VCheng
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2010
- Messages
- 48,413
- Reaction score
- 57
- Country
- Location
Before people start to dismiss the following article by attacking the author, please ask the question how many of these subtle cranks are there on PDF too?
Enter the subtle cranks
Nadeem F. Paracha
A curious column in an Urdu daily recently asked whether all those Pakistanis who have been holding candlelight vigils for the victims of terrorism, have become Catholics?
The writer seemed quite incensed by the ever-growing practice of men, women and children lighting candles in the memory of the many Pakistani civilians and soldiers who have been butchered by armed extremists.
He thinks this is a ‘Catholic practice’. The display picture of the author suggests he is way beyond middle-age. So I wanted to advise him: Sir, be wise, not just old.
Nevertheless, his silly question and allusions did make me wonder, how many forms of bigotry based on both ill-informed as well as diabolical distortions of faith a Pakistani has to face even if he or she just wants to quietly express a moment of sadness about an heartless act of brutality supposedly perpetrated in the name of the Almighty.
It’s easy to pinpoint those who proudly claim that the murdering of men, women and children (by them) is some kind of a holy duty ordained by the Almighty for the establishment of a sacred Utopia on Earth. It has also become easy to point out the ‘apologist’ — that strange, sly creature using public forums to diplomatically rationalise and at times even justify what are sheer acts of barbarity by those he has a soft corner for.
But the recent wave of unprecedented anger cutting across a majority of Pakistanis after the monstrous terror attack on school children in Peshawar by armed extremists, is giving birth to yet another, subtler, breed of apologist.
The exhibitionistic extremists are being condemned like never before and their apologists are being shamed in the media in ways that have clearly flabbergasted them.
So it was only natural (especially in a troubled society such as ours) that the lunatic fringe now generates a more subtle brand of apologists into the mainstream scheme of things.
The newspaper column deriding all those Pakistanis who hold candlelight vigils as possible Catholics is a good example of what this new kind of an apologist is all about.
The wise gentleman had nothing much to say about the Peshawar tragedy, nor on the overwhelming issues of terrorism and extremism that are devouring the country. He had nothing to say about the military operation against extremist militants nor on the much anticipated plan of the government to roll out a strict anti-terror policy.
No, sir, these seem to be minor irritants for the gentleman compared to the apocalyptic practice of (supposedly) behaving like Catholics by holding candlelight vigils!
So why do it? Most probably one was a full-blown apologist, but knowing that the typical modus operandi of explaining acts of terror as being acts of liberation may now sound entirely awful, why not begin to question the religious convictions of those who are getting more press these days for condemning and denouncing what to him were not-so-denouncable.
The new apologists, now unable to confess that they might have been wrong (if not entirely stupid) to have believed that the extremists were actually some kind of revolutionary romantics, have instead decided to wag their fingers at the condemners.
Of course, the old apologists did the same by constantly questioning the religious and patriotic dispositions of the condemners, but before Peshawar, the number of such people was far less than what it is today.
When the populist media was pressurised by the public outrage against the Peshawar attack, it quickly adopted the narrative of the condemners. This was also because this narrative has been mushrooming within the armed forces as well, especially ever since General Raheel Sharif took over as COAS almost a year ago.
When images of civil society members protesting in Islamabad against the radical and controversial cleric of the Red Mosque began to circulate in the social media (with the hashtag, #ReclaimYourMosques), among the many jubilant and passionate comments were also comments such as this: ‘How can they reclaim mosques when none of them (the protesters) even visit them?’
I found such comments to be rather funny, but rest assured, those making them were quite somber. The idea now was to attack the religious convictions of those who were attacking the religious convictions of men who had attacked hundreds of school children in the name of a holy war.
After all, if you can’t join the condemners, confuse those who are now applauding them. Hey, look, they don’t pray; Hey, beware, they are following Catholicism ...
Though the new chief of the Jamaat-i-Islami, Sirajul Haq, has done well to distance the party from the reactionary rhetorical legacy of the party’s former chief, Munawar Hassan, yet, he couldn’t help but recently suggest that ‘some people were using the recent rage against terrorism as a way to expunge religion from school text books ...’
I wonder how by pointing out that the books being taught in our schools and seminaries are riddled with biases, is one is expunging faith from them.
We have been using such text books ever since the early 1970s but have they helped us in building a more literate, morally upright and uncorrupt society? Quite the contrary.
But why worry about school books at this precious and tense hour? What was attempted to be deflected, or expressed? Was it that the outrage against those who exploit and distort faith to justify their violence is an outrage against faith itself? Do explain.
Today more than ever a majority of Pakistanis are on the same boat. Each one of us has to be on the same page as well by setting aside ideological and political biases and grudges. Unity indeed is the need of the hour.
Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, December 28th, 2014
Enter the subtle cranks
Nadeem F. Paracha
A curious column in an Urdu daily recently asked whether all those Pakistanis who have been holding candlelight vigils for the victims of terrorism, have become Catholics?
The writer seemed quite incensed by the ever-growing practice of men, women and children lighting candles in the memory of the many Pakistani civilians and soldiers who have been butchered by armed extremists.
He thinks this is a ‘Catholic practice’. The display picture of the author suggests he is way beyond middle-age. So I wanted to advise him: Sir, be wise, not just old.
Nevertheless, his silly question and allusions did make me wonder, how many forms of bigotry based on both ill-informed as well as diabolical distortions of faith a Pakistani has to face even if he or she just wants to quietly express a moment of sadness about an heartless act of brutality supposedly perpetrated in the name of the Almighty.
It’s easy to pinpoint those who proudly claim that the murdering of men, women and children (by them) is some kind of a holy duty ordained by the Almighty for the establishment of a sacred Utopia on Earth. It has also become easy to point out the ‘apologist’ — that strange, sly creature using public forums to diplomatically rationalise and at times even justify what are sheer acts of barbarity by those he has a soft corner for.
But the recent wave of unprecedented anger cutting across a majority of Pakistanis after the monstrous terror attack on school children in Peshawar by armed extremists, is giving birth to yet another, subtler, breed of apologist.
The exhibitionistic extremists are being condemned like never before and their apologists are being shamed in the media in ways that have clearly flabbergasted them.
So it was only natural (especially in a troubled society such as ours) that the lunatic fringe now generates a more subtle brand of apologists into the mainstream scheme of things.
The newspaper column deriding all those Pakistanis who hold candlelight vigils as possible Catholics is a good example of what this new kind of an apologist is all about.
The wise gentleman had nothing much to say about the Peshawar tragedy, nor on the overwhelming issues of terrorism and extremism that are devouring the country. He had nothing to say about the military operation against extremist militants nor on the much anticipated plan of the government to roll out a strict anti-terror policy.
No, sir, these seem to be minor irritants for the gentleman compared to the apocalyptic practice of (supposedly) behaving like Catholics by holding candlelight vigils!
So why do it? Most probably one was a full-blown apologist, but knowing that the typical modus operandi of explaining acts of terror as being acts of liberation may now sound entirely awful, why not begin to question the religious convictions of those who are getting more press these days for condemning and denouncing what to him were not-so-denouncable.
The new apologists, now unable to confess that they might have been wrong (if not entirely stupid) to have believed that the extremists were actually some kind of revolutionary romantics, have instead decided to wag their fingers at the condemners.
Of course, the old apologists did the same by constantly questioning the religious and patriotic dispositions of the condemners, but before Peshawar, the number of such people was far less than what it is today.
When the populist media was pressurised by the public outrage against the Peshawar attack, it quickly adopted the narrative of the condemners. This was also because this narrative has been mushrooming within the armed forces as well, especially ever since General Raheel Sharif took over as COAS almost a year ago.
When images of civil society members protesting in Islamabad against the radical and controversial cleric of the Red Mosque began to circulate in the social media (with the hashtag, #ReclaimYourMosques), among the many jubilant and passionate comments were also comments such as this: ‘How can they reclaim mosques when none of them (the protesters) even visit them?’
I found such comments to be rather funny, but rest assured, those making them were quite somber. The idea now was to attack the religious convictions of those who were attacking the religious convictions of men who had attacked hundreds of school children in the name of a holy war.
After all, if you can’t join the condemners, confuse those who are now applauding them. Hey, look, they don’t pray; Hey, beware, they are following Catholicism ...
Though the new chief of the Jamaat-i-Islami, Sirajul Haq, has done well to distance the party from the reactionary rhetorical legacy of the party’s former chief, Munawar Hassan, yet, he couldn’t help but recently suggest that ‘some people were using the recent rage against terrorism as a way to expunge religion from school text books ...’
I wonder how by pointing out that the books being taught in our schools and seminaries are riddled with biases, is one is expunging faith from them.
We have been using such text books ever since the early 1970s but have they helped us in building a more literate, morally upright and uncorrupt society? Quite the contrary.
But why worry about school books at this precious and tense hour? What was attempted to be deflected, or expressed? Was it that the outrage against those who exploit and distort faith to justify their violence is an outrage against faith itself? Do explain.
Today more than ever a majority of Pakistanis are on the same boat. Each one of us has to be on the same page as well by setting aside ideological and political biases and grudges. Unity indeed is the need of the hour.
Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, December 28th, 2014
