Hussain H Zaidi
In history, three thinkers have done more than any other to shock the world. The first was 16th-century astronomer Copernicus, who refuted the centuries-old geocentric view of the universe. Copernicus showed that contrary to the popular view, Earth was not in the centre of the world but, like other planets, it revolved around the sun. Called the heliocentric view, it stripped mankind of the fallacious belief that their abode, Earth, occupied a special place in the solar system.
The second thinker to stun the world was 19th-century English biologist Charles Darwin who argued, backed by solid evidence, that humans were not special creatures and that like other species had evolved from unicellular organisms.
Then in the 20th century, Austrian psychologist Sigmund Freud conclusively challenged the view that the human mind is the master of its house. Instead, Freud expounded, that our apparently conscious or deliberate acts spring from deep, dark unconscious drives and impulses on which we’ve little control. If Darwin showed that man/human is an animal, Freud exploded the notion that s/he is rational. Shocking! Isn’t it?
Yes shocking, but largely to the mark. Generally, we don’t like a thing because it’s good or right. Instead, we regard it as good or right, because we like it or are likely to benefit from it. Likewise, it isn’t that most of the time we make decisions or hand out verdicts on the basis of rational and objective thinking or solid arguments.
Instead, we first decide a course of action and then come up with all the reasons in the world to justify our decision. What appears to be a well-thought-out action is at best the tip of the iceberg. People are more likely to be swayed by powerful emotions – love, hate, fear, avarice – than convinced by valid arguments. This applies to both the person in the street and the people holding high and prestigious positions.
Two simple manifestations of men and women being liable to be taken away by impulses and emotions are persuasive advertising and brand loyalty. Big businesses spend a big chunk of their budget in trying to convince the consumer that they can do without their products only at their own peril. That’s why it’s said that it isn’t the product but the brand that’s profitably sold in the market and that an established name carries far greater weight than good work or performance. In Tinsel Town, for example, producers are more likely to put their money on a star than on a newcomer, for the reason that the star power can pull the viewers in droves like nothing else.
From business, we come to politics, where irrationalism has been a powerful, often decisive, factor in making or breaking a movement. Around the time Freud was unraveling the potency of the infra-conscious in shaping behaviour and making decisions, fascism arose first in Italy and shortly afterward in Germany. In essence, fascism is a celebration of the triumph of irrationalism: of will over the intellect, of the creative over the critical, of intuition over logic, of the visionary over the systematic, of propaganda over the truth, of myths over the facts, and above all, of the cult of the supreme leader over laws, rules, procedures, and such other bureaucratic ‘nonsense.’
Instead of appealing to an ideology or a programme, fascists appeal to shared sentiments, such as hatred and fear. The German and Italian fascists described discord as the driving force of history, the engine of social change, and the driver of politics, which culminates in the rise of the cult leader. Conflict is undergirded by irreconcilable forces in which one side either decimates the other or gets decimated. There’s no middle ground.
The prime political virtue for the people is not freedom but loyalty; the principal qualification for the leader is not common sense but charisma; the core competence of a political party is not performance but the ability to play off one section of society against the rest. Debates and arguments are only wit and gossip. Perception is more important than reality; media management is more important than setting things right; and perspectives are more important than facts.
Once in office, both Hitler and his Italian counterpart Mussolini put in place a totalitarian regime, which ruled by decrees and controlled every aspect of the life of the citizens in the name of greater freedom. In the words of Mussolini, ‘Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.’
Carl Schmitt, a member of Hitler’s Nazi Party, defined politics as the ability to mark off friends and enemies. Man, he said, is a political animal, because of the ‘eternal propensity’ of human beings to identify each other as enemies. Politics is the art of building and popularizing narratives by setting up the people’s enemies.
By its very character and coupled with the primordial propensities of human nature, the cult has tremendous emotional appeal. It can sweep millions off their feet in no time. Hitler, by his oratory, would mesmerize the audience. Had he wished, he would’ve made them cut their own throats. In politics, one of the mesmerizing notions begotten by irrationalists/cultists is that of a saviour, who by sheer will and strength of character is capable of rejuvenating a ‘decadent’ society.
In view of the vulnerability of human nature, as a rule, democracy takes root in only those polities where institutions take precedence over personalities and where the due process of law, despite being dull and snail-paced, puts the will of the cult leader in the shade.
In Pakistan, all conditions conducive to the rise of cult politics have existed: a sham democracy, political expediency trumping the rule of law as a matter of course, a long tradition of feudalism ennobling personal loyalty, the state’s indifference to the people’s plight, a culture of blind submission to the authority, lack of critical thinking even among the educated people, disenchantment of the middle class with the political system, demographically a predominantly young society, and infatuation of starry-eyed young men and women with sweeping changes.
It was such a milieu that midwifed the rise of Imran Khan, who created politics primarily by defining the peoples’ enemies: the corrupt elite, self-serving politicians, and rent-seeking businesspersons, with whom he ruled out compromise. The youth were enthralled by his potent anti-corruption, anti-elite, and later anti-America narrative hook, line and sinker. Here was a leader who seemed capable of lifting their fortune by waving a magic wand.
After his exit from power in April 2022, Khan has directed all his guns towards the powerful quarters, on whose coattails he rode to power, and who he’d praise to the skies day in and day out, while at the same time allegedly trying to work out a deal with them.
A singular feature of politics is that it divests the followers of the ability to think critically and thus observe even stark inconsistencies between the words and actions of the leadership. Hence, the leadership will always get away with embracing the people’s ‘enemies,’ provided they’re willing to reciprocate.
In a clash with reason, in at least nine out of ten cases, impulses win. Although it was the PTI government that had set the economy on the downhill, the economic meltdown has reinvigorated the party. Nor have the attempts to collar the party on ethical or legal grounds hit the bull’s eye. The only antidote to a powerful cult is its followers’ disenchantment with it. As long as they believe in it, no logic, no arguments and no laws can sap the strength out of it.Courtesy The News
