A society robbed of political agency does not collapse overnight; it erodes under the weight of systemic manipulation. When a nation’s political landscape is overtaken for decades, the consequences are far-reaching. Pakistan’s political landscape has been shaped by repeated military interventions, from Ayub Khan controlled democracy to Zia-ul-Haq Islamization and Musharraf engineered political order. The systematic dismantling of political institutions, student unions, and independent media has ensured that political engagement remains confined to state-approved boundaries. Over the decades, civilian governments have functioned under the shadow of unelected power structures, weakening democratic norms and reinforcing a culture of silence.
Political awareness and active participation strengthen democracy, promote social cohesion, and foster a culture of civic responsibility. However, Pakistan’s entrenched security-state syndrome has distorted the path of enlightenment and awareness, ensuring that the status quo remains unchallenged. A stark reflection of this is the recent Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Act 2025 (PECA), designed to curtail the constitutional right to freedom of speech and silence civil liberties. As a result, Pakistan has been placed on the Civicus Monitor’s human rights watchlist for 2025 due to shrinking civic space, the arbitrary torture and targeting of human rights activists, and the crackdown on journalists under draconian laws. This systemic depoliticization has a long history, having led to past debacles, insurgencies, and separatist movements. If the elitist nature of the state remains unchanged, it will inevitably further fracture the social contract and fuel radicalism.
The deliberate depoliticization of society is not a natural phenomenon but a well-calculated strategy by authoritarian structures to morph political consciousness. Renowned political theorist Antonio Gramsci, in his concept of cultural hegemony, argues that ruling elites maintain control not just through coercion but by shaping ideologies that make their dominance seem natural and inevitable. In Pakistan, this has manifested through a controlled media landscape, engineered electoral processes, and the strategic dismantling of student unions and grassroots political movements.
Pakistan’s entrenched security-state syndrome has distorted the path of enlightenment and awareness, ensuring that the status quo remains unchallenged.
Historically, states that suppress political participation in the name of stability ultimately breed deeper instability. Political scientist Samuel P. Huntington, in Political Order in Changing Societies, warns that restricting political mobilization without providing legitimate institutional avenues for participation breeds frustration, which can manifest in violent outbursts and extremist tendencies. Pakistan’s own history echoes this: from the alienation of East Pakistan in 1971 to the ongoing insurgencies in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the suppression of political agency has only deepened discontent.
Michel Foucault’s concept of “governmentality” explains how power structures do not merely impose control through force but shape discourse and knowledge to sustain their dominance-turning education into an instrument of ideological reinforcement rather than enlightenment.
The toxic legacy of Zia-ul-Haq’s Islamization continues to circulate through the nation’s bloodstream, shaping mainstream discourses and reinforcing ideological conformity over critical engagement. State-engineered religiosity has not only marginalized progressive thought but also deepened societal divisions, ensuring that the public sphere remains dominated by emotion rather than reasoned debate. Hannah Arendt’s warning in The Origins of Totalitarianism about the dangers of manufactured ideo logical conformity resonates here: when dissent is systematically eroded, a society becomes susceptible to authoritarian control disguised as moral or nationalistic duty. This systemic engineering of depoliticization has turned intellectual spaces into echo chambers of state-approved narratives, where deviation from the prescribed ideology is met with suppression rather than discourse. The result is a polity stripped of its ability to challenge entrenched power structures, rendering democratic participation an illusion rather than a lived reality.
Throughout Pakistan’s history, the state has strategically used religion as a tool of control and manipulation, shaping national narratives to serve its interests. In the 1980s, under Zia-ul-Haq’s Islamization, religious ideology was not just promoted but weaponized, creating a generation indoctrinated with state-sanctioned religious dogma to suppress dissent and justify authoritarian rule. This pattern continued in the post-9/11 era, where the War on Terror was selectively fought-while militant proxies remained instruments of foreign policy, enforced disappearances and crackdowns targeted political dissidents under the guise of counterterrorism.
No state can indefinitely sustain itself on coerced loyalty. Political awareness and participation are not threats to national stability but the foundation of a resilient and inclusive state. Reclaiming political consciousness is not just necessary-it is inevitable. While silencing dissent, controlling the political landscape, and criminalizing free speech may provide short-term stability, history proves that such tactics ultimately breed long-term instability.
The writer is a freelance columnist. He can be reached at zakiir9669@gmail.com