More than half a year has passed, making Pakistan realise that the remainder of the year may present significant challenges to smooth governance. Internal dynamics are shifting rapidly, affecting the country’s immediate future.
Ironically, Pakistan is reluctant to abandon two legacies: its colonial heritage and its Cold War inheritance. In 1947, Pakistan not only inherited the colonial system (both administrative and military), but it also became a favoured ally of the democratic-capitalist West, which saw in Pakistan a willing combatant for the Cold War (1946-1991). However, the generation of Pakistanis who benefited from these legacies is fading into history, leaving a void for the next (younger) generation, who are increasingly indifferent to these bequests. This has led to a tug of war between the entrenched colonial system and the youth, each trying to withstand the other’s onslaught. For now, social media appears to be the final battleground, which the colonial system is attempting to control through intimidation, restrictions, and laws. However, with the rapid evolution of technology and the proliferation of globalisation, social media is continually evolving, thereby intensifying and perpetuating the challenge. The fusion of artificial intelligence with social media is poised to further revolutionise the world, much to the dismay of oppressive states worldwide.
Undoubtedly, social media is susceptible to fake news. So be it. After all, it is social media and not state media. Social media thrives on informality, while state media prospers in formality. Aside from fake news, social media exists for individuals to express their opinions, thoughts, dispositions, and preferences, which can be as unconventional and deviant as possible. This is why it is called social media, and why the issue does not lie with social media itself, but with the state (whether driven by the colonial system or not) that is attempting to impose formality upon it. In fact, it cannot be done. A formal medium may act as a social medium, but a social medium cannot become formal. Social media must remain informal, resisting regulation and formality, and constantly seeking ways to bypass or detour around them.
Social media is not an alternative to state media in the sense of being the next option in a sequence; rather, it is a substitute, disregarding any established order. Social media flourishes in private space, which is precisely why it was created. When citizens become fed up with the state’s contrived narratives, they seek to construct their own, which can be diverse and self-contradictory. This is how citizens struggle to soothe their mental turmoil. When a state somehow subdues most or all private electronic media, social media comes to the rescue, offering citizens an alternative platform to express their thoughts and feelings.
The issue is not with social media, but with the state, which fears that informal media has the potential to overtake formal media, whether state-run or privately managed electronic outlets. No democratic state has the legitimacy to curtail the private social spaces that exist among citizens. When has suppressing a voice ever served a state well? Pakistan’s western half is seething with unrest. Silencing formal media is easier than silencing informal media. The youth, both Pashtun and Baloch, are dissatisfied with the state. The mistreatment of Dr Mahrang Baloch (and her female cohort) and her dismissal without consideration from Islamabad earlier this year were significant blunders. If Islamabad had engaged with her, the Baloch nationalist cause might not have retained its current intensity.
In a country like Pakistan, where the population explosion is a daunting reality, the rising awareness of individual rights is consuming the time and energy of the entrenched colonial system, which is rigidly bound by notions of right and wrong, should and shouldn’t. Fabricated cases insult rational thought, waste taxpayers’ money, and consume the judiciary’s time. The state has become the ultimate vigilante. Dictation is a way of life. Yet, it is not only the word “change” that captivates the youth, but also their connection with the world, which persuades them to pursue the fantasy of a better future. In Scotland, the Scottish youth dreamt of an independent Scotland. Groups were formed and campaigns were run for more than a decade, but no socio-political activist was picked up or tortured to abandon the idea of independence, until the proponents lost a referendum in 2014 and realised that independence was more harmful than beneficial. Politics met politics: administrative coercion did not confront political ideas. Interestingly, in England, the English youth decided to seek (economic) independence from the European Union. Groups were formed, campaigns were run, and a referendum was won in 2016 to achieve Brexit in 2020. The youth asserted their existence with pride. No crackdown was unleashed and no forced disappearances occurred. Now, in 2024, the same youth think that the Brexit experiment was a mistake, detrimental to the economy. No one speaks of punishing the proponents. This is the maturity of a democratic system.
By protecting constitutional rights, democracy withstands the test of time. No doubt, the youth are vulnerable to demagoguery and populism, but they want to experiment with the dream of a modern Pakistan. Dreams cannot be stolen, nor can they be infringed upon. The triad personifying change, social media, and youth is at odds with the legacies that prevent Pakistan from opening up. Pakistan will remain enmeshed in challenges until it decides to be responsive to the wishes of its citizens, especially the youth.
Dr Qaisar Rashid
The writer is a freelance columnist. He can be reached at qaisarrashid@yahoo.com