..out of the dark

The middle eastern countries, as it happens, are no strangers to revolution, or to oppression. From the Iranian islamic revolution in reaction to the shah's royally wasteful regime, and back to the ensuing clerical rule. And further on to tentative steps towards democracy, tempered by state institutions and (relatively) transparent government channels.

Or Pakistan's curious dichotomy between miltary dictatorship towards democratic reform, parliamentarism against it, and religious extremism and islamic law and courts against the corruption and instability introduced by all of the above in turns.

Or Syria's schizophrenic road towards common representation and common law.

None of these have had an overabundance, even in recent times, of subdued apathy towards their closed societies. Far from it. Although, to treat these countries as stable from our point of view as long as no external threat would exist is, after all, a convenient measure, there's no doubt that this does not describe the country in more than superficial terms. Horrendously so.

In other words, to seek and facilitate change, however charitable it may be, must not under any circumstance be sought from that artificial and removed perspective. And, this holds true for internal as well as external influence. Whether it is lobbying interests in Washington, to human rights groups in Sahiwal.

And after that is understood - only then - can any useful discussion be had about the (lack of) merit of inducing elements designed to provoke specific behaviour. Only then will it ever be useful to argue the convenience of murder in order to provoke the general population into establishing order and respect for the law. As the absurdity of the argument will simply not be exposed otherwise.

And yet - to these fucking arseholes, the disaster that has been forced over the heads of several countries in the middle east of late - is still seen as "potential for practical facilitation of positive change", due to how the chaos - now simply let this sink in - the chaos we so helpfully increased will provoke these, oh, barbaric "people"(hem, hem) into becoming democratic and modern (or at least seek to accommodate the right century, hur, hur).

Such is the delusion about the powerful influence of the west, that even in failure - even now, so far removed from the imperial rule and world wars - we presume to have the kind of influence that will inevitably facilitate favourable change. Because of "our" convictions. Because of "our" cultural bloody superiority, and intrinsic property as parliamentarian facilitators. Pfah.


One says: "I'd like to see you make any sense in punjabi politics with that kind of talk, of facilitating change and revolution". Another says: "Yes, so would I. Would you perhaps be taken in by the islamists in the south, or just shot by government forces for instigating insurrection?".

Yet another says: "...". The person does not say: "you're right - having political influence on the general policy- setting is easy, quick and without responsibility, and I admit I enjoy the feeling of purpose to my work. I shall think carefully about this in the future".

...sometimes I wonder if we have collectively become lazy, and degenerated into complete idiots by instant natural selection.