The Influence of Society on Mind and Ideological Movement

Every living organism on this planet lives, or prefers to live, among its own species. For instance, a deer wants to live among its fellow -deer, a dove among its fellow- doves and a snake among its fellow- snakes.

Likewise, man prefers to live among fellow men. That’s how society comes into being. And where there is society, there are social needs and social norms and customs.

Not all societies have similar norms, nor are all cultures alike. Each society has its own norms and culture. According to social experts, a dialect-change occurs at every 100- mile distance. So, if we were to travel, we would notice that one and the same language or dialect undergoes an accent-change, every 100 miles or so. For example, in the Punjab, it is the same Punjabi dialect spoken throughout the province. However, the Lahori dialect is different from the Pindi dialect, and the latter is not the same as the Multani dialect.

A similar case obtains with Pushto in various parts of Sarhad province: the Bannu dialect isn’t the same as that of Peshawar.

Sindhi dialect is common to the Sindh Province. However, Larkana, Dadu, Jacobabad have different accents of Sindhi.

Urdu, likewise, has different accents in Delhi, U.P., Bihar and Hyderabad.

English language doesn’t behave differently, either. In Britain, London has its own accent, different from the one spoken in Scotland or Wales. And this situation multiplies itself all over the world.

Cultural variety is not confined to dialects and their accents; social customs are also influenced by this variety syndrome. Social influences work relentlessly on persons exposed to them. It’s impossible for one not to be influenced by the society around him. There is a simple explanation for it: when one lives in a society one also, invariably, interacts with those living around him. This, then, cumulatively influences his social behavior.

Scientific researches tell us that all living beings on this planet have, more or less, identical genes. It’s the same genes producing snakes, scorpions, lions, parrots and humans.

 Man, coming at the summit of the ecological ladder, contains in him the genes of all other living organisms.

 For instance, man has in him the loyalty genes of dogs and horses, and the bravery genes of lions. Man is also whimsical like a parrot, or unreliable like a scorpion. Man can also be cunning like a fox.

 In common parlance, for every trait there are two genes: an active or dominant gene, and a silent or recessional gene. Man possesses the bravery gene of a lion, as also the cowardice gene of a jackal.

 In other words, if the bravery gene is activated in a person, he becomes fearless like a lion. Likewise, if the bravery gene of a nation is invoked and activated it becomes a brave and fearless nation, just as the Mohajirs of Pakistan have been galvanized into becoming a brave people, under the inspiring motto of MQM, disproving the earlier allegation that they weren’t a brave people.

By the same token, if the bravery gene of a people is silenced, they become cowards.

 The inference from this is that no people are brave or cowardly by birth; it is the social environment, interaction for survival and relentless preaching or educating that makes them brave or cowardly.

God, Almighty, has blessed humans with the title of being the best of His creatures. However, only those humans are truly blessed who prove themselves worthy of it and earn the title. Those who don’t measure up to God’s great gift are as good, or bad, as animals. There are men who, by instinct and behavior, are closer to being scorpions, or parrots, or jackals. But some are brave like a lion.

The moral of it is that a man is obligated by the gift of God to prove himself worthy of it, or else he would be counted amongst animals out of the human pale.

We observe around us many a country with a hotchpotch of cultures, dialects, social values, even faiths and religions, and yet its citizens pride on their allegiance and commitment to it. Take the United States of America, for example. It has 50 states with a variety of social, cultural and faith differentials. Yet every American is proud of being a citizen of U.S.A. This is evidence aplenty that there’s equality in that country between men of different faiths, social norms and customs. There is social justice in that society and a remarkable harmony of social equality. It isn’t uncommon there for the ECO of a multinational corporation to line up for a McDonald burger along with a janitor from his company.

We are fond of quoting this famous couplet to highlight the concept of social equality among Muslims:

The King, Mehmood, and his slave, Ayaz, stand shoulder to shoulder in the same file;

No one, in that queue, is king, and no one is slave.

However, once the king and his slave disperse from that queue (for prayer), they will go their separate ways: the king will eat his kingly feast and the slave will have to subsist on his meager rations. That’s not the case in the U.S., where the CEO of a multinational and his janitor would both be eating the same McDonald hamburger. Why? Because the janitor has the buying power to afford the burger his CEO may be eating.

 Which brings us to the point that only a just society where rights and justice are in lock-step with equal opportunities? Only a social order based on these foundations would become cohesive and strong.

Prophet Mohammad (Peace Be upon Him) was the last of the prophets sent by God to this earth. His embassy was meant to eradicate imperialism and injustice from this world because imperialism reduces ordinary people to the rank of slaves and forces them to grind like animals.  In his Last Sermon at the Hajj he performed he made it abundantly clear that there could be no sense of superiority between white or black, rich or poor, or an Arab and non-Arab. All men are equal was his message for mankind till eternity.

MQM subscribes to the same philosophy. It believes that feudal landlords are not superior, in any way, to the tillers of land and peasants of Pakistan, because Pakistan is not a fiefdom for the landed aristocracy. We, at MQM, are committed, by our manifesto, to rid Pakistan from the tyranny of this privileged class of just 2 % Pakistanis. If we didn’t, then we would not be entitled to call ourselves humans.

 The first requirement, in this crusade, is to make the people, the toiling masses, conscious of their rights and their place in society.

We did the same in Sindh. We insisted on its toiling masses to believe that they had a God-given right over the land they belonged to. Despite our obvious handicap of shortage of resources, we have been successful in bringing down the walls of hatred between the people of Sindh. They are in the process of getting united.

Likewise, we ought to inform the 98 % underprivileged Pakistani masses that the feudals, the chieftains, the waderas, the generals belong to the same clan of exploiters, even though their dialects or social mores may be different from each other. If these exploiters of the people can get together on one platform why can’t the exploited people do the same?

 We must understand that the seeds of differences among the exploited are sown, deliberately, by the vested interest, for its own advantage. Those who suffer are the victims of the feudal conspirators.

As explained earlier, society does affect social behavior to a very large measure. That’s why our forefathers insisted on keeping good company. It’s impossible for an ideological movement, sworn to social change through constant preaching and education, to remain unaffected by the social ambience around them.

It is, therefore, quite likely that in the process of their interaction with their society the workers of the movement may get changed themselves and become part and parcel of their social culture. The question arises: how should this be avoided? How could the workers of an ideological campaign be insulated against their social alchemy?

 It is not possible for the workers and cadres of the movement to cut themselves off from the social currents flowing around them. Interaction is endemic to any society. Therefore, the need for ideological workers is to remind themselves, constantly, of their campaign and its objectives and goals, all the time.