THE EASY WAY OUT

 https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/10/18/the-easy-way-out/

• How to sell dumb ideas

The downside of democracy is that ‘the public’ is not prone to checking what it hears, and those elected to lead the public understand this only too well. What’s more, they use it. This is called manipulation, and those elected people are politicians, and their manipulation generally takes the form of slogans. Politicians are past master at sloganeering. It’s the nature of the beast.

Take Boris Johnson for example when in 2016 Britain was debating EU, in our out. Mr. Johnson of course was campaigning for out and he needed support. He knew full well which buttons to push.

“What I certainly cannot imagine is a situation in which 77 million Turks, and those of Turkish origin can come here without any checks at all,” said Mr. Johnson. “That is really mad.”

Said the man who while being English is himself a great grandson of a Turkish Muslim, and otherwise descended from Russian Jewish/Lithuanian Jewish, Swiss German, French, Irish, Dutch, Belgian, and American ancestors. You could call him a one-man crowd of immigrants who stormed the country without any checks at all, and took over. Mr. Johnson’s English side knew well that a reference to a horde of Turks pouring into the country would translate into a graphic image of a Mongol invasion, and he knew how it would sit with the bulk of the British population which like the bulk of populations anywhere reads little beyond the London Underground guides.

After all why not millions of Spaniards, or Italians, or Hungarians? But that would not have had quite that impact, would it. It had to be Turks and Turks it was.

The people of Israel have managed to elbow away the people who lived in what is now Israel and establish a homeland for themselves. The country is now a fact of life. It is here to stay. It has the backing of powerful nations. Yet ‘Jewish Survival’ remains a rallying cry and their elected leader uses the term freely: when he wants to re-stoke the fires against Arabs and Palestinians he invokes memories of old sufferings. Very much as the spectre of India is used in Pakistan. ‘Jewish Survival’ is a leftover from when the Jews wandered the desert in search of a homeland, and were centuries later horrifically persecuted by a monster with an idiotic moustache.  Those times are over but the fear remains in the hearts of people.

And then out there across the pond in the erstwhile democracy is the man who once said “I’m the least racist person you have ever interviewed” sometime after questioning why the US let people from ‘shithole’ countries enter the United States. He was referring to Haiti, El Salvador and an assortment of African nations at a closed-door meeting with congressional leaders and Cabinet members in 2018.  This is the same man who has fed himself obese on the ‘American Dream’ which he has re-defined to suit himself.

“We’re going to make the country great again,” has been his rallying cry for whatever atrocity he wished to commit, the Mexican wall, little children separated from their mothers, for attacking affordable health care for the people. And it worked. The racism which once simmered beneath the surface but had not been given the stamp of approval has come out guns blazing, crying to make the country white ‘again’. As it once was, you understand. We heard about the Indigenous man who was told to ‘go back where he came from’ so he pitched his tent in his taunter’s front yard.

On home ground then, and here we have the corona relief Tiger Force (rowwrrr), something like another army without the discipline, or a police force without the training. This yet another group is composed of men and women between the ages of eighteen and forty. They are supposed to have their own transport, no police record, be medically fit and dedicated to ‘serving the nation’ (slogan alert). They’re volunteers, but in these times of covid when every paisa should go into supporting the people who have been struck cruelly because of it and are at a loss for making ends meet, there is a special fund to support these by now hundreds of thousands of Tigers across the country. And what they’re supposed to do is hand out food packages, report any breach of SOPs, or issues identified in markets, educational institutions, public places, police stations, land record authorities, and local courts. They are also supposed to keep an eye on the prices of essential food and health items, in other words to monitor food prices and inflation. This is an incredible workload for a massive group of persons with no training or legal sanction.

You wonder what other slogan was used in an attempt to validate this our PM’s latest spark of genius. Well, that would be contained in Mr. Khan’s twitter post – the new political disjointed pontification that has taken over from verbal irrational statements – which says that he wants our youth to do jihad against the suffering caused by this pandemic. There it is, that magic word ‘jihad’ that brings up images of sword wielding Ertegruls driving back shrieking covid attackers.

Raise your hands all those who are sick and tired of religion and Arabic words being used to manipulate minds?

Not many hands. That’s why it works.

Do we honestly need another messy group of persons unable to do their job? Or do we need a dedicated group of persons capable of doing what they need to, but who lack the funds and the necessary support.

All the Tiger Force has managed to achieve for now is to attend a meeting in Attock where they violated all social distancing and safety measures themselves, all 17,000 of them at that one event. There they created uproar because their local chapter’s president was not invited. In the end Mr. Zulfi Bukhari who was to speak at the event had to give up and the affair ended in shambles. What is such a bunch of people going to achieve?

Why is it that politicians almost always try to take the easy but hugely detrimental way out?

ROLE MODELS OF A FREE SOCIETY

 https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/10/11/the-role-models-of-a-free-society/

Howard Zinn, the historian, socialist and great thinker died ten years ago. He described himself as ‘a bit of an anarchist, something of a socialist, and perhaps a democratic socialist.’ Themes in his writings were mainly the Civil Rights Movement, the anti-war movement and the labour history of the USA.

Among Howard Zinn’s most read books is A People’s History of the United States which in that country is something of an icon. It has sold more than 2,000,000 copies.

Zinn stressed that teachers must be honest with children, regardless of the child’s age, and he was honest. His viewpoint was not common in his lifetime. Even today when society likes to think of itself as more politically correct, possessing a greater social conscience, the view presented to the people in most countries is geared to make them proud of what they did, historically, whereas in reality that may not always be right.

Zinn looked at the American Constitution from the standpoint of the slaves, and whether historically it protected their rights. It did not.

Andrew Jackson was the seventh President of the USA, from 1829. Textbooks speak of him as “a man of the people” but Zinn saw him from the viewpoint of the Cherokees, who were the people native to Georgia, and spoke of him as a ‘a land speculator, a merchant, slave trader, and the most aggressive enemy of the Indians in early American history.’ In his book he presented Jackson as a man who exploited native land mercilessly and was responsible for a great deal of death and destruction.

Predictably, Donald Trump calls A People’s History of the United States a ‘propaganda tract,’ and ‘a book that tries to make students ashamed of their history.’

Well if the facts are shameful, then so be it. Being aware of a mistake is the only positive side of making one, because knowing what went wrong can prevent it from happening again, and US society has proved itself to be far from free and democratic. But this is speaking not of just US history, but of the history of any country. Do we in Pakistan know anything about what happened in 1971, if this generation has even heard that something happened then? Should we be proud of what took place then? Are we allowed to talk about it?

Zinn understood a young person’s need for icons and role models, and encouraged them to study their heroes, those currently held up as icons and role models. He wanted them to think outside the box and work out whether or not those icons deserve to be on a pedestal.

Unless we do this, our world, everyone’s world will never change. It will go on as it is, at the mercy of war and those who make coin from it. There will always be hunger, disease, racism, sexism dominating our lives.

Instead of Christopher Columbus and other imperialists, Zinn suggested other role models: Mark Twain who worked against the Spanish American war, Helen Keller whose achievements were not just for those deprived of vision; she was a pacifist, a staunch supporter of women’s suffrage, labour rights and socialism. Zinn suggested Muhammad Ali, the boxer whose greatest fights were outside the ring he was king of: his support of black rights, his insistence on personal identity, and his refusal to fight in the Vietnam War.

Zinn’s view is that a past to be proud is defined by dissidents, and by exponents of peace whose goal is the uplift of the masses, not by those who wage war. If that is so, who should our heroes be? The men in brass or people like Abdus Salam, the great Pakistan physicist and Nobel prize winner, hounded out of the country for his religion. Faiz Ahmad Faiz, the poet who wrote with magic words, a man who spent time in prison for his leftist views. Asma Jehangir, who founded Pakistan’s first legal aid centre, a human rights activist and lawyer who worked on behalf of the poor and most defenseless. Her life was threatened, she was assaulted and also placed under house arrest for her protests when General Musharraf proclaimed a State of Emergency. There was Abdus Sattar Edhi whose services to the poor and needy can never be praised enough. He was opposed throughout his life by conservative religious groups for his work for all who needed help, regardless of their faith.

There was Akhtar Hameed Khan, whose model of community participation in development has been studied around the world. He set up the Orangi Pilot Project in Karachi, and earlier a similar project in Comilla in what is now Bangladesh. He was severely criticised here for his liberal views and was even charged with blasphemy. Parveen Rahman, his pupil and colleague, was similarly criticised and eventually shot dead.

Malala Yousafzai, an excellent role model for young people. She defied the Taliban when they imposed a ban on women’s education in Swat, and was shot because of it. She survived and went on to win a Nobel Prize and continues to work for women and children’s right to education.

And Ghamidi, the scholar of religion and the man who right wing scholars such as Mufti Muneeb ur Rehman love to hate for his rational understanding of Islam. Ghamidi has moved from Pakistan saying he would like to return when things change.

Last, but definitely not least, is Muhammad the man (peace be upon him) who belongs to all of us and can rightfully be claimed by the people of all and any country as their hero and role model. In discussing and understanding whom we are unfortunately as hampered as we are in our understanding of all of the above.

What all these figures share strikingly in common is a brush with violence, in the case of some such as Parveen Rahman and Malala, much more than a brush. They also share the fact that their work has led to the uplift of society, contributed to its knowledge, well-being and happiness. Their sufferings tell us a great deal about our flawed understanding of heroism and idols, greatly because of the curbs placed on our study of their contributions and personalities.

It is suffocating to live in an unventilated society. Minds function better in an open atmosphere, not to mention the fact that fewer people suffer. Pakistan has made many mistakes, but it also has a lot to be proud of, something that its people will discover if they are permitted to study and understand both.

DIVERSIONARY TACTICS?

 https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/10/03/diversionary-tactics/

At the 2020 Presidential Debate on September29th in Cleveland the President of the USA said about his adversary Joe Biden: “I don’t wear a mask like him. Every time you see him, he’s got a mask. He could be speaking 200 feet away, and he shows up with the biggest mask I’ve ever seen.”

At the time of writing this it is not known which way Mr Biden has tested for the corona virus, but the vice President Mike Pence who seems as averse to masks as the President has tested negative. On the other hand, the President and his wife Melania have tested positive for corona yesterday. It is now just a month prior to the elections. It’s an interesting scenario. Given that the President is male (men are at greater risk than women), is 74 years old and the fact that he is clinically (and visually) obese, the prognosis is a bit iffy for him, despite the fact that as POTUS he has the best healthcare in the world.

It is unclear what is to happen now. While Mr Trump is still President, Mike Pence obviously takes over his job and is the acting President until Mr Trump returns to the Oval Office. But should Mr Trump fail to return will Mike Pence take his place in the elections? Does the Republican nomination devolve upon him by default?

Apparently it does. Which means that whether or not Mr Trump survives (and one wishes no one ill), the debates and the elections are likely to go on as planned. The scenario does not have a precedent.

You wonder how a change in candidates will be received.

Mr Trump may have wide support within the country, but support for the Democrats is larger at present, although the way the US elections are with the electoral college system, it does not necessarily indicate a win for Joe Biden. Still, Mr Trump is one of those persons who generate a strong reaction. Following the first debate reaction was not complimentary to either candidate. Mr Trump’s constant interruptions while the other person spoke and Biden’s subsequent frustrated response led to a chaotic shouting match, something that can hardly be called a debate.

According to Wikipedia on the subject:

CNN called it a mess, a fire inside a dumpster and a train wreck. They also called it a ‘disgrace” and a “shitshow” and the worst Presidential debate.

ABC compared the debate to ‘mud-wrestling’ and called it the worst presidential debate ever. They also said that Mr Trump “came across as a bully.”

Fox criticised Mr Trump for not condemning the white supremacist, all male neo-Nazi group the ‘Proud Boys.”

Others have called it a disgrace and an uncivilized and disorderly discussion, and the lowest point in American Democracy.

So, will Pence be seen as a welcome replacement for Mr Trump should the need arise?

You can’t help thinking of something: given the dreadful reception that the ‘debate’ received, was the Covid-19 test engineered? Because really, something like this appeared on the cards ever since The New York Times disclosed the details of ten years of Mr Trump’s tax returns.

That report came out a bit more than a month before the elections and was basically a revelation of years of tax avoidance by the man who loves to boast of his success as a businessman, the man who now holds the highest elected office in the country. Many people felt that a diversion would be created that would take the focus off that report and ease the pressure on Mr Trump and his modus operandi. And that diversion had to arrive soon because the elections were looming and– well here it is.

The Chicago Tribune reported some years ago that Mr Trump is a master at diversionary tactics, something that is surely common knowledge by now. It reports that:  ‘Apart from starting the Obamacare rollback and withdrawing from the TTP, he (Trump) has frozen a reduction of mortgage insurance premiums, allowed the Keystone pipeline to go ahead and is prepared to sign an executive order to begin construction of a border wall.’‘

It reports that he knew that these actions would (and should) cause indignation and protest, so he tweeted– as he does, that ‘I will be asking for a major investigation into voter fraud, including those registered to vote in two states, those who are illegal and even those registered to vote who are dead.’

He got what he wanted. The Chicago Tribune reports that the public hared off after that story ‘with news about the border wall coming a distant second.’

So, the positive test. Everyone goes haywire talking about him not wearing a mask and see what happens? Versus someone else did wear a mask and still got it. Meantime seeing that Mr Trump’s debating skills are somewhat flawed. A positive test means that Mr Pence who probably has a better hold on himself takes over the debates and puts up a better show. Probably. Most people would. And then the baton goes back to Mr Trump, who seems certain that he will recover. Remember the tax evasion anyone?

All this however is just conjecture. Let’s wait for the elections to see what really happens. May God have mercy on His people.

SHE WHO MUST NOT BE NAMED?

 https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/09/26/she-who-must-not-be-named/

According to an Afghan Taliban spokesman in an interview with Reuters, “Mentioning the names of mothers, wives, sisters and daughters is not culturally tolerable in our society,” he said, claiming that from a religious point of view, taking the name of a woman is prohibited.

The context of this curious statement was the question of having a space for a person’s mother on a national identity card, an idea that the Taliban clearly do not approve of.

Which religion is the above spokesperson speaking of? There is no such prohibition in Islam. In a real Islamic society every member is expected to respect other members, women in particular, and the last time one checked respect did not translate to incarceration, or making a woman ‘she who must not be named.’ If that were so, among other problems we would have had a hard time speaking of the female family members of people we hold special in history and benefitting from them. Instead we refer to those women with reverence as Bibi Khadija, Bibi Ayesha and so on and learn from their achievements and character.

It is obvious that for ultra-orthodox persons, women are synonymous with sex  alone, and have no other role in life.

In Saudi Arabia which, like Pakistan, is one of the countries where a national ID card is compulsory, and which as a country is oddly enough considered by many to be the standard of correct Islamic conduct,  only those women who are widowed can register and update their children’s information in the family documents. Otherwise the law considers the father as head of family, and only a father can deal with such documentation as ID cards and birth certificates. It is only when the father dies that this authority devolves upon the mother. When some men fail to register or update their children’s information for a variety of reasons the mother cannot perform this duty. It is hardly a surprise then that in Saudi Arabia just three quarters of births are registered. It might well be the same in Pakistan.

Afghanistan is one of those countries where every Afghan adult over the age of 18 must possess and carry an  ID card, called a Tazkira, the usual small plastic card with identifying information including the owner’s name– even if it’s a women– and a surname.

Three years ago a young woman by the name of Laleh Osmani began her campaign to make a space for a mother’s name on these identity cards. It is this that the Taliban spokesperson above was referring to.

It has been a struggle for Osmani, and she had to face the usual threats and insults but this courageous young lady and her supporters came up with results. Just a few days ago an amendment was signed by the President of Afghanistan according to which it should be possible to allow the mother’s names on an identification card and the birth certificate, as well as the father’s. One can only hope the amendment is able to make it through the obstacle course.

You wonder why the fact of having a mother’s name on an identity card was so difficult to accept since if anyone is entitled to it, it should be the person who has definitely produced the child. If one thing is certain about a child’s lineage it is who his or her mother is, and this is not an attempt at facetiousness, it is a simple biological fact. It is of course not necessary to have either parent’s name on the card.

Identity cards are not a must in all countries. They are not, for example, in the United States and Canada. Instead, everyone owns a birth certificate, which is issued by the State. The States report this information to the federal government for the purpose of statistics. The information sheds light on population changes, childbirth trends, parent trends as well as maternal and fetal health. The names and addresses of both parents are required on the form.

It is time that ultra-orthodox factions in society understood that life is more than the ‘s’ word. It is up to the education we all receive to help everyone understand this fact. The absence of such an understanding makes not just for embarrassment, but for suffering on the part of women and children and as a result of this of the whole of society. Women after all are not just the ones who bear but they raise children too. Women’s abilities, their minds and their well-being deserve care and respect in the interest of us all.

Laleh Osmani deserves respect for her efforts towards this goal.

IS THE DEATH PENALTY A SOLUTION?

 https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/09/19/is-the-death-penalty-a-solution/

• Capital punishment should not be an option in Pakistan

A just society is one in which citizens fully comprehend the result of committing an offence; in which citizens know that if they break the law they will be apprehended and punished. Yet crime happens.

In a place like Pakistan where committing an offence is almost unavoidable and it is easy to avoid apprehension and punishment, crime is rampant. Here not only do real offenders escape being caught and punished, those who do get caught and punished are often innocent.

Fraud and forgery are strong industries in Pakistan, and bribery and misrepresentation a daily occurrence in almost everyone’s life. Fake documents (think driver’s licenses, for example) are nearly more common than genuine. An AFP report says that the system in Pakistan allows people with money or power to rise above the law. And that is scary. One of the basic tenets of the law is that no one should be above it. When segments of society are above the law, law enforcement and justice cannot function. In this scenario innocents suffer and criminals live the good life.

Following the recent dreadful case of the rape of the lady on the Lahore-Sialkot motorway– and in front of her small children, the country has seen strident calls for the rapists to be apprehended and punished as they definitely should be. What is debatable is whether capital punishment should apply. And what is very difficult to understand is the clamour in support of a public hanging and castration. Even the PM has added his voice, for what it’s worth, in support of the call for public hanging or chemical castration.

Whether or not capital punishment is effective is a moot point, and not under discussion here. The point of this column is to question whether capital punishment should be allowed in Pakistan, a country where people with influence are above the law, where officials are easily bribed, where false documentation and false testimony are rife. If a capital punishment is handed out despite this, and later found to be false, a dead person will not come back to life. His or her family members will have lived with the pain of wrongly losing a loved one and that stigma and suffering will never be lifted. This is not justice.

The same argument applies against castration.

The further call for the hanging to be public, to “Let everyone know what happens to those who commit such crimes” is impossible to understand. No one seems to make a move to make repercussions so explicit when each and every day innocents suffer and criminals go free. Why then this sudden baying for blood when in today’s age of newspapers and televisions, when even the poorest man possesses a cell phone and a TV, the public know well what happens without people being hung on their doorstep. Do the people of Pakistan need to witness the image and stink of such violence? Do they lack such images in their lives? Do they lack the tendency towards violence that they should witness more?

Should our children see such images? Should they grow up to accept such sights as part of their lives?

If there were any sort of guarantees that the men caught for committing such crimes are really guilty, that their conviction is not the result of revenge or wrongful arrest based on fake evidence then capital punishment is open to discussion, but public hanging never.

It is my conviction however that because there can be no such guarantee in Pakistan, the idea of capital punishment in this country should never be entertained. Based on very common precedent there is no guarantee whatsoever of the real criminal being caught, in fact a good chance of the opposite.

There are those who say that religion calls for this. That is not so. You can only hand out punishments when the conditions are such that the punishment is likely to be just, and there is little justice in this country.

Pakistani society is as much to blame for crime as the criminals, as are the governments who have failed to check corruption, and law enforcing authorities who have failed to check crime. In the particular case that took place on the motorway the police did not turn up when called. If there was a shortage of officers this should have been made clear to anyone using the motorway and alternative arrangements provided.

So if there is to be no capital punishment, what then?

We need a complete overhaul of law enforcement. Officials should know as much as any rapist that they will be held accountable for neglecting the security of the citizens of the country, accepting bribes and giving in to pressure.

It is the government’s job to ensure that pressure does not come to bear on those who enforce the law. It is most often government officers and the rich segment of society which provide such pressure, and get away with it every time.

Punishment is not the only deterrent. Attempts should also be made to change the conditions that encourage crime, to prevent crime from occurring. We need jobs, education and security in this country. And just as important we need to change the deeply entrenched attitude against women as a result of which it is considered acceptable to harass women, to commit crimes against them and to hold the victims themselves responsible. It is the attitude we saw reflected in the CCPO’s statement where he held the victim responsible for being raped. Such reprimands are not his job. His job is to ensure security and this he entirely failed to do.

The criminals must definitely be apprehended and punished. One has no sympathy for people who commit such crimes. But as we all expect in our own cases, there must be a proper investigation free from bribery, sloth or self-interest. The rapists must face time in jail.

To take a life and to cut off body parts is neither a solution nor a deterrent. Those who have the wherewithal still know that they can get away with rape, murder and fraud, and they are as much a part of this society as anyone else. Is one segment to be deterred and not the other?

In case of a false conviction, if the person is eventually pronounced innocent, at least he or she can still be freed, in many cases, and the shadow cast over his/her entire family can still be lifted, albeit after much suffering. A dead person cannot be brought back to life and whatever is lost cannot be replaced. Choose.

ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER 16,000 MOUTHS TO FEED

 https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/09/12/another-day-another-16000-mouths-to-feed/

A huge population is a threat to its components both individually and collectively, particularly if the size precedes prosperity; a poor country cannot feed or educate a large population, or provide any of the other conditions necessary for prosperity, because the needs of a large population are greater than its lucrative output. Rather like a city that floods after a downpour where you must first unclog the drains to enable the streets to dry, you must clear the way for a large population to sustain itself before it can become prosperous. And without prosperity there is corruption, crime and all the other factors that we see around us in Pakistan.

Pakistan has one of the fasting growing populations in the world– although it is outstripped by Afghanistan and some other countries. Pakistan’s population is estimated at 220.9 million according to the 2020 World Population Data Sheet released by the US Population Reference Bureau, and it is ‘growing rapidly, with an annual fertility rate of 3.6 children per couple.’ According to the same report, Pakistan has a growth rate of 3.6  percent. It points out that a population of this size doubles itself every 19 years.

Reducing the growth rate is not impossible. Other countries with larger populations have managed to reduce the growth rate, India being one of these  with a growth rate of 2.2 percent while Bangladesh stands at 2.3 percent after both countries made efforts to bring it down.

China with its massive population, has brought its growth rate down to 1.5 percent, but given the way it achieved this, it is perhaps not the best example.

In 1980 when the Chinese population was nearing the one billion mark the government announced its ‘one child policy’ which meant that it became against the law (except in certain cases such as where the first child was differently abled) to have more than one child per couple. Those violating the policy were sanctioned in various ways. To encourage compliance the government offered free contraception, as well as financial incentives, even preference in employment, for complying individuals. At times stronger measures were taken, such as forced sterilization and abortions. There was obviously a decline in the population rate as a result. In 2015 China announced that it was allowing families to have two children.

For obvious reasons such forcible measures are undesirable, and in any case they cannot be implemented in Pakistan where contraception faces a backlash. However some measures can be taken on board such as the free contraception and the financial incentives.

Pakistan has a family welfare programme with clinics throughout the country. Attempts are made to include less accessible regions by means of mobile vans. There are health workers who reach out to the public. The clinics include mother and child wellness programmes including childhood immunization and health checks, educational talks and assistance with contraception. But a survey reported that many women preferred attending private clinics where possible because private clinics were better equipped with seating and so on, and they the women were treated with more dignity there.

According to Dr Ansar Ali Khan, an advisor on the subject of reproductive health to the United Nations Population Fund Programme in Pakistan, “A combination of factors like non availability of services, baseless traditional beliefs and misconception play a big role” in this country.

He is not wrong. In the Punjab for example local culture frowns upon parents living with their daughters even when they attain old age.

Dr. Ali Khan adds that a sizeable part of the population “believes the use of artificial contraceptives for family planning is against nature and also against Islam.”

It is yet another example of a poor understanding of religion standing in the way of progress in this country. Pakistan needs to not just educate its people on such (and other matters) but also the mullahs, and to woo the latter onto their side as Afghanistan has apparently managed to do. The American National Broadcasting Company NBC reported a few years ago that in Afghanistan several mullahs endorsed contraceptives as a means of increasing the gap between births. Some even delivered the message during Friday prayers. The mullahs’ major concerns centered on safety and infertility. The report quoted the programme director of a British based family planning organisation in Kabul who said that thousands of religious leaders in Afghanistan had been trained on the subject.

The American National Public Radio quotes a cleric belonging to one of Lahore’s oldest religious seminaries as saying that ‘family planning is wrong and un-Islamic if practiced routinely.’ In support of his statement the cleric cited one of the most misunderstood passages in the Quran which enjoins us not to kill a child for reasons of poverty, because Allah takes it upon Himself to provide sustenance.  This injunction is commonly construed as saying that humans can go ahead and reproduce all they want because God provides, regardless.

The fact that God has also asked us to give our children a good, comfortable upbringing is in that case threatened, since almost 40 percent of the children in Pakistan under the age of five are underweight, and mother and child are both undernourished. None of the family is educated and nor does the poor man of Pakistan live in safe housing and neighbourhoods. And most of Pakistan consists of ‘the poor man.’

One of the reasons for the high birthrate in Pakistan is that infant mortality is so great here at 57.2 per 1000 live births. Couples therefore produce many children against the eventuality that only one or two will survive. In the process they often end up with more mouths than they can feed. The fact is that in the absence of pensions for much of the population, who is to look after an aged couple if not their child?

They also keep producing children until they have a son, given that sons are more important in this culture than daughters.

A doctor working for the family welfare programme in Pakistan suggests the importance of incentives given to parents to keep the birthrate down. A pension, as mentioned above is a good idea, something to keep an elderly couple off the street. It is also a good idea to provide free contraception and consultation to patients.

The doctor also suggests that family welfare programme workers should be given better incentives─ salaries, pensions and perks at a level with other government officials, along with better training.

There is little time to spend on pondering this issue. Every day brings with it an average of 16,918 live births, every hour 704.90. Each day lost increases the problem by as much as that.

God did say our destiny lies with Him. But he also gave us free will and a brain. Why not use the brain and the will and plan accordingly?

GETTING WHAT YOU FOSTER

 https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/09/06/getting-what-you-foster/

Well, the inevitable has happened: Dirilis (Ertugrul), the Turkish play dubbed into Urdu, an enthusiastic project of the Prime Minister, has taken viewers by storm in Pakistan. Now the usual army of desi gawkers and self-righteous blockheads have a brand new target, Ertugrul’s on-screen wife and Turkish actress Ezra Bilgic. The poor girl has been trolled endlessly about what she wears in real life until recently she lashed out and told the offenders to just stop following her, in other words, ‘shut up and get lost.’ Not that that will make any difference.

But for now, let’s ignore the pestering of women that is such an integral part of this society and talk about other aspects of the matter.

It isn’t clear whether people everywhere tend to confuse television shows with reality but they certainly do in Pakistan. That makes the blockbuster serial Ertugrul a great risk here- as has been warned earlier; but the powers that be are not known for their sense, or their will to do the right thing. Just as Bilgic’s trolls presume that her on-screen pious character should conform with her appearance off-screen, many viewers of the show are certain to expect that the Turkish war against ‘infidels’ that took place in the 13th century should carry on in the 21st. Which makes it extremely ominous that toys meticulously modelled upon the weapons used by Ertugrul and his people– swords, knives, daggers, axes, all stamped with the Kayi tribe symbol–  are now selling like hotcakes in Pakistan.

Does it matter if children are taught violence via their games?

Toys are not just cute little things that children spend their time bouncing up and down or talking to. They are crucial to the development of every child’s brain. This is why too much time spent playing with electronic toys is not a good thing because they adversely affect a child’s attention span, intelligence, and social and emotional development, although some electronic toys undoubtedly do foster intelligence. But there is little chance of pushing the genie back into the bottle now and electronic toys and games are here to stay, but parents can restrict their use to a small span of time each day.

Meantime there is also the much larger segment of society for whom electronic toys are just dreams. Of course the specific Ertugrul toys will also be beyond their reach, but should children generally be allowed to play with guns? Swords? Should they be allowed to play ‘kill, kill!’?

The best pastime for children are interesting games that  foster values we care for: creativity, inclusion, patience. Games and sports that promote skills, strengthen muscle coordination and team spirit, sportsmanship, and toys, simple ones, including basic things such as string, old boxes, tape, and so with which children can use their imagination to adapt, innovate, create, and build. Whatever children play with must promote that most important thing of all, peace. Older children must play with younger ones part of the time. It is up to parents to ensure that both employ courtesy, patience and kindness, that no one calls the other ‘stupid,’ or ‘mad’ or ‘langray’ or ‘motay’…the name calling that unfortunately takes place all the time. Even when used in ‘affection’ such names should be firmly disallowed. The aim must be to foster virtues we claim to possess but which are fast becoming a very rare commodity: the virtues of adab.

There are toys appropriate for each age, sound and movement for the very young, hand and eye coordination for the somewhat older, size, shape, push and pull and take apart things for children between the ages of one and two.

Then follows the pretend stage, dressing up, painting, all of that.

Never, ever should violence come into play except as something to be avoided, something to be employed as a very last resort in self-defense.

The problems we are having in this part of the world are all to do with violence and with those who are trained to employ force. Life appears to be imbued with it. In news today is the story of soldiers martyred and injured in North Waziristan as a result of an IED attack, of wars and violence everywhere.

It is an undeniable fact that, in Pakistan, authorities refuse to do their job unless they are forced to do so by means of violence, such as in Karachi where citizens are protesting DHA’s inaction following the rains, by threatening to resort to riots. Violence appears to be the catalyst to action, because that is what we grow up with. Even apart from the violence in games it is considered kosher for parents to threaten children with slaps, ‘meri jooti,’ a whipping or some other form of brute display of power.

Is there a way to raise a new generation along a calmer theme? If so then is it wise to encourage shows such as Ertugrul– gripping as it is– to be shown on national television? Or now that the damage is done is it time to realise the importance of toys that foster peace and creativity rather than bloodshed?