Pervez Hoodbhoy - Why they lynched Mashal Khan and Pehlu Khan
THE mental state of
men ready and poised to kill has long fascinated scientists. The Nobel Prize
winning ethologist, Konrad Lorenz, says such persons experience the ‘Holy
Shiver’ (called heiliger Schauer in German) just moments before performing the
deed. In his famous book On Aggression, Lorenz describes it as a tingling of
the spine prior to performing a heroic act in defence of their communities. This feeling, he says,
is akin to the pre-human reflex that raises hair on an animal’s back as it
zeroes in for the kill. He writes: “A shiver runs down the back and along the
outside of both arms. All obstacles become unimportant … instinctive
inhibitions against hurting or killing disappear … Men enjoy the feeling of
absolute righteousness even as they commit atrocities.”
While they stripped
naked and beat their colleague Mashal Khan with sticks and bricks, the 20-25
students of the Mardan university enjoyed precisely this feeling of
righteousness. They said Khan had posted content disrespectful of Islam on his
Facebook page and so they took it upon themselves to punish him. Finally, one
student took out his pistol and shot him dead. Hundreds of others watched
approvingly and, with their smartphone cameras, video-recorded the killing for
distribution on their Facebook pages. A meeting of this self-congratulatory
group resolved to hide the identity of the shooter. Much of the Pakistani
public, tacitly or openly, endorses violent punishment of suspected
blasphemers.
Khan had blasphemed!
Until this was finally shown to be false, no proper funeral was possible in his
home village. Sympathy messages from Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and opposition
leaders such as Bilawal Bhutto came only after it had been established that
Khan performed namaz fairly regularly.
Significantly, no protests of significance followed.University campuses were silent and meetings discussing the murder were disallowed. A demonstration at the Islamabad Press Club drew about 450, a miniscule figure against the estimated 200,000 who attended Mumtaz Qadri’s last rites. This suggests that much of the Pakistani public, whether tacitly or openly, endorses violent punishment of suspected blasphemers. Why? How did so many Pakistanis become bloodthirsty vigilantes? Evening TV talk shows - at least those I have either seen or participated in - circle around two basic explanations.
Significantly, no protests of significance followed.University campuses were silent and meetings discussing the murder were disallowed. A demonstration at the Islamabad Press Club drew about 450, a miniscule figure against the estimated 200,000 who attended Mumtaz Qadri’s last rites. This suggests that much of the Pakistani public, whether tacitly or openly, endorses violent punishment of suspected blasphemers. Why? How did so many Pakistanis become bloodthirsty vigilantes? Evening TV talk shows - at least those I have either seen or participated in - circle around two basic explanations.
One, favoured by the
liberal-minded, blames the blasphemy law and implicitly demands its repeal (an
explicit call would endanger one’s life). The other, voiced by the religiously
orthodox, says vigilantism occurs only because our courts act too slowly
against accused blasphemers. Both claims are not just
wrong, they are farcical. Subsequent to Khan’s killing, at least two other
incidents show that gut reactions — not what some law says — is really what
counts. In one, three armed burqa-clad sisters shot dead a man near Sialkot who
had been accused of committing blasphemy 13 years ago. In the other, a visibly
mentally ill man in Chitral uttered remarks inside a mosque and escaped
lynching only upon the imam’s intervention. The mob subsequently burned the
imam’s car. Heiliger Schauer!
While searching for a
real explanation, let’s first note that religiously charged mobs are also in
motion across the border. As more people flock to mandirs or masjids, the
outcomes are strikingly similar. In an India that is now rapidly Hinduising,
crowds are cheering enraged gau rakshaks who smash the skulls of Muslims
suspected of consuming or transporting cows. In fact India has its own Khan - Pehlu Khan. Accused of
cattle-smuggling, Pehlu Khan was lynched and killed by cow vigilantes earlier
this month before a cheering crowd in Alwar, with the episode also
video-recorded. Minister Gulab Chand Kataria declared that Khan belonged to a
family of cow smugglers and he had no reason to feel sorry. Now that cow
slaughter has been hyped as the most heinous of crimes, no law passed in India
can reverse vigilantism.
Vigilantism is best
explained by evolutionary biology and sociology. A fundamental principle there
says only actions and thoughts that help strengthen group identity are well
received, others are not. In common with our ape ancestors, we humans
instinctively band together in groups because strength lies in unity. The
benefits of group membership are immense — access to social networks, enhanced
trust, recognition, etc. Of course, as in a club, membership carries a price tag.
Punishing cow-eaters or blasphemers (even alleged ones will do) can be part
payment. You become a real hero by slaying a villain — ie someone who
challenges your group’s ethos. Your membership dues are also payable by
defending or eulogising heroes.
Celebration of such
‘heroes’ precedes Qadri. The 19-year old illiterate who killed Raj Pal, the
Hindu publisher of a controversial book on the Prophet (PBUH), was subsequently
executed by the British but the youth was held in the highest esteem. Ghazi Ilm
Din is venerated by a mausoleum over his grave in Lahore. An 8th grade KP
textbook chapter eulogising him tells us that Ilm Din’s body remained fresh
days after the execution. In recent times,
backed by the formidable power of the state, Hindu India and Islamic Pakistan
have vigorously injected religion into both politics and society. The result is
their rapid re-tribalisation through ‘meme transmission’ of primal values. A
concept invented by the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, the meme is a
‘piece of thought’ transferable from person to person by imitation. Like
computer viruses, memes can jump from mind to mind.
Memes containing
notions of religious or cultural superiority have been ‘cut-and-pasted’ into
millions of young minds. Consequently, more than ever before, today’s youth
uncritically accepts the inherent morality of their particular group, engages
in self-censorship, rationalises the group’s decisions, and engages in moral
policing. Groupthink and deadly
memes caused the lynching and murder of the two Khans. Is a defence against
such viral afflictions ever possible? Can the subcontinent move away from its
barbaric present to a civilised future? One can so hope. After all, like fleas,
memes and thought packages can jump from person to person. But they don’t bite
everybody! A robust defence can be built by educating people into the spirit of
critical inquiry, helping them become individuals rather than groupies, and
encouraging them to introspect. A sense of humour, and maybe poetry, would also
help.
The writer teaches
physics in Lahore and Islamabad.
http://sacw.net/article13234.html
see also
Alizeh Kohari - For the Love of God: The Violent History of Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws / Family of assassinated Governor Taseer continues be the target of fundamentalists
