Cultism and democracy
THE country witnessed paroxysms of rage and irrational hatred in the wake of a successful vote of no confidence against (former) Prime Minister Imran Khan, when he earned the dubious distinction of being the first democratically elected PM to be voted out of power.
In a normal democracy, this would have called for some introspection on the part of the losing party and a sobering realization of the governance challenges lying ahead on the part of the winning party.
No such luck here in our neck of the woods, where the propaganda machinery of each party churns out a diurnal menu of conspiracy theories and calumnious allegations of misconduct, burying the truth deep under the carapace of social media constructed mendacity.
The why’s and how’s of this pernicious phenomenon need to be analyzed to understand the factors behind the ever widening gulf of political polarization.
The democratic landscape of the world nowadays features several variants of democracy.
We find amongst those the liberal democracies, illiberal democracies, weak democracies and anocracies.
Fareed Zakaria defined illiberal democracies as those countries where, despite adherence to the form, the substance of democracy was absent.
That substance, according to him, was a system of check and balance through strong and independent national institutions like the judiciary, accountability commissions, media and civil society organizations all suffused by an overarching spirit of political accommodation and accountability.
The above substance is found in abundance in established democracies due to strong political traditions of accommodation, rule of law and accountability.
The same, however, is found wanting in anocracies i.e. fragile democracies where a transition is being made from an autocratic to a democratic order.
Pakistan’s roller-coaster journey shows that the process of democratic consolidation has not yet completed – not at least in democratic attitudes and traditions.
Luckily, we have a Constitution that is the only consensus document we have enshrined our social contract.
What we do not have in ample measure are the democratic traditions of mutual accommodation, rule of law and political accountability.
That is why the country observed the surreal spectacle of a PM promising last-minute surprises in cricketing parlance, to whip the fecund imagination of his cult followership into a confrontational frenzy before the vote of no confidence.
The upshot of the hyperbole, however, was a childishly petulant rejection of the no-confidence motion by invoking Article 5 on the basis of a creatively imagined foreign conspiracy.
Without regard for the Constitution’s sanctity or its proper understanding, the National Assembly was dissolved, plunging the country in a constitutional crisis.
The courts, to their credit, acted with celerity without letting the constitutional vacuum stir old ghosts of non-democratic interventions.
In any democratic country, this would have been a political development to welcome, but not in the land of the pure, where the conspiracy theories and cultism trump reason and constitutionalism.
PTI’s leadership sedulously nurtured a narrative of conspiracy and victimhood to goad its followers into a defiant mode.
Willing suspension of disbelief and a refusal to confront reality have been the hallmarks of PTI followers, regardless of age or gender.
They apparently had accepted the propaganda from their charismatic leader hook, line and sinker, thinking that a conspiracy was hatched to remove their great leader from his lofty political perch.
When the military and judicial spokespersons cleared the air completely laying to rest the conspiracy theories, even then the PTI acolytes refused to see reason and accept the reality.
Why did this happen?In the absence of the true traditions of accommodation, tolerance and the rule of law, the PTI’s democratic narrative got hijacked by cultism and populism.
Whereas democracy is about tolerance, dissent, accommodation and inclusivity the cultism is about authority, conformism, groupthink, and exclusion of all “out groups”.
While operating in democratic space for political power the PTI’s leadership shunned the democratic practices that call for dissent, criticism and a frequent reality check through a recourse to ground surveys.
Its leadership instead got cocooned into a circle of sycophants painting everything green for the leader while the reality was stark red.
A placebo culture was created by offering quick fix anodyne solutions like langarkhanas, cash doles and creation of a plethora of “Authorities” to duplicate already bloated bureaucratic government structure.
Failing to convict any of their political opponents, their frustration mounted and the steely timbre of rhetoric intoned continuously the fire and brimstone treatment of “No NRO” for thieves with a metronomic regularity.
The revolutionary reform agenda to reform Punjab police and revenue department fell apart when the late Nasir Durrani, a former IG of impeccable credentials sent to clean the Augean stables of police corruption, resigned in disgust after being stonewalled by people whose politics felt threatened by such reforms.
As the governance sank under the weight of a “Wasim Akram Plus” foisted on 60% of Pakistan (i.e. the province of Punjab), the economy started tanking due to a series of faltering steps on foreign relations front.
The continually upward spiral of inflation and price hikes, meanwhile, enervated the lower and middle class that watched askance as Khan made one phantasmagorical promise after another.
What distanced Imran Khan from reality and what continues to command the fanatical, unthinking devotion of his political followers can be understood if one understands cultism.
—To be continued.
— The writer is the Acting President Islamabad Policy Research Institute.
