Ethics of discussions and social media

By Zafar Ahmad We Chitralis have been observed as the most political people in Pakistan. Everyone among us, even the most illiterate person pretends they are an analyst and, hence, is the most active person both politically as well as socially. We think as we know what politics and culture should be; therefore, we consider it necessary to dictate others about politics in general and culture in particular. Social media, nowadays, is a popular platform where we express our activism. With logging into social media, there come FB groups in which we express our concerns in the form of hot debates and discussions. Each of us actively participates in such discussions irrespective of whether or not we are having the core idea of the topic we are discussing. From the hot discussions one can take the false impression as if sooner or later the second phases of Russian and French revolutions are going to be started from Chitral. But wait; don’t be hasty in getting this impression. For that you need to have a look at the contents of such discussions. The topics discussed usually fall into two categories: Cultural and political. The cultural debates are mostly initiated by those who seem to be much worried about our culture and pretend as they are much worried about the invasion of Western culture on us. To save our cultural values ,they suggest various tactics which may not bother in discussing a person’s personal life, including the way one breathes, dresses, eats and drinks. The solutions start from condemning and may go as far as imposing what they define as cultural. To them culture is a kind of law and, hence, a compulsion rather than a choice. Most probably these vigilantes propagate the legacy of Zia – the virus which infected healthy minds empowering them to enforce what was perceived to be right from their perspectives. To such minds I say culture is not what you think it is. You can follow what you think is culture but don’t give yourself the authority to implement it on others. You people are aspiring for a role for which no one is qualified. In fact, there is no such qualification. How much you yourself follow this culture is another debate which I don’t need to mention. I just want to tell you ‘Love people or leave them’ but don’t dictate them. The second type of popular discussion is ‘politics’, which may start with spat but soon turns into ugly fights. The participants may hit each other’s political affiliations, which though fine lacks the logic of rational debates and is based on political rivalries as usual. Occasionally, the debates may get personal turning into bullying each other. Some participants may be seen frustrated as why did the MNA of APML supported the PMLN as they think they had voted him in the name of Musharraf irrespective of whether or not they had actually voted him. Moreover, they will never acknowledge the benefits they got due to the flexibility of the MNA towards the ruling party. Some others will raise voice to change the ‘status quo’ but the Che Guevaras of Chitral will also hesitate to admire the politics of PTI’s Abdul Latif who is totally a self-made person. Some others will accuse and drag the admins of the pages as if they were using their remote controls. To their logic, if the admins express their personal affiliations then they are using the page for promoting their own political interests and hence, must be condemned. In short, the paradoxes do not understand or follow the simple logic that to common masses deliverance should matter whether the status-quo delivers it or the self-made-man. What benefits will it bring to the public if the self-made-man fails to deliver? These will not bother to understand that all we need is performance and no one should take concern over it if the party changing of their representatives benefits them. Thus, crisis of ethics prevails on the social media especially on behalf of Chitralis. But, things were not used to be the same the way they are today. Some years ago there used to be logical discussions and the people avoid attacking each other personally. But gone are those days, perhaps, now every person has social media account. This no doubt is the right of every individual, however, this enabled every person to engage in discussion one is not qualified enough. The result is social media became more of a propaganda instead of a tool for social interactions. These discussion, though fall short to be called as discussions, however, reveal how frustrated we Chitralis are and expose the reality of our peacefulness. We usually are labeled as peaceful and we boast it as well. But this is not fully true as being not violent is not essentially being peaceful nor absence of violence is the same as peace. Though, lack of violence is a part of peace. In order to evaluate how much peaceful and civilized we are we need to conduct an introspection and our discussions on the social media, of course, gives us a clue how much we deserve the title we are entitled, ‘peaceful and civilized’.]]>