Daily Times

It is often said that history repeats itself but the truth is that it never does so in exactly the same way; it repeats itself but on a higher plane. The general consciousness of the masses in any society is neither static nor eternal. It is in a state of constant change, flux and motion. Betrayals and defeats push it back but with the new resurgence of the class struggle, it rises to new heights.

However, the temperament and moods of different classes in society can vary according to the conditions and the epoch through which it is passing. In general terms, the social psychology of the middle classes or the petit bourgeoisie is empirical and suffers from bouts of impatience. This, in times of crisis, puts it in a state of permanent insecurity, discontent and unrest, swinging from one extreme to the other — trying to ape the bourgeoisie in ordinary times and jumping into the proletarian bandwagon in revolutionary situations.

The toiling classes can endure hardships for long periods of time. There can be decades of lull and yet the masses can explode into volcanic eruptions overnight that change the course of history through revolutionary insurrections. Such periods are historical exceptions. Most bourgeois experts and intellectuals cannot contemplate these tremors in advance as they are mentally blocked from doing so by their philosophy of logical positivism and methods of so-called pragmatism.

At the present moment in time, apart from sporadic struggles, Pakistan is passing through a period of relative inertia as far as the mass movement is concerned, yet society is immersed in a terrible social and economic crisis that is pulverising it. This contradictory state of affairs gives rise to a political vacuum with no visible force on the horizon that can present an economic and political way out of this misery and distress. However, nature abhors a vacuum. Hence we see peculiar phenomena that arise to fill this vacuum with rhetoric that touches upon the burning problems but has no real solutions to avert the impending catastrophe. The ostentatious nature of the petit bourgeoisie or the so-called civil society makes them feverishly attracted to these ‘liberators’. As a class it is the petit bourgeoisie that provides the social base for religious fundamentalism, vulgar liberalism, national chauvinism and other metaphysical and sentimentalist tendencies in periods of social stagnation. The latest episode of this series of petit bourgeois binges is the ‘rise’ of Imran Khan.

He has been hyped up by the media and sections of the ruling oligarchy and the state as a substitute in a situation where yet another attempt by the ruling elite to attack the working classes through a democratic façade is being foisted upon society. The failure of direct military rule and the disarray of the cohesion of the army make it arduous to re-impose itself overtly. These weary and weak attempts to salvage a redundant system show the pathetic state of Pakistan’s ruling strategists.

Looking at the democratic political circus in Pakistan one is reminded of the celebrated words of the 18th century British conservative politician Edmund Burke: “The tribe of vulgar politicians are the lowest of our species. There is no trade so vile and mechanical as the government in their hands. Virtue is not their habit. They are out of themselves in any course of conduct recommended only by conscience and glory. The calculators compute them out of their senses. The jesters and buffoons shame them out of everything grand and elevated. Littleness is the object and in means, to them appears soundness and sobriety.”

Imran Khan is no Oedipus in this crime infested politics of a rotten state and system. His odd admixture of Islamic crusades, western liberalism and a redundant nationalism can only add to the prevailing political confusion. The ideology of Pakistani national chauvinism he propagates withered away in the paddy fields of East Bengal drenched in blood 40 years ago. The justice he vows to impart is unaffordable in market economics. The corruption he decries is not the cause of the crisis but the need and product of debilitated capitalism. Black money and corruption run the economic cycle that is prodding the country. The British parliamentary system he espouses is still a monarchy and increasingly facing revulsion by the British masses. The pan-Islamism he idealises is in contradiction with the Pakistani nation state that he harps upon. The American police system he wants to impose has bred more crime than anywhere in the advanced world. The US he wants to befriend on an “equal basis” will not stop leeching off Pakistan as long as capitalism exists here.

He is playing the part of a right wing populist trying to console a beleaguered people with the rhetoric of reforms that the system has no room for. The Baloch and other oppressed nationalities he wants to negotiate and patch up a deal with have since long rejected the Two-Nation Theory that Imran Khan is trying to resurrect as its new messiah. He may be the establishment’s black horse, but who can be in this ring without the blessings of the hierarchy of the state?

The Chinese alternative of time-tested friendship is a hoax. When have they ever made a policy not coherent with their interests? China is today the biggest exporter of capital. And capital is invested to extract profit, not to be eulogised. The workers’ rights he talks about can only be slashed in the present day capital intensive investments, if any. Revolutionary parties and leaders are not built by media ‘exposure’ and pampering, but conversely revolutionary victories are snatched from the jaws of the hostile and belligerent media by rousing the masses against it.

Imran Khan’s politics is based on class collaborationism and trickle down economics. So where is the difference from the other jokers in this political pack? What real change can he deliver? There is none. With the existence of this sick capitalism, misery, poverty, violence and deprivation will only worsen. But the most insidious aspect of the crowd around Khan is that as in the lawyers’ movement, ideological differentiation is being scorned. The ideological divide between the Left and the Right is not a theoretical synopsis. It stems from the nature of the class divisions in society and the struggle for the labour surplus that is in the last analysis a struggle of life and death. As long as class exploitation exists, the ideological fight will continue to rage on. It is a line drawn in the blood of the generations of the toilers. Imran Khan is rousing the petit bourgeoisie with passions sans truth. Once a mass movement erupts again, no deception will suffice. The class war will have to be fought to the finish.

The writer is the editor of Asian Marxist Review and International Secretary of Pakistan Trade Union Defence Campaign. He can be reached at ptudc@hotmail.com