A Tapestry of Troubling Questions

Disclosure: This piece was supposed to be an Email I could never write because despite being too blunt and having enough earned exclusions, aka cancellations, I need to maintain my apparent sanity and some money to maintain my kitchen. Therefore, I am writing an imaginary writeup. It is a work of fiction, and any semblance of reality shall be considered a coincidence.

 In the planners of the big players in the social development industry, the last two months of the calendar year are considered the season of conferences. There was a time when, as a young changemaker, I was very keen to participate in conferences nationally and internationally. I also had opportunities to organize some landmark conferences in Pakistan, such as the first-ever youth conference based on the theme of Human Development and one against dowry violence, advocating for legislation against it.

The prevailing classism in feminist circles, juxtaposed with biases of other origins, drifted me away from the conference landscape. To feel alive amidst the deceptions of all forms, I motivated myself to attend some conferences until now. As expected, one meets older colleagues and friends and makes newer acquaintances. This is often referred to as networking. However, if you are not in any hot seat or position of benefit, many times, older contacts and newer faces give you a cold shoulder with equal fake warmth.

The conventional parameters of success, the loss of sincerity and merit, which contribute to moral vision personally and professionally, may require philosophical unpacking. Yet, with my limited understanding, I am sure that such factors impact technical areas like political economy, economics, debt, taxation, entrepreneurship, ease of doing business, and so forth.

While listening to the formal discussions and side meetings, it was interesting and ironic to note that many of our revered figures are not only failing to convey the meaning and interpretation of some commonly used words and phrases. The list of such issues is too long, but I am focusing on social development and feminism only.

Feminism, not to my surprise, is still maintaining its innate capability to provoke (not intellectually, sadly) even the bright and brilliant academics, besides the obvious bigots. There is no dearth of chauvinistic men as well as patriarchal women. The elite members of women’s rights are successfully maintaining their limelight. This cumulatively is effectively damaging the cause of emancipation of women who are largely trapped in the poverty of income, opportunities, and a hypocritical middle-class value system. The glass ceiling breakers seldom try to support other women who are intelligent and awakened dreamers.

Another ugly and unfortunate attribute of this terminology is its instant association with LGBTQI+ rather than social justice. Perhaps it is much more convenient and risk-free to malign and ‘murder’ someone helpless or a little vocal in the name of the former than to think critically about the state of social justice.

Social development is all about investing in people. Within this population, the larger proportion in Pakistan consists of young people, and within the youth category includes young girls and women who face overlapping and unique disadvantages. Therefore, it becomes necessary to examine specific age-related and gender identity-related discriminations before ridiculing those who raise such concerns. This is not about charity or asking for concessions. Equality and similarity are not synonymous. In the same stride, realizing that neither necessity-driven labor nor money and pedigree-based ventures qualify as entrepreneurship is important.

Now, I will attempt to pose some difficult questions. Who would verify the submissions in the aforementioned text? Who would go beyond rhetoric and take up the responsibilities of creating positive change based on merit in a country where only 7% of civil servants are appointed on merit, while the rest are selected through quotas that are not always fairly distributed? Who would dismantle the elite and patriarchal consensus? Who would call out the Conflict of Interest (COI)? The same people or classes who are responsible are sitting in parliaments, advisory boards, all hot seats, and power corridors. Hence, there will be no actual change, shift of power, change in attitudes, and rule of law. Those of us who, by the stroke of luck and hard work, are aware of the politics of human development would remain obstructed, dispirited, demoralized, and, perhaps one day, silently succumb or leave this homeland.

The writer is a free thinker.