Pakistan’s Political Jargon

By Muhmmad Hamza

We often wrest-out a very famous maxim from Marx’s philosophy. He says that the economic structure of the society defines its political structure. But if we were to replace the word “social” with “economic”, I think the tagline of Marx will resemble the current social and political status of Pakistan. We have a very polarized society, which consists of an ample number of classes. However, in the political domain, we often see the two classes; upper class and middle class. In Pakistan, only the upper class gets to participate in political activities, and the middle class has his “bread buttered on both sides.” They bandage the educational traumas by swaying the policies legislated by politicians through multiple means. They are the key players in the administrative setup of the state.

The middle class has a very mental approach towards “religion” and “nationalism.” In religious jurisdiction, we have Madrassas where the students are vulnerable to the other major players or products of the middle class, for example, the Military. They are at risk in front of the worst policies of the state by presenting the myths in the guise of religion. Then, it becomes almost impossible for the immature students of Madrassas to identify the truth. We have a very vivid example of the Afghan Jihad, where the state agencies used to recruit people having no political wisdom.
Along with religion, the middle class is fed with another venom called​ nationalism. ​This factor is used to fuel the emotions of the people against anybody, perhaps the state-actor or non-state-actor, especially against the West. By acquiring control over the major institutions of the middle class, like the bureaucracy, Army, Mullahs, etc, political leaders face trouble as they face hurdles in full-filling their promises, due to the conflict of interests between the two classes.

Politicians, unlike the representatives of the middle class, show different behaviour toward religion and nationalism. They get nationalism often in a civic sense and not in a sense of tool for giving birth to anti-sentiments of the people against anybody. Yes, exceptional cases exist among the politicians too. We have the example of Bhutto, who used to blame Baloch nationalists by calling them traitors, after the so-called London Conspiracy.

Simply put, the society isn’t suitable for democracy, because firming of democracy was/is of politicians, and unfortunately they have failed. This flaw in political families gives freehand to the non-political factions to interfere in political activities of the state. The acts of politicians pushes the ​establishment​ to declare martial law, and then in response, the military person uses religious cards to make ties with madrassas and material cards to legalize their illegitimate step through the judiciary and other organs of the state.

Written by Muhammad Hamza Student of political science department at Abdul wali khan university Mardan, you can reach him with email: