Welcome to abuses, Points to ponder, Quotable quotes, political marketing through associations.

Welcome to abuses, Points to ponder, Quotable quotes, political marketing through associations. By Dr. Sohail Ansari

Conceived and worded by DR Sohail Ansari (originality of concepts and originality of words).

He believes that there can never be a zero scope for improvement and appreciates criticism if it is not for the sake of criticism

·       Reader reads alone a book, but can’t read a book alone if there is something competing with book for his attention. 

·       Old man in young age and young man in old age are older and younger to themselves.  

Welcome to abuses

·       Satirist is never short of food for satires because he knows that life is too short to sit around fuming. Satirist has ‘an embarrassment of riches’: so many good acidic words, that is difficult to choose the one to develop it into a satire.  Satirist likes every human being reaches a flashpoint but he always appears phlegmatic because he channels his rancor into material for a satire. Satirist awaits with a tingle of anticipation for criticism: every stinging word stings him into action, every verbal assault is a tinder to ignite and inflame imagination, obnoxious sobriquets provide the inexhaustible supply of raw material, the causticness of criticism that his writing has produced adds not only piquancy and vibrancy to his prose; but also it piques his curiosity to dredge up further and dig up deeper. Satire provokes the torrent of abuses so that satirists can wax eloquent on them.

The life of satirist is stunted minus derogatory epithets and dirty slurs. Satirist welcomes criticism as the absence of it can make him inconspicuous and his prose emasculated.   

Points to ponder

·       The tendency to romanticize the past runs deeper in every society, making historians embroider the moments of banality, and generate sanitized and indulgent view of the enormities of past__ these all entail the blatant fictionalization and flagrant glamorization.    

·        The adroit tapping of demagogy gives a new meaning to it as an art: incendiary vocabulary can ignite the spark of hawkishness in the most dovish of all.

Quotable quotes

·       Finding humor in domestic drudgery is the only way to make it a bit uplifting.    

·        Defining literature as any piece of writing that is edifying limits it within the confines of the basic decencies of every decent civilized society.

·        Crumbs of comfort that stops us from crumbling away is that tomorrow perhaps will be better

Political marketing through associating people with philosophy we do not like for compelling questions against philosophy

·       Political marketing consultant uses the word ‘Talban, extremists, and fundamentalist given the pejorative connotations they have acquired to condemn Islam. As many practices of Talban are repugnant to majority of people, the negative feelings toward these practices come to be projected into the Islam itself. Talban practice Islam but certain activities of theirs are debatable; however, political marketing consultant associate everything associated with Talban with evil thus compel support or justify action Islam.

Format:    Leader/Party-Information Format

Campaign: 1988

Newspaper: Jung

From:             P.P.P

Ad:      Leader/party ad

Ad N:  2

Analysis:

Headings provide a frame of reference for interpreting the character of religious leader, highlighting the disarray in opposition, and the corruption of Junejo’s government. As for religious right, over all meaning is brought about by emphasizing the gap between perception of __ and expectation consequent upon it__ religious-cum-political leader embedded in culture and the reality. One can not understand the challenge ad puts for preconceived ideas for rightist politicians without understanding the religious, cultural, and political code. The (own) heading of the ad (others are borrowed from newspaper):

“Contrast between words and actions” applies religious code. In Islam the hierocracy is the failure of demonstration by action what one verbalizes. It is a grave sin. And Ulmma as the custodian of public morale are the most scathing about it. Hypocrisy has gone mainstream in Pakistan. But religious scholars-cum-politicians are perceived to be untainted minority appear to be imbued with charisma that emanates from the integrity of character. Society which never became too accepting of it sees them as the lode star. People in Pakistan see the entire political world in black and white, ad the rightist part of it on the whiter side, but ad stimulates the audience to see it, at least, in between if not on the other side by being a paradigm of the hypocritical side of its politics. It sophistically creates perception compelling enough to have people embrace or at least share its angle to see unclouded by reverence religious political leader not as the crusaders having the ruthlessness of the true believer rather guided by vested interest. Ad makes many believe that religious right fail to measure up to the definition of hard to think of any other politicians embodies so seamlessly the powerful contradictions of the character.

Ad’s main thesis through provoking analysis if general self delusion is that: the image people have of rightist politicians is not the image they should have as the headings offer food for thoughts. By displaying headings, ad reminds readers first through out of the enormity, rather than the inevitability, of the inexplicably abrupt transitions in attitude of Jamat-i-Islami; and subliminally encourages reader to read the lesson in the rethink of Jamat’s policy, that is one that goes well beyond the relative merits of the arguments that Jamat has been pursing either a disastrous or brilliant strategy. It has more to do with the fundamental differences between what these religious parties are and how they see their role in the politics and how people view that role, than with the polices of nay particular party. The ad’s conceptual linchpin is to underscore the mingling of ideology and self-interest. It is propelled by insinuation of insidious effects: religious right applies former as a camouflage for the latter or front for the hankering of having the share of spoils of high office.

The jarring display of headings say much more than heavy text. Ad is not padded out with information of Zia rule needed for contrast:  “Deeds contradicts words”  only words (headings) are quoted but for deeds it draws on the memories of Zia’s rule and role of Jamat in it that how far can party like Jamat islami who had presided over the count down to the greatest demonstration in the country’s history that led to toppling of Bhutto’s government go__ having foreseen the future scenario__ to get a new lease on political life: The PPP is cultivated so that window of opportunities remains open:

“Benazir and Ghaffor entered into agreement for one and half hour”. The statements of Professor Ghuffor are startling enough. It urges people to reconsider the much-analyzed movements of 1977 by saying that the political differences between PPP and other opposition can not by themselves explain the People-power demonstration of 1977:

“1977’s movement was not against Bhutto” then it was against who? “It was not our decision to be part of Martial Law government” then it was whose decision? Ad does not set out to answer these and other questions by describing the events those preceded and succeeded the fall of Bhutto, for the vast literature have already been risen to answer them. Familiar as reader are with what happened, they can not too easily overlook the gulf that lies in implying the possibility of orming alliance with PPP and being the part of Zia government in past:

“Jamat-i-Isalmi won’t reinforce Government by entering into

confrontation with PPP”

                                                                                    Aslam

“All political parties field one candidate against those of government”

                                                                                    Qazi

Party with ostensible contempt for trappings of power endorsed Zia, but it could be argued that it was all politics and now it is all politics again to adjust to the changes in the politics. Definitely there is no wrong in realigning with new political and social dynamics, and to renew itself to adapt to different circumstances. But connotatively ad underscores the difference between adjustments and radical shift. The party which passed 11 years of Zia glorifying him must not be trusted, not only because of the veering from one extreme to another but because of the acquiescence to the efforts of elevating dictator to the planes of “Ammer-ul-Momeneen” (the commander of faithful) and now campaigning on the theme that Zia has failed the country, and declaring him by implication as the one who exploited religion to the perpetuate his rule; the statement of Ghaffer :“Nation can’t be deceived/manipulated anymore for Islam and democracy” reflects a mind off its hinges.

The difference between “Islam as the private matter” and “Political Islam” is the criterion for distinguishing between secular parties and Islamic political parties. The former relegates Islam to private domain of the person; and insists that religion be no role in the affairs of state, and religious groups confine themselves to religious issues rather than delving into the political realm. Latter aims at implementing Islam through ballot as the force that guides the affairs of state, and believes that de-politicization of them would bode terribly for the country’s ideological image and insists on serving as a political voice. It is quite clear that though both believes in Islam but sees and defines the different role for it: “Jamat is ready to ally with all those parties which believe in Islam” Qazi Hussain.

Now which party does not believe in it? It is the matter of perceiving a different role for it. Such statements are more telling of the motives in volunteering to form alliance with any party or say only party that is destined to win, than the overblown rhetoric aim at psyching followers up to sacrifice for Islam.

Qazi’s willingness for entering into alliance may have something to do with the common Political DNA he shares with secular parties. When it comes to exonerating Bhutto from the responsibility for fragmenting Pakistan, Jamat is the last party that comes to mind:

“Dismemberment of country was brought about by the Martial law administer not by political parties” GhufferThe sudden conversion to democracy enables Professor Ghuffer to believe that electoral playing field would be grotesquely skewed if PPP were not allowed to election:

“PPP has large following and the participation of it is necessary for meaningful elections” Ghuffer Had this fact dawned on him before (that PPP is the voice of people), Jamat would have never proclaimed hallelujah vision of Pakistan under undemocratic rule of Zia, and sided with PPP. One really finds it impossible to reconcile himself to the sudden fondness for PPP as palpable as the relationship to Zia was unsettling.

Jamat was in the vanguard in the 1977 campaign against Bhutto. Mr Ghuffur should offer mea culpa for taking part in it than by saying that:“It was not against Bhutto” then it was against who?

This successful highlighting of this bio- polarity of emotions brings life to this ad; and by avoiding labels such as “Hypocrite” “Mealy mouthed” “Weathercock” and instead of reciting a stale catechism of clichés: rightist politicians are greedy; unscrupulous and have ulterior motives in adherence to Islam, ad bring out the shadiness of character in a reality boiled down to just shocking headlines spanning over three months___ so that reader learns by osmosis__ which read like catalogue of flip flops: a can’t-put-it-down tale of how greed and opportunism run amok in the Pakistani politics and stand as the last word on real-politick of party apparently has a deep loathing for it.

The ad deftly uses absence of commentary to convey ticklish complexities that cannot be articulated: religious worlds of politics are not free from the invisible hand of expediencies. This riveting ad is more than the story of Jamat Islami’s reconsideration and becomes a symbolic reference point for other parties of the kind. Readers would see into it the broader story of Pakistani religious political right and learn that Parties may be of different stripes but they are all on the same road.

The ad’s most compelling facet is its journey into the minds of those seeks a religious alternative to secular parties and those who dismiss such possibility with different effects: dismaying former and bolstering latter.Ad does not poses the narratives force of its own but lacks in it makes up for in passion. A gripping account that twists and turns on the fine points of politics standard that often blurs the distinction between compromising on fundamentals and peripherals.

The exclusive focus on the three months in itself would look justified when these months appear to reader as the template for sizing up the religious right. Heavy on text and nothing to say on its own, it is formidable achievement which even reams may not register. Headings are many and long but exhilarating vigor of ad makes light of them.

               

“The wrong polices of government has imperiled the country; those preaching the gospel of hatred and prejudice are not the friend of country” Jotti Which wrong policy or policy regarding what? Who are poisoning the country with racial hatred? Ad gives neither answer, nor it needs to. Since it achieves the purpose of condemning Muslim League by quoting the major ally of it in order to lend credibility to condemnation and underline the tenuousness of an alliance. Ad is published by PPP, so it can safely be understood that promoter of prejudice (as indicated by Jatoi) is other than the leaders of PPP. Ad makes it visible, throughput the opposition, the ripples of pessimism as the words of Muslim league Pir of Pagaro drip satirically the contempt for the rupture in the opposition: “Some one is riding bicycle and some is flying kite….”

At denotative level it means opposition is fractured and cannot mount united front; and at connotative level, therefore, it can’t win against PPP. The other part of this statement weighs heavily against the leadership credentials of Jatoi: “Jatoi was the author of the centrifugal movements of 1983” her ad applies political code. Mr Jatoi was the chief minister of Sindh in PPP government in 70’s; a party which believes in federation; but, then why he succumbed to tendencies of secession after that? Here ad conveys connotatively a very powerful message:

Mr. Jatoi was patriot as long as the country yielded itself to his milking; once out of power or put it in other way once deprived of the opportunity, he went back to his roots to show that his patriotism was charade if anything.

Mr. Junejo is reputed to be clean man in the dirty stable of Pakistani politics and his brief tenure was not _ as widely assumed__ marred by corruption. Quoting of Mahoob ul Haq can be a good blow to the efforts of cashing in on the clean past:

Ten minister of Junejo’s government got the loan written off” Inconsistency: The line:“16 November is day of deliverance from cruel people” is not consistent with the tenor of ad. “Deliverance from hypocrites and exploiters of public” would be more in harmony.

The heading “Yawing gap between words and deeds” does not cover the whole ad, it over only the part which is related to Jamat-i-Islami.