in a feudal society. When peasants were being oppressed, tortured and harassed by
the powerful landed aristocracy, but found no justice, the last resort for them was to become bandits to take revenge from their persecutors. If the
record of Rahim Hangoros case has not disappeared, I wish that some historian uses it to write about what led him to his final fate (to be hanged as
a criminal). It is ironic that the individuals and circumstances, which made him turn to crimes, were not punished and instead retained their high
social status. History has failed to expose their crimes and try them as criminals.
The first condition of availability of material is there but the problem is how to find professional historians. Sadly, the history departments of
universities of Sindh have failed to train and produce professional historians who could use material from medieval and modern periods to write a
peoples history. For using Persian sources of the medieval period, knowledge of Persian is a must, while professional skill is required to analyse
archival material.
After its conquest in 1843 Sindh became a part of the Bombay presidency; therefore, archival material regarding the administration of Sindh is in
the Bombay archives. This material should be obtained from the Indian government. The imperial archives of the colonial period should also be
checked for any records available on Sindh. However, to get the material from these sources, a professional and skillful historian/archivist is
required. A comprehensive history of Sindh can only be written once all this material is collected.
Guilt and redemption

WHATSAPP
6 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
Greek historians focused on politics and wars, whereas Roman historiographers expanded the domain of history by including imperial activities in
their narratives. During the medieval period, history writing was related to both politics and religion. A major change occurred during the
Renaissance, when scholars turned their attention away from the Greco-Roman past and liberated history from theology.
Despite its popularity, history was not a part of the curriculum in educational institutions of Europe until 1770, when for the first time the Gottingen
University awarded a degree in history.
The universities of Europe and the US followed suit and established departments of history that produced professional historians. They developed an
elaborate system of research methodology for writing history analytically and critically the important elements for writing history being
accessibility to original sources, knowledge of classical languages and the ability to interpret events theoretically.
In 1806, when Germany was defeated by Napoleon, a wave of nationalism rose throughout Germany. Philosophers, historians and literary people
started to create a historical consciousness among people in order to achieve liberation from French domination and to achieve political unity. The
State of Prussia became a model that inspired the intellectuals to strengthen the German state by using its institutions for unification.
Different schools of thought have influenced history writing in Germany, yet nearly half a century later, the Third Reich remains a significant
reference point
To German intellectuals, the state became a sacred institution which would accomplish great things for the individual as well as the nation.
The discipline of history hence became a tool for materialising the dream of German unity.
The historical revolution was led by German historians under the leadership of Leopold von Ranke (d.1886), a professor of history at the University
of Berlin. He set up rules and regulations for a new historiography which would be completely objective. According to him, based on the principle
of wie es eigentlich gewesen, historians should report exactly what happened in the past. Ranke relied completely on state documents for writing
history as he believed that other sources were not reliable. The result of this writing was that historical narratives began to represent the state point
of view, focusing more on foreign relations rather than domestic issues. Ranke, being anti-democratic and anti-people, believed that the state was the
only institution which could achieve and solve all problems.
Another historian, Johann Gustav Droysen wrote an exhaustive biography of Alexander, drawing upon the story of both Philip and Alexander and
attributing to them the fall of Greek City states and the unification of Greece.
He also admired Alexander for his conquest which spread Greek culture to Asia. This interpretation expressed his desire for the small State of
Germany to be united as one country under a great leader.
When the Prussian Chancellor Otto Von Bismarck (d.1898), united Germany after fighting three wars, he was fully supported by the historians. They
also favoured him during the Kulturkampf or culture struggle' which was state resistance against the authority of the church. Later, historians
enthusiastically supported the efforts of the state to become a military power in Europe.
When Bismarck followed a policy of colonialism and established a German colony in South West Africa, it was upheld by the historians.
Later, when the colonial officers brutally crushed a rebellion, it was not opposed by the intellectuals who remained silent at the inhumane treatment
of the local population.
In 1914, when the World War 1 was declared, Friedrich Meinecke (d.1954), a leading historian, was overwhelmed by the nationalist sentiment and
welcomed it. He was happy that at this point, all political parties including the socialists supported the war efforts of the country. To him, it was a
momentous sign of unity when people with different political ideologies were integrated as one nation. Germany's defeat in the war was not
interpreted as its weakness, but instead attributed to a conspiracy that forced it to surrender.
Again, the historians supported Hitler and his Nazi Party when political stability was restored and Germany actively pursued expansion.
However, the guilt over the atrocities committed by the Nazis made it difficult for the historians to document that period. In the 1980s, the issue
became controversial and is known as Historikerstreit or historians' quarrel'.
While one group of the historians argued that Hitler and the Nazi Party's rise to power was a continuation of German history, the other believed it to
be an aberration of the German historical process.
After this debate, the approach of young German historians changed from Ranke's interpretation of history and they began to concentrate on writing
the social and cultural history of the society. They became influenced by the views of the Annales School of France, which emphasised the history of
mentalities and sensibilities.
They were also inspired by the Marxist point of view and interpreted history of the marginalised groups.
Consequently, social and cultural aspects of society changed the historical outlook from the state to people and the discipline of history became
more inspiring and popular than it was earlier.
Adapt and innovate

WHATSAPP
3 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
Civilisations may clash, as Huntington posited but they can and do also learn from each other. A civilisation in isolation exhausts its energies at
some stage and stagnates. For a vibrant civilisation, contacts with others are vital for its creativity and innovations. These contacts are made as a
result of trade and commerce, war and conquests and the exchange of intellectual ideas. Those societies which are under developed often borrow
from the more advanced civilisations and after emulating them improve their condition and speed up the process of development.
In the ancient period, Japan lagged far behind socially, politically and economically because of its isolation. Therefore, its ruling classes decided to
learn from China which was at that time much further ahead in every aspect of life. Therefore, between the 5th and 14th centuries Japan started to
send students, teachers, intellectuals, merchants, and diplomats to China to learn from its civilisation. As an outcome, Japan adopted the Chinese
scripts for its language, introduced the institution of the bureaucracy, imitated Chinese art and architecture, culinary etiquette, system of irrigation
and some technological innovations. It also learnt the philosophy of Confucius and the teachings of Buddha. The acceptance of Chinese civilisation
and culture transformed Japanese society and liberated it from backwardness.
Japan repeated this process in the 19th century when American commodore Matthew Perrys gunboat diplomacy forced the Japanese government
to open its ports for foreign trade. This allowed the European merchants and traders to come to Japan for trade and commerce. At this stage, the
Japanese ruling classes realised that they were not advanced in comparison to Europe. There was a discussion among the Japanese intellectuals as to
how to respond to the challenges posed by European intervention. One point of view was to revive the old Japanese culture and values to strengthen
national identity in order to face the new European threats. The other opinion was to adopt the methods that led to the modernisation of Europe in
order to compete with them. After accepting the second proposal, the reform movement was launched in the country. The domination of shoguns or
feudal lords was ended and the authority of the emperor was restored. This period is known as the Meiji restoration. This time the government
decided to send its students, intellectuals, traders, and diplomats to Europe and the US to study their political, social and economic system. When
these people returned after studying, they started to propagate modern ideas and debated how to change Japanese society after adopting the western
system.
Japan could teach us a thing or two about learning from others
In the first phase, the Japanese imitated the European institutions and traditions but gradually they re-adjusted them in the framework of Japanese
culture.
In the second phase, they used their creative powers to modernise the country independently. The first sign of their power came in 1905 when Japan
defeated Russia in a naval battle. It was the first victory of an Asian country over a European power and it thrilled the colonised nations.
However, when Japan became an industrial and military power, its ambitions were to expand its influence and to occupy the neighbouring countries
to fulfill its imperialistic designs. Its role in the First and Second World Wars was imperialist and expansionist. It invaded China and committed
incredible bloodshed and massacred people. It occupied Korea and behaved brutally with the local population and sexually abused women, many of
whom were forced into state-sanctioned prostitution and became known as comfort women. In the World War II, as Japan was on the side of Nazi
Germany, Hitler dubbed them the Asian Aryans. The defeat in the World War II and the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by atomic bombs,
forced it to sign a peace treaty with the allied powers. However, the Japanese again made efforts to recover from the destruction and reconstructed
the country on a new basis. In the new Constitution imposed on Japan, they renounced war forever.
Secondly, the powers of the emperor were curtailed and he became a mere figurehead. Japan re-emerged onto the world stage, not as a military
power but as an industrial and economic power.
The lesson of history is that one should not close doors to outside ideas and should remain ready to learn, adopt, imitate and re-adjust the values and
norms of ones civilisation for the sake of advancement and progress. In Pakistan, some circles argue that the invasion of foreign culture is
threatening our traditional values, and therefore such influences should be restricted. A wiser view may be to learn from foreign ideas in order to
revive our institutions and customs while also maintaining our identity. We have to learn from the example of Japan in how it benefited first from
the Chinese civilisation and later from the Western advancements.
The age of the sage

WHATSAPP
5 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
— Illustration by Abro
In the ancient Greek civilisation, people used to worship a number of gods and goddesses, who were believed to reside far away from human
settlements, either on mountain peaks or in the sky. Magnificent temples were built in their honour and to pay homage to them. To please their gods,
they sacrificed animals, celebrated festivals and performed ceremonies in order to feel the presence of gods and goddesses amidst them.
The Olympics were organised to pay respect to the gods, and here athletes would display their skills and arts in a variety of sports. Dedicated to the
Olympian gods, these games would be staged on the ancient plains of Olympia. Annual theatre competitions were also held to commemorate gods
where great writers participated and dramas would be performed.
However, these deities had no interference in the social, political and economical affairs of the Greek society. For example, when there was a
question of improvement of law and order, the society turned to Draco, the first legislator of Athens in Ancient Greece who replaced the prevailing
system of oral law and blood feud with a written code to be enforced only by a court. The new legal system was an endeavour to create peace and
harmony. As the laws of Draco were very harsh, they could not be sustained over a long period of time.
In the 6th century BC the statesman Solon, also known as one of the seven wise men of Greece ended the exclusive aristocratic control of the
government by substituting a system of control by the wealthy.
What forms the basis of social harmony, faith or philosophy?
He introduced a new and more humane law code. His law system made attempts to bridge the gap between the rich and poor, to abolish the debt
which the poor had to pay to the nobles and to end slavery so that no Athenian could be enslaved. Those who were sold outside Athens were
returned to their homeland. He also introduced some economic reforms and the peasants were encouraged to plant olive trees so that oil could be
exported. When Lycurgus established a military-oriented reformation of the society through his legal system, Sparta transformed into a militant
State.
In the 6th century BC an Ionian philosopher, Heraclitus of Ephesus, propounded the theory that nothing is permanent, everything is in motion and
traditions, values, and norms change according to the need of time. He is also known for his famous saying No man ever steps in the same river
twice, for its not the same river and hes not the same man. He believed in the multiplicity of opinion and plurality of views. According to him,
there is no lasting truth.
In the 4th century BC, Socrates and his followers emphasised on the importance of moral values for the sustenance of the society. However, there
was no divine interference to legitimise morality or the legal system.
The Romans imitated the Greeks in codifiying their laws according to their circumstances. The Roman philosophers such as Cicero (d.43BC),
Seneca (d.65 AD), and Marcus Aurelius (d.180AD) followed stoicism which suited the ruling classes of the Roman Empire. Lucretius (d.55BC)
believed in the philosophy of Epicureanism and denied the existence of deities but wanted to act upon moral values for better enabling the discipline
and organisation of society.
All these philosophers had a secular approach towards social, political and economic problems without making any attempt to seek the help of
deities.
The situation of Roman society radically changed when in 313 AD, Constantine, the then emperor converted to Christianity. The Church, with the
support of the state, launched a campaign against the Pagan philosophers.
Some of them were killed and those who survived took refuge in other countries. When Justinian (527-565AD) became the emperor, he tried to
Christianise the whole Roman Empire by wiping out non-Christians and heretic sects. He abolished Platos academy which was the center of
philosophy, uprooting all liberal and secular ideas. He was the emperor who built the famous church of Hagia Sofia in Constantinople. He was also
famous as a law maker. The famous library of Alexandria which contained the rare manuscripts was burnt for housing what was considered Pagan
literature.
The result of this policy was that Greek philosophy disappeared from the Roman Empire. Most of the manuscripts were destroyed while some of
them were preserved by the Pagan philosophers, who migrated to Harran (an ancient city in upper Mesopotamia) where they were translated from
Greek into Arabic during the Abbasid period. It was through these Arabic translations that the west came to relearn Greek philosophy.
As a result of this narrow-minded policy that there was a single truth and all other beliefs and thoughts were false and irreligious Europe
plunged into the Dark Ages.
During the medieval period in Europe, faith dominated all aspects of life and nobody was allowed to deviate from the teachings of the Church.
Philosophy became subordinate to religion and consequently, during this period, no great philosophers or thinkers were produced. Europe had to
wait for Renaissance to pull it back from darkness to enlightenment. During this period, the lost heritage of Greece and Rome was discovered and
retrieved which transformed European society on the basis of rationalism.
When democracy fails

MUBARAK ALI PUBLISHED OCT 26, 2014 06:38AM
WHATSAPP
3 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
After de-colonisation, most newly-independent Asian and African countries were unable to stabilise democratic institutions and traditions. The
system in these countries further weakened and became vulnerable when armed forces intervened and overthrew democratic government to establish
military dictatorships.
Another factor that has remained significant in the failure of democracy in such countries is the role of politicians. With their mediocrity, corruption
and lack of vision, they plunged the country into disorder and chaos. Based on this situation, liberal western intellectuals often argue that certain
countries were granted independence while their leadership was still immature and unskilled in politics. They argue that during the colonial period,
there was peace, prosperity, law and order in these countries. As these countries became independent and their socio-political situation rapidly
deteriorated, these intellectuals urged the old colonial powers to either reoccupy these countries or to make arrangements to restore the democratic
system.
Although politicians and leadership can certainly be held responsible for the decadence of the system, the seeds of a system that negates democracy
were sown during the colonial rule. After the Indian war of independence in 1857, the British government promoted and strengthened the feudal
system in order to control the rural population with help from the landlords who were granted special privileges and powers to raise their social and
political status in society. In turn, they collaborated with the government against the interest of their own people. The British government supervised
them and kept a check on them so they could not deviate against the policies of the government.
Pakistan inherited the feudal system which gained power and strength since there was no longer the check and balance of colonial governance over
their conduct. These feudals have played a negative role in Pakistani politics since independence. During democratic rule, they formed political
parties, participated in elections and became a part of the ruling classes.
Freedom and democracy are dreams you never give up. Aung San Suu Kyi
In case of military government, they supported every coup in order to preserve and protect their privileges and properties. Army officers who are
granted property after their retirement also became landlords and as their interests became common, both made efforts to strengthen feudalism.
Presently, feudal lords control state institutions for their own benefit as most of the leading families are members of the parliament, holding
ministerial portfolios. They use this power to enhance their influence and prestige in the society. Nearly all political parties are dominated by feudal
lords who are so powerful that a common person does not have the courage to contest elections against them. In political parties as well as in the
ruling circles, there is no space for ordinary people to participate or challenge them.
Some feudal lords exercise even more power and control as spiritual leaders of their community. Their disciples have no alternative but to vote for
them. Therefore feudalism is an impediment in the way of democratic institutions and their growth. Moreover, contesting elections has become so
expensive that common people stand no chance of participating in the electoral process. It is common knowledge that electoral candidates have to
pay large amounts as donation to the party in order to obtain a ticket. The whole process is undemocratic and against the spirit of democracy.
Another cause for the failure of democracy in our country is the institution of the bureaucracy which we have also inherited from the colonial rule.
Bureaucratic institutions such as police, secret agencies, judiciary, and government officials were trained during the colonial period to control people
by using coercive methods. They were not pro-people but against them. For example, in case of strikes and demonstration, the colonial police would
crush them brutally, a practice which continues to the present.
Secret agencies used to check the conduct of people and those whose activities were suspected to be anti-government were imprisoned and tortured.
Nobody would be appointed on an important government post without the clearance of these agencies. At present our government follows the same
exercise. All these bureaucratic institutions are used for the interest of the ruling classes and not for the welfare of the people. All respective
governments have retained these institutions and use them to subdue and crush any opposition which challenges their power. Therefore, the
existence of these bureaucratic institutions is also a major cause for declining democratic traditions.
The Pakistani leadership has created confusion by building the political structure of the country so as to make it an ideological state. Whether
democracy is according to our religious tenets or not remains a debate. Does nationhood include non-Muslims within its orbit or not? In the absence
of Pakistani nationalism, regional sub-nationalism is becoming a strong source of identity. As a result, central authority has weakened and there is no
binding force to unite different provinces under one state rule. There is a need to end feudalism, tribal leadership and the hold of powerful
individuals from political parties. Common people must be provided opportunities to participate in political activities. Only their inclusion in
mainstream politics would strengthen democracy and save the country from corrupt, dishonest and mediocre leadership.
Reassessing the Mughals

MUBARAK ALI UPDATED OCT 19, 2014 08:18AM
WHATSAPP
10 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
A miniature painting depicts a Mughal king and queen. — File Photo
A miniature painting depicts a Mughal king and queen. File Photo
Every society has a collective memory of its past, but each generation interprets it according to their present perspective. Sometimes, the past may
be rejected as an obstacle to future progress, but at other times it is used as an inspiration for a struggle against present weaknesses.
History shows that when a country is colonised, its people and resources are used to further strengthen colonial power. After acquiring political
power in India, the East India Company was surprised at the widespread popularity of the Mughal Empire. Although, the Mughal Empire was in the
process of decline and the emperor had lost his authority, the people of India were still loyal and respectful to him.
Nadir Shah, who occupied Delhi after defeating the Mughals in 1737, failed to replicate the glory of the Mughal rule. He left India with the looted
treasury of the Mughals while the dynasty remained intact. Likewise, Ahmad Shah Abdali invaded the subcontinent several times, but had no
aspirations to rule it. He looted and plundered, forcibly married a Mughal princess and left for Afghanistan along with the acquired wealth and the
family of his newly-wed wife. This gave the Marathas an opportunity to oust the Mughal emperor and to plant their candidate on the throne, but they
still preferred to rule in the name of the Mughal emperor.
History has shining examples of religious bigotry being shunned in order to accommodate marginalised communities into the mainstream
Following the same tradition, the East India Company recognised the emperor as the legitimate ruler of India and paid homage to him. Even though
the company had political power, the Mughal emperor remained popular among his subjects. Therefore, in the first phase, the company ruled in the
name of the Mughal emperor, posing as the inheritors of the Mughal Empire and retaining nearly all its institutions and etiquettes.
However, the policy and the attitude of the company changed when it gained power and decided to create its own administrative set-up to get
recognition as the legitimate rulers of India. At this stage, the Mughal past was denied and portrayed as despotic and oppressive. The idea behind the
motive was to convey a message to the people of the subcontinent that the company had liberated them from a tyrannical rule and established a
benevolent and enlightened government.
The company further propagated their campaign through history writing. The British historians published a series of books on the Sultanate and
Mughal history, distorting it in order to prove that the Muslim rule was tyrannical and biased against the Hindus. Elliots History of India: as told by
its own historians I(1848) is one of the series of history books which condemned the Mughal past but justified the British rule.
The Mughal past was again interpreted differently during the freedom movement against the British Raj. The historians of the subcontinent, under
the influence of nationalism, glorified the Mughals whose rule culturally integrated the Hindus and the Muslims as one community. Their argument
was that the Mughal rule created a pluralistic society in which there was no religious discrimination. It was the basis of their popularity which had
strengthened their empire.
In the 1920s, history was communalised and historians on both sides condemned as well as admired the Mughal past. There was also a conflict in
history writing between secularist and religious minded historians. To the secularists, Akbar was a ruler who Indianised the Mughal Empire and
laid down the foundations of religious tolerance and communal harmony. During his reign both the Hindus and the Muslims shared administration
and contributed in the expansion of the empire.
But according to the Islamist historians, Akbar was the cause of the Mughal decline as he appointed the Hindus on high posts, depriving the
Muslims of their high status. They admired Aurangzeb who deviated from the policy of Akbar and introduced religious practices, which alienated
the non-Muslim subjects. In Pakistani history writing, Akbar has no place while Aurangzeb is regarded as a pious ruler, admired and projected as the
best emperor.
There is a need to reassess the Mughal past in view of our present situation. We must try to understand why their rule flourished for such a long
period (1526-1857). The reason for its continuity and popularity was its policy of religious tolerance and providing opportunities to talented people
to play their role in administration, irrespective of their creed, caste and ethnicity. It respected the local traditions and preserved their values and
institutions. Marginalised communities can only be assimilated into the society as long as there is religious tolerance.
Building blocks
WHATSAPP
6 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
Monuments and buildings reflect the maturity, aesthetic taste and creative capacity of a society. Every age has its own character, values, norms and a
sense of utility. By observing historical buildings, one can easily trace the past hidden in its architecture. New buildings either carry historical
tradition or may deviate from the past and express modern day innovation.
There are different types of buildings; those which represent the political domination of the ruling classes, which include forts, palaces, mausoleums
and gardens. There are religious monuments such as temples, mosques, churches and shrines. The third type belongs to the common people for
instance their houses that cannot be preserved for a long time. Only buildings and monuments built on solid foundations can survive and these carry
the past within their structure.
Since it is the task of historians to unravel the mysteries of the past, some buildings become historical symbols which people feel proud of. Being
reminders of past heritage, these monuments are preserved, conserved and restored to their original condition.
Is our architecture and town-planning reflective of our chaotic thought and dying aesthetics?
After partition, Pakistan inherited two types of cities; those which belonged to the medieval period and others which were built during colonial rule.
The differences between these two types of cities are quite obvious. The old cities are surrounded by walls with a number of gates. The streets are
narrow and houses are congested. On the other hand, the colonial cities are built on the basis of modern town planning with wide and open
thoroughfares along with footpaths and trees on both sides. In the centre of the city, there is a clock tower around which are markets and shops. After
independence, the structure of the town started to change, which lead to their distortion. Take the example of Lahore, which is the only city that we
have inherited with buildings and monuments of the Mughal period as well as colonial buildings. The latter are mostly public buildings, each
representing their individual character.
We have failed to maintain the original structure of Lahore and distorted it by constructing buildings which have no relation with the past. An
example is the Minar-i-Pakistan which is built as a carbon copy of the Eiffel Tower. In its disappointingly shabby and grotesque surroundings lie the
Badshahi Mosque and the Lahore Fort. There was a time when Lahore was known as the city of gardens but slowly and gradually most of the
gardens have disappeared and only the names remind us of their glorious existence in the past.
The city of Lahore further deteriorated with increase in population and consequent increase in transport issues. In the absence of adequate public
transport, people are forced to own cars, bikes, scooters and bicycles while commercial transports like auto-rickshaws are noisy and cause pollution.
Consequently, the flow of traffic increased manifold and to facilitate that, the administrative authorities of the city have widened the roads by
demolishing footpaths and cutting down trees. Instead of constructing an underground metro system, a network of flyovers and underpasses has
been built which does little to solve transport problems. In addition, these flyovers have distorted the beauty of the city further disfigured by builders
who have constructed commercial plazas for financial gains without any civic thought and planning.
In the new settlements, there are roads without footpaths and it appears that there are no pedestrians in the city that need to be catered to. These
localities seem to be reserved only for those who rely solely on their own private transport.
This is the case in every large city where the landscape has been distorted by constructing high rise buildings which reflect our immaturity,
intellectual bankruptcy and lack of aesthetic sense.
In Islamabad, which is a relatively new and modern capital city, buildings such as the parliament house, supreme court, president and prime minister
houses and the secretariat represent political power. One expects these new buildings to reflect the ambitions of a new nation but unfortunately,
neither do they bear the past tradition of the Mughal era nor the designs of the colonial period. There is no creativity in the architecture and no sense
of beauty in the design.
It indicates not only the destruction of populated cities but the devastation of our society and its culture. If we continue to build our cities following
the same trend, our historical consciousness and national identity will be truly lost.
Past Present: Bound and gagged

WHATSAPP
4 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
The progressive German writer Bertold Brecht (d.1956), after experiencing the tyranny and despotism of the Nazi dictatorship, expressed his
feelings against the brutalities of the Nazi Party and its workers in one of his poems. He wrote how one day he saw the Nazis burning books which
were considered to be against the ideology of the party. He was disappointed that his books were not among them.
Traditionally, repressive states, ruling classes, political/religious parties and influential individuals have restricted the circulation of literature which
was believed to be against their belief and ideology. In the early period of history, publication of books was limited; therefore it was easy to ban
books that challenged the status quo.
The situation radically changed after the invention of the printing press, when the number of publications increased and it became difficult for the
state and its agencies to control their circulation. At this stage an attempt was made to ban literature which opposed conservative traditions and
values. It was argued that these books would create anarchy and disorder in the society by disturbing the existing system. Since the conservative
elements were not ready to change and implement new ideas, it was propagated that new concepts and thoughts were anti-state and must be crushed.
When truth is replaced by silence, the silence is a lie. Yevgeny Yevtushenko
When Martin Luther (d.1546) launched his campaign against the Catholic Church and its corruption, the printing press helped to disseminate his
ideas and the church, despite all its resources, could not control his widespread influence among the people.
Before Luther, those who raised their voices against the church were easily eliminated because their ideas remain confined and could not get an
opportunity to reach the majority.
In 1493, the church started to publish a list of the titles of books that were considered contradictory to its teachings it was known as the Index. It
was revised every year and after reading the newly published books, the church authorities added names of authors and their writing which were
believed to be critical of the Catholic faith.
When a new ship would arrive at the harbour, the church authorities checked it thoroughly for banned books which if found would be destroyed.
Later, when the Christian world was divided into the Catholic and the Protestant sects, the books published in the Protestant countries were also
banned and included in the Index while the Catholics were advised not to read the books as they would pollute the purity of their faith.
During the Enlightenment, the French philosophers, thinkers and writers started to publish books which condemned the corruption of the church,
religious extremism, sectarianism and mismanagement of the government. When these writings were banned by censorship authorities, their
popularity would increase. To fulfil the increasing demand of the readers, printers would publish these illegally and booksellers sold them secretly.
Some of these books were published outside of France and smuggled into the country.
When Napoleon came to power in France, he imposed strict rules of censorship. All newspapers and magazines criticising his policies were banned.
The result was that the number of publications in France was greatly reduced. The same policy of censorship continued after the defeat of Napoleon
in 1815 by the European leaders who wanted to restore the old system and control new ideas.
Metternich (d.1859), the Austrian chancellor, issued the Carlsbad Decrees in 1819, prohibiting the publication of books which contained liberal and
progressive ideas. He also asked authorities of the universities to check the kind of books students were reading. He wanted to wipe out all traces of
the French Revolution and revive the values of the ancient regime.
The policy of censorship is not only implemented by the government authorities but religious and conservative parties also persuade state authorities
to censor books that they considered obscene and vulgar.
Saadat Hasan Manto and his short stories were condemned by conservative circles who demanded a ban on these. They approached the court
seeking implementation of the ban. Interestingly, when some of his short stories were included in text books, they were edited and objectionable
material was deleted from his works.
Another example of censorship is the view point of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (d.1943), the author of Bahishti zewar (Ornaments of Paradise). His
book includes a long list of novels, short stories and poetry collections particularly romantic verse forbidden to young girls. He also advised that
unmarried girls should not be allowed to read Sura Yousaf. The maulanas concern was that the process of modernisation could disturb Muslim
society.
Throughout history, conservative forces have tried to control the growth of new ideas, yet they have failed because society remains in process of
constant change. New ideas are required to fulfill the needs of the time.
At present, new technology has rendered all methods of censorship useless. The internet, Facebook, Youtube and other forms of social media break
all boundaries and are accessible to almost all people. Censorship has become a matter of the past, which is no more relevant to the present. This is a
radical change which has paved the way for the propagation of creative knowledge and its access to the people.
Past Present: Deeply regret to inform you

MUBARAK ALI PUBLISHED SEP 28, 2014 06:44AM
WHATSAPP
2 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
During and after the First World War, families of soldiers at war would be in a state of anxiety to find out whether their loved ones had been killed in
the battlefield or were still alive. In France, it was customary for the mayor of the town to inform the families about the death of their relatives.
When he came out of his office, the family members stood in front of their houses, waiting to see which door would he stop at to deliver the news of
the death of a soldier to his family.
In England, the government informed about the death of a soldier by sending a letter to the aggrieved family. Again, the families would go through
an ordeal when the postman passed through the streets and stopped at one front door to deliver the letter announcing the death of a loved one. In
case of an officer at war, information would be given by telegram. It can be easily understood how the families would suffer daily as they dealt with
mixed feelings of hope and fear.
When a father, brother, husband or son dies at war, no medals, tributes and memorials can bring him back to his family
The families whose members were killed in the battlefield would react strongly against the war. While the government highlighted their sacrifices
for the country and the nation, the families views would differ.
In Australia, at a school celebration when the national anthem was played, one girl refused to comply and stand up for the anthem. When the teacher
asked her about her action, she replied that her class fellows fathers were there to participate in the celebration but her father was not here because
he was killed during the war. Therefore, she was not willing to honour the national anthem. A widow also expressed similar views. According to her,
it may be a matter of pride that her husbands name was among those who sacrificed their lives for the country and were on the honour list placed at
the mayors office, yet she was not happy because there was nobody to support her financially.
In Germany, thousands of widows and orphans lost their husbands and parents.
The pension which was granted by the German government was hardly enough for their survival.
This is how the common people experienced the consequences of war.
There was no sentiment for nationalism or patriotism but a sense of loss for their beloved ones, who departed from their families after leaving a few
pleasant memories.
The anti-war sentiment was depicted in a novel All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque.
When the novel-based film was screened, it created anti-war feelings among people. Political activists set up an anti-war museum in Berlin
displaying the horrors of the war. Generally, anti-war feelings prevailed throughout Europe because nearly every family was affected by the war and
fully realised its most terrible impact on the society.
Some family members could not accept the death of their relatives and wanted to contact their spirits in order to get some comfort. Many
spiritualists emerged who claimed to call the spirits of dead soldiers. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the famous detective short story writer whose
character Sherlock Holmes became very famous, was also among those who were in contact with spiritualists because his son and brother were
killed in the war. This situation continued up to 1930s and then gradually ended as by the time people had compromised with reality.
The First World War created a strong response among writers, artists and filmmakers. They showed the horrors of war and propagated for peace.
However, the efforts of the intellectuals failed and again the ruling classes won by resorting to go to war in order to resolve their differences and
assert their hegemony. The result was the Second World War which was more horrible than the first one. It indicates how the ruling classes
mobilised the emotions of people to accomplish their political and economic motives. Every war leaves behind unanswered questions as to who was
right and who was wrong. If soldiers sacrifice their lives for a wrong cause, how are their sacrifices justified? Who is to be blamed: the government,
the ruling classes or society itself? Who is going to compensate for the loss of their lives? How should it be treated in terms of history writing?
Past Present: The dishonoured dead

MUBARAK ALI UPDATED SEP 21, 2014 10:38AM
WHATSAPP
2 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
We are the Dead.
Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.
John McCrae, in Flanders field
On July 28, 1914, when World War 1 began, it was welcomed by the European public who mistakenly thought that it would solve political and
economic crises. They believed that the war would be over within a short span of time and the soldiers would be home in time to celebrate
Christmas.
However, it did not end as people expected but continued for more than four years, resulting in an immense loss of lives and hitherto unparalleled
destruction.
When it ended, a stunned and decimated Europe asked many questions. Writers, artists and filmmakers expressed their views on the horrors of the
war. An interesting book titled Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning by Jay Winter dealt with a number of questions.
After the war ended, soldiers would typically be buried where they fell on the battlefield, but some of the families of the dead soldiers preferred
them to be brought home to be buried in their hometowns and villages. Their argument being that they did not like to leave the bodies in a foreign
country among strangers. Instead, they preferred the bodies to rest in ancestral graveyards near their families. On the other hand, there were those
who wanted the soldiers bodies to be buried along with those of their comrades in a common graveyard which would become a symbol of unity.
A long debate between the government and the war-affected families continued over the issue. In the end France agreed to send back dead bodies of
the soldiers to their native towns and villages where they were reburied.
The American government also decided to shift and ship the dead bodies of the American soldiers to their hometowns. The British government
could not implement it because of the heavy expenses it entailed so their dead soldiers remained in war cemeteries in the land where they had died.
A large number of soldiers from the subcontinent also lost their lives though not for their country, but for the colonial powers who ruled them. They
remained unnoticed by their colonial masters and their sacrifices remained unacknowledged.
In the memory of its dead soldiers, the British government built a memorial for unknown soldiers at Westminster Abbey. This model was later
adopted by most of the European countries to commemorate the soldiers who died during the war. France built triumphal arches as a symbol of
victory. Although the war was over, these governments wanted to keep the memory of war alive as a continuous process to remind people of the
nations glory and success.
All those countries that participated in the war built statues of the generals and soldiers to be erected in public spaces in recognition of their
sacrifices. In Germany, the statue of Hindenburg; the general who fought in the battle and earned a reputation as great strategist, was made of iron.
So impressed and awed were the Germans by his generalship, that they would purchase small replicas of it as mementos.
While governments throughout Europe made efforts to promote war hysteria by building war memorials thereby creating sentiments of nationalism
and patriotism, on the other hand there were writers and artists who wanted to highlight the horrors of the war and its meaninglessness.
Kthe Kollwitz was an artist who lost her youngest son, Peter, on the battlefield in World War I in October 1914. He was buried in the German war
cemetery in Belgium. She visited the cemetery along with her husband, which had barbed wire boundaries that left just a small space for entrance.
When they entered inside the cemetery, they found many graves of dead soldiers. Each grave had a plate with a number, the name of the soldier and
a yellow wooden cross erected at the head of the grave.
They found the grave of their son and stood in silence remembering the good days that they had spent together. It was the sad moment for parents
who had lost their young son. She plucked three flowers from a nearby bush and placed them on the grave.
By the end of the year she prepared drawings for a monument to Peter and his fallen comrades; but she destroyed the monument in 1919 and began
again in 1925. The memorial, titled The Grieving Parents, was finally completed and placed in the Belgian cemetery of Roggevelde in 1932. Later,
when Peters grave was moved to the nearby Vladslo German war cemetery, the statues were also moved.
It shows how the war is seen by the common people as a personal loss and not as glory, which is a completely different viewpoint from that of the
government.
A French filmmaker screened a film showing that one night the dead soldiers came out from their graves and visited their towns and cities only to
discover that nothing had changed and everything went on in the same way as when they were alive. Their wives and friends were enjoying music
and danced with other male companions. Their questions as to why were they urged to die for a nation and a country without any cause and why did
they lose their lives over nothing remain unanswered.
Past Present: Cant be choosers

WHATSAPP
0 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
St Francis of Assisi
St Francis of Assisi
In traditional history writing, marginalised groups are excluded from the mainstream of history and treated as history-less; their contributions to
society are not recognised.
In a class based society where there is a large gap between the rich and the poor, beggars emerged as a dependent class relying on the benevolence
of rich people. Since all religions encourage charity (highly praised and considered to be a quality favoured by God), this concept has also been used
to maintain the domination of the upper classes and to curb the bitterness and hard feelings of the very poor against the exploiters.
The beggars are groups that are contemptuously treated and looked down upon by the society. Whenever they are mentioned in historical
narratives, they are used to project the image of wealthy people as their benefactors. According to the German philosopher Nietzsche, moral values
of kindness and pity assert the superiority of upper classes towards the subordinate section of society.
There are various kinds of beggars. Seneca (d.65AD) the Roman philosopher, points out that there were professional beggars in the Roman Empire.
It was the practice of their leaders to kidnap children, break their bones and deform their bodies in order to get the attention of the people who would
pity them and try to compensate by giving them a decent amount of money as alms. Charles Dickens also talks of professional beggars during the
Victorian age of England, when organised beggar groups existed whose activities were to beg and hand over money to their bosses, who in return
looked after their welfare.
They are but beggars that can count their worth. William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet
This practice has continued to the present day. There are gangs of beggars who try to get the attention of people in all sorts of ways to extract money
from them as charity. We find beggars simply everywhere especially in markets, hospitals, mosques and shrines appealing to people to give them
alms either in the name of religion or out of pity.
In classical Greek philosophy, there was a movement known as cynicism, the followers of which retired from worldly matters and survived on
begging. One of its famous founders was Diogenes (dc.323BC), who possessed nothing but a clay pot for drinking water. One day he saw a boy
cupping his hands to drink water from a river. He broke his clay pot and from then on decided to drink water just like the boy did at the river bank.
He lived all his life on charity.
In some religions, begging is encouraged in order to allow people to express their piety. In Buddhism, Bhikshu, the male and Bhakshan, the female
are not allowed to own a private property or have any connection with the material world.
Saint Francis of Assisi (11811226) was an Italian Catholic friar and preacher. In 1204, Francis had a vision that directed him back to Assisi, where
he lost his taste for worldly life. On a pilgrimage to Rome, he joined the poor in begging at St. Peters Basilica. The experience moved him so much
that he decided to live in poverty. Upon his return home, he began preaching on the streets, and soon amassed a following.
In the 16th century Holland and Belgium, better known as the United Provinces, resisted the rule of Spain. During the struggle, a delegation of the
United Provinces approached the lady Governor of Spain in order to present some of their demands. When the petition was presented to her, one of
the advisors asked her not to accept their demands because they were beggars. When the delegation returned without success they became known as
beggars and the word became a symbol for their struggle against Spain; going up on their banners as a symbol of resistance. When the navy joined
the rebellion they became known as the sea beggars. Thus the word beggar exploited the emotions of people in their fight for liberation against
Spain.
In Europe, begging was not condemned during the medieval period. However, after the industrial revolution, begging was denounced and society
urged people to work and earn their livelihood through labour. In some European countries begging is banned by law.
In case of Pakistan, begging is widespread. Those who neither have financial support from their family, nor a source of income, resort to begging.
On the other hand, there are professional beggars who exploit people emotionally and adopt begging as a source of livelihood.
Begging also flourishes in our society because of the feudal culture. The rich and wealthy feel proud to provide food to poor and hungry people.
Through such acts, they earn themselves a good reputation in society. But charity cannot eliminate poverty and transform the society to one that is
prosperous and flourishing. Begging can only be eradicated from the society when the state takes the responsibility for education, health,
employment and welfare of the people.
Past Present: Mind over matter

WHATSAPP
7 COMMENTS
EMAIL
PRINT
In the 16th century, Europe confronted religious, social and political conflict. This is not necessarily a bad thing as historians believe that conflict is
a leitmotif of change. It awakens society from slumber and stagnation and leads to the creation of new ideas and thoughts with the passage of time.
When Martin Luther challenged the Catholic Church and its outdated institutions, the church became divided. In turn, the Catholic Church launched
the Counter- Reformation with an aim to reform the church and restore Catholicism in Europe.
In 1618-48, the Thirty Year War ravaged Germany along with other European countries like Sweden, France, Spain and Austria when the Roman
Catholic Church attempted to curtail the activities of the Protestants, sparking a rebellion. At first the Catholic Church authorities underestimated the
extent of the Reformation but when they realised that the movement was spreading from one country to another, they decided to take action to
defend and reform themselves.
The Inquisition, which was a group of institutions within the judicial system of the Roman Catholic Church, took harsh steps against heretics to
check any deviation from faith in order to retain its unity.
From the time of the Greek philosophers to the present day, faith and knowledge have been in a love-hate relationship
The most effective challenge that the Church faced was the emergence of new knowledge which contradicted the Holy Scripture, the very basis of
their faith. Until now, the Catholic Church firmly believed in the Ptolemaic idea that the earth was stationary while sun revolved around it. When
Copernicus (d.1543), the Polish scientist presented the heliocentric theory that the earth revolved while the sun remained stationary, the Catholic
Church responded with fury. The manuscript by Copernicus was included in the index of prohibited books, which was published by the Church
mentioning the books which were not allowed to be read by devout Catholics. The argument of the Church was that in the Old Testament, Joshua
prayed to God to let the sun remain in the sky until the war was over. The interpretation being that if sun was stationary why would Joshua pray for
it to stand still? On this basis of it, it was considered heretical to oppose it.
Despite the opposition by the Church, scientists and philosophers continued to discuss this issue. It was a time when Italian universities were
academically active and Italian aristocrats and nobles were also interested to learn about nature and to unfold its mysteries.
The first philosopher to face the charges of heresy was Giordano Bruno (d.1600) who propagated his idea that earth moved and there were a number
of galaxies behind the sun. The Inquisition arrested him and tried him as a heretic. It was the practice of the Inquisition to torture its prisoners and
force them to plead guilty. Giordano Bruno endured the torture but refused to reject his ideas. Finally, he was taken out of prison, paraded in the
streets as a heretic and burnt at stake.
In 1610, Galileo a prominent scientist and philosopher published Sidereus Nuncius presenting his startling astronomical observations in which he
recorded the phases of Venus and the moons of Jupiter. With these observations he promoted the heliocentric theory of Copernicus. Galileos initial
discoveries were met with opposition within the Catholic Church, and in 1616 the Inquisition declared heliocentrism to be formally heretical.
Responding to mounting controversy over theology, astronomy and philosophy, Galileo was tried in 1633 for heresy and sentenced to indefinite
imprisonment. He was kept under house arrest until his death in 1642.
The insult and humiliation did not dampen his spirits. He continued to work, and secretly sent his new manuscript on the theory of motion for
publication to France.
He also received some visitors such as Thomas Hobbes, the English philosopher, and Milton, the English poet, despite the strict ban. Towards the
end of his life he became blind and died in 1642 while still under house arrest.
The Church hence closed all doors for the creation of new knowledge, relegating the Catholic world into backwardness. On the other hand,
Protestant countries free from such religious restrictions created new knowledge and progressed politically and economically.
Though many scientists and philosophers were condemned by the Church, the new knowledge discovered by them overpowered the extremist
religious views and transformed the world. In 1992, some 350 years after his death, the case of Galileo was reopened by the Catholic Church and
Pope John Paul acknowledged the error on part of the Church authorities and declared Galileo right in his views. This was a triumph of knowledge
against faith, even if it came several centuries too late.
Role reversal
MUBARAK ALI PUBLISHED AUG 31, 2014 06:21AM
WHATSAPP
1 COMMENT
EMAIL
PRINT
It is seen through the annals of history that communities or groups with little or no political power are persecuted, discriminated and suspected as
forces of destabilisation.
Hence, the ruling classes victimise them and reduce them to a state of humiliation and submission, and any resistance on their part is crushed
brutally. Sometimes these oppressed communities acquire political power which alters their status, behaviour and attitude. Intoxicated by political
power, they forget their past and assume the rule of oppressors against their opponents and hostile elements.
As an example, we can discuss two communities which have transformed their character after acquiring political power and authority. The first
example is that of the Christian community. In the early days, Christianity spread from the Eastern Mediterranean throughout the Roman Empire
and beyond.
The Christians were a peaceful, humble, submissive and non-violent community which endured hardships and suffering at the hands of the Roman
authorities. They were tortured and executed in case of refusal to pay homage to the Roman emperor. Their most prominent apostles Saint Paul
and Saint Peter were executed by the authorities for refusing to give recognition and respect to temporal and spiritual Roman authorities.
When the city of Rome was burnt during the reign of Nero (54 to 68AD), the people accused Emperor Nero of having caused the devastation,
claiming he set the fire for his own amusement. In order to deflect these accusations and placate the people, Nero laid the blame (for the fire) on the
Christians so they became a victim of peoples hatred. They were thrown in front of wild animals which was an entertainment practice among the
Romans.
However, the number of Christian converts increased gradually which strengthened the community, making them powerful enough to play a
political role. In 313AD, emperor Constantine converted to Christianity which suddenly changed the role of the Christian community in the Roman
Empire. Christianity became the state religion, the officials were granted financial support and churches were built throughout the empire.
Once the Christian community had state support, it turned against the pagan institutions and their deities. Their temples were destroyed, their
philosophers exiled and all traces of old Roman religions were eliminated. As Europe gradually became Christian, the church became strong and
oppressive against heretics who were tortured and burnt at the stake. As oppressors, the church used the same methods and tools which had been
used against the Christians in the pagan Roman period.
The second example is that of the Jews, who were expelled from Jerusalem after the demolition of temples by the Babylonian king Nebuchad nezzar.
He arrested their nobles and took them to Babylon in 598BC, in what is known in Jewish history as the Babylonian Captivity. Cyrus, the Persian
king, (530AD) then allowed them to return to Jerusalem and to rebuild their city and temples.
However, during the Roman period, Jerusalem was destroyed again and the Jews were expelled from the city. Since then, they settled in different
countries as a minority. They were tolerated by the Muslim rulers, who allowed them to devote their energies in conducting business as well as to
contribute to religious knowledge.
On the other hand, they were persecuted in European countries and were expelled from England, France, Poland and Spain. In the 11th century
when a crusade was declared against the Muslims, the crusading army first attacked and slaughtered the Jews who were settled in the Rhineland, a
name for the several areas of Western Germany along the Middle and Lower Rhine.
It became customary that the Jews were the first ones to be accused and held responsible for any number of crises, following which the public was
allowed to attack them and loot their property. In Germany, they resided in ghettos which were isolated from the majority. They were not allowed to
engage in any business outside the ghettos and it wasnt until the French Revolution that the Jews were granted equal status as citizens.
However, despite political, social and industrial progress, anti-Semitic sentiments did not die in the European society. They emerged with full force
during the Nazi period when Hitler launched a policy of pure Aryanisation and planned to exterminate the Jews. Millions of them were killed in gas
chambers; the genocide is known by the Jews as the Shoah, the holocaust.
After facing discrimination and persecution in Europe, the Zionist movement was launched by some Jewish leaders for a separate homeland for the
Jewish people, as a permanent solution.
In 1917, Balfour, the foreign minister of England promised to facilitate the foundation of the State of Israel in Palestine, which was declared in 1948
as an independent State.
Since then, the State of Israel has been slaughtering, killing and massacring the Palestinians to get hold of their properties and land. Millions of
Palestinians, terrorised and forced to leave their homeland, took refuge in other countries.
In the war of 1967, Israel occupied east Jerusalem and Golan Heights and the Israeli forces have occupied and controlled the West Bank ever since.
It withdrew its occupying troops and settlers from Gaza in 2005, but maintains a full blockade of the territory, where Palestinians are constantly
harassed, killed and treated like an occupied nation.
Israel has not learnt a lesson from history. It follows the apartheid policy which failed in South Africa. It also built a great wall to confine the
Palestinians in the narrow land space as prisoners.
Although there are many thinkers, philosophers and noble laureates among the Jewish people, there are only a few voices against Israeli injustices
and the persecution of the Palestinians.
Perhaps, the Israelis would like to follow the American policy of reducing the native Indians to a non-entity after massacring them and occupying
their land. Today those natives live in reservation camps isolated from the rest of the American society. The Israelis also want to exhaust the energies
of the Palestinians and confine them in an area surrounded by check posts which makes it impossible for them to move freely.
This is how the oppressed become oppressors by ignoring the past and refusing to learn from history. Lord Acton is correct when he says that power
corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Perhaps it is true that the only thing we learn from history is that we do not learn from history.

Past Present

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Past Present

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Past Present: Dead language

MUBARAK ALI PUBLISHED MAY 31, 2015 06:46AM

Past Present: Understanding Aurangzeb

Past Present: Pragmatic politics

Past Present: Trial by ordeal

Past Present: Mums the word

Past Present: Light and dark

Past Present: To each his own

Past Present: A multi-layered heritage

Past Present: Unholy wars

Past Present: The high cost of hatred

Death and taxes

Taxation without representation has spelled the doom of many a nation

To protect, serve and sell out

Past Present: The culture of work

Past Present: Exchanges of value

Trade networks crisscrossed continents, inextricably linking cultures throughout history

Past Present: In a material world

positive because their endeavours plunged the society into conflict.

Past Present: Turncoats and traitors

What Confucius taught us

Twist and shout

Past Present: State of violence

Past Present: The new imperialism

Beware the contempt of the under-classes

The spirit of the small town

Writing the history of Sindh

Guilt and redemption

Adapt and innovate

The age of the sage

When democracy fails

Reassessing the Mughals

Past Present: Bound and gagged

Past Present: Deeply regret to inform you

Past Present: The dishonoured dead

Past Present: Cant be choosers

Past Present: Mind over matter

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi