I saw the interview by the Pakistani journalist Moeed Pirzada of Mustafa Akyol, the Turkish writer and thinker and I agree with some of the things Mustafa said, e.g. that we should be respectful of other people’s religions, that we should have equality but not uniformity, and should oppose injustice to Muslims (or people of any religion) but also injustice by Muslims (or people of any religion) etc. Nevertheless, I believe that his basic views are totally superficial and inane. Let me explain.
Mustafa’s basic emphasis is on freedom and liberal democracy for progress.
Freedom Must Serve the People
What he overlooks is that freedom and liberal democracy cannot end in themselves. They can only be a means to an end, and that end must be raising the standard of living of the people and giving them better lives. If freedom and democracy help in obtaining that end, they are good things, but not otherwise.
What use is democracy and freedom to a man who is hungry and/or unemployed? He needs concrete things like food and a job, not abstract ideas.
In India (and Pakistan), there is massive and widespread poverty, unemployment, and child malnourishment (every second Indian and Pakistani child is malnourished according to Global Hunger Index).
Proper healthcare and good education are not available to the vast Indian and Pakistani masses. Prices of essential commodities like food etc. are skyrocketing.
Freedom of speech can no doubt help the people in their historical united struggle which they must wage for creating a new political order under which there is rapid industrialization and modernization and raising the standard of living of the people. However, it can also obstruct it.
For instance, speeches spreading hatred between castes and religions should certainly not be permitted, for they destroy unity of the people which is essential for us at this historical juncture.
Similarly, speeches or writings promoting unscientific superstitions like astrology should be banned.
The great Turkish leader Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who came to power in the 1920s by ousting the corrupt feudal-minded Sultan and Khalifa, did not give freedom to the Turkish people to choose whether they wanted to modernize or remain poor and backward. He (and his associates) forced them to modernize by abolishing sharia, burqa, madarsas and maulanas, and he permitted no political party to exist other than his own.
Read more:The Quest for Modernity in the Muslim World | Mustafa Akyol with Dr. Moeed Pirzada
Mustafa Akylol is critical of Mustafa Kemal because the latter used force. But I believe Mustafa Kemal was absolutely correct in using it, because no amount of persuasion would have made the Turks of that time to give up their feudal customs and practices, which were keeping Turkey poor and backward, and being kicked around by the imperialist powers, England and France (because of which Turkey was called ‘the sick man of Europe’ at that time). So, force was necessary.
So also, in India and Pakistan, too, people must be forcibly modernized, and for that a modern minded dictatorship is necessary. I may clarify here that there are two types of dictatorships, one is the modern minded dictatorship like that of Mustafa Kemal who wanted to take Turkey forward into the modern age, and the other is the reactionary dictatorship like that of Gen Zia-ul-Haq, who wanted to take Pakistan backward into the medieval age. I am referring only to the former.
Breaking Free from Feudal Traditions
We have a system of parliamentary democracy in India, but everyone knows it runs largely based on caste and communal vote banks. Casteism and communalism are feudal forces, which must be destroyed if India is to progress, but parliamentary democracy further entrenches and strengthens them (because it runs on their basis).
The people have therefore to use their creativity and find a suitable alternative, in which India rapidly industrializes and modernizes, under the leadership of patriotic, modern-minded secular leaders determined to rapidly industrialize the country, raise the standard of living of the people, and give them decent lives.
Freedom and liberal democracy must therefore not be treated as a fetish, or like holy cows or objects of worship, as Mustafa Akyol seeks to do.
Mustafa says that one reason why the Western countries have gone ahead of countries like Pakistan (and India) is because the former permit freedom. He forgets that different countries have different situations.
He says that to be successful we must respect existing traditions. But existing traditions in India include treating Dalits (the low castes) as inferior, and oppressing and discriminating against them and Muslims. Should that too be respected?
Mustafa opposes authoritarianism and is in favor of democracy. Now in theory and in the abstract, democracy sounds like a rosy, beautiful word, connoting rule by the people. But we must see how democracy is practiced in India, and not what it means in theory and in the abstract.
Everyone who has even a little idea of the working of democracy in India knows that it largely runs based on caste and religious vote banks. When 90% Indians vote in elections in India, they do not see the merit of the candidate but only his caste and religion (or the caste/religion his party claims to represent).
In the 2024 Indian parliamentary elections almost half the MPs elected were criminals, which means the voter does not see whether the candidate is a criminal or not, but only his caste and religion.
The Need for Modern Leadership
Mustafa says that people should be allowed to live and believe as they choose. This principle may be fine for Western countries, but it cannot be applied to India and Pakistan. In India 80% people are Hindus, and many of them hate Muslims, and are indifferent if Muslims are lynched or beaten for not saying ” Jai Shri Ram ”. Some may even approve of this to ‘keep Muslims in their place’.
Similarly, many Pakistanis approve of blasphemy laws and other means of oppressing and committing atrocities on Ahmadis, Shias, and the other minorities. So, should this continue, or should it be forcibly suppressed by the state?
Most people in both India and Pakistan have feudal mindsets. If freedom is given to them, they will use this freedom to oppress and commit atrocities against people of the minority religion, or of some caste other than their own. So, force must be used by the state to prevent this.
I regret that Mustafa Akylol is living in a world of make belief and La-la-land.
Markandey Katju is an Indian jurist and former Supreme Court judge of India who served as chairman for the Press Council of India. He has also worked as Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Global Village Space.
