Daily Times

The elitist mentality enshrined in the minds of the people of the subcontinent is a residue of the archaic monarchy and nawab systems prevalent in our history, wherein, the affluent condemn the poor and the weak from transcending across boundaries which they believed to be theirs and theirs alone. The privileged still seem to have the incorrect credence that they are the only ones to enjoy luxurious amenities, prestige, eat good food, sit on high chairs, speak well, and pursue politics and other mainstream professional careers. Thus, anyone not matching the cosmetic, scholastic or social standards set by the elite, is frowned upon.

In addition to this mammoth class divide, in the drama leading up to the 2018 General Elections, some voices have crept up requiring the state to disavow the right to vote of uneducated citizens, a majority of the population, mainly residing in the highly underdeveloped rural expanses of the country. Their focal points in deterring the government from giving the uneducated a right to vote, stem from the financial vulnerability of these masses and the assertion that their illiteracy paves way for irrationality and inability to comprehend policies and mandates of the parties/candidates.

Their concerns are not entirely farfetched. History beckons that the uneducated masses, especially the rural ones, have generally been exploited to satisfy the electoral ambitions of the feudalists, mainly prominent landowners and religious exploiters. Amongst others, the cast (zaat) / baradari (tribe/family) systems also pose a threat to the meritocratic voting, as cast and family ties are seen as greater causes to vote for a candidate, rather than their merit. A plate of food, article of clothing or petty remuneration is occasionally enough to buy a vote.

Their illiteracy and poverty are seldom their fault, it is the fault of the elite, who, since the inception of the country have been in power, be it political or financial, and have hardly made the effort to change the status quo in relation to educational deprivation of the poorer population. To deny and to deprive them of a right to support and bring into power, a candidate they think can alleviate their problems, only because the less affluent are unable to afford an education, is nothing short of villainy. If anything, its more of a reason to give them a right to vote, as it holds a much deeper meaning to the destitute, and could be their only weapon enabling them to properly propagate their problems. The focus rather needs to be on setting a criterion in order to gauge the credibility of a candidate contesting the elections.

Isn’t it the educated and the elite, who have overtly used the poverty-stricken masses for their ulterior motives, sometimes children, to better the luxury of their homes and other times underpaid, ill-treated labourers, for the pecuniary benefits of their businesses

The remaining argument relies on the assumption that because a particular person is uneducated, he/she does not have the rationality to understand mandates or policies. There is a phenomenon, more often than not in rural areas referred to as personality voting, wherein the mandate or policy given by a personality or candidate is taken into account, rather than the political parties they hail from. This primarily is a direct consequence and a show of rebellion by the rural masses, to the decades of overwhelming neglect by the parties who come into power.

A recent example of the abovementioned is the General Election contest in my underdeveloped, mostly uneducated, ancestral area Chishtian, Bahawalnagar, between InamulHaqBajwa (Muslim League-N) and Fatima Cheema, daughter of Tahir Bashir Cheema (PTI).

Although there was a general detestation towards the Muslim League-N, the people of the constituency voted to the devastating defeat of the PTI’s Candidate by some 50,000 votes. Only due to the fact that the candidate’s father, Mr Cheema, lastly MNA from Muslim League-N, is a tried and tested candidate, and because he held an iqama, was not given a party ticket but his daughter, wed and living in Faisalabad was afforded one. The people of Chishtian did not want to vote for a corrupt, dynastic, professional politician and did not want Chishtian to become a colony of Faisalabad.

This example reiterates that the illiteracy and poverty of the people should not be mistaken for a lack of political acumen, as the people of Chishtian although mostly uneducated, weighed the credentials of the candidates, the mandates of the parties, and chose that the battle of the personalities in this area were more intrinsic than the battle of the parties. If this isn’t political acumen, what is?

Same goes for the argument that the votes of the needy and uneducated are easily sold. If the electoral procedures are properly conducted, and casting of votes is carried out in a monitored and confidential environment, the provisioning of food, clothing and a few rupees will not have the effect envisaged by the aspirants, as the impoverished will eat their plates of food and vote for whom they desire.

Another assumption sweepingly accepts that given the entirety of the voting rights, the educated people will make all the right decisions and the right decisions only. Isn’t It the educated and the elite, who have overtly used the poverty-stricken masses for their ulterior motives, sometimes children to better the luxury of their homes and other times underpaid, ill-treated labourers, for the pecuniary benefits of their businesses. Basically, they want to give the reigns of the poor into the hands of the affluent, who have a history of exploitation towards the needy. However, now they will not only use the power of their wealth and education but also the organs of state to legally, politically and coercively exploit the destitute. If this happens, capitalism and consumerism will rule, welfare will be extinct, agrarian and labour policies will be made by men who have never felt soil on their hands.

In a time when the majority of the rural and uneducated population is struggling to make ends meet due to a lack of infrastructure, an outrageously meagre literacy rate, disheartening the attention of the state, spiralling input costs, soaring inflation rates, insignificant employment opportunities, crippling power outages and gut-wrenching poverty, it will be an insult to injury, depriving them of the only right that gives them a voice. Education in general and education regarding the right to vote in particular, is essential for democracy to be an effective form of governance in third world countries such as Pakistan. Having said that, the notion that the uneducated do not deserve to vote is nothing but an ill-informed, arrogant and elitist statement thrown around by powerful men, sitting in leather thrones, stuffing their inners with the flesh of the weak.

The writer is an advocate of the High Court

Published in Daily Times, October 2^nd, 2018.