A cross the 20th century, various American historians invested a lot of effort in debunking what came to be known as the Lost Cause Myth.

The myth was the product of an elaborate undertaking in the southern states of the U.S. In 1865, a brutal four-year civil war ended in the U.S. and the federalist armies of the north, commanded by President Abraham Lincoln, vanquished southern secessionists to abolish slavery.

Compared to the rapidly industrialising north, the south was largely agricultural and almost entirely depended on an economy powered by cotton. Black men, women and children, forcibly brought from various African countries, were put to work in the south’s vast cotton fields. They had no rights and led brutal lives.

In 1861, a number of southern states succeeded in creating a confederacy of their own because they believed the federation wanted to abolish slavery — even though Lincoln had only spoken of moderate reforms during his campaign. But in the minds of southerners, Lincoln was a haughty anti-south northerner.

What does the American Civil War have in common with Donald Trump’s abortive January 6 rebellion and what do both of them have in common with contemporary Pakistan?

After the confederacy was defeated and reintegrated into the federation, the defeated states began to frame the war as a battle between well-meaning people against a greedy, arrogant and corrupt northern elite. Thus the Lost Cause Myth was born. The myth insisted that slavery was just an excuse by the federalists to undermine the southern economy and rob the southern states to feed the north’s industrialisation.

The myth grew through textbooks, literature, films and political rhetoric well into the 20th century, no matter how convincingly it was debunked. The myth is largely about romanticising a community that, apparently, had stood up to challenge a powerful conglomerate of corrupt politicians, greedy businessmen and ungodly secularists. The myth also suggests the north wanted to usurp the rights of the southern states and that the slaves owned by rich landowners were treated in a humane manner. To the southerners, their forces lost, but won a moral victory.

While the myth began to fade from the 1990s onwards, another one emerged in January 2021. But it wasn’t about an old civil war anymore. It was about a new ‘war’, but one that was framed almost exactly the way the old one was. Its romanticised hero was Donald Trump. Two months after Trump was defeated in a presidential election, thousands of his supporters stormed the Capitol Building in Washington D.C.

According to the historian Caroline E. Janney, Trump’s defenders cast him as a righteous warrior ousted by traitors. “They rely on the same tools that were used to promulgate Confederate myths: manipulating facts, claiming persecution, demonising enemies and rewriting history.”

To historians, the Lost Cause Myth has also come down to mean turning a military or a political defeat into a moral victory. A “moral win” that is worked to help the defeated stay in the game. Empirical evidence that often contradicts the myth stands little chance to outflank the myth’s emotional impact.

Recently, in Pakistan, a Lost Cause Myth has been in play for over six months. Imran Khan’s government was ousted in April 2022 through a no confidence vote in Parliament. Anticipating an ouster, Khan had already begun to allude to a conspiracy that was being hatched by the U.S., the Pakistani ‘deep state’ and opposition parties to dismiss his government.

After his dismissal, Khan has tried to drown out the fact that his tenure was replete with incompetencies, corruption and acts of authoritarianism. Having a well-oiled social media wing, his party was able to divert the mainstream media’s attention towards unsubstantiated allegations of a conspiracy. Khan has also been bombarding the judiciary with petitions against these conspiracies and mounting an unnerving campaign against his erstwhile mentors and makers, the military establishment.

Through social media, constant rallies and press conferences and court petitions, he has been able to overshadow the failures of his ousted regime and create a Lost Cause Myth that has regenerated emotional support for him.

So what is Khan’s Lost Cause Myth? In a nutshell, this: he is a victim, not a villain. The villains are those who conspired with anti-Pakistan forces to oust a leader who was waging a “jihad” against corruption and “looters” in the country and Islamophobia in the West. He is fighting a Manichaeist war against powerful dark forces. He is the most popular leader in the country, yet the democracy that is practised in the country is engineered to keep democrats like him out.

Lost Cause myths use numerous means to absolve the defeated of all blame. The myth-makers distort and concoct history, immediate as well as distant. They knowingly lie, conscious that the myth is appealing to emotions that negate critical thinking and are not interested in evidence. The myth-makers want to formulate memories that are to replace actual memories. So the actual memories of Khan’s many failures as PM are replaced with memories of him being a crusader whose gallant policies were sabotaged by a corrupt system to make them look like failures.

Will the Lost Cause myths being spun by Trump and Khan manage to turn their so-called moral victories into political wins? Both have burned their boats by alienating state institutions. To them, these institutions can be subdued by the emotional response of the electorate. However, logically, state institutions have no other choice but to keep such men out. Thus, Khan’s recent disqualification by the ECP.

The Lost Cause Myth weaved by Trump and Khan are a quick-burn phenomenon because they were rapidly and belligerently formed and are likely to burn out if both men are kept at bay long enough. Khan’s recent disqualification may now see him seeking reconciliation with the state and government.

This would require politicking that is more measured. But in this is the likelihood that his current image of a ‘bold’, wide-eyed idealist battling overwhelming odds will begin to erode. Therefore, Khan has cornered himself into a precarious position. He will never be accepted by state institutions (no matter how ‘popular’ he is) if he continues being belligerent and unreliable.

Yet, he needs to be all this for his Lost Cause Myth. If he decides on a compromise to stay in the game as a contender and not just a disrupter, the myth will begin to dissipate. Even if he claims that the compromise was his victory.

Published in Dawn, EOS, October 30th, 2022