Daily Times

I confess that recently, I have been curious about what is referred to as ‘Janu German Syndrome’. I now understand that it is not a disease, but something much worse. It is our national habit of optional amnesia (forgetfulness) about painful realities. It is also about having a fake exterior. Rather than help when people are broken on the inside, our society rubs happiness in their faces to feign perfect lives.

According to Amir Mateen, one suffers from this syndrome when one is imprisoned in a gridlock of lies while trying to buy a fake narrative. One pretends to be virtuous while concealing their real character with respect to moral beliefs and leads a double life; being wicked and good at the same time. In this, people are not supposed to judge themselves the way they judge others. If you are opinionated, you are upright; but when someone else takes a stand, he is a rat. Others should be stoned for their sins but yours were honest mistakes. Also, you never admit to wrongdoing, except by accident.

This all started back in 1947, with fake identities and fake claims. To those who did not or could not benefit from these ‘initiatives’, poverty was sold as a character flaw. This was followed by waves of ‘reforms’ including “Basic Democracies”, “Nizam-e-Mustafa” and “Enlightened Moderation”, which were pretences and shams of the worst kind. Each ‘reform’ was for the overthrow of the existing order by tricking others into following a hidden agenda in the garb of justice, democracy or Islam. As a result, governance became a malady that robs the poor, feeds the affluent and destroys hope.

The concept of dishonesty, from a legal perspective, is based on a cost-benefit analysis. Therefore, we do not choose dishonesty if its cost is too high

In an Orwellian notion, the most effective way to destroy people is to obliterate their understanding of their own history. Sadly, our civilian and military establishments have done this quite well. As a result, most of this country’s governments were very successful, and Pakistan has been victorious in all its military misadventures. Meanwhile, justice has been denied to all who have suffered as a consequence of the civilian and military establishment’s sins. We also have the dubious honour of abandoning those who have stood by us, such as the Biharis of East Pakistan. Meanwhile, the top jobs in both institutions kept mushrooming with more and more perks. There was a huge commotion once, when someone in their ranks refused an honour/medal. Everyone was relieved to discover later that he had already gotten one.

Fish starts rotting from the head. Our top leaders need self-reflection as to what kind of legacy they are passing on to the next generation, which is quite keen to rule. What can be said about Maryum? Who has suddenly inherited a global property empire out of nowhere and is reportedly submitting forged documents to the courts without any remorse? Here, I am reminded of the maxim, “Diapers and politicians should be changed often. Both for the same reasons.”

All of us struggle with moral dilemmas. We are all united by the pressure to do the right thing when we are tempted to take the easy way out. We do not become Janu Germans by being dishonest once or twice, but by swearing that one should never be dishonest. Those at the top of the tree are an exception. Nawaz Sharif and company keep bamboozling us with their media talks outside the court. They are supposed to answer questions about their ownership of London properties but they keep saying instead that others cannot answer their questions about this ownership.  Similarly, I once asked the most powerful bureaucrat in the land about this moral dilemma. He conceded that he was unsure as to when he was who he was or the last time he gave a straight answer to anyone including his family and friends. Under the pressure of emotional convulsions and commissioned facts in their daily grind, they forget to look in the mirror where they could meet the person who betrays them the most.

It is said that the cure for corruption is more transparency. The concept of dishonesty, from a legal perspective, is based on a cost-benefit analysis. Therefore, we do not choose dishonesty if its cost is too high. The problem is that increasingly, money is managed through paperwork, credit cards or online. This psychological distance leads people to being able to behave immorally, without feeling any guilt. We, therefore, need to put safeguards in the system which highlight any transgressions. For example, having people put their signature at the top rather than the bottom of financial or legal documents. In this way, they verify that the information they are providing is true before they have a chance to fudge it …by using a suitable font.

The writer is a Consultant Psychiatrist and Visiting Professor. He tweets @AamerSarfarz

Published in Daily Times, April 7^th 2018.