My immediate answer to the question in the title of my column today is ‘No’. Love cannot be legislated, and should not be legislated. On the other side of the spectrum, there is hate, and that should be legislated, because there are limits to how much negativity we human beings should be allowed towards each other.
My reflections today have been promoted by the recent tragedy in Lahore when Farzana Parveen, a young, innocent woman was murdered by her own father, brother and relatives because she had married a man against the wishes of the men of her family. It was an outdated, perverted cultural action; it had no religious foundation.
When asking soul-searching questions about passion, it becomes evident that all of us harbour deep likes and dislikes. We have the strongest feelings towards the people whom we love. But love, or rather, lost love, can also end in hate. That is evident by the fact that most serious violent crimes, notably murders, are committed by people who are relatives or who know each other. This is universal, applying to people all over the globe. But not all such crimes are crimes of passion. They are also committed because the opportunity existed.
If there is a difference between primitive and advanced societies, then it has to do with the emphasis put on curtailing violent tendencies in ourselves and giving protection to the people we disagree with. In an advanced, cultural society, we must allow debate and openness. When discussing ethical and moral issues, it is necessary to see things from the perspective of the people we disagree with. It is important that the powerful try to view issues from the viewpoint of the oppressed. It is important that the oppressors realize that life for everyone becomes better if there is harmony and love. This is not the opinion of dreamers and idealists; nothing is more pragmatic than this!
A few years before the end of the apartheid regime in South Africa twenty years ago, Wazir Jogezai, an educated and wealthy young man from Balochistan, visited that land. When we met last week, he said it was a fascinating land, with its vast agricultural land and natural resources, its shores and beaches, its mines and factories. Alas, the rulers of the state did not see the beauty in diversity, or they didn’t want to see it. Wazir Jogezai said he was treated well, perhaps being considered an ‘honourable white.’ The regime had probably begun to realize that they had to change their racist policies, and that in the future, they needed to cooperate with countries and people everywhere in the world. Interestingly, when Wazir Jogezei was asked what South Africa should do, he suggested to that there should be improved telephone connections, with direct telephone dialing. And that was implemented almost overnight, he told me proudly. It was a symbol of change being on its way in South Africa and the world. Later, Wazir Jogezei became a known Pakistani politician, who also served as federal minister for agriculture. Now, he has retired and is an observer, but still with clear opinions about change and development. I didn’t get to ask him about what he thinks about Pakistan’s change over the years; instead, I was quite fascinated with his South African experience, and the stories about social change that he spoke about.
Apartheid is now history. It is a particularly sad chapter in the history of humanity. But South Africa isn’t the only land where rulers have developed perverted and misunderstood rules and laws for social relations, leading to stagnation and regression. Less than a hundred years ago, the whole of Europe had racist attitudes to people from outside their own lands. In America and elsewhere, slavery was based on racist concepts. But similar concepts about ‘the others’ are still alive today, although in more subtle forms, disguised and explained, so that they are more difficult to discover.
All over the world, there are economic, class and gender inequalities. South Africa is still one the countries in the world with the largest economic inequalities, along with Brazil. But many other countries, including Pakistan, have deep economic, class and gender inequalities. I was glad that Christine Lagarde, the head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) spoke earlier this week about the importance of reducing economic inequalities within and between countries, reducing large differences in salaries and in living conditions.
Deep differences between people can lead to aggression; it is bound to do so. It is a form of violence, notably structural violence, exercised by the strong and powerful. It will certainly lead to a lack of loyalty and commitment to a common course from everyone at the bottom of the ladder. Hence, greater equality is desirable, if for nothing else, then for pragmatic reasons.
When apartheid ended in South Africa, the legendary leader Nelson Mandela, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and many others emphasized the importance of truth and reconciliation, not prosecution of the oppressors. It was a softer approach than what many had expected. However, when social change is to take place, it is only possible through debate and soul-searching. Along the way, we will discover that we become better able to understand some of the views of the opponents without agreeing, and sometimes, we may harbour opinions and feelings that are similar to those of the oppressors.
The tragic killing of Farzana Parveen in Lahore should lead us to discuss openly this particular case, and many other social and economic issues in society. We must reconsider the functions of the traditions and institutions, and seek to understand how we can improve them and live better together. The tragedy should lead schools, religious institutions, the media, and everyone else to discuss issues in more balanced and informed ways; medieval times are long gone.
The tragedy should make us seek solutions that are good for all- for the powerless first, and then for the powerful; for women first, and then for men; for the passionate and not so passionate; for strong, religious believers and for those that are not strong believers; yes, everyone in an inclusive and diverse world.

The writer is a senior Norwegian social scientist with experience in research, diplomacy and development aid.

Email:atlehetland@yahoo.com