No I am not trying to make a new word. Although it could be, given what I imply in this article.

The dictionary tells us that “collective” is both an adjective (meaning combined, forming a whole), and a noun (meaning a collective body; aggregate).

And then we have a saying which goes something like “You can't keep doing the same thing and expect different results.”

History shows that the collective psyche of the people – the collective mind – influences the outcome of a nation’s destiny. What then is this collectivity or collectiveness (or as I would like to say collectivity-ness?

Pakistani politics is fraught with repeat appearances of the same players, playing out the same charade of dreams of a future that is unattainable on realistic appraisal of ground realities.

How then do people, in the face of apparent disharmony, willingly get trapped in the phenomenon of group think and a desire for conformity with a group, resulting in irrational and dysfunctional decision-making at the personal, collective and national level?

How can those in power initiate the change promised in their electoral manifestoes when every action of theirs is dictated by the providers of development, non-development and military loans and aid? Those who lend money for education, medical, infrastructure development, and phone helplines for reporting fraud; when Pakistani land, air and sea is used for those purposes, the government has its proverbial pound of flesh and keeps the advantage also!

So where do we go with this? Is societal change the need? Or is collectiveness the issue? Do we understand the working of the dimensions of societal communication? Do we know how mass media, inter and cross cultural communication, social policy, culture, the concepts of morality and virtue, values, perceptions of family, environment, religion, land, and worldview, converge to shape collective thought?

Every society, social unit, and group of human interaction has a collective mind, the herd instinct of strength in numbers. Inter-cultural communication results in cultural convergence with cultural diffusion bringing about absorption of one culture in to the other, bringing an integration of individual minds to the dominant collective thought, with culture as the cohesive factor of the collective mind.

How can we continue to believe in the so called charade of political expediency and governance in a style that defies “textual definition?” Can we accept governance of the collectively ignorant body politic entrusted with the fate of the people who voted then in power? Can we perceive the message we send to not only the world but also to the future of how we accept the outcomes of non-conformance and pressure maneuvering in the corridors of power?

The influence of communication on culture constructs the message. As the collective psyche reaches completion in the prevailing circumstances; the fast changing and evolving new realities; of challenging the status quo and beliefs in societal value; the visible erosion and questioning of societal value systems; a collective rejection of age old norms, traditions and in some cases respect for standards and ‘old time’ values by the new generation globally, brings us to an impasse in the present imbroglio!

Does this mean that we are at a point of no return as a nation and in terms of its so called collective psyche?

Or are we collectively going through a collective thought process, a collective rejection of archaic traditions, a collective wisdom, a collective adaption, a collective misunderstanding, a collective escape from reality, a collective avoidance, the collective issues that we are not ready to face, a collective will, or a collective death wish?

Maybe we are just afflicted by collectivity-ness!