Smokers’ Corner: Enter Altafism
In 2010 in Karachi, billboards and wall-chalking appeared across the city with the term ‘Altafism.’
Unlike the word ‘Bhuttoism’ that was mainly the construct of some passionate lower-tier leadership of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) that was then (from the mid-1980s onwards) adopted by the party leadership, ‘Altafism’ seems to have been the brainchild of the main headship of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM).
The term, of course, is associated with the political thinking of the chief of the MQM, Altaf Hussain.
It first appeared as political graffiti on the walls of Karachi in 2010, gradually making its way into the speeches of the MQM activists and members.
The MQM explains Altafism to mean ‘doing politics of positive practicalism (sic) ‘ and/or ‘of realism.’
Though it is not a documented doctrine, it did, however, emerge from within the party and was greenlighted by the party head.
The term seems to have come about to describe the synthesis reached by the party’s intelligentsia after a hectic discourse within the MQM in the last decade.
The discourse was an intra-party debate about what the party’s ideology was after it evolved from being a Mohajir-centric party to trying to become a more widespread and non-ethnic political entity.
Even though the MQM’s main support still comes from Sindh’s Urdu speakers, an ideological conflict had erupted in the party when it clashed with the state on the streets of Karachi in the 1990s.
Facing three separate spats of operations as described by the government of the time in the said decade, the party suffered concentrated state action, first by the military (1992-93) and then by para-military outfits and the police (1994-96).
Noman Beig in his lengthy paper, ‘MQM: From Mohalla to the Mainstream’ and French academic and author Laurent Gayar in ‘Guns, Slums & Yellow Devils’ suggest that the authorities at the time of the operations explained them as a way to ‘expose the party’s criminal activities.’
Gradually the accusations then led to some organs of the security agencies and the government accusing the MQM of wanting ‘to break Karachi from rest of the country and turn it into a new homeland for Mohajirs called Jinnahpur.’ Both Beig and Gayar are highly sceptical about the Jinnahpur claim in their respective studies and it was also something that the MQM constantly denied.
But it was only recently that former IB Chief, Brig. Billa, finally went on record saying that the whole Jinnahpur issue was largely a fabrication.
There is however truth in the fact that the MQM’s sudden rise to power in Karachi (in the 1980s) did seem to have galvanised the inexperienced party leadership into exhibiting aggressive, almost totalitarian tendencies.
But since the party’s electoral rise also disturbed the traditional political balance of Karachi (and of Sindh at large), it is also correct that the party did face multiple attempts by those affected by the rise to undermine it.
The state as a whole too began feeling the pinch when the party started to challenge it. In 1979 Altaf Husain was arrested for allegedly burning a Pakistani flag, a charge he denied. Then during a 1986 rally in Karachi he described the Pakistani state as being ‘hegemony of the Punjabi elite.’
Dutch author Oskar Vaarkaik who spent more than two years in Karachi and Hyderabad studying the politics of the MQM (in the 90s), wrote that many of the MQM leaders also thought that the ruling elite was using other ethnicities settled in Karachi to undermine the economics and sociology of Mohajir majority-ism in the city.
The MQM’s ideology was squarely ethnic (Mohajir) between its inception in 1984 till the late 1990s.
However, the party membership and activists began sliding into an existential crisis during the state’s operation against the party.
In the ensuing turmoil, two streams of thought emerged within the besieged party: one was that since the Mohajirs were not exactly a people or ethnicity based on any singular collective cultural homogeneity, they would not respond to the crises like the Bengalis of former East Pakistan.
Then, unlike the Bengalis, the Mohajirs were once actually an integral part of the country’s ruling and economic elite along with the Punjabis.
This strain of thinking concluded that the Mohajirs’ support for the MQM was largely based on the desire that the party would bring them back into the mainstream of Pakistan’s power politics and economics. And thus, the MQM should reinvent itself as a mainstream national political party that would not only look after the political and economic interests of Sindh’s Mohajirs but also (or at least pretend) to cater to the economic and political aspirations of the country’s other urban middle and lower middle-classes.
The second synthesis emerging from the discourse concluded that the MQM’s original project to mould the Mohajirs into a single ethnic entity —through the propagation of a narrative of having a shared history of migration from India and having roots in the royal Persian and Turkish Muslim regimes of ancient India — should be retained.
Nevertheless, it was the first strain that won the day and the MQM, from 2002 onwards, began to expand its ideological scope.
It set out to evolve itself into becoming a modernist and secular urban party that was opposed to the ‘feudal-mullah nexus’ and a supporter of ‘the spirit of constructive business and social enterprise and entrepreneurship.’
The party leadership also explains Altafism’s pragmatist aspect as something that gives the party the flexibility to eschew ideological contradiction.
For example, the MQM, though vehemently opposed to Political Islam, has in recent times supported certain issues championed by its reactionary and fundamentalist opponents — issues such as the demand to release Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, the Pakistani neurosurgeon jailed in the US on the charge of supporting terrorism in Afghanistan.
This flexibility (pragmatism) then also gives the party the space, at the same time (and breath), to exhibit its opposition against religious militancy through huge rallies, and put up billboards saying ‘Dandey ki Shariat namanzoor’ (No to Shariah law through force) — a campaign it ran late last year.
Both ways, the emergence of the term Altafism and its emphasis on ‘practicalism and realism’ can largely be seen as an outcome of a compromise.
It can be explained as a consensus reached between the modernist, pro-business and secular aspirations of the party’s new leadership and the hyper populism of the old guard that still roots its rhetoric in the horrid memory of the bloodshed witnessed during the state’s operations against the party and in imagery entrenched in the idiom of martyrdom found in the tales of defiance in Sufi folklore.
"Altafism" ! – NFP are you working out of NINE ZERO ?
I once heard Altaf Bhai's speech on TV. I am still trying to figure out what was he trying to say. I am amazed that thousands turn out to listen to him. Probably they can decipher him better that I can.
Writer didn't mention gunny bags and drilling holes into human bodies.
It is wrong to assume that mohajir political activity started with the birth of MQM in 1980s. In fact they were the dominant socio-economic and political force in the newly created Pakistan untill overtaken by the Punjabi juggernaut. The emergence of the MQM is in fact the mohajirs positioning themselves for life in the new Pakistan– a Pakistan where they are no longer the sole arbiters of power
When people doubt about the Altafism they have not seen this ism in its practical applied form. they have not seen the karkun being thrown out from the APC by Police alive in 1992 onward and only one condition offered to them for leaving, say altaf murdabad and get alive but those preferred to martyr did not say alftaf murdabad. Such brutalization executed by State Machinery failed only due to the Altafism, it showed that Altafism is not an ideology coined recently in MQM philosophy as a matter of compromise. Altafism has not get recent green light from its leadership recently but it has been documented recently to keep informed to new karkuns who are joining mqm as only option for the better future of them and their country Pakistan.
MQM never run any battle against state ever, a few individuals have used state machinery and organization against a particular rising middle class representatives in Karachi which was suppose to spread like fragrance all over Pakistan. Untimely all those who remained highly active has accepted the fact that all evidences were fabricated in the factory of Asif Nawaz Janjua.
MQM never remain as totalitarian of youth, its blood is youth but its brain is silver aged leadership. Ishtiaq Azhar was not a young man in Party etc.,
NFP: Time to grow a pair and write honestly write about this menace. A party that emerged along the ethnic lines to ensure existence of a bureaucratic system which favored their types cannot really be called pragmatic. The existential crisis may be from perspective of lower or middle order within the party where as the upper section within party still believes in the superiority of mohajirs. I think NFP can provide a more detailed outlook of Altafisim using his more versatile satirical methods. Present article seemed like one that was passed out a by a really constipated patient after sitting for hours in can with really unsuccessful results.
In given time, NFP will prove that Altaf Bhai , after Mao tse Tung is the greatest revolutionary of Asia .
Piece written by mr.Farooq about the urdu language is very interesting I will like to know the source of his commentary.
Well, MQM can become the party for the urban middle class in Punjab also, for the only thing thats bad about MQM is that Altaf Hussain is sitting in London, which seems quite ridiculous.
So….now the great NFP is scared of the MQM? A complete article on MQM without mocking it?
Urdu was the original Indo-European or "Aryan" language of the hordes (urds) who colonized the subcontinent tens of thousands of years ago, driven southwards by the advancing glaciers of the last Ice Age. Sanskrith was a deliberately obscurantist and hyperembellished language developed by pagan priests to maintain their priviledged status. Hindi, Hindustan, India did not exist until the ancient Urdu speakers discovered Darya-e-Seandhu, the great "sea-like" river, thousands of kilometers in length, and then tens of kilometers wide. The primitive aboriginal inhabitants of this land, Seandhustan, Sindhustan, Hindustan (much later Anglicized as Indostan, then India) were termed Seandhus, Sindhus, or Hindus. They and their indigenous languages, related to Australian aborigines and South African bushmen, from the time when India was part of the great southern continent of Gondwanaland, interacted with Urdu to give rise to Hindi, Pushto,Punjabi, Balochi, Sindhi, Gujrati etc, with an admix of Mongolian/Chinese central Asian languages for Bengali, and Malay. Turkish and Farsi (the latter being the language of Iranian or Aryan peoples) are more directly derived from Urdu, not vice versa as most people think (probably as Urdu was the common language of the 700 year Mughal Empire, with both Turkish and Persian cultural affiliations). So, Pushto and Punjabi and Sindhi and Balochi developed as patois languages from Urdu interacting with local Dravidian languages with Farsi influence on Pushto and Punjabi, and Arabic and Coastal African influence on Sindhi and Balochi. They bear a similar relation to Urdu, Persian, and Arabic as Creole and other Caribbean languages spoken in Haiti and adjacent islands to English, French and Ebon or "Pidgin African English". Quaid-e-Azam, being a man of extraordinary foresight and vision selected Urdu or Urdish as it is now evolving, as a common uniting language for Pakistan, and as a counterweight to colonialist and neocolonial aspirations to "divide and rule". To use linguistics as divisive ethnicity is playing into their hands, equally as sectarian conflicts do. Acceptance of Urdu or Urdish as THE national language of Pakistan is an imperative for education as well as economic and political survival in the 21st century. Assalam Aleikum aur jeetay raho!
And you are quoting this piece of history from where?
In the early days of Pakistani politics, the mohajir community vehemently opposed any move to decentralise the government. It thwarted all attempts at constitution making as it feared the rise of Bengalis to the corridors of power.Back then the forebears of MQM demanded a strong federation.During the decades of 60s and 70's, ethnic Punjabis overtook Mohajirs in every sphere of national life and the latter were quick to read the writing on the wall. The MQM was formed and its political agenda has since shifted from a strong to a loose federation with maximum local autonomy. What a transformation!!. To the credit of Mohajirs leadership, they are tirelessly working for the rights of their constituents unlike some other so-called nationalist parties.
Only journalist like NFP can put Altaf Bhai on the pedestal. "—ism" is earned by a leader who is in the fore front of the struggle.Acting as a remote control, living in London , making gibberish speeches on telephone is cop out.He is and will remain a leader who has no universal message. His frequent political somesaults only endears him to his cronies.
Article consisted on huge information about MQM. This is no doubt that this party belongs to middle-class and lower middle-class people. Its reaching areas are at Urban Sindh (especially Karachi, Hyderabad, Mirpur-khas). By the point of conspiracy two operations had been done against this party but now it is real true that this party is play the mainstream of our local as well national politics.
NFP, knows more than me that this party existed with literary class more than others political parties. So they well known about their norms, attitudes and others. If this party belongs mostly to Karachi so why others hate it. Others political parties do well in their belonging areas, Altaf Bhai is running the party to London, this is the quality of any individual. This party against the " Land-loards, Waderas, corrupted industrialists". Why? Its a big question.
It is very true if MQM has not existed than middle class, lower middle class people does not reach in the National as well Provincial assemblies.
MQM is a real fact, everybody try to include it in his/her mind.
One of the Mqm supporter wrote outside the Jinnah'stomb
Tu nay hamhain Bulawayo hum Teri term doray
Tu yahan sooraha hay hamray quaid
You called us to immigrate from India, we obliged
Now we are being discriminated by Pakistanis
Poor Sindhi
There are two main parties in Karachi who represent the majority of population. One is MQM and the other is ANP. Education is the biggest difference between their leaderships. MQM has educated team to lead the masses but this quality is missing with ANP. They think by wearing red cap and inserting red rumaal in their pockets they are representing Khan Abdul Ghaffar khan and Wali Khan's ideologies. If they would be senseable Karachi's problems can be solved by sitting together and talk and not by threatening the other communities and playing with fire.
I am waiting for that big day when mqm chief returns to 90 and starts leading from there. If this dont happen than i doubt the future success of mqm to benefit pakistan. All said, 1 good thing that mqm has produced is mustafa kamal in the form of excellent administrator.
MQM policy has always been"Running with the hare and hunting with the hound". They have always attempted to stay in the Govt,enjoying all the benefits ander its cover carry on their criminal activities.NFP has failed first time in his analysis to pin point the the causes of failure of law and order in Karachi. To begin with one needs to go deep into the factors leading to creation of mqm.Explainations given were always thought over later. The ckearance certi ficates of good conduct issued by intellicent agencies at different times werealways according to the requirment of the govt of the time.
The only 'ism' that should really matter is NFPism. I tell you this country would become a lot better. Of course, there won't be any room for the moral brigade. What a pleasant thought.
Toti34;
I wasn't aware that Altaf Hussain has suggested the removal of the word "Islamic" from our country's name, I will take your words for it. Although I disagree with Altaf Hussain on this and similar issues, I must admire and respect his honesty and courage. Most leaders and journalists who are working to undermine our religion our Tahzeeb and our language wouldn't admit their true allegiances.
mustafa – there is no problem of adding "Islamic" in front of the name of your country. there are flags of muslim countries with Allah, Allah Akbar and the full Kalama who don't have "Islamic" in front of their official name.
ask yourself this question: why don't you have an Indian name but an Arab name? because you are muslim isn't it? that doesn't make you an Arab. does it? so I believe (and its my own opinion) that adding something like "islamic" in front of the official name of your country doesn't make you belonging to a particular belief. another thing to consider is that its a name given to a place where group of people are living collectabily and though its not a great idea to "brand" the majority it also seem a little necessity and treated and behaved rightfully does no harm just like your name doesn't.
yes I know you haven't agreed with him on this issue – perhaps you could also elaborate it why and if you haven't I guess this is my take on it.
The problem is that we have had many generations being gradually conditioned to
“isms”. Whether it’s Altafism, Bhutooism, sharifism, pachaism, jamtism etc. believe me, Pakistan would be a much happier and safer place to live, if all these isams wouldn’t existed in Pakistan. Pakistanis should think in “ out of box”.
The only time I liked Altaf Bhai was when he sang the film song Pardey mein rahnay do..
It was such a refreshing moment. It said volumes about him. Like no article can describe.
From this article you can draw few thinking behind the policies of MQM.__It started as Mohjir Quami Movement. Mohjirs came to Pakistan as Pakistani and with a feeling to support build up of Pakistani State. They to work with their education, expertise and resources for that cause. While migrating they suffered tremendous loss of life and resources. After few years of creation of Pakistan it was a county of Punjabi’s Sindhi’s Pakhtoon’s Bloochi’s and Bengali’s and there was no recognition of a minority but substantially large segment termed as “Urdu Speaking” although this term should be used for all Pakistanis as Urdu is national language of Pakistan. MQM was in the beginning an effort to provide recognition for these people.____Then MQM also realized that there is injustice done to middle lower middle and poor class by Wadairhs Choudhries and Sardars who have taken control of Pakistani Government affairs. To raise their voice it changed its name to Muthada Quami Movement. Its demand to get rid of these systems as was done in India long time back to abolish Zamindara system.____It also demand to widen the Tax policy to include agriculture which is also not possible as long as Wadharas Choudhries and Sardars are having majority in Government.
you are going a little wrong. punjabis are from punjab. sindhis are from sindh. so mohajir were from? well they were from different places like bihar, hyderabad, lakhnaow and so on. so why don't they call themselves that? had they done that and didn't go on to unite and change their identities they'd not have faced the dilemma. infact that would have lead them to make small groups of people from different areas settling into and keeping their loyalties to their own clans than to unite with others to behave like an injured party.
the zamindarana nizam can't be changed – mohajirs left India on their own free will – people with vast lands in India didn't give up and are still living their – there are nawabs and maganates who are muslims and who didn't want to come to Pakistan because they couldn't leave thousand years of inherited fertilized lands or established enterprises.
now the chaudrys and wadairas are the same story – they have been living here with all these previliges and they aren't going anywhere – even in US, Australia, UK and most of the developed countries people who choose to farm do farming on their inherited lands – their is still fuedalism in UK where Lords and Barons and even the Royal family hold palaces and huge estates and yes they do yeild some power of different sorts too.
the whole ideology of liquidating someone's wealth because you don't have it and they yeild power with it would bring MQM nowhere and that is the reason MQM too make alliances everytime with Wadairas (PPP), Industrialists (PML-N) and even Military (despite being voilated by them every now and then) whille brainwashing people that Altaf Bhai (who is sitting on huge cache of wealth himself in LONDON) doesn't believe in it and is against it.
and please for the love of this country (or perhaps GOD because you are so biased against this very land and the division of INDIA being the greatest blunder in the history of mankind) go and check out yourself if India has killed the Jagirdarana nizam or whatever. India is run by Provincial powers and that power comes from religious leaders, land owners, property maganates, industrialists and so on. in India Federal government has no power and even clinton visited a province first than Dehli so I am sure we both aren't smarter than her doing it.
"go and check out yourself if India has killed the Jagirdarana nizam or whatever. " Please check out the this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_reform
A relevant excerpt is reproduced below:
"India: Due to the taxation and regulation under the British Raj, at the time of independence, India inherited a semi-feudal agrarian system, with ownership of land concentrated in the hands of a few individual landlords (Zamindars, Zamindari System). Since independence, there has been voluntary and state initiated/mediated land reforms in several states. The most notable and successful example of land reforms are in the states of West Bengal and Kerala. After promising land reforms and elected to power in West Bengal in 1977, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)) kept their word and initiated gradual land reforms, such as Operation Barga. The result was a more equitable distribution of land among the landless farmers, and enumeration of landless farmers. This has ensured an almost lifelong loyalty from the farmers and the communists were in power till 2011 assembly election."
@Khan : If Altaf Hussain speaks for middle class & against Wadharas, Choudhries & Sardars, why MQM has been part of Musharraf's regime for 9 years where Wadharas & Choudhries were part of the government? Now supporting A Wadhara, AAZ.The fact is MQM wants to be part of the government, any government. Altaf Hussain is leader in absentia, pulling strings from London while his cronies make sure that Karachi is under their unchallenged control. He is a master of political somersaults. He has no ideaology , he is a supremo of a linguistic party.
NFP tries to turn liberal to MQM rather than Imran khan,he fails to convinced them to PPP after zardari roots channeled in party.I do not why he don't like Imran and called him new version of jamat e islami,but where was MQM populism ideology when they banned current chief justice and imran khan to enter in Karachi,MQM was fooled by zardari during all his tenure,they do not deserve vote of secular
The discipline of MQM went against it.
In a public meeting in Karachi where Nawaz was on stage as Prime Minister accompanied by Ch.Shuja'at.
Altar Bhai got up to speak and said,"khaamosh" and there was a pin drop silence.
Seeing this Shuja'at whispered to Nawaz, ' ae'nu nakeel dal'ni '.(he needs to be reined in).
This was narrated to me by an Intelligent person.
hhuuumm – care to share which INTELLIGENT person? who can be intelligent than your own highness?
All intelligence ppl are Intelligent
Are you sure it was Altaf Hussain and not Shatrughan Sinha……..btw are trying to say that your friend was in the intelligence agencies?
It was an intelligence sleuth