Is Pakistan a capitalist state? No. It practices distorted crony capitalism and crude theocracy. The system is more ruthless, exploitative and oppressive than capitalism and theocracy. Various groups have been gathered by their respective interests and they share the power structure. Public opinion and national narrative are manipulated by these groups to keep hold on power.

Power players paddle lies; distort facts and history to manipulate public opinion. Myths are created and presented to masses as universal truth. These myths and generalizations become the basis for legislation, dispensation of justice and enforcement of basic rights. To protect these myths, violence is the most important tool as it prevents the emergence of a counter narrative. The major hurdle in any sincere effort for a just and fair society is the absence of the space for a decent discourse.

Legislative process is supposed to be a scientific process backed by verifiable data and evidence on what is the social evil and how it could be checked. There has to be a public discourse on various aspects of proposed laws and reservations of each segment of society has to be taken care of in order to avoid social exclusion of any group.

However, neither any scientific evidence is gathered for legislation nor any public discourse is possible in an extremely violent environment. Enforcement of these laws which are not based on scientific identification of the problem and a critical evaluation of remedy – generates social conflicts rather than addressing the issue. When legislation is based on myths, perceptions, distortions and manipulations – nothing can prevent the collapse of social order.

When it comes to dispensation of justice – the law enforcement personnel and legal professionals – both lawyers and judges – bear the same biases which are the basis of distorted national narrative. Derogatory terms like ‘bhaagi hui larki’ for female entering in to consent marriage are commonly used in judicial discourse. Such perceptions can have wide reaching consequences and may potentially prejudice legal professional’s vision of the victim as a sinner.

This judicial stereotyping exists all around the world to varying extents. In the US a black man may be a soft target to be blamed as ‘criminal’. In countries like Pakistan, where religious, military, business and political elites manipulate the national narrative – the common man is inherently criminal.. While the word ‘shurfa’ or clean is used for elite – they are clean default. Similar bias exists in the legislative and judicial process against ethnic and religious minority groups; low income class; women and transgender people.

When entire superstructure for dispensation of justice is built on mythical legislative process and biased judicial approach – the concept of justice dies before it begins. People lose trust on judicial process when justice system delivers decisions based on manipulated beliefs and harmful stereotypes – resulting in the collapse of social order and public anger and contempt for law.

That anger is further fuelled by elite groups by injecting hatred in various oppressed groups of the masses against each other – in name of love for their respective biases. This mix of hatred and feeling of worthlessness being oppressed turns them into adventurous time bombs. They are ready to explode by a lightest ignition – the more adventurous and angry may join some violent group.

So, basically, our legislative and judicial system is creating a menace of violence, extremism and intolerance. It has destroyed the very core of social structure to protect its own interests. The elite has shifted their families and wealth in safe heavens of the West and bread hatred in masses against each other.  

When we see a controversial legislation being furiously discussed, someone somewhere is laughing at the fools dragging daggers at each other rather than real oppressor. The debate which was to be carried before passing such legislation becomes a theme of the circus after being passed. Practically these legislative pieces are worthless – of no benefit to common folks. The process for dispensation of justice is rather crocked, inefficient and does not promise fair play to its presumed beneficiariess.

In this situation, those defending the space for free speech and public discourse deserve to be supported. In a non-violent environment, all segments of society are able to present their point of view and masses are free to judge these ideas. This time struggle against violent forces backed by the power elite against public discourse may be more needed than the wild imagination of a welfare state – where right of life is conditioned to silence and submission.