Friday, August 28, 2009

The missing Grays

Once more, here I am writing another post for this blog. The more I see around me, the more I find people and ideologies, opposing each other. If it is not Jihad then it is Revolution, and of course this further reinforces my first post; if it is not Green then it must be Red. The grey shades are some how overlooked at all stages, everything is either Black or White.

A person who speaks of moderation is of course not welcome. Indeed and why should they be welcomed? It does not sell. The idea of moderation will not sell because it is not controversial. In the current consumerism, anything itself being controversial or spreading controversy, not only sells, but prospers as well. Be it Jihadi Muslim ideology or (Islamic) Socialism.

Both the left and right wing have a history that is being forgotten. Let us start with General Zia’s regime, which to some extent is widely accepted, as the worst era in the history of Pakistan. Or better still let us talk about the Islamic Socialist, who tried to sabotage the whole system, who nationalized everything on a massive scale, talked about giving rights to people superficially (because he himself was a feudal and never gave up those ill-gotten privileges), was also responsible for the breaking of Pakistan, brought forward the General who will go down in history as the Mard-e-Momin responsible for the mutilation of the whole psychology of the nation.

This was the person who laid the foundations for the Blame Pakistan Army for each and every atrocity that originally was committed by the Political Civilian Leaders. This concept blew so out of proportion as time passed that now people have stopped questioning the actual hands that move the strings. Be it the breaking away of East Pakistan, be it the invasion of Baluchistan, or even involvement of ISI agents to settle personal scores amongst two political activist of none the less but a communist party. Interestingly, since these sentiments took root, even the incidents that happened before the ‘70’s are now attributed to our Army’s devilishness.

The army and agencies on one hand are labeled as harboring right-wing-extremist tendencies having control over all and sundry, and on the other are accused of supporting the US block. If the same army and right-wing were supporting the Soviet block, of course the left would not have had these issues. Interestingly, the same army that is considered to be a puppet in US hands, is also accused of being so powerful, all on their own, that they were able to shake the foundations of Afghanistan (that were of course already weakened by internal strife and meddling by the USSR).

My only question is, in this tussle between left and right, who is the biggest stakeholder?

1 comment: